What readers think of The Da Vinci Code, plus links to write your own review.

With 7.5 million copies sold, the fact is that Dan Brown has really touched on some themes that have got people talking and examining their beliefs. That's a good thing. That's what a good book does. In fact, not only is the book being made into a movie but I saw it's even inspired a tour to actually go and visit the locations behind the book (www.esoteric-explorations.com). That speaks volumes about the power of the ideas Brown has brought forth. Instead of relegating these ideas to a dull academic text, his brilliance was to build them into a compelling, fast-paced novel. I don't understand how you can fault him for that. And apparently, at least 7.5 million people agree.

Most good thrillers pace themselves. That is they know that without plateaus and valleys you have no mountainous high points. The Da Vinci Code is a seamless series of revelations moving from one mysterious message to another, from one mystical revelation to another, or from one hidden box or chamber to another providing little topographical relief. The oh so secret cursive reproduced on page 298, which Brown tried to pump up as something terribly arcane over the next two pages, was immediately obvious as plain olde English done backwards.

Come on! This book consisted of one enigma, inside another, inside another, inside of...well, you get the idea. Sort of like one of those nesting Russian dolls, except instead of five there were 454 pages worth. And the barrage of endless breath grabbing movements is not sustained by the irony-laden dialogue Brown provides to Langdon and Neveu. The Da Vinci Code is a one trick pony.

Whether or not "The Da Vinci Code" is a good book is, of course, a matter of opinion. What amazes me, as well as many others, judging from reviews posted here, is how badly written it is. I am not here writing about errors of fact, of which I could care less. Or whether or not it is suspenseful (which I found it not to be) or interesting (which I found it mildly to be). I'm writing about how BADLY written the book is. Bad grammar, terrible syntax, blocked metaphors, absurd similes, etc. etc. etc. For those of us for whom part of the pleasure of reading is in the author's use of language, this is a TERRIBLE book. I do not demand that every book I read be a timeless work of elegant and graceful prose, but there ARE minimum standards. And this book, time and again, failed to meet them.

I enjoyed this book. I felt like it contained enough information to convey a sense of conspiracy within a generally traditional and reputable institution such as the Catholic church. Any false information that Brown prints in this book should be forgiven since the genre of the novel is FICTION. Fiction meaning not fact, but fake.

I enjoyed it thoroughly without having to analyze every meticulous detail about it. It's fiction. Get over it.

Dan Brown throws a great number of conspiracy theories together and in that sense inspires you to dig deeper for actual reliable sources.
But before you start questioning your Sunday School lessons, take a look at http://www.ubcaustin.org/ubu_davincicode01.htm or the many books writtten that deals with the so-called facts in Brown's novel. After all, it is a novel, so he can get away with all the errors.
Besides the interesting theories he throws out, his characters are mundane, the twists predictable, and his villans a repeat of his characters from Angels and Demons. If you want good historical fiction writing read anything by Bodie Thoene.
The one amazing concept in this book which I have never heard of before and am definitely going to check out is the Golden Ratio - so I'm reading Mario Livio's book and will see what I think.

this book was juvenile. the story and his hooks are cliche and obvious. his descriptions evoke memories of "An Apple", childish and without eloquence. the history seems to be a pure farce. why this book gets such good review, I could never say, but it depresses me to think that this is what is being read and then praised by america right now.

An afterthought on the development of Christianity - Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' provides a great account of the varying reasons Constantine converted Rome to Christianity. Almost none of Dan Brown's 'scholarship' in this area or around the Council of Nicea stands up to even 15 minutes research. Still could have been an interesting theme for a thriller, however - but this is not it.

If I could give this no stars, I would. I can't belive how popular it is.
From a European perspective, it shows (as so often) a worrying insularity amongst some US authors - the first 20 pages are a completely unjustifiable rant against the French, rather than good scene setting, and then we have the almost obligatory mad Englishman who won't let people into his estate unless they can identify the correct way to take tea...

The writing is equally appalling, with the author so keen to demonstrate how many 'facts' he knows - from the mundane, such as how many Eiffel Towers would line the permiter of the Louvre, to the more archaic and debateable details of goddess-worship - that all narrative momentum is lost.

If you did really like this book, can I suggest - as some people previously have - that you read 'Foucalt's Pendulum' by Umberto Eco. The writing is on a different plane, as is the deep understanding of his material that Eco possesses. If you are really interested in the conspiracy theory underpinning the book's plot, I would suggest reading 'The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail', by Baigent and Leigh, from whoch much of the material here has been lifted.

If you must read the book itself, borrow it from a friend. I am incredibly annoyed to have spent money on it.