Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.48 AVERAGE
3.48 AVERAGE
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
En ole lukenut Robert Langdon tarinoita aivan järjestyksessä, mutta kuten Da Vinci- koodin kanssa, minulla oli liian kovat odotukset. Etenkin oma sisareni kehui tätä osaa todella paljon, mutta en ollut ihan vaikuttunut.
Dan Brown kyllä osaa kirjoittaa ja luoda todella mielenkiintoisia tarinoita ja muutenkin kirjoittaa ne osuvaan asuun. Tämä osa vain ei ihan tarinan puolesta osunut ja uponnut.
Dan Brown kyllä osaa kirjoittaa ja luoda todella mielenkiintoisia tarinoita ja muutenkin kirjoittaa ne osuvaan asuun. Tämä osa vain ei ihan tarinan puolesta osunut ja uponnut.
adventurous
inspiring
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Same formula as the previous Langdon books, but I still enjoyed it a lot
adventurous
informative
mysterious
fast-paced
Pretty good read. The first 100 pages or so I wasn't that excited about it. The layout was too much like his other books and I felt like I was reading the same thing, but using a different subject matter. But once it really got going, it had enough new and interesting ideas and twists that I enjoyed reading it. The "bad guy" is a little too disturbing to me and I almost stopped reading at one point because I felt really sickened by him. But that was probably at the climactic point of the story and then it sort of just resolved and finished. Da Vinci Code is still my favorite of the three books.
Superb! This book truly kept you wondering what the heck was going on. And, to top it off you always feel like you learn so much while reading Dan Brown's books. The antagonist was a bit over the top and far fetched but, not enough to significantly detract from the story.
Eh, it was okay. I didn't find it as fascinating as Brown's other books. I didn't love the little jab at Joseph Smith, but it's to be expected. By the end of the book I just wanted to finish it. The information about Masons was interesting but not captivating the way the other books were. I appreciated that it ended on a positive note, especially regarding religion. The idea of becoming like God was woven throughout the book and was discussed as such a novel idea, as well our bodies and minds being "a temple of God". I found this fascinating, especially looking at it from an LDS perspective. I wasn't shocked by any "doctrine" he discussed, nor was I surprised by the scientific ramifications. In his other books, I found myself thinking, "Hm, that's definitely something to think about." In this one, there wasn't much that shocked me or made me think about where I stand on certain doctrines and concepts. It was pretty straightforward, albeit laden with symbols. I don't think I'll be buying this one. The library copy was good enough. Still, an interesting read and I learned quite a bit about Freemasonry.
I just wrote a really long review, the longest review that I had EVER written, and then my internet crashed. I was so proud of it too! Oh the irony. Damn it all to hell. I'll finish it tomorow. The only thing that was "saved" was this:
So...I was REALLY excited about Dan Brown's new book coming out. I even ordered it early on Amazon.com to make sure it would be in my mail box the day it was released to the public.
Unfortunately, my taste buds were not satisfied. I had anticipated a great novel in the making due to the many years I had to wait in order to devour it within 24 hours.
I thoroughly enjoyed the first half of the book immensely. It continued along with the storyline of Robert Langdon and frivilous search for clues, that had been skeptically laid out in plain sight that no one ever really paid attention to before (sound familiar?). This lightning-paced thriller was awesome. I have always enjoyed Dan Brown's writing style and prose. I like when he switches back and forth between different points of view, and never confuses his reader within his constructed timelines. He always talks in the present, then flashes backward, and then jumps right back into the scene he just left you in. He never complicates things, and always presents his fictional novels with great circumstantial evidence that implores the reader to get out there and discover the hidden symbols themselves.
The reason I have been attracted to Dan Brown's articulation was always in the stories and secret societies that he discovered. I'm glad that he chose the Freemasons as the secret society for this book, but I did not like how he portrayed them. Unlike his other novels, Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code, The Lost Symbol was mediocre in my opinion.
Like I said, I really enjoyed the first half of the book. It was eerily similar to Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code in the sense that yes it was another Robert Langdon mystery suspense story, and all the secret symbols laid out in plain sight, the lengths only the "enlightened" ones went to to secure the truth that apparently we, "normal society" could not handle because our brains would simply implode. I liked all of the high intensity chase scenes, how he would jump from one scene to the next and leave you grasping desperately at the next page eager to get back to the other scene but so captivated in this one that you forgot altogether what was happening, until he left you once again on the cusp of grabbing at straws. Once again, no cigar.
(Just a sidenote, this book was also eerialy similar to National Treasure 2! I felt like Nicholas Cage did a better job in the movie than this book did. Also, I kind of wished that the book would have ended in the top floor of the House of Temple. Oh well.)
The remaining half of the book was definitely not my cup of tea. It went into this highly religious splurge on how we are godlike and we should only try to acclaim this godlikeness when we know the "truth." Um, no. Sorry but I do not intend to act godlike because to me there is a God. I am a Christian and was raised Roman Catholic. My mom has always enstilled in "Always be true to yourself" so I 100% agree with the saying that was repeated countless times in the novel "Know thyself." Even if it goes against all the grain, be true to yourself. I did not like how religion just suddenly exploded into this secret society and was then repeatedly shoved down my throat.
I can understand how science and technology and religion can all come together to explain the true nature of things (to a certain degree), but I do not agree with what Brown was professing that religion is the key to everything. Because of my background in science, technology, and the medicinal field, I fear that I base my life and beliefs solely on facts. Yes, I do believe in God, a Supreme Being of Power, but I also believe in strict, cut and dry, cold, hard facts. I also believe in miracles. I believe that coincidences are reminders that God does exist. I have read other literature prior to reading this book about the pineal gland that Katherine mentioned, and its power and how the brain is not used to its full potential. It was interesting to see that Brown touched on these points.
However, I do not know or compute how exactly Noetic theories work. I understand the concept that Katherine was referring to, but I find it hard to believe that our minds are able to change matter into something that we want. I believe in the power of positive thinking, but I do not think if I concentrate hard enough my water will turn to wine, or a piece of lead will turn into gold. I agreed more with Langdon on this than anything.
I love how Dan Brown ties in the minute details of a theory and then formulates an even bigger clue that really leads nowhere. I hate the fact that Brown predicts or assumes that we have to revert back to the way the "ancients" thought in order to make progress. Even though we have the advanced technologies of today, we are still too ignorant and stupid to compute how to think the correct way.
I also love the fact that Brown will take something as simple as a circle and make it the entire point of the book. CIRCLE! Yes! Sir Isaac Newton first drew this circle and it is a portal to the truth. But in order to open the portal we must find the key. Before we find the key we have to torture people to tell us where it is, then obtain the key, go to the portal but then realize the key is not really a key at all! It's a word and not just any word, but the bible! Ha! He baffles me and makes me laugh out loud. All because some dude drew a circle. Yeah...right.
The one thing that I have noticed in all of his books about Robert Langdon is that there is always a search for in plain sight symbols, a secret society, people going to great lengths to protect these ancient secrets, people trying to steal clues and those secrets, and the really creepy guy who thinks that God has chosen him out of mankind for some kind of transformational outage. I am seriously disturbed whenever he writes about some of the odd obsessions these creepy characters are into; whether that be nakedness, torture devices or demonic symbols interpretted the "wrong" way. And why are they always naked when they die? I get the purity thing, but come on. Let's be a little bit different from your previous novels. Even the huge computer, Kryptos was just like TRANSLTR from [b:Digital Fortress|11125|Digital Fortress|Dan Brown|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21XVTXS129L._SL75_.jpg|40195]. Or even The Cube! That was just a weird concept altogether. Being enclosed in complete blackness, but it contains the world's most precious research. Also Sin-cere was mentioned, also from Digital Fortress.
I did however feel the urge to jump on a plane to DC to look more closely at the edifices themselves. I want to plan a trip now to discover our country's greatest secret(s). The Freemasons' truth. I know that a lot of the architecture and paintings depicted in the book are going to get a swarming response once people start talking about it, and I'm sad to say that Brown did not focus on the art and culture so much in this third installment of Langdon. I did not like the focus on the Noetic theory. Although it was an interesting concept, I wanted something more concrete, more tangible. Since we found out through Katherine that our souls actually weigh something (though we don't know the exact number), it got kind of annoying in my opinion whenever she brought up her theory again. Yes the mind is capable of incredible things, but we do not know the advancements of it yet. Maybe she does, but in all actuality we honestly don't. So it was a little annoying to me because I wanted to know more secrets about the Masons themselves and what control did they actual have over our government, or something of importance.
Apparently, nowadays we are too stupid and ignorant to handle the truth or else as Brown depicted we would annihilate ourselves. (INSERT Jack Nicholson and Tom Cruise yelling at each other "I want the truth!" "You can't handle the truth!") Even when they did look back at the ancients and saw how they handled things, we were supposedly still scratching our heads, even though it was laid out for us each step of the way (quite literally).
Even before he got to the part about Mal'akh being Zach, I had already guessed he was Peter's son and had guessed about the Washington Monument as soon as he said an edifice with a huge capstone on top. I liked that I was right on the nose with it, but usually Brown throws me a curveball, so as you can guess I was a little disappointed that I was right in my assumptions. Oh well.
I can say this though: I will definitely pick up another one of his books and I will definitely re-read Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code. I do not think this was his best work, but overall it was a fun read. I prefer the first half like I said, but that was because of all the chase scenes, the figuring out of the clues, deciphering who were the bad guys, and how the famous Robert Langdon was duped by a simple lie.
Not even a dent into what I had written. CRAP!
Some quotes that I liked from the book were:
"Great minds are always feared by lesser minds." page 287
page 328 literally made me LAUGH OUT LOUD. That Dean was hilarious!
"TIME IS A RIVER...AND BOOKS ARE BOATS. MANY VOLUMES START DOWN THAT STREAM, ONLY TO BE WRECKED AND LOST BEYOND RECALL IN ITS SANDS. ONLY A FEW, A VERY FEW, ENDURE THE TESTINGS OF TIME AND LIVE TO BLESS THE AGES FOLLOWING." page 488
So...I was REALLY excited about Dan Brown's new book coming out. I even ordered it early on Amazon.com to make sure it would be in my mail box the day it was released to the public.
Unfortunately, my taste buds were not satisfied. I had anticipated a great novel in the making due to the many years I had to wait in order to devour it within 24 hours.
I thoroughly enjoyed the first half of the book immensely. It continued along with the storyline of Robert Langdon and frivilous search for clues, that had been skeptically laid out in plain sight that no one ever really paid attention to before (sound familiar?). This lightning-paced thriller was awesome. I have always enjoyed Dan Brown's writing style and prose. I like when he switches back and forth between different points of view, and never confuses his reader within his constructed timelines. He always talks in the present, then flashes backward, and then jumps right back into the scene he just left you in. He never complicates things, and always presents his fictional novels with great circumstantial evidence that implores the reader to get out there and discover the hidden symbols themselves.
The reason I have been attracted to Dan Brown's articulation was always in the stories and secret societies that he discovered. I'm glad that he chose the Freemasons as the secret society for this book, but I did not like how he portrayed them. Unlike his other novels, Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code, The Lost Symbol was mediocre in my opinion.
Like I said, I really enjoyed the first half of the book. It was eerily similar to Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code in the sense that yes it was another Robert Langdon mystery suspense story, and all the secret symbols laid out in plain sight, the lengths only the "enlightened" ones went to to secure the truth that apparently we, "normal society" could not handle because our brains would simply implode. I liked all of the high intensity chase scenes, how he would jump from one scene to the next and leave you grasping desperately at the next page eager to get back to the other scene but so captivated in this one that you forgot altogether what was happening, until he left you once again on the cusp of grabbing at straws. Once again, no cigar.
(Just a sidenote, this book was also eerialy similar to National Treasure 2! I felt like Nicholas Cage did a better job in the movie than this book did. Also, I kind of wished that the book would have ended in the top floor of the House of Temple. Oh well.)
The remaining half of the book was definitely not my cup of tea. It went into this highly religious splurge on how we are godlike and we should only try to acclaim this godlikeness when we know the "truth." Um, no. Sorry but I do not intend to act godlike because to me there is a God. I am a Christian and was raised Roman Catholic. My mom has always enstilled in "Always be true to yourself" so I 100% agree with the saying that was repeated countless times in the novel "Know thyself." Even if it goes against all the grain, be true to yourself. I did not like how religion just suddenly exploded into this secret society and was then repeatedly shoved down my throat.
I can understand how science and technology and religion can all come together to explain the true nature of things (to a certain degree), but I do not agree with what Brown was professing that religion is the key to everything. Because of my background in science, technology, and the medicinal field, I fear that I base my life and beliefs solely on facts. Yes, I do believe in God, a Supreme Being of Power, but I also believe in strict, cut and dry, cold, hard facts. I also believe in miracles. I believe that coincidences are reminders that God does exist. I have read other literature prior to reading this book about the pineal gland that Katherine mentioned, and its power and how the brain is not used to its full potential. It was interesting to see that Brown touched on these points.
However, I do not know or compute how exactly Noetic theories work. I understand the concept that Katherine was referring to, but I find it hard to believe that our minds are able to change matter into something that we want. I believe in the power of positive thinking, but I do not think if I concentrate hard enough my water will turn to wine, or a piece of lead will turn into gold. I agreed more with Langdon on this than anything.
I love how Dan Brown ties in the minute details of a theory and then formulates an even bigger clue that really leads nowhere. I hate the fact that Brown predicts or assumes that we have to revert back to the way the "ancients" thought in order to make progress. Even though we have the advanced technologies of today, we are still too ignorant and stupid to compute how to think the correct way.
I also love the fact that Brown will take something as simple as a circle and make it the entire point of the book. CIRCLE! Yes! Sir Isaac Newton first drew this circle and it is a portal to the truth. But in order to open the portal we must find the key. Before we find the key we have to torture people to tell us where it is, then obtain the key, go to the portal but then realize the key is not really a key at all! It's a word and not just any word, but the bible! Ha! He baffles me and makes me laugh out loud. All because some dude drew a circle. Yeah...right.
The one thing that I have noticed in all of his books about Robert Langdon is that there is always a search for in plain sight symbols, a secret society, people going to great lengths to protect these ancient secrets, people trying to steal clues and those secrets, and the really creepy guy who thinks that God has chosen him out of mankind for some kind of transformational outage. I am seriously disturbed whenever he writes about some of the odd obsessions these creepy characters are into; whether that be nakedness, torture devices or demonic symbols interpretted the "wrong" way. And why are they always naked when they die? I get the purity thing, but come on. Let's be a little bit different from your previous novels. Even the huge computer, Kryptos was just like TRANSLTR from [b:Digital Fortress|11125|Digital Fortress|Dan Brown|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/21XVTXS129L._SL75_.jpg|40195]. Or even The Cube! That was just a weird concept altogether. Being enclosed in complete blackness, but it contains the world's most precious research. Also Sin-cere was mentioned, also from Digital Fortress.
I did however feel the urge to jump on a plane to DC to look more closely at the edifices themselves. I want to plan a trip now to discover our country's greatest secret(s). The Freemasons' truth. I know that a lot of the architecture and paintings depicted in the book are going to get a swarming response once people start talking about it, and I'm sad to say that Brown did not focus on the art and culture so much in this third installment of Langdon. I did not like the focus on the Noetic theory. Although it was an interesting concept, I wanted something more concrete, more tangible. Since we found out through Katherine that our souls actually weigh something (though we don't know the exact number), it got kind of annoying in my opinion whenever she brought up her theory again. Yes the mind is capable of incredible things, but we do not know the advancements of it yet. Maybe she does, but in all actuality we honestly don't. So it was a little annoying to me because I wanted to know more secrets about the Masons themselves and what control did they actual have over our government, or something of importance.
Apparently, nowadays we are too stupid and ignorant to handle the truth or else as Brown depicted we would annihilate ourselves. (INSERT Jack Nicholson and Tom Cruise yelling at each other "I want the truth!" "You can't handle the truth!") Even when they did look back at the ancients and saw how they handled things, we were supposedly still scratching our heads, even though it was laid out for us each step of the way (quite literally).
Even before he got to the part about Mal'akh being Zach, I had already guessed he was Peter's son and had guessed about the Washington Monument as soon as he said an edifice with a huge capstone on top. I liked that I was right on the nose with it, but usually Brown throws me a curveball, so as you can guess I was a little disappointed that I was right in my assumptions. Oh well.
I can say this though: I will definitely pick up another one of his books and I will definitely re-read Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code. I do not think this was his best work, but overall it was a fun read. I prefer the first half like I said, but that was because of all the chase scenes, the figuring out of the clues, deciphering who were the bad guys, and how the famous Robert Langdon was duped by a simple lie.
Not even a dent into what I had written. CRAP!
Some quotes that I liked from the book were:
"Great minds are always feared by lesser minds." page 287
page 328 literally made me LAUGH OUT LOUD. That Dean was hilarious!
"TIME IS A RIVER...AND BOOKS ARE BOATS. MANY VOLUMES START DOWN THAT STREAM, ONLY TO BE WRECKED AND LOST BEYOND RECALL IN ITS SANDS. ONLY A FEW, A VERY FEW, ENDURE THE TESTINGS OF TIME AND LIVE TO BLESS THE AGES FOLLOWING." page 488
adventurous
informative
mysterious
relaxing
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
I definitely like Brown's other books better, this one wasn't a page turner for me like the others. This book does give a lot of interesting things to think about and made me want to visit Washington D.C.