I'm thinking about reading " The Da Vinci Code ".....

[Pauliesonne]

Now, I watched a documentary about the book on BBC4 last night and I learned about the book and they completely debunked the book's supposed facts, while showing that the people who believe the book to be factual, badly misinterpeted the book.

Anyway, I believe as long as I don't take it as fact, it could be a thrilling yarn along the lines of " Indiana Jones " and things like that.

So what do you think?

[tkingdoll]

Sure, why not? I'm planning on reading it myself at some point, although I will be borrowing it from the library rather than buying a copy.

And if you've already seen the documentary, at least you know in advance what to take with a pinch of salt.

Remember, it's in the fiction section, always has been.

[CFLarsen]

As it should be.

It's a quick read, it's a quick plot, it's quickly digested.

It's all in the marketing and hype.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Now, I watched a documentary about the book on BBC4 last night and I learned about the book and they completely debunked the book's supposed facts, while showing that the people who believe the book to be factual, badly misinterpeted the book.

Anyway, I believe as long as I don't take it as fact, it could be a thrilling yarn along the lines of " Indiana Jones " and things like that.

So what do you think?

I don't know why there is such an uproar about this book. I read it. I enjoyed it. I will see the film.

But it's a work of fiction! There is nothing to "debunk".

[Cynric]

I read it, to see what the fuss was about.

I'm still wondering.

One of the most pedestrian books I've read for a while, but it does make you realize how an almost cynically formulaic approach can yield amazing dividends. It was, to my mind, totally unremarkable and quite poorly written.

That said, as others have commented, it passes the time pleasantly and is certainly engrossing. Just don't expect anything deeper than a competent thriller.

[HarryKeogh]

But it's a work of fiction! There is nothing to "debunk".

But there is when the author states in the preface that things are fact when they are not. (It was at this point that I hoped to link to that preface page from the Amazon website but it skips from the copyright page to the main text)

And also when friends say "could you believe Francois Mitterand insisted the pyramid be made with 666 panes of glass?!" when there isn't that number. He tells us he's taking hard facts and working a story around them when in fact it's mostly all fiction. I don't have a problem with that as long as the author is clear about it. Dan Brown is not.

With that said...I thought it was a very exciting and fun read.

[Jimbo07]

I was disappointed to have read skeptical commentary first. It really pulls you out of the narrative... :(

that said, it's fun enough for a popular novel.

Enjoy!

[brodski]

I don't know why there is such an uproar about this book. I read it. I enjoyed it. I will see the film.

But it's a work of fiction! There is nothing to "debunk".
quite so, however I have met several people who believe that it is fact, and the argument that "it's in the fiction section" doesn't usually sway them from their delusions.

[Ersby]

I enjoyed it. Totally formulaic, yes, but setting most of the story in one night was a good move. You really do have to turn your brain off, though.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

But there is when the author states in the preface that things are fact when they are not. (It was at this point that I hoped to link to that preface page from the Amazon website but it skips from the copyright page to the main text)

And also when friends say "could you believe Francois Mitterand insisted the pyramid be made with 666 panes of glass?!" when there isn't that number. He tells us he's taking hard facts and working a story around them when in fact it's mostly all fiction. I don't have a problem with that as long as the author is clear about it. Dan Brown is not.

With that said...I thought it was a very exciting and fun read.

I see your point. I guess it's where you draw the line. And maybe in this case, it's hard to draw. And I suspect Dan Brown likes it like that.

But when he says there are "facts" in the book, I took that to mean that, The Knights Templar are real. The places in the book are all quite real. Jesus was real(?). DaVinci really painted the Mona Lisa. Etc...

Of course he might have to fudge a bit to make the story, i.e artistic license. For example, the Mona Lisa does not hang in the same gallery as some of the other pictures he describes. In fact, it is in a gallery by itself. So is that fact or fiction?

In the end, who cares? I enjoyed it. And the woos will continue to be woos. Nothing Dan Brown could possible say would change that.

[Nettles]

As thriller novels go, DVC is pretty average. Nearly average.

If you want to read a novel that has fun with the Catholic church, try The Road to Gandolfo by Ludlum.

[Pauliesonne]

You really do have to turn your brain off, though.

The same goes for the original Star Wars trilogy, but they were undeniably three of the the greatest films of all time.

[tkingdoll]

The same goes for the original Star Wars trilogy, but they were undeniably three of the the greatest films of all time.

Aaaaand the non sequitur of the year award goes toooooooo...

[Babylon Sister]

I thought the book was generally pretty good. Nothing to write home about but a fast read for a rainy day.

Try to find one of the editions that contains pictures of some of the major references, e.g., the Mona Lisa, Last Supper, Rosilyn Chaple, etc.

I wasn't familiar with many of the details of (mostly) the paintings and being able to see them made reading the book more fun.

Pretty pedestrian as "thrillers" go.

[slingblade]

Look, odd-woman-out, here, but I really liked it for the puzzle aspects. It kept me turning pages, trying to figure out the puzzles. I found it a fun romp, and I didn't notice the writing was too horrible. Okay, it could have been better, but I have read worse work by better authors.

I was really disappointed in one part, though. I won't give it away, but that particular puzzle was so easy to me, and the characters spent a good two or three pages agonizing over it. I rarely scream at books (though I do shout at the TV a lot), but this was one time I was hollering.

Read it. I also read "Holy Blood, Holy Grail," about 20 years ago, and that was the book that really got me thinkng hard about what I believed, and why.....yes, that book helped me choose atheism, but it was only one factor of many.

[athon]

Personally, I think Dan Brown books are poorly written works of fiction. There are countless books which use similiar themes with better plot lines and are written without using obvious cliches and gratuitous info-dumping that (unfortunately) will never get the acclaim or recognition that Brown has received. The very fact that it has ridden the hype-wave is sad, but hell, it's what happens.

That said, it is indeed a lazy, mindless read. I'd never suggest somebody never reads a book; if you're interested, borrow a copy and read it, by all means.

As for the claim at the beginning of the book about 'facts', I think that was a poor decision made by an author who is far too self-congratulatory on his research efforts and wants everybody to know it.

Athon

[Pauliesonne]

It's not Brown's fault people misinterpeted what the " fact " part in the book means.

To quote Forrest Gump; " Stupid is what stupid does".

[De_Bunk]

Pauliesonne...

Yes i am thinking about it too...

its true...

DB

[Luciana]

I'm quite anxious to see the film. A guy murdered in the Louvre? The fast pace, the puzzles, the narrow escapes, symbology, an assassin, a conspiracy? Cool.

Tom Hanks? hmmm. He's not the Langdon I had in mind, and I'm just tired of seeing him. And Audrey Tatou is not my mental image of Sophie, but she's such a great actress, let's see.

Lots of popcorn and a nice adventure movie. Can't be wrong.

[Luciana]

double post. And it wasn't even a remarkable post.

[Angus McPresley]

Ugh, I plan on not seeing the movie. Twice.

C'mon, it's directed by Ron Howard. That should give you pause. Has he ever done a movie that wasn't big-moneyed, safe, emotionally manipulative, and dumbed down? He represents everything that's wrong with Hollywood.

A drinking game for RH movies: drink every time you can picture the script saying "MUSIC SWELLS."

[Luciana]

Angus. Oh, went to IMDB just now and you're right. "Far and Away"? "Apollo 13"?? I know I'll still watch it (Louvre, conspiracy, assassin!!), but now my expectations are much lower.

eta: oh, Paul Bettany (hot, hot, hot!) will be Silas! And Jean Reno is in it also, my fave French actor after Depardieu.

[LibraryLady]

I read it and I honestly don't know what the fuss was about in terms of the story. I thought it was a bit boring--car chases are great on the screen when done well, but boring in books. I thought the characters were a little flat and the narrative pedantic and pedestrian.

*LibraryLady steps back for a moment and admires her own alliteration*

I've had to deal with the fuss about the supposed facts in the book because the grail legend, Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Dan Brown all fall into my department (and I wish they would cut it out). It gets pretty old, and I imagine on May 19 we'll start getting flooded with calls all over again. :rolleyes:

If I were rating it on Amazon, I'd give it two stars. The punctuation and spelling were good.

[brodski]

The punctuation and spelling were good. I long for that day that quotes like that will appear as endorsements on the backs of novels.

:D

[Cheesejoff]

It's fiction, rather like the bible. A mildly entertaining read but not factually accurate.

[Jabberwock]

It was an ok read. It moved quick enough that I didn't notice the somewhat cardboard characterization and wooden dialogue until I finished it. I do remember thinking when I finished it that it would be easy to turn into a movie as it was almost a script already. Actually, I enjoyed the last Gabriel Knight video game (which shares the same subject matter) much more (the puzzles were much harder). The friend who recommended it to me said it was like a bag of Cheetos. You enjoy it when you're eating it, but feel bloated and a little guilty after you've eaten the whole bag. :)

[Raziel]

It was an ok book. The book "Angels and Demons" by the same author is much better.

[tim]

It's the sort of book you might buy at an airport, read on the flight and shrug when you realise you left it on the plane. It passes the time ........
The problems come when people believe it to be true.

[CFLarsen]

It's the sort of book you might buy at an airport, read on the flight and shrug when you realise you left it on the plane. It passes the time ........
The problems come when people believe it to be true.
The Catholic Church also fuels the controversy by acting as if it should be taken seriously.

They should simply have issued a press release, saying "We recognize that some people believe in this, but, really...it's fiction, people."

[tim]

The Catholic Church also fuels the controversy by acting as if it should be taken seriously.

They should simply have issued a press release, saying "We recognize that some people believe in this, but, really...it's fiction, people."

But it really helps the tourist industry......:D

[CFLarsen]

But it really helps the tourist industry......:D
Yeps....

[Jorghnassen]

Two words that might convince me to eventually see the movie: Audrey Tautou...

[tim]

Two words that might convince me to eventually see the movie: Audrey Tautou...

Indeed, yes.......
She was the lead in "Amelie" a couple of years back. Sub-titled films can be a bit of a pain, but that movie's worth it. I laughed my socks off..........:D

[HarryKeogh]

Indeed, yes.......
She was the lead in "Amelie" a couple of years back. Sub-titled films can be a bit of a pain, but that movie's worth it. I laughed my socks off..........:D

and if you liked that check out "A Very Long Engagement" which she also stars in and is directed by the same person who directed Amelie (Jean-Pierre Jeunet). It's set during WWI and has the same quirkiness that made Amelie so appealing (to me at least).

[tim]

and if you liked that check out "A Very Long Engagement" which she also stars in and is directed by the same person who directed Amelie (Jean-Pierre Jeunet). It's set during WWI and has the same quirkiness that made Amelie so appealing (to me at least).
Thanks - on your recommendation, I'll get it! :D :D :D

[womble]

"In the end, who cares? I enjoyed it. And the woos will continue to be woos. Nothing Dan Brown could possible say would change that."

Like your quote

For the real history of templar knights I suggest reading, The Hiram key/The 2nd messiah/Uriels machine/book of hiram/holy bloody-holy grail, authors like Colin wilson, graham phillps et al.

just my thoughts

[The Central Scrutinizer]

and if you liked that check out "A Very Long Engagement" which she also stars in and is directed by the same person who directed Amelie (Jean-Pierre Jeunet). It's set during WWI and has the same quirkiness that made Amelie so appealing (to me at least).

Agreed. One of the best films of 2004.

[CFLarsen]

Sub-titled films can be a bit of a pain

Cultural Imperialist Pig!

[tim]

Cultural Imperialist Pig!

Claus, I've told you before - do not insult our porcine friends. Cultural Imperialist Wombat, if you please.
It's hard, you know, having to speak the universally accepted language in this world. When the pesky foreigners don't understand we have to shout at them. It plays hell with the vocal chords....... :p ;)

[Jorghnassen]

Cultural Imperialist Pig!

Pfft. When's the last time Denmark produced a movie? The only one I can recall is about an old lady cooking a ham for 3 hours...

/end of threadjack
//gotta read Foucault's pendulum eventually

[tomgv15]

After I read DVC I thought: Clive Cussler and Anne Rice collaborated on a story. At some point they considered receiving advice from Umberto Ecco, but forgot to call. Too much absinth. While Foucault's Pendulum is not a quick read it illuminates and entertains.

[Pauliesonne]

Well, I just came back from a shopping trip and I nought the big hardback version for £20:00.

[Mycroft]

Now, I watched a documentary about the book on BBC4 last night and I learned about the book and they completely debunked the book's supposed facts, while showing that the people who believe the book to be factual, badly misinterpeted the book.

Anyway, I believe as long as I don't take it as fact, it could be a thrilling yarn along the lines of " Indiana Jones " and things like that.

So what do you think?

Sure. I read The Celestine Prophesies and enjoyed it immensely as fiction.

[Alliebubs]

I read The Da Vinci Code a couple of years ago, and hated it. Not because of the subject matter, mind you, but because of the shoddy writing and tired cliched characters. I gave my copy to my sister, who promptly fell in *love* with the book and read Angels & Demons right away. I can't speak for that book, but if it's anything like The Da Vinci Code, I want no part of it. :p

[tomgv15]

Angels and Demons - preposterous fun. The climax was seriously over the top. The story line also takes place during a 24 hour period. I don't remember any attempts by the book to be taken seriously. Definately a plane trip read. Bottom line - even more poorly written than DVC.

[WanderinWTF]

Is there a code that needs to be broke is it true that its hidden. If so can someone pls post a link where i can see it to break the code.

[Piggy]

I didn't care for it.

The prose is simplistic and formulaic. It seems designed to entertain commuters, with short chapters ending in soap-operatic cliffhangers. Lots of expository dialog. No character development.

Perhaps the popularity comes from the general public's fascination with the seemingly shocking religious material, the exotic locales, the sinister Opus Dei, and the purported historical secrets.

But to someone who'd heard it all before, the book was very flat. I finished it, though, b/c it was a quick read and my sister-in-law was very excited about the book.

[WanderinWTF]

I don't care to read it either, however I do want to break the code.

[Piggy]

I don't care to read it either, however I do want to break the code.
There is no code. Dan Brown's work is based on fraudulent documents and hairy old conspiracy theories. Breaking this code would be like breaking the code that reveals how the US government covertly planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks. It's all a bunch of hooey.

[Tirdun]

It would have made a good episode of "Young Indiana Jones" if you edited it down (with a chainsaw) and simplified the ridiculous leaps in the "code".

The basic pattern, as Piggy's described already, is:
-> chase to a scenic locale
-> tension (usually hiding from someone, creeping around)
-> HAMMER OF EXPOSITION
-> revelation of the next step of the puzzle
-> which is a set up for...
-> cliffhanger
-> Which leads to a chase scene (see above, rinse repeat)

[antihippy]

I read The Da Vinci Code a couple of years ago, and hated it. Not because of the subject matter, mind you, but because of the shoddy writing and tired cliched characters. I gave my copy to my sister, who promptly fell in *love* with the book and read Angels & Demons right away. I can't speak for that book, but if it's anything like The Da Vinci Code, I want no part of it. :p

Completely agree.

If there has ever been one book that could incite me to a book burning it's this book.

It's terrible in so many ways...

[Curnir]

I read The Da Vinci Code a couple of years ago, and hated it. Not because of the subject matter, mind you, but because of the shoddy writing and tired cliched characters. I gave my copy to my sister, who promptly fell in *love* with the book and read Angels & Demons right away. I can't speak for that book, but if it's anything like The Da Vinci Code, I want no part of it. :p
**spoilers*** spoilers*** you have been warned***
I read it a couple of years ago as well, but I can't say I hated it. Didn't like it either. I simply wasn't impressed.

I read through it in 2 sessions, well the sessions was interupted by me reflecting how incredibly dense/stupid the protagonists were 'how can they fail to recognize mirrored writing???? I thought the main dude knew stuff about Da Vinci???. And pondering things like 'doesn't a GPS chip/transponder require "clear line of sight' upwards?' and of course exclaiming 'Peanut oil isn't salty!'

My elder brother and his SO loved the book however, and seemed to be affronted when I told them what I thought.

I M O not worth re-reading.

[wolfgirl]

I'm right smack in the middle of reading it. I've found it to be somewhat entertaining, though not particularly well written. Some continuity-type errors and problems with time-line issues.

Dan Brown doesn't claim that the whole thing is true, just that the descriptions of the art, writings, etc. are factual. Which I unfortunatly can't speak to.

While the main contention in the book is certainly speculation on his part, it is hardly new and original. There has been a belief in a child of Mary and Jesus for centuries by some sects.

The most important thing to me is that it brings up some issues about the early church, Constantine's role in the beginnings of xianity and the bible, the transference of pagan religious figures and symbols into xian ones, the Deep Sea Scroll and Gnostic Gospels, etc. These are all facts and ones that most xians aren't aware of and should be. I'm hoping that more people will be opened up to the possibility that their precious fairy tale may actually be just that.

(By the way, that figure in The Last Supper sure does look like a woman. I'm just saying...)

[Piggy]

The most important thing to me is that it brings up some issues about the early church, Constantine's role in the beginnings of xianity and the bible, the transference of pagan religious figures and symbols into xian ones, the Deep Sea Scroll and Gnostic Gospels, etc.
You mean the "Dead Sea scrolls"?

It's true that DVC touches on some of these issues, but since the primary focus of the book concerns claims based on forged documents, and on valueless conspiracy theories, it's better to seek other sources for an understanding of topics such as Roman adoption of the Xian religion, canonization of Biblical texts, appropriation of pagan rites and symbols, the relationship between central dogma and gnostic heresies, etc.

[Curnir]

(By the way, that figure in The Last Supper sure does look like a woman. I'm just saying...)

True true.

but so does this figure.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Leonardo_da_Vinci_025.jpg

[wolfgirl]

You mean the "Dead Sea scrolls"?

It's true that DVC touches on some of these issues, but since the primary focus of the book concerns claims based on forged documents, and on valueless conspiracy theories, it's better to seek other sources for an understanding of topics such as Roman adoption of the Xian religion, canonization of Biblical texts, appropriation of pagan rites and symbols, the relationship between central dogma and gnostic heresies, etc.Oh, my god, did I actually type DEEP? (I'm a scuba diver, so I guess I just think "deep" whenever I think "sea." Better than thinking "dead"!)

But yes, you're right, it's certainly better to seek other sources, but the vast majority of the people who have read this book or will see this movie have not and will not do so. At least this gives them some exposure to those ideas that they have probably never heard before.

[HarryKeogh]

I'm still trying to figure out if I want the movie to do really well to piss off the Christian Right or for it to bomb to piss off the people who think The DaVinci Code is the greatest book ever.

Ok, I'm rooting for a hit...pissing off the religious trumps all.

[antihippy]

Dan Brown doesn't claim that the whole thing is true, just that the descriptions of the art, writings, etc. are factual. Which I unfortunatly can't speak to.

Exactly.

And it is an extremely poorly written piece of work.

Film is getting poor reviews (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4989710.stm).

[Meadmaker]

Has anyone here ever read any of the medieval grail quest writings?

I finished the book Monday night. I agree that it's a quick page turner, and it's not an incredible piece of literature. However, I'm surprised that no one in any DVC thread has mentioned the quest for the Holy Grail.

It's not incredibly profound, or extremely deep, but Brown did a very good job of making a modern grail quest, which I'll explain in a spoiler section.



The grail quest stories involve a set of knights out to find the Holy Grail. Most of them are looking for a cup. The one who finds it is the true knight who is looking, not for a cup, but for a true understanding of his relationship with God, as expressed through the act of Holy Communion. When Percival comes to understand the true meaning of communion, he finds the grail. The grail itself is but the vessel. It is found when one understands the contents. In the only version I've read cover to cover, the keeper of the Grail explains it to the successful knight, who incidentally also finds the cup, although he doesn't reveal it to the world, because it is only for those who understand its secrects.

Erase Christianity, and assert that human relationships are the highest goal of mankind. The "sacred feminine" becomes the Holy Grail. To attain spiritual fulfillment, one must truly grasp that ultimate human relationship, the relationship between man and woman.

Langdon, the Bishop, Teabring, and Silas are all on a quest for the Holy Grail. The Bishop wants it to get personal power. (He wants to be reinstated as a prelature of the Church.) Teabring wants it primarily to attack his enemies, the church. Silas doesn't know why he wants it. He just is told to find it.
Langdon, the worthy knight, has studied the sacred feminine. He seeks it out. He stumbles on the actual grail quest, which had up to that time been an academic diversion, but his research was on the sacred feminine. At Rosslyn Chapel, he finally completes his comprehension (perhaps by falling in love. I'm not sure.) and as a result, meets the grail-keeper, Sophie's grandmother. She gives him the final knowledge needed to find the actual artifact of the grail, but that is an anti-climax. The actual discovery, which he does not reveal to the world, is incidental to the true completion of the quest, which is the comprehension of the spiritual mystery of the sacred feminine.

I'm not sure how Sophie fits in. I think that Sophie and Langdon would have to be one "knight", since it would take a man and a woman to make a complete being.

It makes me want to go back and read the quest for the holy grail (I read a translation of an 11th century French version) and see if the unsuccessful knights have parallels to the other characters,



So, while I don't think it's an incredible book, I think most people are missing something when they read the book. It might not be great literature, but there is a cleverness that people are overlooking, in my humble opinion.

[Kerberos]

I see your point. I guess it's where you draw the line. And maybe in this case, it's hard to draw. And I suspect Dan Brown likes it like that.

But when he says there are "facts" in the book, I took that to mean that, The Knights Templar are real. The places in the book are all quite real. Jesus was real(?). DaVinci really painted the Mona Lisa. Etc...

Of course he might have to fudge a bit to make the story, i.e artistic license. For example, the Mona Lisa does not hang in the same gallery as some of the other pictures he describes. In fact, it is in a gallery by itself. So is that fact or fiction?

In the end, who cares? I enjoyed it. And the woos will continue to be woos. Nothing Dan Brown could possible say would change that.
Of course there is thing Dan Brown could have done. It might simply be a marketing trick, but there are very clear implications that Dan Brown want's the book to be taken seriously. You're quite right that the pseudoscience of the book shouldn't be taken seriously, but Dan Brown is partially responsible for the fact that some people do take it seriously.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I'm still trying to figure out if I want the movie to do really well to piss off the Christian Right or for it to bomb to piss off the people who think The DaVinci Code is the greatest book ever.

Ok, I'm rooting for a hit...pissing off the religious trumps all.

Of course it's the greatest book ever - it sold the most copies. DUH!!!!

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Of course there is thing Dan Brown could have done. It might simply be a marketing trick, but there are very clear implications that Dan Brown want's the book to be taken seriously. You're quite right that the pseudoscience of the book shouldn't be taken seriously, but Dan Brown is partially responsible for the fact that some people do take it seriously.

The more obtuse he is about it, the more money he makes. I would do the same thing.

[Diamond]

I think Monty Python had a more plausible grail quest. It seems to me that DVC was written for "Grassy Knollington".

DVC made me realise why I hated reading fiction. Its a complete waste of time.

[Piggy]

The more obtuse he is about it, the more money he makes. I would do the same thing.
I don't think he's being obtuse. He's deliberately misleading people by claiming, for example, that "the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist" when the Priory of Sion is a known fraud. He makes no mention of the fraud in his "official" FAQ (http://www.danbrown.com/novels/davinci_code/faqs.html).

That's charlatanism.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I don't think he's being obtuse. He's deliberately misleading people by claiming, for example, that "the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist" when the Priory of Sion is a known fraud.

They addressed that in the movie, I think. Assuming I caught the line correctly, the claim that it is a fraud is part of the cover up. Clever.

[Renfield]

Brown claims to spend years researching the book which makes you wonder what he was doing with his time or why he bothered. If you're going to spend that much time gathering information, you might as try to imcorporate some of it into the story instead of just pulling things out of your arse.

[tim]

Brown claims to spend years researching the book which makes you wonder what he was doing with his time or why he bothered. If you're going to spend that much time gathering information, you might as try to imcorporate some of it into the story instead of just pulling things out of your arse.

Harsh words, Renfield, harsh words.

























but true. :D