I can’t stand Dan Brown’s writing style, either. As I was reading it, I found myself thinking I could have written it better, and as some of you have said, actually thinking of things to make it better.
I am no Deebie (funny, btw!) but I am currently allllllll about conspiracy theories involving the church and the sacred feminine. I have read Holy Blood Holy Grail, The Woman with the Alabaster Jar, The Jesus Mysteries, and alot of the Nag Hammadi texts. I would like to check out Foucault’s Pendulum after seeing it mentioned here, but I will honestly admit I don’t have any idea what it is.
What else would be good? Please recommend some books for me, as I am hungry for knowledge in this area.
I really feel like those who are interested in this subject and only read Dan Brown are like people who say they love art but only collect Thomas Kincade teapots. Dan Brown is the McDonald’s of the literary world.
It’s not an easy-going book…there’s sections I still struggle with after numerous readings. But I assure you, you can get through it even if you do some hefty skipping of the more bizarre sections. Eco’s allusions and quotations are rarley (never?) explicit - you only very gradually pick up the themes he’s hinting at. And only at the very end will you really understand the point he’s making. One which makes it clear Dan Brown never got to those pages…
If you want to read a Dan Brown style book that doesn’t take itself at all seriously, check out Wilson & Shea’s Illuminatus trilogy. Very much a product of the 1970s, it out-Browns Brown, mostly by winking constantly at the reader: "We know this shit is stupid. But isn’t it fun?" And it is fun. Loads. Where Brown is spewing out turgid melodrama for the creduloids, Shea and Wilson are cavorting in clichés with tongues firmly in cheek. Pretty much the pinnacle of the genre, IMHO, though it’s so far over the top it may not be to everyone’s taste.
Wilson’s solo work Schroedinger’s Cat is similar in tone, though not quite as conspiracy-oriented, and further it’s deliberately designed to not make a hell of a lot of sense, at least until you get to the final chapter and realize what he’s been banging on about.
I think of his books the way my sister thinks of the romance novels she reads–it’s entertaining crap. Mostly I read Grownup Books. Sometimes my brain needs a break.
Just chiming in to say that I tried my best to read Angels and Demons. I just couldn’t get through it. Glad I’m not the only one. I haven’t tried the DaVinci Code. I did read Deception point, however, and thought it was OK.
That Holy Blood, Holy Grail sounds interesting. Hmm…
The DVC is on my Creative Writing final year course list next year. Say what you like about the guy - he knows how to write stories that sell. They may be derivative and repetitive but he saw an X-files sized gap in the market and cleaned up. Part of his success comes from the fact you can just pick them up and finish in a few hours. It might not be literature but I found it a fine enough thriller. Wannabe commercial writers can learn more from studying writers like him than they can from the literary giants IMHO.
If i want to learn how to write good fantasy that will sell I read Gemmell, Feist and Kaye, not Milton.
I didn’t think that so many people would be in my corner given that he sells so many books.
Just got to add a couple more digs at Mr Brown. My wife read the first chapter (A&D) and described it as a cross between League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and X-Men type melodrama (the scientist in A&D is bald and in a wheelchair BTW). She then said, but I like those films and hate this book.
I hated it not just for the bad prose, poor characterisation and melodramatic plot, but because as stated previously Mr Brown claims to be a stickler for facts.
Quote:“Antimatter creates no pollution or radiation” , wrong! When antimatter and matter mutually annihilate all you get is radiation, in fact a nice burst of high energy photons (usually gamma rays). What I suspect he means, but was either to poor a writer to get across, or to lazy to research properly, is that there are no radioactive byproducts.
My big problem now is how to tell my mother in law, who loved the book and thought I would, how much I hate it. Mainly so I don’t get any more for future birthdays, christmas etc. Just got to do it without causing offence.
Fair warning, a lot of people attempt Foucault’s Pendulum and never get through it. It takes a little while to really get going. I’ve had college professors (including medivalists!) express surprise that I’ve read the whole thing. Three times, actually. But as GorillaMan said, I think it would be possible to skip some of it, especially toward the beginning, and still “get” the story and enjoy the book.
The premise involves an Italian student of history who goes to work for a small publishing house. They handle textbooks on one side and vanity press poetry on the other. After a man comes in with a pretty wacky sounding conspiracy theory he wants to publish a book about, they decide to set up a line of vanity press books on the paranormal. (There’s some hope that there are enough tinfoil hatters in the world that people will actually buy these things.) For fun, the men at the office start making up a conspiracy theory of their own. It involves the Knights Templar, the secret of the Holy Grail, and all the other usual stuff.
The problem is, the theory they’re making up starts to seem more and more plausible. Not just to the original creators, but to outsiders…
Lamia, that’s a great summary of the book. I read it a couple of years ago and keep meaning to reread it one of these days because I know I missed a lot the first time around. tagos, if the twist is what I’m thinking you’re thinking (convoluted enough?), then it’s really not so much of a twist at all. At least not in the sense that most people think of twists - i.e., no complete switcharound or sudden changing in direction. Everything came out as you would expect it would. That’s not to say it’s predictable; I just didn’t think there was any shocking surprises.
There’s not really a twist ending, although I can think of a couple of elements toward the end that might be described this way. For instance, a supporting character suggests an alternate interpretation of some evidence. This suggestion seems more plausible than other interpretations developed earlier in the book, but the objective truth is never revealed. By that point in the novel it’s become clear that in the world of conspiracy theories, the objective truth is of little importance anyway.
*Focault’s Pendulum * is one of those intimidating tomes I stroke with longing in the bookstore, knowing there’s no way in hell I’d ever have the patience for it.
*The Shadow of the Wind * just came out in paperback, though. That one sounds like a tasty trip. Every second review blurb invokes the name of Eco.
Wow, thanks everyone for your recommendations and input. I will look into all the books mentioned. I must say, after reading some reviews of FP over on Amazon, I am intimidated. I am determined to give it a try, and hey, from what you guys are saying, I can always leave it lying around just to boost my “lofty scholar” factor. Seriously, I am sooooo afraid of being lumped into the same group as people who are interested in the evolution of religion, and the psychology of mythology but are too lazy to read anything other than Dan Brown. Thanks for your suggestions!
I may be back in a couple of weeks with a thread entitled, “Spoil Foucault’s Pendulum for me, PLEASE!”
Thank goodness I am not the only one that cannot stand these books.
I read A&D and thought it was a bunch of crap. Dan Brown has the writing style of Jackie Collins. No actually, by saying that I offend Jackie Collins, because at least she knows how to properly construct a sentence in english!
This book was practically all T&A, “kewl” explosions and clunky, cringe worthy writing.
