Connect
Sponsors
Currently Reading
-
Terms
The Book Lady's Blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Reviews and articles posted here are property of The Book Lady's Blog and are not to be posted elsewhere without permission. Please contact me if you wish to post any of my work, or any excerpt thereof, in any other location or format.
Miscellaneous
Meet Bookrageous!
Technical Stuff
Design Credits
Oct
02
In which I kind of spoil The Lost Symbol
2009 at 8pm Posted by Rebecca Joines Schinsky
I was going to call this post a book review, but it left me with such a heavy case of the “meh”s (and I’m still getting over the flu), that I’m going to forego the plot summary. But have no fear, I’m still here to bring you a few spoilers, since my official Book Lady policy only prohibits spoiling books that are, oh, I don’t know….actually good.
If you want a spoiler-free run-down of the plot and some of the common complaints against this book, all of which I agree with, you should visit Jen, Swapna, and Michele. For reals, do not read any further if you don’t want spoilers.
Now here’s the skinny.
If you’ve read any of Dan Brown’s books, you’ll know it’s no secret that they are formulaic, and that they rely on supposedly shocking revelations about supposedly real secret societies, and that their particular blend of fact and fiction is often controversial.
After reading The Lost Symbol, you will also know that Robert Langdon CANNOT STOP LECTURING about the REAL MEANING behind commonly used (and misinterpreted) symbols. Or that he has a toned physique thanks to all those laps in the Harvard pool. (That one’s for you, Swapna.) Or that there’s this “science” called noetics that is somewhat interesting but also really makes it sound like good ole D.B. must have read The Secret.
And, oh yeah, that Dan Brown apparently now loves italics and uses them to express Langdon’s deep, intellectual thoughts.
And don’t even get me started on the villain, who has tattooed himself with mysterious, ancient symbols from head-to-toe, save the very crown of his head, which is waiting for the holiest of all symbols (that would be, ahem, the LOST one). And then it turns out that the villain is not who he says he is!
Shocker, I know.
But then it gets better….because we’ve spent 500ish pages thinking that the villain killed the son of one of the main characters (a prominent Freemason), only to find out that….wait for it…..the villain IS HIS SON!
Oh, the joy of family reunions.
And that all happens after Robert Langdon dies.
That’s right folks. Robert Langdon dies. The nasty, cartoonish, tattooed villain drowns him in a clear, plexiglass box that sounded like something from a David Blaine stunt gone awry.
And if you think that’s bad, then just wait for the part where Langdon comes back from the dead!!!!
Okay….so he doesn’t exactly resurrect, but that’s only because his plexiglass box was actually a sensory deprivation chamber filled with breathable liquid. So he only thought he was dead. Whatever it was, that near-death thing really gets Professor Langdon to thinking about all of life’s deeper meanings and how to solve the world’s problems because, hold onto your hats kids, he gets really preachy.
And I do mean REALLY PREACHY. (They got me so worked up that I started channeling Raych with the all-caps!)
And if you ask me, that is just not what Dan Brown should be doing because hello, no one in their right mind reads his books hoping to learn something. They are entertaining at best and filled with pointless cliffhangers (as Jen and Swapna both point out) at worst, and there’s just really no reason they should ever even begin to approach the realm of discussing things like the meaning of life and the nature of religion.
I’ll never be a big Dan Brown fan, but I can see a place for him, and I think it’s great that he gets people who don’t usually read into bookstores and exposed to the idea and practice of reading, but he’s only okay as long as he doesn’t take himself too seriously, and he just might have crossed that line in The Lost Symbol. I mean, really. Dan Brown writing about the nature of religion and the power of human thoughts and beliefs? Puh-leez.
(Not that D.B. cares. If he has any idea that so many people think his books are awful, he probably just chuckles to himself and goes for another lap around his pool full of money.)
And that’s not even to mention the total lack of momentum and the fact that his formula is getting tired, and that, really, he pulled off a huge coup by convincing people to spend their hard-earned money on this long-awaited (and completely disappointing) book.
Sometimes it’s fun to read trash, but this one was truly painful for me, folks.
For a closer look, check out this hilarious piece in which a writer takes a stab at editing Brown’s first two chapters (via Literary License).
Didn’t hit on something you’re wondering about? Feel free to ask away in the comments, and I’ll do my best for ya.
Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2010 Rebecca Schinsky
Related posts:
Thank you for reading the book so I don’t have to (not that I would have anyway). Hilarious post. Slate.com has a Dan Brown plot generator. Plug in a city and a secret society (like the Boy Scouts of America) and get the plot of Dan Brown’s next book!
I’m loving reading all these “The Lost Symbol” sucks posts! : )
I didn’t expect much but everyone is so excited. I won’t be reading it. : )
I’m so glad to find a spoiler-full review! Okay, first of all, I had a *sneaking suspicion* from the whole jail house scene on that the alleged murderer was REALLY the son.
Also, I was SO MAD when Langdon wasn’t really dead. Maybe that makes me a bad person, but so be it.
Yes, Dan Brown is good to get people into the bookstore that don’t usually get there, but I don’t know that THIS Dan Brown is even good for that.
You go girl. Let’s all channel some bad karma towards Dan Brown for being so damn Scooby-Dooish, wearing out what once worked, and not letting Langdon’s sorry ass DIE.
I love this review! I have no urge to read this. I read angels and demons and Da Vinci, they were okay, I really just wanted to see what the fuss was.
[...] In which I kind of spoil The Lost Symbol « The Book Lady’s Blog thebookladysblog.com/2009/10/02/in-which-i-kind-of-spoil-the-lost-symbol – view page – cached The Book Lady's Blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. — From the page [...]
I think it sucks royally that an author such as Dan Brown can write such crap and get paid so much for doing it. Then there will be movie rights too so he’ll cash in twice. I guess he’s really smart but it’s such a let down.
I had no plans to read this, so your post was perfect!
And that whole sensory deprivation chamber with breathable liquid? That alone makes me glad I’m not reading the book.
I *was* going to read this but then you reminded me (how could I forget?!) that Dan Brown basically has the same plots over and over. I’ve read all his books except The Lost Symbol, and when I finished the last one (years ago), I was like, This is lame. So I’ll spare myself the irritation and move on to something else!
I agree totally!! I just finished this book and was sorely disappointed…it just seemed like everything was a little too convenient. Robert Langdon just so happens to drown in breathable liquid…why would the killer even want him to survive? He obviously gets his information. And what about the CIA just so happening to see the drag marks on the carpet where the killer dragged Langdon? And, boy, did those 4-pages long scientific/religious explanation of things drag on… I agree whole heartedly.
It’s entertainment reading – it’s good for getting people in to the bookstore, and that’s not a bad thing. It’s not meant to compete with the books most of the folks following this site are used to.
The liquid in the lungs is taken from the movie The Abyss. I thought of that as soon as it was described as burning.
The son as Mal’lak was just too obvious. A little bit of Fight Club mixed with Scooby Doo.
It’s still entertaining though, and I’m thankful for anything that encourages people to read.
[...] In which I kind of spoil The Lost Symbol [...]
Hahaha…I have no problem with spoiler review of Dan Brown books. Blah-blah. I do have to say that I delight in his huge twists and revelations. I’m just waiting for the price to drop to pick up a copy.
I must have just needed an entertaining book, because it worked for me. Seriously, I didn’t see depraved-madman-as-son-of-mentor coming … definitely need to recharge my brain
(yeah, the whole Langdon dying // not dying ticked me off!)
[...] a funny, but spoiler-filled review check out The Book Lady’s Blog Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)The Lost SymbolKanye West strikes again.Review – [...]
What’s everyone’s probelm with the sensory deprivation chamber with the breathable liquid? That breathable liquid is a real thing.
I know it’s a real thing….but in the context of Dan Brown, it’s just another sensationalistic trick.
It’s not a real thing. It’s only theoretically possible. It would also only provide enough oxygen to a human, completely at rest, if a tube were inserted to assist in movement of the liquid in and around the lungs. The viscosity of a liquid versus air doesn’t allow fast enough transfer and removal of CO2 without such a setup.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing.
Well thanks for clearing that up
[...] gives Brown more credit than he deserves, like when he calls The Lost Symbol (which I’ve reviewed in spoilerific detail here) “a bold and ambitious undertaking,” he provides such interesting information that [...]
LOL Great review. I had much the same reaction to that book. http://fewmorepages.blogspot.com/2009/09/book-review-lost-symbol-by-dan-brown.html
Your book reviews are terrible.
Gosh, I’m so sorry you feel that way.
I hated this book too! It was painful to read but I felt obligated to finish it. I fell asleep trying to read the last 30 pages of the book. BORING! I figured out about the villain being the son during the chapter about when Zach was in prison. Not too much suspense when you figure out what is happening during the first third of the book. LAME! I don’t think I’ll read any more of his books.
Can’t say I blame you for that one.
….a total nonsense crap!!! You can impress people by your tricks and gimmicks once, maybe twice; but if you try to do the same the third time and still expect people not to throw your work down the gutters, then either you are taking your readers to be too naive, or it is for sure that you lack luster. Exactly this is reflected in Mr. Dan Brown’s work “The Lost Symbol”. I got fed up so much that I didnt even bother to go till the end, because i knew that the “WORD”, hyped so much throughout the whole work, has “got to be” something too weightless.
The book is full of disappointments. I mean, when you are trying to create a mesh of plot in and around a subject, then you got to do some justice at the “prestige”; and the reveal-ation of all the secrets in The Lost Symbol prove this. Also, a plot should be around something which is substantial, something revealing…The Lost Symbol shows people chasing around a buried “WORD” which masons have tried to protect for centuries. The characters go round the same philosophy again and again….and at the end what do you get? A piece of the same spiritual philosophy!!! At the end there is nothing revealing which the reader has paid for with much anticipation. And there you are left thinking, “That’s it? This is THE thing which these masons have been trying to protect by making serious codes through all these centuries? Whats the point?” You have to give something more realistic to the people.
The dialogues are too heavy and monotonous. There is a LOT of metaphysics and theory which is very solid…but then again a thriller story is not the place for classroom subjects. Robert Langdon plays around the same notion…his intellect guided reasoning till the end, despite of many instances wherein he has been proved wrong. Somehow this man cannot conceive that even he, the super-genius code breaker, the knower of all hidden metaphysics” can be wrong when it comes to the comprehension of secrets and esoteric understandings.
Mr. Brown should consider the fact that readers have a human mind, and it sub-consciously looks for things which it can relate to in real life. A claustrophobic man (LANGDON), already shot by a stunning taser, who is by now almost drowned in a liquid, who has probably left a few seconds of breath, can still manage to break a code while gasping his last few breaths…wow!!! This is really superhuman. And then there is the “Resurrection of Langdon”…that was too much to take. Actually I was very happy when it was declared in the book that Langdon will breathe no more…I thought, “Well! That explains the whole purpose of The Lost Symbol. Mr. Brown wanted a way to end this pathetic super-genius “Langdon” so that he gets saved from the pressure of his fans urging him to write more, and it is for this reason that Brown created this fitting end. Very Justifiable!”…but then Langdon came back out of a limbo…..Holy Cow!!!
I couldnt go any more…
“And if you ask me, that is just not what Dan Brown should be doing because hello, no one in their right mind reads his books hoping to learn something. ”
Isn’t the point of reading to learn, even if it is a subconcious desire?
Why would anyone ever touch a book if they didn’t have some need to fulfill? Learning is part of ALL levels of life, no matter a person’s lifestyle, race, gender, social status, etc. Reading is just another channel through which we learn.
Also, I find it unfair to Dan Brown and his readers that you said “no one in their right minds reads his books hoping to learn something.”. I’m sure I am in my right mind and I do enjoy his books. I have actually learned things from his books- albeit some things are Scripture verses or small facts about other religions or parts of life. However, that’s part of learning…small facts being acquired to comprise bigger, more complex thoughts. I respect your opinion about your dislike of his work, but that generalization seems a bit disrespectful.