Thursday, October 12, 2006

The Da Vinci Code

I've read this book twice and I still think it's a stupid rehash of his other books.  I actually used to like Dan Brown, however, his work has slid downhill while his publisher's marketing has turned into a force of nature.  I saw this great page about the book, it's "facts" and some questions anyone who has read it should ask themselves

For example, "Digital Fortress" is by far one of the worst fictional work about cryptography I have ever read.  I imagine that historians, theologians and scholars alike feel the same cold fury I felt (reading "Digital Fortress") when they read his pathetic attempt as "historical fiction," more based on some masturbatory ego trip in which Dan Brown thinks that rearranging the plot elements from "Angles and Daemons" somehow makes an entire new work.

His bibliography represent works of New Age speculation that run counter to established history, focus on alleged secret societies and conspiracy theories, attempt to reinterpret the Christian faith, and are imbued with radical agendas. Historians and religious scholars do not take these works seriously.  In fact other authors have even gone so far as to sue Dan Brown for plagiarism and other creative sins.

I am inspired to write this little rant by some thinking I was doing: I wonder what would happen if a westerner wrote a similar book exposing the "falsehood" of another major religion, Islam.  Can you imagine the backlash?


Post a Comment

<< Home