Everything that I said for Angels & Demons
applies to The Da Vinci Code
as well. I will, however, admit that Dan Brown's writing has noticeably improved between the two books. For that reason alone, if you somehow have to read one
of the two, I'd probably recommend this one. But you're better off not reading either of them.
It would not be nearly half as bad if Dan Brown just did one thing: throw out that stupid "fact" preface. One reviewer
explains it far better than I can: this is worse
than a fluffy beach read, because beach reads don't insist that their conspiracy theory fiction is fact. The Priory of Sion was founded in 1956, not 1099. The history of Christianity, history of the Bible, and etymology of the Holy Grail are far more complicated than Dan Brown makes it seem, and at some points, he blatantly misrepresents the history of the Church. Once again, it's not the nature of these fabrications: fiction is good. But fiction claimed to be fact does no favours.
I think I'm done with Grail myths and Templar fiction. Time for some fresh conspiracy theories.My Reviews of the Robert Langdon series:← Angels & Demons
| The Lost Symbol →