Da Vinci code author targets Masons as The Lost Symbol becomes bestseller - before it's even released

Dan brown is a novelist, he writes books for entertainment , however his books have got historical fact in them, Its like conn iggulden writing his rome and Genghis Khan series. its a fiction story mingled with fact, and some historical truth.
The Da Vinci Code didnt attack Christianity, it just used a lot of its history in order to illustrate his story more,

I’ve read about 25% of the new book. I think it will cause a lot of problems for people who claim the US was founded as a Christian nation. I won’t say anymore because I don’t want to spoil it for anyone.

thank you Scottishguy. some people choose to forget that he is a novelist and that he writes books for entertainment. his fiction does include some historical fact and i found the facts about the Washington monument and other landmarks in D.C. very interesting.
i finally finished the book over the weekend. this book is not for everyone, but for people who like symbols and solving puzzles and like the character of Robert Langdon, i don’t think they will be disappointed. now that he has the Da Vinci code behind him and his latest book, i am very interested to see what he will write about next and if he will keep robert langdon’s character, or perhaps, go off in an entirely different direction. if this book is turned into a movie and tom hands reprises the role of robert langdon, it will be a demanding one for him.

I’m sure you’ve enjoyed many books other could say the same about. just because you didn’t like them doesn’t mean there is nothing truly entertaining about them. I see a new aspect every read-through. Perhaps you see them as dime-a-dozen simply because you didn’t give it enough time?

See, thanks for making my point better than I could. Here you have one of the people saying “lighten up, dude its just fiction” turn around and obviously put credence into Brown’s claims about what part of his work is “fact.” Historical fiction is a great genre, but not when the author lies about which part is fact and which part is fiction. Guys like Michener make it obvious. Brown purposely mixes it all up to provoke controversy (and its inevitable companion: confusion).

I’ve read all of the Robert Langdon series, and I have to say that he isn’t a good writer (this comes from a student in college who is studying, as a minor, English, Rhetoric, and Writting). Though I am hesitant to use them as a source, the New-York Times agrees with me that he butchers sentences and the English language and his stories always follow the same plot guidlines.
That said… I enjoyed the novels (I had to stop cringing at the writting, though). My biggest problem is that Dan Brown says that things are facts when they aren’t (and I DON’T subscribe to the idea that people should just be left alone to tell the difference between the two). Don’t claim that something is true if it isn’t. In fact, very little of what Dan Brown says is fact is true (this coming from a religion and philosophy major, myself, as well as from my fiancee, future father-in-law, and future mother-in-law, all of which are/were history majors and my future in-laws both made it to their Ph.,D.). Dan Brown’s Da Vinci code work, when written by scholars before him, was laughed off of the scholarly bookselves, even by most liberals.Angels & Demons, though less filled with history, still often err, and The Lost Symbol is riddle with misinformation (for example, the U.S. was founded on Christian principles by Christians. Though most of them were Deist and we wouldn’t call them Christians now, at the time they would have been. Furthermore, they thought it important that the morals of Christianity be the basis of law in the U.S. Read the Dilusion of Disbelief).
Anyway, that’s all I have to say.

many of us could use help with our writing, including the posts we add to these threads.
i recommend you read the other two works of fiction that Dan Brown wrote before the Robert Langdon series.
his character development is usually the same - the good guys versus the bad guys.
the plot involves some long held belief that he is showing doubts about. sometimes,
there is a little too much going on. i think he is writing for entertainment and not in the hopes of winning a Pulitzer Prize. like you, i would like for him to do a lot of research and let it be known in his novels what is fact and what is myth. however, it does make one want to do research themselves and learn more about the history that he is writing about.
supposedly, he was already working on The Lost Symbol when the Da Vinci Code took off, so maybe he will take more time and thought in putting together his next work. i am curious to know what will be his subject matter.

If it was a novel set in a colony on mars, you wouldn’t try to figure out if it was true or not. A novel is a novel. Just because Brown’s are sent in history the novel claims to be true does not mean it is. For example, Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five creates it’s own history, although it includes some factual aspects for the war, but you don’t believe the whole “unstuck in time” notion simply because it contains some factual elements.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.