Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I absolutely agree with your comment. This book does shed a different light on religion and sparks new ideas that someone my not have thought about. I am christian and the information in the book prompted me to do a little more research about christianity and the affects that it has on other religious beliefs.

For the most part, it seems that people either passionately love this book or they passionately hate it. For my part, I don't see it so much as an indictment of the Catholic Church in particular but of religious extremism and religion interfering in political process in general. The unwarranted political control granted to extreme religious organizations like the CBN is an issue that we will be forced to address one way or the other. To my eye, our political process has been poisoned by it and the danger of theocracy is quite real. Furthermore, Brown's indictment of the Church for removing or suppressing feminine divinity figures is justified and needs a much closer look. Women do not have enough of a role in religion, religious practice, heroic myths, and creation myths, nor are they portrayed as divinity figures enough. In short, our religious systems and institutions lack balance and have a bias two suppressing issues, stories, and roles that empower women to live as equals to men. Finally, Brown wrote his story simplistically, in my view, to spread his tale to as broad an audience as possible. Though it is not as pristine a narrative as, say, Umberto Eco, the message it conveys is one that needs to be heard. More obscure books on the matter are not as accessible as Da Vinci Code and if someone were to write an accessible book of genius on this subject, I would give him all due praise. In the meantime, Dan Brown is telling a story that needs to be told. It is one that has been kept quiet and in the dark for far too long.

Yep! Thank you Ryan and Robert for speaking up for those of us who aren't as "learned" as others in these matters. Those of us that just read it for pure entertainment. Those of us that realize that this book never was supposed to be the TRUE tell-all book of the life Jesus or something, but rather that Dan Brown did write a fictional novel, to appeal to the masses. I agree that it was perhaps a catalyst as you say, for us unlearned (yet open-minded folks) to get out and learn more on the subject as we should all do in order to form an opinion on something as opposed to "flocking like sheep" to this one story and live by it. Robert, you mentioned Ecco, and I have seen his name mentioned in other reviews on this book too and I would like to read his book now! But in those same reviews, I was almost offended because we are all at different education and reading levels and what is entertaining to one, may not be entertaining to others for a number of reasons. I respect the views of others, otherwise, what would be the point of this website! But there is no need to demean people if they found something entertaining but you didn't because you're much more educated in the subject. I am Christian and my own Dad was mad at me for reading this book. I just think that if you're reading a book for entertainment and it is good for you then so be it, it doesn't necessarily mean that you believe everything that comes out of it, but if you do then that is your problem. But in the mean time, we should all be open-minded to others opinions and get along!

I don't care about what Dan Brown did or did not want to do with Christianity. I do care that the book is terribly written, terribly plotted, and just bad bad bad.

Thank you Amanda for your perspective on the literary value of the book. I appreciate that this conversation thread has focused on the positives the book has done for the world, how it has not meant to come down on Christians but to open people's minds to a broader perspective.

As for it being terribly written and terribly plotted. Well, I am not literary genious but somehow it kept me on the edge of my seat.

I think Dan Brown must have done something right with his choice of literary approach as it was a best seller and became a movie.

He may not be a master literary author, but he is a master at knowing his target audience.

What do you think?

I appreciate the rational discussion here.

I simply can't agree that this book is a good one, though, for so many reasons.

This book isn't good, plain and simple. I think it is appealing to people because it treats Christianity as magic and not faith. If we had proof, then we would have no faith. And it creates the idea of being special and part of this fictional orgainazation makes people special, and that is what they really want.

He has the right to express his ideas, but if he is so sure the church is hiding something, come in. We welcome anyone who wants to come.

There is nothing new or revelatory in this dismal book. Most of it was ripped off from a book called The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail which itself was inspired by a "documentary" on BBC TV by Henry Lincoln. Indeed most of Lincoln's assertions in the film were distorted and sometimes fictionalised historical facts and myths. The whole was woven into a highly entertaining show. But even back in 1982, those bits of the cobbled together story which were based on fact or persistent legend were in the public domain.

The problem with this book is that whilst the bits of myth, fact and nonsense are rehashed into an engaging enough plot, the writing is execrable. If you find yourself stuck somewhere miles from civilisation on your own, desperate for some diversion, then this is a fine choice to waste a couple of hours and then chuck in the nearest bin. But if you are interested in the source and nature of legends concerning Jesus and the Grail and the facts about The Templars, Opus Dei, Rosicrucians, Cathars and so on, then read some serious well-researched works on these subjects not this tosh.

Don't worry! You're not the only one who likes this book. It's pretty good.

finnaly some people that arnt nuts this was a really interesting book

I agree with your comment as well. I loved this book way more than I thought I would. It was the most fun I have ever had in reading a book (and I have read tons of books). It definitely made me say "hmmm...what if?". It amazes me how people write such negative reviews (not you) on highly successful books and movies. It comes across as jealousy to me. So your positive comment was refreshing. :o)

As somebody that loves all kinds of weird historical legends and conspiracy theory, I love that Browned jammed a bunch of them together and then got people talking about it like he'd written a text book.
Plus, the fact that he wrote a very old fashioned mystery novel and then made a gazillion dollars off of people that apparently never picked up an Agatha Christie novel.
It appeals to my warped sense of humor and hopes for myself as an aspiring writer.

Plus, it was a fun read. Hard to top a murder mystery set in the Louvre.

Travis: if you want a book about weird historical legends and conspiracy theories jammed together that also has a warped sense of humor, read "Foucault's Pendulum", the book "The Da Vinci Code" wishes desperately it was. The fact that Dan Brown never picked up an Agatha Christie novel is pretty obvious.

Everybody who likes this book: Roger Ebert once stated you should judge a movie not on what its about, but on how its about it. The people who despise "The Da Vinci Code" do not despise it for what it says about Christianity or Christ or what have you. We despise it because it is poorly written and treats its audience as though they aren't capable of rational thought. The subject matter is fine (see again: "Foucault's Pendulum") but Dan Brown is a horrible writer and is offensive to people who read actual books.

Thanks, I'll have to try and track down 'Foucault's Pendulum.

I don't have much problem with Brown as a writer. His style is just very old fashioned. Reminds me of a lot of the old 70's spy and mystery paperbacks I've come across.
It's just that people's sense of history only goes back five to ten years, so it looked like he'd reinvented the wheel.

It's kind of like how JK Rowling obviously read a lot of Roald Dahl, got herself a copy of Campbell's 'The hero with a thousand faces' and suddenly she's outselling Shakespear.

Amusing and it gets people to read. It's a win/win situation in my mind.

Good review Ryan. I think sometimes people just start bashing the book for the wrong reasons.

This book is written to be a mass-market best-seller. I don't know what people were expecting! I just finished reading it and I liked it very much.

If a person starts reading already with a bad impression, then why read it... In my opinion you have to understand this book for what it is.

Yes, it's a page-turner. Yes, it has cliffhangers. Yes, it may have its flaws. But one has to see the audience this book is for. It helps the general public to see things from a different angle and to question some aspects of our society.

To Dierdre: Not necessarily true what you say that it was "ripped off". I know, I know. There was a lawsuit against Brown which he WON as we know, and which was won in Britain's High Court of Appeal. No small minds in that arena. Of course, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail was inspired by the documentary as you say, for goodness' sake...since the producer, Henry Lincoln, is one of the authors of the book!! Hello? It is most assuredly NOT inconceivable that Jesus the man, the Jewish Rabbi, would have, could have, and SHOULD have been married! For him NOT to have been married , he would have had few devotees indeed, for in those times, a Rabbi was respected and held in esteem if he was a family man. For him to have been unmarried would have been frowned upon, not only that, but he would have contravened Divine Law which would have insulted the Jewish God, AND the people. Now, he may have been PORTRAYED as celibate, (by the sexually neurotic catholics) but it's doubtful that he ACTUALLY was. And what's the big deal if he wasn't? The fact is that NO ONE really knows, but the probability of his being a 'virgin' is slim. Dan Brown never set out to make titanic waves with his book, but he did nevertheless. And good for him for doing so! He was writing a novel. Period. End of story. And yet--he was able to reach millions of readers who would ordinarily not reach out to academic bookshelves for a research tome. This was Dan Brown's clever way of getting a terribly important social, historical message out to the average Jane and Joe. He did an outstanding job, and I for one will always be grateful to him for doing what he did. He made people think. And he left people going: 'wow!'. Can you ask for more from a writer? No, it is not a literary masterpiece. But you can rest assured that The DaVinci Code isn't going to slip quietly "into that good night" like many people wish it would. Nope, it's going to be discussed, torn apart, put down, held up to scrutiny, and praised longer than you or I could even wish for. Brown succeeded in stirring up--through a novel--a controversy that was long overdue in coming to the attention of the general population. Because the Truth had been hidden by churchianity for far too long. Uh, amen.

When I read a book, I don't really care about the serious things behind. It is a good book to me, when I read it, I was so into it. I wouldn't do anything unless let me finished the book.

I absolutely have to agree with your comment. Many people nowadays seem to hate this book, for reasons I cannot see- research and hard work went into it, and I thought it was extremely well written. It was awesome, and I support your comment.

Ryan, your so right!

I totally agree with you, Ryan. Thank god someone is on my side :)

i found this book an interesting read. i liked it. it was a little drawn out.but i am glad i finally sat down & read it & can give MY own honest opinion of it. Yep, it makes you think.

It makes you think...? Dudes! Salman Ruhsdie makes you think! Gabriel García Márquez makes you think! Doris Lessing makes you think! Susan Sontag! Elfried Jelinek! Where are your standards in quality, for the love of Darwin?!?!?! this book is a pice of shit that sells because there is people like you in this world. Fuckin shame on you, retards.

Time to change your diaper.

Rob wrote: "Time to change your diaper."

Who is that comment for?

David Caleb wrote: "It makes you think...? Dudes! Salman Ruhsdie makes you think! Gabriel García Márquez makes you think! Doris Lessing makes you think! Susan Sontag! Elfried Jelinek! Where are your standards in quali..."

You didn't think while reading this book?
Personally, I thought all the fringe bits of history, religion and conspiracy theory were interesting.
Plus, any book with Da Vinci in it is thought provoking, as he was a fascinating guy.

though apparently, all those authors might make you think, but didn't do much for your vocabulary.
Unless 'fuckin shame on you, retards' is a quote from someone on your authors list.
Sounds like the kind of thing Rushdie would write.

I wish David Caleb would please shut up. He's giving those of us who have intelligible reasons for not liking "The DaVinci Code" a bad name.

Chad wrote: "I wish David Caleb would please shut up. He's giving those of us who have intelligible reasons for not liking "The DaVinci Code" a bad name."

Chad, gear your hatred towards its true source and don't penalize me for saying what you think but don't dare to write.

Travis wrote: "David Caleb wrote: "It makes you think...? Dudes! Salman Ruhsdie makes you think! Gabriel García Márquez makes you think! Doris Lessing makes you think! Susan Sontag! Elfried Jelinek! Where are you..."

That's good for you, finding intelligent reasons for reading shit and all. It reminds me of a neighbour I had who'd always look for intelligent reasons for eating junk food and snorting coke.

As to my vocabulary, please. Do you really have to go there. It's like relying on grammar to insult and debase a person who is right because you have no solid arguments to debate with. ;-)

David Caleb wrote: "Travis wrote: "David Caleb wrote: "It makes you think...? Dudes! Salman Ruhsdie makes you think! Gabriel García Márquez makes you think! Doris Lessing makes you think! Susan Sontag! Elfried Jelinek..."

Wait, you called anyone who liked the book retards and now want to quibble over the rules of literary discussion?

Especially love how you shrug off when I give you a solid argument and then your rebuttal to getting called on talking like a 12 year old boy is claiming only people with no solid argument do that?

Think you just broke the needle on my irony-meter.

Travis wrote: "David Caleb wrote: "Travis wrote: "David Caleb wrote: "It makes you think...? Dudes! Salman Ruhsdie makes you think! Gabriel García Márquez makes you think! Doris Lessing makes you think! Susan Son..."

You have more chances of shutting me up by ignoring me than by arguing with me... the fact that you haven't noticed it serves to prove how retard you are.

Travis wrote: "David Caleb wrote: "It makes you think...? Dudes! Salman Ruhsdie makes you think! Gabriel García Márquez makes you think! Doris Lessing makes you think! Susan Sontag! Elfried Jelinek! Where are you..."

"You didn't think while reading this book?
Personally, I thought all the fringe bits of history, religion and conspiracy theory were interesting.
Plus, any book with Da Vinci in it is thought provoking, as he was a fascinating guy."

If you call this a "solid" argument, you need to go back to debate club. ;-)

David Caleb wrote: "Travis wrote: "David Caleb wrote: "It makes you think...? Dudes! Salman Ruhsdie makes you think! Gabriel García Márquez makes you think! Doris Lessing makes you think! Susan Sontag! Elfried Jelinek..."

It's not my fault you haven't exposed yourself to real literature. Junk food is ok (I guess) for real life. So think cultural veggies. You want a good book? Try Infinite Jest, A Hundred Years of Solitude, the House of Spirits, The Satanic Verses, The Kingdom of this World, The Lord of the Rings... Then, we can talk about how they compare to this rubbish.

you want to go from 'you are all a bunch of retards' to literary snob...?
Wow, completely broke the irony meter...gonna need to get a new one now.

seriously, your main rant is flawed in that every book makes you think.
Poe makes you think, Wodehouse makes you think, Tolkien makes you think, hell, even Ann Coulter makes you think.

You are just being a snob and making some blanket statements that sound good if you have an english degree.
Yes, in theory, literary vegetables are supposed to make you think deep thoughts or it can make you think 'Cool! another battle scene. Man, those orcs are bad ass."


stop spouting vague BS and then we can talk about this book and wether or not it's rubbish.

David Caleb: you're more like Dan Brown that you think, in that I can sort of see the point you're trying to make, put you have such a piss-poor notion of good prose or how to express yourself that I can't bring myself to take you seriously. (The previous sentence would also make a good review for "The DaVinci Code" btw.)

Also: What I don't dare to write? You obviously haven't read the above thread where I make an intelligible case about why I don't think "The DaVinci Code" is a very good book, and I even manage to do it without calling anyone a retard. Or my GoodReads review, which is only a few lines long, but honestly, that's all such an insubstantial piece of fluff like "The DaVinci Code" warrents. But you're not interested actually reading any of that. You're a troll, more concerned with punching people in the face with your hyperbolic opinions.

Yes, the diaper comment was for you, and you really should heed its advice. You'll feel a lot better if you put on a fresher pair of panties.

I'm not a Christian so I'm not really into the truth or not about the story and won't judge anything about it. I only read for mistery solver and entertainment. For me this book very interesting and yes, so simple that I as non english speaker can understand it well. But I believe there is other definition of genius, not because its complexity but how one can make it simple enough to understand by other

Chad wrote: "David Caleb: you're more like Dan Brown that you think, in that I can sort of see the point you're trying to make, put you have such a piss-poor notion of good prose or how to express yourself that..."

Chad, really, shut up.

"Shut Up". Wow. That's deep. Did you steal that line from Salman Rushdie?

I agree very eye opening I haven't looked at anything the same since. I didn't feel that it was badly written i feel that it was brilliant

Totally agree with your comment...takes an open mind and removal of blinders to be appreciate this fictional but oh so relevant book

same like we are on d same page. just same comment I would have posted

Chad wrote: ""Shut Up". Wow. That's deep. Did you steal that line from Salman Rushdie?"

No, I stole it from your literary mother.

Okay, David. Let's take a step back for a moment. I took a look at your profile, and I'm a bit troubled that you claim to be a writer. If you want anyone to buy that bridge, you're going to have to produce some criticism that consists of more than name-dropping a bunch of famous authors and novels you think will impress everyone, and calling your detractors retards. Seriously, go back and re-read all your comments in this thread, and that is pretty much all you've put forward.

And pay special attention to that part where you neglected to provide any kind of solid arguement against "The DaVinci Code" beyond "It's Feces!!!" and called everybody a retard, then bitched out another commenter for resorting to insults because he had no solid arguement. That certainly took some balls, I'll give you that.

Now, I'm fairly certain this comment will be answered by what you assume is a wildly clever insult/retort, but I really do hope you take a moment to self-reflect on the lack of anything intelligible you've contributed to this comment thread.

Dearest Chad:

My books are in Spanish, as I live, write and publish in Puerto Rico (mostly), though i have been featured in a number of American anthologies, as well as Caribbean quarterlies (Poui, from Barbados; The Caribbean Writer vol. 19; From Macho to Mariposa, Lethe Press, etc.). If you want to take me seriously, that is completely up to you. I honestly could not care less. As to my profile on Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ, well, it is in construction for obvious reasons. Think of Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ as a platform mainly for books written in English and that will give an idea why my profile is "in construction". Add to that the fact that I haven't been able to figure out most of this site's author-reserved features, and voilá.

I neglected to provide any solid argument as to why this book is bollocks, because I fail to see why such arguments are needed. Anything I say would be redundant at this point, as my arguments against this book have been stated and restated to exhaustion. If your research skills are up to par, then by all means, just look at all the arguments set forth by people who classified this book in the 1-star category, and such exercise will give you a pretty good idea as to what my arguments are. I'll definitely not engage into that.

"Now, I'm fairly certain this comment will be answered by what you assume is a wildly clever insult/retort, but I really do hope you take a moment to self-reflect on the lack of anything intelligible you've contributed to this comment thread."

Well, then, I guess I have naught to say, have I? Oh, wait. Yes, I do. I really hope you take a moment to reflect on the lack of apparent understanding as to what good literature is. A well-settled and quite worn metaphor for this is human diet. Take good literature as fruit, meat and veggies, and the DaVince Code as fun junk food, but junk food nevertheless. I would never bother reading a book like this for a second time and I consider my having read it a waste of unrecoverable time. If you, dear sir, saw universal truths, revelations of undecipherable knowledge and feasts of the utmost quality in asthetics, then goody goody for you. That speaks a lot about your tastes and formation, which I question.

By the way... your claim as to what constitutes a good argument has just been brought into question. You criticize me for wielding ad hominem arguments when I call everyone "retards", yet you do the same by looking at my profile and speaking about it. You dity dog! Judging me by a Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ profile!!! HA! Do your eally think a real reader has time to be here all day? Or on Facebook for that matter? Grow the fuck up! My not really liking to write reviews has nothing to do with my ability or my love for reading books. What a dumb argument. You really are a retard! Well, whatever you say, mate. Really. Think whatever you may of me. Just be more consistent and less hypocritical.

"name-dropping a bunch of famous authors and novels you think will impress everyone"

Who would want to impress you, i don't know. But let's reflect on this comment for a bit, shall we?

You imply that famous authors are worthless. Is this what you are saying?

You imply that, instead, I should name obscure authors so that everyone is impressed by either my research skills of finding them or what? My ability to read people that nobody knows? I don't get you.

Another thing, there are strong reasons why I don't write reviews. The first one is I am a writer (poetry and fiction). I dislike essays (writing them, that is). I really, REALLY dislike writing essays. They were never my forté. I hated writing essays at college. And now that I've graduated and I don't have to write them anymore, I honestly feel free. the few reviews I've made, I wouldn't even consider them reviews. they are more like personal anecdotes than reviews. And I am honest enough to recognize I am no review-writer. But that should never mean that my opinion is less important than yours or anyboyd else's. I do have a college education. I do have my readings. I was well-trained to read. The fact that I have not marked in stars, right here on Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ, all the books i've read in my life, should not mean anything beyond me having a life outside the boundaries of this site. I read. I work. I write. I log in here only once a week. Congratulations, Chad, on such a solid argument.

Simmer down there, hoss. I will grant you that if you write primarily in Spanish, that may in fact explain why you can't express yourself coherently in English.

But seriously, if you're going to go onto a messageboard and yell at people about how their opinion of an objective piece of literature is self-evidently wrong, then you can't act offended when someone asks you to back that up. If you 'fail to see why such arguements are needed', then I'd propose that you've mistaken this comment thread for your playpen, where you get to arbitrarily decide what constitutes arguement and debate.

I have no idea what you're rebutting concerning the 'in construction' nature of your GoodReads site, and I'm not sure how me looking at your profile constitutes an ad hominem attack. In it, you say you are a writer. In my experience, writers tend to express themselves more clearly than you do, hence my questioning of your claim on that label. Based on that statement alone, I'm not convinced you know what 'ad hominem' means.

I was going to attempt to address the rest of your screed, but I honestly can't make out what you're complaining about. Something about being on GoodReads and Facebook too much? Something about how you don't like to write reviews or care what other people think, even though you fling your shit at the wall like an agitated monkey every time anyone calls bullshit on your nonsensical tirades? Something about your profile being under construction? Something about how you've given an exhaustive critique of "The DaVinci Code" that you don't care to rehash, even though all you've said on this thread and in your own review is that everybody's a retard if they like it and that you've read Salman Rushdie and "Lord of the Rings" and that you really love your junk-food metaphor? Most of these rants are complete non-sequiturs to anything anyone has said to you. You're like a dog who is barking at me but I can't tell if you want to go for a walk or need your water dish refilled or maybe your tummy hurts and you need to go to the vet.

Help me out, man. Pour through your ramblings and see if you can boil them all down into a proper thesis for me, that can be supported by evidence stronger than "trust me, you're a retard". Get focused, brother. Make some sense. I know you can do it!

Chad wrote: "Simmer down there, hoss. I will grant you that if you write primarily in Spanish, that may in fact explain why you can't express yourself coherently in English.

But seriously, if you're going to ..."

Chad, honestly, your mother told me to tell you to go to your room.

David wrote: "You imply that famous authors are worthless. Is this what you are saying?"

Um, no. THat is not remotely what I'm implying. I'm implying that you do not know how to convey why you don't like "The DaVinci Code", and in place of the well articulated opinion that you are incapable of crafting, you are trying to give yourself credibility by name-checking a handful of successful writers that you've read. ("Well gosh, if he's read Susan Sontag, then his opinion must be infallible!") I'm implying that you think when people see you can name-drop a bunch of famous writers and novels, they'll take you more seriously even though you haven't actually said anything substantive.

Just because Rushdie and Sontag and Marquez are great writers, and you know who they are, doesn't mean you get a free pass to call everybody a retard and belittle their opinions.

He just doesn't write very well... I've read more of his books, and he's just barely average in my opinion. His reveal was too obvious in this case, and the book was really boring. I'm not offended in the least by the ideas put forth. Who gives a shit? These aren't new ideas, and the book is fiction.

:D :D :D The story line has a long long history!