The plot: The Pope is dead. The four supposedly the best position to be elected cardinals are kidnapped in Rome. The kidnapper, responding to the sect of the Illuminati, which many thought was a myth, says it will kill one cardinal each hour, before detonating a bomb, he sent a video. The Vatican is seeking help from the specialist symbol Robert Langdon to decipher the message of the kidnapper ...
Yes, we have the same type of plot as in the DVC: now exhausted even protagonist, who works on the symbols and the hidden secrets of history, and it was the idea of a race against time.
However, A & D is much darker and much more than a thriller adventure novel (DVC leaning more on the adventure side and being less creepy). The kidnapper has everything a serial killer Machiavellian. Nothing to do with the disturbed but also emotional character Silas the monk in DVC, which also killed.
Some find the novel too farfetched ... Well, the thriller style / race against time / mystery / adventure is never very realistic huh. The set is no more farfetched than the DVC. I would say that the whole investigation and the pursuit of clues are much more credible than the DVC, but by the end is largely against too much on certain points.
Nevertheless, it would be a little out of his mind waiting for this kind of realism novels. The set still holds, and is no more eccentric than other publications in the same style.
But what adds much to the interest of this thriller, beyond the discovery of the scenes from the Vatican, race through Rome churches in piazzas in chapels, it is my reflection on religion-science relationship . I who am passionate about religious facts and studied the sociology of religion, I found exciting and well brought reflection. It is distinguished in the words of some characters, in the way they are outlined (for once the characters are more complex than those of DVC, even if they are not the engine of the novel), in their choices, opinions and very interesting ... End the work of the author.
Dan Brown's writing is quite correct. By cons, it is true that I read the English novel ... And can not judge translation. But it is true, often translations are revealed and agreed flat compared to the original, I have noticed ...
Anyway, in the VO, Dan Brown has a good literary style, though admittedly basic, for the simple reason that he focused his writing on dialogue, action, or short and vivid descriptions. Not really the place to spread a high register of language and a refined style. There is hardly enough to mediocrity, and my word, call it poor at writing is really making fun of the world. He can turn his sentences, and even if often simple, they are not flat or worthy of a blog so far ... As I often say, I prefer 100 times a simple and correct style a pretentious style ...
In the end, a good read, I advise those who loved the DVC, even to those who have least liked if the reflection on religion interests them, to those who love quite dark thrillers, adventure, and races against the clock with substance.
