Please do not be taken in by the raving of the author of this piece. Either he is trying to act intellectually superior to the majority of us book lovers or he is just trying pathetically to be different from the rest of us. Either way, this piece on Da Vinci Code is best forgotten. Da Vinci Code is no doubt a thriller which is there among the best of the best.
I am really sorry to have read this article. 1. The author of this article is just trying to show off her "wisdom" and the fact that she is well read and has a better idea about literary works that any of us laymen - I know this sounds like a blatent accusation, but then that is what she is also doing in her article when she criticises the works of Neal Donald Walsch or Dan Brown. The fact still remains that they are Best Sellers... and for a reason too.... 2. Every one is free to form their own opinions about any art - that is why it is an art. But trying to form generalised opinions about then is bad. 3. I don't see why the author is so paranoid about the celebrities' reading habits. They are also human beings who may or may not have their own tastes using which they appreciate certain arts. And, being celebrities, they have to show off also, sometimes. So do normal people on many occasions. So, let us try to see facts as they are - Da Vinci Code is a good book just because so many people around the world would like to read it, or have already read it and liked it. No one claims it is a literary masterpiece. It is interesting. Many people have aslo been moved by Neal's works.
RE:''Da Vinci Code? What a Yawn!'' - How Prepostorous
by Kaushik Das on Apr 01, 2005 10:49 AM Permalink
So, aren't you doing the same? Why can't you want to let the author have his/her own opinion? Why are you generalising it?
I understand the pain Ms. Lindsay Pereira must have gone through while trying to endure bad prose. But then everyone does. At the same time, I was kind of wondering what could have been the trigger for Ms. Pereira's vitriolic attack on the reading habits of the 'celebreties.' To give her the benefit of doubt, I presume that she was not indulging in the same game which her 'celebreties' apparently indulge in before the camera. To ask why "The Name of A Rose" is not as popular as "The Da Vinci Code" serves no purpose here. Umberto Eco obviously does not need popular recognition to showcase his skills. If i remember Louvre correctly, that section of the museum where the opening scenes of Da Vinci Code is set is a section for italian masters. It does not matter if four or four million of Brown's readers have heard of Carravagio (Ms. Pereira obviously has - so it seems). Carravagio would still remain a master. I am no "celebrity." I do not have any pretensions of being as well read as Ms. Pereira. I certainly enjoyed reading Da Vinci Code more than Ms. Pereira's exasperation in a public place about the reading habits of individuals who she can easily ignore if she wants to.
RE:Holier than thou???
by Kaushik Das on Apr 01, 2005 10:52 AM Permalink
I understand the pain that some have while reading humour simple because they do not have a sense of it (humour). And I am at pains to understand why celebrities need to show theya re well-read.
Your article smacks of cynicism and vanity of an astounding degree. Essentially you have:
a. Denounced a bestseller based on a non-contextual critique of one sentence in first few paragraphs in the first chapter of the book, ignoring the first rule of serious literary criticism-base your critique on a synthesis of the whole piece. And to set matters straight - Sauniere 'staggered' through the gallery and 'lunged' for the nearest painting because he was suffering from a bullet wound, which to me would be a fair thing to do if I'm shot, regardless of whether I lunge at a Caravaggio or your pen.
b. Presumptously indulged in incessant and unnecessary celeb bashing. Ever considered the possibility that the celeb might actually be reading Ulysses? Or, that celebs ,dealing with pressures you and I don't understand, can actually find solace in Conversations with God?
c. Subtly but surely advanced your status as the I-know-of-Carvaggio-Eco-and-Walsch-but-you-obviously-dont. This I'm not so critical of - a mustdo for a wannabe celeb.
Please tell me you are not a serious student of literature - I'd be concerned if I were your teacher or more importantly, your employer.
RE:Probably not the best thriller - but why the negativity?
by Kaushik Das on Apr 01, 2005 10:54 AM Permalink
Ditto for you. You are doing exactly the same. Is this the class of people that love to read 'literature'?
Each author has a style, and that is what they exhibit in their writing. Your comments here sound like that those of a novice who just criticises for the sake of criticising - not really a worthy read.
I don't know why Ms. Lindsay Pereira asuumes that all celebrities must have an IQ of 160 and must read Proust before going to bed. If an actress thinks Da Vinci Code is the best thing since mango milkshake then so be it. She is not the one to judge them. So what if a celeb is romping in his bed with Ulysses, he really might be reading it. Maybe if she looked hard enough she might have seen an annotated copy of finnegans wake lying next to it. Ms Pereira column is more cliched then the celebs she talks about.
First of all let the reviewer decide if its a "Yawn!!" or exciting as she has made both the comments which is a contradiction. Secondly what does she expect out of a thriller ? ways of attaining nirvana ?? . I think this book has attracted a lot of attention and the negative especially because it questions some beliefs which should be the real reason to be potrayed and not the writing style or anything else. I have read the book and its certainly not a yawn though some descriptive details could have been certainly skipped. I have found it fairly engrossing and intend to suggest it to everybody. The reviewer should present her view on the while book and not on a couple of opening lines.
