2004-03-30 18:51:05.661299+00 by Dan Lyke 10 comments
Did Dan Brown rip off The Da Vinci Code from Lewis Perdue's The Da Vinci Legacy? Makes me want to read the latter to see if there was a real story somewhere under that somewhat contrived thriller...
[ related topics: Religion Intellectual Property Books ]
comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):
#Comment Re: made: 2004-03-31 23:17:11.357597+00 by: meuon
Contrived Thriller: I liked 'The Davinci Code', but like you, it felt like a movie turned into a book.
#Comment Re: Did Dan Brown rip off The Da Vinci Code from Lewis Perdue's The Da Vinci Legacy made: 2004-03-31 23:54:08.988623+00 by: lperdue
You might be interested in this:
Much of the data is online.
#Comment Re: made: 2005-06-14 15:46:31.038026+00 by: ebradway [edit history]
Bringing an old post back to life: I read Da Vinci Code and Digital Fortress over the weekend. I liked Da Vinci Code, especially the underlying history of the Masons and Xtianity. But after reading Fortress (which I almost put down out of disgust a few times), I began seriously questioning Brown's research. Afterall, the focus of Fortress is the NSA Vice Director is trying to decrypt the code so he can patch it with a backdoor and replace the version on a webpage with his own using an NSA supercomputer consisting of three million "HAND SOLDERED" cpus that melts down and explodes because some encrypted source code infects it with a virus??? What kind of crap is that?
Fortress is the first book I've read cover-to-cover in about one sitting in quite a while. But it was much like watching a bad movie - even though you know you should get up and leave, you don't want to admit that you've already wasted so much time. So you just stick with it. If the technical errors in Fortress are any indication of Brown's research abilities, then either all of Da Vinci Code is suspect or he didn't actually write it.
I'll let you know after I've read Perdue's book!
#Comment Re: made: 2005-06-14 15:54:53.184004+00 by: Dan Lyke
It doesn't take too much googling around, or history in reading conspiracy theory books, to know that Da Vinci Code breaks down fairly quickly. It's your basic "leave your analytical skills at the door" thriller, alas, so Digital Fortress never made my radar.
#Comment Re: made: 2005-06-14 16:56:43.170949+00 by: ebradway
Hmmm... That's a little disappointing. I guess I believe the prologue that implied the research was valid. I should have known when the book started off with discussion of a GPS Dot that's supposed to provide satellite-based tracking that somehow works inside the Lourve, even in areas that are later claimed to block even cell-phone communications. GPS works on microwaves - line-of-sight. GPS only happens to work indoors at times when there is enough scattering and reflection for the receiver to make an estimate. Of course, that gives you an idea of just how sensitive GPS receivers are AND how much error you can expect to get from scattering and reflection (sources of error that are eliminated by Differential GPS or WAAS).
#Comment Re: made: 2005-06-14 19:47:11.381876+00 by: Larry Burton
I enjoyed The DaVinci Code. I thought Angels and Demons was also a decent read. I mourn the time I lost reading Digital Fortress. Deception Point is probably the better of all of them. None of his books are anything to look forward to reading but at least three of them will give you some enjoyment while you are traveling. I think Deception Point, though, will just piss off anybody who might be a regular reader of Flutterby.
#Comment Re: made: 2005-06-15 18:29:28.922961+00 by: ebradway
I just started Angels and Demons. Are you saying I should skip Deception Point?
#Comment Re: made: 2005-06-16 01:28:49.071523+00 by: Larry Burton
No, Deception Point isn't bad. I probably enjoyed it better than Angels and Demons even though history and religous symbology seem to be more Brown's cup of tea than science. Digital Fortress is the one you should have forgone.
#Comment Re: made: 2005-09-26 19:35:58.768399+00 by: ebradway
I just finished Daughter of God, one of the books that Dan Brown supposedly ripped-off. But it's not even close. Sure, some of the same ideas are in there, but that's not plagarism. Not even enough similarity to think that Dan Brown needed to mention Purdue's books. After all, this isn't a journal publication. Fiction authors aren't required to give a bibliography and citations.
As far as a read, I liked Da Vinci Code better. It was less violent and involved cryptography and other heady stuff. In DoG, the main character is an ex-cop turned philosophy professor who married a beautiful young art historian who hears colors (synesthesia).
BTW, I read Angels and Demons as well. Brown managed to throw in enough extra-stupid things like the main character jumping out of the helicopter at 20,000 feet and managing to survive by landing in a river. Yeah, right...
#Comment Re: made: 2005-09-26 20:09:40.74043+00 by: meuon
"main character jumping out of the helicopter" - And that's a gripe of a lot of popular literature. It's 'movie ready'. Chase scenes when there needn't be. Complicated escapes sequences. - Dispite my affection for odd drivel, I really like it when everything makes sense and is believable.