Dan Brown Sucks

[Tez3]

Books are like food to me, I need them to live lol. There's different types of books, ones you read to pass a bit of time, ones you get so deeply into they change your life, ones you read to make you laugh, ones to enjoy a good adventure story. I tend not to pan any writer on the basis I can't write a book,if it has words in I will read it. The withdrawel syomtoms of not reading are unbearable lol so anything will do. I will also have two or three books on the go at the same time. I can have Elizabeth Gaskell, CP Snow, one of my son's Black Library series and a thriller going on. Dan Brown is in the category of books I read on nighshift when I'm on admin and nothings doing, light entertainment.
Harry Potter is written for children although adults seem to be fond of him lol.
I read Austen, Huxley, Trollope, Joyce, Eliot, Chaucer, Fielding, Primo Levi, Han Suyin, Du Maurier,Voltaire, Maupassant,Boccaccio,Turgenev plus many many more all for pleasure, I just love books, I'm not a book snob some of my favourite books are written for girls in the 1920's the Abbey Girl series and the Chalet School series.
Brown's books get read and put away, it's okay but not a read, kee and re- read thing. They are for passing the hour or so they take to read them then pass them on thing.

 

[Steve]

Ok - so in apparently everyone's opinion, who IS a good author? Throughout this thread, you've named quite a few authors whose work I enjoy that apparently suck. Now, they are by no means Shakespeare (I apologize if he sucks, I enjoy his work too), but I don't go into a Dan Brown book expecting a literary classic and I'm sure that when he wrote them, he didn't intend to write a literary classic. I assume that he meant to make some money - which he did. REALLY well. And apparently he is doing ok, because his books do tend to sell pretty well. Although most people are pretty dumb I guess.

McDonalds sells a lot of hamburgers, but that doesn't mean they're all that tasty.

I understand the idea of critiquing people's work, I read reviews of just about anything that I watch or read....but I'm really curious what everyone DOES consider good work?? Do I have to pick up a copy of Moby Dick or Crime and Punishment to be reading a good author? Lately, my serious reading involved non fiction works on Leadership and Management....but just like my fun reading, I'm interested in content, enjoyment, and what I get out of it. General Patton probably wasn't the greatest author in terms of language and literary devices, but he certainly had a lot of great things to say.

I highly recommend Shackleton's Way. It's the true story of a stranded Antarctic expedition. Great book on leadership. Another good one is the Oz Principle... talks a lot about personal accountability.

But the real point you're making here is this:

I agree with Grendel here....If you can't get through it because of the writing, fine...don't read it. I don't understand that....but it is your call. Because I like all of these mediocre authors doesn't make me a moron.

I think this is more about you feeling personally insulted than any critique of the authors. Personally, I think Anne Rice, Dan Brown and whoever the lady was who wrote Twilight stink. If you like them, fine. You have nothing to be ashamed of. I never said you're a moron, and certainly have no reason to believe so.

So seriously, I'm genuinely curious - who IS a good author?

I was going to say Gaiman, as well. I like John Irving. Lian Hearn is pretty good. I read his Tales of Otori series and enjoyed them.

Stephen Lawhead is great, too. I just got the third in his new Robin Hood series for christmas. I'm a sucker for anything King Arthur or Robin Hood. I'll even read the bad ones. But Hood and Scarlett were excellent, and I'm looking forward to reading Tuck.

James Lee Burke is good, too, if you're interested in fiction. His Dave Robichaeux mysteries are terrific, and I'd also recommend the Lost Get-Back Boogie.

Another I think is great is The Road by Cormac McCarthy.

These are all off the top of my head, but if you're really looking for some suggestions, I'd be happy to give it more thought. And once again, these are my opinions. If you don't agree, i'm totally cool with that.

I have a lot of problems with the twilight books, including the writing style, some of the grammatical errors, and some huge holes in the plot....not to mention the personalities or lack thereof of the characters. But that is when I stop to think about it. But when I shut my brain off and just read to enjoy, they aren't bad. I could do with less whiny inner monologue, but I think that they are popular because people like the story.

I play video games to shut my brain off. Maybe it's a personality flaw, but there's a point where I am so distracted by bad execution that I can't concentrate on the story anymore. This goes for movies and for books. If the writing or the directing/acting/editing is so bad that it distracts from the story, the story is lost. They say in culinary school, "Presentation is everything." While I wouldn't go that far, it's definitely important.

Particularly because it is a love story that I imagine teenage girls like a lot and maybe identify with - except the whole werewolf and vampire thing.[/quote]

Buzzy, you are taking it way too seriously, I posted the thread to poke fun at Brown's atrocious writing, not to condemn anyone who enjoys his work.

QFT!

Good writers..well I guess in the thriller genre I enjoyed Len Deighton when I was younger, as for fantasy I think Piers Anthony is a much better writer than Rowling , so is LeGuin.

A recent favourite is Neil Gaiman who I think is vastly more talented than Rowling.

A friend of mine who is more literate (and also despises Dan Brown) recommends Thomas Pynchon, I intend to read Gravity's Rainbow in the next while.

Not heard of Pynchon. I'll look him up.

 

[Steve]

Differentiate yes, be my guest. What I won't do is judge your daughter due to the fact that she likes the Twighlight series or anyone because they patonise McDonalds. I had a thing for A. Huxley, Ray Bradbury and George Orwell when I was young.

To differeniate is one thing to blanket judge and set yourself on high is quite another. It is the latter that I find bothersome and tiresome. I find the need to knock others down to raise one's self up odious and common.
lm

I'm not sure what you're referring to, Grendel. Differentiate what? Why would you judge my daughter or someone for eating at McDonalds?

 

[teekin]

I was refrencing a post of Omar's. But that's long dead and Pointless. (when will I learn) Good authors are a much better topic.
Steinbeck is my all time Fav, Camus (damn him) changed my life, Dickens is still fantastic, King of course, Huxley, Kant, Asimov, Ray Bradbury, Rory Miller. There are lots.
Most of what I read is Non fiction. University texts, then debate them with profs and others. Thats the real fun, the exchange of ideas the reading brings. The double-think it can cause.
lori

 

[Tez3]

I think our MacDonalds must be different from yours lol, our burgers are quite tasty here! It's as they say ( and its been tested) 100% meat and they taste like it!

I can't stand book snobs, them and wine snobs. I love trashy novels as well as good writing and I read most of what are considered good writers. I will as happily read the Star Wars books as I will a Russian 'great'. Reading fiction and sometimes non fiction is for enjoyment so enjoy. No one should ever have to defend what they read.

 

[Omar B]

I was refrencing a post of Omar's. But that's long dead and Pointless. (when will I learn) Good authors are a much better topic.
Steinbeck is my all time Fav, Camus (damn him) changed my life, Dickens is still fantastic, King of course, Huxley, Kant, Asimov, Ray Bradbury, Rory Miller. There are lots.
Most of what I read is Non fiction. University texts, then debate them with profs and others. Thats the real fun, the exchange of ideas the reading brings. The double-think it can cause.
lori

Now I'm curious, what referrence of mine were you using because I read the post and it didnt spark a memory for me.

Anyways, onto authors. I liked Steinbeck a lot in high school, my first experience with him was "The Pearl," powerful stuff. Of the other authors you mention a bunch of good ones and a couple I'm not that into, King, Kant and I don't even know Rory Miller so I'll have to fix that.

Unfortunately perusing a degree in English Lit a lot of books that people consider classic old works have kinda lost their sheen to me because of quite frankly over-analysis. So I kinda fall into this sci-fi, fantasy, spy novel, techno-thriller, action type of rut (if you can really call it that, because I like it and a rut denotes a dislike).

Oh, and back on topic. Dan Brown sucks. Ludlum!

 

[Ramirez]

Oh, and back on topic. Dan Brown sucks. Ludlum!

In the words of Stephen Fry "**** gravy"


http://www.thestar.com/entertainmen...nt-works-of-the-decade-no-2-the-da-vinci-code

 

[Steve]

I think our MacDonalds must be different from yours lol, our burgers are quite tasty here! It's as they say ( and its been tested) 100% meat and they taste like it!

haha. I think the McD's are the same. You're just British. I mean... what do you guys eat that's not boiled or fried? To you, a quarter pounder must be like heaven!

I can't stand book snobs, them and wine snobs. I love trashy novels as well as good writing and I read most of what are considered good writers. I will as happily read the Star Wars books as I will a Russian 'great'. Reading fiction and sometimes non fiction is for enjoyment so enjoy. No one should ever have to defend what they read.

The problem isn't reading and enjoying a trashy novel. That is, if you know that it's trashy and don't try to pretend it's otherwise.

 

[Indagator]

I gotta admit, McDonald's angus burgers are pretty good, although personally I reckon they shoulda gone with highland beef for their prestige line...

As for Dan Brown, don't even get me started. Although if the concepts of his books made you wanna read but then you were let down by lousy writing and overt refutations, as mentioned in the other thread check out Windswept House - it's brilliantly written, and it's based on true events. There's even a list floating around of the real names of the characters in the book (Malachi Martin changed everybodys names, of course).

TBH, there seem to be precious few decent authors out there these days. I've yet to see Chaucer's rival in 700 years(!) s
As for suspense &c. Brown just ain't got it...

 

[Indagator]

I can't stand book snobs, them and wine snobs.

I'm a whiskey snob, can you stand that? Lol.

Noticed some discussion on Steven King going on, used to be a massive fan of his but never read the Dark Tower series. Later on found out that DT provides a depth and interpretive context to the majority of his other works... Oh, well.

 

[Tez3]

I'm a whiskey snob, can you stand that? Lol.

Noticed some discussion on Steven King going on, used to be a massive fan of his but never read the Dark Tower series. Later on found out that DT provides a depth and interpretive context to the majority of his other works... Oh, well.

That's the Irish stuff so if the Irish don't beat you up carry on! It's the wine snob type who sips a bit, makes rude noises then proclaims that it tastes like roses on a summers day mixed with mint from an old ladies garden stuff I can't stand. They then spit it out so they can bore you about it! What's wrong with pouring a glass and enjoying it quietly!

 

[Bruno@MT]

I am a whisky and cognac snob. It's the only luxury item that my wife and I spend money on. I do agree with Irene though. Have a drink and enjoy it. Don't spit it out and for christ sakes don't start a monologue about how you were able to taste the hint of vanilla with the salty sea air and the fragrance of lavender that grows nearby the distillery...

 

[Sukerkin]

There's snobbery and then there's good taste - the two can sometimes co-habit in the same body but not as often as might be anticipated :lol:.

I joke about being a wine-snob but I'm not prone to outbursts of purple prose about a particular bottle. Some stuff is windoleen and some stuff is very nice, with some stuff in-between .

I might on occasion try to explain to someone why a particular wine is better than another one but it all has to be done with the proviso that everyones sensation of taste is different.

In the end, most of the time, wine ... gooood .

 

[punisher73]

To be honestl I am not too keen on Rowling either, I read the first Potter book and about 1/2 the second, her characterization is lacking, Potter a nominal good guy, Voldemoort a nominal bad guy and absolutely no explanation on what motivates him....dull.

I don't recall an explanation on how magic works in the Potter universe or how they co-exist with Muggles, that might have been interesting to explore.

The plotting is a bit odd too, I remember in the first one, Harry and his compatriots use an invisibility cloak for some surreptitious adventure and then get caught because they forgot the invisibility cloak on top of roof of the school.....kind of an important thing to forget.

Just thought that I would point out that Harry Potter was written for KIDS. How many of them really want all of that plot analysis/motivation? It just happened that adults liked the books too.

Same with the "Twilight" series. They were written for young teenage girls. Why are people surprised that they dont' measure up to "adult fiction" and good authors with lots of complex characters, subplots, etc?

It is silly to judge those types of books by any other measure than the purpose they were written for.

To semi-quote George Lucas about Star Wars. He wanted to create a modern fairy tale. It wasn't meant to be a social commentary or deep in philosophical ideals. It was just meant to be a good story about good and evil.

I like reading all types of books, and sometimes, I like to read a book that isn't overly complicated and is just a good story where good beats evil (recently taken with the Spenser stories by Robert Parker). I wouldn't put him up there with the "literary classics" even though I enjoy the books. I think that is the problem, people put books in categories that they really aren't meant to be in.

Going back to the Stephen King, some of his books I loved and others I couldn't stand to read. In fact, I have pretty much stopped reading him with his newer stuff altogether. I'm with Steve on this one, pre-It was great after that not so much.

 

[Indagator]

So I kinda fall into this sci-fi, fantasy, spy novel, techno-thriller, action type of rut (if you can really call it that, because I like it and a rut denotes a dislike).

Hmmm... maybe you could call it a "niche" instead!

Lol.

 

[Ramirez]

Just thought that I would point out that Harry Potter was written for KIDS. How many of them really want all of that plot analysis/motivation? It just happened that adults liked the books too.

.

And I would like to point out that Rowling stretched the paper thin premise of Potter into 7 novels, the last 3 or 4 running into almost 1000 pages.....she may have started out writing for kids but at some point she switched over to a larger audience, for one thing her original audience was growing up.

How many "kids" do you think read novels running 1000 pages? At the very least she was writing for a fairly sophisticated adolescent audience I would say at least 15 years of age....at that age they study Shakespeare in school FFS.

 

[punisher73]

And I would like to point out that Rowling stretched the paper thin premise of Potter into 7 novels, the last 3 or 4 running into almost 1000 pages.....she may have started out writing for kids but at some point she switched over to a larger audience, for one thing her original audience was growing up.

How many "kids" do you think read novels running 1000 pages? At the very least she was writing for a fairly sophisticated adolescent audience I would say at least 15 years of age....at that age they study Shakespeare in school FFS.

I still consider 15 years old "kid" age. Also, how many 15 year olds actually LIKE studying Shakespeare at that age?

Even if she did start to write for a slightly older group when she realized that the Harry Potter books were really taking off, would you change up the formula of what made them so successful in the first place? Most of the people I know (both adults and kids) read them because they just wanted a good storyline, they weren't concerned with the other elements that make for good literary pieces.

 

[Ramirez]

I still consider 15 years old "kid" age. Also, how many 15 year olds actually LIKE studying Shakespeare at that age?

Even if she did start to write for a slightly older group when she realized that the Harry Potter books were really taking off, would you change up the formula of what made them so successful in the first place? Most of the people I know (both adults and kids) read them because they just wanted a good storyline, they weren't concerned with the other elements that make for good literary pieces.

my kids when they were 10 years old were reading graphic novels (comics) meant for adults , X-Men, Batman etc. that have more characterization and plot than Rowling ever put to paper, don't underestimate "kids".

The fact that Rowling never challenged her readers when she was wealthy enough and the novels popular enough that it made no difference if she changed the formula is a case in point at how mediocre a writer she is.

It doesn't matter that most kids might not enjoy Shakespeare, its the fact that they are capable of much more sophisticated fare than Potter.