بار اول که کتاب راز داوینچی را خواندم برایم مسحورکننده بود، دو سال پیش فیلمش را دیدم و هنور جذاب بود، اما مرور داستان برای بار سوم چندان مرا به دنبال خود نکشاند و آن را نیمه رها کردم. شاید علت این موضوع، لو رفتن معماهای داستان باشد. اولین بار تقریبا ده سال پیش راز داوینچی را خواندم و امتیازم به آن برای بار اول پنج بود.
---------------------------------
بخش‌های ماندگار:
روح انسان از گمراهی نجات پیدا نمی‌کنه، مگه اینکه هر دو‌ وجه مؤنث و مذکر رو داشته باشه.
...
تاریخ را همیشه برنده‌ها می‌نویسند. وقتی دو فرهنگ با هم برخورد می‌کنند، بازنده از بین می‌ره و برنده کتاب‌های ﺗﺎرﯾﺨﯽ رو می‌نوﯾﺴﻪ ـ ﮐﺘﺎب‌ﻫﺎﯾﯽ ﮐﻪ آرﻣﺎن ﺧﻮدﺷﻮن رو ﺗﻤﺠﯿﺪ می‌کنه و دﺷﻤﻦ ﻣﻐﻠﻮب رو ﺣﻘﯿﺮ ﺟﻠﻮه میده. ﻧﺎﭘﻠﺌﻮن ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺗﺎرﯾﺦ ﭼﯿﺴﺖ، ﻣﮕـﺮ داﺳﺘﺎنﻫﺎﯾﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ آن ﺗﻮاﻓﻖ می‌کنند؟

(A-) 80% | Very Good
Notes: Excessive exposition and ludicrous writing discolor an otherwise captivating, thought-provoking, page-turning read.

it's an action movie! it's a book! it's an action movie!

it surprises me that the movie version was so dull, having such a simple adapted screenplay to write. this book reads like a blockbuster looks. and i will admit that i totally loved it while i was reading and forgot it promptly after, but i did the same when i watched vin diesel in XXX.

it's a very fun read. it's horrendously written, the characters are rather shallow, there are enough chase scenes and things popping out of dark corners to satisfy anyone's juvenile appetite for suspense. and if you're catholic or knowledgeable at all about religion, it does provide some fodder for thought in between all the drama. but after you think, you realize that none of this information, true or not, is really that shocking and has little effect on the catholic faith. people would do well to learn about the nature and history of their belief system a little more.

i still can't figure out how this book has caused so much controversy. let me rephrase that. i still can't figure out how people can be so oblivious and closeminded as to be scandalized by drivelly fiction. i was on an airplane a while ago and i sat next to a man reading "cracking the davinci code" or one of those other pissed off books that came out soon after. i asked him what he thought of the book. he said, 'oh! i've never read the da vinci code! it goes against the catholic church! why would i read such blasphemy? i just want to be armed with information when i speak to some simple-minded person who believes that heretic dan brown!"

i wish i could make that kind of stuff up.

i was silent, smiled and nodded, and quickly opened up Kavalier and Clay. i simply had no idea how to respond to someone who was taking notes on a book to collect information on a novel that he had never read so he could disprove the opinions of those who thought it was true. what?

It created a different branch of thriller genre. I liked this book when I read it. Then I read many other books similar to this and at one point I got tired and switched to read fantasies. But before I was much into fantasies, I was a dedicated conspiracy thriller reader. It's one of the best books of this kind.

First of all, let's try to rid our mind of all the hype and hoopla surrounding the whole thing. Let's pretend the whole thing is just some spiral bound notebook that you found on the train and read because you were lonely.


Ok, having accomplished that, let's dole out some compliments. Good plot, Danny boy! You managed to write an interesting crime/mystery/whatever thing WHILE managing to blaspheme one of the most worshiped dudes of all time. That takes some creativity, and some balls. Kudos.

If i might suggest something, though- and I realize this is hurtful, but take it like a man big guy- you probably could have done the literary world a favor by giving this wonderful little story to, er, a writer. I mean, it's nice to be able to read the whole thing in one afternoon without even having to get up for a piss, but I couldn't help but feel like I was reading the newspaper the whole time. And that's a big part of a book's validity- the whole "quality of writing" thing.

Anyway, you kind of got fucked over with the whole international attention thing- now all the 'cool' people in the world will diss on your book because it's way overblown, and the only people who still embrace will be those poor little simpletons who don't know the difference between hip and square. Looks like it's a life in the lower-middle class for you, Mr. Brown.

But hey- enjoy that swimming pool filled with gold doubloons.

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 …?

I am utterly stupefied by this masterpiece and Dan Brown's ability to blur the lines between the real and the fictional, as he did in the first book in the Robert Langdon series. It's a mouthwatering book, always keeping you on the edge, from page one up until the last page I could hear my own heart beating because of the thrill.

I had found the first book extraordinary when I read it three months ago and I'm so glad I finally read it, especially after all those years of reading the controversial reviews regarding this book, which is so full of cryptic messages and honestly is amazing to see how our two protagonists decipher those messages, ultimately leading to the truth. To my view, this one far exceeded the first book of the series. The formula was almost the same, although now we didn't have the illuminati, it was a sole man, not an entire organization ready to take down an entire city.

I really really love how Brown took real events, real symbols etc and wove them into such an intricate story about a secret that could change everyone's beliefs, change the entire world as we know it.

Take Da Vinci's most famous painting to kick off your story nicely and artistically, add a secret organization protecting a powerful secret, add some lies and deceit and lots of intrigue and yes that's the formula to creating an incredible book. But it takes a masterful author to create an incredible book such as this one.

I won't start talking about the protagonists because I'm never gonna stop babbling about their awesomeness. Langdon just rose on the scale of my list of the most brilliant characters, meanwhile I loved Sophie Neveau as the companion of Robert. They fit amazingly good together, always filling the blanks together and assisting each other when they hit an insurmountable cryptic message which neither thought they could decode.

I am in awe by Brown's amazing mind. The way he writes, all those details of real, existing history and art, all mixed together... He must be a genius, and he must have done one hell of a research before writing this.

If you've read the first book, loved it and you fear that this will fall short of your expectations then be sure that this will be one hell of a ride for you.

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

A mi, me gustó.
Tal vez no es un prodigio de literatura, pero me resultó interesante y entretenida. Es verdad que se permite ciertas licencias, pero es ficción, ¿no?
Todo lo que sea plantear puntos de vista diferentes sobre un dogma que lleva más de 2000 años sin moverse ni un ápice, a mi me parece bien.
Después, cada uno tendrá su propia opinión. De eso se trata.

To me, I liked it.
Maybe it's not a literary prodigy, but I found it interesting and entertaining. It's true that certain licenses are allowed, but it's fiction, isn't it?
Anything that raises different points of view on a dogma that has been standing still for more than 2000 years seems to me to be fine.
Then everyone will have their own opinion. That's what it's all about.

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.

در کتاب راز داوینچی، رابرت لنگدان که برای یک کنفرانس به پاریس سفر کرده، درگیر ماجرای یک قتل در موزه‌ی لوور پاریس میشه. مقتول، رئیس موزه، پس از اصابت تیر مدتی وقت داشته تا پایان زندگیش و این مدت رو به نوشتن رمز و کدهایی اختصاص داده و این آغاز ماجرای هیجان‌انگیز این کتابه. کتاب تشکیل شده از کمی واقعیت، اندکی نظریه‌ی اثبات نشده، مقدار لازم تخیل و مقدار زیادی هنر داستان نویسی. ه

I read this during the Da Vinci code craze. I was unimpressed then and am largely unimpressed now. never really thought i reread this but thanks to a Lisa of Troy's read along group i just wish i could stop at a few chapters like i was supposed to.

Robert Langdon is the type of Main character i dislike. I'll start there since I'm all about characters. He is the type of guy you ask a question, and he responds with a research paper length response. If you ask him what he believes. you'll get a shrug and some PC response also long and drawn out. he's a talker not a doer. which is why Sophie Neveu is the action facilitator. she is the star of the show like the sacred feminine itself. The one-time Langdon was responsible for creating a action he delivered them into danger! The other characters are common types but still entertaining Lee Teabing, Silas, bishop Arinarosa, and Bezu Fache all bring something to the narrative. I feel bad for Silas he's a Frankenstein type character. I'm a softie for Frankenstein. The story was simple and i predicted the teacher 20 years ago and just waited for his arrival this read. I remembered most everything in the book. One is supposed to take a the conspiracy theories and fact check them to go on there own grail quest. i tried this as a teenager and was disappointed to find most "facts" in the book non possible.

Simple story rather entertaining but nothing more. In the end i don't get it. would Jesus having children and a wife be that big a deal? no it would not, at least not to me!