But the evidence (ie: sales) suggests that Brown, if a lousy writer, is a great storyteller (or at least with CODE, he was). You have to understand that the first requirement for a book — at least from a commercial standpoint — is whether or not it keeps the reader turning the pages. From that same commercial standpoint, compelling storytelling trumps masterful writing each and every time. And learning to tell a compelling story is an art and a skill and takes just as much practice as anything else. It’s easy to slam books like CODE because they’re so artless, but even though everybody *thinks* they can pull off a book like that, because it looks so ‘easy’ — they can’t, and it’s not. (Look at all the writers who also thought they could imitate King and have at least some of his success.)

Because telling a compelling story that keeps readers turning the pages and caring about the outcome — is hard.

DA VINCI CODE had major, major buzz within the publishing industry before it hit the bookstores — even though Brown’s previous novels had middling sales, with CODE people sensed he was on to something big. And of course the book spread like a wildfire in the Malibu hills during dry season.

That’s why when I say “writing at a publishable level” — ‘publishable’ usually, but not always, means strong craft, strong writing. What it *does* always mean is a strong, compelling story that’s a little different from everything else out there while still being accessible to the reader. It means commercial, marketable, sale-able.

DA VINCI CODE is a black swan of a book — a very rare event, almost a freak of nature — and it’s highly unlikely that Brown himself will ever repeat that level of success (same with books like Elizabeth Gilbert’s EAT, PRAY, LOVE).

I recognized your name & pic from the commentary on Kelly Diels’ site. Glad you’re here.

My partner, David, just found your site a few days ago and sent me the link. I’m so glad he did. Tribal author sites are an emerging trend, but you’re the real deal.

C.