How many of u ppl out there have read The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown? Give comments on it?

Answer 1

I've read hundreds of books that were better and that didn't make the bestsellers lists like this one. I'm baffled as to why people think it's so good.

The book is filled with pages of historical/religious detail which makes it read like a history textbook. The characters are hardly characterized - they are two-dimensional and the reader doesn't really get to understand them or their motivations.

The plot is flimsy and the author "tells" more often than he "shows." Telling is an amateurish writing method.

The only reason this was so popular was because of its controversial religious implications.

Answer 2

The Da Vinci Code is simply Magnificent!!! once you start reading it, you can't stop... But To understand it well you should have the book with pictures which explains the clues and the facts in the story..

Answer 3

I read it, and it was a fun book to read. Every chapter had a cliffhanger last sentence and it just made you want to go to the next and find out what happens. I would usually start reading it around 11 and go on until about 1 every night, because I would read it after I was done all my work. It wasn't the greatest, but it was alright.

Answer 4

I've read it. It was a pretty good book, but the first book in that series, Angels and Daemons, is much, much better.
(They're making a film of that book as well)
Another good Dan Brown read is Deception Point.

Answer 5

Ive read it. I didnt for the longest time though because I thought it would be boring...but its really interesting. And if you believe in it or not (I personally do not) it still makes you think. Really interesting and never any slow parts. I cant bring myself to watch the movie though because I think Tom Hanks would ruin it....and they had to edit the heck out of it so.......

Answer 6

i have... it's very interesting but not the best nor the worst book i've read... but since i read it it makes me more interested in the world history and religion but i'm not a fanatic... Dan Brown have a very distinctive writing style...

Answer 7

I liked it a lot.
the author did massive amounts of research so it's next to imposible to tell wher reality ends and fiction begins.
i find it was doubly rewarding when i read it with a book of classic art next to me so i could look up the pictures mentioned.

Answer 8

I have and I absolutely loved it! The book is WAY better than the movie! It is a great read and I would recommend it to anybody.

Answer 9

It's not a bad read, but there are all kinds of historical and other little blunders throughout the book. Let me just mention a few of them. And by the way, you don’t have to take my word for it, you can easily check these out for yourself.

1. The “Fact” page begins by saying: “The Priory of Sion—a European secret society founded in 1099—is a real organization. In 1975 Paris’s Bibliotheque Nationale discovered parchments known as Les Dossiers Secrets, identifying numerous members of the Priory of Sion, including Sir Isaac Newton, Botticelli, Victor Hugo, and Leonardo da Vinci.”

Well, these documents really do exist, but the evidence shows that they were planted there by a man named Pierre Plantard (1920-2000) in this last century. As Wikipedia says, the Priory of Sion “ultimately, has been shown to be a hoax created in 1956 by Pierre Plantard, a pretender to the French throne. The evidence presented in support of its historical existence has not been considered authentic or persuasive by established historians, academics, and universities, and the evidence was later discovered to have been forged and then planted in various locations around France by Plantard and his associates.”

Throughout the 1960s and 70s, Pierre Plantard created a series of documents “proving” the existence of a bloodline descending from Mary Magdalene, through the Merovingian kings of France, down to the present day to include Pierre Plantard of course. This was really promoted by the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

From what I understand, one of his friends latter admitted to participating in this hoax, and in 1993 Plantard himself admitted under oath that he made the whole thing up. This hoax was exposed in a series of French books and a BBC documentary in 1996. Some scholars think Dan Brown just didn’t know this.

2. In chapter 3, it says that it would take a visitor an estimated five weeks to properly appreciate the 65,300 pieces of art in the Louvre. But, the Louvre museum official website says that there are only 35,000 works of art on display.

3. The Da Vinci Code says in chapter 4 that there are “exactly 666 panes of glass” in the Louvre pyramid. This is an urban legend that originated in the 1980s; there are actually 673 (603 diamonds and 70 triangles).

4. We also read in the book that during three hundred years of witch hunts, the Church burned at the stake five million women (chapter 28). But Sandra Miesel (a medieval historian) says, “The latest figures for deaths during the European witch craze are between 30,000 to 50,000 victims. Not all were executed by the Church, not all were women, and not all were burned.”

5. Leonardo Da Vinci’s Madonna of the Rocks is said to be a “five-foot-tall canvas” in chapter 30. It’s actually six and a half feet tall.

6. There are two quotes from Leonardo Da Vinci in chapter 55: “Many have made a trade of delusions and false miracles, deceiving the stupid multitude.” And, “Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!” After reading this it says, “Sophie felt a little chill. ‘Da Vinci is talking about the Bible?’ Teabing nodded.” Well, these are quite easy to look up and as Richard Abanes said, “His first comment, in context, is about alchemists who claimed that they could change lead into gold. His second comment, in context, refers to the foolishness of what he called men’s “own opinions”, “lascivious joys”, and “vain splendour”. Brown completely misrepresented Leonardo’s writings to make it seem as if the great artist detested the Bible.”

7. We are told in chapter 55 that the word “heretic” was used for the first time when Constantine created a divine Christ and a new Bible and called everyone who didn’t accept this a heretic, and then the Latin form of the word is mentioned. Well, the word ultimately comes from the ancient Greek (αἵρεσις, hairesis) which actually dates back several centuries before Constantine, and was even used before the time of Christ.

8. The book says that the Merovingian Kings founded Paris in chapter 60, but historians tell us that Paris was founded by the Gauls centuries before the Merovingians.

9. In chapter 104, the Knights Templar are said to have built Rosslyn Chapel, designed it as an exact architectural blueprint of Solomon’s Temple, and worn into the floor is a large star of David. It was actually founded by Sir William St. Clair so that Mass could be said for the souls of his family, it was built upon a blueprint of St. Giles Cathedral, and there is no star of David worn into the floor (I watched a show where they lifted up the red carpet to prove it).

And you can go on and on and on detailing all the little flaws like this. At first I thought it was just Christians attacking it, but there have been plenty of secular articles and documentaries as well. It is attacked by experts in history, art, ancient documents, and many others. Dr Paul Maier (professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University) said, “If a student of mine had written something like this, I would flunk him.”

Answer 10

Yeah i thought that book was pretty fun to read it had very interesting art and religious history in it.