“The Lost Symbol” Review

13. November 2009 by Samldanach.

So, I just finished off Dan Brown’s latest this morning, The Lost Symbol.  I figured I’d write up a review here.

Spoiler-free version:

It should have stayed lost.  Seriously, this was by far the weakest of the three Langdon books (note, I have not read Digital Fortress, and based on other reviews, do not plan to).  The plot was surprisingly simple and hackneyed.  Everything was telegraphed way ahead of time, and even so wasn’t novel.  The only suspense to be had was trying to guess the latest scene location based off the incredibly drawn out “tantalizing” hints.

The other reason to read Brown’s books, of course, is for the esoteric history.  Whether or not his research is pathetic and/or deliberately malformed, it is generally entertaining.  Not this time around.  Maybe I just already know too much about what he’s discussing.  Maybe too many of the criticisms of DVC and A&D stung, and he decided to stick closer to the mundane truths.  Maybe Masons just aren’t as exciting and exotic as ancient Roman Catholic secrets.  I’m not sure, but I did not enjoy most of the asides.

When discussing Brown with a friend shortly after the DVC movie came out, I realized what Brown’s  appeal is.  He has a remarkable knack for making his readers feel intelligent.  He explains things well, and has many of his characters, including Langdon, be just clueless enough about enough stuff that you can go, “Hah, for all your Ivy League education, I know stuff you don’t!”  That spark wasn’t there this time.  Most of his explanations were far too long, and included too little humor and character.  Some were lectures, and some were sermons, but very few were conversations.

It also didn’t help that Brown apparently doesn’t have very many voices he can speak with.  The woman sounded just like the woman from A&D and just like the woman from DVC.  The villain sounded just like the villain from DVC.   Sato, the main “cop,” was a bit different, admittedly.

There were a couple things I did like.  First, Langdon’s introduction to the mystery was surprisingly well-handled.  Many similar series have a really hard time with the suspension of disbelief that one guy can have three or four “once in a lifetime” adventures (q.v., “Die Hard”).  In each of the three books,  there is actually a good, solid reason for Langdon, specifically, to be involved.  I did like the central messages of the book (I’ll wait for the spoilery section to discuss exactly what those are).  The central puzzle was very well done, even if the characters took WAY too long to figure it out.

Setting it in DC was, um, interesting.  On the one hand, it was kind of neat that I knew all this stuff.  I know where most of these places are.  On the other, he got a bunch of stuff wrong.  When Langdon is flying into DC, he looks out the window at the Washington Monument.  The problem is, he’s flying into Dulles.  Trust me, you can’t see the Monument from Dulles.  OK, I’ll allow some poetic license there.  But, his errors when describing the Metro go beyond “poetic license” straight into “bah, I don’t need to actually go see the station, all subway stations look alike.”  Er, no.  Of course, Sonya pointed out to me that DC has a history of forcing writers to deliberately misrepresent places, security measures, etc.  Maybe that’s part of what is going on here.  So, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.  Especially as it won’t make any difference whatsoever to most of the readers.

Short version:  If you actually like Brown, go ahead and pick it up (though you probably already have).  If you actively dislike Brown, this won’t do anything to change your mind.  If you’re meh on Brown, wait for the movie.  Based on A&D, it will probably be better than the book.

Now, we’ll get super-spoileriffic:

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Reviews | No Comments »