The Da Vinci Code

The Da Vinci Code➲ [Read] ➭ The Da Vinci Code By Dan Brown ➽ – Jobs-in-kingston.co.uk หลังการบรรยายในกรุงปารีส โรเบิร์ต แลงดอน ศาสตราจารย์ชื่อดังด้านศาสตร หลังการบรรยายในกรุงปารีส โรเบิร์ต แลงดอน ศาสตราจารย์ชื่อดังด้านศาสตร์สัญลักษณ์แห่งมหาวิทยาลัยฮาร์วาร์ด ถูกตามตัวกลางดึกขณะนอนพักอยู่ในโรงแรม เมื่อ ฌาคส์ โซนิแยร์ ภัณฑารักษ์ผู้มีชื่อเสียงประจำพิพิธภัณฑ์สถานลูฟร์ ถูกฆาตกรรมพิศวงในพิพิธภัณฑ์ โดยทิ้งรหัสลับปริศนาไว้ให้แลงดอน กับ โซฟี เนอเวอ หลานสาวของตนเป็นผู้ไขเพื่อหาตัวฆาตกร รหัสลับที่โซนิแยร์ทิ้งไว้อย่างชาญฉลาดกับศพของตน เกี่ยวข้องกับผลงานศิลปะของ เลโอนาร์โด ดาวินชี ศิลปินเลื่องชื่อแห่งยุคเรอเนสซองซ์ และนำไปสู่รหัสลับอื่นๆ ตามมาเป็นลำดับ รวมทั้งภาพโมนาลิซา รหัสลับที่ปรากฏอยู่ต่อหน้าต่อตา แต่ไม่มีผู้ใดล่วงรู้!. PLEASE do NOT recommend The Da Vinci Code to me because you think it's brilliant. Please do not try to explain to me that it is a really interesting and eye-opening book. Just don't. Please.

I've read Iain Pear, I heart Foucault's Pendulum, Dashiell Hammett is my hero, Alan Moore is My Absolute Favorite, I listen to Coil on a fairly regular basis, and cloak n' dagger secret society/Priory of Sion/Knights of Templar-tinged num nums make me a very happy girl
but if you truly believe that Brown's stupid airport thriller has ANY right whatsoever to be placed in the same category with Michael Wooden Dildo Dialogue Crichton, let alone Umberto Eco, kindly keep this opinion very far away from me, or the ensuing conversation we have will not be constructive or polite in any way.

I loathe Dan Brown. I resent him for spoon-feeding the masses pseudo-intellectual Holy Blood, Holy Grail D-grade thriller shite under a pretense of real sophistication, and getting orally serviced by The New York Times for his effort.

I'd heard that the novel was meticulously researched and contained some really interesting and controversial assessments of religious zealotry. Um, not really? Well, not by my Merovingian standards, anyway. :D

Let's put it this way. If Dan Brown was teaching an Insurgent Christian Symbolism in Art and Literature 101 class at my local community college, I'd definitely have a different opinion about him.

But NO. Dan Brown is not a professor of anything but pap. He is a barely competent thriller writer who wrote an AWFUL book that I could not bear to finish because I felt my IQ plummeting a little further with every Let's Go to Paris! Guidebook description and blowhard authorial essay. Oh, don't even get me started about those cute soliloquies the main characters are so fond of delivering, ever so calmly, often while cops n' bovvers are chasing them.

The characters are weakly drawn. The dialogue is excruciating. The research is shoddy and self-serving at best. The plot, no matter how open-minded you are, is beyond ludicrous. It's laughable enough to be incorporated into the next Indiana Jones movie. That'd be sweet, dude.

What really irks me are Dan Brown's sanctimonious interviews, wherein he shows off all of his priceless antiques while expressing his abiding convictions that the American public needs a deeper appreciation of art and history and culture. What a shallow, self-aggrandizing hypocrite. I'm all for fictional subversion of the dominant Catholic paradigm, but only if the subverter knows what the hell they're talking about. Brown DOESN'T. He's all la la la, connect the dots but the picture he comes up with is awkward and unconvincing.

The DaVinci Choad is a dead easy, nay, downright lazy read, and yet droves of people are patting themselves on the back for having read and *gasp* actually understood it. Like this is some spectacular achievement? WHY? What, because the slipcover describes it as erudite? Are you fucking kidding me?

Don't believe the hype, kids. You are profoundly more intelligent than this holiday page-turner gives you credit for.

If you really, honestly, just plain liked the book, that's cool I guess. Maybe you also prefer Anne Geddes to Alfred Stieglitz, Kenny G to Sidney Bechet, John Tesh to Igor Stravinsky. Your prerogative. Just
. please don't try to tell me that this is fascinating or meaningful literature. Frickin' read The Club Dumas or something. Then we'll talk, and I won't want to shoot myself in the face.

Alright, glad I purged that poison from my system. Carry on. most of us have heard of this controverisal book. it takes an open minded person to read this and to remember it is just fiction. but it brings up a lot of important questions about the Christian church, and the loss of paganism and the respect of the Goddess or the Woman.

I don't care if I am the only one who likes this book. it is my own truth, and i will think what i want to think. Dan Brown didn't LEAD me or anyone else. he OPENED our minds. simply and importantly
he was just a catalyst for different thinking. that is a good thing
poorly written or not.

if you finish the book you will notice that Dan Brown even makes it clear to readers through his characters words, that he doesn't want to destroy christianity because it has done so much good for so many people, and if it works for them, let's let them continue to do what works for them. but find your own path.

if you were or are a Christian ask yourself about the topics in this book. They are so eye opening. Jesus having a baby? totally possible
never thought of it before. never thought of it. is it true? who knows. Things like this are happening all the time today
Weapons of Mass destruction in Iraq? sound familiar? Maybe the church repressed information LIKE this because it was a threat to the church. totally possible. The catholic church creating the biblical canon with a political agenda to wipe out paganism? actually this seems to be a fact. women being oppressed due to the fear of religous zealot men in power losing their power
never looked at it that way. but this seems to be a fact too. is it helpful in broadening my perspective of the fact that christianity is just a religion made by fallible people. it sure is. does it open my mind to other faiths like paganism, judiasm, islam, bhuddism, and want to take the truths from all of them, and then THINK FOR MYSELF and figure out my own truth. it sure does
and that is what this book has probably done for many other people. why do you think Dan Brown's book was on the bestseller list for so long
and became a movie
obviously it was doing some good. Four stars for pure entertainment value.

However, Dave Barry's review gets five stars:


`The Da Vinci Code,' cracked
by Dave Barry

I have written a blockbuster novel. My inspiration was The DaVinci Code by Dan Brown, which has sold 253 trillion copies in hardcover because it's such a compelling page-turner. NOBODY can put this book down:

MOTHER ON BEACH: Help! My child is being attacked by a shark!

LIFEGUARD (looking up from The DaVinci Code: Not now! I just got to page 243, where it turns out that one of the men depicted in ''The Last Supper'' is actually a woman!

MOTHER: I know! Isn't that incredible? And it turns out that she's . . .

SHARK (spitting out the child): Don't give it away! I'm only on page 187!

The key to The DaVinci Code is that it's filled with startling plot twists, and almost every chapter ends with a ''cliffhanger,'' so you have to keep reading to see what will happen. Using this formula, I wrote the following blockbuster novel, titled The Constitution Conundrum. It's fairly short now, but when I get a huge publishing contract, I'll flesh it out to 100,000 words by adding sentences.

CHAPTER ONE: Handsome yet unmarried historian Hugh Heckman stood in the National Archives Building in Washington, D.C., squinting through the bulletproof glass at the U.S. Constitution. Suddenly, he made an amazing discovery.

''My God!'' he said, out loud. ``This is incredible! Soon I will say what it is.''

CHAPTER TWO: ''What is it?'' said a woman Heckman had never seen before who happened to be standing next to him. She was extremely beautiful, but wore glasses as a sign of intelligence.

''My name is Desiree Legume,'' she said.

Heckman felt he could trust her.

''Look at this!'' he said, pointing to the Constitution.

''My God, that's incredible!'' said Desiree. ``It's going to be very surprising when we finally reveal what we're talking about!''

CHAPTER THREE: ''Yes,'' said Hugh, ``incredible as it seems, there are extra words written in the margin of the U.S. Constitution, and nobody ever noticed them until now! They appear to be in some kind of code.''

''Let me look,'' said Desiree. ``In addition to being gorgeous, I am a trained codebreaker. Oh my God!''

''What is it?'' asked Hugh in an excited yet concerned tone of voice. ''The message,'' said Desiree, ``is . . . ''

But just then, the chapter ended.

CHAPTER FOUR: ''It's a fiendishly clever code,'' explained Desiree. 'As you can see, the words say: `White House White House Bo Bite House, Banana Fana Fo Fite House, Fe Fi Mo Mite House, White House.' ''

''Yes,'' said Hugh, frowning in bafflement. ``But what can it possibly mean?''

''If I am correct,'' said Desiree, ``it is referring to . . . the White House!''

''My God!'' said Hugh. ``That's where the president lives! Do you think . . . ''

''Do I think what?'' said Desiree.

''I don't know,'' said Hugh. ``But we're about to find out.''

CHAPTER FIVE: Hugh and Desiree crouched in some bushes next to the Oval Office.

''We'd better hurry up and solve this mystery,'' remarked Desiree anxiously. ''It's only a matter of time before somebody notices that the Constitution is missing.'' She had slipped it into her purse at the National Archives while the guard wasn't looking.

''The answer must be here somewhere,'' said Hugh, studying the ancient document, which was brown from age and the fact that he had spilled Diet Peach Snapple on it.

''Wait a minute!'' he said. ``I've got it!''

''What?'' said Desiree, her breasts heaving into view.

''The answer!'' said Hugh. ``It's . . .

But just then, shots rang out.

CHAPTER SIX: ''That was close!'' remarked Desiree. ``Fortunately, those shots had nothing to do with the plot of this book.''

''Yes,'' said Hugh. ``Anyway, as I was saying, the answer is to hold the Constitution up so that it is aligned with the White House and the Washington Monument. . . . There, do you see what I mean?''

''My God!'' said Desiree, seeing what he meant. ``It's . . . ''

''Hold it right there,'' said the president of the United States.

CHAPTER SEVEN: '' . . . and so you see,'' concluded the president, ``you two uncovered a shocking and fascinating secret that, if it should ever get out, could change the course of history.''

''Mr. President,'' said Desiree, ``thank you for that riveting and satisfying explanation, which will be fleshed out into much greater detail once there is a publishing contract.''

''Also,'' noted Hugh, ``we may use some beverage other than Snapple, depending on what kind of product-placement deals can be worked out.''

''Good,'' said the president. ``Now can I have the Constitution back?''

They all enjoyed a hearty laugh, for they knew that the movie rights were also available
(A-) 80% | Very Good
Notes: Excessive exposition and ludicrous writing discolor an otherwise captivating, thought-provoking, page-turning read. This is a pretty formulaic page turner, a fun quick read. Written at about the level of the average Nancy Drew mystery, it is best appreciated at that level. As far as the content, there are howlers on virtually every page (starting with the hero who looks like Harrison Ford in Harris tweed and is a Professor of Religious Symbology at Harvard -- good work if you can find it). You have to ignore very pulpy, cheesy writing to enjoy this romantic thriller.

Intended as a book that a dedicated reader could finish in a day, or something you take to the beach and casually finish in a weekend, The Da Vinci Code makes for a reasonable airline novel, so much so that it is often a bit clunky in its desire to ensure that no intellectual effort on the reader's part will be required. Here's a recurring example in this novel: a bit of unfamiliar terminology, say crux gemmata (jeweled cross) will will be explained on page N, then on page N+1, a character will finger his jeweled cross and explain, Oh, yes -- this is a crux gemmata. I've read dinner menus that were more demanding on the reader. My wife and I both read about a third of it in a day, sharing the same copy, and that's a full work day plus taking care of kids, bedtime, etc. That's also a kind of virtue, I guess -- it's fast and peppy.

As far as history goes, Dan Brown apparently thinks that most historians give credence to the hoary forgeries and frauds promoted in sensationalist best-sellers like Holy Blood, Holy Grail. This author gets the best of both worlds: simultaneously claiming that it's just fiction, while introducing the novel with claims that the historical record contained within is fact. That claim is ridiculous. To pluck a random example, he spends some time talking about the Council of Nicaea, and incorrectly summarizes it as the origin of the doctrine of Christ's divinity by Constantine. He ignores the Arian controversy out of which it arose, which is like trying to explain the Treaty of Versailles without mentioning World War I. He ignores the documented fact, agreed upon even by the cheerleaders of the gnostics that he is sympathetic to, that the earliest gnostic doctrines held that Christ was *purely* God, and not really man -- the very reverse of the doctrine that serves as the linchpin of his novel's intellectual base (such as it is). This is a bad novel for weak or misinformed Christians, but anyone familiar with history should spot the train wreck of Brown's ideas a mile off.

Oh yes, and in Brown's world, Opus Dei has shadowy assassin monks (in real life, Opus Dei is not a monastic order -- there are no Opus Dei monks, let alone trained assassins), and the Catholic Church has been promulgating known lies as its central dogmas, promotes violence throughout the world, and has been retarding the progress of science and knowledge for 2 millennia. Brown leaves the reader with the impression that this, too, is a matter of settled historical record. Oh, but then again, it's just fiction. Except when it's not.

In general, if you're looking for a heady thriller wrapped around Christian arcana, I'd recommend Umberto Eco's excellent The Name of the Rose, not this dumbed down, by-the-numbers novel. A thriller devoid of pacing or exciting language. A mystery devoid of clues, foreshadowing, or facts. A tell-all of half-truths based upon a forged document written by a schizophrenic conman. A character-driven modern novel devoid of character. The second draft of Angels and Demons. Page-turning action thanks to the literary equivalent of pulling out at the moment of orgasm. A spiritual awakening built on new-age conspiracy theory. This book is many things, and none of them good, new, or interesting. However, it is an excellent litmus test for idealistic delusion.

Upon the first reading, I must admit I found it a bit interesting, but then I turned the final page, and there was no bibliography. No explanation of how the author became familiar with all the concepts he claimed to 'faithfully portray'. He wrote this book and pretended it was a history book, and then refused to support it in any way. And any history you can't check up on is a bad one.

He's no better than James Frey. In fact, he may be worse, since I know people who base their religious beliefs on this book, whereas Frey's only crime was wishing he was Scarface. And really, what macho thirtysomething male doesn't?

Brown had good reasons for hiding his sources: they were forged by con-man Pierre Plantard and snuck into the Bibliotheque National in Paris back in the seventies. And it's not like Plantard got away with it, either--the whole 'Priory of Sion' thing was debunked thirty years before this book was even written.

The artistic 'iconography' that figures heavily into the mystery is also completely made-up, and was declared ludicrous by an art history professor of my acquaintance. There are a lot of well-known symbols and allusions in classic art, but none of them resemble Brown's claims. The whole hinge on which the plot turns--the notion that an inverted triangle is automatically symbolic of women--makes about as much sense as declaring that the use of the swastika by 3rd century, BC Buddhists was proof that they were fascists.

The rest of Brown's book is filled with the sort of cliched religious conspiracies you get from your first year as a theology student. Not only that, but these conspiracies were already explored by better writers in 'Foucault's Pendulum' and the 'Illuminatus! Trilogy'.

Well, I've already done more legitimate historical research on this review than Brown did in his whole book, so I guess I'll call it a day. OKAY PEOPLE…someone let me in on the gag because between the cries of Greatest Book of Greaty Greatness EVER and the screams of Lamest Load of Lamey Lameness EVER, my itty bitty brain is left very… Photobucket
So post Hype-a-ganza, I finally got around to reading this popular, polarizing, pop culture icon and thought it was….drum roll……………………FINE(sigh). It was a solid read with a slight lean towards the “eh” side of MEH and few moments of genuine “that’s neat.” I don’t see all the love and I don’t see all the rage. Other than the obvious religious flavor of the content, it reminded me of your typical page-turning, popcorn beach read and I thought it accomplished its goal in decent, if unremarkable, fashion.

Now I have a strict “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t mock, don’t preach” approach when it comes to religiousness so I am going to ignore the bird-flipping Vatican bash aspects of the story, though I can certainly see people on both sides of the fence having “epic rah rah” or “epic fail” reactions and I respect that. For me, it didn’t move my needle much in either direction beyond my fondness for the “big hidden history mystery” which is something I generally really enjoy.

The plot of this one has been talked to death and beyond so rather than adding one more jelly bean to the jar, I thought I would just run down a few likes and dislikes about the story and leave it at that.

TURN ONS

1. Conspiracy theories: are just fully fun and I am a major sucker for plots concerning “shadow” histories and secret people doing secret things behind secret doors for reasons that are SHHHHHHH. I love a good conspiracy. Find me a rumor involving Kim Kardashian being a Bilderberger and using a secret banking pipeline running from Area 51 through Microsoft to the Saudi Royal Family and laundering vast monies to be used to coordinate the sale of Boise, Idaho to a mysterious consortium headed by Jay Z and Justin Bieber who will then turn the city into a giant quasi-government facility used for the testing of alien “cloning” technology………….and I am glued to my seat and ONE HAPPY FELLA.

2. Knights Templar: As much as I love conspiracies in general, when you throw the Knights Templar into the mix, it’s gonna perk me up better than a latte enema. I am always in favor of having them show up as a lynch pin to any massive global plot. The Knights Templar are like caramel on ice cream and just make a good conspiracy better. I had a lot of fun with the rehash of the Templar’s place in the center of EVERYTHING.

3. Symbology, Da Vinci and the Holy Grail (the IDEA): I thought the major plot components themselves were interesting and I enjoyed following the hidden clues, messages, riddles and the tie in to all of the famous historical artifacts. It was fun. I also liked the “historical significance” of the search (i.e., the “big reveal”) and the implications to the world if revealed.

TURN OFFS

1. Symbology, Da Vinci and the Holy Grail (the EXECUTION): As much as I enjoyed the plot concept, the execution of the story was often frustrating and occasionally insulting. I’m not talking about the clunky, “serviceable at best” prose as that’s gotten enough play without my squirting lighter fluid on the bonfire. My issue is more with Dan feeling the need to “spoon feed” me details about his “oh so clever plot” so that my economy-sized brain could grasp it.
Photobucket
For example, there would be a “reveal” that I thought was interesting….and then Dan would exhaust me with explaining EXACTLY what that meant and EXACTLY what the implications were and make sure I knew EXACTLY what he had told me. I get it Mr. Brown, heard you the first time.

2. THRILLer killing amounts of PLOD: For a page turning, actiony thriller, there was just too much sideways movement of the plot and some really unnecessary amounts of plod to the narrative. Part of this has to do with the excessive “hand holding” Dan does with his audience mentioned above. However, there are also WAY too much time spent slowing down to take a look around and where we are and where we’ve been. I started getting the impression that Brown was trying to hit a particular page count for the book and didn’t have anything but filler to loan the pages with. This is never a good thing for this kind of story.

3. The End: Not a big fan of the final resolution of the story and I found it very un climaxy and a bit of a let down. Once we have the big reveal, very little new information ever really got added to the picture and I felt like my curiosity should have been stroked a few more times than it was in the home stretch. This lack of satisfying climax left me with a serious case of “blue brain.”

Still, overall, this was a good, serviceable mystery-thriller that seems tailor-made for a warm afternoon on the sand. It isn’t great literature, or even good literature, but it is a good thriller, a good concept and, for the most part, fun. It seems to accomplish pretty much exactly what it set out to do.

2.5 to 3.0 stars.
5 stars to Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. Most folks have seen the movie and probably not read the book. What a loss for them!

That said, I know a lot of people don't enjoy Brown's books, believing he is too commercialized and over-exaggerated in his style. While I can understand why someone may think that, I don't agree. I love the complexity of the story, the reality and the fiction, the test of character strength, the puzzles, the different view points. It completely absorbs me
so I fall into the category of those who love him and this style of writing, even if others think his writing isn't fantastic. Doesn't mean I don't love the more classic and richly written novels where it's the imagery and the words that win out, too.

I had never heard of Dan Brown in his early years. I heard about the movie being made of the book and how it was coming out relatively soon. I looked it up and saw it had the treasure-hunter thrill appeal and decided to read the book before the movie could come out and warp my interpretation. So glad I did!

It's addicting. Growing up Catholic, I knew most of the religious detail, but once it weaved it art, literature, history and philosophy, I was just enamored with the story. Could it really be true? Maybe I'm related to Adam and Eve too! Ok, let's not get too crazy


Magnificent story-telling. Quick adventure. Beautiful scenes and images. Brown exhibit's intensely good control weaving back and forth between each of the plots, sub-plots and mini-plots. It's as realistic of a treasure hunt as one can get if you are not an adventurer, archaeologist or exhibition-junkie.

But what took it to the next level for me was the amount of detail included for every component. It's the intricate of the intricate, relying on pure puzzles to move the story forward. Each new puzzle creates its own spark of drama directing readers to challenge what they do and do not know about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, languages, culture, locations, etc.

It hits so many different waves of appeal that I felt it was at the top of its game. And it probably only edged out Angels & Demons because of how tight this story was. Definitely a must-read for the genre, for Brown and before watching the movie adaption. Alternate history, uchronias, and indirect criticism of faith and ideology combine to one of the most successful thriller series of all times.

Everything was already on the table, many authors had dealt with the different ideas Brown is mixing together, and finding and recombining conspiracy theories isn´t that complicated. It´s the mix of different topics that interest many people stirred together that make it entertaining for the ones who like art or thrillers, for atheists and religious people, for the ones interested in plot or characterization, it´s just difficult to find someone who would immediately say that she/he isn´t interested in one of the plot vehicles.

It doesn´t just relativizes general history, but religious and political history in a way that makes it a prime example of the fact that history and holy texts are written by the winners. Widening the range, questioning the status quo, and making people skeptical regarding omniscience, commandments, and whatever is something of huge importance and Brown did more than Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens combined and multiplied could have done in centuries by reaching so many people and making them think about the legitimation of any kind of belief.

Imagine many people would start writing fanfiction like that about different religious texts, expanding universes with new and alternative prophets, letting the whole thing collapse into a parody of itself within years.

I tend to equate religious, economic, and political science texts for the simple reason that, as soon as there is one more truth, or in hard science, formulas and equations, the others or even the own one must the wrong. The more open criticism and sarcastic to profound interpretations of all those one hit wonders are made by sophisticated, young people, the less power all of those charlatanries can generate in their stupid quest towards the one and only variation of reality they want to establish.

Blasphemy in a (view spoiler)[ Why can´t JC have a daughter, what´s your problem dudes? It´s so ridiculous, if any prophet would be a woman or, gosh, a lesbian (or even a gay male prophet), they would of course completely freak out even more. (hide spoiler)] No, I am not!

No, I am not going to write a review about this piece of nonsense just because I had yet ANOTHER of those incredibly annoying conversations (in a bookstore to top it off!).

No, I am not.

Oh, for goodness sake!

It is NOT a great book to broaden your cultural horizons, and whatever the humbug mentioned on Leonardo - it is NOT equivalent to reading a book researched by a REAL art historian, - which is something entirely different from a blind-folded arrogant gold digging bestseller author.

It is not a well-written, exciting thriller.

It is Brown in Wonderland, minus the humour, the wit and the beautiful language of the Wonderland Alice visited, and minus the credible plot.

It is not something a bookworm like me HAS to read! Okay? Once and for all, no!

Lisa, you as a book lover and art historian must love Dan Brown!

No! Period. I don't. I read three
THREE!
of his arrogant idiocies posing as novels. I DON'T love him.

It makes me furious to get the question, over and over:

How much of what he discovered on Leonardo is true?

I did not write a review, I hope. It would have been a bad one. Let's forget it.

The Da Vinci Code PDF ´ The Da  eBook ´
  • Hardcover
  • 462 pages
  • The Da Vinci Code
  • Dan Brown
  • Persian
  • 16 October 2018
  • 9789645704344