No Mention of Dan Brown?

[JayEgo]

OK, so I'm jumping on the fashionable read bandwagon but I finally picked up DaVinci code whilst on holiday and read the whole thing in a couple of days and must admit, I was really impressed! A great mystery with fun clues to solve (some of which I got, some I didn't!) and a realistic feel, as if this could be taking place right under our noses?

I'd have thought there'd have been mention of Dan brown somewhere in this forum and please forgive me if I've just simply missed it but if not, here's a home for those who want to make comment...

I shall be reading Angels & Demons next... Then the other two ;)

Ja¥son xx

[Faren]

Haven't read DaVinci, but did read Angels and Demons. That was very exciting and quite an enjoyable read. I will pick up DaVinci eventually when I get through with all these OTHER books I have on my shelf. :erm:

[Stewart]

da vinci code one heck of a story i loved it one in the eye for the catholic church if it is ever proved right then the church of rome has one hell of a lot of explaining to do also did you know jesus had brothers and sisters? what ever happend to them does the catholic church keep them secret as well? or chooses not to admit he had brothers and sisters at all ? i am a lapsed catholic my self and have chosen to walk away from this faith due to the hypocrasy of the church but i wonder how many more secrets the church of rome has hidden from all christians :2cent:

[Dux]

I read the DaVinci Code just because of all the controversy. I had to see what the big deal was about a work of fiction that churches across the country were up in arms. It was a good book. I dragged out my old art history books whenever he brought up a work of art - very interesting. there is an extra arm in The Last Supper, but a couple of the other pieces he mentioned are not as he describes in the book.

[Crysania]

da vinci code one heck of a story i loved it one in the eye for the catholic church if it is ever proved right then the church of rome has one hell of a lot of explaining to do also did you know jesus had brothers and sisters? what ever happend to them does the catholic church keep them secret as well? or chooses not to admit he had brothers and sisters at all ? i am a lapsed catholic my self and have chosen to walk away from this faith due to the hypocrasy of the church but i wonder how many more secrets the church of rome has hidden from all christians :2cent:

:roll: Didn't you see at the end that it wasn't the Catholic church who was behind it? Just that one guy in the Opus Dei who was following orders of someone who wasn't even Catholic. And just for the record the Catholic church allows for the fact that Jesus may have had brothers and sisters and says it's possible that he was even married but they don't push those myths forward as fact because they are, in fact, myths and there's no proof one way or the other.

[Crysania]

I loved both The DaVinci Code and Angels & Demons. It would be really cool if Dan Brown wrote another book about the same guy. I've also read Digital Fortress which was also good but I couldn't get into Deception Point for some reason.

[Anareth]

Given the lousy condition the original Last Supper is in, it's hard to see, but I find myself on inspection siding with those who think the "extra hand" is Peter's (it's possible, it's just an awkward position.) I also think that art historians/debunkers who argue that most of the odd religious imagry in Leonardo's paintings points not to any secrets about Jesus and Mary but about Leonardo's fixation on John the Baptist (especially The Madonna of the Rocks.)

The idea of Jesus having siblings is based on how you translate one Hebrew verb (much as that commandment that Christians claim says "Thou shalt not kill" says nothing of the sort--it says "Thou shalt not murder", a different word entirely.) The Church is touchy about that one as it does call into question the enduring virginity of Mary, but they have no solid position on the issue of Jesus's marital status, as Crysania said. It's considered of secondary relevance to the matter of His divinity--that Jesus was God become Man. (Which argues that he might well have been married--the Catholic position, as opposed in fact to a lot of the Gnostics, was that Jesus was fully Man and subject to all the same feelings and needs, while some of the Gnostic sects argued for Jesus as God-disguised-as-Man and not really human at all. Mr. Brown played very fast and loose with what the Gnostics actually wrote and believed and in some cases seems to have confused them with the Cathars, who were heretics.) In any case, the Church figures that any descendants are so diluted the question of Jesus genetics is pretty much moot (unless of course they've kept up an unprecedented run of incest.)

I haven't read Angels and Demons, just "The DaVinci Code." Took me less than two days. It was entertaining, but it was also really, really formulaic and predictable--did anyone not have the main plot points figured out two or three chapters in? (Like who Sophie turned out to be? Did anyone NOT guess that as soon as she was introduced?) The only surprise I had was the grandmother and brother, but that was a bit of a cheat on his part--unless you were the author you couldn't see that coming. But by making it about Jesus and a conspiracy, he made about a jillion bucks, so more power to him.

[JayEgo]

Haven't even started on Deception Point or Digital Fortress yet so can't comment further on those but I agree about some of the comments on the Davinci Code being a little predicatable. There were indeed very obvious elements and some of the code was downright plain and basic and wouldn't have taken logical folk more than seconds to translate but as was suggested, by being clever with insinuation, he's managed to make himself a packet out of this novel and has inspired controversy where there may have been none...?

Ja¥son xx

[Beisla]

I recently read The DaVinci code.

I liked it all right, it was quite entertaining, but as said it was rather predictable at times. I also wasn't particularly fond of a gazillion little chapters, most of which ended in some kind of a "surprise" or "exciting spot". Not a bad book, but I'm not sure I'll bother to read more of his books or not.

[Dux]

I recently read The DaVinci code.

I liked it all right, it was quite entertaining, but as said it was rather predictable at times. I also wasn't particularly fond of a gazillion little chapters, most of which ended in some kind of a "surprise" or "exciting spot". Not a bad book, but I'm not sure I'll bother to read more of his books or not.
Have to admit, this got on my nerves too.

[S'amm]

Well I enjoyed it and am still trying to figure out the challenges. I have managed to get to the 4th one (I think) but as I have no languages other than english, and definately no latin, I am having some difficulty.

Anyone get through them all and could help me out with the seal? I also found the #'s quite hard to read but I am assuming I have them right.

20,11,11,68 ; 1,10,11,61,15 ; 5,8,73, 11 ; =
E,U,U,N
M,L,B,U
R,S,U,P,I or
I

Ok E is first ...then what?

Help appreciated...

S'amm

[granath]

I enjoyed both Angels & Demons and Da Vinci Code, although the latter was somewhat predictable in places. Deception Point was okay, although I tend to have little patience with the "power plays in Washington" plots... I haven't started Digital Fortress yet. I know I'll read it at a sitting when I start, so I'll need to choose a weekend when I'm not doing anything special so that I can read until 4 a. m...

[S'amm]

Well I enjoyed it and am still trying to figure out the challenges. I have managed to get to the 4th one (I think) but as I have no languages other than english, and definately no latin, I am having some difficulty.

Anyone get through them all and could help me out with the seal? I also found the #'s quite hard to read but I am assuming I have them right.

20,11,11,68 ; 1,10,11,61,15 ; 5,8,73, 11 ; =
E,U,U,N
M,L,B,U
R,S,U,P,I or
I

Ok E is first ...then what?

Help appreciated...

S'amm


Figured it out by myself. Thanks anyway.

S'amm

[anonew]

Please - if you are going to post plot details, use the word 'SPOILER' somewhere! :irked:

I'm reading the Da Vinci Code now.

G

[Dai]

I enjoyed both (as fluff obviously) but prefered Angels and Daemons...

The highlight for me was recomending the Da Vinci Code to a friend of mine, we both like reading and often recommend books to each other and i got this 15K email diatribe in responce about the how wrong it all was and linking to all sorts of Christain webpages proving it all wrong... I was like "Dude, its just a book" - and was less that impressed that he decided to hack on a book he hadnt read, now he has read it he still thinks it is horribly blasephous but did enjoy it ;)

I like the limited edition version you can get here in Australia at the moment - big hard cover with all the pictures and photos of all the locations :D

[Lara]

I've read all the books mentioned, and also found them entertaining (though predictable). Was anyone else as disturbed as I was by the violence, which was not only extreme, but savage? Some of it made me feel physically sick, especially in "Angels and Demons".

[The Harper]

I've only read Deception Point so far and whilst the story was ok(i'm in the middle of Angels and Demons). It was the actual style of writting that turned me off. I've written paragraphs longer than his chapters I've got the Da Vinci Codes downloaded as a ripped E book on my PC so I'll give that ago once i've caught up with my other reading

[Crysania]

I couldn't read Deception Point. I tried but I just couldn't get into it. The rest of his I loved though. That might be because I would really like to be a cryptographer or a symbologist (if it actually existed that is) if I could learn all that stuff!

[Mausey]

There was a show on tv not long ago about the Da Vinci code and as Dan Brown himself said ..... it's just a book. :D

That said, the show itself was very interesting. The host travelled all across Europe tracking the some of the things in the book. The one thing I really liked was an "ancient" tapestry in one chapel. They quite proudly state that it's one of the finest medevil tapestries anywhere. The catch, there'a coat of arms on it that didn't come into existance until the mid 1700's. :D Sort of shoots the ancient bit out of the water. Another intersting part concerned the grail itself, apparently it didn't exist until a monk, about 200 years after the fact, was writing a story and thought it needed a twist, so he invented the cup. :laugh: Within a couple years it was the greatest literary invention of the century.

[The Harper]

There was a show on tv not long ago about the Da Vinci code and as Dan Brown himself said ..... it's just a book. :D

That said, the show itself was very interesting. The host travelled all across Europe tracking the some of the things in the book. The one thing I really liked was an "ancient" tapestry in one chapel. They quite proudly state that it's one of the finest medevil tapestries anywhere. The catch, there'a coat of arms on it that didn't come into existance until the mid 1700's. :D Sort of shoots the ancient bit out of the water. Another intersting part concerned the grail itself, apparently it didn't exist until a monk, about 200 years after the fact, was writing a story and thought it needed a twist, so he invented the cup. :laugh: Within a couple years it was the greatest literary invention of the century.

That would be Tony Robinson of BlackAdder fame.
The other misconception about the grail is that it was some sort of fabulously ornate bejewelled thing. This is ridiculous Jesus was a poor carpenter so more like the grail in the last of the Indiana Jones films it would have been simple wood or pottery at best. Considering the the graven image thing i always wondered at the trade in so called relics. :2cent:

[anonew]

That would be Tony Robinson of BlackAdder fame.
The other misconception about the grail is that it was some sort of fabulously ornate bejewelled thing. This is ridiculous Jesus was a poor carpenter so more like the grail in the last of the Indiana Jones films it would have been simple wood or pottery at best. Considering the the graven image thing i always wondered at the trade in so called relics. :2cent:
SPOILERS BELOW!!!







I've now finished the book. It was okay - although frankly the riddles and clues wouldn't really keep a determined and educated person away for very long - where the key was not a particular piece of ancient knowledge, I could get it right away. The Newton thing was a slam-dunk, for starters. The mirrored writing was particularly tacky, but for all that it was an okay read. Zero character development, though - this book is all about the story and the mystery, and nothing else.

WRT the Grail, I couldn't go for more than a few pages without muttering 'We are the knights who say.....NI!' under my breath, or murmuring 'three shall be the number of the counting, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four thou shalst not count, neither shalst thou count two, save that thou then proceedest to three. Five is right out.' :evil:

G

[JayEgo]

Please - if you are going to post plot details, use the word 'SPOILER' somewhere! :irked:

GIndeed! :roll:

Ja¥son xx

[selket]

i work in a bookstore. when the davinci code first came out, a man asked me where it was. there was a pile of the book as highas my hip (i'm 5'3"). i said right here. he sadi "why isn't it in religion? i said because it's...fiction.
but dan brown really hit a nerve. there are so many pro and anit code books, we could have 1 section on it alone.

[The Harper]

i work in a bookstore. when the davinci code first came out, a man asked me where it was. there was a pile of the book as highas my hip (i'm 5'3"). i said right here. he sadi "why isn't it in religion? i said because it's...fiction.
but dan brown really hit a nerve. there are so many pro and anit code books, we could have 1 section on it alone.

I havent read it yet although I intend to again isnt this a case of freedom of thought being frownwd upon?

[Anareth]

On the easiness of the puzzles--I was too lazy to work out most and just kept reading, but one, if you've ever even just seen a history channel show on Leonardo was a no-brainer--as soon as I saw the "Mystery writing", I stopped reading, took the book to the bathroom and held it up to the mirror. Everyone knows Leonardo (a lefty) wrote backwards, at least if they've spent five minutes on pop-history TV they do. Why it took the characters more than two seconds to catch on was just silly.

[Bane]

I've read The daVinci Code and am now reading Angels and Demons and I have Digital Fortress and Deception Point. I went to his website and viewed it.

Now, for al you religious people out there, please don't read the rest f my post. Kindly keep scrolling past ntil you reach the next one.

I do not believe that there is an all knowing god.

There, you can come back now. That topic is not open for discussion by me.

DaVinci did make fun of the Church at every possible chance. It's why the Mona Lisa is smiling. If you look closely at that painting, the horizon is off.

I do not believe that any art book or copy of the art mentioned in the book will show what is revealed. You would probably actually have to go to the Louvre and view the painting in person. Although, in pictures on the 'net after I Googled the Last Supper, the "man" on the right of Jesus is decdedly feminine looking.

On his site, there is a disclaimer that reads (not direct quote) "The plot of this book is purely fictional. However, the symbology and organizations mentioned are factual." Or that basic gist. I believe that was for both DVC and A&D. I'm nt sure, it's been a while since I did that search.

There actually were the Illuminati. The ambigrammatical symbols are real. And typing this has made me hungry.

And the freemasons are (or were) a real secret society. Watch From Hell for more information and speculation if you haven't already.

[Jozell]

Since this thread has been dug up again, I'll add that I read the book a few weeks ago and while I know it is a bit of a fashion to bash the book I have to say I found it a bit tedious. It took 200 pages to get anywhere, for all love! And cliched to bits. Nope, not the kind of stuff I would read all that often.

[SFAHarper]

I agree the book was nothing more than entertaining fiction with some truths (such as real organizations and places) mixed in. My parents, however, have jumped on teh bandwagon and bought all these other books that point to the supposed fact of the marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene (and Peter was a mysoginist) Please note I do not endorse these beliefs, I'm only quoting my mother. It was rather easy to figure out the "mysteries" but my favorite thing was the use of the Golden mean and the Fibonacci sequence. I loved that because about two months later we learned how musicians (Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Debussy, etc...) used this in their music. So many fascinating things in one book that apply so well to real life and history. I will say that most of the stuff is used as fiction (yes I know that's been said) but i hope so many other people do not take the FICTIONal book as fact.

By the way, I saw a program about a month ago that said the whole "Merovingian" Dynasty (I.E. the blood line of Jesus Christ) is one of the biggest hoaxes in history. ! HA! HOw's that for a practical joke.
:note: SFA :note:

[Anareth]

Uh, Bane, if you really want to know who the Masons are, try getting your information from someplace besides a movie based on a comic book. The Masons do indeed still exist, and while there have always been some rumors about their inner workings, and some of the things high-ranking members say in ceremony (these vaguely pagan rituals were the reason it used to be automatic excommunication for a Catholic to join the Masons, though an awful lot of devout Protestants have never seemed to have any problems with it) the vast majority are perfectly normal people and the organization's function is largely philanthropic. (The Shriners are an offshoot--in fact they initially split from the Masons because they were tired of doing so much charity work and of course ended up doing nothing but!) The worst that's every been halfway proven about them is that they frequently favor their members in employment, politics, etc.

I've said before and I'll say it again, while the fresco is deteriorating terribly and most reproductions only make it worse, if that's Mary Magdalene she needs a shave. Not to mention that figure and Jesus aren't in composition--Jesus is posed as a lone focus, while James/Mary/whomever is in the group to the viewer's left. All the motion of the painting is away from Christ, except for the highly aggressive figure to the viewer's right, thrusting a finger at Jesus in what's been interpreted as a symbol related to the cult of John the Baptist, which Leonardo's art DOES in fact show some indications of his supporting. (That had nothing at all to do with any alleged bloodline and with a possibly heretical belief that is was in fact John the Baptist who was the Messiah, and the Jesus cult usurped his role.) And the absence of A Grail is hardly evidence, as the entire concept of the Grail as a mystical chalice is largely the invention of the Medieval French.

Brown's disclaimer does say that the symbology and organizations are real. Unfortunately he can't back that up. There is no evidence for the Priory of Sion besides some VERY questionable documents found by a man later proven a forger, the use of the Templars in DVC is just another example, like National Treasure (which is more entertaining), of that poor order getting dragged into every crackpot conspiracy theory to come down the pike (let's get this straight--they were suppressed because the King of France owed them money and didn't want to pay, and the Pope was old, weak pushover that Phillipe the Fair manipulated easily.) Leonardo (art historians and other academics never call him 'da Vinci', which is an appelation, not a name) did so many interesting and unusual things and was so much ahead of his time in many respects it's easy to fit his works to just about any theory you want. As for Opus Dei, I think their lay ministry is a bit silly (if you're going to be THAT devout, just join an order--there are plenty to go around!) they're hardly some sort of Vatican hit squad.

[TamTam]

Well, I wasn't going to read The daVinci Code, but all the kerfuffle with the Vatican and their "read this book and go to hell" stand piqued my curiosity.

The story itself wasn't bad, but I nearly got bogged down in the middle with all the blah blah blah about the grail and the rose and Venus and the Merovingians. :banghead: I had already read Breaking the Code, a few books about the Gnostics, and a couple about Mary Magdalene. I was forearmed, but do you realise how frustrating it is to debate a book? It can't answer your objections, after all.

I was a little concerned that maybe I didn't have all the facts. But I was talking with a friend whose daughter was a historian and had also read the book. She had even stronger objections than I did.


I do not believe that any art book or copy of the art mentioned in the book will show what is revealed. You would probably actually have to go to the Louvre and view the painting in person. Although, in pictures on the 'net after I Googled the Last Supper, the "man" on the right of Jesus is decdedly feminine looking.


That would be the disciple John. He's generally shown in art as being quite femme.

But that brings up something that I wanted to mention. If that is Mary, then why are there only eleven disciples? The scene is supposed to be taking place at the moment that Jesus reveals that someone will betray him. Judas Iscariot was still there at the time. He only left later on.

[Anareth]

Well, I wasn't going to read The daVinci Code, but all the kerfuffle with the Vatican and their "read this book and go to hell" stand piqued my curiosity.


Uh..I'm Catholic and I missed the part where reading the book was latent excommunication. The Vatican thinks it's a silly theory and that the mischaracterization of Opus Dei is somewhat offensive, but there haven't been any sort of official edicts from Rome about reading DVC being a sin.

Off Topic: Is it just me or do a disproportionate number of people seem to have this weird, anti-Catholic view of the Catholic Church, like we're all knuckle-draggers who are ready to burn books and hold witch trials? Save it for the Fundamentalist Protestants, please.

On Topic:


But that brings up something that I wanted to mention. If that is Mary, then why are there only eleven disciples? The scene is supposed to be taking place at the moment that Jesus reveals that someone will betray him. Judas Iscariot was still there at the time. He only left later on.

*forehead slap* D'oh! Should've noticed that! Good point! If that's Mary Magdalene, Leonardo left one of the other disciples (presumably James) out, because Judas is one of the figures, IIRC, at the right. And you're right--everyone is reacting away from Jesus because He just announced that one of them was a traitor and they're shocked.

[The Harper]

Uh..I'm Catholic and I missed the part where reading the book was latent excommunication. The Vatican thinks it's a silly theory and that the mischaracterization of Opus Dei is somewhat offensive, but there haven't been any sort of official edicts from Rome about reading DVC being a sin.

Off Topic: Is it just me or do a disproportionate number of people seem to have this weird, anti-Catholic view of the Catholic Church, like we're all knuckle-draggers who are ready to burn books and hold witch trials? Save it for the Fundamentalist Protestants, please.

On Topic:



*forehead slap* D'oh! Should've noticed that! Good point! If that's Mary Magdalene, Leonardo left one of the other disciples (presumably James) out, because Judas is one of the figures, IIRC, at the right. And you're right--everyone is reacting away from Jesus because He just announced that one of them was a traitor and they're shocked.



Personally I was brought up as a Church of England Protestant. I tend to view the Catholic faith with a jaundieced eye. It appears to be almost as controlling as Islam and demands total obedience from it's followers. The old gripes about contraception and the so called celebiacy of its officials will always come up. As to the book burning and witch trials well every faith has had its turn at those all apart from the pagans that is :)

[TamTam]

Uh..I'm Catholic and I missed the part where reading the book was latent excommunication.
Just a little joke, honey. Sorry if you took it the wrong way.

[Anareth]

Personally I was brought up as a Church of England Protestant. I tend to view the Catholic faith with a jaundieced eye. It appears to be almost as controlling as Islam and demands total obedience from it's followers. The old gripes about contraception and the so called celebiacy of its officials will always come up. As to the book burning and witch trials well every faith has had its turn at those all apart from the pagans that is :)

If you think pagans have never had their turn at massacering those who oppose them, you have a very rosy view of pagan religions. The whole lovey-dovey blessed-be oh-my-goddess stuff is a modern invention (or as my no-illusions Wiccan friend has on a bumper sticker, "Wicca: Pretending to be an Ancient Religion since 1952.")

And if we're on the subject of burnings, let's go into what the Church of England liked to do to Papists. Frankly, I don't feel very sorry for Queen Mary's 'victims.' From where I'm sitting they just got a bit of their own.

I didn't think you meant it personally, TamTam. It's just that people (like The Harper up there) seem to have this bizarre view of Catholics as some sort of Taliban religion, which we're not. Frankly compared to a lot of the Protestant denominations we're absurdly liberal. People see the celibacy rule or Humane Vitae and dig up all those centuries of Anglo-Protestant anti-Catholicism. We're probably one of the denominations least threatened by "The da Vinci Code" because our Church's official position is, "Maybe he was married, maybe he wasn't, we honestly don't really care." Though don't get us started on the continuing virginity of His Mother. ;)

[The Harper]

Though don't get us started on the continuing virginity of His Mother. ;)

This was after the aritfical insemination was it ? :D

[Brenda]

According to Anne's short story "The Greatest Love" it was an exogenesis procedure! (speculatively!)

I read the Da Vinci Code a while ago, found it interesting; I am Catholic but I also attend my dad's Methodist church. I found all the possible interpretations of the art fascinating whether they are true or not; I definietly think the person in The Last Supper looks feminine, but unless someone's hiding under the table they're missing an apostle. I really like the idea that Jesus was married; he had so much love to give.

[C_ris]

I have read DaVinci Code, Angels and Demons, Digital Fortress and Decption Point (in that order). I found all of tehm interesting books, and very well written and convincing, but they all have the same basic undercurrent plot. They are all set out very early on. DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons were the best two, as I had not yet fully cottoned on to his system. By the half way through Digitasl Fortress I knew who the baddie was, and the same by quarter of the way through Deception Point. They were still great reads, but for future work he needs to change the basic plot.

[The Harper]

I have read DaVinci Code, Angels and Demons, Digital Fortress and Decption Point (in that order). I found all of tehm interesting books, and very well written and convincing, but they all have the same basic undercurrent plot. They are all set out very early on. DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons were the best two, as I had not yet fully cottoned on to his system. By the half way through Digitasl Fortress I knew who the baddie was, and the same by quarter of the way through Deception Point. They were still great reads, but for future work he needs to change the basic plot.


With chapters sometimes a whole two pages long .:devil:

[C_ris]

With chapters sometimes a whole two pages long .:devil:

Well, maybe thats asking a little TOO much... :evil:

[The Harper]

Well, maybe thats asking a little TOO much... :evil:
I've known people writting their disertations who have written longer sentences than that.:devil:

[C_ris]

I've known people writting their disertations who have written longer sentences than that.:devil:

I've also know people who can spell better than THAT^^^! :evil:

[The Harper]

I've also know people who can spell better than THAT^^^! :evil:


Ok ok so the spellchecker doesn't work and i couldn't be bothered to find my dictionary but you know what I mean. It sometihng to do with soap opera's and the average persons attention span LOL:devil:

[Nefermiw]

I've read the DaVinci Code, and I must say that I wasn't impressed. It's a nice crimi, but it's nothing but popular science for the public. Every time he mentioned anything remotely egyption it made me cringe.
And it doesn't surprise me that it seems that his book is a total rip off from some other writers. I read it in a Danish newspaper some time ago, but since you guys probably don't read Danish, I did a google and came up with this link:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=1&ObjectID=9003822
:disguise:

[selket]

dan brown startes a subgenre of his own with the davinci code. the must be a coupls dozen books on the subject.