Because there can't be too much Dan Brown bashing

[athon]

Seriously, I know the usual drill - 'Yeah, he's a hack, but a) you're just jealous, b) it's pulp fiction, c) not everybody can write well...etc. etc.'

Now at least I have a handy list of 20 reasons why Dan Brown is over-rated as a writer. I mean, seriously - if I was an editor and somebody handed me such poorly written tripe, it would have red ink all over it.

And this made it to print. And sold in the millions.

*sigh*

Athon

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

There isn't enough Dan Brown bashing!

His writing is so pedestrian, it gives pedestrian writing a bad name! It gives bad novels a bad name!

Such potboilers. So badly written. So ludicrous. So self-serious. The style- just unbearable. Such...phony cleverness. Danielle Steel would be ashamed. A high school English teacher would flunk some passages if they appeared in a paper. Agatha Christie would be appalled.

A.O.Scott's review of Brown's writing was priceless:

http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/movies/15ange.html

Since “Angels & Demons” takes place mainly in the Vatican, and is festooned with the rites and ornaments of Roman Catholicism, I might as well begin with a confession. I have not read the novel by Dan Brown on which this film (directed, like its predecessor, “The Da Vinci Code,” by Ron Howard) is based. I have come to believe that to do so would be a sin against my faith, not in the Church of Rome but in the English language, a noble and beleaguered institution against which Mr. Brown practices vile and unspeakable blasphemy.

[lionking]

He does, though, give encouragement to budding authors everywhere - "hey I can write like that".

But IMO Matthew Reilly, who has sold books by the millions, make Dan Brown look like Steinbeck.

[athon]

Originally Posted by lionking

He does, though, give encouragement to budding authors everywhere - "hey I can write like that".

But IMO Matthew Reilly, who has sold books by the millions, make Dan Brown look like Steinbeck.

Haha. I just made a similar comparison to a friend not thirty seconds ago. Not sure I agree that he makes Brown look better, to be honest. I think they're both just as bad.

Seriously, though, I do wonder what it is that grates on me so much. I mean, ok, fine, they are poor writers. Big deal, right?

But when I read something like, '...the mountainous silhouette of his attacker stared through the iron bars. He was broad and tall, with ghost-pale skin and thinning white hair. His irises were pink with dark red pupils.', I immediately think back to when I've made similar writing errors and cringe at the inconsistency. Yes, I've made the same mistakes. But I'm aware of the fact they are fundamental errors in narration. A colleague of mine who happens to be an editor (and enjoy DB books) says it's the editor who should catch them. And she has a point. If they were occasional, I would probably even blame the editor instead.

But the books are littered with such examples, as well as a range of other bad devices.

So, why does this bug me? I think it is because it says the details aren't important. I read that above example and thought 'so which is it - is it a silhouette, or can you see his eyes?'. It detracts from the scene, and makes me think the author himself was less interested in the imagery and the mood, and more interested in sounding like a cliche, or appearing clever. Yet it means the author, the editor, and the market also find such details trivial and unimportant. It means every student I've encouraged to be proud of their efforts in writing, to consider the meaning of their words, to be particular in their choice of language I've given the wrong advice - I should have just said 'make it up, because nobody really pays attention anyway.'

Yet ultimately what offends me most is the same thing that offends me when it comes to a lack of critical thinking amongst people.

To me, words matter. For us to think critically, we need to share information as faithfully as possible. We can't just make it up. We can't paint images with words that just sound pretty - we need to select words that will convey meaning as we intend it. An acclaimed writer should be what society holds in the highest respect when it comes to wordsmithing. Sadly, Dan Brown is that person.

Is it laziness of a population who couldn't care to think, who just want an easy read regardless of whether the words make sense or the author has considered how to weave the information into the narrative? Is it a symptom of people's need to sympathise with the deficits of an artist, forgiving mistakes because they feel they can't do any better?

It would be different if he was a poet whose style was to use the wrong words intentionally, or wrote prose that played on the infodumping style as a parody or social commentary. I'd have less of a problem.

Maybe I'm just an elitist writer who is trying to justify a gut reaction with something more reasonable.

Athon

[lionking]

Athon, do you seriously expect that books wouldn't have gone down the same dumbing down highway as TV?

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Originally Posted by athon

Yet ultimately what offends me most is the same thing that offends me when it comes to a lack of critical thinking amongst people.

To me, words matter. For us to think critically, we need to share information as faithfully as possible. We can't just make it up. We can't paint images with words that just sound pretty - we need to select words that will convey meaning as we intend it. An acclaimed writer should be what society holds in the highest respect when it comes to wordsmithing. Sadly, Dan Brown is that person.

I feel your pain. That Dan Brown writes for anything beyond Geek Monthly is a global travesty. Agatha Christie and Mario Puzo wouldn't be caught dead with some of the sentences. There are better writers on this forum. Heck, there are better writers in 8th grade Language Arts class.

However, think of this. Fifteen years from now, Dan Brown will be entirely forgotten. Trash, however big at the time, is ephemeral and great art is immortal.

Well, not always. There is some trash that seems destined to live forever. Guess even trash can strike a universal chord.

[athon]

Originally Posted by lionking

Athon, do you seriously expect that books wouldn't have gone down the same dumbing down highway as TV?

Yeah, it does seem a little naive I guess.

Maybe I've held onto the hope that because reading takes more effort than watching television, it wouldn't suffer the same fate. People seem to be happy that 'at least Dan Brown's getting people to read'. But it's like saying because McDonalds is being renovated with faux-wood paneling and fancy new menus, it's a good thing as it gets people out enjoying fine dining again.

Sure, people reading books is a good thing...so long as it is because it shows they are gaining an appreciation of the written word. Otherwise, why should I be happy about masses of semi-literates thinking a good novel should have passages like, 'He was sitting all alone in the enormous cabin of a Falcon 2000EX corporate jet as it bounced its way through turbulence. In the background, the dual Pratt & Whitney engines hummed evenly.'?

Athon

[Lucian]

I read The Da Vinci Code a few years ago, and since then I have been trying to blot it from memory. Sadly, I have been unable to forget that he described some object as being "shaped like a cruciform." No, Dan, either it's cruciform or it's shaped like a cross. I know it's a minor detail, but shouldn't professional writers understand how words work?

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Athon- that's how you discover art. By going through junk first. You have a starting point and you need that starting point before going on to other things and then other things and then other things. At least people know the joys of reading through DB and might be later prompted to seek out better things. Better things that will make them realize how bad the first thing was.

I'm a major film buff. How did I discover the world of movies? Through movies like Lord of the Rings.

[athon]

Originally Posted by EeneyMinnieMoe

Athon- that's how you discover art. By going through junk first. You have a starting point and you need that starting point before going on to other things and then other things and then other things. At least people know the joys of reading through DB and might be later prompted to seek out better things. Better things that will make them realize how bad the first thing was.

You have a point there.

I read David Eddings when I was about 11. I loved it. Thought it was great. I read Dragonlance around then as well, and also thought it was the best read.

I tried again on both accounts years later, just to bring back the memories. I was horrified at just how awful they were. How could I have loved them so much once upon a time?

Over time, I grew to recognise cliches. I came to see dimensionality in characters, and to appreciate that good writing is sneaky - you're not beaten over the head with descriptions, but find yourself immersed in a world where you find yourself sympathising with the character's perceptions with no conscious effort.

Now, those books were bad...but I only came to recognise that as I read more. As with pulp romance, the cliche and infodumping was almost a part of the formula. It hardly forgives them for being poorly written, but I don't see Tom Hanks playing Tasselhoff Burrfoot in a Hollywood blockbuster.

Originally Posted by Lucian

No, Dan, either it's cruciform or it's shaped like a cross. I know it's a minor detail, but shouldn't professional writers understand how words work?

See, that's pretty much my thought.

It's the mass's way of saying 'we don't care if he doesn't know the meaning of words, or if he feels obliged to make us swim through an encyclopedia of descriptions for his own academic gratification, or if he is inconsistent - we just like his story!'.

But here's the thing - the stories themselves aren't all that clever, or interesting. They're simple, true, but in my time I've read far more gripping tales that are written well and are very straight forward, yet never got so much as a review in the local rag. I'm simply curious to know how the hype wave started. Good publicists? The 'shocking' controversy? What was it? Given the variety of damn good, simple, well-written, easy to read (and let's face it - how the hell can paragraph's of pointless information describing the make and model of a friggin' plane that has nothing to do with the narrative really make it 'easier' to read?) books I've come across in my life time, it simply can't be that this popularity wave started because a bunch of people thought Dan Brown was good!

Man...if only I knew.

Athon

[lionking]

You know what? For all of the truth in the posts here, I'll probably read it. Sometimes you eat at first class restuarants, sometimes you have fish and chips.

[athon]

Originally Posted by lionking

You know what? For all of the truth in the posts here, I'll probably read it. Sometimes you eat at first class restuarants, sometimes you have fish and chips.

I did read it. So I can't say 'no, don't'. I picked up my stepfather's copy, in spite of suspecting it would be awful. And I did read it all. It hurt, but I persisted, mostly just to face the ending.

I read it for the same reason most people do - because somebody else read it and said they liked it, and there appeared to be a widespread appreciation of it. Like most people, I wanted to know what the fuss was about.

So, I don't blame people for reading it, to be honest. Hype waves are like that. I also read Harry Potter for the same reason.

Athon

[pmckean]

Plus one for Matthew Reilly. Appalling.

Does anyone think that James Patterson is a terrible writer? His detective mysteries are normally wrapped up by zero detection and a great deal of luck or coincidence. His writing just grates on me - although he's not as bad as Reilly.

Douglas Preston/Lincoln Child, anyone? Yuck.

Anyway, I read all of Dan Brown's novels before Da Vinci code made it big - and let's not forget that it was word of mouth that turned Brown into a global publishing phenomenon. I enjoyed his novels greatly, forgave them their sins against language and recommended them to others.

I can appreciate great writing, but I also love a good page turner. The two aren't always mutually exclusive (try Michael Connelly), but Brown definitely gets me turnin' those pages without being as obviously bad a writer as Reilly/Patterson et al.

I do think criticism of Brown's writing has become a new meme.

[ddt]

First, I have to admit I'm not much of a fiction reader. But Dan Brown would never, ever, make it to my short list for two other reasons than his prose style.

1) He claims that most of the CT in his novels is true, while in fact it is not. From an accompanying Telegraph article:

Quote:

They are works of fiction, but Brown tells us they are based on fact: "All organisations in this novel exist,” says a foreword to The Last Symbol, "including the Freemasons, the Invisible College, the Office of Security, the SMSC, and the Institute of Noetic Sciences”. Similarly, at the beginning of The Da Vinci Code, we learn that The Priory of Sion is a real secret society founded in 1099.

Fail one. I wouldn't even mind a CT if it makes for a good story, however, don't tell me it actually exists.

2) He doesn't even bother to get his basic facts right. See, e.g., this wiki article. Versailles to the NW of Paris? Getting the locations and destinations of the Paris railway stations wrong. Couldn't he miss the 10 bucks to buy a decent map of Paris. Paris founded by the Merovingians - he never heard of Lutetia?

If the writer apparently can't be bothered with such basic fact checking, why should I bother to buy and read his novels? Errors of this kind would irritate me to no end while reading. And I do have a good (paper) map of Paris at arm's reach to check the locations.

[HarryKeogh]

Originally Posted by lionking

You know what? For all of the truth in the posts here, I'll probably read it. Sometimes you eat at first class restuarants, sometimes you have fish and chips.

I'll probably read Dan Brown's latest for the same reason I read The DaVinci Code. Everyone else read it and I came across a free copy.

I picked up a friend's copy of TDC and wound up reading it in a weekend. Why? Each chapter is 3 pages long and ends in a cliffhanger. And I constantly said to myself "this is so ridiculous...but let's see what happens next". Yeah, it's not literature, it's actually quite silly, but it was fun the same way the last Die Hard picture was.

Yeah, sometimes you have fish and chips and enjoy it (but feel guilty afterwards).

[lionking]

Originally Posted by HarryKeogh

I'll probably read Dan Brown's latest for the same reason I read The DaVinci Code. Everyone else read it and I came across a free copy.

I picked up a friend's copy of TDC and wound up reading it in a weekend. Why? Each chapter is 3 pages long and ends in a cliffhanger. And I constantly said to myself "this is so ridiculous...but let's see what happens next". Yeah, it's not literature, it's actually quite silly, but it was fun the same way the last Die Hard picture was.

Yeah, sometimes you have fish and chips and enjoy it (but feel guilty afterwards).

I think that I read the Da Vinci Code quicker than any other book. I even ignored sports on TV.

[athon]

Originally Posted by HarryKeogh

I picked up a friend's copy of TDC and wound up reading it in a weekend. Why? Each chapter is 3 pages long and ends in a cliffhanger.

Yup. It's kind of novel writing 101 (addictive computer games work on a similar principle) - short, snappy chapters that end in such a way that make you curious to know what comes next.

Athon

[pmckean]

"I picked up a friend's copy of TDC and wound up reading it in a weekend. Why? Each chapter is 3 pages long and ends in a cliffhanger. And I constantly said to myself "this is so ridiculous...but let's see what happens next".

Exactly right. There's a technique there that keeps you reading. Short chapters, lots of suspense. JJ Abrams, master of cliffhangers, talks about his love of the mysterious unknown in this link:

http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2009/07/abramsbox/

[athon]

Originally Posted by pmckean

Exactly right. There's a technique there that keeps you reading. Short chapters, lots of suspense.

Here's where I disagree - there is curiosity, but I would hesitate to state it goes as far as suspense, at least in my case.

Suspense (IMO) requires you to care about the characters. You've engaged with the narrative and are drawn into the plot, having a personal stake in the outcome.

In the case of Dan Brown, I found myself getting to the end of the chapter and possessing a curiosity in how he was going to resolve a situation. I didn't even find his resolutions all that clever. However, by the time I'd read it and saw I only had another page or two left of the chapter, I'd keep reading. Easy to digest, and provokes you into wanting to know how a scene will resolve, but hardly 'suspenseful'.

Athon

[Dr. Tobias Fünke]

I strongly recommend "Digital Fortress" .

There's no limit to what Brown can fail at.

[timhau]

Originally Posted by EeneyMinnieMoe

Such potboilers. So badly written. So ludicrous. So self-serious. The style- just unbearable. Such...phony cleverness.

You hit a home run there. I've wondered for a long time how to describe the feature that most irks me in Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code, but phony cleverness captures it perfectly.

[timhau]

Originally Posted by lionking

But IMO Matthew Reilly, who has sold books by the millions, make Dan Brown look like Steinbeck.

Oh, you've run into Mr. CrapGenerator too. If there's something below Reilly (other than illiteracy), I don't want to know about it.

[dtugg]

Originally Posted by ddt

1) He claims that most of the CT in his novels is true, while in fact it is not. From an accompanying Telegraph article:

Fail one. I wouldn't even mind a CT if it makes for a good story, however, don't tell me it actually exists.

To be fair to Dan Brown, he doesn't say that the CTs are true. Just that the organizations in his stories exist and they do.



I'm a little embarrassed to say that I have read all of his books.

Digital Fortress - sucked
Angels and Demons - I liked this one the best
Deception Point - pretty good
The Da Vinci Code - ok
The Lost Symbol - sucked, especially the ending

His prose style can be pretty annoying but he has a way of keeping you wondering what's going to happen enough to keep reading. I think I read all of his books in a day or two.

[timhau]

Originally Posted by athon

But when I read something like, '...the mountainous silhouette of his attacker stared through the iron bars. He was broad and tall, with ghost-pale skin and thinning white hair. His irises were pink with dark red pupils.', I immediately think back to when I've made similar writing errors and cringe at the inconsistency. Yes, I've made the same mistakes. But I'm aware of the fact they are fundamental errors in narration.

Exactly. They'd be OK in a rough draft. Apparently never spotted by Mr. Brown; combined with the fact that he does errors like that literally all the time leads me to conclude that he's got the stylistic sense of a mudbrick.

[HarryKeogh]

Originally Posted by timhau

Exactly. They'd be OK in a rough draft. Apparently never spotted by Mr. Brown; combined with the fact that he does errors like that literally all the time leads me to conclude that he's got the stylistic sense of a mudbrick.

Hey! Did Dan Brown write that sentence?!

[timhau]

Originally Posted by HarryKeogh

Hey! Did Dan Brown write that sentence?!

Hey, I'm a non-native speaker on teh interweb. I can do that.

[ddt]

Originally Posted by dtugg

To be fair to Dan Brown, he doesn't say that the CTs are true. Just that the organizations in his stories exist and they do.

First: I forgot a link to the Telegraph article I mentioned - it is linked to in the head of the Telegraph article from the OP.

He claimed in the preface to the Da Vinci code that the Priory of Sion was a real secret society, founded in 1099. The truth is that it is was a hoax set up by a Frenchman Pierre Plantard in the 1950s, and that it only existed in the imagination and the documents made up by Plantard.

So, fail on both the founding date and on the "real society" thing.

His claims about Opus Dei and the Illuminati are also way besides the truth.

I can't care less if he might be right with his newest novel, then. I'll just wait for a wiki article listing its inaccuracies.

[davidhorman]

I've read one Dan Brown novel, and that was Deception Point. I've also read one Tom Clancy novel, Hidden Agendas (I think), and the former was far better (though hardly great itself) than the latter.

Now we all know not to expect too much in the way of accurate portrayal of computer systems in films, and unfortunately Mr Clancy seemed to be writing this with adaptation in mind. In order to recover an incriminating email, one of the agents decides the best way would be to enter a VR of the Old West and rifle through a post master's office.

There's a scene where the henchman, a cardboard cut-out gay-hating Nazi, goes to the gym and pumps iron while two other similarly muscled (and possibly greased) gym-goers compliment him on his abs and lats. (Insert Family Guy cutaway on repressed sexuality here).

And then there was the subplot ("sub" in the sense of "has absolutely no connection to anything else in the novel at all") where a boy finds redemption and a connection to his absentee hero father by... buying a boomerang.

At least with the Dan Brown I didn't feel I'd utterly wasted the time I'd spent reading it (but if I was a slower reader, I would have).

David

[dtugg]

Originally Posted by ddt

First: I forgot a link to the Telegraph article I mentioned - it is linked to in the head of the Telegraph article from the OP.

He claimed in the preface to the Da Vinci code that the Priory of Sion was a real secret society, founded in 1099. The truth is that it is was a hoax set up by a Frenchman Pierre Plantard in the 1950s, and that it only existed in the imagination and the documents made up by Plantard.

So, fail on both the founding date and on the "real society" thing.

His claims about Opus Dei and the Illuminati are also way besides the truth.

I can't care less if he might be right with his newest novel, then. I'll just wait for a wiki article listing its inaccuracies.

OK. I had forgot that the Priory of Sion was a hoax.

ETA: The link you gave says that in Brown's lastest book, he claims that the Freemasons secretly run America. He doesn't.

[bjornart]

I read the Da Vinci Code only to be able to truly enjoy the Norwegian parody "Madonna-gåten", the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna...Munch))Madonna riddle, and I'm not planning on reading anything else he's written, but he comes nowhere near truly horrible writing.

This summer I read "Shock wave" by Clive Cussler, a book so bad I threw it in the recycler after reading.

[timhau]

Originally Posted by dtugg

The Da Vinci Code - ok
The Lost Symbol - sucked, especially the ending

The Lost Symbol has a worse ending than The Da Vinci Code?

[dtugg]

Originally Posted by timhau

The Lost Symbol has a worse ending than The Da Vinci Code?

Much worse. Do you want me to tell you what it is?

[timhau]

Not just worse, but much worse? That is an achievement. Please don't spoil it, this I have to see myself.

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by athon

Haha. I just made a similar comparison to a friend not thirty seconds ago. Not sure I agree that he makes Brown look better, to be honest. I think they're both just as bad.

Seriously, though, I do wonder what it is that grates on me so much. I mean, ok, fine, they are poor writers. Big deal, right?

But when I read something like, '...the mountainous silhouette of his attacker stared through the iron bars. He was broad and tall, with ghost-pale skin and thinning white hair. His irises were pink with dark red pupils.', I immediately think back to when I've made similar writing errors and cringe at the inconsistency. Yes, I've made the same mistakes. But I'm aware of the fact they are fundamental errors in narration. A colleague of mine who happens to be an editor (and enjoy DB books) says it's the editor who should catch them. And she has a point. If they were occasional, I would probably even blame the editor instead.

But the books are littered with such examples, as well as a range of other bad devices.

So, why does this bug me? I think it is because it says the details aren't important. I read that above example and thought 'so which is it - is it a silhouette, or can you see his eyes?'. It detracts from the scene, and makes me think the author himself was less interested in the imagery and the mood, and more interested in sounding like a cliche, or appearing clever. Yet it means the author, the editor, and the market also find such details trivial and unimportant. It means every student I've encouraged to be proud of their efforts in writing, to consider the meaning of their words, to be particular in their choice of language I've given the wrong advice - I should have just said 'make it up, because nobody really pays attention anyway.'

Yet ultimately what offends me most is the same thing that offends me when it comes to a lack of critical thinking amongst people.

To me, words matter. For us to think critically, we need to share information as faithfully as possible. We can't just make it up. We can't paint images with words that just sound pretty - we need to select words that will convey meaning as we intend it. An acclaimed writer should be what society holds in the highest respect when it comes to wordsmithing. Sadly, Dan Brown is that person.

Is it laziness of a population who couldn't care to think, who just want an easy read regardless of whether the words make sense or the author has considered how to weave the information into the narrative? Is it a symptom of people's need to sympathise with the deficits of an artist, forgiving mistakes because they feel they can't do any better?

It would be different if he was a poet whose style was to use the wrong words intentionally, or wrote prose that played on the infodumping style as a parody or social commentary. I'd have less of a problem.

Maybe I'm just an elitist writer who is trying to justify a gut reaction with something more reasonable.

Athon

It's terminal Bulwer-Lyttonitis.

[dtugg]

Let's just say that I am glad I didn't pay for it.

[Chaos]

Guys, I agree that Matthew Reilly isn´t exactly Shakespeare, but you have to give him a little bit of credit for not pretending to write the world´s best, most carefully researched mystery novels. I´ve only read one of Reilly´s novels, Scarecrow, but at least that one was good, brainless fun... sort of like a James Bond movie in novel form.

[patchbunny]

I've mentioned it before, and I'll mention it again. Dan Brown writes in the tradition of Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys. His style has all the feel of that juvenile literature. I can't go knocking it for the bad writing, as I'm such a JK Rowlings fan and Frith knows the Harry Potter series isn't that great, but at least Potter is marketed for what it is - kid's literature. Dan Brown needs to either move his stuff to the Young Adult section or get a better editor.

[Simon39759]

Can you spoil the ending for me?
I have no intention of buying any more of Dan Brown's books.

Just put it in Spoiler tags...



What first got me was the big cop Bezu (what kind of first name is that) wearing a crucifix on the job.
That's have gotten him fired, separation of church and state and all that.

[Big Les]

Originally Posted by lionking

You know what? For all of the truth in the posts here, I'll probably read it. Sometimes you eat at first class restuarants, sometimes you have fish and chips.

Ah, but there ARE first class fish and chip restaurants. By analogy, this would be Dan Brown's chippy.

[Retrograde]

Quote:

Douglas Preston/Lincoln Child, anyone? Yuck.

I liked the older ones. The last few have gotten somewhat woowoo-ye and, dare I say it, Dan Brownish. At least their writing style doesn't actually cause pain.

I sort of read A&D and DVC - I listened to the audiobooks while doing tasks that required some attention but not a lot. Still didn't keep me from yelling at the heroine in DVC: "Gee, the answer to this difficult puzzle concocted by my grandfather who doted on me is a word that means 'wisdom': what could it be?" "It's your name, you ninny!"

When the library gets the audiobook of the latest I'll probably borrow it: I'll need something to listen to when I clean the garage.