The Da Vinci Code
by Dan Brown
|
List Price: Our Price: $1.62 You Save: $25.33 (94%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of The Da Vinci Code
Book Review: The French is spelled correctly
Summary: 1 Stars
For the time-challenged, here is the short version of this review:Highs: the French sentences are correctly spelled.
Lows: everything else.
Want a more complete picture? Read on, but don't say I didn't warn you.
The basic premise of "The Da Vinci Code" is this: an American expert on religious symbology uncovers a conspiracy to eliminate the descendants of Mary Magdalene, who was Jesus Christ's wife. He is aided by a French cryptologist, who happens to be the recent victim's granddaughter, while being chased around by the French police and, naturally, the Catholic Church's hitman. Hero and heroine go through an esoteric version of a treasure hunt involving, more of less in this order: a message written in blood, another message written in invisible ink, a permutation of the Fibonacci sequence, a safe deposit box key, a box with a rose on its lid and a white cylinder with five coded sections inside, an inverted message (in English, despite having been written by a Frenchman, for his French granddaughter), a tomb in London, a smaller cylinder, presumably with a papyrus inside, and here I stop to avoid spoiling the non-climax.
Needless to say, this by itself would not carry the story very far but, wait, there's more: did I mention the Catholic Church is dead set against our heroes ever discovering its dirty secret, and therefore they're throwing in their best and brightest to thwart them? Namely: a self-flagellating, gigantic albino with an IQ of around 20, who seems to be perpetually on crack, plus a jet-set American bishop connected with a mysterious "Teacher" (whom I won't reveal, either, lest I spoil this component of the final non-climax as well). And that's it. No Sicilian Mafia, no Spanish Inquisition, no Swiss Guard-sorry, wrong again: there's the French police, perpetually two steps behind everyone else in the story, but speaking lots of correctly spelled French (unlike the Spanish in the book).
Characters: you've probably guessed it. Robert Langdom, the hero, is a Harvard version of Indiana Jones. He's an expert in religion, maybe because of his belief that religion is bad for people. At the end, he hasn't changed one iota. Sophie Neveu is the granddaughter of the previous Grand Master of the "Priory of Sion," and this fact is key, because she keeps remembering things her granddad had told her long ago so she could solve the mystery. We're told she's a brilliant cryptologist but her memory, however, is so weak that the necessary clues only come back after pages and pages of mental jogging. As to the villains, I've already mentioned the albino and the bishop; the French police inspector is very French (as in "Casablanca," but without the jokes), which defines him completely. There's also an English scholar, Sir Leigh Teabing, who hides a terrible secret behind his facile demeanor. This secret is definitely not his deep aversion to the Catholic Church, which he expostulates through lengthy lectures.
Plotwise, the book follows a treasure hunt structure, with chapters interspersed to show how the villains are getting closer to the heroes. At some point, the albino catches up with them but they disable him easily despite having no weapons (this sort of thing happens again in the non-climax scene, involving another villain that I won't mention). This and the "anima ex machina" interventions by the dead grandfather, who always had the right clue to give but Sophie had somehow forgotten until that very moment, make for very dull reading. Here is a typical page: Langdon and Sophie are stumped by the most recent clue. They talk back and forth for many pages. Then Langdon reveals a piece of the ongoing Catholic conspiracy against the defenders of truth and freedom, and then Sophie remembers something her grandfather had once told her, which leads them to the next clue after maybe using a bit of kindergarten-level cryptography. Rinse. Repeat.
As for setting, the whole book has a luscious white-room feel, where the only locations described in any detail are the albino's hideouts. Even street addresses are given for those (they are, apparently, Opus Dei centers, whom anyone can find in a phonebook). After he goes inside, accuracy goes out the window, but what do readers know? Depictions of the albino's self-flagellations are presented at the start, probably to hook the reader, but these too seem taken from medieval stories rather than modern-day practices of corporal mortification. There are lectures on the Priory of Sion and Church's big conspiracy against them, but you can get more depth from a Web search for a fraction of the cost, and I suspect this is precisely all the author did.
Style? Every problem imaginable can be found: non-simultaneous present-participle constructions, chopped-up, stilted yet mundane dialog, adverbs galore. It reads quickly, but I suspect this is mainly because you end up skipping a lot so your mind doesn't shut down. All of the above recommends a zero-star rating which, hopefully, Amazon.com will consider after this experience.
So, is there something going for "The Da Vinci Code"? Why is it selling so well? Aside from the fact that many best-sellers are manufactured by marketing devices, the most memorable trait of this novel is its pervasive, corrosive attack on the Catholic Church, presented as the ultimate villain, eternal source of slavery, war, ignorance, and everything else bad that's ever happened, and this is probably why so many find it appealing (I find it hard to believe it's because of its elementary plot and shoddy writing). If wallowing in this stuff is what you like, go ahead and read "The Da Vinci Code." It may be boring otherwise, but you'll get your kicks.
Book Review: From "The Last Supper" on-- Properly categorized as Fiction.
Summary: 1 Stars
What a journey I've been on, as a result of this book. Earlier this week, a friend requested that I read it. Did so in one sitting at Barnes and Nobles; would typically purchase those books that I browse, but this would have been $25 illspent.
My immediate reaction was that the author is by no means intellectual. His writing is blatantly elementary, as many reviewers have already pointed out- two dimensional characters, rampant cliches, predictable plot points. The man just doesn't have the imagination or intellect necessary for writing.
My secondary reaction was that I was glad to have read it, for although his writing provoked many groans, the ideas [though not his own] were enticing. Ever the knowledge addict, I expressed my opinions to my friend, and we two went off on a quest for understanding.
It is this quest that brings me here. There was no need, prior to it; I assumed most people would simply enjoy or dislike what they read, and my opinion would be inconsequential. However, at this point I feel it's somewhat necessary to share what we've discovered: that this book is, without question, a work of Fiction.
Mr. Brown strikes me as the type of man who delights in the arrogant appeal of 'knowing more than other people'. The type of man who seeks higher education and book learning, so that he might re-introduce the concepts he's discovered to those "less knowledgeable"; the problem being, of course, that he presents the information as undeniable truth. The idea of challenging what he has been taught would not occur to him, as he is a passive learner.
By writing the book as he did, he is not only promoting false information- he is encouraging a continued pattern of passive learning. Even his characters never question the information presented to them; no matter their degree of so-called 'intelligence', each consequently smiles and nods in agreement when they are presented with a new concept.
I dislike the idea of passive learning, and consequently seek answers and information with a relentless passion. After reading the book, my first experiment in understanding involved the suggested theory of PHI; after some scattered research, I conducted a series of measurements that time and again proved the 'ratio phenomenon' to be false. After searching more, I learned that most individuals attempted this same experiment after reading the book; and, as with myself- were consistently disappointed.
PHI is not a natural phenomenon. While I am not a mathematicean, I enjoy the study of numbers; PHI isn't much more more than a representative variable along the lines of 'i' or 'pi'.
So. Although my friend and I acknowledged this theory to be untrue, we also recognized that it was one of the lesser ones mentioned in The Da Vinci Code- and continued to explore some of the other concepts presented.
Our first involved the much-discussed idea that Da Vinci had painted Mary Magdalene into The Last Supper. Our journey became prolonged due to confusion of names, but in the end came to this result:
John the Apostle was, in fact, effeminate. Most artists depicted the man similarly to Da Vinci [you're welcome to do an image search on google for "John the Apostle"]- long hair, youthful features, no facial hair. Coinciding with this is the fact that Da Vinci simply struggled with depicting the male form; during our search we viewed a massive amount of his work, and portraits of men are quite noticeably absent. Those that we did find were undeniably effeminate, or depicting older men; The reason for the former might have something to do with Da Vinci's rumoured homosexuality, as well as his preoccupation with female beauty- and the latter, as I explained to my friend- is that it's easier to draw what you're familiar with. [In this case, men who looked like himself.]
This said, I'd imagine that the depiction of John the Apostle is strikingly effeminate, not only because of his natural features- but quite simply, because Da Vinci got 'carried away' with the idea of portraying the man as meek and delicate, and inadvertently incorporated his adoration of the female form.
As for Peter leaning across to whisper in his ear, as well as the mysterious dagger; it is said that Peter is informing John of Judas' plans to betray Jesus. [Matthew 26: 14-16; in the painting, Judas is seated in front of the two figures, and turned towards]. Small symbolic subterfuge on the part of Da Vinci, but nothing quite as overwhelming as the author would have us believe.
This is not to say that there isn't some truth to the idea that Mary played a larger part than she is credited for- nor is it to say that Jesus absolutely did not have children. Certainly possiblities, [and in the case of Mary Magdalene, becoming increasingly undisputed]; but this book does not provide any particularly compelling evidence in the case of either.
As for the "Priory of Sion", our research is incomplete. So far it's not looking too good, and I would be entirely unsurprised if it didn't amount to yet another mistruth on the part of Dan Brown.
It's unfortunate that this book has become the bestseller that it is; especially given that most will read his words as reality, and go no further. Please do not let yourself be lulled into complacency. You have been played for a fool, by a fool.
Suggested reading:
"Reading the Bible Again for the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously But Not Literally", by Marcus. J Borg
"King James VI and I and the Reunion of Christendom"
"In the Beginning : The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language,and a Culture"
"New Revised Standard Version: Study Bible"
Book Review: From another reviewer...worth reading
Summary: 1 Stars
Da Vinci' code for Catholic bashing Our Sunday Visitor // Amy Welborn
08 June 2003
Who says that Catholicism doesn't influence American culture? The number one best-selling fiction title in the nation, "The Da Vinci Code" (Doubleday, $25) has "Catholic" on practically every page. Granted, the word is usually awfully close to words like "repressive," "patriarchal," and "brutal," but you have to take what you can get.
Or do you?
Since its release in March, the book has surprised many by becoming a best seller. The word on the street is that it's an "intelligent thriller," challenging the reader's mind with a suspenseful plot, but also with lots of culture and learning.
But "The Da Vinci Code" is neither learned nor challenging - except to the reader's patience. Moreover, it's not really suspenseful, and the writing is shockingly banal, even for genre fiction. It's a pretentious, bigoted, tendentious mess, and the uniformly positive press - including a rave in The New York Times and a fawning National Public Radio interview with author Dan Brown - should give us serious pause.
But if you think you might like a book whose ultimate effect is something like Umberto Eco proudly presented by Fox Network, here's the plot, such as it is:
(Be warned, there are "spoilers" ahead. A book this bad deserves to be spoiled, but if you don't want to know what happens, stop reading now.)
A curator at the Louvre is murdered in a gallery, but before he dies, he manages to leave clues and arrange his body in a significant way. His cryptologist granddaughter, Sophie Neveu, and a visiting American academic, Robert Langdon, whose specialty is religious symbolism, are drawn into the case and discern that Grandpere Sauniere was trying to leave a message - not about his killer, but about a Big Secret.
Catholic conspiracy
Sauniere was part of an ancient secret society called the Priory of Sion, for centuries charged with protecting the Big Secret. The Big Secret threatens to disrupt Life As We Know It. Naturally, the Catholic Church has spent the last thousand years making sure that it doesn't get out.
So, what's the Big Secret? Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, who was pregnant when He was crucified. Their child's descendents are still alive, anonymous and protected by the Priory.
The Priory is also the guardian of the real true faith Jesus and Mary Magdalene wanted passed on: the celebration of the "sacred feminine ."
The Da Vinci Code, then, is the story of the big race to reach the Holy Grail - which turns out to be not the chalice of the Last Supper but the remains of Mary Magdalene, mostly.
Sophie and Langdon race against the Church, primarily represented by an albino Opus Dei adherent taking directions from a bishop and mysterious "Teacher."
They race from clue to clue left by Sophie's code-loving Grandfather, puzzles left everywhere from the Bank of Zurich to the Church of Saint-Sulpice to Westminster Abbey to the paintings of Leonardo DaVinci.
Da Vinci, the story goes, portrayed his devotion to the Holy Grail of the sacred feminine into his Last Supper. The figure at Jesus' right is not a male, but Mary Magdalene, who is his partner in the gospel of the sacred feminine.
Same old lies
Hardly any of this background is original. Most of it is derived directly from the fantasy-disguised-as-history work "Holy Blood, Holy Grail," and the rest of it is cobbled from other bits of well-worn and risible nuggets of esoteric and Gnostic conspiracy theories.
Brown's treatment of the Roman Catholic Church is unoriginal as well. He uncritically repeats, among many other lies and distortions, the canard that the Church was responsible for killing five million accused witches during the medieval period.
And, I bet you didn't know the divinity of Jesus Christ thing was invented by the Emperor Constantine as a way of shoring up his power:
"'My dear....until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet....a great and powerful man, but a man nevertheless. A mortal.'
"`Not the Son of God?'
"`Right.' Teabing said. `Jesus' establishment as `the Son of God' was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea.'
`Hold on. You're saying Jesus' divinity was the result of a vote?'"
Whoa, dude!
You get the picture. This is not exactly the learned, intellectually engaging work it's cracked up to be.
Neither is it a well-crafted suspense novel. There is precious little action. Characters stand in a restroom in the Louvre for two chapters, explaining things to each other. Then they move to the Bank of Zurich, where they explain some more. And so on. These one-dimensional characters talk their way to Scotland where they spend a few chapters explaining the unsatisfying climax of this most wretched book.
Books this bad are usually best ignored, but in addition to being a best seller, Amazon reader reviews show a startling number of people are deeply gratified the book has taught them some history they didn't know before.
So thanks to "The Da Vinci Code," Catholicism is blipping on the cultural radar, loud and clear, aided by aggressive marketing and generous reviewers of influence, defining Catholic Christianity for scores of gullible readers.
Talk about a conspiracy. ...
Welborn (awelborn@osv.com) writes from Indiana.
Copyright 2003 Our Sunday Visitor
© 2003, Information Office of Opus Dei on the Internet
Options
Print
Send to a friend
Write to us
U. S. A.
info@opusdei.org
Other countries
.
Book Review: What a great book!
Summary: 4 Stars
Take what you previously thought about the Holy Grail, the Roman Catholic Church, the Crusades, the Mona Lisa, Leonard DaVinci and the role of Mary Magdalene and forget about it. Set in modern times, The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown, uncovers a mystery thousands of years old. "Langdon nodded, unable to imagine a less congruous backdrop for the legend he was about to tell. He wondered where to begin. The brotherhood's history spanned more than a millennium... an astonishing chronicle of secretes, blackmail, betrayal, and even brutal torture at the hands of an angry pope." Infused in a clever story, Dan Brown reveals the real truth of the Holy Grail, which is believed to be the cup of Christ, and the story behind it. Brown takes numerous religious conspiracy theories, some of which question the very beginnings of Christianity, and combines them with a murder mystery to create a readable and fascinating story on two levels. The reader is brought into the fast paced chase of Robert Langdon and Sophie Neveu. Langdon, a schoolteacher, is accused of murdering curator Jacques SaunieÌre, of the French Louvre art museum. Sophie is an agent with the French DCPJ (The French equivalent of the FBI) whose grandfather was Jacques SaunieÌre. She believes that Langdon is innocent and that SaunieÌre left a message for them to protect the Holy Grail. Along with the unveiling of conspiracy's and a secret society that existed for over 2,000 years. Art, Medieval history and religion are wrapped around the murder mystery that moves the story along at a fast pace, with every chapter ending in a cliffhanger. It makes a real page-turner.
The year is 1099 and the Prieureìì de Sion - the Priory of Sion- is created to protect documents of infinite power. These documents, if revealed, would destroy the Christian faith. What is contained in these documents is not entirely clear, but for thousands of years the church has been trying prevent them from being released. The Priory of Sion is a group made up of various people including Leonardo Da Vinci. This secret society is the only group that knows where the documents are and only the leaders, known as seìneìchaux, understand what they contain. "It cannot be! The curators true identity, along with the other three seìneìchaux, was almost as sacred as the ancient secret they protected..." This quote in the prologue is one of the ways Dan Brown pulls you into the story by creating a desire to venture deeper into the book in order to understand exactly what is happening.
The book begins with the curator's murder. Langdon, an American, is in France for a presentation on religious symbolism and was supposed to meet Jacques SaunieÌre after. There was enough circumstantial evidence to accuse Langdon of murder, but the curator's granddaughter, Sophie Neveu, believes that he is innocent and helps him evade the DCPJ. Following coded clues that SaunieÌre left for them, they discover a key to a bank deposit box containing a piece of the puzzle that will help them find the documents. The pair are led to many other pieces leading them to discover the truth. Along with the French authorities, they are perused by a fanatical sect of the Catholic Church known as Opus Dei who wish to prevent the truth from coming out.
The author uses extensive imagery that places the reader in the world of the story. His description is very useful because he is good at getting the details down. "He was staring into the mouth of a long, deep canyon. On either side of the gallery, stark walls rose thirty feet, evaporating into the darkness above. The reddish glow of the sirvise lighting sifted upwards, casting an unnatural smolder across a staggering collection of Da Vincis, Titians, and Caravaggios that hung suspended from ceiling cables..." This imagery continues throughout the book enveloping the reader into the book.
One of the things I like about the Da Vinci Code is the pace. In the beginning of the book the pace is slow and methodical. While later in the book the pace is rushed, often only giving a little amount of description. I think that this is an excellent way to perceive the changing pace of a book. In real life you wouldn't look stop to look around and describe how a certain object looks while the police are chasing you.
Dan Brown uses his skill in developing the characters to move the story. His characters are interesting because they are believable; they have traits that are in real people. As a reader, it makes the story seem like it could actually happen. A perfect example of this characterization is when Silias, who basically is the man doing the dirty work for Opus Dei, is told to find the documents at any costs. This includes murdering someone if he has to. There is a moment where this character is in the position where he might have to kill someone but in the end he decides against it. It was interesting to see a "bad guy" that was not pure evil and seemed to have morals.
The best-devolved character is Robert Langdon. As the protagonist, he is the most important character, and Bown did a wonderful job of creating him. Because Langdon is a schoolteacher he is someone you would not expect him to handle the many perilous situations in which he finds himself. However, he proves to be courageous and able to think under pressure.
This book is an incredible read. Dan Brown writes an amazing novel that you will want to read over and over again.
Book Review: What we've got here's a case of irresponsible writing. Sigh.
Summary: 3 Stars
To start with, "The Da Vinci Code" is a thriller through and through. The writing is as formulaic and hackneyed as your average thriller, though clearly no one cares about this. Characters are one-dimensional, the plot is too convenient, the chapter set-up is annoying at best - what I'm getting at is simple. The book should not be read if you are looking for a literary novel about the early Catholic Church and the Holy Grail. Nor should it be read if you are looking for an intelligent read. I say go in looking for ideas to research later.The meat of the book is the controversy surrounding Brown's view of the Holy Grail. His theory, one certainly not new, concerns the possibly marriage between Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene, their offspring, the early Catholic Church's persecution of Mary and the centuries' long fight to preserve the bloodline of Jesus and Mary. Valid ideas? Eh. They are supported by a variety of sources (not given) and symbols
Supposedly the Gnostic Gospels and Dead Sea Scrolls support this claim, with some loose interprations and evidence contrary to the printed Gospels. Also, the (somewhat) recently discovered history of the Priory of Sion (an old French secret society), its ties to the Knights Templar (and Masons) and the hidden imagery in select Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings are supposed to shed more light on an otherwise murky subject. Brown uses a bevy of symbology to link everything together, and while for the layman this is dangerous, he has no regard for the layman.
Your average person doesn't know much about ancient symbology and if you read this book and fall into that category, you'll probably be swayed to believe all he says is true. That's where the danger lies in symbology, especially ancient symbology. One of the central keys to said field is the iconic image, like the cross, the smiley face, even Superman's 'S'. Brown uses old icons - these images that are meant to have broad meanings; the smiley face is the best example of an icon anyone relate to because of its simplicity - to bolster his new claim. An upward wedge (^) is masculine, and is historically so (check a book of symbology) and a downward wedge (v) is feminine, again something we know as fact. Ancient societies used these two symbols for male and female and Brown would have us believe they are the only ancient male and female symbols, but that is beside the point (obelisks and lone pillars, people!). Combined they make the Star of David, and you probably wonder why I am mentioning all of this but there is a point - the Star of David is the combination of two triangles, one reaching to God, one to Earth. That is its historical significance. Brown's modern interpretation (a supposed revelation) based on the aforementioned ancient symbols (^ and v) is bad history; when you know why an icon or symbol was created, you don't then force other history onto them.
Unfortunately, he doesn't give this interpretation of the Star of David, only his own, supported by no texts, which leads me to what for the sake of length, I'll make my last criticism. I feel Brown should've written a critical analysis of the Holy Grail, Jesus, the Priory of Sion and Mary Magdalene, not a muder myster/thriller. Even still, he should've inculded a bibliography (annoted would help also) so we can leave the book and check his sources. As it stands, he gives us supposed facts and expects us to swallow them whole, which the layman reader will. To me, his book rests on the shoulders of the work of dozens of others, and while there is an acknowledgement, there is no list of sources.
All right I lied. One more thing - I found the book engaging and it forced me to remember old things learned in history classes and read. I'd previously paroused the Gnostic Gospels, and from what I found they enhance the published Christian writings, perhaps amend or alter a few things, but past that are merely the extended teachings of Jesus. I didn't see them as he did - damning to Christianity (or our perception of it). Anyway, what I mean to say is the Dan Brown is not a reliable author (I apologize for my tangents). The man has a passion for what he is writing about, but he also has a deep seated hatred for the Catholic Church and while I don't agree with them all the time, it's my opinion that they are generally trying to do good. Even in the beginning; but Brown cannot accept that and (together with Angels and Demons) villifies the church and the greater Christian religion with little evidence. That's not good writing. One of the basic questions a writer has to ask himself at the end of a book is, "Is this responsible?" (or perhaps, am I responsible for it/in writing it?) I do not believe he even stopped to consider, instead barreling ahead because, like he says about the Catholic Church, he has an agenda.
I do not see why this is a bestseller, from a logical standpoint. Poor writing + religious controversy shouldn't equal a best selling novel, but.... People can look past the writing to the ideas, and that is what this book is about. But should you pay attention to and then accept them when the author writes in such an irresponsible manner? That is for you to decide. But please, for me, if you are engaged as I was and don't know anything about what you've read, go to your library or bookstore or here and find other books on the topic from authors on both sides of the idea. Don't let this mediocre fiction sell you ill-conceived fact.