<p>I was wanting to talk to a few people on AIM/MSN about this book. Have a few questions/Discusssion.</p>
<p>AIM: ZacDizzle87
MSN: <a href="mailto:ZacTargac@gmail.com">ZacTargac@gmail.com</a></p>
<p>I read to about page 150. It's okay so far but kinda dragging on. I liked how it described conclave so I understand current events.</p>
<p>GREAT books...both of em!...those are my top 2</p>
<p>although they are entertaining, i speak from personal knowledge as a catholic about their falsities. they are loaded with them, whether they are lies or exagerations. dont get me wrong, they are good reading but dont take the stuff he says as fact, its pure fiction though he claims that its "based on real people, events and places"</p>
<p>yea, they do make preety good reading stuff, infact when i was reading da vinci, i finished 400 pages in a single day! so very interesting. but yeah there may be many exagerations but he doest make it preety real.</p>
<p>As an Arab and a Catholic, I find those books offensive. I am neither a devout Catholic, nor am I a paranoid Arab, but his subliminal messages are insulting. Real excrement. But I am looking forward to the movie with two of my favorite actors, Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou! hehe</p>
<p>"All of the characters and events in this book are fictitious, and any resemblance to actual persons, living of dead, is purely coincidental."</p>
<p>"All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."</p>
<p>Look on the Publisher's Page...the one right before "For Blythe...again. More than ever."</p>
<p>never claimed they were based on real ppl and events ;)...the places are real....:p</p>
<p>If you treat the books as works of fiction, they are pretty good (Although when compared with other Dan Brown books, they get a bit predictable). However, the problem is that many people treat it as non-fiction and believe everything Dan Brown writes.</p>
<p>I'm not religious so I don't know which parts Dan Brown exaggerated or made up in regards to the religions he used. I was talking to a friend of mine who is fairly religious and she agreed with a previous poster that a lot of the symbolism and other "facts" were false.</p>
<p>it says on the 3rd page in the entire book that it's a work of fiction lol.....he just used some historical stuff that was real...for example...the heirosgamos ritual...it wasn't meant to be taken as a nonfiction/history book.</p>
<p>The only aspects Brown stated as facts were the existence of Opus Dei and the controversy behind their use of corporal mortification...which is a fact...and the existence of the Priory of Sion, which included a number of artists and "scientists" of the past....which is also a fact.</p>
<p>I thought it was kind of interesting when he posted the list of heads of the society to protect the descendants of Jesus (yes, I know - a total crock) that he listed Nicholas Flammel. That name rang a bell, and I realized it was the person in the Harry Potter books who supposedly had the Sorcerer's stone that guaranteed eternal life. I had not realized before that J.K. Rowling took that name from a real legend.</p>
<p>I loved reading these books and recommend them highly as recreational reading, but they are not great books. These books are like a roller coaster -- you get on, you take the ride, you think, "that was fun." A great book is like a cathedral -- you enter, you explore, you think and think and think...</p>
<p>Both are interesting experiences, but one can be described as "fun" and the other as "great."</p>
<p>i just consider it great, because of the story...how Brown put it all together....his imagination.....that's what great stories are....the use of one's imagination to his or her full potential...and i like fun stories :)</p>
<p>awesome awesome books</p>
<p>While I did enjoy the books as quick reads, I was frustrated by some of the things that he got plain wrong. For example, in one section of the book, Teabing explains that Mary is described as the "companion" of Jesus. The quote that follows is "any Aramaic scholar will tell you... literally meant spouse." As the original document wasn't actually written in aramaic but rather in Greek, that is a fairly absurd claim. Does the author have a copy that no one else has seen?</p>
<p>He did do a good job with the books. The concept he used for Da Vinci Code is not a new one by any means though. Not taking anything away from him. They were good books.</p>
<p>yeah...i know a lot of people liked the da vinci code better...but personally i liked angels and demons more...i guess i just liked the story better...and i read it first</p>
<p>This is a year old thread :/</p>
<p>i know...i brought it back to life :p</p>