Take a photo of a barcode or cover
“Don’t tell me we’re in the wrong museum.”
“S____, we’re in the wrong country.”
The fulcrum of the plot spins around Robert Langdon’s amnesia. His skull was grazed by a bullet and he has resultantly forgotten the last 3 or 4 days. Something happened in those four days that have set the events of the novel in motion. His dashing around Italy is peppered with factoids, preposterous timely accessing of repressed knowledge deep within his brain (“Robert then realized when he had last seen this painting: five years ago when he was giving a lecture in the same room” etc. etc.). Need we mention the run-ins with people who know him from said forgotten four days, or who remember him from a momentary encounter years prior.
This novel makes no mention of the exploits of prior books. No reminiscences of any characters, no parallels to previous situations or chases. It’s as if the story of each individual Langdon novel exists in its own universe. Langdon can be a local celebrity, known by the cleaning staff of an entire church he visited years ago, or a complete unknown depending on the needs of the narrative.
A huge problem plagues this and the previous Langdon novel [b:The Lost Symbol|6411961|The Lost Symbol (Robert Langdon, #3)|Dan Brown|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1358274396s/6411961.jpg|6600281]: the reveal of the antagonists very early on. In fact, the antagonist commits suicide in the very first chapter! No spoiler here. The bad guy’s motivations and the method by which he accomplishes his goal are transparent to the reader in the opening pages. We get no cool revelations. Absent is any tension. I am utterly confused about the reasons for constructing a novel with this architecture.
While much is forgivable, the CHEATING is not, a Brown staple. This is a novel where some good guys concoct Herculean, Truman-show caliber ruses for other good guys (elaborate set pieces, induced comas, fake injuries, fake murders, fake doctors, fake pursuits with SWAT teams) with the aim of tricking an amiable protagonist when he is already on their side. Everyone is not what they seem, particularly the last 100 pages in which we get the classic “reveal” about one of the “good guys.” Of course this person’s actions and motivations are utterly incomprehensible and every shade of random. Hence, cheating.
The Malthusian Catastrophe (human population is outpacing agricultural production/natural resources) is an interesting one and forms the motivation for the biological insanity of the antagonist. It could have been treated better, like the problem it represents. If Brown betrays my confidence as a writer with his contempt for honesty in the narrative, how can I take him seriously on a serious matter?
“S____, we’re in the wrong country.”
The fulcrum of the plot spins around Robert Langdon’s amnesia. His skull was grazed by a bullet and he has resultantly forgotten the last 3 or 4 days. Something happened in those four days that have set the events of the novel in motion. His dashing around Italy is peppered with factoids, preposterous timely accessing of repressed knowledge deep within his brain (“Robert then realized when he had last seen this painting: five years ago when he was giving a lecture in the same room” etc. etc.). Need we mention the run-ins with people who know him from said forgotten four days, or who remember him from a momentary encounter years prior.
This novel makes no mention of the exploits of prior books. No reminiscences of any characters, no parallels to previous situations or chases. It’s as if the story of each individual Langdon novel exists in its own universe. Langdon can be a local celebrity, known by the cleaning staff of an entire church he visited years ago, or a complete unknown depending on the needs of the narrative.
A huge problem plagues this and the previous Langdon novel [b:The Lost Symbol|6411961|The Lost Symbol (Robert Langdon, #3)|Dan Brown|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1358274396s/6411961.jpg|6600281]: the reveal of the antagonists very early on. In fact, the antagonist commits suicide in the very first chapter! No spoiler here. The bad guy’s motivations and the method by which he accomplishes his goal are transparent to the reader in the opening pages. We get no cool revelations. Absent is any tension. I am utterly confused about the reasons for constructing a novel with this architecture.
While much is forgivable, the CHEATING is not, a Brown staple. This is a novel where some good guys concoct Herculean, Truman-show caliber ruses for other good guys (elaborate set pieces, induced comas, fake injuries, fake murders, fake doctors, fake pursuits with SWAT teams) with the aim of tricking an amiable protagonist when he is already on their side. Everyone is not what they seem, particularly the last 100 pages in which we get the classic “reveal” about one of the “good guys.” Of course this person’s actions and motivations are utterly incomprehensible and every shade of random. Hence, cheating.
The Malthusian Catastrophe (human population is outpacing agricultural production/natural resources) is an interesting one and forms the motivation for the biological insanity of the antagonist. It could have been treated better, like the problem it represents. If Brown betrays my confidence as a writer with his contempt for honesty in the narrative, how can I take him seriously on a serious matter?
Same Dan Brown formula, with just a little twist at the end. The plot is thinner and less compelling that the other Langdon books. The only reason I give this 3-starts instead of two is that my personal interest in Medieval and Renaissance art/history/philosophy kept me sucked in to a lot of the background. If the same story was set against the religious backdrop of "Angels" and "Da Vinci" or the Washinton DC lore of "Symbol," this would have suffered - at least in my eyes.
Robert Langdon is in Italy for this latest installment of the series named for him. He wakens in a hospital in Italy with no recollection of why he is there. A woman arrives with a gun and he goes on the run with his doctor, with no explanation why. Of course there is a shadowy organization with shady plans. And lots of landmarks and Italian places and things.
I just could not stomach this book. It just came across as pretentious. Everything had a fancy name and there were plenty of things to name. I resented having to stop and look up words, not for a piece of art or a historic landmark, but for a yacht. It did not hold my interest, if anything it turned me off. Did not like!
I just could not stomach this book. It just came across as pretentious. Everything had a fancy name and there were plenty of things to name. I resented having to stop and look up words, not for a piece of art or a historic landmark, but for a yacht. It did not hold my interest, if anything it turned me off. Did not like!
Formu-fucking-laic.
Geeze, will Brown ever write a novel where Tom Hanks, I mean, Robert Langdon *doesn't* save the bloody day? Criminy, I was hoping an actual catastrophe was going to come to pass. But, nope, Langdon pieces the scenic clues together, duct tapes his way out of espionage and intrigue and saves the frickin' day.
Nut's to any more Brown novels. Suck, suck suck.
Geeze, will Brown ever write a novel where Tom Hanks, I mean, Robert Langdon *doesn't* save the bloody day? Criminy, I was hoping an actual catastrophe was going to come to pass. But, nope, Langdon pieces the scenic clues together, duct tapes his way out of espionage and intrigue and saves the frickin' day.
Nut's to any more Brown novels. Suck, suck suck.
Absolutely loved it
First book to read for Dan Brown
Not the last (I already have Angels and Demons and The da vinci code which I want to read)
First impression i so want to go to Italy and pass by the places he mentioned (I felt I was there and had this urge to go there) and also Hagia Sofia (absolutely superb)
Dan Brown knows how to describe and makes you feel that you are in the event.
The constant twists made you at the edge of your seat. Unexpected twists till the end of the book.
The ideas are exciting and the sequence of events and analysis on point
First book to read for Dan Brown
Not the last (I already have Angels and Demons and The da vinci code which I want to read)
First impression i so want to go to Italy and pass by the places he mentioned (I felt I was there and had this urge to go there) and also Hagia Sofia (absolutely superb)
Dan Brown knows how to describe and makes you feel that you are in the event.
The constant twists made you at the edge of your seat. Unexpected twists till the end of the book.
The ideas are exciting and the sequence of events and analysis on point
Absolutely loved it
First book to read for Dan Brown
Not the last (I already have Angels and Demons and The da vinci code which I want to read)
First impression i so want to go to Italy and pass by the places he mentioned (I felt I was there and had this urge to go there) and also Hagia Sofia (absolutely superb)
Dan Brown knows how to describe and makes you feel that you are in the event.
The constant twists made you at the edge of your seat. Unexpected twists till the end of the book.
The ideas are exciting and the sequence of events and analysis on point
First book to read for Dan Brown
Not the last (I already have Angels and Demons and The da vinci code which I want to read)
First impression i so want to go to Italy and pass by the places he mentioned (I felt I was there and had this urge to go there) and also Hagia Sofia (absolutely superb)
Dan Brown knows how to describe and makes you feel that you are in the event.
The constant twists made you at the edge of your seat. Unexpected twists till the end of the book.
The ideas are exciting and the sequence of events and analysis on point
Absolutely loved it
First book to read for Dan Brown
Not the last (I already have Angels and Demons and The da vinci code which I want to read)
First impression i so want to go to Italy and pass by the places he mentioned (I felt I was there and had this urge to go there) and also Hagia Sofia (absolutely superb)
Dan Brown knows how to describe and makes you feel that you are in the event.
The constant twists made you at the edge of your seat. Unexpected twists till the end of the book.
The ideas are exciting and the sequence of events and analysis on point
First book to read for Dan Brown
Not the last (I already have Angels and Demons and The da vinci code which I want to read)
First impression i so want to go to Italy and pass by the places he mentioned (I felt I was there and had this urge to go there) and also Hagia Sofia (absolutely superb)
Dan Brown knows how to describe and makes you feel that you are in the event.
The constant twists made you at the edge of your seat. Unexpected twists till the end of the book.
The ideas are exciting and the sequence of events and analysis on point
Well, Dan Brown certainly has a formula. And I'm not ashamed to admit, I've really liked it...until now.
Look, you know you're not getting great literature with Brown. It doesn't have to be. He's entertaining. Yes, there are cliches, stilted dialogue, and the setup is invariably the same (at least with the Langdon books), but something in these stories is speaking to people. I loved The Lost Symbol--not ashamed to admit it. You should never be ashamed to say you liked any book, but for some reason Brown enthusiasts draw those groans from the literati (okay, I can see reasons why literature buffs are disgusted he's a top seller, but come on, some of that is entirely sour grapes, you know?)
Inferno starts off with a blast, and despite myself, I thought, "He's done it again. Despite all the flaws, he's done it again." But soon, the familiar weight of Brown's style, along with multiple--and boy, I mean multiple--flashbacks, weighed Inferno down. More than once I wasn't even sure whether I was in the novel's past or present narrative and was surprised when I found out I guessed wrong. For all the interesting detail in Inferno, the story because too much travelogue and textbook and not enough character and action. It seemed every single plot point in the book had to be slowed down and discussed (and yes, I realize this has happened with Brown many times before, but I thought he did a better job at integrating in previous novels).
I didn't dislike Inferno. I didn't necessarily really like it either. Even with all its blemishes, Brown got me through to the end, which is more than I can say for other top sellers. But still, it may be time for a change of pace with Langdon. There's a lot of wisdom in Brown's books--it's just that hardly any of it comes from the characters. When it does, it seems hokey. Brown's genius comes across best as the narrator. I'd be very interested to see what he could do in a nonfiction setting.
Recommended for Brown fans. Anyone new to this hugely popular author is better off jumping in earlier in the series.
Look, you know you're not getting great literature with Brown. It doesn't have to be. He's entertaining. Yes, there are cliches, stilted dialogue, and the setup is invariably the same (at least with the Langdon books), but something in these stories is speaking to people. I loved The Lost Symbol--not ashamed to admit it. You should never be ashamed to say you liked any book, but for some reason Brown enthusiasts draw those groans from the literati (okay, I can see reasons why literature buffs are disgusted he's a top seller, but come on, some of that is entirely sour grapes, you know?)
Inferno starts off with a blast, and despite myself, I thought, "He's done it again. Despite all the flaws, he's done it again." But soon, the familiar weight of Brown's style, along with multiple--and boy, I mean multiple--flashbacks, weighed Inferno down. More than once I wasn't even sure whether I was in the novel's past or present narrative and was surprised when I found out I guessed wrong. For all the interesting detail in Inferno, the story because too much travelogue and textbook and not enough character and action. It seemed every single plot point in the book had to be slowed down and discussed (and yes, I realize this has happened with Brown many times before, but I thought he did a better job at integrating in previous novels).
I didn't dislike Inferno. I didn't necessarily really like it either. Even with all its blemishes, Brown got me through to the end, which is more than I can say for other top sellers. But still, it may be time for a change of pace with Langdon. There's a lot of wisdom in Brown's books--it's just that hardly any of it comes from the characters. When it does, it seems hokey. Brown's genius comes across best as the narrator. I'd be very interested to see what he could do in a nonfiction setting.
Recommended for Brown fans. Anyone new to this hugely popular author is better off jumping in earlier in the series.
Yes, I know I've read all of Dan Brown's books but this book was samey. Same plotline, same character backgrounds (Robert Langdon meets beautiful woman who get chased in a European city by an underground corporation or other, usually religious) and same locations. I listened to it on audiobook and to be honest as it was like most of his other works, I didn't really pay attention to a lot of it. The narrator, Paul Michael, wasn't brilliant and was quite droll, there was no pitch to his voice and his accents were annoying. I ummed and ahhed on whether I should buy this book for ages. I wish I hadn't bothered.
Typical Brown. Langdon running across famous city reciting verses from famous book. Not impressed with the plague theme though. All in all I've read better books.