terlwyth
Since: Oct, 2010
12/06/2011 00:00:00
Diasgreed, The Inheritance Cycle is much better written
Secondly all the characters are cardboard cut,the prose is actually worse than Paolini's,and really all it has going for it is its Alternate History
But that's taken too seriously and as such all is lost. The Inheritance Cycle may be generic,but the generic stuff is proven and its really kind of hard to go wrong when the first book is a Star Wars expy.
Next he seems to go into Author Filibuster mode far too many times.
I'm sorry but I prefer a Jerk Ass Gary Stu character I can snark about and his clumsy romance,over a Gary Stu who doesn't have any personality and whose romance feels kind of robotic
Luminous beings are we, not this crude matterLeave a Comment:
Fascinating alternate history taken too seriously
The Da Vinci Code is not without its hatedom, and I'll be the first to agree that the hatedom is not undeserved. But at the same time, its not the worst book that was ever written (I shall refrain from giving examples).
Yes, there are plenty of historical inaccuracies in the book, but the alternate history that Dan Brown paints is rather fascinating, and very realistic. The main problem with the book is that its taken too seriously. The Da Vinci Code is ultimately just a piece of fiction, and people, including Dan Brown, forget the books ultimate purpose; to provide entertainment.
The books main flaw is ironically also the greatest strength of the book. Just as the historical inaccuracies have been the cause for much of the book's hatedom, the vivid alternate history is rich and colorful, and very well written. It makes the reader feel like they have lived in a world where Jesus was Mary's child, and where The Masons, Priory of Sion and Knights Templar are all keeping a big secret from the world. This vivid history is pretty much the only thing the story has going for it, though. Without it, it would be a bland thriller that uses the conventional murder mystery. Watchmen also achieves the same effect with its Alternate History, except Alan Moore wasn't trying to make readers believe that a big blue naked guy had walked the earth or think that Vietnam is part of the United States.
Kudos to the author for having realistic and sympathetic villains that aren't in it for the evulz. Most of the villains are morally gray people with sympathetic traits and motivations, which works in the stories favor when creating a vivid, realistic fictional history. And while the author appears to have some beef with Christianity (which can be rather grating at times, and this is coming from an Atheist) he doesn't see Christians as evil, but merely misguided.
I'm willing to bet that this book would receive less criticism if Dan Brown didn't screw up and announce to the world that his alternate history is accurate. And I think Dan Brown had shot himself in the foot by telling people that his fictional history is real. As a consequence, you have the fan dumb who take the book too seriously.