Inferno

Inferno
by
Dan Brown
read by
Paul Michael

I forgot that this was coming out. I knew that Dan Brown was working on the fourth book in the adventures of Robert Langdon, but nothing specific. And then I was listening to the radio last week, I heard an interview with Dan Brwon about Inferno, and I've got to admit that I was a little bit excited. Which is kind of weird, since the last book left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. Actually most of the book was pretty good, but towards the end there were a couple of monologues that really felt like Brown had stopped telling me a story to preach at me. Or maybe it was just way the reader said it. Shrug. Then, when I was helping out at the library, one of the audiobooks I processed was the very book that I am now listening to. I was very surprised to find that no one had put a hold on it.
I came to this serious during the height of praise for the DaVinci Code (the book not the movie). I read it and really liked it and then picked up the first book for a couple of bucks at a local bookstore wholesaler in Minneapolis where I was living at the time. I like Angels and Demons even better, in big part because it had taken me a while to get used to Brown's short chapters while reading the DaVinci Code so I didn't need to spend the time getting used to his style. It's kind of funny that I read them in the order that they made the movies. And just like the movies, it didn't matter which order they were read in. The Lost Symbol has a few references to the first two books, but you could get by without reading them and still understand the book.
This time out, Langdon starts off in Florence, which is his favorite European city, we are told many times, yet not once does he refer to it as Firenze which I think is odd. He's a Harvard professor who always tries to refer to things by their correct, in this book's case Italian, names, yet the city is always referred to by it's English name. But, it's all good, because while I am hardly the most traveled of people, I love that I have firsthand experience with the city and the historical sites they are romping through. I'm all like, "yes, that's right, the garden is up the hill from the palace". It's easy to feel smug and self-important when listening to an audiobook while sitting in your bedroom at night.
While the first half to sixty percent of the book is in Florence, they then move to Venice, which is the other city that I'm familiar with in Italy. The tourist in me was really unhappy with how little of the city was used, practically none of it, but the story-enthralled-listener in me knows that the use was exactly appropriate to the story.
I think this says more about me then it does about the book, but I kept waiting for it to suck. There were a couple of monologues towards the end of The Lost Symbol that really detracted from the story in my opinion. Not only did it dump Brown's view on religion onto us, but it really broke up the flow of the story. That did not happen this time out. There were no big speeches, just continued probably dialogue. Probable if you're one of the elite, super smart characters of the story, not like if you're me, but probable in the context of the tale.
I heard an interview with Dan Brown about Inferno, as I mentioned at the top, and in that he said that a reviewer had said about Inferno, "It's pretty good for a Dan Brown book." I'll take that further and remove the qualifier, it's pretty good. This book is frenetically paced as all of the Langdon books are. It's smart and poignant, and while not necessarily realistic for a Harvard art professor to do what he does, it is a fun romp.

Losing Symbols

I just finished the latest book by Dan Brown last night, "The Lost Symbol". In this third instalment of his Robert Langdon series, Brown explored the mysteries of the Masonic Order, religion, and the notion of beauty.
With out going into details of the book and it's story, let me just say that if you liked the first two, you will like this one. The main difference is that he spends even more time talking about the religious aspect of symbols and the human condition than he does in the other books, if you can imagine that.
My only point about story specifics is that Brown makes the quasi-love-interest an attractive woman of the grand old age of 50. I don't' know how old of an actress they will get to play her in the Ron Howard adaptation, but I hope it's a woman close to that age. I say kudos to you, Mr. Brown. I have no difficulty imagining the heroine to be a half century old and beautiful. Thanks for giving this image to the popular culture.
I'm mostly concerned about this book as a philosophical text. I at first think of Albert Camus (see previous posts) and while the philosophy is not the same, wonder if Mr. Brown will ever write any non-fiction books that explore the religious and philosophical aspects of the Robert Langdon seriece. My thoughts also turn to Pullman and his "His Dark Materials" series as a better example of what Brown is doing.
It seems that there are many fine authors who are concerned with religion and philosophy, but not concerned as being labelled philosophers. I think this is sad in a way, not that they are unconcerned, but that modern Western culture is lacking in philosophers. Don't get me wrong, as a student of philosophy, I have read the work of many excellent philosophers who are alive and writing today, it's just that they are not known to mainstream culture. Religious leaders and quasi-religious leaders and political pundits are all known, and someitmes it's hard to tell which of the things I mentioned that they actually are, but our culture seems to be lacking popular thinkers that engage in the public discourse for the sake of furthering knowledge and not some personal agenda.
But, maybe it's all a matter of perspective. It may be that in a few years I will comem to realize that Brown, Pullman and others really are shaping the national discourse and that the philosophers of old go by a different name now. It may well be that modern media and the vast size of our society compared to the ancient or even more recent history means that the popular thinkers are not known to all because they have never been known to all. I think of an old addage "fools names and fools faces always appear in public places". I am after all, not looking for the fool, unless it is the fool that I need to see. :)
Perhaps this blog entry is the modern equivalent of a student sitting in a bath house asking questions of the philosopher who is their teacher in all respects. And while the answer may never come back to me from Brown himself, it is possible that others may give me answers or opinions or ask more questions, and in the end the same is achieved.