Has anybody read The DaVinci Code?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

My dad has been going on about it all week, telling me I'd love it. I'm wary of philosophy disguised by fiction (Ayn Rand and Andrew MacDonald come to mind, to say nothing of Battlefield Earth etc) but this seems interesting...anyone read it?

― roger adultery, Monday, 23 February 2004 04:56 (twenty-two years ago)

It's not philosophy, really. For a beach read or long airplane ride, it's not too bad- the story goes by pretty quickly, and it's really not very intellectually taxing, for all the "puzzle solving" aspect of it that's been hyped up. The characters are pretty lame (he essentially has the same characters playing about the same roles in an earlier book, Demons and Angels), the plot is, to put it lightly, fairly implausible, but if you just go with it, it's kind of enjoyable.

Also, didn't we have a thread or two on this earlier? I'm pretty sure I posted an earlier rant about the character recycling a few months ago. ;-)

― lyra (lyra), Monday, 23 February 2004 05:04 (twenty-two years ago)

Summaries I've read of it make it sound like a cheap Foucault's Pendulum knockoff.

― Dan I., Monday, 23 February 2004 05:12 (twenty-two years ago)

Never read Foucault's Pendulum, but the book does feel like a cheap knockoff of something. I will be hopelessly old fashioned & say if you want a nice puzzling book, read Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy.

― lyra (lyra), Monday, 23 February 2004 05:14 (twenty-two years ago)

it's actually a cheap holy blood and the holy grail knockoff! i read it on vacation (another book i read on vacation was smiley's people, actually, lyra!) and while readable it was really shitty.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 23 February 2004 05:23 (twenty-two years ago)

it's funny, i read it right after the le carré and couldn't help but thinking how much more exciting george smiley making a phone call was than professor dude in the da vinci code escaping from the cops.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 23 February 2004 05:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Le Carré spoils you for reading almost anything afterwards. ;-)

― lyra (lyra), Monday, 23 February 2004 05:25 (twenty-two years ago)

crappily written rehashed esoteric conspiracy laden potboiler rubbish that sells like hotcakes (if hotcakes were so popular you couldnt keep up with the demand for them).

― jack cole (jackcole), Monday, 23 February 2004 05:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Aaaarrrgggghhhh!!! I had to sit through my mum's church group's book club discussion of it. 1) Temple of Priory IS A HOAX!!! Wake up and smell the tentacles, folks. It's not Cthulu, it's good old fashioned squid ink. 2) It's like Foucaults Pendulum for people have never read a conspiracy novel in their lives. In fact, not even as clever as Foucault, cause it doesn't have the framework that makes it interesting. 3) The characters are so wooden and dense, light bends around them. 4) The puzzles? Christ, my dog figured them out before the characters! 5) Still a good read on a long airplane ride, though.

It's caught on like wildfire with Christians who are looking for someone to blame for the mess their churches are in now. Sigh.

― The River Kate (kate), Monday, 23 February 2004 10:29 (twenty-two years ago)

It's on it's knees begging & pleading to be made into a film starring Ralph Fiennes and Audrey Tautou.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Monday, 23 February 2004 14:20 (twenty-two years ago)

I read _Digital Fortress_, which was really really boring for the first three quarters of the story.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 23 February 2004 14:34 (twenty-two years ago)

it's not really like foucalt's pendulum at all, considering the way eco's book ends.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 23 February 2004 17:05 (twenty-two years ago)

Haven't read it, but Laura Miller had an interesting bit on it in Sunday's NYTBR.

― spittle (spittle), Monday, 23 February 2004 18:11 (twenty-two years ago)

the last line of that article = foucault's pendulum (almost)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 23 February 2004 18:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Met JLC once and he has the demeanour of someone who is thinking eight different things at the same time. Which explains the novels a bit.

― Chuck Tatum (Chuck Tatum), Monday, 23 February 2004 20:37 (twenty-two years ago)

cool!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 23 February 2004 20:43 (twenty-two years ago)

I like to call this book 'Da TheVinci Code'.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 23 February 2004 20:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Le Carre was so great until the cold war ended. All the smiley books are masterpieces. Now, it's all garbage. Just can't get through the latest one. But T, T, S, S was so good. A perfect spy, a masterpiece. When he was good, he was good.

Oh, yeah, da the vinci code, stupid, and yet, stoopidly entertaining on a train/plane/automobile....but only if you're driving said train/plane/automobile...

― Skottie, Tuesday, 24 February 2004 05:52 (twenty-two years ago)

watch Pi instead.

― Orbit (Orbit), Tuesday, 24 February 2004 05:53 (twenty-two years ago)

three months pass...

My in-laws are forcing me to read it!!

― AdamL :') (nordicskilla), Monday, 14 June 2004 19:33 (twenty-one years ago)

i read this before it came out. my mom works at a waldenbooks and wanted my opinion of it since it was going to have a prominent display in the store along with a huge promotional push. i thought of it then the same that i do now: a cheesy typical vatican-conspiracy thriller. i figured out the "secret" of the book before it even was revealed. that priory of sion/"holy blood, holy grail" shit has been rehashed over and over and it's all a demonstratable friggin hoax!

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Monday, 14 June 2004 19:51 (twenty-one years ago)

I proudly stand by my retitling.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 14 June 2004 19:52 (twenty-one years ago)

As well you should. I've always thought of this as 'Da Vinci Code' but yours is better.

― Vinnie (vprabhu), Monday, 14 June 2004 19:55 (twenty-one years ago)

I sold 2000+ copies while working at Borders during the holiday season. Try Cryptonomicon for a worthier time.

― x Jeremy (Atila the Honeybun), Monday, 14 June 2004 20:02 (twenty-one years ago)

I just don't think this is going to be my kind of thing. I don't like popular philosophy/maths/religion, and I'm a Plot Nazi!

― AdamL :') (nordicskilla), Monday, 14 June 2004 20:04 (twenty-one years ago)

six months pass...

my mum wants me to read to read this. i drag my feet at reading any sort of bestseller pop phenom books, whether i need to or not.

― kingfish (Kingfish), Saturday, 25 December 2004 13:48 (twenty-one years ago)

This book is horribly written.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Saturday, 25 December 2004 14:42 (twenty-one years ago)

People like Dan Brown novels, I think, because of the suspense, but the methods he uses are so hackneyed (OH NO A CLIFFHANGER AT THE END OF THE CHAPTER AND A SWITCH TO ANOTHER SUBPLOT IN THE NEXT ONE! MUST KEEP READING etc etc)

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Saturday, 25 December 2004 14:45 (twenty-one years ago)

"philosophy." oh the many ways to separate the American people from their money. Orbit otm - at least pi is funny.

the guy who wrote this was in my Dad's class in college. my Dad makes a lot of decisions about reunions and such and i think is stopping any effort to have some event with this guy.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Saturday, 25 December 2004 14:48 (twenty-one years ago)

someone should promote Tha G Code as the audio companion to this book - give it new cover art and everything

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Saturday, 25 December 2004 14:52 (twenty-one years ago)

I read this on my car ride to Long Island over Thanksgiving. It was silly but passed the time. I still like Holy Blood, Holy Grail better.

― tokyo rosemary (rosemary), Saturday, 25 December 2004 18:40 (twenty-one years ago)

"philosophy." oh the many ways to separate the American people from their money.

What does this mean?

― youn, Saturday, 25 December 2004 19:22 (twenty-one years ago)

people who only read two/three books a year will rave about this. it's not bad, kinda like crichton. he's the 00s crichton.

― stevie nixed (stevie nixed), Saturday, 25 December 2004 21:12 (twenty-one years ago)

its a really unremarkable book, which is why it's so surprising that it has become sucha phenomenon. its really just a standard Vatican-covering-up-the-truth-about-jesus conspiracy potboiler. which there are about a million of.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 25 December 2004 22:28 (twenty-one years ago)

What does this mean?

the quotes are from a word in the first post.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Saturday, 25 December 2004 23:07 (twenty-one years ago)

Fuck y'all, it's fun. Sure, it's fourth-grade shithackery, but we can't all be carrying around Hanish Murafuckeri or whatever you charlatans stuff your eyecraws with. Sometimes you've got to go the glazed donut sundae.

― Michael Stuchbery (Mikey Bidness), Sunday, 26 December 2004 02:39 (twenty-one years ago)

Baaaaaaa

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Sunday, 26 December 2004 04:49 (twenty-one years ago)

My mother says that she met someone who is very concerned about this book, because it might lead some people who might have been "saved" one day, to not be "saved" as a consequence of reading it.

― You've Got to Pick Up Every Stitch (tracerhand), Monday, 27 December 2004 18:36 (twenty-one years ago)

If I want a glazed donut sundae, I will read The Wheel of Time.

― Ian John50n (orion), Monday, 27 December 2004 18:41 (twenty-one years ago)

I hardly ever read and I could STILL tell that this book was terrible.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 27 December 2004 18:47 (twenty-one years ago)

When I was telemarketing, I worked with this middle-aged guy with pants up to his chest who was very upset that the book misrepresented some of underground societies he was involved with.

― C0L1N B...CKETT, Monday, 27 December 2004 18:49 (twenty-one years ago)

"My mother says that she met someone who is very concerned about this book, because it might lead some people who might have been "saved" one day, to not be "saved" as a consequence of reading it."

I'm actually more surprised than anything that there hasn't been an insane evangelical backlash against this book yet.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 20:47 (twenty-one years ago)

no because it's anti-catholic!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah I can see why that would be popular, but I would still think that books which cast doubt on the veracity of the bible and Jesus' divinity would not be popular with Falwell and Co.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:05 (twenty-one years ago)

one year passes...

it's actually a cheap holy blood and the holy grail knockoff! i read it on vacation (another book i read on vacation was smiley's people, actually, lyra!) and while readable it was really shitty.

-- s1ocki (parrisactava...), February 23rd, 2004 6:23 AM. (slutsky) (link)

OTM. Let's see if the law agrees.

― StanM (StanM), Monday, 27 February 2006 19:54 (twenty years ago)

...and I was wondering why all the reporters were gathered around the courts today when I went for my afternoon walk!

― Boris and the Johnsons (kate), Monday, 27 February 2006 20:05 (twenty years ago)

holy blood/holy grail is suposed to be 'true'! so the authors are suing over 'research' that uncovers supposed 'truths' being used for a fictional story. rich.

― latebloomer: My Baby's A Labrador, He's Beautiful (latebloomer), Monday, 27 February 2006 20:06 (twenty years ago)

I'm fascinated by the way the exact same plot can be non-fiction in 1982 (no Vatican reaction at all) and fiction in 2003 (criticised by the Vatican).

― StanM (StanM), Monday, 27 February 2006 20:23 (twenty years ago)

Whoa, Kevin Smith's gonna be eating shit for lifiting the plot for DOGMA, too.

― Abbott (Abbott), Monday, 27 February 2006 20:33 (twenty years ago)

The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail is reasonably careful not to claim that most of its wilder theories are true, though they did seem to get taken in by the Priory of Sion dudes. I'd like to think they're only suing Dan Brown cos they're offended by how fucking awful his book is, but I guess with the film on the way they got the scent of serious money.

― Raw, Uncompromising, and Noodly (noodle vague), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 01:40 (twenty years ago)

there's a film coming out

two books

same publisher

one suing another

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 01:52 (twenty years ago)

worst. haiku. ever.

― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 07:07 (twenty years ago)

holy blood/holy grail is suposed to be 'true'! so the authors are suing over 'research' that uncovers supposed 'truths' being used for a fictional story. rich.

Yeah, I was gonna say exactly this. In order for the writers to claim plagiarism they'd have to admit their work was fiction, not historical research, right?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 07:12 (twenty years ago)

i always liked the comments in this essay about it

― kingfish has gene rayburn's mic (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 07:14 (twenty years ago)

i haven't read either yet, should i bother?

― not-goodwin (not-goodwin), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 07:20 (twenty years ago)

Earlier this evening I said to my housemates "Have you ever decided someone was a moron just for reading the Da Vinci Code? ... Just assumed they were a moron only because they were reading it, not even because they liked it.

They both answered "Yes" without hesitation.

My friends and I are terrible people.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 07:22 (twenty years ago)

Only read it if you like "the whole of history is a conspiracy which we unravel in a detectivey way" type books like The Illuminatus! Trilogy (but that one's also funny) and Foucault's Pendulum (but that one's actually well written) first.

xpost

― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 07:25 (twenty years ago)

rofl. i read it. i also adore barthes. (not brown of course.) so what does that make me?

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 08:05 (twenty years ago)

No one should ever start Da Vinci Code because it is one of those books that's built in such way that it's almost impossible not to finish, yet when you've finished it you feel like an idiot for going through such mediocre crap masking itself as something "deep" and "thought-provoking". The whole plot is basically just a couple of people running from one historical site to another solving word puzzles, spiced with supposedly scandalous revelations about Jesus.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 08:08 (twenty years ago)

i thought it was funny and entertaining and crap. waste of time? i finished it in two/three days or so. hardly longer.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 08:12 (twenty years ago)

i thought it was mildly entertaining. but im pretty stupid and i fall for stuff like this pretty easily

― phil-two (phil-two), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 08:35 (twenty years ago)

The Illuminatus! Trilogy (but that one's also funny)

Funny you should mention that... have you read Brown's other novel, Angels and Devils. It's all about this... POWERFUL ORGANISATION CONTROLLING HISTORY called... ::shock shock horror horror:: THE ILLUMINATI!!!

Brown has made a career of turning cult classics into airport novels.

― Boris and the Johnsons (kate), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 10:05 (twenty years ago)

"Airport novel" is totally OTM. I was given four Dan Brown books (The Da Vinci Code, Angels & Demons, Deception Point, Digital Fortress) for my birthday last year. The first three are likeable enough page-turners, but Digital Fortress was unreadable. I soldiered on till the end, and got the "shocking twist" a few chapters ahead. One disadvantage of reading them all in a short space of time is you realise just how formulaic they really are - i.e. "good guy" is revealed to be bad, bad guy is actually okay etc.
As for Code's basis in theology, I suppose that reading stuff like this can raise people's curiosity which can't be bad really.

― Ben Mott (Ben Mott), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 11:45 (twenty years ago)

"Brown has made a career of turning cult classics into airport novels."

wait til he tackles the crying of lot 49!

― latebloomer: where dignity goes to die (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 12:41 (twenty years ago)

Digital Fortress is completely unforgivable. The Da Vinci Code was way more entertaining than it should have been and Angels and Demons was really enjoyable.

There are so many more authors out there that people should be getting into a snit over before Dan Brown it isn't even funny.

― Dan (I'll Take Him Over Joseph Conrad Any Day) Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 15:02 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, well, it's like this. There are so many worse bands in the world than say, The BRMC, but I hate the BRMC more because not only are they shitty and derivative, but they're ripping off bands I do love.

― Cuair Crithlonracha (kate), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 15:07 (twenty years ago)

are any of them as popular and prominent? (xp)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 15:08 (twenty years ago)

Only read it if you like "the whole of history is a conspiracy which we unravel in a detectivey way" type books like The Illuminatus! Trilogy (but that one's also funny) and Foucault's Pendulum.

You might be missing the point of Foucault's Pendulum there, Stan.

― Raw, Uncompromising, and Noodly (noodle vague), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 15:26 (twenty years ago)

haha there's no way i'm reading that shit.

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 16:29 (twenty years ago)

What was the line from the Family Guy about this? "The chapters are really short so you feel like you've read a lot when you're done"

― kingfish has gene rayburn's mic (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 16:30 (twenty years ago)

Noodle: ok, that's true, it's only a small part of the plot, but since this book sometimes gets listed together with the other two, I thought I'd throw it in here as well.

― StanM (StanM), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 16:35 (twenty years ago)

foucault's pendulum is absolutely about how wrong these things are. I think. I can't remember actually, I read it 11 years ago. I liked it though and because i read it I feel like I don't need to read Dan Brown's dumb book, but I'll probably see the movie.

― kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 16:57 (twenty years ago)

BEWARE RON HOWARD.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 17:03 (twenty years ago)

I've read Foucoult's Pendulum like, 5 times. And I've done all kinds of research in support of it just to see how much of Eco's book is based on "fact", and how little he had to invent to tie it together into the grand conspiracy that wasn't. If you didn't know better, it'd be fun to think he was making up all those stories about the Rosicrucians and the Templars and the Comte de St. Germain and Cagliostro, but those were all already out there.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 17:15 (twenty years ago)

id like to see a foucalt's pendulum movie.

― latebloomer: where dignity goes to die (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 18:04 (twenty years ago)

6+ hour mini series, Singing Detective style.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 18:32 (twenty years ago)

THBATHG is shite, but if was the first thing that made me realise the constructedness of the Bible, and thus began the journey away from being a proper Catlick, beliving in God'n'stuff.

― Dave B (daveb), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 18:37 (twenty years ago)

x-post

in italian with subtitles, or americanized?

― latebloomer: where dignity goes to die (latebloomer), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 18:41 (twenty years ago)

Well, I read the book in english, so I can't imagine watching the mini-series the same way would cause any bother.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Tuesday, 28 February 2006 18:47 (twenty years ago)

eleven years pass...

So! Who wants to read Dan Brown attempting to write about IT security? Someone alert Tombot

Because I hate you all, I’ve decided to share one page of Dan Brown’s thriller “Digital Fortress”. pic.twitter.com/eJIahe3RIM
— Matthew Green (@matthew_d_green) October 12, 2017

Oh fuck, I can’t share just one page. pic.twitter.com/7272EZe0LA
— Matthew Green (@matthew_d_green) October 12, 2017

(thread has several choice selections)

― Hit to Death in the "Galactic Head" (kingfish), Sunday, 15 October 2017 05:17 (eight years ago)

seven years pass...

well he's back with a new one that sounds bonkers

at least he's not very prolific

― Andy the Grasshopper, Tuesday, 9 September 2025 23:01 (seven months ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.