Dan Brown

[HarryKeogh]

Why does Dan Brown write in the forward to his books how pretty much everything presented in his novels are factual and accurate (when clearly they are not) and other authors of popular fiction like John Grisham will state how they had to make up stuff (change laws, places, etc) to suit the plot?

What the hell is wrong with Dan Brown?



this post written after I just finished Angels and Demons...reading it with my jaw dropped because of the sloppiness of it all and angry at myself for not being able to put the book down (because it's kind of fun to root for the blowing up of the Vatican.)

[Garrette]

He wanted to sell 50 million books in three years.

Worked, too.

I may be among the few on this board who actually enjoyed The DaVinci Code.

I thought it was factually rotten and the foreword unforgivable and from a technical standpoint the writing fairly poor.

But it was fun.

Same things for Angels and Demons but to a lesser degree.

[kmortis]

I enjoyed the DaVinci Code. It's a good ariplane book. I'd previously read (about 10 years previous, that is) "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" so I was alreay familar with the concept. I didn't like that, when I got around to reading A&Ds that I found out that he'd basically written the same book twice.

Eh. so he's a hack writer...so what? Does it get you through that three hour layover in Philadelphia?

[Garrette]

We're obviously twins. I had read Holy Blood Holy Grail also about ten years previously.

And I also thought Angels & Demons was in effect the same as The DaVinci Code but not as well done. Remember, though, that A&D was written first--it was rereleased after the success of DaVinci.

And who are all you mutants who can read novels in three hours? I'm an excellent reader, but my speed is, at best, average.

[bob_kark]

What the hell is wrong with Dan Brown?

He's allowed to breed? I mean, I don't think that makes him such a schmuck, it just seems wrong is all.

[dogjones]

I had the misfortune of reading "Deception Point" the other day. It was nauseating.

[kmortis]

We're obviously twins. I had read Holy Blood Holy Grail also about ten years previously.

And I also thought Angels & Demons was in effect the same as The DaVinci Code but not as well done. Remember, though, that A&D was written first--it was rereleased after the success of DaVinci.

And who are all you mutants who can read novels in three hours? I'm an excellent reader, but my speed is, at best, average.
Well, once you skip over all the woo in the book, it's about three hours to read all the intoduction, conclusion...ok, I take it back, take out all the woo and it'll take you three minutes to read DaVinci and that includes the time to walk over to the bookshelf to pick it up

[Tony]

I haven't read any of his books. I guess I should if I want to know what you guys are talking about...:)

[kmortis]

I haven't read any of his books. I guess I should if I want to know what you guys are talking about...:)
Eh...it's ok. Borrow a copy if you really have to read it.

[TobiasTheViking]

Eh...it's ok. Borrow a copy if you really have to read it.
Just remember to also have a supply of vicodin handy

[ImaginalDisc]

Does anyone else find it odd that Dan Brown would claim that every single "fact" in his book is correct, and yet the darned title has a glaring factual error? It ought to be "The Leonardo Code". da Vinci was what he was called, but it wasn't his name. When the author of book doesn't even take care to keep his titles error free, I start to wonder.

[kmortis]

Does anyone else find it odd that Dan Brown would claim that every single "fact" in his book is correct, and yet the darned title has a glaring factual error? It ought to be "The Leonardo Code". da Vinci was what he was called, but it wasn't his name. When the author of book doesn't even take care to keep his titles error free, I start to wonder.
MEH! It's his PR guy telling him to do that. It make for contraversey, which sells books. So does misspellings....

[Johnny Pixels]

I really liked the Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons. Digital Fortress was good. Deception point was alright, but there was a mistake in it that don't know how he managed to make it. He specifically mentions the OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopter, which he must have done some research on as it's not a name you pick out of the air or that's bandied around a lot, and even describes its mast mounted sight, but then later on he states that the laser beam is coming from the nose of the helicopter. I'm confused because the laser is mounted in the mast sight, so why did he not know this after doing research on the helicopter? It's a picky minor point I know, but just strikes me as strange.

http://jiatelin.jschina.com.cn/heli/gfx/oh58/oh58_2.jpg

[BeholdTheTruth]

The ending of the DVC was a let down.

[logical muse]

The ending of the DVC was a let down.
Could you please save me the trouble of reading the damn thing and just tell me what happens in the end? Does everyone die? I can only hope.

[dogjones]

I quite enjoyed DVC actually, even though the bad guy turns out to be like any other American blockbuster bad guy: English

[Hutch]

I really liked the Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons. Digital Fortress was good. Deception point was alright, but there was a mistake in it that don't know how he managed to make it. He specifically mentions the OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopter, which he must have done some research on as it's not a name you pick out of the air or that's bandied around a lot, and even describes its mast mounted sight, but then later on he states that the laser beam is coming from the nose of the helicopter. I'm confused because the laser is mounted in the mast sight, so why did he not know this after doing research on the helicopter? It's a picky minor point I know, but just strikes me as strange.

Never read the book, Johnny, but I have a hunch that he confused it with the AH-64 Apache, which does have the laser beam coming from the nose of the aircraft. IMHO.

[Morwen]

I read Holy Blood Holy Grail, or rather, 1 line of every 3 more or less. It was woo fun.

Then I played Gabriel Knight 3. Much more fun.

I'm not really interested in revisiting the d*mned Rennes-le-Château mystery for a 3rd time, so I'll pass on the DaVinci code. Maybe I'll borrow it one day. Anyone have a copy they don't care about?

[Johnny Pixels]

Never read the book, Johnny, but I have a hunch that he confused it with the AH-64 Apache, which does have the laser beam coming from the nose of the aircraft. IMHO.

Whoah, I seem to have made a huge mistake. Just checked the book and it doesn't mention the laser coming from the nose. I must have seen that somewhere else. My apologies. I was so sure too, it's gonna annoy me til I find out what I was thinking of.

[Diamond]

The DaVinci Code used every plot device in the pulp thriller writer's arsenal. I just felt I was reading something incredibly silly.

The big groaner for me was the multilayered meanings of words and symbols. After a while I thought I was reading stuff into everything. I even felt sympathy for Opus Dei and the Roman Catholic Church afterwards for the portrayal made in the book.

It's pulp fiction.

[MRC_Hans]

Read Deception Point and DVC. In that order. DP is yer plain vanilla action hero thriller. It is about as deep as a street puddle. DVC was fun because it was a bit different. As with all such plots, the end stinks (and the rest of the plot falls apart if you think too deeply about it). You make a lot of red herrings and layered deceptions, and you need to vrap it up in a remotely logical way before the book ends. Nobody pulled that even half good since Alistair McLean.

I consider both of them good "bring on your holiday trip, leave at the hotel" books. Good thing I borrowed DP and got DVC cheap at a flea-market.

Hans

[Lothian]

All the facts in his books are right.


Those that are wrong are not facts but fiction

[MRC_Hans]

Ehr, good point, except that some of the things he claims to be fact, are in fact, fiction.

Hans

[Piscivore]

Why does Dan Brown write in the forward to his books how pretty much everything presented in his novels are factual and accurate (when clearly they are not) and other authors of popular fiction like John Grisham will state how they had to make up stuff (change laws, places, etc) to suit the plot?

What the hell is wrong with Dan Brown?


The same thing that's wrong with the Farrelly Bros who put "This is a True Story" in front of Fargo.

[Lothian]

Ehr, good point, except that some of the things he claims to be fact, are in fact, fiction.

HansSo you are saying, in fact, that the facts that are facts and are described as facts are indeed facts whereas the facts described as facts which are in fact not facts should in fact not be described as facts.

[rustypouch]

I agree that it was a pulp whodunnit, with far-reaching implications.

Very easy to read, with enough hints that the average dumbass can convince themselves that they knew the answers all along. But the writing was pretty bad, with the cliff hanges at the end of every chapter.

[thrombus29]

The same thing that's wrong with the Farrelly Bros who put "This is a True Story" in front of Fargo.

Cohen brothers, The Farrelly Bros claimed that "Stuck on you" was true.

[LW]

Why does Dan Brown write in the forward to his books how pretty much everything presented in his novels are factual and accurate (when clearly they are not) and other authors of popular fiction like John Grisham will state how they had to make up stuff (change laws, places, etc) to suit the plot?[/SIZE]

In my opinion there are writers who are much worse in this respect than Dan Brown.

The bottom of the pit is probably Sven Hassel who claims to have written his own memoirs.

The only problem is that I have spotted plagiarized scenes that are lifted word-to-word from books such as Remarque's All Quiet on the Western Front, Hasek's Good Soldier Svejk, Konsalik's Strafbataljon 999, Linna's Tuntematon sotilas, Heinrich's Das geduldige Fleisch (better known in English as "The Cross of Iron"), and several others that I can't remember offhand. In fact, I can't remember ever reading a single Hassel book where I didn't recognize at least one scene. Probably the most absurd plagiarization was when he lifted the plot of Kelly's Heroes and claimed that it happened to him in Russia.

Well, OK, there are another problems, like how his stories are internally inconsistent to the degree of absurdity with him being in three or four different locations at the same time and like there is actually no evidence that he ever served in the German army.

[Haywire]

I just finished DVC on the plane to San Diego.
I just don't see what the big deal is. It's in the fiction section for a reason.

[Renfield]

Does anyone else find it odd that Dan Brown would claim that every single "fact" in his book is correct, and yet the darned title has a glaring factual error? It ought to be "The Leonardo Code". da Vinci was what he was called, but it wasn't his name. When the author of book doesn't even take care to keep his titles error free, I start to wonder.

People have been referring to him as "Da Vinci" for a long time. Its a common practice, done in encyclopedias, articles, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was actually the man's name, taken from the place of his birth. The book might have a lot of errors and woo-ish thinking, but this isn't one of them.

Edited to add: from Wikipedia, "Leonardo, the illegitimate son of a Florentine notary named Ser Piero and a local peasant woman called Caterina, was born before modern naming conventions developed in Europe; his name "Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci", simply means "Leonardo, son of [Mes]ser Piero, from Vinci". "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci

[Spindrift]

People have been referring to him as "Da Vinci" for a long time. Its a common practice, done in encyclopedias, articles, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was actually the man's name, taken from the place of his birth. The book might have a lot of errors and woo-ish thinking, but this isn't one of them.

Edited to add: from Wikipedia, "Leonardo, the illegitimate son of a Florentine notary named Ser Piero and a local peasant woman called Caterina, was born before modern naming conventions developed in Europe; his name "Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci", simply means "Leonardo, son of [Mes]ser Piero, from Vinci". "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci
The "di ser Piero da Vinci" is a descriptor not really a name. In scholarly circles (and the hero of the story is a Harvard professor) he is not referred to as "da Vinci". That would be like referring to Joan of Arc as "of Arc".

And for someone who seemed to know a lot about the "secrets" of the Catholic Church, Brown messed up on a basic tenet of Roman Catholicism. The "Immaculate Conception" is about the birth of Mary, not the virgin birth of Jesus. Mary was born without original sin, hence "Immaculate Conception". - Hi, my name is Jim and I'm a recovering Catholic.

I can't count the number of times I rolled my eyes at some of the things. The book takes place in about a 24 hour period and there are more coincidences per hour than can be imagined. But even with all that I liked the book, it would have been a lot better if a competent editor had gotten to it before publication.

[Luciana]

Regardless of all the factual errors, I'm dying to see it on the screen. There's potential for a very entertaining popcorn-quality movie, in an Indiana Jones kind of style. A corpse on the Louvre, come on. And Audrey Tatou! Cool.

[Checkmite]

I even felt sympathy for Opus Dei and the Roman Catholic Church afterwards for the portrayal made in the book.


I second that. Any book which mentions the mythical "Illuminati" automatically goes bankrupt in the cool-points department; but after trying Angels and Demons, I almost wish the Illuminati were real, just so they could do something insidious to Dan Brown.

I will go to see the movie of The DaVinci Code. Being only two hours long, it would've been impossible for the producers of the film to include any of the effluvium which makes up most of the book, leaving only the marketable, halfway-decent material. I hope it makes a good movie.