My take on The Da Vinci Code, eighteen months late.

Bear with me, because I read the book a year and a half ago, but I didn't want to re-read it just to write this.  (My disinterest in re-reading it isn't a condemnation of the book.  It's one of those books that's enjoyable once--like the movie Speed--more than that and I'd start to really pick it apart).

Last week, at the Brent Hartinger event--he was great--he asked us what books we'd been reading lately.  The Da Vinci Code, not surprisingly, came up.  He (Brent) said that he had loved it, and that he thought it was weird that all of a sudden, everyone he knew seemed to be constantly bad-mouthing it.  Backlash was discussed briefly.  (I'm obviously paraphrasing.  Unlike the girl sitting next to me who couldn't seem to stop using the term GLBT, I didn't take notes).

I said that I had read it, and although I hadn't been able to put it down, I didn't think that the writing was all that great.  His response was that the un-put-downable-ness of it pointed to good writing.  (Again, obviously paraphrasing--B. H. is able to articulate MUCH better than this).  I didn't agree, but I didn't want to get into it there--it would have been obnoxious in a setting like that.

Obviously, though, it's been on my mind for almost a week now.  Which probably says something very unflattering about my obsessiveness, but whatever. 

So here's my brief take on The Da Vinci Code: 

If a sentence (sometimes even a phrase) jumps out at me, I bookmark it or write down the page number, at the very least--while reading TDVC, I didn't do that once.  Dan Brown's actual writing just wasn't that interesting--a wordsmith he is not.  I never cared about any of the characters.  But the plot--the plot was a blast.  Events progress rapidly--it was one big chase scene.  It's an action movie of a book.  At least, I think it is--apparently Hollywood sees it as more than that.  Either that, or Tom Hanks wants to be able to write "Action Hero" on his resume.

Basically, I think that Dan Brown is the new Michael Crichton.  Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.  It just means that he's a formula writer that has found a formula that works.  But as far as I can tell (and I've only read TDVC and Angels & Demons, so really, what do I know?  Deception Point and Digital Fortress could be completely, amazingly different) his formula is all about plot, with simplistic writing and minimal characterization verging on caricature in some cases.

That's all.  Just needed to get that off of my chest.  Phew.  I feel better.