How to Evaluate dan brown's Hell?

Look at the original hell, there are three main feelings (spoiler):

First, it is rich in content. The rich contents here include: first, the art, architecture and history of the Middle Ages and Renaissance are rich; Rich; Second, there are many puzzles, suspense and turning points in the full text. This makes the whole book very substantial, but it also brings many difficulties to reading. I have to check the information repeatedly and look at the map to understand the relevant art and architectural content, otherwise I have no idea what kind of route Langdon and Siena are running;

Second, the turning point in the article is very "despicable". Say "despicable" because Langdon's amnesia complicates truth, illusion, reality and lies. The role identity and story of the characters are constantly subverted, which always makes me feel cheated by the author. Especially when I thought Ferris was gay, when he said "I have never been with any man" and the villain replied "Let me be your first", I almost got angry. Of course, I finally found out that Siena was the protagonist of this memory instead of Ferris, and my disappointment was beyond words.

Third, although the theme of humanistic care in the book is very common, as the book says, people always avoid it in a conditioned way. Population issues, ethical issues of genes and other technologies, and trade-offs before human well-being. Simply put, it's whether it's moral to kill 100 people. This problem did not end in the book, but the plan of "little people" was implemented, and almost the whole world was infected with randomly activated sterilization virus. Finally, Dr. Hinsky's words are thought-provoking. Now that it's a foregone conclusion, should we try to save it? This book blurs the traditional sense of good and evil, which is of course a very common way to question traditional morality. But when the final human catastrophe really happened, the influence of this doubt was considerable.

Fortunately, the plague didn't happen in the end, but the villain chose a relatively "humane" way, which also highlighted the concern that the villain has always emphasized on human beings. After reading this book, I will feel glad you came, but it is not a perfect work, at least in my opinion, it is not as good as The Da Vinci Code I read before.

First of all, the real timeline of this book is 48 hours, interspersed with memories of different characters. But in the narrative of Real Time, we find that the protagonist Langdon is almost always in a state of distraction (related to the sedative he takes? ), in such an urgent situation, the author's in-depth description and discussion of architecture, painting, sculpture and history greatly slowed down the pace. At the same time, it also makes the work more full, with a sense of history and reality, which makes people unbearable for Langdon's fugue state.

Secondly, as before, although this is not a novel, but a simple mystery novel, there is no need for the author to compete fairly with the readers. However, as a fan of this book, when I was deceived by the author's various "despicable" narrative tricks, I still felt that there was nothing I could do to hit cotton with one punch, and my heart was very uncomfortable.

Finally, in fact, the efforts of various characters in this article to "save" mankind are in vain, because in fact, the virus has already spread, and the villains have opened a small (really not big? ) joke, this is another place that makes me speechless. Although I didn't expect a happy ending, I was still a little depressed when I found my tense nerves being replayed with the book.

Summary is a book worth reading, but how much it attracts you is a matter of opinion.