Da Vinci Code (Robert Langdon, #2)

ISBN: 2266144340
ISBN 13: 9782266144346
By: Dan Brown Daniel Roche

Check Price Now

Genres

Adult Adventure Favorites Historical Fiction Mystery Mystery Thriller Novels Series Suspense Thriller

About this book

Enfermé dans la Grande Galerie du Louvre, Jacques Saunière n'a plus que quelques instants à vivre.Blessé mortellement, le conservateur en chef va emporter son secret avec lui. Il lui reste cependant un mince espoir de ne pas briser cette chaîne ininterrompue depuis des siècles. Mais il lui faut agir vite. Une seule personne au monde peut prendre la relève, décrypter le code et être traquée à son tour...

Reader's Thoughts

Michael

I read the Baigent book a decade before I read this novel.Somehow, Brown managed to "dumbify" everything.Afterwards I read Eco to wash the taste out of my brain.

مصطفي سليمان

دان براونحيث كمية المعلومات اللي تخليك تفكر مليون مرةكمية المعلوماتالموثقة اللي محتاجه منك انك تتحرك مش تفضل عامل تسمع الكلام وخلاصروايات الالغاز بشكل حديثهو واحد من أهم الناس اللي كتبوا ف المجال داهنا المحقق روبرت لانغدونبيحقق ف جريمة ليها علاقة بجماعات دينيه سريةانا مش عاوز احكيلان الروايات دي مش بتتحكيالروايات دي بتتعاشسيبك ان الفيلماستخف كتير بالروايةوطلع نسخة باهتة جدا من الروايةبالذات ف الحلول المقدمةوتجميعه للنهايةمش عارف محستوش بنكله مع ان المخرج من المفضلين لياالمرة دي نظرتك لمتحف اللوفروصورة الموناليزاودافنشي هيتم تغيرها او علي الاقل هيخليك تفكركتير جداهو دا حقيقيبداية معرفتك بالماسونين والجماعات السرية المنتشرةالراهب القاتل ذو الاقتناع المريب بتعذيب النفسحفيدة مدير المتحف اللي جدها كان بيسيب ليها الغازشفرات طول الوقتلعب بالاعصابعادة امتاز بيها دان براونكل نهاية فصلهو صفعة ممتازةليكفاكر انك عرفت مين عمل ايه تراكعارف بقي اخوية سيون؟آهتراكلالغاية آخر الرواية كدايا جدعان انا دخلت علي الموقع بتاعه ايامهاكان عمله بشفرةO_oاول ما تدخل يقولكاسم لوحة الموناليزا ايه؟اللي هي الجيوكنداحلوفلطيب عدد الحروف اكتر من المربعات المتاحةوعيش يا برنستقريبا غير الموقع كتير دلوقتيبس اصلا من الروايات اللي لما تقرأها هتفكر علي الاقل

CJ

Caveat Academics!!!I won't belabor the obvious, as it's been done quite well by other reviewers, but I just couldn't stand not to add my own "hear hear!" to the fray. If you're going to create a character who is an expert, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE make sure you check your facts! Whoever edited this drivel ought to be sewn in a sack with a rabid raccoon and flung into Lake Michigan.And just as a matter of good taste - your expert should not be an expert in everything under the sun. That's one of the hallmarks of poor writing.Even if I were not a practicing pagan, I would find it stretching credibility that every single item the characters run across is a symbol of goddess worship. Five pointed star? Goddess worship. Chalice? Goddess worship. Porcelain toilet bowl? Goddess worship. Pilot ball point pen? Goddess worship. You get the general idea. Not only is every item part of the mythology of the divine feminine, but every number is also part of the divine feminine. Hello? Is a cigar NEVER just a cigar? And some of the claims of symbolism are just plain wrong, as the editor would have found out if he'd bothered to do some fact checking. Remember those military chevrons that, because of the way they were pointed, represented the female divine and those poor slobs of soldiers had been running around all these countless centuries with goddess symbols flaunted on their uniforms without knowing it? The only problem with that premise is that the chevrons facing in their current direction is relatively recent - according to my military historian husband, they faced the OPPOSITE direction for quite some time before being reversed (for what reason, I have no idea...unless the generals all got together and decided they didn't have quite enough goddess symbols on their uniforms and needed it fixed post haste).My theology professor ended up traveling around the country giving talks about this book to thousands of interested people. He loves the book if only because he's now giving pretty much the same information that he used to give to dozing freshman and sophomores to packed theaters of interested listeners. He tells a story about being somewhere in southern Ohio and making a joking remark about the celice being something that all Catholics wore and how now the secret was out, and there was a lady in the back row who elbowed her husband and said "See? I told you so!" The increased interest in history is about the only positive thing that's come out of this book. Honestly, you don't need to make anything up about the Catholic church to point out that it's been the source of some horrible things.I could go on about the poor research and editing in this book, but others have done a pretty thorough job of finding the problems with it.If you want a decent page turner, go for it. If you want something well researched and accurate, give this one a big ol' pass.

Robert

For the most part, it seems that people either passionately love this book or they passionately hate it. I happen to be one of the former. For my part, I don't see the book so much as an indictment of the Catholic Church in particular but of religious extremism and religion interfering in political process in general. The unwarranted political control granted to extreme religious organizations like the CBN is an issue that we will be forced to address one way or the other. To my eye, our political process has been poisoned by it and the danger of theocracy is quite real. Furthermore, Brown's indictment of the Church for removing or suppressing feminine divinity figures is justified and needs a much closer look. Women do not have enough of a role in religion, religious practice, heroic myths, and creation myths, nor are they portrayed as divinity figures enough. In short, our religious systems and institutions lack balance and have a bias to suppress issues, stories, and roles that empower women to live as equals to men. Finally, Brown wrote his story simplistically, in my view, to spread his tale to as broad an audience as possible. Though it is not as pristine a narrative as, say, Umberto Eco, the message it conveys is one that needs to be heard. More obscure books on the matter are not as accessible as Da Vinci Code and if someone were to write an accessible book of genius on this subject, I would give him/her all due praise. In the meantime, Dan Brown is telling a story that needs to be told. It is one that has been kept quiet and in the dark for far too long.

Tea Jovanović

Čitav svet je poludeo za ovom knjigom... I dalje mi nije jasno zašto... Mislim da je pisana za prosečnog neobrazovanog Amerikanca kome je autor sažvakavao istoriju i ti delovi su me bolno smorili... Uvek sam pre za čitanje knjige nego gledanje filma po istoimenoj knjizi... U ovom slučaju prednost dajem Tomu Henksu i filmu... Film kraće traje i preskočene su lekcije iz istorije :)

Mer

PLEASE do NOT recommend The Da Vinci Code to me because you think it's brilliant. Please do not try to explain to me that it is a "really interesting and eye-opening book." Just don't. Please. I've read Iain Pear, I heart Foucault's Pendulum, Dashiell Hammett is my hero, Alan Moore is My Absolute Favorite, I listen to Coil on a fairly regular basis, and cloak n' dagger secret society/Priory of Sion/Knights of Templar-tinged num nums make me a very happy girl... but if you truly believe that Brown's stupid airport thriller has ANY right whatsoever to be placed in the same category with Michael "Wooden Dildo Dialogue" Crichton, let alone Umberto Eco, kindly keep this opinion very far away from me, or the ensuing conversation we have will not be constructive or polite in any way.I loathe Dan Brown. I resent him for spoon-feeding the masses pseudo-intellectual "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" D-grade thriller shite under a pretense of real sophistication, and getting orally serviced by The New York Times for his effort.I'd heard that the novel was meticulously researched and contained some really interesting and controversial assessments of religious zealotry. Um, not really? Well, not by my Merovingian standards, anyway. :DLet's put it this way. If Dan Brown was teaching an Insurgent Christian Symbolism in Art and Literature 101 class at my local community college, I'd definitely have a different opinion about him. But NO. Dan Brown is not a professor of anything but pap. He is a barely competent thriller writer who wrote an AWFUL book that I could not bear to finish because I felt my IQ plummeting a little further with every "Let's Go to Paris! Guidebook" description and blowhard authorial essay. Oh, don't even get me started about those cute soliloquies the main characters are so fond of delivering, ever so calmly, often while cops n' bovvers are chasing them.The characters are weakly drawn. The dialogue is excruciating. The research is shoddy and self-serving at best. The plot, no matter how open-minded you are, is beyond ludicrous. It's laughable enough to be incorporated into the next Indiana Jones movie. That'd be sweet, dude.What really irks me are Dan Brown's sanctimonious interviews, wherein he shows off all of his priceless antiques while expressing his abiding convictions that the American public needs a "deeper appreciation" of art and history and culture. What a shallow, self-aggrandizing hypocrite. I'm all for fictional subversion of the dominant Catholic paradigm, but only if the subverter knows what the hell they're talking about. Brown DOESN'T. He's all "la la la, connect the dots" but the picture he comes up with is awkward and unconvincing.The DaVinci Choad is a dead easy, nay, downright lazy read, and yet droves of people are patting themselves on the back for having read and *gasp* actually understood it. Like this is some spectacular achievement? WHY? What, because the slipcover describes it as "erudite"? Are you fucking kidding me?Don't believe the hype, kids. You are profoundly more intelligent than this holiday page-turner gives you credit for.If you really, honestly, just plain liked the book, that's cool I guess. Maybe you also prefer Anne Geddes to Alfred Stieglitz, Kenny G to Sidney Bechet, John Tesh to Igor Stravinsky. Your prerogative. Just.... please don't try to tell me that this is "fascinating" or "meaningful literature". Frickin' read The Club Dumas or something. Then we'll talk, and I won't want to shoot myself in the face.Alright, glad I purged that poison from my system. Carry on.

Joey

This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.This book is non-stop action.

Seth Hahne

For cheap supermarket fiction, this sure was cheap supermarket fiction. It would have helped if this was the first book I had ever read. Unfortunately, having read Curious George as a child (a towering work of literary genius by comparison), The DaVinci Code suffered perhaps unjustly.

Tortla

I accidentally deleted this from my books. So that sucks. I don't remember when I read it anymore. It was horrible.EDIT:...But not quite as horrible as the idiotic discussion which this review spawned. I hate this book. That is my opinion. Many people share that opinion. I do not claim to be capable of writing a better book (although I suspect I already have written better pieces of literature, for some school assignment or something). You can like this book if you want. But if you do, please do not embarrass yourself by stating such a thing publicly. Especially on this review's comments. Because I'm deleting them all.PSThe whole "if you can't do better, you have no right to criticize" thing is not a valid argument. So please stop making it. Please.

rachel

I was genuinely confused by the stupidity of the DaVinci code. The two protagonists were touted as supergeniuses, yet kept making the most amazing dumbfuck moves. Sometimes this could be written off as making the book accessible to its intended public (e.g., to insure that his readers understand the concept of a keystone, Brown has one of his supergenius characters exclaim, "but wait, vaulted ceilings don't *have* keys!" as an intro to a suitable-for-third-graders explanation). Other times, it was just ridiculous and disorienting. I spent significant mental energy trying to rationalize why the supergenius characters were stealing an armored van from the swiss bank and driving it straight to their hideout when *obviously* any such van would be fitted with a tracking device and thus was a dangerous thing to leave parked right outside your "safehouse". In fact, I had half convinced myself that there must be some supersecret reason that I just didn't know about as to why the swiss bank wouldn't want its vans to be traceable (the system could be hacked into, necessitates getting too many outside parties involved, etc). But then it turned out that I had been right all along - the van *was* being tracked. The Supergeniuses just hadn't considered that possibility. Duh.Not every book has to be brilliant. Sometimes a nice, fun, escapist mystery novel really hits the spot. But dude, this kind of inconsistency and bad writing (and bad imagination!) just cannot be tolerated. As a reasonably smart person, I was offended at the limitations Dan Brown seems to have projected onto human intelligence - both with respect to his characters and his audience.

Jen3n

I found this book condescending, unexciting, and ill thought-out. I wanted it to be better. I had been TOLD it was fun. I was lied to. This is an awful book.

Jonathan Cullen

Hating the Da Vinci Code is a right of passage for any self-proclaimed intellectual. When the airport page-turner first came out, it was a sensation and a favourite water cooler discussion. Shortly thereafter, Dan Brown was vilified by the minority of his readers who actually had previous experience finishing a novel(s). The more the general public liked Dan Brown and his tripe, the more those of notable cultural and artistic expertise pooped on his face. With each Entertainment Tonight spotlight on the "smash hit", the closer the literarians came to castrating Brown to halt the general decline of homo sapien intelligence. To express your love of the "fast-paced, complex" plot also marked you for gelding.Here is but a sampling of my favourite cherrypicked Goodreads comments on the book and/or Dan Brown:- "bag of piss"- "laughable enough to be incorporated into the next Indiana Jones movie"- "$9 dollar wine"- "I've read dinner menus that were more demanding on the reader"- "inexcusable waste of time"- "total crap"- "ridiculously formulaic"- "self-aggrandizing oh-so-clever stuffed pompous troll"- "Whoever edited this drivel ought to be sewn in a sack with a rabid raccoon and flung into Lake Michigan"- "He is the Brittney Spears of authors."- "Worst. Book. Ever."- "Having read Curious George as a child (a towering work of literary genius by comparison), The DaVinci Code suffered perhaps unjustly."- "Facts are clumsily shoe-horned in or splattered about the page like pigeon-poop" Wow. Ok. I can't necessarily disagree with all of those comments, but you may notice my three star rating. I am a self-proclaimed (at least in an whisper) intellectual. Therein lies a conundrum. Am I a slack-jawed troglodyte? Or rather have I discovered something about Dan Brown's ignominious best-seller that all other intellectuals overlooked, thereby making me an Über-Intellectual with the potential to become Chief Über-Intellectual within my lifetime by giving five stars to Miley Cyrus' book "Miles to Go" after discovering its hidden meaning?No, in my humble opinion, I am neither.What I am is a guy who appreciates quality exposition, clever plots, vulnerable characters and economical prose. Yet I also somehow enjoyed the movie Glitter, with Mariah Carey, which by my definition was the worst movie I've ever seen. I enjoyed it because I had a good day, watched two movies with my future wife and laughed at the terrible dialogue. I had a positive emotional reaction to it, for reasons beyond the dreadful quality of what was on the screen. When I read The Da Vinci Code, I ignored the flashing warning light emanating from the self-proclaimed intellectual portion of my brain and embraced the troglodyte portion. I ate it like you eat an entire box of Fig Newtons: you don't think about it baby! Just do it! Regret it later. I actually did read this book while on a beach, along with the twelve other people I saw doing the same thing. I learned nothing about life and certainly and nothing about writing from this book. Well, I did learn how not to write. Thanks Dan! One of my favourite authors, Dan Simmons, uses the other Dan as his whipping boy in his Writing Well installments on his website. I enjoy that also.So I grant thee three stars Da Vinci Code. I ingest thee like a large movie popcorn with butter and with naught a look back...

Keely

A thriller devoid of pacing or exciting language. A mystery devoid of clues, foreshadowing, or facts. A tell-all of half-truths based upon a forged document written by a schizophrenic conman. A character-driven modern novel devoid of character. The second draft of Angels and Demons. Page-turning action thanks to the literary equivalent of pulling out at the moment of orgasm. A spiritual awakening built on new-age conspiracy theory. This book is many things, and none of them good, new, or interesting. However, it is an excellent litmus test for idealistic delusion.Upon the first reading, I must admit I found it a bit interesting, but then I turned the final page, and there was no bibliography. No explanation of how the author became familiar with all the concepts he claimed to 'faithfully portray'. He wrote this book and pretended it was a history book, and then refused to support it in any way. And any history you can't check up on is a bad one. He's no better than James Frey. In fact, he may be worse, since I know people who base their religious beliefs on this book, whereas Frey's only crime was wishing he was Scarface. And really, what macho thirtysomething male doesn't?Brown had good reasons for hiding his sources: they were forged by con-man Pierre Plantard and snuck into the Bibliotheque National in Paris back in the seventies. And it's not like Plantard got away with it, either--the whole 'Priory of Sion' thing was debunked thirty years before this book was even written.The artistic 'iconography' that figures heavily into the mystery is also completely made-up, and was declared ludicrous by an art history professor of my acquaintance. There are a lot of well-known symbols and allusions in classic art, but none of them resemble Brown's claims. The whole hinge on which the plot turns--the notion that an inverted triangle is automatically symbolic of women--makes about as much sense as declaring that the use of the swastika by 3rd century, BC Buddhists was proof that they were fascists.The rest of Brown's book is filled with the sort of cliched religious conspiracies you get from your first year as a theology student. Not only that, but these conspiracies were already explored by better writers in 'Foucault's Pendulum' and the 'Illuminatus! Trilogy'.Well, I've already done more legitimate historical research on this review than Brown did in his whole book, so I guess I'll call it a day.

Odai Alsaeed

الرواية هي ابرز واجمل ما قرات في حياتي مع تحفظي على الافكار التي يريد الكاتب بثها من خلال روايته ولكن الحقيقة ان هذا الرقم الخيالي من المبيعات للرواية يجعلني اقف له وقفة تبجيل واحترام .رواية مرتبة الاحداث ورائعة وانصح الجميع بقرآتها

mary

it's an action movie! it's a book! it's an action movie!it surprises me that the movie version was so dull, having such a simple adapted screenplay to write. this book reads like a blockbuster looks. and i will admit that i totally loved it while i was reading and forgot it promptly after, but i did the same when i watched vin diesel in XXX. it's a very fun read. it's horrendously written, the characters are rather shallow, there are enough chase scenes and things popping out of dark corners to satisfy anyone's juvenile appetite for suspense. and if you're catholic or knowledgeable at all about religion, it does provide some fodder for thought in between all the drama. but after you think, you realize that none of this information, true or not, is really that shocking and has little effect on the catholic faith. people would do well to learn about the nature and history of their belief system a little more. i still can't figure out how this book has caused so much controversy. let me rephrase that. i still can't figure out how people can be so oblivious and closeminded as to be scandalized by drivelly fiction. i was on an airplane a while ago and i sat next to a man reading "cracking the davinci code" or one of those other pissed off books that came out soon after. i asked him what he thought of the book. he said, 'oh! i've never read the da vinci code! it goes against the catholic church! why would i read such blasphemy? i just want to be armed with information when i speak to some simple-minded person who believes that heretic dan brown!" i wish i could make that kind of stuff up. i was silent, smiled and nodded, and quickly opened up Kavalier and Clay. i simply had no idea how to respond to someone who was taking notes on a book to collect information on a novel that he had never read so he could disprove the opinions of those who thought it was true. what?

Share your thoughts

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *