Da Vinci Code

[Elwyn]

Elwyn the newbie here again.


I went to the library today and checked out Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code because of all the hoopla about the book.

I just started reading the prolog and found the writing to be what some may consider amateurish - because contractions aren’t used in the dialog.

Now before ya'll start throwing daggers at me, understand that I've been told more than once in this forum that if someone wants to learn how to write, they have to read. And, that's also what King say's in his book On Writing. And I've been told that mechanical dialog (no contractions) is a no-no.

What am I missing?:Shrug:

[DamaNegra]

Sure, you just have to write a really controversial thriller that will p¡ss off a very powerful group (i.e. the church) and voila! Who cares that you can't write?

I read the first few pages of his 'Digital Fortress' and wasn't too impressed either. All of his novels I've read go exactly the same way. Once you've read one, you've read all of them.

[Peggy]

What am I missing?:Shrug: I haven't heard anyone say they thought Brown's writing was very good (in fact, some people feel it's terrible). What Brown did was create a story that captured people's imaginations, particularly the "true" account of religious conspiracies. It just goes to show that good writing isn't necessarily necessary to have a best seller.

[Perks]

Now before ya'll start throwing daggers at me Lol! I don't think you'll find that here.

The Da Vinci Code has been trashed every way from grandma's porch on AW. Personally, I think some books are all about the story; some books are all about the writing; the best books are all about both. I enjoyed the story told in the book. I don't find his success all that surprising. In that one and in Angels and Demons, Dan Brown gets away with the literary equivalent of the Friday afternoon episode of a tangly 'daytime televsion drama' (formerly known as Soap Operas.) It's good fun. It's not high art. It's arguably not even medium-warm art. But the public sure did lap it up. I can't tell you how many times I've heard, "I hadn't read a novel in years. I couldn't put it down." So, as far as I'm concerned - trash away. Dan Brown got some sort of job done.

[Elwyn]

Once again, I've learned something in this forum; and my suspicions are confirmed - write something interesting then worry about the craft of writing.

[DamaNegra]

Once again, I've learned something in this forum; and my suspicions are confirmed - write something interesting then worry about the craft of writing.


Or write something so interesting you won't have to worry about the craft of writing, lol.

[Emerson Dell]

I started reading DVC out of curiosity, same thing that got me to reading Bridges of Madison County, and came away with the same hurl-the-book-cross-the-room frustration! I've been in the Louvre, been in UBS...no way ANYONE (including Spider Man, Superman, and Wonder Woman) could escape either institution as described. And I didn't find the story all that gripping because the writing was pure-tee horrible. As for Bridges, Waller claimed he locked himself in a room & lived on bread & water (okay, I exaggerate for effect) and wrote Bridges in 3 weeks--my reaction to that is, what took him so long? I am so sick and tired of trash making the bestseller lists and staying up there for eons!!!

[expatbrat]

I am so sick and tired of trash making the bestseller lists and staying up there for eons!!!

I'm different. I want the cash. I want to know what I need to write to SELL plenty of copies of my book. On my wall - right here in front of me - I have "Goal: 20 million copies of expat brat sold by 2008". The goal is not to be perfect - it is to SELL the copies.

If what everyone is calling tripe can sell 49 million copies then I want to know how I can jump on that bandwagon. I want to know what Dan did right. How did he get that attention and those sales, and how can I do that?

Having the goals stuck to the wall helps in other ways too. Editing I ask myself "is this a 20 million copies sold chapter," if it is not then fix it up.

Using Dan's 49 million copies sold standard as the yardstick - perhaps this is going to be a piece of piss?

[DamaNegra]

Well, I don't agree with you- at all. If you want to be a millionarie or famous, you've picked the wrong business.

But everyone has his/her reasons to write, I suppose, and if that works for you then it's cool. Anti-religious topics seem to be booming now, or rather religious-conspiracy. Heck, even plain conspiracy will do.

[expatbrat]

Well, I don't agree with you- at all. If you want to be a millionarie or famous, you've picked the wrong business.
.

So why do you write? If you don't plan to be successful - what’s your plan?

[DamaNegra]

I write because I love to. It's purely an emotional need, writing is the only ability I have naturally. I write because it feels good for people to read and praise my work, even if it's just my friends and family. Why do I like the praise and not the money? I rarely get praised in my life. Writing is the only thing that makes me stand out from my cousins and brothers.

Of course I'd love to reach a larger audience, and to know that people around the world are reading and enjoying my work. Success would be like an added bonus, but it's not a requirement.

[expatbrat]

I write because I love to. It's purely an emotional need, writing is the only ability I have naturally. I write because it feels good for people to read and praise my work, even if it's just my friends and family. Why do I like the praise and not the money? I rarely get praised in my life. Writing is the only thing that makes me stand out from my cousins and brothers.

Of course I'd love to reach a larger audience, and to know that people around the world are reading and enjoying my work. Success would be like an added bonus, but it's not a requirement.

If I want to "feel good" I go for a massage, hug my husband or do a workout. Even drinking water and eating fresh fruit make me “feel good”. But hey – I am that sporty person who wins stuff all the time. In the last four weeks I have won an Adventure race, prize money in a Triathlon, a place in a 2-day sailing race and a place in the Queens Cup Kayak race. I expect to win and usually do. Writing is not about a warm fuzzy feeling – it is about selling. Selling lots and lots of books.

20 million books is where I am aiming. If you aim at nothing you will hit it.

[DamaNegra]

I respect your opinion, but our circumstances are different and it's not just the 'warm fuzzy feeling', it's much more than that.

However, I will hijack this thread no further. If you want to keep on discusing this you can always PM me. I feel this could be a very interesting conversation.

[Perks]

Expat, that's an interesting strategy and obviously anything that's motivating is probably a good thing. But I'd have to say that trophy-writing is completely different from success in sporting competitions. In running, biking, swimming, sailing, all you have to be is good enough to beat the others.

Not so in writing. You have to be good enough and also appealing enough to 20 million people (or 10 million if each buys a copy for a friend.) There's topicality and originality. There's timing and nice cover art. In a race, it won't help you if the spectators like your running style. In writing, it's everything.

[Cheryll]

So why do you write? If you don't plan to be successful - what’s your plan?

"Success" can mean many different things.

Cheryll

[expatbrat]

Expat, that's an interesting strategy and obviously anything that's motivating is probably a good thing. But I'd have to say that trophy-writing is completely different from success in sporting competitions. In running, biking, swimming, sailing, all you have to be is good enough to beat the others.

Not so in writing. You have to be good enough and also appealing enough to 20 million people (or 10 million if each buys a copy for a friend.) There's topicality and originality. There's timing and nice cover art. In a race, it won't help you if the spectators like your running style. In writing, it's everything.

There was that American front crawl swimmer with terrible style - was it Jannet something?? – anyway, she won a bunch of Olympic gold despite her critics. And Dan the Man who everyone is trashing, complaining that he has no style and the stories are all the same (which they are), is number one everywhere.

But instead of knocking them - I want to know what they did right. How did they do that? How did someone with the "wrong technique" win Olympic medals or sell millions of books? What did they do right and how can I do it. How do you get the timing and cover right? What works?

It IS a bit like a race because when a person is in a book store they are going to buy a book, and that purchase is the writer’s trophy? How do I get that prize? How do I make my book good enough to beat the others and snag that sale?

My definition of success is achieving what you set out to achieve.

[James D. Macdonald]

And I've been told that mechanical dialog (no contractions) is a no-no.

Who told you that?

[Perks]

But instead of knocking them - I want to know what they did right. How did they do that? How did someone with the "wrong technique" win Olympic medals or sell millions of books? What did they do right and how can I do it. How do you get the timing and cover right? What works?

It IS a bit like a race because when a person is in a book store they are going to buy a book, and that purchase is the writer’s trophy, how do I get that prize?

I believe success is achieving what you set out to achieve.



And you'll see in my post above, I wasn't knocking him. It's a dicey thing around here to say one enjoyed The DaVinci Code, but I'll say it. It was a rootbeer float when nothing else would do.

I don't know how much there is to learn from it, though. Massive, incongruous successes are flukes and as such, not very valuable in practical study. Dan Brown, if you've read his other work, is unlikely to be able to do that trick again. (That being said, I actually thought Angels and Demons was a better book, but Deception Point put me off Dan Brown, probably for good.) I don't think you can engineer a fluke.

And I can't imagine anyone arguing that one form of success is achieving what you set out to. Seems fairly straightforward. I do think, however, that a strategy of entitled-because-I'm-determined may be better translated to accomplishment in business and sporting, than the arts. Perseverance is essential of course and admittedly, there are many ways to express this drive.

[maestrowork]

I liked Angels and Demons much better -- but as thrillers, both are ridiculous. I'd really like to see a plane flying from Boston to Geneva in an hour... or falling 10,000 feet using a tarp as a parachute...

What Dan Browns did was create a thinly plotted novel based on a fascinating and controversial premise, then use a formulaic approach for thrillers -- lots of cliffhangers, lots of action, a bad-a$$ weirdo villain, quasi-suspense (what really is the secret, etc.) and did I mention lots of cliffhangers to make people turn the page? Anyway, why DVC is a phenomenon is the premise -- people keep talking about the premise, and it spawned many knock-off books (fiction and non-fiction alike) based on that topic. But did you ever hear people actually talking about Brown's story? Plot? Or characters? Robert Langdon is one of the most boring action hero, but people are NOT talking about all that. They're talking about the premise: Can it be? Everyone I've talked to mentioned about the premise and the topic... but none (at least I haven't met one yet) ever commented on how great the actual story/plot/characters were. Kind of made you think... As a matter of fact, most people I know read the book because of all the hype and talk about it. But once they finished reading it, I'd say 8 out of 10 said they didn't like it.

So I thin DVC is a phenomenon because of word of mouth, but not about the writing or the story, but about the premise. Had someone else written the same book, it would probably have been a phenomenon as well. Brown just happened to do it first (plus he did have that cliffhanger thing down pat).

[aruna]

So I thin DVC is a phenomenon because of word of mouth, but not about the writing or the story, but about the premise. Had someone else written the same book, it would probably have been a phenomenon as well. Brown just happened to do it first (plus he did have that cliffhanger thing down pat).

As usual you're right. My son (20 years) hardly ever reads fiction but he read DVC and loved it. And why did he love it? Because of the controversy, the premise, the conspiracy theory etc. That's all he wanted to talk about. He did not care at all about plot, characters or writing style. he would have read it if it were non-fiction (which is anyway more up his alley) but Dan managed to pack the non-fiction premise into a page-turner, with lots of thrills and spills. That's the secret.

So if you want to that sort of success thats what you have to do: find some outrageous premise, (Hitler was secretly desperately in love with a Jewish woman, for instance. You can have that one for free.) make it sound as if it COULD be true, and pack loads of murders, car chases around a big city, one-eyed assassins with a club-foot and so on around it.

It seems to me that the "it could be true" thing is what facinates. You must try and dig up lots of "real" evidence.

Good luck!

[Perks]

That reminds me of a great book (well, I loved it way back when) but I can't remember the title. Hitler was kidnapped by Stalin and the whole bunker-thing with Eva Braun was accomplished with a double. Stalin kept him in a cage, I think. Anyone know what I'm babbling about? I should go to bed...

[goatpiper]

I think that DB certainly catered (intentionally or unintentionally) to the short attention span our culture has today. I was completely blown away by how short most of the chapters were - and many had some sort of chapter cliff-hanger!

I also think he went way overboard withholding information from the reader, but that's a lot of what kept many people (including myself) turning the pages. His overuse of it did irritate the heck out of me, though.

I think the story is fun enough, but I think the book reads like an over-long treatment for a film.

For once, I think the film will be better. Ron Howard makes good, solid films, and he'll make the characters more likable and engaging (as will the actors).

My two sense.

[Garpy]

Yeah, premise is everything...for the mainstream thriller market that is. That's the thing you need to get right first. Get a premise that you can communicate in two sentences eg: see the tagline below.

The rest (ie writing) is considered secondary, sadly.

[Jamesaritchie]

I'm different. I want the cash. I want to know what I need to write to SELL plenty of copies of my book. On my wall - right here in front of me - I have "Goal: 20 million copies of expat brat sold by 2008". The goal is not to be perfect - it is to SELL the copies.

If what everyone is calling tripe can sell 49 million copies then I want to know how I can jump on that bandwagon. I want to know what Dan did right. How did he get that attention and those sales, and how can I do that?

Having the goals stuck to the wall helps in other ways too. Editing I ask myself "is this a 20 million copies sold chapter," if it is not then fix it up.

Using Dan's 49 million copies sold standard as the yardstick - perhaps this is going to be a piece of piss?

I'd love to sell twenty million coies of a novel, but good novels can sell as well as tripe, and even better, on occasion. I'd love to have the money, but I'd like to retain my integrity along with it.

And in all honesty, if you're really after millions of dollars, forget writing and buy a lottery ticket.

What Dan did right was easy. He got there the firstest with the mostest when it came to a subject he knew would be a major controversy. If you want your own millions, you're going to have to find you own controversy, and get there the firstest with the mostest. But I doubt another one exists anywhere near this big.

As for Bridges of Madison County, also a colossal bestseller, teh writing was awful, but what Waller did right was find the right story at the right time and fill it with the right characters. He got rich in the process, but also lost pretty much all the respect he might have gained as a writer.

But there are many successful writers who make more money and sell more books than either Dan Brown or Robert James Waller, and they do it with something called talent and integrity. Why not try to learn what these writers are doing right?

[DamaNegra]

I also think he went way overboard withholding information from the reader, but that's a lot of what kept many people (including myself) turning the pages. His overuse of it did irritate the heck out of me, though.

Argh! Me too! By the middle of the book I was ready to throw it at someone because I was already tired of it!

[nandu]

DVC is a terrible book, assessed from the point of view of literary merit. But the controversial subject, and the puzzles at each corner, made it a page-turner. I love mysteries of the "puzzle" variety, mostly written by British authors, where the problem is everything. Also, I like mathematical puzzles. That's why I enjoyed DVC.

It's a formula book, and gets boring when repeated too often. That's what happened to Angels & Demons. Moreover, the inaccuracies in that book were too glaring.

[maestrowork]

I doubt that Brown or Waller would go down in history as great authors, and 100 years from now, people won't remember them, or maybe just "one of the many best selling authors in the 21st Century" and nothing more. But hey, I can use those millions, too, but some authors manage to make those millions with good writing (some might say Stephen King, for example, or John Irving) that will be remembered long after they're gone. I, for one, aspire to that -- great writing first, $millions$ a close second. :)

[aruna]

I I, for one, aspire to that -- great writing first, $millions$ a close second. :)

A combination of the two, best of all!!!!

What I noticed with DVC, but only afterwards, is that the charcters were constanly moving - they never slept and never ate for the whole book!

[maestrowork]

Why eat, sh!t or sleep when you have a world to save in 24 hours?

[L.Jones]

When I worked at Booksamillion we sold The Davinci Code everyday - or almost sold it - a lot of people balked at the HC and decided to wait or get it used (this was 4 mos ago -- we also sold a Million Little Pieces in bulk back then). I have not read it but got it for my hubby way ahead of the wave - and he shared it with his family and they all liked it, despite being Evangelical Christians (some people actually can tell fact from fiction and not get in a fit over fiction).

The one thing my hubby and his family and whole lot of people who bought and read the code have in common is that it is 1 of maybe 2 books they have read in the last year or more. If they are only going to read 1-2 books a year (which is the number the majority of Americans who call themselves "readers" manage) they want story, they want something that is easy to read and that loads of other people are reading so they can discuss it and feel good about being in the book set.

I can't speak to Brown specifically to say he is in this group but I felt while assisting people in the book store that there is a whole class of bestselling author who have tapped the biggest market in America - Writing books for people who don't read.
Patterson and Sparks are names that I sold a lot of and can't count the number of times people said "I don't read books but I read his." "I never read anything until someone gave me XXX and I went and bought every one of his".

That's not to knock them, there are a lot of reasons someone reads or writes a book and only one of them is creative expression, just an observation.

btw - writing for praise baffles me. It seems just as iffy a proposition as writing for money.

annie
Luanne Jones
(Heathen Girls - MIRA)

[MadScientistMatt]

Once again, I've learned something in this forum; and my suspicions are confirmed - write something interesting then worry about the craft of writing.

Writing things to be interesting is an important craft in and of itself. And really, who would want to pick up a book that isn't interesting?

[James D. Macdonald]

As I've said several times in the "Uncle Jim" thread, all the prose has to be is workmanlike. What you absolutely cannot do without is a compelling story.

[CaroGirl]

Dan Brown is not really a writer, he's a story teller, and a darn good one, by all accounts. I haven't read the DaVinci Code. I tried to read Angels & Demons and couldn't get past the second chapter of stilted, hackneyed prose and wooden, formulaic characters.

I like the way that Truman Capote puts it: "To me, the greatest pleasure of writing is not what it's about, but the inner music that words make." Dan Brown is not the kind of writer who makes music with his words.

[Bufty]

I bought the DaVinci Code while on vacation because there was nothing else in the microscopic book stand. I read it purely for relaxation and fun while sprawled on a lounger in the sun with a drink in the other hand. And I enjoyed it - technical flaws one may say it has - but I wasn't looking for any. However, I enjoyed the journey more than the final arrival at the end and out-guessed the ptotagonist more than once.

I spotted Digital Fortress the next day and read that. Again, a page-turner - I was reading to be taken away somewhere and for me DB did that, although I did find the continuous 'I have the ring' - 'No, I just missed it' a tad wearisome.

They're not books I'd rave about, but as L Jones said, the hype over DB and the DVC have probably created a lot of new readers of books who, hopefully when we are published, may pick up and flick through one of ours.

[citymouse]

I just started reading the prolog and found the writing to be what some may consider amateurish - because contractions aren’t used in the dialog.


Elwyn, you're correct about the use of contractions in dialogue, however, there are acceptable exceptions. Say if I want to stress some point I may write: Tim said, "Do Not, I repeat, do not do that again!"
In my Jan Phillips series, I have several charaters who do not have English as their first language. I use formal speech (no contactions) in their dialogue.
This also relieves me of having to add a clusters of he said/she said because teh reader knows who is speaking by the speech pattern.

As for Mr. Brown's writing skills, I'd say he's average with flashes of light. I read The DVC as well as he Angels and Demons. In each I felt he didn't really know how to wrap up the story. In Angels and Demons his book's raison d'être
is completly unbelievable. I won't spoil it here unless anyone plans on reading it. I will say that A&D is a better written book.

Michael

[James D. Macdonald]

Many of Damon Runyan's characters do not use contractions.

I'm still boggling over the identification "uses no contractions" = "mechanical dialog."


There are many ways in which dialog can be mechanical, but not using contractions is not the first one that springs to my mind.

[Yeshanu]

What Dan did right was easy. He got there the firstest with the mostest when it came to a subject he knew would be a major controversy. If you want your own millions, you're going to have to find you own controversy, and get there the firstest with the mostest. But I doubt another one exists anywhere near this big.


Headline from this week's MacLean's:

The author who inspired the Da Vinci Code wages a new war over Jesus: Did He Really Die On The Cross?

I agree with your comment about Dan being the "firstest with the mostest." However, controversial topics haven't been exhausted, and I'm certain there's ones that will be as big as DVC in the future. If that's the book you want to write, go for it.

I read a chapter or two of DVC, but I really detest authors who withold information simply for the sake of leading the reader on a merry dance. I like the suspense to be in the story, not due to witholding information from the reader that the characters obviously have. That's a television trick--put the commercial break at some point where we're just about to find out something juicy, so we'll come back after the commercial, but it doesn't work in writing. In fact, it had the opposite effect and pissed me off. I won't waste my time reading Dan Brown's next book.

The idea that some authors are catering to "borderline readers" is intriguing. I do think heavy readers read differently and expect different things from books than "ordinary" people, but since the majority of people aren't heavy readers, you can do big business if you can write a book that caters to this audience. I wouldn't mind exploring that option. Not only is the potential to earn millions there, but you'll also have the warm fuzzys of bringing the joy of reading to millions of non-readers.

And IMO, you don't have to sacrifice quality or bash religion to do it. How many people who read only one or two books a year have read about a boy named Harry? Millions, perhaps? (And yeah, I know her writing isn't the best of the best, but it's still a thousand light years away from Dan Brown's.)

[Perks]

The idea that some authors are catering to "borderline readers" is intriguing.

I think it's a great idea and that's why I don't begrudge Dan Brown's success. We know that reading activates a different part of the brain than other methods of ingesting information. But in our culture, we've come to rely so heavily on visual media.

Dan Brown's book is discussion-promoting and it's reading. Da Vinci Code - the movie. Yippee.

I hope that what I write is someday (hey! how 'bout tomorrow? I'm free)received as having finer sentence structure and cleverer word-play. I hope my characters are more memorable. But, more than anything, I also hope people enjoy the reading. I think Dan Brown is taking too many stripes.

[Avalon]

If they are only going to read 1-2 books a year (which is the number the majority of Americans who call themselves "readers" manage)...

Is this true? Dear god. This stopped me in my tracks. I'm appalled. I'm hoping it's hyperbole. Most people who consider themselves 'readers' read only one or two books per year?

Kill me now.

[Yeshanu]

Avalon, I think it's even worse than that. I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that the average number of books read by Americans (and I don't think Canadians are much different) is 1-2, not that the average American reads 1-2 books per year. Considering some of us read 60 or more books a year, there's a whole lot of people out there who don't read books at all.I ain't gonna shoot you, though. I share your dismay. And I pity those who don't read. No movie or television program can ever compare to the thrill of losing one's self in a good book.

[L.Jones]

Is this true? Dear god. This stopped me in my tracks. I'm appalled. I'm hoping it's hyperbole. Most people who consider themselves 'readers' read only one or two books per year?

Kill me now.



This is a stat from a study done a few years back. I don't recall exact numbers but went along the lines of percentage of Americans who consider themselves readers, then a breakdown of percentages by how many books they read. The highest bracket considering themselves readers said 1-2 books -- which makes sense if I cast a wide net to consider friends and family (most of whom need a wide net cast over them but that's another case study) and find they mostly read 1)a book while on vacation 2)a book everyone is talking about.
There were still plenty who read multiple books (and plenty who don't read anything), and when you are talking percentages in a country this size, it's a lot of folks but it isn't a majority.

An editor was once asked about another study which found 40% of Americans are considering writing a book. To which she replied, "I wish 40% of American's would consider READING a book."

annie
Luanne Jones
(Heathen Girls - MIRA)

[badducky]

I've always been surprised by the number of intelligent people who read light tripe. For some reason, people want to get their pseudo-science lectures on morality and astrology and christianity in the form of a polemic thriller.

As a "snooty artiste" who works inside of a genre (sci-fi/fantasy), I'm constantly battling the mechanical plot reflex that makes us mope along waiting for plot twists to shock them.

Of course, if you asked me if I woul do it for the seventy bajillion dollars Dan Brown made off the book, and is going to make off the movie, then I'd ask where I can stand in line to sell my soul to the devil.

I keep asking the devil to buy my soul, but he never wants it! Where's the contract? Where do I sign? Is there some sort of line I must stand in? Is there a website I'm missing?

Sigh... Guess I'll stick to what I know and write weird, arty fantasy novels.

[Elwyn]

Many of Damon Runyan's characters do not use contractions.

I'm still boggling over the identification "uses no contractions" = "mechanical dialog."

There are many ways in which dialog can be mechanical, but not using contractions is not the first one that springs to my mind.

Uncle Jim -

I've only started this writing "stuff" a very short time ago. I've been a technical writer for decades, but that's an entirely different type of writing.

I read until my eyes bled – and still do – about writing what ya’ll call prose. While I was writing my first novel, I spent most of the time reading about how to write novels. So, I’ll have to do some research to see where I came up with the dialog ideas. I do remember getting a book from the library about writing dialog.

But, it seems (to this rookie) that you’d write the way people talk.

I spent a lot of time going through my 99,000+ word manuscript getting rid of as much “mechanical dialog” as I could – before I sent it to the publisher the other day.

Here’s a sample of dialog from the book:

“Yous sit ere an’ finish cleanins des, ya ole buzzard. I gots bizness,” she said.

The above isn’t a sophisticated person, but a ‘backy chewin’ “hick” that lives in the woods.

I’ll keep huntin’ for the reference.;)

[aadams73]

I've always been surprised by the number of intelligent people who read light tripe.

I've noticed you tend to be purposely inflammatory. Far from coming across as intelligent or controversial, you just come across as rude.

[aadams73]

Is this true? Dear god. This stopped me in my tracks. I'm appalled. I'm hoping it's hyperbole. Most people who consider themselves 'readers' read only one or two books per year?

Kill me now.

It's a bit sad, isn't it? I can't imagine not being a reader.

[aruna]

I've actually read all of Dan Brown's books, borrowed from the library of course, although I did buy a paperback version in the UK to give to a friend in the US last summer, from Catholic high school.

The Da Vinci Code's basic premise reminded me of a non-fiction book from the 80s about Mary Magdalen (I won't write any more as to not spoil the story, but my God, where have you been living if you don't know the plot of this book already?)

.

Was it The Last Temptation of Christ? I read that book back in the 80's and just today it occured to me that THAT may be why the plot of DVC seemed so stale to. I was really underwhelmed by the premise of DVC; my reaction was more huh? than Wow! That theory's been around for decades. I personally wasn't a bit bowled over by the premise.

(oops, just remembered that Last Temptatin of Christ was fiction)

If I'd read it before the frenzy started I'd never have guessed it could be such a hit. There is something utterly unpredictable about bestsellerdom. There really is no formula. Who would ever have thought, for instance, that a book about a bunch f rabbits running across the countryside would be a bestseller? (Watership Down) We just don't know what wil hit a chord with the reading public.

[James D. Macdonald]

Christ didn't die on the cross?

Perhaps you're thinking of The Passover Plot. Like Holy Blood, Holy Grail a purported work of non-fiction.

[ChunkyC]

I don't begrudge Dan Brown his success either. It's great that he's made pots of money, because his publisher has lots of cash they made off DC to hand out as advances to us little fellers still trying to begin and build a career as fiction writers.

To be well regarded among my peers is far more important to me than money. Respect is priceless. Sure, I'd love to make gobs of loot from my books some day, but when all is said and done, what makes me feel the best is the knowledge that long after I'm gone from this world, my grandkids might sit their own grandkids down some evening and read them a story I wrote. No amount of money in the world can replace that.

[Cheryll]

I don't begrudge Dan Brown his success either. It's great that he's made pots of money, because his publisher has lots of cash they made off DC to hand out as advances to us little fellers still trying to begin and build a career as fiction writers.


I was thinking the exact same thing the other day! LOL :)

Cheryll

[Jamesaritchie]

But, more than anything, I also hope people enjoy the reading. I think Dan Brown is taking too many stripes.

I don't think he's taking enough stripes. I'm all for making money, and I'm all for writing popular novels, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. And I'm not altogether sure all that many people enjoyed reading Dan Brown. For things I've seen, imense numebrs have bought the book ONLY because of the copntroversy, and read it even though they hated the reading.

And like many such controversial books that top the bestseller list, it's also bought by huge numbers who never manage to finish reading it at all.

With books like this, number of sales may have very little to do with number of readers, or with how much the book is enjoyed as a novel.

Now, I don't think controversial topics have been exhausted, but I doubt there's another one this big. . .unless you want to write a novel about Muhammad that's equally as controversial. And good luck finding a publisher for that one.

[Jamesaritchie]

btw - writing for praise baffles me. It seems just as iffy a proposition as writing for money.

annie
Luanne Jones
(Heathen Girls - MIRA)

I don't think writing for praise makes any sense, either.

[badducky]

I've noticed you tend to be purposely inflammatory. Far from coming across as intelligent or controversial, you just come across as rude.

If I'm not offending somebody, somewhere, I'm probably not doing my job.

I don't see how inflammatory it can be to call bad writing what it is, and to call people out for choosing it over good books.

And James Richie really nails it on the head in his last post.

And many, many authors wealthier and more influential than I write the same tripe. And I wouldn't mind retiring to a New England mansion, so I always wonder how I could compose something equally successful.

Good thing I'm not V.S. Naipul, otherwise one rude comment on a message board would make the BBC.

If you've read lots of my posts, you've probably seen this before. I say it all the time. My opinion and fifty cents will get you a Coke.

[Yeshanu]

Now, I don't think controversial topics have been exhausted, but I doubt there's another one this big. . .unless you want to write a novel about Muhammad that's equally as controversial. And good luck finding a publisher for that one.

I would suggest for the time being that anyone who wants to write controversial schlock about religion pick on Christians. It's not liable to get you killed...

Uncle Jim, the book about Christ on the Cross is by the same author as HB, HG. The theory's apparently based on a letter Jesus was supposed to have written after his supposed crucifixion. Bad science piled on bad science, if you ask me, but if anyone wants to take a shot at it, I don't think it's been turned into a novel yet.

Elwyn, it seems to me that you've been led astray. There's a difference between contractions (isn't, there's, etc.) and dialect, which is what you've posted in your sample. Contractions are acceptable, and even desirable in some cases. Dialect is problematic, and should be avoided if possible. It's hard to read, and reliance on dialect in the place of true characterization leads to one-dimensional characters.

[Perks]

With books like this, number of sales may have very little to do with number of readers, or with how much the book is enjoyed as a novel.



I'm going by the word of everyday people I've talked to in airports, in my neighborhood, at the bookstore (the employees were bananas over this book), not sterile articles on the dearth of literary merit in The DaVinci Code. Real, regular people. People who buy books.

It's not that I don't understand the criticisms. I do. I just think the line from rueful head-shaking to overt snobbery has been obliterated by the diatribes against this book. It's schtick, it's formula, it's even silly. But people like Girl Scout Cookies, Kentucky Fried Chicken and Thomas friggin' Kinkade paintings too. And all the people who enjoyed The DaVinci Code weren't slack-jawed morons.

I appreciate that the lyricism and depth of The DaVinci Code is substantially less than in many other works. So what? I really hope that everyone who in overbearing superiority rails against the quality of this book has absolutely impeccable tastes and faultless manners in every other facet of their lives. You better not be enjoying any of your sitcoms, or your watery American staple beers. Keep your elbows off the table at your backyard barbeques and if I catch any of you picking 'comfy' clothes over couture, I'm gonna be sure to make a note.

[badducky]

Comparing the book to such things as KFC, Sears clothes, and barbecue is absurd. They take anywhere from five minutes to an hour of your time.

However, reading a book is an extremely long, and personal experience.

It's like comparing a six hour movie to a half hour sitcom. If it's going to take you that many hours, it better be worth the time and energy.

And DVC? It's not.

[MadScientistMatt]

One of the funniest nitpicks I've seen leveled at the DaVinci Code was when someone on an automotive message board nailed Dan Brown for saying a car had polypropylene headlights. (http://www.grmotorsports.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=12948&highlight=polypropylene&sid=53aa048b69443003017b0bf4e012b7c2) Polypropylene is normally made into fabrics - I know you can buy blocks of it, but I doubt it comes in a clear version. But I doubt that goof would have been noticed in a less widely read book. It's just with more readers, you have more nitpickers. Still, that is a pretty bad example of making up terminology when you don't know the correct words!

[TrickyFiction]

All I remember thinking when I read TDC is, If he describes any aspect of that woman as "soft" ONE more time, I'm going to find a way to eat my own eyes out of my head!

[Elwyn]

Elwyn, it seems to me that you've been led astray. There's a difference between contractions (isn't, there's, etc.) and dialect, which is what you've posted in your sample. Contractions are acceptable, and even desirable in some cases. Dialect is problematic, and should be avoided if possible. It's hard to read, and reliance on dialect in the place of true characterization leads to one-dimensional characters.

The sentence I wrote was to show that I "think" we should write how people actually speak. And, the person talking in that particular line surly matches the dialect.

Contractions are what I was talking about. "I am not going over there." vs. "I'm not going over there." vs. "I'm NOT going over there vs. "I AM NOT going over there."

C'mon, do you think some guy with a gun is going to say "When you are gone, I will be the only one who knows the truth." OR "When you're gone, I'll be the only one who knows the truth." I guess its the tone that would suggest how it's (it is) said.

About the MONEY: Personally, I'd like enough to survive comfortably so I could sit around and daydream - then write it down. I don't need billions - because that would mean I'd (I would) have to think about how it should be invested/spent.;)

[JAK]

Many of Damon Runyan's characters do not use contractions.

I'm still boggling over the identification "uses no contractions" = "mechanical dialog."


There are many ways in which dialog can be mechanical, but not using contractions is not the first one that springs to my mind.

I believe it's a matter of:

"Let us go to the show."

vs.

"Let's go to the show."

[Julie Worth]

Polypropylene is normally made into fabrics - I know you can buy blocks of it, but I doubt it comes in a clear version.

Actually it does, but you still wouldn't use it to cover headlights. Brown probably meant polyester or polycarbonate.

[Bufty]

Showing dialogue the way people speak it using say 'you're' instead of 'you are' isn't exactly the same thing as phonetical spelling to convey dialect etc., which can be an absolute pain to read.

[Perks]

Comparing the book to such things as KFC, Sears clothes, and barbecue is absurd. They take anywhere from five minutes to an hour of your time.
Oh, okay. You must be right. Wait! No, I actually did think that out before I wrote it, so I'm sorry I'm going to have to reject your ridicule out of hand.

All of these things mentioned are less than high class indulgences. And it's okay. Dan Brown isn't a charlatan. He's a purveyor of an easy read. And he managed two that were exciting and conversation-provoking. What's really funny is that I didn't love The DaVinci Code. It was fun time. I liked the puzzles and the premise was something I hadn't read in a novel before.

I too find it a shame that many people seem to avoid richer fare. I don't know why that is, but it doesn't incite me to vilify the Good Humor man either.

[expatbrat]

I'm going by the word of everyday people I've talked to in airports, in my neighborhood, at the bookstore (the employees were bananas over this book), not sterile articles on the dearth of literary merit in The DaVinci Code. Real, regular people. People who buy books.

It's not that I don't understand the criticisms. I do. I just think the line from rueful head-shaking to overt snobbery has been obliterated by the diatribes against this book. It's schtick, it's formula, it's even silly. But people like Girl Scout Cookies, Kentucky Fried Chicken and Thomas friggin' Kinkade paintings too. And all the people who enjoyed The DaVinci Code weren't slack-jawed morons.

I appreciate that the lyricism and depth of The DaVinci Code is substantially less than in many other works. So what? I really hope that everyone who in overbearing superiority rails against the quality of this book has absolutely impeccable tastes and faultless manners in every other facet of their lives. You better not be enjoying any of your sitcoms, or your watery American staple beers. Keep your elbows off the table at your backyard barbeques and if I catch any of you picking 'comfy' clothes over couture, I'm gonna be sure to make a note.

Haven’t you all been busy while we on the other side of the world slept.



I’ll just put it out there that I have read off of Dan’ books and they were fine. Other books are better but I never felt the urge to criticize Dan’s books, I’ve certainly read far worse. Living in Thailand and hanging out on islands fairly regularly I like to see what other people are reading – I would say that 30% of people on a beach (by the pool etc) are reading Brown’s work; be it in Chinese, German, French or whatever (you can tell by the big DAN BROWN on the front) a lot of people are reading his work.



Perks – I am with you! You are my hero – couldn’t agree more… People are not after quality. Proof:

What news programs do people watch? Fox news – could they hype up that missing dog any more? They report the news like sports reporters, it can get pretty sickening at times.

Other popular TV? How about Big Brother, American Idol, Survivor? Reality TV that is HOURS and hours of crap. In the UK people watch that annoying nanny that tells parents how to control their kids or a bunch of gay guys teaching a man how to dress. Tripe! People love tripe.

What food do they love to eat? McDonalds, chips, candy, KFC other fast cheap rubbish (diabetes, stroke, heart disease and cancer flavoured) excuses for nutrition. How often to people attend fine dinning restaurants – or even bother to cook that way at home? Not very often I’m afraid. Are there any “fine dining” chains making a fortune? None I can think of. But the fast cheap easy to eat rubbish – this crap is everywhere. Who is the most famous chief on the planet right now? That would be Jamie Oliver; the man who teaches people how to make quick easy simple food. Key words here are quick, easy and simple.

What do the masses wear? Chain outlet brand clothes – or what the other people are wearing. People follow fashion – and in my world (‘cause I have my own you see) fashion is what the cool people wore LAST YEAR. People wear ripped jeans and inside out shirts – this is cool. Fashion chain's don't make quaility, and this is fine, because people don’t want quality. They want quick, easy, disposable and simple.

Look at our construction. Every generation before us has made quality structures that have stood the test of time, but in our fast rushed pace we don’t worry about such things. We just throw up cheap “that will do” garbage.

And what do they read? Ooooh that’s a big question. WHAT DO THEY READ? When shopping for a book to read on the plane, at the beach or to put them asleep at night, what do they read? Quality?

[TrickyFiction]

Fast food may be popular, but that doesn't make it good for you. :tongue

I'm not saying the book isn't fun to read.
It certainly isn't the best way to learn to write, though.
You wouldn't learn the culinary arts from a kid who works at McDonald's.

[expatbrat]

You wouldn't learn the culinary arts from a kid who works at McDonald's.

Agreed, but would you learn how to appeal to the masses from Ray Krook (s?)

[TrickyFiction]

Agreed, but would you learn how to appeal to the masses from Ray Krook (s?)

Yes, but this all depends on what your goal is. If it's just dollars you want, regardless of how detrimental your product is to society, then appeal to the culture of convenience, by all means.

It IS possible to make a living on quality, though. While that independent restaurant owner may not be a multimillionaire, he isn't starving either, and at least he can be proud of what he has produced.

[James D. Macdonald]

I spent a lot of time going through my 99,000+ word manuscript getting rid of as much “mechanical dialog” as I could – before I sent it to the publisher the other day.

Here’s a sample of dialog from the book:

“Yous sit ere an’ finish cleanins des, ya ole buzzard. I gots bizness,” she said.

The above isn’t a sophisticated person, but a ‘backy chewin’ “hick” that lives in the woods.

I’ll keep huntin’ for the reference.;)


That isn't mechanical dialog, nor is it writing without contractions -- that's dialect.

The use of dialect has fallen out of favor over the last hundred years or so. You can do as much or more with word choice.

Dialog is priviledged. That is to say, you can do anything at all in dialog. The rules of grammar do not apply. But don't use dialect.

[James D. Macdonald]

I seriously doubt that Dan Brown sat down saying "I'm going to write a crappy novel, but it'll earn pots of money." I expect that he wrote as well as he could, and the pots of money were a happy surprise.

We all write as well as we can. The pots of money usually don't arrive.

[TrickyFiction]

I seriously doubt that Dan Brown sat down saying "I'm going to write a crappy novel, but it'll earn pots of money." I expect that he wrote as well as he could, and the pots of money were a happy surprise.

We all write as well as we can. The pots of money usually don't arrive.

Oh, totally. And, I don't think I'm necessarily any better than he is.
I just don't think his novel is beyond criticism, or that it's pretentious to recognize some of his mistakes and try to avoid them in our own writing.

[Perks]

I just don't think his novel is beyond criticism, or that it's pretentious to recognize some of his mistakes and try to avoid them in our own writing.

I hope that doesn't seem the net effect of what I have written on this thread. The DaVinci Code has technical flaws and any book will have its detractors for style points (or lack thereof.) The success of the book combined with its literary simplicity has just brought out sneering and snobbery which is very unbecoming, in my opinion.

My writing style and the books I love the most are generally of a very different style and content. The DaVinci Code was a side excursion into topicality over form and I had fun. Millions of readers had fun. Chewing on it to milk it for examples of what not to do seems petty, since it worked extremely well for Mr. Brown. Not that I'm advocating as a writing primer. Yikes! Not every book is a tutorial, for good or bad. Some of them are just there.

[TrickyFiction]

I hope that doesn't seem the net effect of what I have written on this thread.


Not at all. Sorry, if it seemed that was what I was getting at. I was not responding to anything anyone in particular said in the thread, just trying to better express my own opinion. :)

Hmmm... I'll say it this way:
I think we can all learn from each writer out there in some way. They all have some positive and negative habits, and I really feel that by recognizing those things in others' work, we will be better able to see them in our own.

DaVinci Code was a fun read which I got through in about two days. I think he abused the cliffhanger chapter endings, but then, maybe I need to try that a little more often, just to toy with it. I also thought he overused some adjectives ("soft," for example) which is something I have since been trying to avoid.

On the positive, I think he was able to take a normally super intellectual topic, and make it available to everyone. His language was to the point, and easy to follow. I liked that about him, and I hope that my work can be as accessible as his.

[Cheryll]

I seriously doubt that Dan Brown sat down saying "I'm going to write a crappy novel, but it'll earn pots of money." I expect that he wrote as well as he could, and the pots of money were a happy surprise.

We all write as well as we can. The pots of money usually don't arrive.

I agree.

I picked up TDC while on vacation. It took me less than a week to finish.

Do I think it's a spellbinding, absolutely-the-best-thing-I've-ever-read work of art? No. It has its problems, sure, but it kept me turning the pages and it got me through two rainy days and a couple of layovers at the airport.

I've certainly read worse.

Cheryll

[goatpiper]

As a point of criticism, I found it interesting that he used a character staring at his own reflection as a cheap way to describe what that character looked like. He did it with Langdon at the beginning, and the bishop later on (perhaps there's more...I can't remember). Plain old silly and tired, if you ask me.

Btw, I don't think people need to qualify their comments with things like 'I'm not saying I'm a better writer than he is...'. Poppycock! Just because a man makes millions off a book doesn't elevate him to the status of a great writer. There are, I'm sure, many better writers than he on this message board alone.

My two sense plus some extra change from my car ashtray.

[TrickyFiction]

Btw, I don't think people need to qualify their comments with things like 'I'm not saying I'm a better writer than he is...'.


Yeah, but... I really didn't want to imply my own superiority.
I mean, I'm not saying I'm not a better writer either, just that that wasn't the point.
I still get to be a timid new person right?
Wait... my status went up?
ACK! I can't pull that card anymore. eh... :e2smack:

[Jamesaritchie]

I seriously doubt that Dan Brown sat down saying "I'm going to write a crappy novel, but it'll earn pots of money." I expect that he wrote as well as he could, and the pots of money were a happy surprise.

We all write as well as we can. The pots of money usually don't arrive.

From reading Brown's other work, I suspect you're right. I think he did write DC the best way he could, and the money was a happy accident. But, Lord, I'd hate to get rich and famous based on the quality of writing in DC.

I suspect Brown will suffer the same fate as Waller. His subsequent novels will also have less than steller writing, but won't have this particular story to pull them out of the critical fire.

[Jamesaritchie]

I

I appreciate that the lyricism and depth of The DaVinci Code is substantially less than in many other works. So what? I really hope that everyone who in overbearing superiority rails against the quality of this book has absolutely impeccable tastes and faultless manners in every other facet of their lives. You better not be enjoying any of your sitcoms, or your watery American staple beers. Keep your elbows off the table at your backyard barbeques and if I catch any of you picking 'comfy' clothes over couture, I'm gonna be sure to make a note.

I love some sitcoms, and hate other sitcoms. Some of the sitcoms are masterpieces, and will still be masterpieces a hundred years from now. Dan Brown's novel won't be.

I also love American beer, and I think the only reason those in the UK call it "watery" is because their taste buds have been totally destroyed by what is laughingly called "cusine" over there.

Whatever my taste is, bad writing remains bad writing, and the truth is, you don't need perfect taste to call bad writing bad writng, anymore than you need a bloodhound's nose to say that sh!t stinks.

[L.Jones]

That isn't mechanical dialog, nor is it writing without contractions -- that's dialect.

The use of dialect has fallen out of favor over the last hundred years or so. You can do as much or more with word choice.

Dialog is priviledged. That is to say, you can do anything at all in dialog. The rules of grammar do not apply. But don't use dialect.

Mark Twain said: Southerners speak music.

Dialect is more than just a mangling of words, it is a cadence, a use of phrasing for emphasis, a smattering of colloquialisms, choice of points of reference and probably a lot of other things.

The first rule of writing is to communicate, if your writing fails there the rest doesn’t matter. Dialect is an easy way to cause a breakdown in that communication, which is probably why it has "fallen out of favor". Just as stiff dialog can be off putting so can trying too much to capture every syllable of a dialect.

annie
Luanne Jones
(Heathen Girls Mira - sidenote - gave my copy ed. fits with a Japanese/Arkansas characters, a Puerto Rican/New Jersey/Southern accent, multiple southern accents in this book)

[loquax]

I also love American beer, and I think the only reason those in the UK call it "watery" is because their taste buds have been totally destroyed by what is laughingly called "cusine" over there. Actually we call it cuisine like everyone else http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif. P.S. no more roast dinner at christmas for you!

[waylander]

[QUOTE=Jamesaritchie]
I also love American beer, and I think the only reason those in the UK call it "watery" is because their taste buds have been totally destroyed by what is laughingly called "cusine" over there. [QUOTE]

It's been a while since you've been over here hasn't it.
Things have changed

[brokenfingers]

I have to say that find all the comments on DaVinci funny.

But then I always find it funny when writers (and especially starving writers) have the gumption to say that they know what makes a good book and what makes a good writer and Dan Brown isnt it and the book buying public just doesn't know what the hell it's talking about.

And I especially find it funny when people make judgements on what is good and what is bad when we all know (or should know) that such things are subjective. What Joe likes, Mary hates and vice versa.

Anyways, I read the book years ago when the hoopla was developing to see what it was about and posted my comments on another writing board back then.

Here it is. You can read it or ignore it as you will. They are only, of course, my humble two cents gathered through reading the first 10 chapters (didn't read further than that as it was only an exercise in story construction and to see how he'd done it - and the book itself did nothing for me.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dan Brown followed all the rules that have been laid out for writing a book that publishers will want to see and the public will want to read:

1) He started the story right where the action begins. No backstory, no descriptive passages about the setting. No lead-up. Boom! The proverbial phone rings and the adventure begins.

2) He had the protagonist in action from the get-go. The protag didn’t sit around his motel room wondering how he got to this point in his life, or what he was going to do, or sit admiring the Paris lights from his window. No long bouts of internal dialogue or description.

3) He starts with a question and keeps piling them on. The whole story is question after question. In the book there is the Main Story Question, but there are also myriad other little questions that he inserts constantly and leaves unanswered for the reader to eventually find out. Not by the characters telling the reader – but by the author showing the reader through the character’s actions and the story’s natural evolution.

4) He creates a character the reader can identify with, sympathize with, relate to. Now, granted – it may not be the most memorable character any of us here have ever seen – but for the average reader (the majority of the buying public) the character is just fine and dandy enough for them to spend a little time with. And that’s all they’re looking for. It’s a temporary investment – not a lifelong commitment.

5) He also did this gradually. He didn’t start his book by saying:
“Robert Langdon was an intelligent, likable man who also happened to be an expert cryptographer. As a matter of fact, he taught it at Harvard. He was a decent, likable, down-to-earth guy, not only tactful and diplomatic when the situation required it, but resourceful and quick-thinking also. He had not seen his love in over a year but he was determined to carry on. He also suffered from claustrophobia.”

He layers all this information in – line by line, paragraph by paragraph, chapter by chapter - through dialogue, character interaction, internal monologue, subtext, character actions and all the other tools a writer uses.

In other words: He SHOWS it.

6) He’s set the protag up against opposing forces. The conflict begins right away. Now, it doesn’t have to be life-threatening but there has to be something opposing the protag from the start. He wants to sleep – the phone won’t let him. He wants to be left alone to go back to sleep -the police won’t let him. He wants to go back to the US – the police captain won’t let him. Etc etc. Plus the real antagonist is interesting, fascinating. The main opposing force here is supposed to be good, but it is doing evil things - why is it doing these things?


Now Mr. Brown’s writing isn’t lyrical and his style may not be dazzling but it is sufficent to the needs of the story. He has built his story according to the guidelines of good story structure. And that puts it 90% ahead of the game. He follows good storytelling procedure and I firmly believe that is the biggest problem when it comes to learning to write.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The funny thing is that all these things mentioned above are mentioned in Uncle Jim's thread.

So just look at this book as proof that if you follow the rules of good writing - by which I mean presenting a story in a compelling way - and not just using nice words arranged nicely - then you stand a good chance of finding someone who will buy your book.

[Perks]

Whatever my taste is, bad writing remains bad writing, and the truth is, you don't need perfect taste to call bad writing bad writng, anymore than you need a bloodhound's nose to say that sh!t stinks.

Lol! That's a good one and I entirely agree. I take no issue with anyone noting that they don't, for whatever reason, care for The DaVinci Code. What bothers me is that its success seems to have opened the door for some of those same people to draw rude conclusions (and voice them) where it would be considered inappropriate and mean-spirited to do the same against an author with a less fruitful endeavor.

There are people who like SlimJims. Some people even like them a lot. Otherwise you wouldn't see them in every checkout aisle in every gas station and grocery store in the United States. SlimJims, in my opinion, are foul beyond reason, but it wouldn't never occur to me to make sweeping judgements about the mental faculties, moral standing and general worthiness of people who enjoy an occasion SlimJim.

[MadScientistMatt]

I also love American beer, and I think the only reason those in the UK call it "watery" is because their taste buds have been totally destroyed by what is laughingly called "cusine" over there.

It's been a while since you've been over here hasn't it.
Things have changed

I visited England about three years ago, and believe it or not, I was very impressed with English cooking.

At the time, I was traveling with my uncle, an Anglophile who had not been able to visit the UK for some time. He kept commenting on how much the restaurants had changed for the better. "I can't believe they're serving broccoli in pubs now. This would have been very exotic ten years ago."

[badducky]

The best thing about European cuisine was all the great immigrant cuisine. The best Lebanese food I've had was in Mainz.

The best Thai was in Wiesbaden.

The best Greek was in Trier.

The worst food I've ever had was at a restaurant serving "cuisine" in Mainz. The Rathaus next to the Gutenberg museum is just awful. Awful.

[Bufty]

You went to a restaurant called the 'Rathaus' and were disappointed?:Shrug:

The Rathaus next to the Gutenberg museum is just awful. Awful.

[maestrowork]

As I've said several times in the "Uncle Jim" thread, all the prose has to be is workmanlike. What you absolutely cannot do without is a compelling story.

The problem is, the DVC is not even a compelling story. It's a page-turner, no doubt, because of Brown's success in doing cliffhangers and suspense. But the story itself is actually rather run-of-the-mill and the characters cardboard. It is the killer premise that sells the book, because that's what everyone is talking about, and not about how the plot rocks. So I'd add that to make a book really sell, you need either 1) a killer premise; 2) a compelling story or 3) great writing. And if you've got all three, you definitely have it made.

[maestrowork]

I read a chapter or two of DVC, but I really detest authors who withold information simply for the sake of leading the reader on a merry dance. I like the suspense to be in the story, not due to witholding information from the reader that the characters obviously have. That's a television trick--put the commercial break at some point where we're just about to find out something juicy, so we'll come back after the commercial, but it doesn't work in writing. In fact, it had the opposite effect and pissed me off.

Same here -- that's one of the most annoying aspects of the book, besides the inane info dumps. However, like someone said earlier, the DVC and other thrillers/suspense/etc. caters to people who only read one or two books a year. These people most likely are used to the TV-style cliffhangers and suspense and they love that stuff -- it's good for a couple of hours of entertainment on the beach or on the deck of a cruise ship to the Bahamas. And the paperbacks would sell through the roof for years to come. But you probably won't find anyone who read a lot, like Stephen King, praising a book like DVC much (even though he writes highly commercial crowd pleasers himself).

If that's the kind of books we want to write, go for it. There is certainly a market for it (a huge market) and hey, if we can get some people who would otherwise not read to read, it could be a good thing (although entertainment like that, I think, also dumb people down). Personally, I think I have a thriller in me as well -- but I need to find a killer premise first. ;) I guess I'm not ready for my millions yet. ;)

[maestrowork]

Avalon, I think it's even worse than that. I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that the average number of books read by Americans (and I don't think Canadians are much different) is 1-2, not that the average American reads 1-2 books per year. Considering some of us read 60 or more books a year, there's a whole lot of people out there who don't read books at all.I ain't gonna shoot you, though. I share your dismay. And I pity those who don't read. No movie or television program can ever compare to the thrill of losing one's self in a good book.

I have MANY friends who wouldn't even read 1 book a year. One told me that if there was no "moving pictures" he wouldn't touch it. One reads mostly non-fiction and he hasn't touched fiction for years. He's reading the DVC now and he liked it, but he couldn't really finish it yet (not sure why). His last fiction was The Jurassic Park -- that's how long ago it was. It's funny that most of these people are male. I don't know if it's stereotypes, but I think women do read more than men, at least fiction (men I know do read non-fiction quite a lot).

[Canada James]

Chewing on it to milk it for examples of what not to do seems petty, since it worked extremely well for Mr. Brown. Not that I'm advocating as a writing primer. Yikes! Not every book is a tutorial, for good or bad. Some of them are just there.

The success of the Da Vinci code had nothing to do with either the story as entertainment nor the writing style in and of itself (good or bad).

Unfortunately, and I think this is a huge failing of this world, the Da Vinci Code's success came from its claim of historical accuracy (a claim that many still believe - although even Mr. Brown no longer claims this) of a religion and its people. He wrote a book that makes false claims about a religion, that,if taken as "historical fact," leads to distrust and hatred of that religion. (Whether or not you yourself came to a conclusion of Christianity due to this novel does not negate the fact that many many others have.)

Sad to say, but if he had just made up a religion and not used Christianity as it's center point no one would be talking about this poorly crafted book.

Canada James

[maestrowork]

I appreciate that the lyricism and depth of The DaVinci Code is substantially less than in many other works. So what? I really hope that everyone who in overbearing superiority rails against the quality of this book has absolutely impeccable tastes and faultless manners in every other facet of their lives. You better not be enjoying any of your sitcoms, or your watery American staple beers. Keep your elbows off the table at your backyard barbeques and if I catch any of you picking 'comfy' clothes over couture, I'm gonna be sure to make a note.

I don't agree. People (gobs of people) like Reality TV, too, and I personally think some of those shows are tripe and they dumb people down, and I am HARDLY an elitist. The Survivor is very good, I think, but no way would I watch something like Big Brother. I like sitcoms but NOT every sitcoms -- Frazier, for example, is smart, but not the inanely lame and bad "Coupling." I read Angels and Demons and enjoyed it. I was a big fan of Jurassic Park and silly movies like Indiana Jones. I have a diverse taste. But I really don't see how we can say "hey, if many people enjoy it, it has to be good, and if you don't, you have a superiority complex." That's absolutely not true. Something simply is bad. And there are many people who can't tell tripes from steak.

[maestrowork]

Yeah, but... I really didn't want to imply my own superiority.
I mean, I'm not saying I'm not a better writer either, just that that wasn't the point.
I still get to be a timid new person right?
Wait... my status went up?
ACK! I can't pull that card anymore. eh... :e2smack:

We don't need to be "better" writers to know what crap is. All we need to do is read more. ;)

[Canada James]

...and he shared it with his family and they all liked it, despite being Evangelical Christians (some people actually can tell fact from fiction and not get in a fit over fiction).

The problem is when the author himself can't tell the difference until the media puts pressure on him and he has to. Makes it cloudy for those unable to do the research themselves.

Canada James

[katrinka]

One of the funniest nitpicks I've seen leveled at the DaVinci Code was when someone on an automotive message board nailed Dan Brown for saying a car had polypropylene headlights. (http://www.grmotorsports.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=12948&highlight=polypropylene&sid=53aa048b69443003017b0bf4e012b7c2) Still, that is a pretty bad example of making up terminology when you don't know the correct words!

I recently watched the show, "The Real DaVinci Code," and in the show, they kept flashing to Dan Brown saying, "This book was highly researched...based on fact." He totally lost credibility with me. I know his work is fiction, but I couldn't get past his arrogance and didn't read past the first few chapters. If I hadn't seen that show first, I might have given the book more of a chance, annoying devices and all.

[badducky]

Man, if you can't get past arrogance in authors, I'm DOOMED!

[Liam Jackson]

Many of Damon Runyan's characters do not use contractions.

I'm still boggling over the identification "uses no contractions" = "mechanical dialog."


There are many ways in which dialog can be mechanical, but not using contractions is not the first one that springs to my mind.

I seem to recall vague details of another thread from some months past (years?) in which some (several) stated that "real people" use contractions during everyday conversation. The poster(s) went on to say the absence of contractions in dialog gave the conversations a stilted or mechanical feel. I remeber thinking someone would leave that thread thinking "uses no contractions" = "mechanical dialog" was a "rule."

[Liam Jackson]

The success of the Da Vinci code had nothing to do with either the story as entertainment nor the writing style in and of itself (good or bad).

Canada James

All a matter of personal perspective, CJ. I thought the premise was entertaining. I had no problem seperating what I believe (religiously speaking) from the story told by Brown. Mark me down as being among the few (apparently) fans of DVC. No, I didn't particularly like Brown's style. However, I did enjoy the story.

I thought Angels and Demons was another good premise, but with some serious mechanical issues. It seemed to me he was writing a long treatment for a screenplay, rather than a novel.

[Mike Martyn]

The following is an excerpt of an interview of Ban Brown from Slate posted by Bryan Curtis on March 22. Sorry about teh messy formating.

"Brown has done a lot of thinking about what makes a Dan Brown thriller. He has found that it requires a few essential
elements: some kind of shadowy force, like a secret society or
government agency; a "big idea" that contains a moral "grey area";
and a treasure. The treasures in Brown's four novels have been a
meteorite, anti-matter, a gold ring, and the Holy Grail. The shadowy
forces have included the Priory of Sion, Opus Dei, and the National
Security Agency. The big idea, if I'm reading him correctly, goes
something like this: Is the Vatican good … or is it evil? Is the
National Security Agency for us … or is it against us? When all of
Brown's elements come together, doled out over cliffhanging
chapters, with characters that exist to "move the plot along," it is
like mixing the ingredients to make a cake. For example, Deception
Point, Brown's third novel, is "a thriller about a meteorite
discovered in the Arctic—a discovery that turns out to have profound
political ramifications for an impending presidential election."

Another author might have sneered when asked to lay bare his
methodology. Brown, on the other hand, appears eager to reveal every
one of the secrets of the pulp novelist: "All my novels are set in
24 hours"; "All of my novels use the concept of a simple hero pulled
out of his familiar world"; "I intend to make Robert Langdon my
primary character for years to come." My favorite secret is Brown's
notion of the "thriller as academic lecture." The trick is to make
your characters experts—in Brown's world, they are symbologists,
cryptographers, and so forth. Then you pair them with an expert of a
different discipline, making it convenient for the experts to essay
to one another at some length, in the process spilling all the
research you have done for your novel. (The Da Vinci Code contains
dozens of loosely connected academic lectures.) I was also curious
about how Brown named his protagonists. He has heroes ranging from
Vittoria Vetra to Susan Fletcher—names that, in the glorious
tradition of pulp writing, are either ostentatiously foreign or
ridiculously dull. "I named the protagonist Robert Langdon," Brown
writes of his Da Vinci and Angels & Demons hero. "I thought it was a
fantastic name. It sounds very 'New England' and I like last names
with two syllables …"
One can't help but feel good about Brown's portrayal here. He is his
own most fully formed character—the only one not rushing off to foil
some dark international conspiracy or another; the only one who is
allowed to emerge in a rush of small details. For instance, we learn
that Brown's writing day begins at 4 a.m. He writes seven days a
week. He keeps an hourglass on his desk and, on the hour, puts aside
his manuscript to perform push-ups, sit-ups, and stretches. He does
not like to write in the margins of books, but his wife doesn't feel
that way. He is invariably delighted by anagrams. (He was extremely
delighted to discover that Heide Lange, his literary agent, had a
last name could be rearranged to spell "angel.") For a while, Brown
sold books out of the back of his car. Some of his recent vacation
destinations have included Tahiti, Rome, and the Mayan pyramids at
Chichén Itzá. He is not a pack rat. He has thrown away most of the
documents from his younger days, especially from his failed
songwriting career, because they were "painful reminders of years
spent for naught." He wrote the outline for The Da Vinci Code in a
laundry room, himself planted in a lawn chair and his manuscript
balanced on an ironing board.
None of this has the slightest thing to do with plagiarism. It seems
that Brown, working under the restraints of the legal system, has
freed himself from an even more rigid system, that of the commercial
novel. When not absorbed with shadowy conspiracies or buried
treasures, his prose becomes confident and disarmingly confessional.
How else to explain the decision to reveal the fact that his father
hid young Dan's Christmas presents around the house, providing him
with treasure maps and codes to find them? Or that he once composed
a music album called Angels and Demons? Or that as a student he felt
profoundly moved by a professor's description of Michelangelo's
Pietà? This document is a pulp novelist's renaissance. For the first
time in his life, you might say Dan Brown is trying to create
literature."


And now you know! Go thou and do like wise that your days may be long in the land or your bank balance shall bloat or something.

[Danger Jane]

I thought DVC was okay, and Angels and Demons was better. I enjoyed them all right--A&D kept me reading more attentively, but whatever. The writing was mediocre, the characters were flat flat flat, but I can't begrudge Brown his success. I doubt he'll be terribly famous in a few centuries, but, hey...he's got what he needs now and that's what he writes for.