Comments on: The DaVinci Code http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/ A Geekboy's Search for Happiness Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:21:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: leemobile http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/#comment-15 leemobile Wed, 31 May 2006 14:43:59 +0000 http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/#comment-15 Although Ash, I think your point about Jay commenting on his content than style is kind of moot. An author's work should be judged on CONTENT as well as QUALITY or style of work. You can be as fancy with your words all you want, but if the content of fiction is garbage then it reflects a poor author. Writing is not just style but substance too. It'd be like saying Britney Spears is a good musician because her music videos have a lot of style. Though I haven't read the book, I can still argue on the semantics of your point :-p Although Ash, I think your point about Jay commenting on his content than style is kind of moot. An author’s work should be judged on CONTENT as well as QUALITY or style of work. You can be as fancy with your words all you want, but if the content of fiction is garbage then it reflects a poor author.

Writing is not just style but substance too. It’d be like saying Britney Spears is a good musician because her music videos have a lot of style.

Though I haven’t read the book, I can still argue on the semantics of your point :-p

]]> By: Ashleigh http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/#comment-14 Ashleigh Tue, 30 May 2006 17:02:06 +0000 http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/#comment-14 Personally, I beg to differ -- and I wonder if Jay is referring to the CONTENT rather than the actual QUALITY or style of the author's work. His own comment suggests he has more of a beef with the author's choice of character traits! While not particularly innovative or experimental in style, Dan Brown's writing is fast-paced and stylistic simple, using many common writing techniques to develop suspense and tension in a store of this genre. He uses relatively basic sentence structure, likely in order to appeal to the elementary reading level of the masses. He doesn't purport to have written the next Great American novel but he does contend to tell a story of intricate puzzles, history and adventure. And I liked it specifically because it was a quick and engaging read. But that's probably an "unpossible" and "contraversial" claim on my part :-p Personally, I beg to differ — and I wonder if Jay is referring to the CONTENT rather than the actual QUALITY or style of the author’s work. His own comment suggests he has more of a beef with the author’s choice of character traits!

While not particularly innovative or experimental in style, Dan Brown’s writing is fast-paced and stylistic simple, using many common writing techniques to develop suspense and tension in a store of this genre. He uses relatively basic sentence structure, likely in order to appeal to the elementary reading level of the masses. He doesn’t purport to have written the next Great American novel but he does contend to tell a story of intricate puzzles, history and adventure.

And I liked it specifically because it was a quick and engaging read.

But that’s probably an “unpossible” and “contraversial” claim on my part :-p

]]> By: Jay http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/#comment-13 Jay Mon, 29 May 2006 16:17:26 +0000 http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/#comment-13 All contraversy aside, the bottom line is that Dan Brown can't write for shit. Don't bother reading the book, Lee. It's a relatively entertaining story (if you can turn off the part of your brain that controls critical thought), but the writing is horrible. I thought the whole time I was reading it that it would have made a better movie than a book. If the movie isn't any good (haven't seen it myself), then either I was wrong (that's unpossible!), or the book was even worse than I gave it credit for. Seriously Mr. Brown... An albino? Can't you create a memorable bad guy without leaching all the pigment from the poor bastard's skin? WTF! Just my opinion; I could be wrong... (But I'll never admit to it. Heheh.) All contraversy aside, the bottom line is that Dan Brown can’t write for shit. Don’t bother reading the book, Lee. It’s a relatively entertaining story (if you can turn off the part of your brain that controls critical thought), but the writing is horrible. I thought the whole time I was reading it that it would have made a better movie than a book. If the movie isn’t any good (haven’t seen it myself), then either I was wrong (that’s unpossible!), or the book was even worse than I gave it credit for.

Seriously Mr. Brown… An albino? Can’t you create a memorable bad guy without leaching all the pigment from the poor bastard’s skin? WTF!

Just my opinion; I could be wrong… (But I’ll never admit to it. Heheh.)

]]> By: Tom http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/#comment-12 Tom Sun, 28 May 2006 20:47:28 +0000 http://www.leemobile.com/2006/05/28/the-davinci-code/#comment-12 I've read a bit more than halfway through the book, and I understand what you mean when you say the movie felt a bit too rigid/mechanical. Even the book comes off in that way. I find that there's a lack of imagery for much of story in the book, with the obvious exceptions of the islets of historical "Did you know?"s. The Church is certainly attacking it with passion: When I last went to mass, the priest spent a good 30 mins railing against it. The homily is only supposed to be around 20 mins! I don't know how many of those historical tidbits are true or not, since the book does a fantastic job of blurring truth and fiction in that respect. But they do compel you think for yourself and do a little research. As a Catholic, I often find myself if disagreement with many of the church teachings, and dogma, so I certainly do understand the critical thinking aspect :) But really, even Dan Brown points out through Langdon in the story that in this day and age, no one can deny that the church does do wonderful things overall throughout the world. Many people also find personal solace in the faith that they get through Catholicism. So overall, it really doesn't matter to me whether or not the teachings of the church are true or not. I still respect it overall for what it does today. I’ve read a bit more than halfway through the book, and I understand what you mean when you say the movie felt a bit too rigid/mechanical. Even the book comes off in that way. I find that there’s a lack of imagery for much of story in the book, with the obvious exceptions of the islets of historical “Did you know?”s.

The Church is certainly attacking it with passion: When I last went to mass, the priest spent a good 30 mins railing against it. The homily is only supposed to be around 20 mins!

I don’t know how many of those historical tidbits are true or not, since the book does a fantastic job of blurring truth and fiction in that respect. But they do compel you think for yourself and do a little research.

As a Catholic, I often find myself if disagreement with many of the church teachings, and dogma, so I certainly do understand the critical thinking aspect :)

But really, even Dan Brown points out through Langdon in the story that in this day and age, no one can deny that the church does do wonderful things overall throughout the world. Many people also find personal solace in the faith that they get through Catholicism. So overall, it really doesn’t matter to me whether or not the teachings of the church are true or not. I still respect it overall for what it does today.

]]>