It is not about Robert Langdon: I found characters SiennaBrooks and Bertrand Zobrist the principal protagonists holding the story in a better way than the main series protagonist of the story, the Harvard symbologist Robert Landon. They push the story and Langdon carries the supportive role.
It is not a one-sit read: A good read but not as riveting a work to make you pick the book and deliberately push other engagements to finish it first.
It is a thriller but not a racy thriller: The hard-bound edition that I went through, the one that has over 400 pages, had very few page-turners, certainly not enough to push the reader to continue with the book suspending every other activity of the time. The plot has very few hair-raising twists and one can easily see the time lapsing.
It is not about unexpected twists and turns: As the story begins, if you are a discernible reader and have read Dan Brown earlier, you start sensing the turn of events that the author tries to make the ‘twist points’ in his story. And all through the work, a well defined sense of ‘predictability’ flows regularly. It was a similar problem area with Dan Brown’s previous book ‘The Lost Symbol’.
Characterization of one the main protagonists, Sienna Brooks, gives it all in the very beginning and as the story progresses, soon it becomes clear what we are going to have about her in the final outcome.
The main plot element of bioterrorism becomes very clear in the beginning. That may be what Dan Brown might have intended but furthering it with symbological elements of architecture and with themes in Dante’s Inferno doesn’t go too well with the plot development. Yes, its finality of emerging as an unorthodox solution to contain the ‘pandemic of the overpopulation’ does ring some bells but doesn’t hold the ground well as it becomes too late by the time the reader comes to know about it to give it a thought as a serious climactic plot element.
The climax doesn’t hold for the whole body of the work: The way things boil down so soon to a ‘positive apocalyptic periphery’ leaves a lot to be desired. The dilution of the provost’s equity, from an all powerful manipulator to some small-time crook in the last of the story, is totally anti-academic. The place of the creation of the ‘final solution’ by Bertrand Zobrist and the dramatization of the plot elements about it and the event don’t gel with the character development of Zobrist. The only saving grace here is the segment specific character shades of Sienna Brooks.
‘The Lost Symbol’ too, was similarly squeezing on the detailing in the story climax.
It doesn’t push to know more: Like other Robert Langdon starrers, this too, has a plot of few hours focusing largely on extensive detailing of a geographic locality, in this case, two main Italian cities, Florence and Venice. But what I found this time, the architectural and semiotic detailing sounded more like a ‘filling’ in the whole body of the work than being the inherent part of the plot elements.
This creates a sort of detachment and pushes one to scan the segments (and not serious reading) that contain such detailing. Dan Brown’s earlier works prompted people to do some earnest googling about plot elements and themes like symbolism, Symbology, Leonardo da Vinci, The Louvre, The Vatican, Freemasonry and so on but I could not find the similar urge with this work.
Have you read the book? What do you say about it?
©/IPR: Santosh Chaubey – https://santoshchaubey.wordpress.com/