Quote:
Originally Posted by LDBoblo
Wonder how many people read Dan Brown just to learn about the standards of "good" or "bad" writing, given the amount of critical attention he gets.
I have to admit, I'm tempted to pick it up and go through it just to see what people think of as "bad", though a link posted earlier gave me a few clues.
I mean there are lots of great ways to think of bad writing. It can be obtuse, redundant, repetitive, contrived, verbose, sparse, and a bunch of other adjectives. Sometimes a writer can roll more than one of these into an indigestible literary omelet...I wonder how Mr. Brown fares.
|
Burp!
The first thing that pops to mind is how easily everyone can come and go at the Louvre at any hour of the day or night. Why did I pay admission, when all I really had to do was walk in and claim to be some sort of special decoder person?
The next thing you wonder is if anyone didn't figure out that "Princess" Sofie was supposed to be the "special" one by page 3 or so?
Finally, you think how creepy it is that the old grandpa picked out the nerdish symbologist for his granddaughter, and that it is very much creepy inbreeding, much like with thoroughbreds and hillbillies.
Then you belch again and your brain threatens bodily harm if you ever read anything like this to it ever again.