Book Idea...

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Dan Brown lifted the basis for his book straight from the Holy blood and the Holy grail.

I agree with Alanus about the use of modern language to engage the modern reader.
That is precisely what got me 'back' into my roots, when I read Gates of Fire by Pressfield, he was able to conjure the ancient world
in my mind clearly, as if I could reach out and touch it. However historically accurate we can debate til the cows come home, but it was a great story, and one that put me on a journey of discovery that I possibly may have missed had I not found the book laying on a shelf on a rig in middle of the North sea. Kudos to the story tellers!

[Alanus]

Dan Brown lifted the basis for his book straight from the Holy blood and the Holy grail.

I agree with Alanus about the use of modern language to engage the modern reader.
That is precisely what got me 'back' into my roots, when I read Gates of Fire by Pressfield, he was able to conjure the ancient world
in my mind clearly, as if I could reach out and touch it. However historically accurate we can debate til the cows come home, but it was a great story, and one that put me on a journey of discovery that I possibly may have missed had I not found the book laying on a shelf on a rig in middle of the North sea. Kudos to the story tellers!

What a great book! Pressfield slammed you right into Thermopoli (sic? but you know what I mean). In turn, his novel spawned a surreal graphic novel and a movie that created a 7-foot Persian king. :roll: But "Who cares?!" as Chris Tucker yelled it. If it wasn't for Gates of Fire, we never would have been triple-entertained. What we see, from start to finish, is a tale and characters that leap off the page (or out of the movie). That's why it's important to enguage the reader in language he/she is familiar with, not archaic Graeco-Latin "jibberish" that immediately turns the reader off. :? lol:

Like Gaius did with Pressman, I read MM's Grass Crown; and that novel started me on the journey of writing historical fiction. Give your audience a sense of personal journey, real situations, plain English language, and characters that make you want to zip to the next chapter. Otherwise you lose the reader. 8)

[Titus Juventius Tertius]

My first novel (about Vercingetorix) was written in the first person-- a huge mistake.

What was the reasoning for it being a mistake? I'm still trying to entertain my options of either 1st and 3rd person... so it's good to hear from both the reader and the writer.

This discussion has spawned a new idea for me... and I think I'll be working on two stories. One is going to be a Simon Scarrow style book that follows a group of soldiers while the other will be historically based but with a much different twist. So I have a lot of work ahead of me. My end goal was always to have written a novel that was put to print. So that's what I'll be working towards.

[Alanus]

My first novel (about Vercingetorix) was written in the first person-- a huge mistake.

What was the reasoning for it being a mistake? I'm still trying to entertain my options of either 1st and 3rd person... so it's good to hear from both the reader and the writer.

This discussion has spawned a new idea for me... and I think I'll be working on two stories. One is going to be a Simon Scarrow style book that follows a group of soldiers while the other will be historically based but with a much different twist. So I have a lot of work ahead of me. My end goal was always to have written a novel that was put to print. So that's what I'll be working towards.

New ideas are good. As you start writing, you'll get even more ideas, making changes in plot and character.
I discovered that by writing in the first person, I was limited to one person's thoughts and knowledge of events. After awhile, it gets real old and boring. In third person omnipotent, you (the writer) become akin to God-- seeing everything. You can enter the thought-train and outlook of any major character... even minor characters.

This can be a BIG plus. I have Merjands dumbfounded as he awakes from a two-month siesta under an oak tree, wiping off leaves and hearing the call of an autumn bird, and knowing that he's hibernated a little too long. This character is the only non-real person in the novel, but he's Merlin, and Merlin was not a standard human in any Arthurian tale. You (the reader) enter his strange yet exceptional mind, and it adds greatly to your interest. Also note the senses, not just sight but the sound of a bird calling. Use all senses, expecially smell and texture (touch).

Go to it! Begin. 8)

[Robert Vermaat]

I’m still baffled at the response to The Da Vinci Code, which is simply a novel and was always billed as such.

Dan Brown stole 90% of the 'facts' behind his story. This theory about Jesus having offspring was developed in the 1980s in a book called The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. That 'Jesus conspiracy theory' was maybe well-known to a lot of readers (there have been follow-up book and a number of documentaries in the years since the first publication), but it surely it provided a very 'easy' groundwork for Brown. It certainly helped his story - as many of his other books are completely unknown to the larger public, i have no doubt that this 'borrowing' was part of the success of his book. Of course, the whole thing was already refuted before Brown's book was published, but nobody actually minds that. :mrgreen:

[Alanus]

Dan Brown stole 90% of the 'facts' behind his story. This theory about Jesus having offspring was developed in the 1980s in a book called The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. That 'Jesus conspiracy theory' was maybe well-known to a lot of readers... surely it provided a very 'easy' groundwork for Brown. It certainly helped his story - as many of his other books are completely unknown to the larger public, i have no doubt that this 'borrowing' was part of the success of his book. Of course, the whole thing was already refuted before Brown's book was published, but nobody actually minds that. :mrgreen:

Hello, Titus

Robert certainly hit the nail on the head. Dan Brown's other movie-inspiring novel, Angels & Demons, was published around the same time (about 2003, I think) but it never had the selling impact that was found in the Da Vinci Code. Brown found a good controversial plot, filled it with semi-weak characters, and he ran to the bank with it. 8)

When you work-out your own plot, spend more time on the characters than Brown did. The colorful nuances of good characters lead to better plots. The great thing about a novel is its structure as a "bridge" between historical events and a purely fictional situation. With imagination, you can make your characters/plot do anything except change historicity. They can attempt to alter history (as we know it), but they cannot accomplish that goal. This is the only limitation in a historical novel. Minor events, not bound to change history, or conceived by you as the REAL reason certain events actually happened, are the imaginative tools you can build upon. Dan Brown's books do not change history as it happened, but his plots are akin to "science fiction." And this is proof of just how far, or "wild," you can go yet still be convincing... if your writing is good enough.

[ParthianBow]

First person narrative is so much harder because the scene can only be presented from one point of view. Third person means you can use loads of POV. Your idea sounds great, Titus - I'd read it in a flash. IMHO, there's a good core of readers out there who will read anything Roman or anything to do with Rome - even if it has a fantasy/SF twist. From my experience, if you do your very best to get the kit/dress/details correct, then most people don't mind too much (there are always a few purists who like to nitpick though :? ).
The best advice anyone ever gave me was to start writing - anything. Once you've started, take the time to write every single day. Then it becomes a routine, and you can see the progress rather than having an idea that never comes to fruition.
Good luck!

[Alanus]

First person narrative is so much harder because the scene can only be presented from one point of view. Third person means you can use loads of POV. Your idea sounds great, Titus - I'd read it in a flash.

The best advice anyone ever gave me was to start writing - anything. Once you've started, take the time to write every single day. Then it becomes a routine, and you can see the progress rather than having an idea that never comes to fruition.
Good luck!

Good advice, PartianBow. Titus is liable to discover that daily writing not only becomes routine, it becomes addictive! hock: And perhaps worst (or best) of all, your characters become real people. You think of them as friends or enemies; and when you eat lunch, you wonder what they were eating at the same meal.

Looks like it's two thumbs up for third person POV. 8)

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I’m still baffled at the response to The Da Vinci Code, which is simply a novel and was always billed as such.

Dan Brown stole 90% of the 'facts' behind his story. This theory about Jesus having offspring was developed in the 1980s in a book called The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. That 'Jesus conspiracy theory' was maybe well-known to a lot of readers (there have been follow-up book and a number of documentaries in the years since the first publication), but it surely it provided a very 'easy' groundwork for Brown. It certainly helped his story - as many of his other books are completely unknown to the larger public, i have no doubt that this 'borrowing' was part of the success of his book. Of course, the whole thing was already refuted before Brown's book was published, but nobody actually minds that. :mrgreen:

That exactly what I said, Robert, and I agree almost 100%. But not sure if we can really say it was refuted was it? I have seen a few
clips of the argument against the book, but just how convincing was the counter arguement? :wink:

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Byron,

But not sure if we can really say it was refuted was it? I have seen a few
clips of the argument against the book, but just how convincing was the counter arguement? :wink:

The culprits 'found' a document in the National Library in Paris, which documentation showed was put there by the same men. Sounds like proof enough, for this document, if I recall correctly, was onee of the lynchpins of their 'theory' about the Priory of Sion. :mrgreen:

Of course, the 'true believers' still maintain, in the face of this and much more evidence, that all this was a smokescreen to 'hide' the real secret order. Yeah right.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

And so the the conspiracy continues..... :lol:

I have to admit that as soon as I read about/saw the publicity about the first Da Vinci code film, I was
amazed that it appeared no one connected it to the holy blood/grail books....
Appears we have as bad a memory collectively today as the ancients, despite the masses of recorded information we have available, and are bombarded with daily.

But I will just say this, as overused as it may be...fact is often stranger than fiction.