I recently read The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown. A couple of years ago I remember a furore over the book’s portrayal of the Catholic Church and Brown’s attempt to present “fiction as fact”. I find all that fairly irrelevant—it’s a novel, it’s fiction, most people understand that.

So I’ve written my thoughts on the book from a technical perspective as a writer, since I found many aspects of The Da Vinci Code annoying. I’m unsure whether non-writers would even notice (or care about) the problems I had with the book.

The thing I noticed first is the constant infodumps: exposition in the form of large indigestible chunks that every “how to” on fiction will tell you to avoid. Brown doesn’t even attempt to disguise them: most of the time a chapter or section begins with an infodump. I don’t recall reading a novel with such consistent dumping. Ideally imperative background information should be worked into the story, and it shouldn’t feel like you’re being lectured to. Many sections of The Da Vinci Code read like the results of pure research: I researched it, the author seems to say, so you’re going to read it.

The second thing I noticed is the manufactured suspense: the point of view characters choose to ignore vital points in their “thoughts”—thoughts they would be almost certain to have—purely to keep the reader in the dark.

The worst of this is the blatant misdirection in the point of view of Remy (the short section from this character’s point of view seems to have been included only to misdirect the reader). I began to suspect Teabing as the Teacher as we went along (due to lack of anyone else who it could be and, since it’s a word game book, “Tea”bing and “Tea”cher). But at one point we are privy to Remy’s thoughts, who gloats (internally) that he knows the Teacher’s identity, but thinks about “Teabing” and “the Teacher” as if they are two separate people. If the reader is shown a character’s legitimate thoughts, surely such a major piece of information would be at the forefront of those thoughts.

Then there is the irrationality and irrelevance of some of the major characters.

Bezu Fache goes on an immediate vendetta against Langdon, as if he knows something and is trying to frame him, but by the end has “seen the light” and realised Langdon is innocent.

We follow the Opus Dei leader Aringarosa for almost the entire novel, only to find at the end that he is more or less irrelevant. His only affect is that he put Silas in touch with the Teacher.

Silas himself kills four people to instigate the plot, but does little of importance beyond that other than a few minor acts to grind out a bit more action for Langdon & Co.

The Swiss bank manager, Vernet, ends one chapter demanding to know Langdon’s location, presumably so he can track Langdon down. We only hear about Vernet in passing from then on.

Langdon’s claustrophobia is mentioned a couple of times in the first hundred pages but then plays no further part.

Others have pointed out that the entire plot is irrelevant. The characters spend the entire novel trying to uncover the grail, only to succeed and...not uncover it.

Yes, it’s a page turner. The conspiracy theory stuff and some of the word games are fun. In the end though, the faults detracted so much from the reading experience that the book left me unfulfilled.