The Da Vinci Code

Rating:
Summary: Open the Box¿Then
Review: Like dolls that nest inside one another Dan Brown's newest book, "The Da'Vinci Code", is, a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, as Sir Winston Spencer Churchill once wrote. And Like Sir Winston there is a Knight in this book as well, Sir Leigh Teebing. Sir Leigh and our protagonists are faced with constant puzzles, one of the most fascinating of which is the cryptex, or more sinister, nesting cryptexes invented by none other than Da'Vinci himself.

This book is a thriller, mystery and even a healthy measure of counter-factual history, how might the World have been different if only a certain what if had occurred? The variables examined are done with skill, a very clever pen, and most importantly with respect for the subject matter. Religion is as volatile an issue as there is; to successfully use it in a work of fiction is a tribute to the author as a writer and individual.

The brilliance of this tale is that you don't know, that as you open the first doll, that a variety of smaller ones wait within. Dan Brown sets a box in front of you. Open the box and you may find another cube or perhaps a pyramid, and inside that a sphere. And every layer you work your way through requires a different method from our protagonists to move forward. Open an object correctly and the quest continues, puzzle out your solution in a flawed manner....and who knows?

The author also firmly plants the book in reality with a real organization he mentions at the book's start and that you can visit on the web. The nature of the group lends credence to extremes in points of view, makes what could be fantastic possible.

The great news is that when you have finished the book the fun has only begun. The author has placed a quest for readers on the web, and I have spent a few hours puzzling through it and can state without condition it is wonderful fun.

This is the fourth book from this author and I feel it is his best. His previous work, "Angels and Demons", was number one with me, and now perhaps is 1A. This book is a fantastic ride, and will get you hooked on this man's work if you are not already one of his readers.

Rating:
Summary: Nothing More Than A Cliché Thriller...
Review: Like every single other novel he wrote, Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code is an over-the-top paranoid conspiracy thriller that's riddled with a poor plot and questionable "research". All religious controversy aside, the main problem with this book is just the godawful clichés that are everywhere. The unstoppable assassin (who despite being albino has no vision problems even though the lack of all pigments cause albinos to have bad vision), the forced romance, the ridiculous plot twist that's supposed to shock us all, but seems to lack reason, and inane puzzles. Additionally, the plot is rife with mere stupidity. How does someone dying of a gunshot wound manage to write a diagram and other various things on the floor? (It's rather like the scene from Monty Python And The Holy Grail with the Castle Aaarrrggghhh....) Why is it that the aforementioned dying character have the same last name as a priest who dabbled in the occult about 100 years ago (talk about obvious allusions)? Why do the main characters stop to look at a painting as they're being chased? Why are all the villains so stereotypically malicious without any motivation? Why does the villain do the old "tell 'em everything before you kill them" routine that's been in every single James Bond movie?

Finally there's the whole religious issue. Obviously, Dan Brown has some issues with the Roman Catholic Church as evidenced by this book and his other work Angels & Demons (which by the way is EXACTLY the same as this book), but that is not what bothers me. What bothers me is that he claims all he is written is true, when most of his sources are of questionable integrity and much of what he writes is apparently woefully inaccurate.

To conclude, The Da Vinci Code is a formulaic thriller that only stands out due to its subject matter, which cannot save it from the woeful clichés that pepper the novel. If you want a thriller based on fact, read The ODESSA File by Frederick Forsyth, or Spandau Phoenix by Greg Iles. These novels manage to combine fact and fiction and do not fail on such ridiculous cliché.

Rating:
Summary: Jurassic Park for History Nerds (almost)
Review: Like Jurassic Park this is very good genre fiction, which the author roots in real concepts (J. Park- genetic engineering, chaos theory, DV Code- religious, medieval and art history) but very seemlessly builds on those concepts using his own imagination and constructions. If Jurassic Park is the pinnacle of genre fiction (5 stars), than this book deserves four stars. The two main reasons being its pacing, short cliff hanger chapters, which gets slightly redundant after a while, and a (slight) let down of an ending.

That said, as an admitted history nerd myself, I really enjoyed this book. I like the way he reveals the whole back story over the course of the book, as I stated before, moving from actual history into his own theories. I like the clues in the art he uses, and the connection between the main theme of the book (I don't want to give it away) and well.. everything, from Rennaissance Art to language to pop culture and everything in between.

The writing was good, I didn't expect much, and it was a true page turner. I read it faster than any thing I've read in a while. All in all, a very entertaining read with some very interesting ideas.

Rating:
Summary: Two levels
Review: Like many here I read this book on the urgings of others. Eventually, I could only have so many people tell me what a great book this is before breaking down and reading it myself. Also, like many here, I found my enjoyment decreasing as I noticed an occasional error or strange interpretation of something I was familiar with. In terms of the history, I think the strongest thing I took away is the importance of having multiple sources, and always looking for bias on any issue where interpretation will account for a sizable amount of the research.

As for the actual story, I thought it was fun. At times the author seemed to be pandering to the target demographic, but it's not common enough to cause too much annoyence. While certainly the characters are a bit cliche at times, and seem to often have their mental functions tied down so as to not outpace the reader, I still found them to be enjoyable. They're candy rather than a full meal, but sometimes one just wants some sugar and fun.

Rating:
Summary: Re-define 'Bestseller'
Review: Like many other people, I bought this book simply out of curiousity. It appears to have made many waves and since I am interested in the history of Religion I thought it would make an interesting read. Far from it.
The characters are flat and one-dimension and the whole book is based on the so-called 'secrets' Brown reveals. Without the information on the history of the church (though their accuracy is debateable) the fact that the storyline is completely lacking would have been blaringly obvious. But even so, he obviously trusts that all his readers are as dense and uniformed on the subject matter as his character Sophie. Rather, I found myself laughing out loud every time it took Langdon and Leigh forever to figure out a 'riddle' I, the layman, had solved within seconds. Not to mention that the 'revolutionary' ideas portrayed by Brown are hardly new. I had heard most of this before at one point or another.
I should hope that everyone takes this book with a pound of salt.

Rating:
Summary: Great book just remember its fiction
Review: Like many others, I found this book to be an exciting page turner. I had read that Brown had spent a lot of time researching the different ideas presented in his book so I wanted to see for myself to what extent the ideas of the book were based on truth. It appears that Brown was sucked into a hoax that many before him also bought into. The priory documents that gave him the basis for his claims were most likely forgeries deposited by noted criminal, con artist, and prankster Pierre Plantard who registered the Priory of Sion in 1956 with a group of friends. I could go on and on about how Plantard claimed to have deposited those documents which also pointed to him as a member of the Merovigian line amongst other claims. However, one of the great things about writing a fiction book is that the author is free to expand on thoughts of what if this was true without worrying about having to back up everything stated. Whether Brown knew this was false or got caught up in this hoax is irrelevant to the fact that this is an incredible fast paced book. Brown's description of the artwork and various locations caused me to vividly remember exactly what he was talking about from my own experiences. Many have described this book as "...an intelligent thriller..." for which I would have to agree. I found myself not wanting to put the book down and also stopping the midst of the story to try and decipher the codes before the characters. I would most definitely encourage others to read this book just keep in mind while reading that it is fiction.

Rating:
Summary: All that and a bag of chips
Review: Like most people out there, The Da Vinci Code was my first encounter with Dan Brown's writing, and I finished the book very pleased and impressed. On many grounds it appears similar to other good pop-fiction thrillers out there, though it is important to note one big difference: Brown is able to pack a lot of really fascinating information (some factual and some pseudo-factual) into his story, and still keep it very fast-paced and entertaining. This is not a simple task, and Brown does it marvelously. Far from being a burden on the story's action, one could easily make the case that the addition of such information goes a long way towards building up the novel's intrigue.

The Da Vinci Code is styled like an action film (indeed Columbia Pictures has already acquired the rights), and as a result it is very easy to find yourself engrossed in the plot - even in its first few pages. It is requisite for me to note that I am biased in this regard, because I have always had a fascination with religious thriller movies like End of Days, Stigmata, and the Indiana Jones series. If you enjoyed any of those films, you will certainly like this story.

On a personal level I found the Da Vinci Code to be so stimulating that upon stumbling on unfamiliar factoids and myths, I would put the book down to go search for related lore on the Internet (admittedly, not a first-rate source). This certainly was not necessary for grasping the background of the novel; the point I am trying to make is that the story was so interesting, that I was compelled to do additional investigating on the side.

I have also been fortunate enough to have traveled to most of the locales described in detail in The Da Vinci Code. This was one of those little things that really made me fall in love with this book. Brown nails the descriptions of his settings perfectly every time; if you've ever spent any time in Paris (and London) you will instantly recognize the vivid imagery he paints. You may even recall a few 'forgotten' experiences from your own times spent at these locations (as I did).

One of the major themes that crops up in this novel involves questioning the accuracy of our historical record. This is a deeply philosophical problem that cannot be definitively solved, yet begs at least some contemplation, and Brown certainly demands this from readers of the Da Vinci Code. If (even just for the sake of good fiction) you are not willing to suspend your faith in the accuracy of our given history, then you probably will not care for this book.

Ultimately, I loved this book, and despite what I saw as slight predictability in the short-term, the Da Vinci Code is certainly a wild, unpredictable ride in the long-term. I firmly recommend it to anyone willing to temporarily suspend their beliefs and accept (at least briefly) an alternate view of history. If you become engrossed in the book, be sure to visit the author's website (danbrown.com), as it contains a wealth of supplemental resources and pictures.

Rating:
Summary: The Da Vinci Code
Review: Like others,this book was highly recommended to me. Although the subject matter was very interesting, the writing style left me wanting more. The characters were not fully developed and after a while, it became predictable. I felt as if the author was telling me everything, instead of letting me figure some things out on my own. After all the high praise, I was dissapointed.

Rating:
Summary: "EVERYBODY" was reading it, so I felt I had to.
Review: Like so many novels the "DaVinci Code" starts off strong and engaging and 2/3 of the way through becomes tiresome and a chore to finish. Being a Catholic Clergyperson, many people told me "You HAVE to read this" because it exposes so much of the corruption of the Catholic Church. I do agree that there is lots of corruption in the history of any institution, the Church included. However I have reminded the folks who told me I have to read this that it is a NOVEL!!! And not a very good one. I did finally finish it only because I had invested so much time in reading the first 2/3 of it. Honestly, I thought I would never get to the end!
I do have to admit that I found Dan Brown's presentation of ancient symbolism to be enjoyable and saw how lots of it probably is true. But the whole premise of the book seems to be that the Church has supressed the fact that Jesus was married to Mary Magdeline and in order to maintain control over the masses, the Vatican and Opus Dei (a conservative faction in the Catholic Church)have to keep this secret. And if the secret gets out to the masses then they will be much more free and the leaders of the Church fear this. I do agree that the leaders of the church don't want people to feel free, but I don't think it has anything to do with whether or not Jesus was married to Mary Magdaline!
Again, it's a NOVEL. And not a very good one.

Rating:
Summary: Da Vinci?
Review: Like some of your readers, I found The Da Vinci Code to be a fun summer pastime. But although I am no art history expert, I found some of the errors to be disconcerting. In the first place, most art lovers refer to the artist as "Leonardo", in the same way they call Raphael and Michelangelo by their first names. No one would dream of referring to them as "Buonarroti" or "Sanzio." Also, Leonardo did not have "hundreds of lucrative Vatican commissions." He didn't even have hundreds of commissions period. Considering his genius and his long life (69) his output is surprisingly meagre. And his disappointment at receiving no commissions from the Medici pope Leo X, a fellow Florentine, is well documented. Furthermore, Leonardo's Adoration of the Magi has no paint on it at all. Only the underpaint, the preparatory ground, which is not grey-green but reddish brown. No one has ever painted over it, unlike The Last Supper, which was painted over many times. Surely the most rudimentary research would have prevented these errors.