A Brown beating

I nearly feel sorry for poor old Dan Brown. Or should that be extremely rich old Dan Brown?!

Got a couple of books from the library last week about the "Da Vinci Code" and "Angels and Demons". I thought the 2 books would tear him to shreds. However, the first book, "The Real History Behind the Da Vinci Code" hardly mentions Dan, funnily enough. It is a very good synopsis of the actual history behind the book, covering things like the bible, Jesus, Christianity, Knights Templar, Opus Dei etc. The author (who is a scholar) has a somewhat amusing style and I'd recommend it to anyone who wants an unbiased history of what you think you believe in!!!

But, boy oh boy, does Dan get it with both barrels in the other book "Secrets of Angels and Demons". That's more like what I expected; experts in each field rubbishing the book. This is where I feel somewhat sorry for Dan (who probably doesn't care, having laughed all the way to the bank!). Dan was an English teacher in a small New England college, not a nuclear physicist, art historian, architect or theologian. He's also a novelist, not a gospel writer (I know, I know, but don't get me started there!), so I don't know why they expect him to have every little thing factually correct or scientifically accurate. I think that the fact that he boldly asserted at the start of most of his books that certain things were facts, which in fact were not, is what caused so much ire. The problem is, I suppose, that people believe it's all true (predominately Yanks, I would imagine!).

I don't think any fiction would stand up to the undue scrutiny these badly written books got. In my opinion, it's fair to take pot shots at him for his poor English, but after that, it's only a bit of fluff! He just found the magic blend of conspiracy theory, religion, puzzles, art and murder and good luck to him! (Why didn't I think of that?!)