Welcome back. We're relaunching the blog after a long break, during which I have been feverishly working on finalizing my novel Dying Declaration and preparing my next book. Today we're beginning a review of books, since, like most writers, I am an avid bibliophile. Our first book to review will be Dan Brown's new sensational bestseller, The Lost Symbol. By way of disclosure, as you may know, I myself am a Freemason. The reasons are long and complicated, which will be discussed in this blog later.
The Lost Symbol is the first book I've read in a long time that I haven't been able to put down. Paradoxically, I'm a very fast writer, when the creative juices start flowing, but a slow and plodding reader most of the time. This book was an exception, and I finished it in the lightning speed (at least for me) of about two weeks. This book is in the typical mold of Dan Brown's other blockbusters, Angels and Demons and The DaVinci Code. All three follow Robert Langdon, an academic symbologist (student of symbols around the world) as he goes on one scavenger hunt after another and must solve a series of ingenious puzzles. For the mathematically minded, that alone is reason to be engrossed by his books. The result is getting to be a bit formulaic, and this formula runs the risk of growing stale if it continues for more than another book.
Part of the curse of being an author is that you approach every book you read with the same critical eye that you turn towards your own work. So, first, what I did not like about The Lost Symbol and its predecessors: the main thing that rankles is the fact that the principal characters (other than Prof. Langdon himself) begin by being very skeptical of the outlandish theories that are central to the book, but are then much too quickly and easily converted. There's nothing wrong with making theories and alternate histories the central theme of the book - the fact that his books are more about ideas than characters or plots is part of their charm. However, to be true to life, his characters should really put up more of a fight. Instead, they are like credulous wide-eyed children, putting up a token skepticism that is too easily demolished. What are they demolished by? They're demolished by the good professor's erudite knowledge, logical argument, and pedantry. In real life, almost nobody is convinced by logic and reason. The truth is people make decisions based on emotion and experience, and he presents his arguments with almost no supporting evidence other than a (possibly coincidental) string of symbols that could be taken either way. The other weaknesses of the book are that they are beginning to follow a predicable formula, with stock characters (the professor, elderly, wise mentors, young, attractive heroines, and an outlandish, intolerant villain), and that the characterization is a tad weak. But as I said, these books are about mind-expanding ideas of another way to look at history, and not so much characters and plots.
Which are the strength of the book. After reading The DaVinci Code, I'd had one other serious criticism, and that was a criticism more of the reader than the author. That is, there were those who took the novel as a statement of historical fact, and spent a lot of time and energy discussing the merits of his theory about the bloodline of Jesus. These critics lost sight of the fact that it is a novel. What Dan Brown was doing was taking ideas in ancient writings and tantalizing clues from history and weaving them into a hypothesis that was compelling and provocative. He was taking them out of context and making his theory the plot device around which the book revolved. Now, there are historical documents that support his point of view, but there are also many other ancient writings that contradict it and present competing theories about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The Lost Symbol is different in that regard, in that it revolved around concepts that are part of the mainstream thinking about the history and meaning of Freemasonry.
I was pleasantly surprised that his views of the Fraternity were so positive, and he did not give in to all the conspiracy theory nonsense swirling out there. That would have been the easy way out. Instead, he made the Masons the heroes of the book, broad-minded, tolerant, and benevolent guardians of hidden truth. I felt very good about my involvement with the Fraternity upon closing the book. Much of what is in the book is well-researched and accurate, while some of it is embellished or modified for literary purposes. But if you approach it not as a textbook on Freemasonry, but just as an entertaining read, you will thoroughly enjoy it, and I recommend it especially to my brother Masons.
I've already rambled on enough, so we won't get into the ambiguous philosophy of symbols and theories about man's relationship with God. I have spoken at length about my own religious philosophy, which is mine alone, in The Tyranny of Being. Suffice it to say that all Dan Brown's books extol the virtues of man's search for God, his quest for self-improvement (central to my own philosophy), and tolerance and broad-mindedness in all things religious. That's the noble high ground and this is a refreshing change from the usual kind of dark shadow conspiracy theory novel.
No comments:
Post a Comment