"The Lost Symbol"

by Dan Brown

Earlier I said I would add to the several reviews of this book after I finished it . Here ‘tis.

My verdict is sideways on this one – neither an enthusiastic upwards gesture nor a nose-holding downward one.

High points:

· Fast pace.
· Suspenseful.
· Lots of occult references and spookiness (for those who like those sorts of things).
· Good plot continuity despite MANY sudden scene changes.

Low points:

· One dimensional characterization.
· Implausible situations and constructs requiring enormous suspension of disbelief.
· Questionable factual grasp (e.g., one of the “ancient mystical texts” cited is actually a fairly recent popularization of quantum physics that I have reviewed in this blog).
· Reads a lot like the screen play for which it is obviously destined (I found myself fantasy casting – Hanks, of course, as the protagonist, that diminutive actress who looks like Mother Theresa (I can’t think of her name, doggone it) as Sato, the CIA director, Anthony Hopkins as one of the old wise ones, and some very buff, but very weird wresting type as the super villain).

All in all, it was a kind of fun read, but, in my opinion, simplistic and adolescent in its overall literary quality. It has features reminiscent of “Star Wars” with its dark force, the arcane references that those of us familiar with H.P. Lovecraft might remember, a “find-the-treasure” puzzle novel, James Bond-like adventure, a lot of the conspirational innuendos common to tracts from both the lunatic fringes of the far right and the far left, and even some touches of Odysseus’ trials and tribulations.

As far as Brown’s reputation as a heretical anti-catholic and here as an uncoverer of Masonic secrets, I think that folks get bent way out of shape in looking at his fiction. I know enough about the Catholic Church, for example, to recognize his having fun with it (the pope as a helicopter pilot and parachutist in “Angels and Demons”??) or being abjectly ignorant of some of the institution’s framework. I don’t know anything at all about the Masons beyond their local shrine having a nice country club golf course with a monochrome grey statue in front portraying a shriner leading some crippled kids somewhere – that statue with the flat-topped fez always reminds me of Karloff’s Frankenstein monster taking those poor kids off into the woods.

In any event, I think Brown and similar writers in this genre (Steve Berry, being one, or even Ian Fleming) deliberately try to give an impression that there are insidious, super-powerful institutional forces in the world with well-planned scenarios for social domination. Having some experience with the usually chaotic way institutions work, I simply can’t see organizational leadership in government, the church, secret societies, or anything else having the simple wisdom and coherence to carry it off. My cynical view is that, even if there were organizations with mission statements to provide a “New World Order”, the leaders, being as idiotic and disorganized as the rest of us, go around with one thumb in their mouths and the other in their nether parts, waiting for someone to holler, “Switch ‘em!” (the favorite taunt of our old football coach).

So read “The Lost Symbol” for fun if you want, or wait for the movie, but Great Literature – no.

Reviewed by Ken West

"The Lost Symbol"

by Dan Brown

One of the things that Dan Brown does well, this I even remember from ‘The Da Vinci Code,’ is that he knows how to end a book chapter with the reader wanting to read more.

In ‘The Lost Symbol,’ I think he took to heart some of the criticisms that he was anti-religion and wrote part of this book in response as if to say between the lines, “No I’m not!”

As everyone and their mother, brother, and dog are aware, ‘The Lost Symbol’ centers around the Freemasons and all of their degrees of masonry, particularly the 33rd level…and no, it isn’t a coincidence that Jesus was reportedly 33 when he was crucified. For someone like me who has very little interest in the Freemasons the book was quite ‘educational’. I was aware that many of the founding fathers of the United States of America were Freemasons and had incorporated their symbols into various things like American money and buildings in Washington D.C. If anything, one walks away from this novel with a greater appreciation for both American history and Washington as a tourist destination.

I liked the book. I thought it accomplished everything that it promised and lived up to the undertaking that Dan Brown’s name now inspires in literature. In fact, though I do not enjoy admitting this, there were some twists that I didn’t see coming. In one particular case, I felt I had been the audience witnessing a magician’s sleight of hand; while distracting me he was able to pull a coin out of my ear. Normally I’m not so readily fooled so all I can offer was that Brown’s twist was well-played.

Since Brown writes about symbols it is important that when he uses them in his storytelling they are easy for the reader to imagine. Throughout the book there are illustrations of certain symbols and even magic squares that allow a reader to keep on track; further Brown does a decent job in explaining things like a severed appendage kicking/crawling/pointing/spurting in/at/from a particular direction. I’m sorry for all the subterfuge, but I’m trying to describe what I enjoyed about the book without giving essential plot twists away.

Where I think Brown is very weak is in his portrayal of women characters. Sometimes I feel as if he went to the Home Depot and purchased a generic brand of female archetypes (well, all archetypes in a way, but he gives his male archetypes a little more personality). I’m sure I’m giving nothing away when I report one of the major characters is a female scientist who apparently is married to her job and romantically unattached. You see, once Robert Langdon, played by Tom Hanks in Ron Howard directed movies, cut his hair for ‘Angels & Demons’ after the hair-o-atrocity that was his ‘The Da Vinci Code’ do, he has been turning the heads’ of the ladies. Granted, he didn’t go very far with Jesus’ granddaughter, but I’m not going to reveal if he gets on better with the sister of a 33rd Level Freemason.

Besides the possible love interest there was also a character that reminded me of fashion/superhero suit designer, Edna Mode from the movie ‘The Incredibles’ – who in return reminded me of Linda Hunt. This woman has some health issues and because of that the biggest crack in the suspension of disbelief for me was a scene that required her to hoof it down to the Congressional basement; she seemed okay with all the dust and mold along with the physical exertion.
Overall, I would recommend ‘The Last Symbol’ even if it does have flaws because it works where it is supposed to work, and by its standing on bestseller lists I believe it has sparked conversation and interest. I don’t think it will have the impact that ‘The Da Vinci Code’ had, but as a film fan I hope that in the next year or two there will be a Ron Howard and Tom Hanks movie. Probably the best compliment I can give it is that it did have me thinking about things in some ways that didn’t before, and for that alone I thank Dan Brown.

Review by Lisa Westerfield

"The Lost Symbol"

by Dan Brown

Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon is called to Washington, D.C. this time, to give a lecture at the Capitol Building, but when he arrives at the indicated location it's empty. There are no chairs, no lecturn, and no people. Things are not so empty in the nearby rotunda. A man's hand, severed at the wrist, is discovered pointing upward. Langdon recognizes the ring on its finger - and the symbols tattooed on its fingers. The hand belongs to his mentor and friend, Smithsonian head Peter Solomon, the man who supposedly invited Langdon down to give the non-existent lecture. Langdon is soon contacted with an ultimatum - figure out the secrets of the Masonic pyramid before midnight or Solomon will die.

Meanwhile, Solomon's sister, Katherine, is waiting for her brother in the top secret lab he built for her in the gigantic Smithsonian storage warehouse. She's exploring noetics, the power of thought, and making inroads into proving that human thought really can affect physical matter. Although the specifics are still very much on the hush-hush, her research is starting to rattle some cages and those in the know don't want it to see the light of day.

The two threads rush toward each other fairly quickly and soon Katherine and Langdon are racing around Washington, sometimes working with and sometimes against the CIA who seem to be in charge of the formal investigation into the incident in the rotunda. Working from the clues left on the hand and a secret package Solomon left in Langdon's care years before, their search leads them through the bowels of the Capitol, the Library of Congress, and several other landmarks as they try to save Solomon, solve the puzzle, and thwart the bad guy. If you're going to make Washington and the Masons featured players in a story that requires hints be left in the open on historically important buildings and monuments, chances are fairly high that many of those locations will overlap.

That said, this book seemed more focused on action and on the involvement of the CIA in the matter than on figuring out the big secret. There are a handful of puzzles, but they're interrelated and often require exactly the same key to solve. The first several hints and clues are not real puzzles, but items or symbols recognized by Langdon and imparted to the reader, so it takes some time before there's anything to solve at all. One of the things I liked about The Da Vinci Code was how there were a wide variety of puzzles and riddles to solve. That's definitely not the case in this book.

The involvement of the CIA is also odd, especially as it's not really clear why they got involved. The villain in the piece did try to cause a scandal involving several prominent government officials, but that didn't happen until fairly late in the book and it didn't feel like sufficient motivation to explain the CIA's role. Their goals weren't always clear, either, and I kept expecting their role in the book to morph in ways it never did.

The bad guy in the book is a nasty piece of work, but his motivations and identity were crystal clear from almost the very start. It took the characters forever to figure it out, though, and by the time the big reveal scene rolled around I was so used to the idea of his identity that I was totally underwhelmed. I was also a bit disgusted that none of the characters had figured it out for themselves, although some of the information that gave away his identity came in sections of the book where he was the viewpoint character. I still think there was more than enough information available to them to figure things out well before they did. Poor plot development.

I have no problem with fiction taking liberties with history or legends or bringing additional motivations or ideas into play beyond those we can prove. I like playing around with the ideas of different religions and being asked to think about them and how they evolved. The Lost Symbol doesn't have the same level of overt ties to Christianity as The Da Vinci Code but in my mind it examines spirituality and some core religious issues (across different religions) in more depth. I felt more religious theory imposed on me in this book. It definitely trys to examines the idea of the human soul and what happens after death and does so in ways that try to intertwine science and religion. If that's going to bother you, stay far away.

The science in the book is a pseudo-science that explores the physical properties of human thought. Katherine Solomon proposes that human thought has gravity and grows exponentionally as more people think the same thoughts. It essentially takes the philosophical ideas of noetics and turns it into a serious science with actual laboratory experimentation. The latter portions of the book get a bit carried away with the intermingling of this idea with religious concepts and can be a bit much to take, but the idea of attempting scientific experiments to examine such esoteric ideas is interesting. I view it in much the same light as some of the the religious and cult elements of all three books - nice stuff to think about in the realm of fiction.

All of that said, neither the puzzles nor the religious elements nor the science are the real focus of the book. The Lost Symbol felt like a fairly generic thriller with these other elements overlaid on the story. It was a good example of the generic thriller and an enjoyable read if you like that sort of thing, but it doesn't have the extra zip of really good integrated puzzles and I didn't care much if the mysteries of the pyramid were ever solved. The main thrust seemed to be rescuing Peter Solomon and stopping the bad guy. Everything else was somewhat extraneous.

I was also somewhat disappointed. It’s hard to imagine anyone, after reading "The Lost Symbol," debating about Freemasonry in Washington, D.C., the way people did Brown’s radical vision of Jesus and Mary Magdalene in "Code." That book hit a deep cultural nerve for obvious reasons.

"The Lost Symbol" is more like the experience on any roller coaster — thrilling, entertaining and then it’s over and quickly forgotten. If you like thrillers and won't freak out about exploring spirituality in non-traditional ways or about the inclusion of noetics as a serious science, go ahead and read the book. If you want to solve lots of puzzles on your way to uncovering a historical mystery, and you love a mental challenge, this book won't work for you.

Review by Nan Sevic

"The Lost Symbol" -- a pre-review

by Dan Brown

Dan Brown’s latest book ‘The Lost Symbol’ was released on September 15th and currently resides on the top of the New York Times bestseller list as a hardcover fiction. His first three novels, including ‘Angels & Demons’ (which was the first book that Brown’s signature character Robert Langdon a.k.a. Tom Hanks appeared in) didn’t set the publishing world on fire (he had also published a handful of non-fiction books). When ‘The Da Vinci Code’ hit in 2003 it hit hard and became the type of phenomena that one can only describe as an event book. Even if you didn’t read the book you heard about it, and Leonardo Da Vinci had a pop culture renaissance becoming everyone’s favorite Renaissance man again. Eat it Michelangelo!

Of course the downside to success is that your work is looked at through a microscope, thus Brown in regards to ‘Da Vinci,’ has had two lawsuits filed against him for plagiarism as well as criticism directed at him for his research. One of the suits involved a nonfiction book called ‘The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail,’ which was published in 1982. This suit filed by the three authors was dismissed. The second lawsuit filed by Jack Dunn, author of ‘The Vatican Boys,’ was also dismissed. A few years ago ‘Vanity Fair’ ran an article involving Brown’s alleged plagiarism and, although I have forgotten the specifics of the article, I do remember it was convincing.

Beyond the allegations of plagiarism and faulty research, Dan Brown has also had to deal with the literary purists. Some people didn’t want to read ‘The Da Vinci Code’ simply because everywhere you turned there was Da Vinci this and Da Vinci that. Books were published (‘The Real History be the Da Vinci Code’ for example) because of the success of the ‘Code’ many warranted that the book itself didn’t deserve all of the attention it got. Various folks I know had a plethora of responses ranging from they loved it to it was poorly written.

I liked it.

It didn’t overpower me with images and philosophy I hadn’t known before; the whole thing about Mary Magdalene being the wife of Jesus I had heard before as well as that she wrote a book for the Bible that was edited out through the years. However, I was a bit surprised to learn that ‘The Last Supper’ seems to have always featured a woman in the painting.

I thought the story arch was fine and the only real complaint I had was that it felt too ‘John Grisham let’s have a massive chase scene’ at times. Also, I don’t particularly like it when an author feels that they have to tell me something is funny as if I as the readers don’t have the intellectual capability to decide on their own if something is humorous or not – but that is just nit picking. Overall, I thought that ‘The Da Vinci Code’ was a nice addition to the book-reading universe in that it prompted a lot of interesting discussions and had a lot of people doing research into religion, history, and culture, which I don’t think can ever be a bad thing.

No one was shocked to learn that the novel was going to be made into a movie. This of course prompted another kind of literary snob, the type that never feel as if the films based on books are as good as the original source. I’m someone who is much more relaxed about my assessments. Often people are comparing apples and oranges; things that work in a book might not work on film and vice versa. Seriously, when I hear folks grip that ‘Jurassic Park’ was a much better book than film I have to roll my eyes and wonder if the person actually read the book. Even though Christian Lander, in his blog ‘Stuff White People Like’ is writing about ‘Where the Wild Things Are’, his points are just as valid to ‘The Da Vinci Code,’ although more than white people are literary snobs (snobs come in all shapes, sizes, and ethnicity – a United Nations of snobbery).

The debut of ‘The Lost Symbol’ is a tricky one for Brown, because it is basically the novel that decides if ‘The Da Vinci Code’ was a fluke, and if he has the writing chops to live up to his fame or will he go down in flame. With a book such as this which I purchased in hardback, I want to take all of my literary opportunities to savor it which explains why I am putting off my full review until later. Also, my father is going to borrow, read, and also write a review which I will publish.

He is educated in the particular Stephen Hawking type of science that is described within the book, plus he seems to enjoy books written by men in their traditional forms of mystery, chase, and science fiction whereas I am different. He cringes at the thought of chick lit. He is of the Silent Generation, I am of Gen X; so the litmus test for Dan Brown is to see what the two of us think of his latest.

Review by Lisa Westerfield