Friday, December 4, 2009

Originality

I entered the world of blogging back in 2007, at first with some faithful companions, and then on my own. It was my senior year and I honest to god wanted to become a better writer, express my thoughts more clearly, and put myself out there. It was a rough start to say the least and, honestly, I don't know if it's even gotten that much better for me. I've watched the progress of my friends and, like everything else in my life, they've improved miles while I've gone inches. Or so I think, one thing I've learned over these past few years is that you cannot judge your own writing, at least not so much that it prevents you from doing the thing you're here to do; write. I've had so many difficulties with this idea; in fact I don't believe I've overcome it yet. To date I have never finished a short story or any sort of fiction at all; I've ranted, I've raved, I've peered into my soul at times on this blog, but I still have yet to actually do what I set out to do. I know that very, very few people actually read this blog, and I know that I thrive on those readers, but honestly I'm actually quite terrified of certain kinds of criticism. Sure I don't really give one wit about what others think of me, but when it comes to fiction and short story stuff, I'm terrified. Perhaps it isn't just them I am afraid of; perhaps I'm afraid of what it is I will think. My first and last attempt at any sort of story was Untitled and I came to a very interesting conclusion: I may read too much. I know it sound weird and off—authors need to keep in touch with their genre after all—but I've been thinking about it for the past couple months and I don't know if I have any of my own ideas.

Originality is, after all, an authors best friend, it's what gives him his power, his allure, his greatness, but it's also one of those things that is becoming harder and harder to come by. If you think of great fantasy, Tolkien comes up without a second thought, but really how many other authors are really being as original as they should be? I mean sure a few come to mind, but many of the fantasy authors I can think of have striking similarities to Tolkien, some, like Terry Brooks, blatantly rip him off. Of course many authors are different too, but I find that when I write, or even think of stories playing out in my head, that they are horribly similar to things I've read or seen in the past. Some are completely subconscious to the extent that I don't even realize it isn't even my idea in the first place, others take a mere five minutes of thought for me to realize "shit.. this isn't mine". The easiest example is, of course, Untitled because one of my good friends first pointed it out to me. You see there's this graphic novel called Air Gear that was floating around the net back freshmen maybe sophomore year (it's now available here in the U.S. in hard print), this graphic novel was the inspiration—without my knowing it—of Untitled. From wiki:

"Itsuki "Ikki" Minami, is a student and a delinquent. Also known as the "Unbeatable Babyface", Ikki is the leader of the youth gang by the name of "East Side Gunz". Upon his return home, after being humiliated by a Storm Rider team called the Skull Saders, Ikki discovers a secret hidden from him by his benefactors, the Noyamano sisters. The sisters belong to a group of Storm Riders who go by the team name of Sleeping Forest. In the anime, learning the sisters' secret angers him and he steals a pair of Air Trecks, abbreviated as "AT". (In the manga, the sisters give a pair of ATs to him and invite him to skate with them.) Ikki eventually settles his grudge with the Skull Saders, but in the process he receives more than the simple satisfaction of revenge. Determined to experience the sensation of "flight" for as long as he can, Ikki is quickly engaged in the mysterious, irresistible world of Air Treks."

Yeah, you might not be able to tell too much how similar my story was, but trust me, it was. Sure I had different names, a different setting, and a slightly different premise, but at the heart it was Air Gear written poorly. This may be part of the reason I stopped, subconsciously I knew I was kind of ripping off this story, but who knows. Recently I have had a million ideas running through my head, stories to tell, characters to create, but I am afraid of ripping things off again. This is partly why you have an editor I'm sure, partly why you keep in touch with what others are doing, but honestly, can I really say that I have any of my own ideas? I look over at my bookcase and there are so many stories there, so many characters, plots, and worlds, can I really write something on my own? There are book I read back in middle school that I don't even remember, probably books from my childhood that are gone, but memory never really disappears, we just loose access to it. Already I scoff at professional, excellent writers because I see similarities to others, who am I to even judge? I know that people get inspiration from others, every author interview says as much, but where can you draw the line? Some, like Lev Grossman, make it obvious enough that they're writing satire that it's okay to use such fundamental ideas, but others, like Brooks, seem to not know or not care that their story is the same give or take a character name. I wonder if maybe I just need to write without thinking and get it out of my system. Perhaps I'm over reacting and just need to get my foot in the door because I have not written anything to completion. Maybe writing something, finishing it, even if I don't show anyone, is the way to go, I mean if it is blatantly ripped off from somewhere who cares? Yet I feel as though everyone else out there can write amazing, original, creative works on their first try. So many of my heroes wrote their first book or story, got it published, and were on their way. They had a well of ideas that never seemed to end, and yet the first thing I try and seriously write is plagiarized trash. Now look at me, I read, and then write about books, that is all this blog has turned into. Sure it's interesting, but it is not what I wanted after two years of this. Even if it was, I see no improvement between April 2007 and now. My vocabulary may be somewhat more sophisticated, but not much, and certainly not as a result of me writing about fucking books. I mean I don't even do that "right", I ramble and I jump around, and in the end I just have a big puddle of mush that probably turns people off from the books more than interests them. What do I do? I know I have ideas, but how can I know they're mine?

Maybe that's the thing; maybe everything really is just a copy of a copy of a copy. Is there even such thing as true originality? Or are things only original because we have yet to have encountered them before? Tolkien could have knicked some of his ideas off someone before him, and that person from someone before. Back in the early 1900's Carl Jung—one of Freud's disciples—was examining patients in a mental hospital when he encountered a severely schizophrenic man gazing out the window in a peculiar way. When he asked the man what he saw the patient told him that if he squinted his eyes and looked at the sun, he could then see the "sun's penis", and that if you moved your head to and fro you could see the penis moving and this, he said, was the origin of the wind. Pretty fucking weird eh? Well, it wasn't the first time that had been said. It turned out that when Jung was studying mythology he came across a recently translated Greek text that said nearly the same thing: a tube hanging from the sun, when moving, caused the winds. Penis aside, there was no possible way for this schizophrenic man to have even heard of the text since it wasn't even translated until after he had been committed, from that encounter Jung developed his idea of the collective unconscious. As the name implies, Jung believed that every human being had access to this vast store of knowledge and could not be explained by personal unconscious from ones memories. Things like God, the spirit, truth, justice, these things aren't learned even over an entire person's lifetime, yet even a young child knows when something is just "wrong", he may not know what that thing is, why it feels that way, or be able to explain it, but he just knows it. Certainly we learn things, from our parents, society, and many other things, but there's something else going on. This is one of the topics that was addressed in The Witch in the Waiting Room by Robert Bobrow M.D., and one of the things that I feel we have yet to truly unlock. Even Plato believed in this with his Forms which "asserts that non-material abstract (but substantial) forms (or ideas), and not the material world of change known to us through sensation, possess the highest and most fundamental kind of reality". Essentially anyone can look at a chair, any chair, and know that it is a chair. I'm not a philosopher so I probably botched the metaphor a bit, but the idea is the same. Why is it that in fiction there is always a hero and always a villain? Even the oldest written human stories contain these ideas: in Homer's works and even in the ancient, ancient Epic of Gilgamesh contain these very same themes. Certainly there isn't The Lord of the Rings just floating up around, but the idea of it is there, Good over Evil, Light vs. Dark, Friendship and Loyalty, it's hard for me to believe that these things, which are all so prevalent in every culture, are just things we learn. They're too profound, they're too intense. Even just the idea of "friends" is too much for anyone to come up with on their own, and yet at the youngest of ages we group together, we are loyal to one another, we make these connections with other people that just cannot be explained. And then there's love. Countless songs, ballads, poems, and every other kind of expressive form have described this. Across generations, throughout the world, love is another one of those forces that every human just knows deep down.

Perhaps originality is merely taking these ideals and putting your own face on them, certainly we enjoy authors like Tolkien and Herbert not only for their ideas, but for their characterizations, their subtle twists and turns. It's a cliché by now, but it really isn't the destination that really counts, it's the journey to get there! That's kind of where I hit a rut, I'm so paranoid about ripping ideas off, that I can't appreciate my own unique ride. I do truly feel that reading is almost detrimental to my writing, but at the same time imitation is the highest form of flattery—unless you're a lawyer. I said back in the day that the only way to improve one's writing was to write, I think the same is true for fiction, your first few stories might be horribly familiar, but it might only be because you're most familiar with other peoples writing and haven't yet learned what your own style is. Write now I really do not know what my style is, at least not in a fictional sense. I know I ramble when I write, but that is because of my lack of proofreading or editing. It's horrible, but I have never proofread my stuff before, I generally write, and post (or turn in as the case may be). As such I've realized that proofreading is a skill, a skill that is hard, frustrating, and makes me want to shoot myself, but a skill none the less. As all skills go it's another one of those things that you just have to do over, and over, and over again before you can really do it decently. For someone such as myself it is also one of those skills that is absolutely essential, my grammar sucks, I ramble, my sentences are awkward, and I generally take forever to make a single point, so bear with me. This is one of those things that I am going to try and do from now on, on all of my posts. Except this one, it's 12:30, I'm tired, and I really don't want to look at this post ever again!

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Year Two

So I started keeping a log of how many books I've read since November 2007, and I kinda like the idea of keeping a list. Naturally I have a Word doc, but I think my readers like to see what I read too. (Don't burst my bubble, I know none of you care :P). Back in March I said I was going to start writing some thoughts down on the books I read, so I have linked all the books I've read--since March anyway--to the post that I wrote about them. Just click on the title of the book and it'll take you to that post. So this is Year 2:

  • Beyond the Shadows by Brent Weeks
  • Mistress of the Empire by Raymond E. Feist
  • First Meetings by Orson Scott Card
  • Denial of Death by Ernest Becker
  • The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout
  • The Road to Dune by Frank Herbert, Brian Herbert, and Kevin J. Anderson
  • Masterpieces Edited by Orson Scott Card
  • Descartes' Error by Antonio Damasio
  • Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson
  • Green Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson
  • Blue Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson
  • Galactic North by Alastair Reynolds
  • The Heart is a Lonely Hunter by Carson McCullers
  • The Mole People by Jennifer Toth
  • Shadow of a Dark Queen by Raymond E. Feist
  • Rise of a Merchant Prince by Raymond E. Feist
  • Rage of a Demon King by Raymond E. Feist
  • Shards of a Broken Crown by Raymond E. Feist
  • The Science of Vampires by Katherine M. Ramsfield
  • Diamond Dogs, Turquoise Days by Alastair Reynolds
  • Foundation by Isaac Asimov
  • Pygmy by Chuck Palahniuk
  • Foundation and Empire by Isaac Asimov
  • Cemetery Dance by Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child
  • Scar Night by Alan Campbell
  • Second Foundation by Isaac Asimov
  • Dracula by Bram Stoker
  • Iron Angel by Alan Campbell
  • The Edge of Reason by Melinda Snodgrass
  • Tyrannosaur Canyon by Douglas Preston
  • God of Clocks by Alan Campbell
  • Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard
  • Gut Feelings by Gurd Gigerenzer
  • The Magicians by Lev Grossman
  • The Prodigal Mage by Karen Miller
  • Century Rain by Alastair Reynolds
  • The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown
  • Forty Studies that Changed Psychology by Roger R. Hock
  • Infoquake by David Louis Edelman
  • Multireal by David Louis Edelman
  • The Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury
  • The Case For Mars by Robert Zurbin
  • Flight of the Nighthawks by Raymond E. Feist
  • A Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula Le Guin
  • Into a Dark Realm by Raymond E. Feist
  • Wrath of a Mad God by Raymond E. Fesit
  • Witch in the Waiting Room by Robert Bobrow M.D.
Total (Nov. 19th, 2008 - Nov. 19th, 2009): 49

Grand Total (Nov. 19th, 2007 - Nov. 19th, 2009): 104

Note: Titles in bold I own, the others were borrowed or read at work.

As you can see, I haven't linked all the books I've read since March (I wrote that introduction back in April) and though I've tried to keep up with it, it's been hard! I'm slowly working my way through them though, I have created posts with outlines of what to talk about, its just finding the time and motivation to write those up. Hopefully sometime in December, probably during winter break, I'll write up another Ry Recommends, but for now if you wanna know more about a book not talked about comment and I'll make it a priority!

Friday, November 13, 2009

Reading Dilemma

It seems that I do my best thinking in the scant minutes before I a fall asleep; that in between place where you are neither awake nor asleep. Generally I find that I think of something amazing, but the next morning it's gone, but this past night I found that I actually remembered some of my thoughts. Actually it may just be that I've thought on this problem for a while now, either way, it comes down to whether or not it's worth the time to re-read books/series again or not.

There are a lot of pros and cons for each, but honestly I find myself stuck. I've read a lot of amazing books and series before, many of which are worth reading multiple times, but yet it comes down to being overwhelmed by the options. Working in a book store really opens your eyes to all thats out there, sure intellectually I always knew there were lots and lots of books, but seeing the thousands of titles that come out over the months really gets to you. So the choice is this, do I fall back and read what I know is good? Or do I take that risk, that leap of faith if you will, and try out these new books? It really is a risk in the sense that I could spend time reading and finishing a book only to realize that it was complete rubbish! That time spent on that book is gone forever after that, it's regret, sadness, and pure rage all at the same time, but yet to only read books I've read before would be stupid. It's what's killing the church, and what plagues every religion: stagnation. Indeed had I only read what I read before I would not be nearly as well read as I am now--this is why some people only read the bible they don't wanna risk reading good fiction--so its a balance. Sure. Easy to say, but I'm still stuck with the idea of if it's actually worth re-reading books I've fallen in love with before.

Since starting this blog, I haven't re-read any books, but in the past I have. I've read all the Harry Potter books twice except the last one, I've read Magician: Apprentice and Magician: Master several times, as well as a few of the Anne Rice books, plus Tolkein, so it's not like I'm truly opposed to the idea, it's that I'm afraid of missing out on books I haven't read. This is really quite frustrating because with school and work I hardly have enough time to read in general, should I really be reading things again? But they're SO GOOD. *sigh* I've also put myself into a bit of a corner because before I used to only buy books when I needed a new one, so if I finished one and didn't have anything else I'd pick up one I'd read before, but now working at a bookstore I have a stack of freaking books to read on my shelf! Not to mention in my line of work I am practically bombared with suggestions and recommendations on what to read next! If only I was a vampire I would have so much more time, or hell if I didn't have to sleep, blast you body, you are so limiting! Okay, well, I feel that there are some series that are must reads, and as such, must re-reads. Generally speaking if the book is grand enough, you'll find new things with each time you read it, so there are benefits. But should I only re-read novels? Or should I re-read entire series? Well you can't just stop after reading The Fellowship of the Ring, so I'm going to say that I should go big or go home!

Now that that's cleared up, I think I'll make a list of some books/series I should re-read, because as much as I'd like to re-read every book I've ever enjoyed, there are just too many. So here's a list:

Science Fiction
  • The Dune Series by Frank Herbert
  • The "Enderverse" by Orson Scott Card -- This one is unique in regards to the fact that Card is still writing for this universe and since my memory isn't what it used to be (and of course the books are fucking amazing) I think it would be beneficial to go through these again.
  • Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson
  • The Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson
Fantasy
  • The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien
  • The Riftwar Saga by Raymond E. Feist -- Again this is another unique one because, like Card, Feist is still writing this saga. As of this year there are 26 books out with 4 forthcoming. 30 books, that's more than half a year in what I'm averaging so far so reading them would probably be a year long event. Yet.. Feist is honestly my favorite fantasy author, and ALL of his books are so good. Now I haven't read 6 of those 26 since they're side books, but my logic is to wait until the entire series is done and done and then just sit down for a Feist marathon. We'll see though.
  • The Tales of the Otori by Lian Hearn
  • Kingkiller Chronicles by Patrick Rothfuss -- He just needs to finish this series, I'm already going to have to re-read the first book just to know wtf is going on with the second when it comes out.
Fiction
  • The Vampire Chronicles by Anne Rice -- Now I'm not sure if I'll read the entire series again because she went all religious and shitty the last couple books, but the first few for sure.
  • Chuck Palahniuk, mainly Fight Club, Survivor, and Choke
  • Dystopian favorites: 1984, Anthem, A Brave New World, and We
  • Hotel New Hampshire by John Irving

For now I think that's good, I know I should put more of the classics up, Steinbeck and the like, but I feel like those are still too fresh in my mind, not to mention dry. I know I will eventually, but for the purposes of this blog I'll leave them out. I'd also like to say that if you need a good book in the three above genres you wouldn't be wrong to pick up one of the ones I mentioned. Speaking of which I think I'll write another Ry Recommends in the near future. Stay tuned!

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Physical vs. Digital Books

I remember back in February I made a post about the e-book revolution that is going on and I mentioned something to the nature of "I like to own my books". Well recently Sony came out with two new additions to the e-reader family: The Pocket edition, and the Touch edition. Both relatively cheap, I mean if $199 and $299 respectively is ever cheap and I am again examining my preferences. Certainly the e-readers are still too expensive, for me anyway, have too much other crap going on--I really don't want internet on my book, sorry guys--and the e-ink has this horribly obnoxious function where when you turn a page it flashes the entire screen black. Sure it's not very long, but on every e-reader I've tried I notice it. Now I've hear "oh you get used to it", but come on I can turn a page in a real book and not suffer any sort of annoying flash. We are at the point technologically that this should not be an issue. Old computers did this, but we can now sit at a computer for hours and not have any eye strain nor any flashes. When, and if, this ever gets fixed I might be more inclined to buy one, but until then it's just another thing that turns me off.

That was a bit of an aside, but back to what I was saying. I see these e-readers more and more and one of the big advertisements is that you can store XXX amount of books on the e-reader itself, and then store your other books right on your hard drive. Saves space, convenient, and takes the hassle out of moving books all around.. but I just don't like the idea. Technology is fallible and thus far I have over 300 books in my library, one lighting strike, one virus, one user error and all that would be gone.. Ouch.. I've heard that some places, Amazon?, let you redownload the book as many times as you'd like after you buy it, but I don't know how valid that is. It seems like a rather easy way to pirate books if that's the case, but I don't really know. But either way it's a scary thought. Whereas someone can break into my house, steal all sorts of stuff, but generally speaking they're not going to go for the books. The only thing I have to worry about when I'm not home is fire, water damage, and the occasional animal attack, and only fire will really kill off my collection. Sure you can back things up and copy things and save things, but really how secure are electronic things? For how much I love my books: Not enough. That's one reason I'd rather own a material copy. Another I think is perhaps how I grew up. Back when I was a kid we didn't have cell phones, computers, ipods, or much in the ways of electronics. Game Boys and walkmans were about all we had going on so, understandably, I never put much stock into electronics, but kids these days have cell phones, ipods, and complete internet access starting in elementary school or earlier at home! Maybe material objects aren't as important to younger generations as they are to me, I mean, I'm at the point where I think CDs are kinda a waste, I haven't bought one in years and years and years, so undoubtedly kids a mere 3 years younger might be okay with digital copies of things.

Two perfectly logical reasons right there, but those just don't seem to cut it either. I don't know why, but reading things on a computer screen just isn't satisfying, not to mention the pure raw sex appeal a loaded book case has. So honestly I don't know why I want books, they're expensive, they're heavy, they take up loads of space, but.. but.. I love them. I look over at my bookshelf and smile to myself thinking of all the adventures I've been on from the various spines, the color and the magic they add to my room, so I guess logically speaking it would be better not to own them. I'd save money, maybe--there's still the whole issue of just what you're paying for--save space, and it certainly is more environmentally friendly to not buy paper books, but.. I don't know.

I will say this though: I think e-readers do have a place in our society in the schools and in table top role playing. For schools, oh man, I wish upon every star that I could have a Kindle-DX loaded up with all my textbooks, and all my future textbooks! There would have to be some negotiation on price because while the content is obviously valuable, a large part of the cost of a text book comes from the actual publishing of the book, hard backs, full color, pictures, etc. etc. All books/textbooks start out in word (or some other program) and thus it's a few clicks of a button to put them up on the internet and seriously should not cost as much. What the value of someones book is, is much too hairy of a topic to cover. Some authors spend years and years perfecting their books, others spend a week writing it and then publishing it *cough Nora fucking Roberts cough*. Are those two books equal? Ehhhhh I don't even wanna touch that topic. The second thing was pointed out to me by my friend and coworker Diego, he's a classic gamer, not the type that uses consoles but the D&D table top gamer. Basically, if you've never looked into D&D or anything, you have to buy lots of heavy hardcover books filled with info about spells and stats and other intense things so putting something like that onto an e-reader would make sense. Instead of carting 20+ books over to play a game you can just have them all loaded onto your e-reader and even ctrl-f specifics. I'm sure there are other things that it would be useful for as a professional, the DMV-IV-TR, there's a book of building codes that's a beast, electrical codes that's also beastly, but for a casual non-traveling reader it doesn't fit.

*sigh* that was one of the most horribly rambling posts I've done in a while. But it kinda straightened things out in my mind, so thanks for bearing with me. If anyone owns an e-reader and wants to fill me in on some of the gaps in my knowledge feel free. Other uses and pros, cons, etc. Comments are appreciated!

Thursday, October 1, 2009

The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown


Oh Dan Brown what have you done? What oh what have you done? You were in the groove, Angels and Demons was new and unique, The Da Vinci Code then solidified your reputation, but you let the money and fame go to your head. I, by no means, disliked his new book The Lost Symbol, but it was horribly flawed, and honestly the worst of his books. Now if you're one of those people that has been living under a rock and don't know who Dan Brown is, well, get out of your rock and look around!

Dan Brown started out back in the '90s as a failed singer/songwriter. This in and of itself isn't too special, many, many people try and fail in the music world, what's important here is that he released a CD called "Angels and Demons" and used John Langdons ambigram:

John Langdon is, of course, the inspiration for the now world famous Robert Langdon in Browns books. After his stint in music, which he still dallies in now and then, he began writing Digital Fortress--which also happens to be my favorite of his books--followed by Deception Point (bleh), then Angels and Demons and then in 2003 The Da Vinci Code. From there it's history, with over 81 million copies sold, it's considered "one of the most popular books of all time". I am a firm believer that of the books Robert Langdon appears in--Angels and Demons, The Da Vinci Code, and The Lost Symbol--Angels is by far the best. This is all water under the bridge of course, but I figured I should mention it before talking about The Lost Symbol. A mere three years after the release of Da Vinci, it was turned into a blockbuster movie, one that was decent, I guess, but didn't do the book justice. After that, Angels and Demons got eaten up and released in May and was, thankfully, much better, still no match for the book, but not as sickening as the first. Tom Hanks does a fantastic job in both movies, the problem was the complexity of the books, which make it hard to transfer into a movie. The movies, I believe, are Dan Browns downfall.

Unfortunately, they were great hits in the theaters, made him lots and lots of money, and as such... blew his head up. When The Lost Symbol was announced earlier this year I was more than skeptical, but vowed to read it when it came out. Sure enough the day comes, I'm stuck doing a midnight release "party" at my work (only two people showed up) and I begin reading. The first thing that struck me was how amazingly short the chapters were! I thought that maybe he was just dipping into a few places, getting the setting set up and such, but then it quickly dawned on me that he was, in fact, completely serious about writing half page chapters! Two pages, a page, sure, some authors can pull it off, but NOTHING useful can be said in half a page! Why is this? I thought, Ohhh he's making it easy to turn into a screen play! Wow Mr. Brown, wow. Not even Michael Crichton or Stephen King, both of whom have a pretty good track record of getting their books raped into movies, wrote in a screenplay-esque style. Not only were his chapters short, but more often than not he ended them in a mini cliffhanger, which sometimes developed the plot, but mostly made it impossible to find a stopping place. This, of course, is brilliant. I can't tell you how many people have told me that they read his book within a day and late night, you get lots and lots and lots of people reading your book really, really, really fast and you've done something that most books lack: made it so people can talk about it. Most people when they read, it takes them a couple weeks or a month or two to finish a book, but by writing The Lost Symbol in such a way as to not let people stop without severe anxiety makes it almost like a movie. It's true too, that was one book I had a hell of a time putting down! The other thing missing from his book was previous characters or any sort of mention of Langdons previous adventures. What happened with the Grail? With the Vatican? The women?!

The next thing I noticed which made me kind of sad was the blatant product placement. Every other chapter featured the "amazing, advanced, super useful iPhone" or someone is whipping out their blackberry. This isn't too terrible when kept to a minimum, it is nice to know little details such as the brand of soda the character is drinking or the laptop he or she may be using, but to blatantly us iphone and blackberry over and over, was horribly distracting. After the first couple chapters you know the character is using an iphone or blackberry, so then why must Brown feel the need to tell us again the phone they're using and how amazing it is? It calls into question as to whether or not Brown got a little under the table money for his book, naturally there's no word of such a thing, but when the movie comes out I won't be too surprised if iphone sales go up. Then again with Brown putting both the iphone and the blackberry into his book perhaps he was trying to play fair and mention the competitor. We will never know, but it is one of the things that distracted me from the overall smoothness--as smooth as short, choppy chapters can be--of the plot. As for product placement in general, I'm not a believer in its usefulness, especially not in books. Already as a nation we're bombarded with hours upon hours of commercials, I don't see how seeing a product on a television show will up my interest that much. With all the advertising done already, I doubt things can enter my awareness that much more, and no, just because I see House drinking a coke I won't drop everything to find one. When it comes to games, well, in some cases I think it might be okay, if the product is common enough and it fits the setting it's not a big deal, but when I'm playing a game set in the year 2500 and I see the aliens reaching for a coke.. well.. that's just a dumb distraction. And books, well like I said, if it's just mentioned to give us a better overall picture in our head then whatever, but anything more than just a mere mention is too much. I fear that Brown may have opened pandoras box and set loose agonizing distractions and placements for your favorite books. Imagine, sitting down to read your favorite novel, and low and behold the main character pulls out a Kay Jewelers box, the girl swoons, and written in black and white is "every kiss begins with Kay." Or an the characters running from zombies stop, pull out a couple bucks and buy a coke saying "you can't survive without a refreshing coke!". Shoot me now.*

For those of you that read Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code you'll remember how blatant Brown was in his bashing of the church and religion in general. Sadly it seems he may have been spooked by all those protesters because this book seems to put major value in religion. I won't go into the details of just how this is done (Lagndon does put his snarky opinion out there), but by the end of the book I was questioning just how Brown had gone from strongly opposing the Church to almost respecting it and its ideals. Along the same lines is the "science" of Noetics which one of the main characters researches. In fact, I really don't know what to think of the whole thing! I looked up the book she referenced and found it to be a metaphysical philosophy book along in the same section as L. Ron Hubbard. I haven't bothered to do any research of my own to see where or how he got his ideas, whether he believes in them or not, or if there is indeed true science behind it, that's a different topic for a another time. In regards to The Lost Symbol, though, it played a roll far larger than I believe it should have, it was interesting, sure, but in the novel--which is set roughly in our time--it was a bit beyond the scope of what he was trying to say. And the Masons, oh dear god the Masons! I know this is something I should have some sort of opinion about, I do, but honestly after reading a bit about it, watching one or two discovery, history channel, or national geographic specials, I really don't care. At all. Sure they influenced our founding fathers, sure they have a symbol on our dollar bill, and are horribly powerful people, I think people just enjoy conspiracies. More to the point, I think that because the Masons are a secretive group that no one truly understands they automatically put a negative/evil opinion on them. They may have some secrets, but so does the FED, CIA, FBI, and practically any government agency in the world. Do I think they hold the key to our "rebirth" or death? Nope.

I've mainly mentioned the negative aspects of Browns novel, but really it's not all bad. I thoroughly enjoyed it; the good, the bad, and the iphone. If one honest thing can be said about Dan Brown, it's this: he is a master of suspense. Sometimes he fumbles the delivery on a plot twist, but a page later you're sitting there amazed at the turn of events. Some of his twists are a bit predictable, but I don't care how many people out there say just how much they saw them coming, he would not be a bestselling author if he didn't surprise his readers. That's what mystery/thriller is! Props to Brown on his ability to throw spins and twists in there to make people shake their head, it's a difficult task, one which I doubt I will ever be able to do, and one that very few authors can do multiple times in a book. Not only that, but his overall style is enjoyable. I, at least, haven't read many authors who can accomplish what Brown does in a 24 hour time line, the emotion, the suspense, the action, some authors can't even manage those things in a setting that lasts a year! All and all, I honestly believe that if you can entertain your audience, make them squirm in anticipation, make them stay up late into the night just to find out what happens next, that you've written a good book. All those negatives aside, that's what every author should aim to do! Sure he may have distracted with the product placement, made the experience choppy with his short chapters, and almost completely reverse his view on religion, but overall he wrote a damn entertaining book! One that with its flaws, still manages to surprise and awe the reader!

Oh and if you're wondering if this is the last we hear from Langdon don't count on it! Just listen to this:

----"Do you have a lot of ideas for future books?
There is no shortage of secrets and adventures for Robert Langdon to take. I have ideas for about 12 books. I know I won't have time in my life to write them all. For a symbology professor, someone who understands iconography, ancient mysteries, there is no shortage of material for this character." ~ Entertainment Weekly 2003

I dunno how I feel about 12 books, but this is surely not the last!


**I've heard a god awful rumor that Amazon is considering putting ads into the ebooks they sell at some point in the near future! Not just little products authors put in, but visual ads IN the books as you're reading! You turn a page, and just like on the radio, an ad will come up for this product or that product before you can move on. Talk about horrible! I hope to god that that is only a rumor, but until confirmed or denied I'm gonna have to say the Kindle has dropped another spot on m list!