I've seen a couple of posts on this fourm saying that they're not good books? I'm reading Angels and Demons and its pretty good! Is it the hype?
I liked them. I read them a long time ago, I don't recall reading them from a writer POV, honestly (at the time I really didn't think that way) I just read them because of the hype and figured I would hate them. I didn't. I didn't hate them at all. I won't say they were the greatest books I've ever read in my life or anything but I certainly enjoyed them, still have them, and I'm sure will probably read them again at some point.
I didn't care much for the DaVinci Code. It was alright, but not great. But I loved Angels and Demons. Read it in two days because I couldn't put it down. So I can't say I understand the hatred for Dan Brown either.
I thought they were excellent, not really because of the religious conspiracy plots that many have a problem with, but rather the way he builds tension. Love his shifting point of views and cliffhanger chapter endings. For me his books are a study in suspense. Lost symbol was a bit of a disappointment though, most likely because I've become sensitized to his writing devices.
I read Da Vinci Code, and hated it. I like the material about religion, but the plot was just preposterous and lurid and unbelievable. Those cliffhangers at the end of every chapter are just blatant, obvious manipulations of the reader. They don't arise naturally from the story. The whole thing is so obviously contrived. I had a bad taste in my mouth when I finished it. I won't read any more Dan Brown. I did see the movie of Angels and Demons, and it looked like exactly the same kind of thing. To me, all this stuff is just a big, bloated, glittery blah.
I thought they were okay the first time I read them. And then I read them again... Once you know the story, it becomes really clear how terrible his writing is. Just plain bad. And so, so formulaic. But yknow, they're easy to read, trashy novels, I don't think anyone expects anything more than that from them.
/\ Yeah you just have to take them at face value, they're not really "deep", just the literary equivalent of junkfood, or a popcorn flick. Not a lot of depth but an enjoyable, fast-paced read and entertaining. At least, I was entertained.
This is what I don't like about Dan Brown's writing. I forget which book of his I read first, but I liked it. Then I read another one, and I thought to myself "huh...I feel like I read this book already, but with a different settings and different names." Then I read another one...every book of his that I've read is exactly the same plot, just set in a different place. Disappointing.
I think that Dan Brown is probably the worst writer I've ever read: his characters are pure stereoptypes, the fascinating professor in tweed, the woman in peril (changes every book, and always finished in bed with the protagonist), the superevil villain without a clue (like the albino priest, BTW I found it racist because in many cultures, especially in Africa, people hunt albinos because they're suppose to be evil), the men of lore etc... His writing is also terrible, he puts a lot of useless details that most of the times are wrong (like the Smart car's fuel efficiency, or the engines of an executive jets) so he can't even do some good work of documentation with google, his tricks very poorly executed, he doesn't have any kind of esoteric knowledge (the message written in english because english is "pure" and without influence from latin? Half of the english vocabulary, including this word, comes from latin) and to be honest I don't understand why people like him, besides the fact that the Catholic Church made a lor of fuss about his books and therefore a lot of people thought they had to read him. So the lesson I learned from reading his books is that today success is given by marketing and opportunism.
I enjoyed Angels & Demons more than The DaVinci Code. Imo, it helps that when I read them (a few years ago now) I didn't know anything about any of the "facts" he presented, so I didn't pick up on any inaccuracies. I enjoy the cliffhanger chapter endings. Yes, they blatantly manipulate the reader, but most readers don't pick up on that. I didn't, the first time I read them. Even now when I read a story like that, I think, "I know the author just wants to keep me reading, but damnit, I want to know what happens." I get absorbed into a story very easily, though. It has to be a pretty bad book for me to be able to put it down. All in all, Dan Brown's books are good chewing gum for the brain. They aren't literary masterpieces, but I don't think there's anything wrong with occaisonally curling up in front of the fire with a trashy thriller.
There are entertaining, trashy novels, and then there are books that just suck. I have no problem reading a "trashy" novel if it is a fun and entertaining read. I won't read a book that just sucks. You can pick up most any trashy novel off the shelf and the writing, characters, etc are all likely to be better than Brown's.
He's not the worst I've ever read. An old fantasy book by Douglas Niles probably holds that distinction. But in all honesty I'd have to put Brown in the top 3 to 5 of the worst writers I've ever read, and I find myself in agreement with the points you are making.
I don't have problems with "trashy" book like Buffy's, they're fun, I have a problem when I see that an author like Dan Brown is indicated as "good", "intellettualy provoking" etc...etc...
^I haven't actually heard Dan Brown's stuff described as intellectually provoking before :/ Most people I know just read his stuff for fun
I basically read his books for their entertainment value. One thing I can say is that the books were better than the movies.
Finished Angels and Demons. Left me with no wanting to read the Da Vinci Code. It was easy to read, but didn't leave me very satisfied like other books I've read. A bit like Junk Food.
Angels and Demons was actually the first non-fantasy book I ever read and I'm glad for it. I loved the book. It was recommended to me by a coworker when I was in highschool. He made the story sound really cool. It was Before the Da Vinci Code even came out as a movie. Of course, I wasn't reading it frmo a writers perspective, but I thought it was good. It made me branch out from my little corner of high and urban fantasy.
I haven't read them but I think the main bone of contention people have with it is that Dan Brown says all of the setting and rituals and backdrop ect. are completely true. Except they're not.
I was in suspense the whole time I read The Da Vinci Code, but when I finished it, it felt a little lightweight. It didn't provide much to think about.
