that parts of his theories were quite interresting. But why oh why did he have to write such a seriously bad novel about it?? I mean, it`s been a while since I`ve read a book that was this badly written. Now I did read the Norwegian translation, so ofcourse things might have been lost in translation. But somehow I don`t think that`s it.
Considering the topic of the book, I found it quite annoying that he chooses to consistently call the female main character by her first name Sophie, and the mail main character by his last name Langdon. Which, at least the way I see it implies a difference in status between them that I didn`t find appropriate. And I don`t like overexplaining in novels. For instance, when the main characters are entering Westminster Abbey in the middle of a huge drama, I do not need the author to explain to me that they are not thinking about the history of the place at that moment. I never thought they were. It seems the author has a need to show us how much he knows about history and all sorts of symbolism, and he keeps looking for excuses to add all his facts (true or false) to the story. And he doesn`t do it elegantly.
And then there`s all the comments and phrases that are just weird. For instance, in one of the most dramatic moments at the end, he chooses to add the phrase “He did not breathe for a whole second.” A whole second?? What is that?
Also, in reading the book, I kept wondering about his time aspect. How many hours is there in one night in this novel? Maybe it is possible for all of that to happen in one night, theoretically, but I doubt it. And he could so easily have avoided things like that.
I found the characters flat and the plot just really bad, the ideas are interresting to some extent, but they just get lost in all the bad writing.