Beloved author Dan Brown has achieved a level of stupendous, globe spanning success through the bewildering commercial triumph of his genre busting novels beloved by millions worldwide. His stupdenifying levels of commercial success has befuddled critics of fine literature worldwide, as they contort themselves in absurd ways to explain how a man with such pedestrian command of prose can enshrine himself - at least in the eyes of the common man, alongside true literary greats.
Ok, let me snap out of it. I can't really nail down Dan Brown's prose. But I have read all of his books, so let me try to explain how an author that critics nearly universally dislike has been able to sell such a mega crap load of books and achieve such rediculous levels of success.
I personally consider Dan Brown to be a one trick pony. He's not a one hit wonder, as he has been able to make the best sellers list over and over again. But on the other hand, Dan Brown has never been able to really write in a variety of different genres or styles.
Let's start by examining his prose. Writing instructors worldwide denounce his mixed usage of literary devices. Dan likes to pile on the metaphors, mixing in smilies, as he crushes them together in sentences that span half a paragraph. Brown also likes to open sentences with adjectives, and he doesn't particularly believe in economy of language, preferring to repeat phrases like "Navy Admiral" (critics will ask, is there any other kind of admiral?). If there is one thing that one cannot criticize Brown for though, is his mastery of vocabulary, as he routinely pulls out adjectives common enough to be understood by the typical reader, but used just infrequently enough to seem exotic.
Although his prose is commonly criticized, one can hardly doubt the effectiveness of his writing. What it does achieve however, is immersion. Dan Brown's writing is probably what most people would imagine an erudite symbology professor's to be like. Hardly surprising of course, considering that Langdon is commonly accused of being a Mary Sue.
To an inexperienced reader who does not regularly enjoy works of literary fiction, Brown's peculiar and much mocked writing style might even seem smart. Although it isn't necessarily well written, it may seem well written. Combined with the subject matter of his novels, the reader is likely to think that they are enjoying sophisticated pieces of literature.
When you open his book, the first thing you will see is an instance that all the locations, pieces of art, and organizations are real. However, Brown seems to be allergic to fact checking, as his novels are riddled with mistakes from the major (the organization at the heart of the Da Vinci code is a hoax) to the minor but jarring (referring to the Rio grande as a notable old world river). Brown takes the same attitude towards factual accuracy as screenwriters who write movies "based on a true story". But it is undeniable that he plies the facts to create a quality thriller.
Either way though, Brown references a greatest hits list of classical artists and writers. Now if you examine his references closely, he uses a very Jepordy like approach - never focus on topics too obscure for the average audience member. You want that A-ha moment, like "ahh, Raphael! I've heard of him!".
Becuase of his references and prose, I have to slightly ashamedly admit that for years, I thought of Dan Brown as a sophisticated writer of high literature, when I was a kid, I'd name drop him in a misguided attempt to assert my non-existant intellectual superiority over my peers and to impress adults.
The reason why I consider Brown to be a one trick pony is because once you distill down the structure and style of his stories, it seems like Brown only follows one general template.
The villains in Dan Brown novels always slavishly follows some sort of seemingly esoteric symbolism in their villainy (aside: why is Bond villain a thing but not Langdon villain?) There is almost always an M Night Shyamalan style twist three quarters of the way though. And finally near the climax Langdon always achieves certain physical feats that are highly unlikely for a 50ish professor, but is often transparently foreshadowing.
None of his successful books have deviated significantly from this one template. The only thing he really changes is the secret organization he uses in the novel and the list of Renaissance artists he references.
This is why as a writer, I relegate Dan Brown to the one trick pony category. Unlike say, Tom Clancy, Dan Brown has never been able to display much range in his works.
This is not to say that I am desparaging him. He might be a one trick pony, but damnit is Dan Brown a master of the one trick. If you really immerse yourself, you do have a hard time putting his books down.
Submitted February 07, 2019 at 07:39PM by Uptons_BJs http://bit.ly/2I6RRJE
No comments:
Post a Comment