Young Writers Society

I haven't read Da Vinci code yet, but i'd like to. There are loads of theories ging around over here. Mothers and some overly supersticious fathers are banning their children from reading it coz they think it's satanic coz it puts doubt in the bible. What they don't get is that it's only fiction, like Tessitore said.
Oh and new theories say that Jesus wasn't from the House of David, coz Maria was a virgin and she wasn't from the house of David and everything.

I have not read it, but from what I hear, it's not well written and the author claims that a lot of the stuff he made up was true. Still, I'd like to read it, but I'll wait until it shows up in the second-hand bookstore.

Oh and new theories say that Jesus wasn't from the House of David, coz Maria was a virgin and she wasn't from the house of David and everything.

Mary was from the House of David. Her and Joseph both were.

If you notice In Matthew, it says that Joseph is the son of Jacob, and in Luke, it says he is the son of Eli. Eli was probably Joseph's father-in-law, amking the geneology presented in Luke that of Mary, not Joseph. Thus, they were both the descendents of David.

I'm pretty sure they were.

I liked it, personally. *shrugs* You just have to be able to distinguish fact from fiction. It's not the best book I've ever read but I thought it was pretty good. It was an easy, fast-paced read, but not a book I'd reread.

Yes I did.

I'm reading it right now. I like it so far. Not the best, as many have said already, but I still like it.

This book is so very overrated.

Yes, it's a great story and a fun read. Yes, the fact verses fiction combined with a blending of various mythologies and philosophies and theories makes it all the better. Yes, the codes were nifty. Yes, I probably would've liked it better if it hadn't been so freaking overhyped.

But at its very basic, the story is a very weak, formulaic (not to mention predictable) thriller complete with the obligatory chase sequences, menacing henchmen, angry police dudes, and final extravegant reveal. (Please note that this entire thing has spoilers, so if you want to read it and don't want to be spoiled, you should probably look away now.) And after 400+ pages of suspense, the most interesting part of the novel — the quest for the Holy Grail — was wrapped up almost as an afterthought, in a couple of very quick pages, with no exceptionally conclusive finish. (This is often very effective, but after an entire novel of spelling everything out for the reader, it seems suspiciously as if Dan Brown is trying to avoid wrapping up any loose threads by with his blink-and-you-miss-it ending.)

And the things that really bothered me:

- The characters - They had absolutely no depth whatsoever. Silas, maybe, was the most well-explored character, and that's not saying much. They're canon Sues — characters with no flaws whatsoever, who are attractive and intelligent and multi-talented. In fact, Sophie fits the definition of the clichéd Mary Sue perfectly, and Robert Langdon is close at her heels. Neither of them are given any depth whatsoever, and as a result they become absurdly unrealistic. Sophie severed contact from her grandfather for ten years because she saw him having sex? Granted, it was a group ritual, and yes, it would've been scarring, but he's taken care of her all her life and he's her only relative and she loves him and she doesn't even give him the chance to explain? Riiiight. Plus, all her angsting about him breaking her trust and blah blah I don't care. Partly because he didn't break her trust and partly because she's so underdeveloped as a character that I as a reader couldn't have any sympathy towards her.

And on top of that, for a brilliant symbologist and a brilliant code-cracker, they're disturbingly stupid. I figured out half of the codes ten pages before they did. They thought the Da Vinci handwriting was Semitic script? What the heck — were they drunk?! The mind boggles.

- The dialogue - Pretty much every dialogue cliché in the universe was used in this book. It's kind of sad. I love the sheer ridiculousness of the characters interspersing their English dialogue with random French. If Brown was trying to create some sort of authenticity, he failed completely. If people are talking in English, they're going to talk in English — there's absolutely no point in throwing in French words. (Okay, I sometimes throw French words when I'm talking, but not on a regular basis and only because I'm overdramatic like that.) Plus, the dialogue in the prison and in the college scenes (both brief) made me cringe. I've never ever ever heard people talk like that, and the attempt to make the prison guys look "rough" was horrible. Plus, the really bad jokes. But let's not go there.

- Gimmicks - I've said it before, but I hate cheap plot gimmicks, and Dan Brown's use of them hits the reader over the head with a textbook. The book isn't written so well that you can't put it down — it's designed so that the reader will want to continue reading. Virtually every chapter ends in some kind of crappy cliffhanger-esque way, and it reminds me way too much of the Hardy Boys. (Although, to be fair, Brown's cliffhangers are better written, but not by much.) But his completely unsubtle use of cheap story gimmicks to keep the reader reading is kind of nauseating. He's trying to manipulate the reader, and it's very obvious and very uncool. Yes, they work (mostly/sometimes), but they underline the fact that the story isn't very well-written.

- Obviousness - Brown spells everything out for the reader, and it's very frustrating. We're not stupid. We can connect the dots all on our own, and the fact that he assumes we can't is demeaning and annoying. Plus, it undermines his storytelling — he keeps doubling back to explain everything for the reader in massive, block-lettered detail. You can't miss anything because he clubs you over the head with everything. Instead of marvelling at his genius, you have to wade through ankle-deep, tedious explanation, and it completely kills the effectiveness of his narrative. And ticks me off beyond description.

- Everything else - He switches from past tense to present tense to past again, butchers the use of ellipses and em dashes and italics. A lot of times, his attempts to be dramatic sound weak and contrived. And a lot of times, the story falls flat on its face because he's burgeoning it with overuse of italics, or too many ellipses (combined with cumbersome explanation and useless description).

Don't get me wrong — I did enjoy reading this book — it was fun while it lasted, and I'll probably even read it again. And again. A lot of the historical/mythological references he makes are fascinating (the brief allusion to the Gospels of Mary support the Gnostic belief that such gospels, along with others that are missing or destroyed, were excluded from the Bible). But from a writer's perspective, it was very poorly written. Makes you wonder where his editors were.

Ive read Angels and Demons, DaVinci Code, and Deception Point. I thought that DaVinci Code was probably the worst of the three. So why the fame? Its the theory that gets everyone, the book really isn't too good. Angels and Demons is quite a bit better and, as someone pointed out before, they are so alike I recomend avoiding Code and just reading A and D. Deception Point was different because it had a COMPlETELY different plot and characters, and no secret organizations that I can recall. It was good, not great, but good for easy reading like on airplanes or in the car or whenever you can't focus well enough to read something better.

Well I thought the book wasn't bad, though I abrubtly stopped reading it when he mentioned his theory about Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. Don't get me wrong, I know it was a fiction book. But I guess even reading something like that made me depressed.

I mean why write something like that? And his story makes no sense whatsover to me. He says women were always treated like dirt and disrespected and then he brings in Mary Magdalene to say that she was the one who should have been remembered in history for being the wife of Jesus.

What about the Virgin Mary? He completely left out the fact that the Virgin Mary is perhaps the most famous woman in history. He also says that Jesus was going to carry on his church to Mary Magdalene. That also makes no sense because of Jesus Christ was really married to her then he wouldn't be the son of God. If he wasn't the son of God then what church was he carrying on???

I don't know why he decided to write something like this. Maybe he has a problem with the Church or something.
I mean why write a book that contradicts Christianity? It just really gets on my nerves. I got assigned that book for english class and refused not to read it because of how much it offended me. I don't care if it's fiction or not.
Someone's religion is not something to joke about.

I think Dan Brown should be ashamed of himself. And to make it worse a movie is coming out based on the book.
Why? Why not make a movie about his other books if they are as good as you all said? It's just so he could voice his ridiculous theory to the world.

I'm sorry if I annoyed you with this post but I just had to get out how I feel. I don't know what else to say. Words cannot explain how disgusted I am with this book. I couldn't sleep for a week after reading it. It actually made me cry and my brother cry.

Please, if you havn't read the DaVinci code, don't. Dan Brown thinks his theory is the truth. Well, I want to tell him just one thing.

I have already found the truth, and it's Jesus Christ. If he doesn't think so he can keep it to himself.


-Tony

i havn't read it but i have read review and it doessound a bit weird

I'm a christian so i don't like improper facts that could confuse people or guide them from the truth

like it does.
But i'm sure it's agood FICTIONAL book to read.

magicman wrote:I have already found the truth, and it's Jesus Christ. If he doesn't think so he can keep it to himself.

](*,)

Thank goodness for freedom of speech.

DaVinci Code was okay, nice break from the heavy Chaucer I was reading for class. I have to agree with smaur on the gimmicks and such. Also, I think people are getting too hyped up over it. It's a book, a piece of fiction, something from some one's mind, it's not dogma.

Angels and Demons was far better. It definitely gave Robert Langdon more depth.

About the movie, it's Hollywood, they are in the business to make money. Of course they are going to make a movie of a bestseller. I think their casting director should be fired, but I'll wait it out and see it when someone in my family either buys it or drags me to the theaters.

I havn't read it yet. I'm not too sure if i want to.

Aparrently it's quite hard to tell the facts from the fiction, and don't want to be thinking wrong things.

I saw the advert for the film and i'd quite like to see it when it comes.

How come almost everyone has not really liked the book. To me, it honestly was a pulse racing read. It's so exciting I couldn't keep the book when I was reading. I burnt two nights' worth midnight oil over the stuff because I had lost all sleep over the pulse-racing classic. However Dan Brown overdid it in the end. I'm not going to spoil it for future readers by saying what hapeens in the end but I found the ending [b]too[/b] sensational. Definitely, Hollywood stuff. Something Hollywood would have loved to get its hands on but also a great book. I wonder why nobody's liked it as much as me.
Of course, you have to start reading with an open mind, as somebody else said before me. If you go into it thinking that it'll be tedious filtering facts and fiction, you are bound not to like any book.
I would advise future readers to start reading it with no prejudice. Read it like you would read any other Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew book.

I've not read it yet, I'm getting both positive and negative reviews from people who have.