Thu 24 November 2005 - Deep dark secret
Andrew asks what blog posts have been later regretted. I’m struggling to remember, but I think there have been one or two over the years that I’ve edited, deleted, or not quite posted, after realising how cranky or stupid I sounded.
Maybe I’ll regret this post. For I have a deep dark secret.
I’m reading a Dan Brown novel. Demons and Angels. A colleague lent it to me, and while I’m the first to rant about Dan Brown’s popularist theological babble, the fact that his books were in the top ten list for a whole damn year, and that at one stage it seemed like every second person on the train was reading the Da Vinci Code, I haven’t yet thought up a good way of weaseling out and not reading it.
The main problem of course is: what if someone I know on the train spots me reading it? Solution: only read in public when sitting down, so the cover can be held out of view.
First impressions: the writing is thoroughly unchallenging; it’s like reading one of those old kids’ Choose Your Own Adventure books. It spells out everything and leaves nothing to the imagination. I’ve become used to having to think about what I read — not so with this.
The plot is mildly interesting. For now, surreptiously, I’ll keep at it.
November 24th, 2005 at 10:21am
NO!! Daniel! Don’t read it! You’ll go blind! For the love of some higher deity, don’t. It’s bloody awful.
And I deleted a whole blog because I regretted it. Heh.
November 24th, 2005 at 8:22pm
I read the Da Vinci Code. I was told (afterwards) that it’s a poor rip off of Angels & Demons. Absolutely with you on the “unchallenging” thing. Don’t know about A&D, but not only was DVC seriously unchallenging, he futzed every dramatic turn in the story. Things that *should* have had some emotional impact just fell flat.
November 24th, 2005 at 10:53pm
I read angels and demons first and just finishing reading the da vinci code. I thought I was the last one to read it. I much prefer angels and demons, and was dissapointed with da vinci code as expected.
November 24th, 2005 at 11:23pm
Dan Brown sucks!
November 25th, 2005 at 1:21am
read angels and Dragons…sevral times
in fact i kind of skimmed it the first time, and it had so little effect on me, i thaught it was because of my skimming.
Second time, read it again, the plot didn’t change, and it had the same effect on me
NOTHING!
what a waste of my life…
great website- nice one
November 25th, 2005 at 1:21am
i ment deamons
November 25th, 2005 at 10:32am
Its always good to admit your sins
November 25th, 2005 at 9:03pm
Even if you do, somehow, survive Angels and Demons, DO NOT under any circumstances read Digital Fortress. It’s so bad it isn’t even “cool” bad. Utter, utter sh*te in plot, characters and writing style. aaaarrrrrggggghhhhhhh.
November 28th, 2005 at 9:07pm
Dan Brown sure has a great money-making formula. I’ve not been lured into any of them yet - I don’t read a huge amount of fiction so tend to choose it fairly carefully.
November 28th, 2005 at 11:24pm
Dan Brown’s writing isn’t what has caused all the hype. The writing sucks - and he uses the same plot outline in all his books. Ick.
The Da Vinci Code (and Angels and Demons, to some degree) offers people a version of religious history that is infinitely more believable that that offered up by the Catholic Church. He also attempts to show that the Holier than Thou attitude of the Catholic Church is a sham - they are in fact typical of any large powerful organisation. They have parts that are very good and parts that are very bad.
Dan Brown offered an alternative to current religious dogma that the public was very ready to hear. He could start his own religion… Hehehe
November 29th, 2005 at 11:37am
I read Angels and Demons after reading The Da Vinci Code and was disappointed to see how similar the plot was.
However I’m one of these people who quite unashamedly admits to enjoying DVC. I even bought the illustrated coffee-table version after having read the paperback!
I think it became popular because it’s easy to read, a real page-turner, and has a provocative treatment of modern Christianity. It’s no work of literary genius, but it really isn’t as bad as people make out. The problem was that it reached such heights of fame that everyone felt they had, to read it - even people who otherwise wouldn’t have bothered. Now it’s trendy to bash it, as if it somehow reveals the reader to be oh so sophisticated.
So, I guess my take would be that if you enjoy an entertaining thriller that doesn’t require too much hard work to digest, give it a go. If you think that popular fiction is somehow beneath you, then please don’t bother and save the rest of us from hearing all about it.
This possibly fits into the category of “blog comments I will one day regret”
November 29th, 2005 at 10:56pm
I didn’t like it - it was too contrived and (I thought) too predictable.
I was as confused by it’s good reputation as I am by the reputation Matthew Reilly books have. I’ve read “Ice Station”, and it hurt. It is crap. All the blokes are James Bond on steriods, all the women are supermodel nymphomaniacs, and all the villains are John Howard.
Holy cliche Batman!
(That last simile involving J. Howard may have been exaggerated).