Amazon was supposed to deliver it to my kindle at 12:01am. It’s 12:50 and nothin.
Oh well, probably wont be reading it for a few weeks anyway.
Well, if by “bad writing” you mean his poor style then, no, I don’t think that’s going to bother them much this time either. There’s certainly worse out there, and that’s not what got to me when I was reading his earlier books (I grew up reading Stan Lee comics and pulp SF, so I have a pretty high tolerance for trash).
What made Angels and Demons in particular so hard to read was that Brown was so obviously profoundly ignorant of everything he’d chosen to base his plot on, and content to fill in the gaps in his knowledge with bullshit.
I’d guess that if he’s taken the same approach with this latest book, given that it apparently concerns things that the average American might be expected to know something about, his editors will have been able to spot the bullshit immediately and call him on it.
“Hi, Dan … yeah, got the new draft – love it! I can see you’ve fixed a lot of the issues we had before… Just a couple things… uh, I’ve double checked, and Washington really didn’t found the CIA… no, I think quite a few people will know that… well, they just will – it’s sort of common knowledge. Also, I’m sorry, but I still think there might be a problem with Benjamin Franklin hiding a cypher in the Lincoln Memorial…”
Incidentally, I just found out that a friend of mine is involved in the launch of this book at a large local bookshop. She’s speed-reading the whole thing and then doing a review. I feel sorry for her because she takes pride in reading not only quickly, but with a high level of comprehension. I can just picture her shooting through it in half an hour, and then going “Wait… what?” and having to start again.
Or else her head will explode. One of the two.
Honk if You Are Jesus by Peter Goldsworthy also has Jesus cloning. And it’s funny. Intentionally.
From the description (ancient Masonic conspiracy hidden in historic artifacts in DC) I thought he was ripping off National Treasure.
Me, I plan to rush right out and ignore it.
You probably didn’t do the secret handshake properly. Is there no help for the Kindle’s son?
Dan Brown is on the Today show right now and Matt Lauer asked him if he sent each chapter individually to his editor or several at a time. I guess everyone has heard the same stories. Oh yeah, and NBC Nightly News is doing a real think piece tonight on whether the Lost Symbol will change the way we look at American history. :rolleyes: That’s some hard-hitting news right there.
Wouldn’t that create some kind of subspace feedback loop that would cause a temporal singularity?
Only if someone were foolish enough to reverse the polarity.
Don’t look now but The Lost Symbol is racking up some pretty good reviews:
The NY Times: Too many popular authors (Thomas Harris) have followed huge hits (“The Silence of the Lambs”) with terrible embarrassments (“Hannibal”). Mr. Brown hasn’t done that. Instead, he’s bringing sexy back to a genre that had been left for dead.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/books/14maslin.html
LA Times: The Lost Symbol" is more like the experience on any roller coaster – thrilling, entertaining and then it’s over.
NY Daily News: It is thrilling in the extreme, a definite page-flipper.
Washington Post: *Call it Brownian motion: a comet-tail ride of short paragraphs, short chapters, beautifully spaced reveals and, in the case of “The Lost Symbol,” a socko unveiling of the killer’s true identity. *
Here’s a so-so review from the London Times: Since the hype was begun by fans and merely stage-managed by Random House, we have only ourselves to blame if the latest reconfiguration of a proven formula doesn’t quite live up to expectations.
TLS - Times Literary Supplement
This sounds like something Violet would have said to Roz in Nine to Five. Which is to say, this does not sound like a compliment.
This sounds like a bowel movement.
The New York Times needs to check itself before it wrecks itself. I’m sorry, the Grey Lady does not get to say that Dan Brown is bringing sexy back. No, not ever. I realize that it’s lost all self-respect in recent years, but it still isn’t the LA Times or anything.
The BBC Radio 4 review of this book on the arts program Front Row this evening was fucking hilarious. Not a single member of the review panel had a single good word to say about it. “It’s proof that 80 million people can indeed be very wrong.”
Mark Lawson, the presenter, concluded with words to the effect of: “The new Dan Brown book: sold in shops that don’t normally sell books, and also sold in shops that normally sell good books.”
The first reviews have hit Amazon. Apparently, four stars now mean “not as bad as it could have been.”
That sounds like a massive backhand to me. It sounds like they’re saying there’s really nothing to it but a tight plot.
Well, “thrilling” and “entertaining” aren’t exactly descriptions of a lousy book.
I’ll wait for the film, which I have to assume will be released in a few months. I can see Ron Howard and Tom Hanks already finishing the script as I write this.
I’m not even on page 40 of the book yet and already Brown has described at least three things, including (I believe) a view and a museum collection, as ‘astonishing.’ That’s the sign of a really weak writer. Describe what’s so ‘astonishing’, Dan!
But the novel certainly gets off to a quick and compelling start…
That’s likely to be a self-selecting bunch of Brown fans. I doubt anyone who thinks Brown’s previous efforts were execrable even bothered to touch a copy of this one, let alone read and review it.
Wait - Let me guess. Langdon is awakened from a dream in which a woman he loves disappears before his eyes calling out to him, “Robert… Robert…”