Wednesday, September 23, 2009

The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown

Once again, Robert Langdon is the main character, and the plot for discovering the meaning of hidden symbols takes place in Washington, D.C., rather than Rome, like The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons. The primary characters with whom Langdon interacts are a brother and sister, Peter and Katherine Solomon, who come from significant old money and political influence. The story revolves around the history of the Masonic Lodge and the fact that many of our founding fathers, including George Washington and Ben Franklin were Masons. According to Masonic beliefs, there are Ancient Mysteries that contain the knowledge of the ancients who knew all, but their knowledge was lost and forgotten by mankind or hidden by those who had kept the knowledge intact for the time when man was ready to know it. The good news about this book is that the first half was good in terms of holding my interest, and it will probably make a good movie. The bad news is that the second half of the book was uninteresting and too convoluted. Those who want to destroy the Ancient Mysteries in order to keep mankind from being enlightened do battle with Robert, Peter, Katherine, and others, including the CIA. Throughout, Brown lets it be known that some new information has been gleaned by the characters, but he holds out from delivering that information to the reader. My response was, once the information was revealed, was one of disappointment. The end of the book, for the taste of this atheist, had too much Bible and too much god. I would not have finished the book except for my OCD approach to most things. My advice – wait for the movie.


WC Don

2 comments:

  1. Hmmm...maybe I'll wait on this one then. A complaint about Brown (beyond the crummy dialogue) is his stretching his interpretation of the Bible to meet his needs for plot development that in the end damages the story's authenticity. I thought both Da Vinci and Demons were a little preach-y. But, it is fiction and he is allowed to do what he thinks for his story. Nearly every novelist presents revisionist history so why not him? Trevor is reading it now. I'll be interested if he thinks the 2nd half of the book is a problem with him, too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nov 17, and Trevor still hasn't finished the book. Guess that says something . . .

    ReplyDelete