The Lost Symbol (Dan Brown)
by Dan Brown
|
List Price: Our Price: $2.44 You Save: $27.51 (92%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.01 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of The Lost Symbol (Dan Brown)
Book Review: Not the Best but Definitely Not as Bad as Some have Stated...
Summary: 5 Stars
I have been reading a lot of these reviews from others who have read this book. I disagree with almost all of them. One reviewer stated that it was "fast paced, as the DaVince Code was," yet I found it very slow paced, especially at the beginning. It went on and on about why Robert Langdon was in D.C. and all the background on how he was called there and the relationships with Peter Solomon and his sister, etc., to the point that I was about ready to abandon it if it did not get more interesting and thankfully, it finally did, but took a long, rambling path to get to that point, but it wasn't all in vain and a waste of time, as the action did pick up slightly after the hand was discovered, but it still took about the entire book to get to an answer that wasn't that hard to figure out, as we all know it anyway, and I had figured it out well before the end, not everything, of course, but what the "secret word" was, as I am sure most everyone did. I admit it is made up of many, many small chapters, as another reviewer pointed out, a couple of them just one page, and most of them anywhere from one and a half pages to three or four, very rarely any over that many pages, but hey, a chapter is just a number and can literally be ignored, they don't mean anything except to let you know that the story is going to jump to another part, with some of the other characters featured rather than the one you are currently reading about. In spite of all of this, it is an entertaining read, if it had not been, all of these negative reviewers would not have finished reading it! All the puzzles and symbols got a little tiring, but they were very interesting and are part of the plot so had to be there. And as always, with all of his books, he leaves you wondering how much is made up (fiction) and how much is really true, especially when dealing with the Masons. We hear so much about the secret rites and initiations in that organization that we really don't know what the truth is about them, and my husband is a Mason, has been for forty years and I still know nothing at all about what goes on at their meetings or teh initiations! Of course, he denies most of the "secrets" that this book "tells" about them. I only know, and know it first hand, that the organization does do a LOT of good works, especially where children are concerned. I know that the Scottish Rite Hospitals does tremendous work for burn victims and without payment if necessary. They also help crippled children without payment. A nephew of my husband's family who was born crippled was taken care of for years and fitted with needed leg braces free of charge, so I cannot say anything bad about the Masons and Shriners. My husband is a Shriner(which is just another degree of Free Masonry, I think) and has driven the buses that take burned children from our home state to Cincinnati,OH numerous times to be treated there. As for this book by Dan Brown, it has been described here as not being "great literature." Tell me, please, just what is "Great literature?"
I have been reading all of my life and have read books in all genres. To be honest, I still can't answer that question accurately. I have read books that are supposed to be "great literature" like "War and Peace" "The Quincunx"(worst, most boring book in the world, bored me to insanity almost, my recommendation: Don't read it, it is lousy) "Madame Bovary" and many others that some call "Great Literature." Well, frankly, I don't know what is so "great" about them, they are usually always very boring. And whether he (Dan Brown)is supposed to be a great writer or not, judging by the number of books he has written and how long "The DaVinci Code" stayed on the best seller lists, he must be doing something right and evidently people buy and read his books, so what makes him different or judged as "not a good writer?" Seems a lot of people consider him good enough to look forward to and enjoy his books. I certainly do and I liked the story he has written in this book and found it very entertaining and a really good mystery isn't that why we read a book? To be entertained and get enjoyment from reading it? I experienced both of these emotions so I consider it a "good book!" And as for Brown's writing skills, they seem as good as any other author that I have read, they tell a story and make it clear and concise through the words that are used, and what else makes a "good writer," pray tell? And he usually wraps it all up neatly at the end, so what more do you want? I was satisfied with "THE LOST SYMBOL" and not sorry that I have read it, in spite of the rather slow beginning. It got very interesting farther into it. Is "Gone With The Wind" considered "great literature?" Or does it have to be a very, very old book and boring, to be considered "great literature? I am on a Forum about great literature and it is surprising at the number of "book snobs" on that Forum who seem to think that if a book isn't old and boring or translated from some Asian language, like Japanese or Chinese, it isn't worth reading and only "not very intelligent" people read books that do not fall into that category. I think they are just trying to impress others with their own "intelligence" which can be seen very plainly in their postings isn't really that great at all. They actually appear to be very unintelligent with some of their rambling postings about "the translations" instead of being about the books and the content and the stories that the books tell. It is people like that that is constantly putting Dan Brown's books down.
Alphia D. Larkins
Book Review: A Lost Opportunity
Summary: 4 Stars
The Lost Opportunity
In the year 2005, Dan Brown released his fourth novel, The Da Vinci Code. It soon became a world-wide sensation, outsold only by J.K. Rowling's fifth Harry Potter novel, Order of the Phoenix. Still, The Da Vinci Code is one of the most widely read books ever written. Clearly Brown hit on some sort of secret formula of entertainment. The question is, can he do it again? Does his latest novel and Code follow-up, The Lost Symbol, live up to the legacy? Well, yes...unfortunately.
The first thing one notices about this book is the jacket. Simply put, this book is beautiful. The seal of the Masonic Scottish Rite is stamped in red "wax", directly above the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., which can be seen through a pyramidal rip in yellowed parchment. Layers of arcane symbols cover nearly every inch of the jacket, and the Washington Monument is visible through a keyhole on the spine. Nearly everything on the jacket has a meaning, including several hidden puzzles that the clever reader can decipher. They say not to judge a book by its cover, but if an exception was made for The Lost Symbol, then it would be a literary masterpiece.
But who cares how the book looks? What really matters is the story. Every Dan Brown novel centers on a secret society and its, well, secrets. This time it's the Freemasons, a world-wide organization whose roots stretch all the way back to the ancient Egyptians, and whose members range from your grandpa to the President of the United States (pick your favorite, they were all Masons). The Freemasons, however, are not so much a secret society as they are a "society with secrets", secrets that people would kill for.
The story starts with the usual shadowy ceremony, this time a mysterious tattooed man named Mal'akh being inducted into the 33rd degree of Freemasonry (this being the highest possible level). But, of course, Mal'akh has sinister, ulterior motives, as can be deduced by such interior monologues as, "They have opened their doors to me," and "Soon you will lose that which you hold most dear." Despite being something of a cookie-cutter villain, Mal'akh is actually quite terrifying, with an
intriguing back story and a knack for really ruining your day. He's also really full of himself, as can be deduced by such interior monologues as, "I am a masterpiece." Mal'akh does a lot of interior monologues.
The story then jumps to returning Harvard "symbologist" (no, there is no such thing) and lover of turtle necks, Robert Langdon. Langdon receives an urgent call from his old mentor Peter Solomon and is asked to come to Washington, D.C. right away, where he is needed to give an emergency presentation on (whom else?) the Freemasons. He catches the next flight and speeds off. Naturally things don't go too well. One kidnapping, severed hand and sinister phone call later, Langdon is racing against a 12-hour clock to rescue Peter Solomon by solving the Ancient Mysteries of the Freemasons, all for the benefit of Mal'akh.
Brown's work has been accused of using the exact same template, and The Lost Symbol is no exception. The great thing about The Lost Symbol, however, is that it manages to make a tired formula new and exciting. The tone and pace are tense and urgent as Langdon struggles to sort out the web of deception in order to save his mentor. The situations Mal'akh puts the characters through are nerve-wracking and sometimes disturbing. The puzzles and codes, being Brown's specialty, are excellently crafted and immensely fun to try and solve before Langdon. Then there are the locations. From the Masonic Temple to the Smithsonian Museum, each place that Langdon visits is a real location in Washington, and each is a fantastic set piece described in wonderful detail. Lots of surprising facts are revealed about the nation's capitol city. In fact, the entire story is full of detail that never becomes too overwhelming. There are also some small secrets (try dialing the phone number Langdon is given early in the story) and nods to the fans (a mention of one of Brown's earlier novels) that can be found throughout the story.
It's unfortunate, then, that the worst part is the ending. The Lost Symbol commits the same crime as The Da Vinci Code, by rewarding readers with--well, nothing. After the intense chase across Washington, after the deception and puzzle solving, when the Ancient Mysteries are finally revealed they don't live up to the grand name. The trouble gone through just doesn't seem worth it. Not only that, but the story rambles on when it feels like it should have ended 37 pages ago. The action comes to an abrupt halt, and suddenly the characters begin to wax philosophical. There's nothing wrong with some depth to a story, but the message Mr. Brown tries to convey seems to have been lost in translation. Even Langdon is left scratching his head at the confusing conjecture. It's tempting to recommend that readers simply stop reading after the final confrontation, but that would leave loose ends. It's a disappointing conclusion to an otherwise great story.
The Lost Symbol could have been better than The Da Vinci Code, and in some ways it is; the writing is better, the story is more skillfully crafted (and more historically accurate), and there's lots more action. But it ultimately loses points for an unsatisfactory finish and several pages of pointless rambling. Read the book and enjoy the ride, just don't expect too much at the end.
Book Review: The "Word" is... Unclear.
Summary: 4 Stars
=The Da Vinci Code= was a hard act to follow, and I can't say that Dan Brown either met or exceeded the standards he established in his previous book, which discredited (nay, virtually decimated) Christianity and exposed the many atrocities committed in its name, to the delight of many who were really sick of the Christian fascism exhibited by so many far right-wing Republicans during the Bush administration.
Dan Brown books always contain a large amounts of very interesting background information and this one didn't disappoint in that area, with its many details about Masonry, noetic science, symbolism in paintings by Albrecht Durer, references to hidden science in ancient scripture, mysticism, the relationship between the mind and quantum physics, the power of intention, the effects of meditation, and attaining mental powers by merging with "The One".
The author talked a great deal about the "Lost Word", the "Ineffable Word"--- which, if a person were to discover it or accidentally say it, he could become instantly enlightened and endowed with omniscience and an understanding of buried Ancient Mysteries that have been sought by Masons, Rosicrucians, philosophers, meditators, alchemists, and other assorted occultists. But one of the places where the book failed for me is how at the end, the author is not terribly clear about what his definition of the Lost Word exactly is. First he says it's a circumpunct, a circle with a dot inside of it that represents The Source or merging with The One, which makes a great deal of sense from a mystical or Eastern philosophy standpoint. But then he starts talking about how "The Word" equals the Bible, where some have found hidden scientific meanings. Or, "Laus Deo", which translates as "Praise God". Or, "Jeova Santus Unus", which translates as "One True God".
So--- the thing that offends me about the end of the book is that first he comes to a mystical solution, but then it seems like he twists it to make it sound like a Christian solution. It's almost as though he was coming to the end of a really good book, but then a bunch of Republicans kidnapped him, took him into a room and told him how his previous book made them really mad, and then they forced him to put a Christian twist onto the end of this one.
It would make sense, from a Masonic standpoint, to "merge" all religions together at the end of the book, because Masonry does merge all religions, but it just seemed to me that with all of the expostulating about "Praise God" and "the Word equals the Bible" and "One True God" that he was coming to more of a Christian conclusion, which to me was disappointing and somewhat offensive. At the very end, he speaks of "God" as a symbol of man's potential, but I guess the fact that is sounded like a male god instead of an androgynous "god" made it seem Christian to me instead of universal.
The character Mal'akh made more sense, in a weird sociopathic way, when he was talking about trying to attain "fleshless sentience" (that would occur during meditation) and his statement about how god had no gender and was an androgyne. That is what the ancients believed and it makes sense today, because: Asking a woman to worship a male god is sexist, and diminishes the woman. Asking a black person to worship a white god is racist and diminishes the black person, asking a homosexual to worship a chaste heterosexual makes no sense, and asking the mother of a child to worship a "pure" virgin makes her seem unclean because she has been de-virginated.
I was also interested in the "John gesture" made by the severed hand and made in what Dan Brown says are three of Leonardo's paintings (but it is also made by the baby representing John the Baptist in the Madonna of the Rocks, so it's actually in FOUR of Leonardo's paintings). I read something in Madame Blavatsky about how a raised index finger was supposed to signify "back to the grove", i.e., back to the paganism, back to the mystery schools that practiced sacred sexuality and rituals that killed the king so that the crops could grow, but he was always "risen" or resurrected by a woman, with whom he then "merged" sexually in the same way that mystics merge with The One. Actually, in Leonardo's painting of St. John the Baptist, his forefinger is "risen" but so is another part of his anatomy, which would tie in with the whole sacred sexuality aspect of Madame Blavatsky's explanation of the gesture. But--- Dan Brown just says that this gesture, also depicted in a statue of George Washington, is "a well-known symbol of the Ancient Mysteries" and an invitation to be initiated into mysteries or ancient knowledge (or the hieros gamos).
Another thing that bothered me about the book: Katherine, the noetic scientist, talks about how "today's science was not so much making 'discoveries' as it was making 'rediscoveries'" because mankind had "let go" what they once knew. Well, I think the author should have pointed out that the reason much of the ancient science was lost was because Christians (and also Muslims) burned the Library of Alexandria, in their attempts to destroy paganism and science and enhance religion, and that efforts to nourish science were further inhibited by the Church during the 1000 years following the Fall of Rome, which were completely dominated by Christianity.
Anyway, it's a very interesting book--- but the conclusion is ... somewhat murky.
Book Review: The Last Langdon (I hope)
Summary: 1 Stars
I read "The Lost Symbol" out of curiosity about what Dan Brown would write about the Washington, D. C. area and the Masons, and to see what the storyline was this time. Admittedly I had very low expectations, and they were fulfilled.
*Robert Langdon has even less personality than before-his most important personal characteristics are his claustrophobia and wearing a Mickey Mouse watch. The other characters are Brown's boilerplate cast with different names and nationalities. Over-the-top villain described in disgusting detail. I like some relation to reality in my fiction-the villain's ability to disguise himself was too unbelievable. The wig camera is a hoot.
*The "OMG" tone of the characters' thoughts, except where they are ponderous and self-righteous-bad, bad writing.
*The whole book seemed pointless. It's never clear exactly what Langdon's looking for. There's the lost word, and the map to the Ancient Mysteries, and the Ancient Mysteries themselves (which are theoretically not lost at all, if they're contained in the sacred books of the world's religions). No lost symbol. The villain already knew the location of the Masonic pyramid. Using the severed hand as a puzzle map for Langdon is just another "Look how bad I am" moment.
*The reader doesn't know what the CIA is doing until very late in the storyline, and the CIA wouldn't be involved in domestic matters anyway. Again, no relation to reality. Their real function was to provide someone for Langdon to run away from, and provide the authority figure to be an enemy and then a grudging ally of Langdon's. Had to laugh at the line about a "CIA inquisition." The big, bad CIA, rather than the big, bad Catholic Church.
*Plot: The crazed villain is going to tattoo the top of his head with the lost word, sacrifice himself to the dark side, get revenge on those who wronged him, and embarrass the Masons, while preventing the rest of the world from having access to the Ancient Mysteries. He plays Langdon and Katherine Solomon expertly; they comply with his requests with no verification (I brought the secret artifact that Peter asked me to keep safe with me because someone I'd never heard of or spoken to before told me to?). The CIA at least had a concrete objective, but their portrayal and behavior were ludicrous.
*Katherine's secret lab-ludicrous. Peter Solomon can dispose of Smithsonian space to his relatives without formalities? Katherine has no secure backup for her work? A carpet path through the dark? And Peter Solomon's personal space in the Capitol? Come on.
*Once the villain was disposed of, Dan Brown tried to find some point to it all. There was really nothing lost to be found, but Langdon had to be convinced that ALL of the world's religions for thousands of years had hidden their common central theme from the unenlightened masses. For what and how? And now the Masons can reveal it because of-Katherine Solomon's research?
*Again, it's fiction, but-Katherine Solomon, in an astonishingly short time, and with no apparent help except her mostly-unlamented computer tech and the odd volunteer, no peer review, no corroborative research-has proven the existence of the soul, the ability of humans to affect matter with their thoughts, and all sorts of other things, giving everyone access to the hidden ancient wisdom just as soon as she publishes. All the messy details of competing religions will be forgotten, and we can all become like gods due to our mental abilities, just as soon as this research is released. Bushwa.
*If you're at all familiar with Washington, D. C., or even able to use the internet, there's nothing amazing about the descriptions of the Capitol and other Washington buildings, except perhaps Brown's continuous attempts to find hidden esoterica. For example, the painting on the Rotunda of the Capitol is entirely understandable in terms of the 19th century view of George Washington, with no need for convoluted interpretation. He was the father of our country, the exemplar of patriotism, civic duty, and virtue. Many other readers have pointed out numerous errors in the physical descriptions and directions in the book. The one that stuck out to me: The Masonic Temple (as it's known to local residents) in Alexandria is not across the street from the King Street Metro station, and that's an easy check. If you're going to talk about real places, take the 30 seconds it would cost you to get it right. There was no overriding plot need to change the location.
*Nothing about the Masons was in the least shocking or surprising. They filled the bill for a somewhat secretive, not well-understood group who could be connected to vague esoteric antecedents. Instead of the Illuminati and Opus Dei as bad guys, you have the Masons as good guys. Check out some of the Masonic websites for their takes on Brown's descriptions of their rituals and symbols.
*The Solomons are superhumans-no physical repercussions from serious blood loss or nonsurgical amputation-no shock, no pain-Maybe I'll show up at the hospital after I convince this friend of mine that he can get hidden ancient knowledge out of this stone.
All in all, just a badly written, silly, pointless book.
Book Review: Remain extremely critical
Summary: 4 Stars
The thriller is perfect and breathtaking, even if there are some weak points here and there, I mean the lack of professionalism on the side of the CIA. As for that Dan Brown reveals some of the modern techniques the CIA has been using for a while to torture people and at the same time shows how they can very easily overuse their powers and endanger the freedom of other people in the name of national security. It shows also how easy it is to make them panic. The book is doing exactly what the CIA and the criminal use to frighten people into doing what they want. It reveals that some of the top US officers, ministers and representatives, without forgetting the Supreme Court justices and the senators, the generals and the police departments, FBI and CIA, are members of the Freemason movement in absolute secrecy. But then the fact that the book tries to show that these free masons are nothing but the direct descendants of the founding fathers and the framers of the USA is at least excessive, though it is funny to show the beautiful ideological art produced by that political movement to honor and deify - they use the word apotheosis (transformation into a god) in Congress - George Washington and some others. At the time that was pompous, but Napoleon had done the same, but to show that as the acme of freedom and democracy is absurd and the great indifference of the people today about these "masterpieces" of grandiloquent propaganda is plain sanity. The fact that Dan brown builds the whole novel on the map of Washington DC and the basic freemason symbols and representations that are embedded in that town is also interesting but definitely excessive, the indifference of people about it today is plain sanity. Dan Brown though goes beyond and turns freemasonry into the full merging of all the various movements that have always existed in the world and that have questioned the ideological and existential dictatorship of one political organization across the millennia. I do not think that the Rosicrucians, the Zoroastrians, the Vedic Rsis, those he calls the original Jews and Christians, the freemasons, the Illuminati and all the others he covers with ... are the same thing. But what's more his harping on the idea that we have to re-discover and go back to the knowledge of the origins of humanity is a plain absurdity that in a way kills the credibility of the novel. It is the basic myth of Marx, the Bible, and the Quran, the belief in some kind of original primival paradise. Marx called it original or primitive communism. Absurd. Man emerged through accidental mutations from animality and the selection of the best mutations by natural conditions enabled the human kind to develop little by little the brain we have, the languages we have, the intelligence we have, etc. Our science being produced by our brains has to be in phase with them and our brains being produced by the surrounding world that selects the mutations have to be in phase with the world, hence our science has to be in phase with the world, but, and that is a big but, it does not reproduce the world: it explains the world by producing a model of that world, and a model is in no way a reproduction. The wheel, used to transport our bodies and goods, is nothing but a model of our legs since it produces the same effect: to transport us from one place to the next. Dan Brown ignores science and only accumulates things that he declares look alike, but comparing is not proving and historians like Eisenman know that the meaning of history can only come from the differences between documents and not from the common points. Yes we are living a transitional phase due to science and technology, due to communication and the economy of knowledge, but not because knowledge has a weight or a material density, but because knowledge is able, when used in exchange and cooperation among people to produce added value and hence to increase the value of our production, of our products, of our goods, hence the wealth of our society. Dan Brown is far from this knowledge economy since he defends the idea that some knowledge has to be kept as mysteries, that is to say something only those who have been initiated can know. That is what is totally unacceptable in the freemason movement, apart from the fact it is a secret society that hides a lot of its inner functioning and members, the fact that it is believing in an elite, in the necessity to entrust the government of the world to an initiated elite. And of course Dan Brown makes some basic mistakes, like telling us there have only been twelve zodiac signs. Wrong. There have been thirteen zodiac signs up to the twelfth or thirteenth centuries in our society (the 11th century thirteenth sign has been put back up on the outside wall of the abbey church of Issoire (France) a few years ago. The thirteenth sign is the serpent bearer, the ancestor of pour caduceis, of medicine, the healer, the bronze serpent of Moses. It's a shame such approximate facts and mistakes are used to support the forty page final lecture which is absolutely useless in the plot and absurd in content. By the way Buddha did not believe in God.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, University Paris 12 Créteil, CEGID