I imagine a few people have read at least one of his books. I happen to have read two. The Da Vinci Code, and Angels and Demons.
I wasn't a fan of either of them. The story telling was rather dull. Robert Langdon always had information he could have shared that would have cut the plot by a few chapters. The writing was at times awful. Just the way he'd begin some sentences. And I wouldn't criticize him for that if he weren't a best selling author. The books themselves were just... dull in my opinion. I can understand the appeal to some people -- the cliffhanger at the end of most chapters. It can keep some people on the edge of their seat.
Worst of all, I think, though were the historical inaccuracies. And those would normally be fine in a work of fiction, but Dawn Brown likes to state that he did his research. It's gotten so bad that there's a Trope that is called Dan Browned. He often goes far off from the truth, and of course he makes the claim that he's 99% accurate. Which leads to people thinking things happened that really didn't.
But that got me to thinking. What other book makes those same claims? Well other than a lot of them. Most importantly: The Bible. It makes those claims. And it made me wonder if Dan Brown was being clever with it. Trying to say "A book isn't true just because it says it's true." Now, I'm not sure he's actually that clever. But I can't help but wonder if maybe -- just maybe -- the message of his books is not to take claims at face value.
I wasn't a fan of either of them. The story telling was rather dull. Robert Langdon always had information he could have shared that would have cut the plot by a few chapters. The writing was at times awful. Just the way he'd begin some sentences. And I wouldn't criticize him for that if he weren't a best selling author. The books themselves were just... dull in my opinion. I can understand the appeal to some people -- the cliffhanger at the end of most chapters. It can keep some people on the edge of their seat.
Worst of all, I think, though were the historical inaccuracies. And those would normally be fine in a work of fiction, but Dawn Brown likes to state that he did his research. It's gotten so bad that there's a Trope that is called Dan Browned. He often goes far off from the truth, and of course he makes the claim that he's 99% accurate. Which leads to people thinking things happened that really didn't.
But that got me to thinking. What other book makes those same claims? Well other than a lot of them. Most importantly: The Bible. It makes those claims. And it made me wonder if Dan Brown was being clever with it. Trying to say "A book isn't true just because it says it's true." Now, I'm not sure he's actually that clever. But I can't help but wonder if maybe -- just maybe -- the message of his books is not to take claims at face value.
