Dan Brown's "The Lost Symbol," or a new way to encourage bookworms to exercise
You know in "24," where everything's happening in "real time," and you feel each dramatic, action-packed second (outside of commercial breaks)? "The Lost Symbol" is kinda like that, only without that pesky drama to deal with.
The plot of Dan Brown's latest thriller is paced over 12 hours in D.C. And you feel every. single. second. A walk down a hallway takes chapters. A lecture -- er, conversation -- about symbology (sigh) grinds down until you don't even care about what that circle thingie means, just get to the bloody stuff!
And "Symbol" has just as much gore as good history to tell. Having lived in the area for years now, I really appreciate the new perspective on the Library of Congress, the Smithsonian and the Washington Monument that the book provides. If only Brown weren't so darn proud of himself for knowing this stuff all the time!
There are many wink wink, nudge nudge moments in the book. At one point, a woman approaches Robert Langdon in the airport, congratulating him on his cheeky controversial books that her book club members so love to discuss. Later in the book, another character laughs that the "Twitterati" are going to latch on to her research as soon as its published, excited to learn about Noetic science.
Uh-oh, Dan. I think your ego's showing again. Might want to put that away.
You may be interested in the plot. Well, see, there's this secret society, the Freemasons. Except Langdon knows everything about them, and explains that to everyone he meets, so I guess they're not so secret. And then there's this menacing, obsessive man with a certain outlandish physical appearance -- no albino this time, just a guy covered in tattoos. Anyway, Langdon has to save the not-so-secret society from the madman's rage, while uberpowerful billionaires stand by idly, seemingly incapable of helping in anyway, and the CIA is on his tail, foiling Langdon's investigation at every turn.
Brown's writing style, which has never been particuarly elegant, is hindered by a plot twist that he tries hard to hide through third-person narrative. So the twist ends up being obvious, while the reader ends up annoyed.
And that's how I hurt my wrist while reading "The Lost Symbol." About halfway through, I was so fed up with Brown's poor writing, that I set the book down for a little kickboxing action in my basement. I guess I hit hard when I'm angry, and man, that was a good workout. Exhaustion works wonders for easing the disappointment of a badly paced book.
The bright side? It turns out the sub-plot of "The Lost Symbol" is a Redskins game, which explains why the book didn't come out as a summer blockbuster. I won't ruin the suprise by telling you the outcome, but I can tell you that I certainly hope Skins fans are as loyal in real life as they are in Langdon's world.
Comments
Just wanted to say that it could be possible for YOU yourself not to include your own personal workout activities in the review of a BOOK. Haven't read any Dan Brown, nor do I plan to. Just thought I'd let you know how unfair of an OPINION it is. Besides you didn't even read the whole book???? Some book critic you are. Give an objective review next time, so I don't waste my time reading nonsensical chatter. And could you try not to be so rude?
Posted by: Christine | September 16, 2009 9:03 PM
I haven't yet read THE LOST SYMBOL, although I plan to. But I did read Nancy's review, which I found both entertaining and informative. It's the kind of fun, quirky, stylish kind of writing that I've come to expect and enjoy on Read Street. Brava!
Posted by: Gail Farrelly | September 16, 2009 11:14 PM
Dude, you are a book critic? You don't sound like one. Almost seems like you tried to squeeze in there about your kickboxing workout. Different people like different types of books. You obviously don't like Brown's books. Another critic will have a different view of the book. This is why critics should just keep their opinions to themselves or stick to kickboxing.
Posted by: Eddie in Iraq | September 17, 2009 5:48 AM
Not too surprising. Dan Brown has a decent gift for story but is a poor writer at best and the main character is a Gary Stu at the best of times in any book of the series.
I have to say the most surprising thing about the book is that Brown seems unable to impriove his craft in the past 6 years.
Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2009 8:26 AM
@Christine I just wanted to clear up any confusion. I did indeed finish the book; I decided not to include the ending since many have not yet had the chance to do so. I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that I did not.
Posted by: Nancy | September 17, 2009 8:33 AM
Oh, Nancy, I thought this was a fun report that doesn't at all deserve this unpleasantness.
Posted by: Eve | September 17, 2009 9:47 AM
Thank you for sharing your opinion. I mean that is, after all, what critics do. (Assuming you are a critic and not just someone who is supposed to summarize the book for people who don't want to look up the summary on the book jacket or Wikipedia.)
Honestly, I feel like understanding your state as you began to read, through reading helps me understand how you might see the book - for example you watch 24 which means you like action, suspense and results/speedy resolution which this book may not have. Someone who likes biographies or histories may enjoy it because Dan has a very detailed way of writing in which every little thing needs to be explained.
Too often people won't critque or offer opinions because of responses such as previous posters but I appreciate your opinion.
Thank you!
Posted by: Liz | September 18, 2009 3:44 PM
I read this in two days. It is as good as The Da Vinci Code. Beware it is hard to put down..
Posted by: Mikes | September 22, 2009 6:29 PM