I just think it is hard for me at this point to believe that Professor Robert Langdon saved the world 5 times and that symbology is the key to all life problems.

I loved the first book I read by Dan Brown, the second I liked less and the third was very predictable for me. I guess it is the usual formula with the blonde girl, the Mickey watch and the "Unpredictable" twists that I can see miles before they come.

Nothing's personal but I am trying to clean my shelves and add books I am really interested in.

This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.

I didn't realize I never bothered with a review for this; I'm cranky today, so now seems like a good time.

The only good thing about having read this (probably ten years ago) was that I did not pay for it. The woman I was working for at the time forced me to read it; she had read it and thought it was wonderful, and since I had some kind of reputation as a reader she wanted (demanded, actually) my opinion.

I gave it to her.

I don't really think that has anything to do with the fact that I didn't work for her much longer.

I really did hate this book. I hated this book before I knew it was cool to hate it.

The writing was mediocre – that's not why I hated it, though it made (makes) me sick that something that led the best-seller list for approximately a hundred and sixty-three years was so bad.

I don't generally go for international suspense thriller type things – that's not why I hated it either.

I was raised Catholic, and this was an absurd view of a conspiracy-laden church that was so dumb as to be offensive – but that – the Vatican's opinion aside – is still not why I hated it.

The reason I got that blue-laser-beam duck-and-cover light in my eyes when I read this was that it completely and totally screwed with art history. I kick myself once in a while that I deleted the web page I put up at the time outlining and illustrating the things Dan Brown simply got wrong about the paintings and artists he pretended to know so much about. There was a lot of stuff up there. I'm no expert; I went to art school, though, and the best teacher I ever had in any subject happened to be the one who taught History of Western Art. It offended me on her behalf that there was so much garbage spewed out in this book.

Someone defensively said to me once that at least it was bringing attention to Da Vinci and art and the Louvre and … stuff. To me that's like saying an A-list celebrity benefits from the attention of paparazzi. There's a strong similarity: if all a person goes by is the sordid and erroneous crap spoon-fed to them by such authorities as Dan Brown or the National Enquirer, they would be better off remaining completely ignorant.

I'm still cranky. Hm … Did I ever review Twilight …?

Where I got the book: I downloaded the audiobook on my Audible subscription back when The Da Vinci Code was a Big Thing, so I suppose I have to admit I technically bought it. A Bad Book Buddy Read with Crystal Starr Light.

Plot: The Divine Feminine, mystical messages, the Knights Templar, Opus Dei, secret societies, coded paintings, you name it - Dan Brown packs a Discovery Channel-load of what he gets one of his characters to call "pop schlock" around a puzzle to be solved by granite-jawed Harvard Professor of Symbology (still makes me laugh every time I think about it) Robert Langdon, a tweedy brainiac, and French police cryptologist Sophie Neveu, who is touted as brilliant but who spends most of the time playing second fiddle to Langdon's encyclopedic knowledge as they run around Europe (in about a 48-hour time period, I believe) being chased by the Evil Catholic Church, the French police, and assorted other baddies. This Europe-wide clue chase has been set in train by Sophie's grandfather who, while being murdered, somehow manages to set up a ridiculously elaborate trail to lead our heroes to the Big Secret.

Confused? Remember the movie, where Tom Hanks spends 99% of the time with a puzzled frown on his face and the dumbest hairstyle I have EVER seen him wear?

[image error]

That frown is reflected on my face as I try to figure out how in the world this novel got to be so popular. I think the answer lies in the fact that if you just give up on any attempt to analyze what DB is positing, don't worry about the writing and just go with the flow, you get a page-turner that hurtles you toward the point where you are mercifully done with the book. That's what that second star is for. And there are tons of people who love all that esoteric-mystery stuff, plus the book came to the attention of a certain type of Christian who is very easy to bait into perceiving any criticism of any aspect of Christianity as A HUGE THREAT, and the resulting kerfuffle must have had DB's publicist offering up heartfelt prayers of thanksgiving.



Nope, I'm still puzzled. On my second time around I really paid attention to the writing, and came to the conclusion that The Da Vinci Code is a truly execrable piece of prose that manages to include just about every mistake wannabe novelists are told to avoid. I particularly love the way you're in the middle of an exciting chase-around and then the action suddenly GRINDS TO A HALT while Langdon launches into yet another of his explanations. And the bits where DB was obviously writing with a map of Paris and a guidebook at his elbow, so that you get turn-by-turn street nav and a guided tour of wherever they happen to be, down to the exact dimensions of the room.

And can you say plot illogicalities? And what about the Moving Body Parts ("Langdon's eyes followed her arm to the structure ahead")? And DB's cringeworthily bad understanding of British, well, everything, as personified in Sir Lee Tebing ('twas an audiobook so the spelling may be wrong, I personally like Surly T-Bing). The other characters, even those who should have known, kept calling him Sir Tebing (it should be Sir Lee) and even, at one glorious moment, "your knightship". And he put clotted cream in his tea... please see this discussion so I don't have to go over it again. Last but definitely not least, there was supposed to be some sexual attraction between Langdon and Neveu but any time DB went there it was as awkward as watching your brother come on to your BFF. There's something eerily virginal about Langdon which, I swear, manages to communicate itself to Hanks. Never have I seen the Tom look less attractive.



This is definitely not the best book to listen to as an audiobook unless you are very, very masochistic. The narrator has to do huge chunks of the story in a French accent and then there's Lee Tebing, who got a ludicrously overblown stage British heehaw voice in my version. Then there was the pronunciation of Louvre as LOOV and Tuileries as TOOLERIES but you know, I've got to hand it to this guy - to wade through a reading of this scab on the body literary must be quite the endurance test.

As a Bad Book read, it's superb. I had to stop about every two minutes in some chapters because there were just so, so many things wrong with this book. See here for the full roundup. I did, however, fall asleep in a couple of places, as I have done EVERY TIME I have attempted to watch the movie.



Finding the Hanks images has been about the only thing that's kept me going through this review. The success of this loose stool of a novel remains one of the Great Mysteries of the Age.

I remember when this book hit the Arabian markets around 2003 and how everyone was aghast by it and what it suggested, I didn't know anything about it except the title and who Da Vinci was, my mom bought a copy, I think she and dad talked about it.



In 2006, the movie was released, it was prohibited in many countries, THAT intrigued me! It wasn't sexual, or political... it was religious, and I have always been fascinated by religions. I remember watching it, and it scared me, especially Silas. I felt weird about the whole thing. I decided it wasn't for me.



Sometime later, my interest in the occult and cults aroused again, I watched it and it made me think. Some years passed and when I watched it on TV I loved it deeply, now I watch it every month or so. It became a favorite. I love the mystery, thriller aspect to it, (and I love Audrey Tautou) it is a crime story but it's also about two religions, Judaism and Christianity. Priory of Sion is Zion, and it's with a constant war with the Vatican, both of them are ready to kill for what they believe is the truth, and it all revolves around the Holy Grail aka Mary Magdalene, who they believe carried the daughter of Jesus. Opus Dei, another secret society has one goal, kill the heir! So the Vatican can stay safe. I think the author is not into Christianity at all. i get why Christians felt insulted by the movie/book.



After watching the movie, I researched extensively the known cults and secret societies, and I feel that these people are so lost from the point of life. Isn't it very tiresome to live this way? One question that keeps nagging at me, did Robert contact Sophie at the end and tell her the location of the Holy Grail? After the four great masters were killed the secret is supposedly buried with them, right? The priory wouldn't know where it was?

رواية مثيرة رائعة تشد اهتمامك حتى أخر سطر

I thought I was going to hate this when I picked it up. I thought there was no way I was going to fall into the hysteria that happened years ago when this book came out. I didn’t exactly find myself in a frenzy but quickly found myself fifty pages in and interested in a hurry. It reads fast, with short chapters and a thriller pace. Maybe I should read more thrillers but I doubt they will fill the same urge. I enjoyed this book thoroughly but, in the end, I don’t know exactly what I came away with. It felt like a car commercial at times, written for the big screen and the characters were pretty weak, but the story did grip a cynic/atheist like me, so that’s something.

یچیزی که همیشه سوالم بوده اینه که چقدر احتمال داره چیزایی که ما به عنوان نماد مخفی توی نقاشی، شعر یا معماری پیدا میکنیم واقعا عمدی کار گذاشته شده باشه و اتفاقی نباشه؟ ما اینجا نشستیم و داریم میگیم اوه آره؛ این حتما یه نماد سرّیه که داوینچی با ظرافت تمام توی این تابلو پنهان کرده و داوینچی ازون دنیا انگشت به دهان مونده که اینا چی دارن میگن ؟!
----------

خوندن این کتاب برای من جالب بود، به عنوان کسی که کاملا بی‌طرفانه به تئوری های براون درباره مسیحیت و کلیسا گوش میدادم میتونم بگم که حرفهاش منطقی به نظر میومدن. دوست داشتم کتاب کوتاه تر بود و خیلی قسمتای "اضافی" کتاب که شامل تکرار یسری حرفا بودن حذف میشد. جام مقدس نمادی از مریم مجدلیه ست ، راستی یادم رفت بگم که جام مقدس درواقع نمادی از مریم مجدلیه ست، حالا که بحثش شد باید بگم جام مقدس نمادیه که برای مریم مجدلیه به کار میره. We get it sir, let go

Impossibly complicated plot. Really, really, really bad writing. This book was forced upon me. I should have known better.

I really enjoyed this book. It's the first time I read Dan Brown's book. I think he can write while making every page gripping in some way.

شيفرة دافنتشي عنوان موفق.
فكل الأحداث والرموز والأسرار تبدأ من شيفرة دافنتشي.
لا أستطيع ان انهي رواية لدان براون بسرعة، فهي تحتاج الى قراءة مركزة وإلا فإن الأحداث ستفوتك وتتوه.
طبعا الرموز والصور والمواقع جميعها حقيقية ولكن ان تطوعها من اجل رواية بوليسية مليئة بالمغامرات فهي العبقرية بعينها.
والتنقل بين فصول الرواية غاية في الروعة، فهو ينهي الفصل عند اكتشاف جديد ، كأنك تشاهد فيلما سينمائيا وعندما ينتقل الى موقع اخر في الرواية تغضب وتريد ان يعود الى حيث كنّا ولكن عبقريته في التنقل بين الأحداث يجعلك لا تطيق صبرا للانتهاء من هذا الفصل لتعود الى حيث كنت مع الاكتشاف الجديد.
اعتقد انها اروع رواياته مع انني لم اقرأ رواية الجحيم بعد.

استخدام جوجل للبحث عن الأماكن ورؤيتها او اللوحات الفنية ومشاهدتها أساسي لقراءة الرواية وكل رواياته.

شكرا دان براون

I accidentally deleted this from my books. So that sucks. I don't remember when I read it anymore. It was horrible.

EDIT:
...But not quite as horrible as the idiotic discussion which this review spawned. I hate this book. That is my opinion. Many people share that opinion. I do not claim to be capable of writing a better book (although I suspect I already have written better pieces of literature, for some school assignment or something). You can like this book if you want. But if you do, please do not embarrass yourself by stating such a thing publicly. Especially on this review's comments. Because I'm deleting them all.

PS
The whole "if you can't do better, you have no right to criticize" thing is not a valid argument. So please stop making it. Please.