Book review: The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown

Dan Brown has been widely criticised. Some of the criticism has been justified, and a lot of it hasn’t. Whatever one might think of The Lost Symbol, it is, for better or worse, a typical Dan Brown book.

The book is a sequel to Angels and Demons and the wildly successful The Da Vinci Code. Once again, Harvard professor Robert Langdon unwittingly becomes involved in a crisis of international proportions, but this time he doesn’t travel to Europe to uncover secrets within the Catholic church. This time, he discovers some of the potentially world-altering secrets of Freemasonry while dealing with a madman who has kidnapped his friend.

The strong points of this book are the same as in all of Dan Brown’s books. It is a pageturner, fast-paced and with many short chapters that will keep you reading on to find out what happens next. It deals with an organization that many people view as mystical and secretive, while actually trying to view the case from both sides.

The weak points, however, are also the same that unfortunately weigh down all of Dan Brown’s books. The actual language is surprisingly bad for a former English teacher. Things that are obviously just speculations on Brown’s part are presented as fact, more or less. In the first two Langdon books, it was easier to overlook this, because the story itself was actually interesting and – at least to some extent – breaking new ground. At this point, we have read two Langdon books and know what to expect. Also, the Freemasons have been treated so extensively before that there is really not that much new ground for Brown to break.

The thriller parts of the book are exactly what you would expect – no more, no less. What really annoyed me about it, however, was Brown’s apparently superior attitude and his tendency to use the book as an opportunity to preach his own views about religion and the philospophical meaning of the concept of “truth”. In itself an interesting discussion – but not in a work of fiction. Unfortunately this very badly hidden agenda ended up overshadowing the actual story and thus, to a large extent, spoiling my enjoyment of the book. Especially the ending was a big letdown and left me wanting a “real” revelation, rather than the philosophical rant I got.

Of the three Langdon books this is definitely the weakest so far and, like both its predecessors, the story is probably better suited for film than for the written word. Let’s see what Tom Hanks & Co. can do with it. Hollywood leaving out the religious commentary and focusing solely on the action might actually be an improvement.

The Lost Symbol (2009) by Dan Brown. 528 pp. hardcover. Listed for € 14.49 on play.com

Movie review: 2012

Let it be said right away that this is not a deep, thoughtful movie that will leave you pondering the big questions of Life, the Universe, and Everything. It is what it is: a disaster movie – and not a bad one at that.

The premise for 2012 is based on an ancient Mayan calendar, according to a misinterpretation of which the world is supposed to end on December 20, 2012. In fact, the Mayas never predicted such a thing. They simply divided their calendar into lesser cycles and greater cycles, lasting about 394 years and 3082 years, respectively. One of these greater cycles happens to end on December 20, 2012, and a new one will start on December 21. There is no evidence to suggest that the Mayas believed the world would actually end on that date.

That being said, it’s a pretty good premise for a disaster movie. In 2012, the worldwide catastrophe is kicked off by unusually powerful solar flares which make the Earth’s crust displace itself, causing massive earthquakes and tsunamis. Just like any other disaster movie, this one is an ensemble piece, following the – often intertwined – fates of several individuals, from the scientist (Chiwetel Ejiofor) trying to warn people, to the US president (Danny Glover) trying to save his people and the rest of humanity – naturally – to the divorced down-on-his-luck author (John Cusack) who gets to spend a little ‘quality time’ with his ex-wife and children while fleeing the destruction, to the comic-relief crackpot conspiracy theorist (Woody Harrelson) who turns out to be right after all. Add to this a metric buttload of CGI and you have the makings of a classic disaster movie.

Director Roland Emmerich is certainly no stranger to disaster movies (Independence Day, Godzilla, The Day After Tomorow) and it shows. The CGI scenes are simply first class – they really have to be watched on the big screen. The acting is not bad, although many of the characters are predictably cardboard – and yet you can’t help but root for little man in the face of overwhelming odds – indeed, in the face of Mother Nature herself. And of course they do. Of course the good guys survive. Of course there are heroes who sacrifice themselves so that other may make it. And of course there are egotistical bad guys who would sell their own mother to save themselves – but don’t worry, they get their come-uppance.

All in all, 2012 may not be a cinematic masterpiece for the ages, but as a disaster movie it delivers on all accounts. Don’t expect Oscar-class acting and well-hidden agendas. If you like the genre, just suspend your disbelief and take it for what it is.

P.S. A little side note: In the movie several symbols of Christianity (St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, Christ the Redeemer in Rio) and western culture (The White House) are destroyed. The Kaaba in Mecca, however, is shown but not destroyed. Emmerich confessed that he wanted to but decided not to, apparently out of fear for a fatwa. That raises two important points. One: any Muslim who would (choose to) misinterpret a harmless piece of fiction like that as a crituque of Islam would be a disgrace to his or her religion. Two: If the international political climate forces artists to make compromises in their art just because someone might be offended, that art has completely lost its justification and purpose. But let’s not dwell on stupid details and just enjoy the movie for what it is.

2012 (2009) Starring John Cusack, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Oliver Platt, Danny Glover. Written by Roland Emmerich, Harald Kloser. Directed by Roland Emmerich. Rated PG-13. 2 h 38 min.