I just finished it tonight, and I absolutely loved it. I found it fascinating how Dan Brown was able to take all of the little pieces of history and relate them to a fictional story.

Easily the best book I've read in quite a while.

IMO it's a bad book.

It has all the characterization of a comic book and the plot - or the extended riddle-me-this narrative just held no interest for me. I can tell you that sus also teaches art history and she also thinks the book is a hack job, a badly written snore, and a typical popular-fiction easy-reader.

I suppose if I had to elaborate on why I think it's so bad (and I suppose I'll have to, since I have a student doing an Independent Study Project on it) is that when symbology is presented as a series of one-to-one relationships, as it is in many popular books on dream symbolism, for example, all of the living and resonant qualities of symbols is rendered quite dead and lifeless.

It's the "easy answers to complex questions" syndrome that concerns me. To bring a one-to-one symbological perspective to works of art - da Vinci's for example, really does a disservice to the artist, art history, and more broadly, the open-ended significance, ambiguity, and potential meanings available in works of great art.

IMO, the only way to defend this book is to see it as a light time- passer, good for reading at the beach or on a plane trip, but nothing serious enough to merit anything resembling meaningful discussion.

Perhaps the notion that discussing the themes as have been listed above does merit some consideration - as they are significant topics. But the mere fact that they are mentioned by this author - and that he hangs his narrative on them - does not credit him with doing anything more than raising the issues. He could have done that with a simple list of interesting points that attend to the subject. The fictional treatment here is not a work of literature but a work of rank popular writing.

Tom Hanks has been cast as Robert Langdon

Hmmm...I like Tom Hanks, but he's definately not who I'd cast as Robert Langdon.

ART... But it is a work of popular fiction! It incorporates art-history, physics, religious symbology, etc, into a plot meant to carry a story along that ultimately required glossing over certain issues. Coming from someone who studied physics in college, my main critique of his other book "Angels and Demons" was the wishy-washy job he brought up the subject of anti-matter and the err.. ending flight... (those who have read it probably know what I mean). I can see how you, as someone I take to have a great interest in art and its symbology, would be put off by a book that places the meanings of good art work into strictly defined pigeon holes. But, coming from my perspective, I learned a lot about the ways art can be interpreted as well as a lot of historical context in when the art was made. I imagine others view the physics in the book the same way; it is not any where near a substitute for a text book on the matter, but at least it generates interest and possibly presents new information to the reader. I certainly can't say that about much of the popular fiction I read. I would commend Brown for taking some rather obtuse and difficult subjects such as physics and art-symbology to the popular reader.

I would also point out that Langdon through out the book made mention of the fact that there were many ways to interpret the art work, and that it was only the necessity of the plot that Da Vinci's works were boiled down to conveying simplistic "go there next" types of messages.

Oh... And after typing all that above, I opened up my "my yahoo" page and saw this as a top emailed news story, a link to an article mentioning Tom Hanks possibly cast as Langdon. (Just to confirm what FailedEagle said above).

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp.../film_hanks_dc

Good book, i just hope that digital fortess will equal up to it. Thought i should at least read one more book of his in the hope that the next book will be better.

Everyone says it is fiction but it does bring out some strong points across about religion and other symbolism. My book of the year so far. I'll let you know how digital fortess goes. Lets hope Robert Langdon cracks this code to, you could say he's the new Indiana Jones (not that there could ever be a replacement).

I heard recently that Tom Hanks had signed on to play Robert Langdon

teflonian, I do understand that. When people ask me if they should read it, I do say yes. I just have these issues with it and I think they need to be stated. And personally, I didn't enjoy the read.

Well there is no accounting for personal taste. :) I think people have blown this book out of proportion, but the flip side is not giving it enough credit for what it does do well.

In any case, a fun book in my opinion, and I have enjoyed all three books by Brown that I have read including Deception Point, Angels and Demons, and The Da Vinci Code. I look forward to what comes next from Brown, but I am sure his style will grow tiresome as Crichton's did for me long ago.

I liked the book, but I thought all the good stuff would have fit nicely into about 100 pages. There seemed to be a lot of stretch and filler. There were a few too many lines like "She couldn't image what was going to happen next." Also I can't picture a grown woman being quite so tramatized by the incident with her grandfather, and that it took her 150 pages to tell us what it was.

I am not sure that I'd go with Tom Hanks for Langdon--Russel Crowe could have worked...but I'll never complain about Kate Beckinsale if that happens!!!

Digital Fortress wasn't near as good, though it was better than theone set on the iceberg was... now that was eh. I liked DaVinci Code, it was -- what it was, an entertaining read. It moved fast, and was interesting... Was the perfect plane book. I did like Angels and Demons a lot better though.

I liked the book it was a fun read, but his writing style is .. well crumby :/ I hated the cliff-hanger chapter end, it got lame after chapter 2
IMO.

Well said.

For me a true test of a book's quality is if it can withstand multiple readings. Although I enjoyed parts Da Vinici Code and thought parts were clever, the book just had too many scenes that were unintentionally funny, but mostly just silly. And on a second look these scenes become unbearable. Bad enough to drag the story down, and, yet, not bad enough to get some kind of "Plan Nine From Outer Space" humor out of them.

This book is simply poorly written. Cliche after cliche pile up leaving of interest only the historical "facts" which he lays down with a heavy hand (as I've seen someone mention, you think Langdon's going to whip a chalkboard out of his jacket whenever he starts on history, and try taking a shot everytime one of the characters mentions the "sacred feminine" you'll be wrecked by the end).

I've heard people mention that they finished the book quickly. That's not a good thing. These types of books are meant for mass consumption. A quick read designed to get you onto the next book as quickly as possible. Sure, it may foster interest in some historical tidbits. But googling The Last Supper and arguing with your friend wether or not the figure next to Jesus looks like a woman or going all the way to the Louvre just to see the Da Vinci Code points of interest both seem a tad superficial. But they'll hold people over until the next Dan Brown novel.

Now, I don't think there's no place in this world for page turners. In fact, they'll probably continue to dominate the bestseller lists. But when someone mentions the Da Vinci Code and three other people in the room pipe up and say "Oh I love Dan Brown, I've read all his books, I love the historical parts" it's a little disheartening.

And for those who've mentioned that they're waiting for paperback, don't want to spend too much money. Don't you want value for your dollar, more bang for your buck? Why not pick up Foucault's Pendulum or In the Name of the Rose? Or how about some classics: Moby Dick? The Sound and the Fury? Sure, these books will take a lot longer than a few days to read (unless you have a lot of time on your hands, and even then), but the deeper meanings you get from these works are far more satisfying.

It's a good book but most of it is untrue. Many people think that Dan Brown is a religious expert but really he is just a good writer. The facts that he presents seem realistic even though he made them up.

I'm not going to waste time repeating things when art said what I think better than I probably would have. So, I agree with art completely.

And dbc's point is also an important one I believe. To me, some of the popular reaction to The DaVinci Code is the equivalent to if people started believing there was a map on the back of the Declaration of Independence after seeing National Treasure.