Angels & Demons by Dan Brown

Angels & Demons

When world-renowned Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon is summoned to a Swiss research facility to analyze a mysterious symbol—seared into the chest of a murdered physicist—he discovers evidence of the unimaginable: the resurgence of an ancient secret brotherhood known as the Illuminati ... the most powerful underground organization ever to walk the earth. The Illuminati h...

Title:Angels & Demons
Author:
Rating:
ISBN:1416524797
Edition Language:English
Format Type:Mass Market Paperback
Number of Pages:713 pages

Angels & Demons Reviews

  • Rosey
    Apr 24, 2007

    Religion always was, is, has been, and always will be a very sensitive subject for me. However this book was a "battle" of religion and science. The storyline was engaging. I have to admit that the beginning was a bit slow, but as the book progressed, the pace really picked up to a point I pruned myself out in the bathtub finishing it. There was a page I found to be very thought-provoking.

    "Religion is like language or dress. We gravitate toward the practices with which we were raised. In the end

    Religion always was, is, has been, and always will be a very sensitive subject for me. However this book was a "battle" of religion and science. The storyline was engaging. I have to admit that the beginning was a bit slow, but as the book progressed, the pace really picked up to a point I pruned myself out in the bathtub finishing it. There was a page I found to be very thought-provoking.

    "Religion is like language or dress. We gravitate toward the practices with which we were raised. In the end, though, we are all proclaiming the same thing."

    Langdon was intrigued. "So you're saying that whether you are a Christian or a Muslin simply depends on where you were born?"

    "Isn't it obvious? Look at the diffusion of religion around the globe."

    "So faith is random?"

    "Hardly. Faith is universal. Our specific methods for understanding it are arbitrary. Some of us pray to Jesus, some of us go to Mecca, some of us study subatomic particles. In the end, we all are just searching for truth, that which is greater for ourselves." - page 110

    This does explain a lot of things for me... *pondering*

  • Brian
    Aug 14, 2007

    I read this after the drivel that is called "Da Vinci Code." I decided to give the author another chance, and take on something that maybe wasn't so formulaic.

    No dice. I am convinced that Dan Brown does absolutely no research into the subjects he writes about. Or if he does, he decides it is not "titilating enough for him" so he makes it up. I mean why even include actual real things in his books if he chooses to ignore any facts about them. Opus Dei? I doubt he could spell it. Catholic Church?

    I read this after the drivel that is called "Da Vinci Code." I decided to give the author another chance, and take on something that maybe wasn't so formulaic.

    No dice. I am convinced that Dan Brown does absolutely no research into the subjects he writes about. Or if he does, he decides it is not "titilating enough for him" so he makes it up. I mean why even include actual real things in his books if he chooses to ignore any facts about them. Opus Dei? I doubt he could spell it. Catholic Church? Has he even read any history about the Catholic Church at all? His descriptions of the Church seem to be based on whatever anti-Catholic propoganda he could find, Chick Tracts, and superstition.

    So it comes to no surprise that he has 2 massive bestsellers that are more or less, anti-Catholic. Cuz you know, Catholic baiting and prejudice to the Catholic Church is the only real acceptable prejudice left. The underlying superstition and hostility towards Catholicism, priests, the Pope, Vatican, etc is very close to the same sentiments that lingered in the decades and centuries before WWII in Europe.

    Think I am overreacting? If someone wrote these books but instead baited the Jews or Muslims there would be a huge outcry. Bashing Catholics and depicting them and their history in the way Dan Brown does in these books is outrageous and should be criticized and shunned.

    And I didn't even delve into how awful of a writer he is, did I? The only thing more embarassing than his writing that will never be remembered 20 years from now, is the fact that so many people bought into his piece of shit and wasted their time with it. Including respectable people like Tom Hanks and Ron Howard. There's time you will never get back again. Congrats!

  • Russell
    Oct 22, 2007

    This was Brown's book before the infamous "The Da Vinci Code." In many ways, this book was like a rough draft for "The Da Vinci Code", same character Langdon, same other characters, same basic start, same concepts, same bad research passed off as fact, same trick of having nearly every chapter end in cliffhanger, the same in so many ways.

    Sadly, I think he did a better job the first time around.

    I recommend you have a computer handy so you look up what Brown is talking about, and that way you can

    This was Brown's book before the infamous "The Da Vinci Code." In many ways, this book was like a rough draft for "The Da Vinci Code", same character Langdon, same other characters, same basic start, same concepts, same bad research passed off as fact, same trick of having nearly every chapter end in cliffhanger, the same in so many ways.

    Sadly, I think he did a better job the first time around.

    I recommend you have a computer handy so you look up what Brown is talking about, and that way you can have a better idea of what it really looks like. Added bonus too, you can have a laugh over how Brown had to forced it into his world to make the plot somewhat cohesive.

    Look, if you want to write fiction, do so but please own up to it being fiction! Trying to pass off the

    as being so pornographic in nature that the Vatican had it exiled to a small church, is, well, wrong as wrong as gets.

    Brown throws out a number of stunningly stupid statements, like asserting that since Christianity is syncretic, God-eating (the Holy Communion) was taken from the Aztecs. How, Brown never explains, since the practice was established by Christ himself during the Last Supper around 33 A.D. and the Aztecs didn't show up until 1248 A.D. I figure Brown left it open so he could write some sort of time travel book, involving a long lost secret that the Aztecs built their pyramids as sort of a dry run, traveled back in time and were actually behind the pyramids in Egypt. And, of course, were the sect that created the Christ-myth due to a poorly thought out plot.

    Thanks to the internet, you too can have fun poking holes in the book. See, for example,

    . And if that doesn't do it for you, here's a good site

    .

    A sample from the last site:

    "While walking around the CERN campus, Langdon notices a marble column incorrectly labeled Ionic. Langdon points the mistake out to Kohler: "That column isn't Ionic. Ionic columns are uniform in width. That one's tapered. It's a Doric -- the Greek counterpart." (26) The problem is that Ionic columns are themselves Greek. The three orders of classical columns, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian, are all Greek in origin, so it's impossible for the Doric order to the be the Greek counterpart of the Ionic. It's also much easier to distinguish the Doric from the Ionic based on their capitals; Doric columns have plain capitals, while Ionic columns are topped by volutes or scrolls."

    That irked me when I read that passage, because not only is a poor joke, it doesn't make sense!

    Let's ignore the bad, the erroneous, and the ugly, and you have decent little thriller zipping around Rome looking at art. Of course, it has to zip along, slow down long enough to think about it, and a host of questions start to swarm up. Like how Langdon has a whole theory on who the bad guy is and how Langdon was involved in these rather preposterous circumstances. Of course, the premise is wrong, so that that whole house of cards fall down. Not bad in of itself, but then Brown doesn't ever provide any reason Langdon was involved after that.

    Of course, you aren't supposed to notice while reading it, and preferably not afterwards, either. Doing so reveals how badly Brown writes. He can't provide a single decent reason why his hero is there, aside from a vague "Because" and a shrug.

    I'm envious of Brown, he can't write well, has plot holes big enough to drive the

    through, bad research and "facts" that aren't, and yet still is entertaining, popular and, most galling perhaps, published.

    Caveat lector.

  • Jessika
    Aug 03, 2008

    Wow.

    Before I begin my review, I want to preface it by saying a few things.

    I know a lot of people think Dan Brown is a crappy writer who writes crappy books about crappy stories with crappy characters and crappy, unbelievable plots.

    I know a lot of people think Dan Brown is one of the best at the "cheese factor" and roll their eyes at his stories.

    I know a lot of people out there know more about European history, etc. etc. than I do, and therefore, I might not be the appropriate judge of this s

    Wow.

    Before I begin my review, I want to preface it by saying a few things.

    I know a lot of people think Dan Brown is a crappy writer who writes crappy books about crappy stories with crappy characters and crappy, unbelievable plots.

    I know a lot of people think Dan Brown is one of the best at the "cheese factor" and roll their eyes at his stories.

    I know a lot of people out there know more about European history, etc. etc. than I do, and therefore, I might not be the appropriate judge of this story.

    And I'm also aware that this is not the next literary classic.

    HOWEVER.

    I loved this book.

    Every time the action picked up in this book, I had a serious adrenaline rush. My heart raced, my eyes frantically read line after line, and my hands automatically went to my mouth. I was totally engrossed in the story Dan Brown told, even though I had already seen the movie. Watching the movie before the book is very uncharacteristic of me, but I'm glad that it happened that way in this case. Reading the book cleared up a lot of unanswered questions for me, and the book was different enough from the movie to keep me gasping out loud at plot twists. For me, I was hooked along for the ride, and even though some might find his twists unbelievable or even predictable, I was just in it for the story and found myself completely absorbed. I appreciated the facts (or "facts") throughout the story that were presented to the reader about the Illuminati, Vatican City, etc. and I loved the feeling of being on the inside of solving a puzzle while racing against time. I appreciated Robert Langdon's character, and I'm so glad they cast Tom Hanks to play his character because even when I read The DaVinci Code years ago, Tom Hanks is always how I pictured Robert Langdon. Pretty damn intelligent, resourceful, and witty. Dan Brown can be pretty witty, too, and I found myself chuckling from time to time. I even enjoyed the general mechanics of this book--I liked the short chapters that kept me coming back for more. They made it easy to fly through the pages. I would look down maybe after a half hour or so into reading and be 150 pages further in the book. The "dun-dun-dunnn" moments at the end of pretty much each chapter had me flipping, too, even though I could understand how some might find that worthy of an eye-roll or two. My favorite part of the book, besides the adrenaline rushes, was how he bounced from one point of view to another without leaving the reader feeling disoriented. Rather, it had the opposite effect for me, clarifying everything by being able to watch the story unfold from all angles.

    After reading The DaVinci Code a few years ago, I was a little hesitant to pick this one up...would I love Dan Brown as much (or more)? Or was The DaVinci Code a one-time deal? Well, I'm here to say that I can officially consider myself a fan of Dan Brown, however crappy others might want to declare him.

  • Will Byrnes
    Oct 26, 2008

    Robert Langdon is the protagonist. This is the first novel in which the character appears (The DaVinci Code being the most famous) The well-known symbologist is called in by the director of CERN when a renowned scientist is found murdered. The scientist had created anti-matter, in an attempt to demonstrate that divine creation of the universe was scientifically explainable. The scientist has, of course, a brilliant and beautiful daughter. The tale has much payload regarding the Illuminati, an an

    Robert Langdon is the protagonist. This is the first novel in which the character appears (The DaVinci Code being the most famous) The well-known symbologist is called in by the director of CERN when a renowned scientist is found murdered. The scientist had created anti-matter, in an attempt to demonstrate that divine creation of the universe was scientifically explainable. The scientist has, of course, a brilliant and beautiful daughter. The tale has much payload regarding the Illuminati, an ancient group of scientists who had formed a secret society in opposition to the church. It is fast-paced, and a well made example of the action adventure tale. We learn much about the history of the illuminati, a bit about CERN, but the central questions remain ones of faith and science. It was a fun read, one I felt impelled to return to when free moments appeared.

    A few other DBs for your consideration

    -----

    -----

    -----

  • Fabian
    May 19, 2009

    And I am left STUNNED. Incredibly, this one is the one to top when it comes to adventure & history and pace & ingenuity.

    I've recently noticed how much history is revered (rightfully) by the modern authors. This is a different type of historical immersion. This is about bringing it to the forefront... something in the past is incredibly relevant, vital, to the present.

    Everyone but me had read this, & after Da Vinci Code--that bitch of an overrated heathen--I thought Brown was a phony

    And I am left STUNNED. Incredibly, this one is the one to top when it comes to adventure & history and pace & ingenuity.

    I've recently noticed how much history is revered (rightfully) by the modern authors. This is a different type of historical immersion. This is about bringing it to the forefront... something in the past is incredibly relevant, vital, to the present.

    Everyone but me had read this, & after Da Vinci Code--that bitch of an overrated heathen--I thought Brown was a phony (in company of Nicholas Sparks, among others). Not so. This is a MASTERPIECE indeed.

    I read this in like two sittings. All 710 pages of oversized print.

    I was sooo hooked I recalled many other lesser books that have riveted me. This one is so incredibly put together, it is no wonder Brown has been heralded by the general readership, ingrained in the zeitgeist.

    The awesomeness of this work lies in the battle between science and religion, perhaps one of the most seminal works about that topic. It explores this duality literally, symbolically... every which way. That they are married, both science and religion, is the thesis. Brown proves this with the precision of a skilled scientist. & with the heart of a devout... historian.

  • Kiki
    Sep 11, 2012

    When I was in high school, I was group-travelling across western Europe and in the interest of saving money, we forfeited airfares for rail and coach. This meant aching backs, exploding bladders, and as much sleep as fifteen teenagers can muster while sitting bolt-upright on a coach driving up a clay-soil hillside with no crash barrier and overzealous air conditioning.

    Driving up from Rome to Paris, intent on salvaging as much daylight as possible, we took the night train. The night train! Doesn'

    When I was in high school, I was group-travelling across western Europe and in the interest of saving money, we forfeited airfares for rail and coach. This meant aching backs, exploding bladders, and as much sleep as fifteen teenagers can muster while sitting bolt-upright on a coach driving up a clay-soil hillside with no crash barrier and overzealous air conditioning.

    Driving up from Rome to Paris, intent on salvaging as much daylight as possible, we took the night train. The night train! Doesn't that sound like fun? Doesn't that sound like a huge adventure?

    "Best sleep I ever had," I was told. "You'll love the night train."

    I was lied to. The night train was like a bad mood on rails. In fact, just replace the word "train" with "mare" because that's pretty much what it was. We were stacked four to a room the size of a coat closet and forbidden to open our suitcases until we left the train. The bathrooms were like coffins with no toilet roll and seats that kept falling off, and doors that didn't lock, and the queues for the ladies' were like the fucking Danube. It was worse than the hole-in-the-wall showers with the saloon doors in Normandy two years earlier.

    When we got on the train in Rome, it was boiling hot. Even in pajamas, I was sweating. There were four duvets in our four-person room, but I was so unbelievably overheated that I donated mine to one of the other girls who complained about being freezing. The train rattled to a start, and I figured I'd get a great sleep. I'd be cool, and comfortable, and this would be the brilliant rest I was promised. Suddenly, the night train didn't seem so bad after all.

    I woke up halfway though Switzerland with feet like ice and rug burn from the carpet covering on my bunk. I sat up to try to grab a sweater from my suitcase but it was stowed where I had no hope of reaching it. The window had been left open, but I didn't know how to close it.

    I lay back on the bunk, sure that this was truly the worst sleep I had ever had. It was a non-sleep. It was worse than a non-sleep. It was a non-sleep with goosebumps and rug burn on my elbows, and what's more, afterwards, we spent an entire day zipping around Paris trying to keep our eyes open long enough to appreciate a dozen excruciatingly boring tour guides and this gross constant film of polluted city rain. You know, the kind that makes you feel filthy the second it touches you.

    Dan Brown is that person; the one who told me I'd have a great sleep on the night train. Though instead, he told me I'd really enjoy this book and that it was a complex, mysterious thriller.

    He lied, like the night train person lied. This book is the literary equivalent of rug burn on your elbows and trying to sleep in Switzerland with no fucking socks on.

    This book wants you to think that it's really adventurous and spiritual and intelligent when in actual fact it's like giving your duvet away, except your duvet is money, and trying to sleep on the bottom bunk on a rickety-sounding train with a bladder full of pee and a quiet certainty that the person on the bunk above you is going to break it, and you're going to be crushed to death with no bra on in a foreign country, except the person above you is Dan Brown.

    Picture this: Robert Langdon, Harvard "symbologist" (let's put a pin in that one) is called to CERN to investigate the murder of a scientist, and then discovers that the murder is connected to an ancient secret society threatening to destroy the sacred Vatican City and murder four cardinals in the name of science.

    Then picture this: a bishop falls in love with a nun and they really want to bump uglies but they're supposed to be chaste so instead of having sex they decide to conceive a child (because having a child is supposedly the only alternative to sex in proving one's love for another person) by IVF and then the nun gives birth to a boy who goes on to become the Pope's camerlegno, all the while unaware that he is in fact the illegitimate son of the bloody bishop of Rome.

    One of those scenarios sounds like a bestselling novel worthy of praise. The other one sounds like an episode of

    pencilled out on the back of a Booster Juice napkin by an intern doing pails. But both of them are true components of this garbage dump of a commercial novel that wants to think it's so clever and edgy but is in actual fact nothing but Europorn Indiana Jones fanfiction with a side of racism and just a sprinkling of good old fashioned bullshit. Because we love when certain authors twirl their mustaches and tell us all about how much

    they know when in actual fact they can barely stumble through a single sentence without using the word "awkward" or describing someone's physical appearance with intensely invasive and sexual terms.

    Can we just take a moment to discuss Vittoria? Vittoria is the daughter of the murdered priest/scientist from CERN who was creating the antimatter that went into the bomb that intends to blow up the Vatican...to some end. I'm not 100% sure if there was even a point to all of this but let's roll with that.

    Vittoria as a character just kills me because not only does she constitute this

    book failing the Bechdel test, but she's this terrible walking trope of a character whose every single action is punctuated with "...the woman." Vittoria has a gun...and she's a woman. Vittoria is mad about something...and she's a woman. Vittoria is a scientist...and she's a woman. There is not a single moment wherein Vittoria's womanness is not commodified, ogled, fetishized or taken advantage of by the plethora of male characters surrounding her and patting her on the head while simultaneously

    her tanned legs and cleavage as subtly as a baboon rubbing its bright red buttcrack up against a window at the zoo. Vittoria's only purpose as a character is to make Robert, our sanctimonious, self-righteous and highly overrated protagonist look like a hero. Is nobody else finding this insulting? Vittoria is sexualized to within an inch of her life and is then punished for it by a racially problematic villain who tries to rape her but doesn't succeed because Langdon, our plucky hero, swoops in and saves her. He is of course ultimately rewarded for this with sex because obviously, fellas, that's what's supposed to happen when you help a girl out. Held the door for her? You earned a blowjob! Helped her push her car in the snow? Expect sex! Chased away a leering predator who's making her uncomfortable? You ought to get your shot! You won, after all! Fair and square!

    And if she says no? Bitch! You're in the friendzone now. You'd better cry about it because she's being so ungrateful.

    We also have this terrible image of the "Hassassin" - a brown guy who's obviously evil and a sexual predator and totally perverted and twisted because...well, he's brown?

    Look, we all knew this character was going to be a terrible rehash of racist Islamophobic stereotypes. At the same time as fetishizing eurocentric women's lib we have Muslim women being scoffed at for their generally more reserved culture. They're literally called "livestock" and don't try to tell me that this is all part of the evil character of the Hassassin because (a) the portrayal of the Hassassin is racist in an of itself because he is one of only two characters of colour and he is pure evil (the other character of colour is a reporter for the BBC who has absolutely no moral compass whatsoever) and he is not invested in the cause in any way, thus his involvement boils down to white Dan Brown figuring "well, he's a rapist and a terrorist, so that must make him Muslim" and (b) the majority of people in the west actually believe that Muslim female culture is like that and that feminism involves charging into their country, ripping their niqabs off while screaming "I'M WHITE AND I'M LIBERATING YOU" which is only perpetuated by this supposedly worldly, well-traveled and suave killer. Bonus points for suggesting, with this huge stereotype of a character, that Muslim men have absolutely no respect for their female counterparts and are inherent abusers. Um, yay?

    (I absolutely love the lack of any research that went into portraying the BBC as the main body of press. We have these two BBC reporters looking for "scoop" and being generally tacky and invasive and this is just such an awful misunderstanding of everything that is characteristic of the BBC. British news networks are not like American news networks; they aren't jokey and cute and funny. They don't mutter about Syria for five minutes and then run a half-hour story about raccoons in Ontario. They're serious and somber and they cram as much world news as possible into about an hour of programming, which almost always includes some stony-faced reporter standing in the middle of a war zone delivering a status report. BBC reporters have been killed out on the field before. The thing about the BBC is that it doesn't need to be gimmicky to attract ratings because it's comfortably funded by TV licensing. The BBC do not look for "scoop" or sensationalize breaking news or act on anonymous tips from assassins or send two clueless idiots to an event as big as a papal conclave. It's so painfully obvious that, disregarding any cultural differences between America and Europe, of which there are hundreds, Brown simply googled "British news networks" and search-replaced the BBC into this laughable, lovable brick of a novel.)

    In between Vittoria being a sexy Mediterranean and the Hassassin being a Big Bad Brown Man we have this dreadful hokey plot with more holes than, ironically, Swiss cheese - considering that one of the most prominent Swiss characters' surnames is "Olivetti" and our hero survives a fall from three miles up with nothing but a small tarp as a parachute, and real-life CERN is graciously putting up with this total crusade of slander and misinformation involving the shape of pillars, their teaching facilities, and the purpose of the Large Hadron Collider. Look, people were irrationally mad enough about the LHC without Dan Brown pulling out his copy of National Geographic and fanning the flames.

    Robert and Vittoria go on this bullshit quest across Rome to locate the Church of Illumination, for some reason, which leads to all sorts of insane conspiracy claims and both of them jumping to the most ridiculous conclusions in order to find the path that ultimately leads to a painfully obvious location that, after years of preservation, study and reconstruction, someone should have already found inside the Castel Sant'Angelo. They then kill a person, and nobody follows up on this - doesn't the person who found the Hassassin's body lying crumpled on a pile of

    think there's maybe something fishy going on? - and there's a huge twist at the end that is so utterly ridiculous and predictable that it brings up the taste of yesterday's lunch.

    Where exactly does Dan Brown get off creating books like this one? Books with no integrity, no soul, and no finesse? There is nothing good about this book, and yet it's constructed in such a way that it's virtually impossible to abandon. The constant cliffhangers give this extremely convoluted and silly novel a crack-like quality that is unmatched by any other. I've read some seriously addictive books, but this one takes the fucking cake.

    I'm not sure why I bothered sticking with this book until the bitter end. It amused me, I suppose. That's probably why. By the final few chapters, I was literally shouting at the book. I kept thinking, "this needs to end. This fucking book needs to be gone from my life." And yet...I continued to read? Like a madwoman? Well, then. A book marketed and constructed with that much psychological witchery deserves a pat on the back. Never have I ever been so sucked in by something so filled with pompous, pretentious, mansplained crap. That's right, actually; this book should have just been called 'Mansplaining'. Because that's basically what it is. Jesus fucking Christ.

    I have a warm place in my heart for books about special snowflake Americans arriving on their white horses to rescue the rest of the world from themselves. I find them cute. They're certainly entertaining, like a preteen diary, and this one in particular; Brown wants so desperately to be Langdon that it hurts. But where's the harm in all that? Sure, this book is filled with racism and sexism and ethnic stereotyping and pretentious philosophical twaddle but it's not starting any wars. It's no worse than anything on television or anything written for a YA audience of late. I let myself get lost in it for an hour or two, and that was kinda nice. And for all the book's faults, it inspired an absolutely awesome movie. Seriously - the movie was excellent and they cut almost all of the bullshit tumors out for the screenplay which made for two hours of pretty painless entertainment. No mean feat considering the source material.

    I guess how much you'll enjoy this book depends on how many cheesy yoga jokes you're willing to put up with. Let that be a lesson to you all: when in doubt, or when licking lightbulbs seems like a worthier pastime, leave it out.

  • Mohammed Arabey
    Jan 29, 2013

    ده صورة أحد أغلفة الرواية اللي بيظهر فيها التماثل, وفي غيره ضمن الأحداث نفسها .. لو قلبت الصورة حتلاقي عنوان الرواية بيتقرا من فوق زي من تحت

    ده صورة أحد أغلفة الرواية اللي بيظهر فيها التماثل, وفي غيره ضمن الأحداث نفسها .. لو قلبت الصورة حتلاقي عنوان الرواية بيتقرا من فوق زي من تحت

    "الرواية اخدت مني وقت بجد لكن المهم طلعت بحصيلة لغوية كبيرة افتكر اني

    عرفت اكتر من 10 كلمات مختلفه كلهم معناهم رجال الدين :)"

    هناك ايضا رسم وتفاصيل المؤلف للاماكن او الاثار المسيحية المكتظة بها روما والفاتيكان كان صعب احيانا تخيله لولا اني اقرا نسخة خاصة مصورة كنت تعبت بجد :(

    اما الافضل فكان النظام السينمائي المثير المكتوب به الرواية بالاخص تتابعات نهاية الرواية الذي شهد خلط مشاهد الفلاش باك سويا ومزجها مع الحدث الحاضر بطريقة غير مربكة بل مشوقة لدرجة تجعلك "علي حافه الكرسي" "حابسا لأنفاسك " لمعرفه ما حدث في الماضي بالظبط ادي الي هذه الاحداث و الصراعات النفسيه لاحد الابطال.

    من روائع الرواية ايضا..خطابات الكامرلنجو "مش عارف معناها بالعربي بالظبط بس اللي هو راعي البابا وخادمه" اللي بيتكلم فيها عن صراع الدين والعلم .الصراع الابدي..من منتصف الروايه لاخرها هذا الصراع تم صياغته بطريقة ممتازة سواء في الخطب المباشرة او المواقف اللي مر بيها اتنين من اهم الشخصيات بالرواية في ماضيهم.

    يمكن عجبتني جدا في الرواية فعلا ان الاحداث كلها في يوم واحد لاني بعشق الافلام اللي بالطريقه دي "طبعا للاسف في الحاله دي انا حزين اني شفت الفيلم قبل قراءه الرواية " وتقريبا دي اول مره اقرأ رواية بالنسبه لي تدور كلها في يوم واحد وتكون بهذا الحجم "ربما فقط احسست ان الشمس لم تغيب الا متاخرا جدا يمكن ده العادي في روما"

    في النهاية دي اول رواية اقرأها لدان براون واكيد مش الاخيرة ..وتقيمي ليها بالرغم من انتقاص متعه القراءة بمعرفتي النهاية من مشاهده الملخص المختصر"الفيلم" الا ان مازال ان هناك مفاجات واثاره في الرواية و ايضا اعتقد ان تعاطفي مع الشخصية "المفترض انها شريرة" زاد بتتابعات النهاية.

    محمد العربي

    الاسكندريه 3 فبراير 2013

    الي 16 فبراير 2013


Top Books is in no way intended to support illegal activity. We uses Search API to find the overview of books over the internet, but we don't host any files. All document files are the property of their respective owners, please respect the publisher and the author for their copyrighted creations. If you find documents that should not be here please report them. Read our DMCA Policies and Disclaimer for more details.