"I think when we read for leisure in our society today we just want something to be fun."

Please speak for yourself, ilove tulips. Rather than finding excruciatingly bad, laughably clumsy writers who concoct silly plots and populate them with cardboard characters "fun", many readers find them tedious and irritating. Believe it or not, good writers are not a chore to read, and they're actually read "for leisure".

It's pretty sad when a writer can steal so much information from others, almost get sued, completely misrepresent christian history (not to mention his interpretation of arius and arianism) and still manage to pull it all off with millions. Sadder still that people believe this guy, over 4,000 years of scholastics and some of the most intelligent human being ever. Completely amazing. No offense, but Dan Brown get a clue.

Colorado17,

Since my religion is good writing, that must explain why I thought "The Da Vinci Code" was such an extremely bad book.

Wanderlust5 you are not alone! And don't bother with Angels and Demons, it is not worthy it.

Its a great read for what it is....theres a reason why its on the best seller fiction list for almost two years now. Most books don't stay near #1 for two years......People liked it for the most part. He's creative and did some homework. If you don't buy into his stories or theories that's fine. But you can't say that he didn't make people think though. And after all thats what good writers do...make you think and entertain.....read all his books....entertaining and worth the time in my opinion.... good fiction and thats what your trying to buy in the fiction section of your bookstore after all. If it's non fiction your after and you were offended than shame on you for buying in the fiction section...........

Wow! A lot of pretentious answers. If you have recently traveled to either place the books are fun and fast-paced. I found Angels and Demons to be more interesting especially because I read it after returning from Rome and visiting many of the specific places described. They came to life in the words and I could easily picture the exact sites. I also find it interesting that so many non-christians read the Da Vinci Code because of the prospects and so many christians read it to debunk the theory. I say enjoy the ride and lighten up on the criticism.

John

Pretentious? More like discerning!

A couple of you above would like the following book; it was written about 30 years ago but has characterizations similar to Ian McEwan's.

The Columbus Tree, by Peter S. Feibleman

Very appropriate for Europe/Travel as it is about a Spanish coastal town turned into a tourist spot. Real characters, and not cartoon characters as in DVC. Told from viewpoints of locals, tourists, politics (police), and a teenage boy.

When I started the Da Vinci Code, I thought that it was a fun little read. It was a lot like a treasure hunt game that some friends of mine and I did in college, the only difference being that our games did not take place in Paris, and hardly anyone got killed.

When I got to the end of the book, however, I was disappointed in ending. Nothing in the book seemed worth killing for. Nothing seemed worth dying for either. I found the pretext of searching for the secret chicken salad recipe in "What's up Tiger Lily?" more believable.

Along the same line as John's post above, I would like to add that what some here seem to forget is that this book is FICTION, lighten up!

To read the reviews of A&D is interesting. I thought it was a good book until the end. I thought Dav. Code was better but what do I know. They are great fiction books and it was fun after reading Dav. Code on the plane to Paris to go see some of the things that were written in the book. But it is purely fiction with a whiff of reality thrown in. You may only want the illustrated version if you have been to Paris but it isin't necessary.

I read the non-illustrated version - no problems. Enjoyable fiction. I must admit, the book made me want to visit Paris all the more!

DVC is such a silly book. (Might as well be blunt about it.) Its art historical bits are nonsense, on top of everything else. If I'm not mistaken, there's a bit where the heroine lifts "The Virgin of the Rocks" off the wall--hi, a six foot, three inch painting? She must be stroooong. And John the Evangelist is typically shown beardless and often with long hair. This isn't the only case. It's so not a woman in the Last Supper. Silliness. Brown's wife is allegedly an "art historian" but I don't think she's a real one; I'd be shocked if she were fulltime faculty anywhere. I was disappointed in the Louvre for letting the movie film there, but hey, money talks I guess.

I guess I'm a big snob. Cheers to that! ;-)

So in summary - some people liked it, other did not

I, too, liked A&D b/c I read it after I got back from Rome. I also love reading art history type stuff (fiction and non-fiction), and love Bernini, so I enjoyed it.

But I don't think being at the top of the best seller list indicates anything of quality. More people eat at McDonalds than at 4* restaurants. That doesn't make the food better.

So, what do you all think of John Grisham? ;) (as if I don't already know...)

Loved Karen's analogy comparing the ten list to MacDonalds...I SO agree. I finally read DVC after folks raved. As a minister, it is both my job and my passion to study theology and religious history and this is just such a bad pastiche of both. Myths that had been debunked years ago (or centuries in the case of some)and theories that have no credibility with scholars...and the writer's craft seems to elude Mr.Brown. I was frankly depressed and kept wishing that a good writer, like Carre or a P.D. James, had taken this on. If you are going to transform theology into suspense, do it well, for heaven's sake!

I was surprised that someone who writes so poorly could sell so many books. After wading through DVC, with its Batman-style enigmas and character stereotypes, I've decided to give the other novels of world-renowned author Dan Brown a miss.

I found I was able to read the Da Vinci Code even though the characters were, as many have said, shallow in the extreme - particularly the female character. I thought the constant male/female principle thing really boring and the ending was totally pathetic. However, I stupidly bought Angels & Demons because other people told me it was better - so wrong. The bit about stopping his fall from the helicopter by holding out his coat was ludicrous (sorry if I have spoilt that bit for anyone) and the story seemed to me to be the same as the Da Vinci Code in its essentials. Secret sect, powerful sect member/great scholar gone mad, very-bright-but-not-nearly-as-smart-as-the-guy-but-still-beautiful-in-an-unusual-and-tall-way female lead whose father/sort of father has been killed. Blah blah.

I am embarrassed to admit I read them.

Thanks to the last three or four responses, I know that sweet reason lives. Embarrassment says it all. J.

I've already complained about DVC earlier in the thread and here I am again. ;-) The biggest problem I have with the book is illustrated by something that happened last week: one of my students, in a discussion of the Last Supper, raised her hand and asked me about the figure that DB claims is Mary Magdalene. When I explained why it is not, the student, confused, referred to DB's preface where he makes it sound like he is working from facts and sound scholarship. Then I had to explain that DVC is fiction and is NOT fact. Therein lies the problem: too many people are reading this and thinking that there is truth to it.

I saw the preview for the upcoming movie last week. I'll be in Paris when it opens, and I can just hear the stampede of DVC fans running to find a theater with the version originale. Count me out.

I don't think that DB presents it as fact. I got the impression that is was writing a work of fiction that "connects the dots" of theories, legends, etc. that gives a possible situation.

The critique of writing style makes me shake my head. Don't read it if you don't like it. I know I put plenty of books down when I don't like the author's voice. But, it is interesting reading and an interesting premise. What excellently written (according to the critics) are going unread because of DVC's stellar sales of the last three years?

As an educator, I am thrilled that such a wide cross-section of adults are reading. So many don't. I despise Danielle Steele, but I'm thrilled when someone I know who NEVER reads pick up a book for "escape" reading. Once again, different strokes for different folks.

First, I agree with Starrsville, reading is reading. In this day and age where video rules, its good to know that there is something out there that can get people curled up in front of the fireplace, instead of in their barcolounger with the built in cup-holders.

Secondly, as far as the fact vs fiction aspect. My personal opinion is that the buzz created by the book has lead DB, his publisher and his publicist to spend more time and effort into hinting at the possible validity of the premise than was originally planned. After all, this is a commercial enterprise, not a religious recruitment white-paper.

Thirdly. the debunkers are themselves working from "works" that may have less validity to them than anything that DB will ever write. Again, JHMO

I didn't re-read the entire thread. If people read just cereal box backs I would be happy, but there is something that REALLY bothers me, not about the book, but about the REACTION to the book.

You have no idea how many twenty somethings here (USA-walking around, discussing in class, and writing articles in college newspapers etc.) who believe that this is true or semi-true. They have absolutely no context on Jewish law or tradition, sexual mores anything-but are swallowing this tale whole. It is not historic, and it is fiction.

"I got the impression that is was writing a work of fiction that 'connects the dots' of theories, legends, etc. that gives a possible situation."

"As an educator, I am thrilled..."

Wow.

Yes, what does that say about where the education process has headed. Good observation.

Where can the imperative, definitive, or scienctifically proven fact stand within that expressed context of what "truth" is and how it is to be attained, idealistically or not? Yipes!

Wow is right. Do your own little experiement and ask adults you respect how many books they have read in the last year. It is shocking to "readers" how little reading adults - including very successful ones - actually do.

Whether or not a person can read, MAY have something to do with the educational system. Whether or not a person CHOOSES to read when they can read is due to far, far many more variables than the educational system. JMHO of course :-)

Sorry for the "inventive spelling" of experiement. Should have previewed before posting.

Now, how could I possibly do that twice in a row? Experiment!

I read both books and I could not put them down. I don't know much about great writting but they sure kept me entretained...I read TDVC first and then read A&D, I loved them but and I honestly felt like I was reading the same story twice....only minor changes. I was not happy when I heard Tom Hanks was cast for the role...I really can't see it!

I actually listened to the De Vinci Code on tape, when I went on vacation to San Diego. I LOVED it. Me and my family would find our selves leaving the hotel early just so we could hear more of the book! I'm a big fan.

AhQuehago, I totally agreed with you. I was dismayed when I heard he was cast - just could not "see" him in that role.

But, I did see an excerpt of the film on TV recently, and enjoyed it. They were able to film in the Louvre and the segment I saw was absolutely amazing. They had to use a stand-in for the Mona Lisa though :-)

Opinion on the novel's quality aside ;-) , I am just amazed that this book continues to sell in such large numbers. Why on earth would anyone still pay retail prices for it? Every one of the charity shops where I live has at least half a dozen to a dozen paperback and hardback copies on their shelves, most in pristine condition and priced under £1.

It is total escapism so I guess it depends on what you are looking for. I preferred The Da Vinci code simply because I am more familiar w/Paris, & it evoked some good memories as well. I would love to hear what the critics read for pleasure. I like the 'Doc Ford' (by Randy Wayne White) novels as well (try his "Last Flight Out" for some good travel reading). As well as Peter Mayle. But when in the proper frame of mind, I also like a little Hemingway or Sartre. It depends, you know ?

I have an aside on readers v. non-readers. I am a HUGE reader - I read fiction and non-fiction about almost everything I am interested, from travel to art, the NBA to cooking to whatever. My husband doesn't read at all (except for Newsweek).

When my kids were young, we made many trips to the library for books for them and me. We would always go in the late morning, when most people are at work. One day my son, then 4, saw a middle-aged man in the library. He thought that was odd and said, "mom, there's a man at the library!". My first thought was, well, uh, men CAN read, you know. He just was not used to seeing his dad read, or seeing any men at library and he thought that remarkable. Sigh.

My son's school stresses reading and makes the kids read books of their own every quarter. Each of my sons has a huge bookshelf in their room stocked with used books sale findings - all sorts of non-fiction and fiction. They've barely look at 75% of the books. Sigh.

I too, karens, a constant reader among men who read when they HAVE too. No one role modeled it better. Read to them constantly. None like to read as much as I, all are math/numbers people even within their jobs. Only my daughter will read some fiction.

But that any poster liked DVC, or that you rec it, is not my objection at all. There are two separate issues here. Totally separate. It's the acceptable "opinion" interpretation of what this story represents that bothers me. And the people who categorize that that assumption is acceptable and part of some learning process. Fiction is fiction. Historical fiction is based on some historical facts. This is not culturally historical. It's like having Jesus look at his wristwatch.

Minimally the person who writes about a time in history should have some grasp of the gender and cultural roles and strictures of that time.

Regardless of how little some people read, when they do, they still should never believe that fiction is fact or that because it is in print it is a scholarly or truthful measure of an historic period. They aren't educated until they know context of reality in what they read. Not just because they do read.

Young people are walking around quoting this social context as if it had some basis in Jewish reality.

JJ5, I have a problem with your base premise, ie. that what we believe is history is indeed fact. Much of the western belief system is based on writings by a closed society of individuals that had a vested interest in their writings being taken as "believe or burn in hell" fact.

I look at most of the passages in the old and new testaments as fiction. Their message is what is important, not the validity of the sequence of events.

I don't think that DB wrote the DVC or A&D to be message pieces. I don't believe that he intended them to re-write history. But, if today's youth believe that women's position in society has been unjustly diminished by religious leadership, and it leads to a change, then I'm all for it.

If it points out that giving yourself over, mind body and soul to a small group of individuals pretending to be following the will of god, is dangerous, then again, I'm all for it.

I'll never forget one of my favorite college professors telling me about how SHOCKED her freshmen classes are when she tells them that she disagrees with something that was in a book she assigned them to read. They ask her: you disagree? - but it's in a book! (b/c if it's in a book - it must be true!) And if she disagreed, why did she have them read it?

Maybe more critical thinking classes are needed at the high school level.

I know we've gotten off topic, but I am enjoying reading all the discussion here.

I did not say all recorded history was truth. Yes, it is always tinted through the eyes of the recorder, especially economically and socially tinted. But then again there are also archeological and historical relics telling their own tales as well. Some now are time frame provable scientifically. And this is not about the Bible at all- but about the area that is now Israel and surrounds circa the 1st Century.

And I would have no problem with your two queries. But that's not what I'm objecting to or what I'm hearing.

A female who wrote better than Shakespeare could have lived in 2 B.C. and all humanity would have missed her work because she was too busy carrying water 4 hours a day and was never physically alone at any time or had any space to write during her entire lifetime. But if she did or could learn to write, she would not have written in Shakespearean English. That's the kind of jump in logic that is being made.
We "are" of our time and place.

People are not seeing the context. The context for Jewish law, mores, sexual/social roles in this book is incorrect. And they are assuming that it is possible. And then going on to premise all kinds of modern agendas from that assumption. As if they followed.

Just found this website. Maybe helpful for those who may be reading the book (not the illustrated version) and want to see some of the locales -

http://www.danbrown.com/secrets/davi...de/louvre.html

It is a work of fiction and the things it says are not necessarily true. But it doesn't really matter, because the things it talks about aren't really important, either, except to a few specialists. The world continues to turn either way, and people who read it are entertained by it (although I didn't see much entertaining about it myself—I read DVC only because it took place largely in Paris and France).

From the Broadway play, Wicked, soundtrack =

ELPHABA(spoken) So you lied to them.

WIZARD
(spoken) Elphaba, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it - "history."