The Da Vinci Code
Jan. 2nd, 2005 07:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shipperxWell, I spent most of last night and today reading The Da Vinci Code.
Interesting book. Plotwise, it's relatively average. I spent a fair amount of my youth reading Robert Ludlum novels so "man solving convoluted secret one step ahead of the bad guys" isn't exactly a resoundingly new plot. Then again, it's always a serviceable one. I liked that the hero was rather nerdy. Anyone this deeply steeped in research would have to be somewhat nerdy (and reading the book, I think that Tom Hanks, who has been cast in the role, can be a believable fit for the character as written). Still, the plot in itself isn't really innovative. The twist of who is the true villain isn't that shocking. And the ultimate resolution of the plot is... well, to be honest, it's a bit anti-climactic (I mean, Sheesh. I'm an architect and it's fairly absurd to speculate that with the way modern architecture firms and construction companies work, that there's anything beneath recent construction that a whole bunch of people don't know about. If trying to keep something a secret, that would NOT be the way.) In the end, I'm not sure how much has been solved (then again whenever a story is about finding the Holy Grail you sort of know it will prove somewhat elusive in the end). What makes the book interesting isn't the plot or even the characters (characters who seem to function primarily to provide a dizzying amount of exposition) but the research.
Boy, Dan Brown must have done a hellacious amount of research. I had the "Special Illustrated Edition" of the book (40% off at BooksAMillion) which I think is the way to go. What's fascinating about the book is actually the artwork, locations, religious, and scientific history it discusses, so having pictures of these things is rather nice.
The theories introduced in the story aren't new to me. I've had my own interests in these areas and to that end have read non-fiction books such as Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which theorized that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' wife (and who also looked suspiciously on the fact that the Dead Sea Scrolls have often been kept away from scholars. However, I always found that writer's theories regarding the "resurrection" to be far less than convincing and enough to leave her research as interesting but unconvincing) and The History of God which traces the assimilation of pagan religions into Christianity and the history of the early Church. Therefore, I did have some grasp of the history and theories that Brown's characters were discussing, and it does provide fertile ground for a mystery novel.
I also had to smile at Dan Brown's discussion of Phi and The Golden Mean (not that he called it that in the book, but it was the way it was taught to me in Architecture school). I clearly remember during my Study Abroad tour while in college going to cathedral after cathedral and being told to sketch and examine their floor plans and their detailing (I still have sketchbooks full of it). And yes, they invariably broke down into following the order of The Golden Mean. (So color me less than shocked when the character in the novel points it out.) My classmates and I reached the point of rolling our eyes at our professors and saying "What's the point? It ALWAYS breaks down into that ratio." I do have to say though that Brown was far more interesting in discussing the Mean's importance than Professor Scott Finn was (Saw Finn a couple of months ago. He's still an asshole. He's just a gray-headed asshole now. Oh, and he finally came out of the closet. . .not that we hadn't known that he was gay when he was IN the closet, so what was the point?). Anyway, I have to say I found it amusing that Brown and his characters were so fascinated by something which had become a point of repetitive boredom to a class of architecture students travelling through England, France, and Italy. (I did begin to wonder whether Phi might in some way factor into the proportions in string theory. I may actually pull out my copy of The Elegant Universe because I seem to vaguely remember it having to do with the relationship of quarks...er... or something in strings and subatomic particles. I'm very much a dilettante in these subjects. Beats me what 99.5% of it means, but I find it fascinating. And looking at Amazon, Greene's new book The Fabric of the Cosmos looks like it might be a worthwhile read). Speaking of science and physics, I also found the inclusion of Sir Isaac Newton in this "return of the goddess" theory to be quite suspect because if I remember correctly, for all that Newton was a scientist, he was quite religious... or am I misremembering? Was it Galileo who was religious? [Hmmm... just googled. Turns out I was right that Newton was religious but it seems it was a somewhat unorthodox belief so I suppose he isn't an odd choice to figure prominently in Brown's story.]
Anyway, touching on all these subjects-- history, religion, art, architecture, math/science-- is what I found interesting about the book. Then again, I also think a lot of the fun of the novel for me was this tour of paintings and architecture as it reminded me of the study abroad tour. We went to museum after museum and cathedral after cathedral analyzing composition and symbollism so I had some affection for the characters' quest. Even if the quest for the Grail wasn't as satisfying as it could be, I found the book as a whole to be interesting in its areas of speculation and research. Honestly, the questions are more interesting than any answers anyone could come up with anway.
Interesting book. Plotwise, it's relatively average. I spent a fair amount of my youth reading Robert Ludlum novels so "man solving convoluted secret one step ahead of the bad guys" isn't exactly a resoundingly new plot. Then again, it's always a serviceable one. I liked that the hero was rather nerdy. Anyone this deeply steeped in research would have to be somewhat nerdy (and reading the book, I think that Tom Hanks, who has been cast in the role, can be a believable fit for the character as written). Still, the plot in itself isn't really innovative. The twist of who is the true villain isn't that shocking. And the ultimate resolution of the plot is... well, to be honest, it's a bit anti-climactic (I mean, Sheesh. I'm an architect and it's fairly absurd to speculate that with the way modern architecture firms and construction companies work, that there's anything beneath recent construction that a whole bunch of people don't know about. If trying to keep something a secret, that would NOT be the way.) In the end, I'm not sure how much has been solved (then again whenever a story is about finding the Holy Grail you sort of know it will prove somewhat elusive in the end). What makes the book interesting isn't the plot or even the characters (characters who seem to function primarily to provide a dizzying amount of exposition) but the research.
Boy, Dan Brown must have done a hellacious amount of research. I had the "Special Illustrated Edition" of the book (40% off at BooksAMillion) which I think is the way to go. What's fascinating about the book is actually the artwork, locations, religious, and scientific history it discusses, so having pictures of these things is rather nice.
The theories introduced in the story aren't new to me. I've had my own interests in these areas and to that end have read non-fiction books such as Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which theorized that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' wife (and who also looked suspiciously on the fact that the Dead Sea Scrolls have often been kept away from scholars. However, I always found that writer's theories regarding the "resurrection" to be far less than convincing and enough to leave her research as interesting but unconvincing) and The History of God which traces the assimilation of pagan religions into Christianity and the history of the early Church. Therefore, I did have some grasp of the history and theories that Brown's characters were discussing, and it does provide fertile ground for a mystery novel.
I also had to smile at Dan Brown's discussion of Phi and The Golden Mean (not that he called it that in the book, but it was the way it was taught to me in Architecture school). I clearly remember during my Study Abroad tour while in college going to cathedral after cathedral and being told to sketch and examine their floor plans and their detailing (I still have sketchbooks full of it). And yes, they invariably broke down into following the order of The Golden Mean. (So color me less than shocked when the character in the novel points it out.) My classmates and I reached the point of rolling our eyes at our professors and saying "What's the point? It ALWAYS breaks down into that ratio." I do have to say though that Brown was far more interesting in discussing the Mean's importance than Professor Scott Finn was (Saw Finn a couple of months ago. He's still an asshole. He's just a gray-headed asshole now. Oh, and he finally came out of the closet. . .not that we hadn't known that he was gay when he was IN the closet, so what was the point?). Anyway, I have to say I found it amusing that Brown and his characters were so fascinated by something which had become a point of repetitive boredom to a class of architecture students travelling through England, France, and Italy. (I did begin to wonder whether Phi might in some way factor into the proportions in string theory. I may actually pull out my copy of The Elegant Universe because I seem to vaguely remember it having to do with the relationship of quarks...er... or something in strings and subatomic particles. I'm very much a dilettante in these subjects. Beats me what 99.5% of it means, but I find it fascinating. And looking at Amazon, Greene's new book The Fabric of the Cosmos looks like it might be a worthwhile read). Speaking of science and physics, I also found the inclusion of Sir Isaac Newton in this "return of the goddess" theory to be quite suspect because if I remember correctly, for all that Newton was a scientist, he was quite religious... or am I misremembering? Was it Galileo who was religious? [Hmmm... just googled. Turns out I was right that Newton was religious but it seems it was a somewhat unorthodox belief so I suppose he isn't an odd choice to figure prominently in Brown's story.]
Anyway, touching on all these subjects-- history, religion, art, architecture, math/science-- is what I found interesting about the book. Then again, I also think a lot of the fun of the novel for me was this tour of paintings and architecture as it reminded me of the study abroad tour. We went to museum after museum and cathedral after cathedral analyzing composition and symbollism so I had some affection for the characters' quest. Even if the quest for the Grail wasn't as satisfying as it could be, I found the book as a whole to be interesting in its areas of speculation and research. Honestly, the questions are more interesting than any answers anyone could come up with anway.
