My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Dan Brown: Yay or Nay

CorbanGW

Registered User
I was researching in my local public library and i saw the book "The Lost Symbol" by Dan Brown. I noticed it had a story line that involved Freemasonry. I am not yet an Ea but will be in the coming weeks. Would it be okay if i were to check this book out and read or should i wait? Thanks for answering
 

Bloke

Premium Member
I was researching in my local public library and i saw the book "The Lost Symbol" by Dan Brown. I noticed it had a story line that involved Freemasonry. I am not yet an Ea but will be in the coming weeks. Would it be okay if i were to check this book out and read or should i wait? Thanks for answering
I'd wait... you'll not be able to tell truth from fancy.... but I did like the book and I think it's pro-freemasonry, but there was a description in it of activities of no lodge I've attended ....

Sent from my SM-G920I using My Freemasonry mobile app
 

MarkR

Premium Member
I'm in the minority. I thought it was a terrible book. Not only is the Masonic stuff mostly nonsense, but I got to the end and thought "really? That's it? All of that for this ending?"

I read that he was way past his "deadline" for submitting the finished book to his publisher. I think he just didn't know how to end it, and finally just plugged something in.

It's the only "Masonic" book I've ever given away after I read it rather than keeping it in my personal library.
 

Bloke

Premium Member
You are talking about the original for the Da Vinci Code not The Lost Symbol.
No, Holy Blood Holy Grail was one of the sources that inspired he Da Vinci Code, so it would be Holy Blood Holy Grail that James is referring to...
 

Elexir

Registered User
No, Holy Blood Holy Grail was one of the sources that inspired he Da Vinci Code, so it would be Holy Blood Holy Grail that James is referring to...

Yes?

Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln was the three authors of
Michael can also be found as the author of this book.
Its not any diffrent book and its still the inspiration for Da Vinci Code and not the lost symbol.
 

hanzosbm

Premium Member
I'm in the minority. I thought it was a terrible book. Not only is the Masonic stuff mostly nonsense, but I got to the end and thought "really? That's it? All of that for this ending?"

I read that he was way past his "deadline" for submitting the finished book to his publisher. I think he just didn't know how to end it, and finally just plugged something in.

I completely agree that the ending was hugely disappointing (although, any more spectacular ending would've been so fanciful as to probably also draw our disapproval), but I didn't think the Masonic stuff was necessarily nonsense. Some of it was. Some of the ritual was in there (which I didn't appreciate, and for which reason the OP might want to steer clear). But what really impressed me was how much of the deeper, esoteric concepts were captured. The first time I read it, was a pretty decent ritualist and amateur Masonic historian, and I thought it was cute, but little else. The second time, several years later, after I had really learned more about the esoteric aspects of Masonry, particularly in regards to Gnosticism and Hermeticism, I was blown away but some of the tie-ins that were made. I honestly question whether they were done intentionally or not. On the one hand, for them to come about by accident would be a pretty remarkable coincidence. On the other hand, Dan Brown doesn't strike me as the type to have those kinds of interests or that deep of an understanding of them. I'm not really sure, but I was impressed; far more so than with the actual story itself.
 

Warrior1256

Site Benefactor
But what really impressed me was how much of the deeper, esoteric concepts were captured. The first time I read it, was a pretty decent ritualist and amateur Masonic historian, and I thought it was cute, but little else. The second time, several years later, after I had really learned more about the esoteric aspects of Masonry, particularly in regards to Gnosticism and Hermeticism, I was blown away but some of the tie-ins that were made.
Same here.
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
I'm in the minority. I thought it was a terrible book.

To me it's terrible compared to his other books but that establishes a very high bar.

I'm currently going through Origin. When my wife and I do road trips we play a book on audio so it can take many months to go through a book. That's our current one. Vaguely half way through at this point.
 
Top