Young Writers Society

I thought that even though Jesus was the son of God he was man. I thought that was the whole point, God sent his son down to earth in human form to clense our sins?

Why isn't it ok for him to be married? He was a man and its a natural thing to do.

i read it and i thought it was good
i mostly liked to figure out the codes and puzzles but other than that i was very annoyed by it
i am a christian and having the knowledge i grew up with in church totally made it more like a story so it didn't really change the way i think about my religion

magicman wrote: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 read it, and it's amazing. It really does make you think and it's really exciting. I loved it, but at the end I didn't really like the in-your-face obviousness. Also, if you have trouble seperating fact from fiction, I suggest that you look at his paintings and find his references of them. Like, the "omnious" hand in the Last Supper and the "threating" gestures of the babies in Madonna of the Rocks. Also, I went to lisahea.net, I think it's called, and she had an explanation for everything in the book. Also, on the back of the book there's a few websites that you may wish to visit.

I also get annoyed about how much anger that the Da Vinci Code has caused. Don't people understand it's fiction and that Dan Brown is only going to cry all the way to the bank?

Firestarter wrote:IceCreamMan, calling Adam101 a "retard" for stating his opinion isn't acceptable. Here's a better way of saying what you meant:

I believe you have a right to you opinion, I also believe that your opinion doesn't mean anything if you can't back it up, so please provide some evidence before making a sweeping statement like that.

That kind of talk is acceptable, because you are not flaming nor attacking another member. We appreciate discussion but not bashing.

IT WAS TERRIBLE. There was no real plot, and Vitoria disproved Einstein's Theory with a can of tuna fish. Come on. It was a very lame book.

I borrowed the book and read a few pages last night. It was.. just not something I'm interested in.

At college there was such a fuss most people saying it was a load of ... and I'd agree.

And I won't even begin on the movie.

IceCreamMan, calling Adam101 a "retard" for stating his opinion isn't acceptable. Here's a better way of saying what you meant:

I believe you have a right to you opinion, I also believe that your opinion doesn't mean anything if you can't back it up, so please provide some evidence before making a sweeping statement like that.

That kind of talk is acceptable, because you are not flaming nor attacking another member. We appreciate discussion but not bashing.

IceCreamMan wrote:

Adam101 wrote:I liked it very much, I loved reading it and the plot was excellent, personally i find it more believable than the bible, as that is also a fictional book.

You know, that just makes you look like a complete retard. While I believe you have a right to you opinion, I also believe that your opinion doesn't mean s*** if you can't back it up. Tons of stuff which Dan Brown says in that book is not just slightly twisted but is actually compete bogus. His portrayal of Jesus is absolutely absurd and it is disturbing that people actually fall for this. Whether or not you believe Jesus was who he said he was, the bible is a very historically sound record of his life on earth which is considered to be quite reliable by many historians who are not even christians because it passes the protocol tests for ancient manuscripts. Obviously they don't believe in the miracles or the resurection, but they think that the authors of these books of the new testament believed in them. And while Dan Brown would like us to believe that the early church supressed some 76 gospels while only allowing the Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John to remain in the bible, if you look it up you will find that there are something like 35,000 manuscripts of the 4 gospels while most of the other gospels (of which I can only find 16 at most) only have one surviving manuscript. And isn't it a coincidence that these missing gospels are the ones which supposedly show Jesus in a different light, while the 4 current gospels show him pretty much the same way: as a man who believed he was God's son, who never married, who performed miracles, who was resurected, etc etc. And what about his description of Opus Dei and the Catholic Church? Do you honestly think that was accurate?

So while the bible may or may not be a fictional book, Dan Brown's book most certainly is. Do you know that the only group of people more angry about this book than Christians are HISTORIANS? Guess why? Cause its a big fat load o' bs. End of story.

P.S. After looking at the link that Smaur posted, I dislike Dan Brown even more. The book was actually enjoyable to read for me. Thats not what I have a problem with. My problem is with people who are so easily persuaded that they believe this book is nonfiction. You would think that anyone would be able to find at least one thing in the book which they know for certain is not a fact, and therefore they know the book is just fictional. Or they could just read the page which says "this book is a work of fiction..."

There were three who always walked with the Lord: Mary, his mother, and her sister, and Magdalene, the one who was called his companion. His sister and his mother and his companion were each a Mary.

As for the Wisdom who is called "the barren," she is the mother of the angels. And the companion of the [...] Mary Magdalene. [...] loved her more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples [...]. They said to him "Why do you love her more than all of us?" The Savior answered and said to them,"Why do I not love you like her? When a blind man and one who sees are both together in darkness, they are no different from one another. When the light comes, then he who sees will see the light, and he who is blind will remain in darkness."

This is slightly random but quite funny...

One time I was discussing this book with a friend and I said that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. My teacher jumped in and said "Well, he was trying to reach out to those type of people..." Well yes, but I certainly hope he wasn't reaching out to those type of people the way the book suggests...

I read it and enjoyed it but it wasnt an easy read, it also confuses fact and fiction was didn't really do me any good ...

EDITED

In terms of Dan Brown's questionable literary merit, I'd rather like to point everyone in the direction of this little article.

*cough*

Yeah, that's all.

I liked it very much, I loved reading it and the plot was excellent, personally i find it more believable than the bible, as that is also a fictional book.

ali 2 wrote: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.

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

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

Yes I did.

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.

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.

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.

Tessitore wrote:It was interesting, but what a lot of people don't understand is that this book is FICTIONAL... there's a lot of chaos theory and just plain guesses, though he does present them in a way that seems highly factual, and some of the stuff that he points out ARE facts. That's always neat. But you really have to weed through it all and figure out what's what.

I'm going to read Angels and Demons this year, since I heard it is much better, but we'll see.

I do think it was an awesome book, though.

Firestarter:

I liked it, but it wasn't very well written.

i read this and gave it to my grandma for christmas (she has a degree in religion and theology) and she believed parts of it but i had to tell her that it is just a wild leap from militant conspiracy theories to the da vinci holy grail.

I've only read angels and demons.. still have to read davinci code.. once finals are over! A&D was really good, though

One of my parents have/are reading the Da Vinci Code (probably mum, dad think fictional books are boring... honestly!), I've seen it hovering around the place. I need to nah it and read it sometime.

My friend is letting me borrow The DaVinci Code.. it's pretty good so far. If I like it, I'll read Angels and Demons next.

Angels and Demons IS soo much better! Here is the Recipe for The Da Vinci Code:

1)Take Angels and Demons
2) Replace the Illuminati with The Priory of Sion
3) Replace Leonardo Vetra with Jaques Sauniere
4) Replace the Hassassin with Silas.
5) Replace the camarlengo with Teabing
6) Replace Vittoria with Sophie
7) Replace the Roman police with the Parisian police.
Replace CERN with The Louvre
9) Replace the whole science v. religion thing with The Holy Grail.
10) Replace Bernini with Da Vinci.

No I'm serious, the plots are so alike. They even have similar twists!
And they are both named after something that appears in the beginning.

But of course both are worth reading because they're good and they raise interesting questions. I'm reading Secrets of Angels and Demons right now. It is very interesting, even if it pretty much dismisses the book as conspiracy theory.

You should probably read Angels and Demons first as it comes first and it kind of helps you understand how Robert Langdon became a celebrity.

In other news, is anyone else upset that of all the 40-something actors that are out there, they chose TOM HANKS!!!!! Hello! The magazine makes a reference to him as "Harrison Ford in Harris tweed." Who do you think that implies? Hmm...

Plus does Tom Hanks look like he swims 40 laps every day?

sam im also doing some research of my own to

It was interesting, but what a lot of people don't understand is that this book is FICTIONAL... there's a lot of chaos theory and just plain guesses, though he does present them in a way that seems highly factual, and some of the stuff that he points out ARE facts. That's always neat. But you really have to weed through it all and figure out what's what.

I'm going to read Angels and Demons this year, since I heard it is much better, but we'll see.

I do think it was an awesome book, though.

I read it...i thought it was pretty interesting. I'm trying to do a bit of research to separate fact from fiction, but it's still a great story in my opinion anyway. There are so many conspiracies, lies, plots...that kind of thing, it keeps you guessing!

Firestarter wrote:I liked it, but it wasn't very well written. All Dan Brown did was grab some extreme theories going round about the Holy Grail, and put them in a book. He put some inoffensive characters in, used italics a lot, did some average description, and let the very interesting theories sell the book.

King David has no basis in fact. He is more of a mythological figure created by the Bible, like KIng Solomon. The House of David was created afterwards. That doesn't really have any relevance!

Anyway, I'm just saying don't jump on the bandwagon and believe this stuff because it's in a book. There are many other books on this theory, yes. There is no evidence, however, that the Priory of Sion has anything to do with the Grail, and neither does Opus Dei. It's just a conspiracy. Don't be one of those people that believes it just because it sounds right.

firestarter ive read into a lot of backround about that theory.Like since Christ was from the house of david the house of david members were by law required to marry and that it back in those days would be very odd not to marry.and theres so many books out there on that kind of stuff like th knights templar and the priory of sion.

Yeh, I read it.

I liked it, but it wasn't very well written. All Dan Brown did was grab some extreme theories going round about the Holy Grail, and put them in a book. He put some inoffensive characters in, used italics a lot, did some average description, and let the very interesting theories sell the book.

And it worked.

But don't believe anything in the book. Most of it is lies. Though, if you look at the Last Supper painting, you can almost believe.....