Plot: An ingenious code hidden in the works of Leonardo da Vinci. A desperate race through the cathedrals and castles of Europe. An astonishing truth concealed for centuries . . . unveiled at last.
While in Paris, Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon is awakened by a phone call in the dead of the night. The elderly curator of the Louvre has been murdered inside the museum, his body covered in baffling symbols. As Langdon and gifted French cryptologist Sophie Neveu sort through the bizarre riddles, they are stunned to discover a trail of clues hidden in the works of Leonardo da Vinci—clues visible for all to see and yet ingeniously disguised by the painter.
Even more startling, the late curator was involved in the Priory of Sion—a secret society whose members included Sir Isaac Newton, Victor Hugo, and Da Vinci—and he guarded a breathtaking historical secret. Unless Langdon and Neveu can decipher the labyrinthine puzzle—while avoiding the faceless adversary who shadows their every move—the explosive, ancient truth will be lost forever. (via Goodreads)
I’ve been hammering on this fact for ages to anyone who would listen: Dan Brown would never have achieved fame and movie contracts on his books if he didn’t write about controversial topics. His writing style is nauseatingly flamboyant and his ideas of plot twists are just sad and unoriginal.
I would have liked the DaVinci code much more if it had been 150 pages less. That end is the longest conclusion to a story that I’ve yet found and it feels that Brown was desperate to end it with a bang and make it more dramatic than it needed to be.
Langdon, the main character, was an endless source of irritation. He’s written as a brilliant Harvard professor, the best in his field. I know people how are the best in their respective fields, I deal with them daily, and they are neither shocked, nor flustered, nor endlessly flabbergasted by an event that happens in their expertise. He would just never classify as a person I would have time for in real life, no way. I did like Sophie Nevue. She was strong and had direction and dealt better with the exhausting amounts of plots and turns that Dan Brown wrote for his central characters.
Another thing that irritated me and it is a topic that constantly irritates me, is the blatant attack on the Roman Catholic Church. Do they have a violent history? Yes, certainly. Are they likely hiding magnificent artifacts from the world? I’m not discounting it. Do they have corrupt officials? No doubt.
However, I think it is a recurring theme in modern society to constantly attack the Roman Catholics and that is not okay. I am not even part of their Church, but I find it offensive and unnecessary to constantly pick at them. It is the easy route to go if you plan to take on a religious organization in your book – other religions do not take it lying down when false truths are spread about them. We live in a society were tolerance is constantly blasted out over social media to all forms of religion, so let’s all actually live in tolerance, eh, Dan Brown?
The last thing I absolutely hated (before I attack the flamboyant writing style), is that Dan Brown writes at the beginning of the book that all his data in his novel are factual. Can someone just film me while I go off the rocker about this? What utter bullshit. I absolutely loathe, LOATHE people who passes sensation off as fact. You can’t state something is true if you don’t have ACTUAL EVIDENCE SUPPORTING A STATEMENT.
Now, for the writing style: I would have enjoyed this book if there weren’t overly dramatic sentences of flustered emotions and stunned realizations and deep breaths everywhere by our special Mr. Langdon. The constant explanations of completely unwanted information left me incredibly frustrated. This book could have been good – I can enjoy controversial books and I can even read books that I don’t agree with and still have fun, if it is well written. The book had the possibility of being a great adventure but even that fell flat with the endless descriptions of artifacts in the book.
This book was really not one of the most moving pieces of literature I have ever encountered. Have you read it? What did you think?