Rating: 
Summary: Quite Possibly the Worst Book Ever Written
Review: "The Rule of Four" is often billed along side Dan Brown's mega-hit "The Da Vinci Code", based on their shared roots in several themes: art, religion, the renaissance period, scholarly pursuits, etc. However, to purport that these two works segue nicely into each other is absurd. Brown's novel is a well-paced imaginative page-turner - a great beach read that can actually inspire further research and debate into its assertions. "The Rule of Four" is a sloppy mess of boring mini-plots played out by tedious yet uninspiring characters.
The book follows a group of Princeton seniors preparing for their upcoming graduation. The main protagonist has several "crises" facing him - an fast-approaching thesis deadline, a foundering relationship with an underclass girlfriend, social anxiety over the upcoming spring formal, etc. Kinda sounds like an Ivy League version of "Beverly Hills: 90210", right? If only it was that good.
The antiquity angle stems from a mysterious renaissance text that is the basis of a character's senior thesis. The text may or may not contain a code that has gone unsolved for centuries. [MINOR SPOILER AHEAD. Normally, I never put any spoiler material in these reviews, but I'm bending my own rule to warn you away from this "Rule"] The suspense and action in this book is so lackluster, there is no way to describe it without giving it away: the primary "mystery" to be solved eventually reveals itself to be that the protagonist's faculty advisor is attempting to steal his thesis and publish it as his own. Oh, the intrigue - I've got chills! Of course, in order to defend the world from this electrifying web of plagiarism, the protagonist manages to unlock codes that drove countless others mad for hundreds of years in just a matter of days. It's very difficult to blend both dullness and implausibility (bad books usually steer way too far one way or the other), but our authors have pulled it off astoundingly well.
The "action" takes place exclusively on the Princeton campus, moving from dorm to library to classroom and so on. The authors are obsessed with letting the reader know that they went to Princeton and that they know the best routes to get from any location to any other location. They then shoehorn in lengthy discussions on the social caste system that surrounds Princetons supper clubs (those are dining halls to the rest of us regular-college luddites) and ill-fitting scenes that reveal the traditions and rites that go with attending the college. One of the most gripping action sequences sees our gang avoiding the campus police after some late-night laser tag (that's right, these geeks are still playing laser tag) in the tunnels under the campus. I can't wait for the movie!
The characters bumble through a number of situations that even the authors don't seem to care anything about. As a result, there are many loose ends left dangling. Plus, even though one of the plot angles peeking through this mess seems to be a hackneyed coming-of-age tale, there is no development for any of the characters at all. As a result, the reader never connects with any of them.
The overall feeling that reading this book leaves you with is that you've been forced to go on a campus tour of Princeton for prospective enrollees. By the end of the book, the reader can't help but feel that the authors are talking down to any poor soul who didn't attend this wonderland of education and maturation.
The book is a start-to-finish bore and a poorly executed one at that. It fails to be either an exciting screenplay-in-the-making or a highbrow work of fiction rooted in scholarly facts. I can't imagine that it would have ever been published if not for the potential for false crossover marketing born of "The Da Vinci Code". Don't fall for it.
Rating: 
Summary: Promising and curious first novel
Review: An ancient book sinks its seductive claws into yet another generation of truth
seekers. The Hypnerotomachia Poliphili was the obsession of Tom Sullivan's
father, to the detriment of both his own family and to his professional
reputation. Tom Sullivan knows what it is to live with frustration and parental
neglect but cannot escape the pull of this puzzling book as he nears the end of
his days at Princeton University. He has not based his thesis on this maddening
book but for his college room mate Paul, there is no other puzzle worth solving.
Paul Harris's involvement brings him under the tutelage of Richard Curry, a man
whose whole career may hinge on whatever discoveries his bright pupil can
deliver. With the murder of the project's scribe there is more reason still to
decipher and solve the puzzles that have bested so many for so long. There is a
secret text within the Hypnerotomachia that the anonymous author has trusted
only to those with the dedication and the knowledge to find it. Long ago
secrets that once needed to be hidden must now come to the light.
Debut authors and best friends Ian Caldwell and Dustin Thomason worked on
writing "The Rule of Four" for more than six years. It shows. Don't take
comparisons with you to this read, as while more popular authors may provide the
thrills they wouldn't necessarily provide the achingly beautiful prose and the
near perfect air of regret and melancholia that shrouds this interesting and
curious novel. The whole tone of the book is sepia stained with nostalgia and
such is the elegance of composition that it elevates the read to the much over
used tag of a "literary" novel.
"The Rule of Four" is not a great treasure hunt of exciting facts and is more
about the journey. We follow the four Princeton college friends who are all
caught up in the riddles of an ancient book, and of what becomes of them when
they become caught up between two very competitive and obsessed professors. A
solid read that does however get caught up in its own pomposity, "The Rule of
Four" perhaps tries too hard to showcase the research and cleverness of its
characters (and of course, its authors) at the expense of providing the
page-turning pull to its readers. Caldwell and Thomason are definitely authors
to watch.
Rating: 
Summary: Not the Da Vinci Code! But still good
Review: Do not expect to read a nail biting thriller. The comparisons to the Da Vinci Code are very few. They both deal with a historical mystery, end of comparison. This is a good book though. It is worth a look if you have an open mind.
Rating:
Summary: No Way Near The DaVinci Code!
Review: I purchased this book because it was tauted as The DaVinci Code for 2004. NOT! Where the DaVinci Code engaged the reader in the problem solving and code breaking, in The Rule of Four, the reader is spoon-fed the answers. I was very satisfied with the DaVinci Code, esp. when I would get the answers to the cyphers correct. I am so disappointed in The Rule of Four, that maybe I will just set it on fire too, though I doubt anyone would martyr themselves rescuing it...
Rating:
Summary: Good for a first time novel
Review: I purchased this book when it first came out and I have never bothered to check the customer reviews until now. I believe a lot of the reason behind the negative reviews is that people are simply not getting what they are expcting. Many people I think are expecting something along the lines of the Da Vinci Code, which for what it is worth is how this book was billed.
This is not the Da Vinci Code and bares little or no likeness of the Da Vinci Code. If you are wanting a book like that then check out Dan Brown's other 3 books. They are all excelent.
However what we have is a book that while it is trying to break a code, it is more about the humanity of the two main characters involved. This is not the big mystery book that people are wanting. What it is again is a book more about the people rather than the problem.
It is a good book which reads very quickly. Is it a perfect book? of course not. You can not possibly compare a first time novel to someone who has been published 4 or more times. This is a good read and certainly worth picking up. It will be nice to see another work from these guys in the future and watch them grow as authors
Rating:
Summary: Avoid the inevitable (and incorrect) comparisons to enjoy
Review: I think "The Rule of Four" has both benefited and been victimized by its following in the successes of Tom Brown's Angels and Demons/DaVinci Code series. The benefits are obvious - considering it was written by two young, first-time authors, its popularity and presence among the best-sellers for so long is incredible and was undoubtedly enhanced by its connection with Brown's work. But on the other hand, those who criticize it usually do so by holding it up against A&D and DVC, despite the fact that The Rule of Four and Brown's works are very different experiences. Yes, they use ancient texts to drive the plot, but that doesn't mean the content is the same. DVC and A&D were both fast-paced (and incredibly entertaining) thrillers where ancient mysteries needed to be solved in order to save the world, where any semblance of realism was set aside and long-standing arguments over religious history and science vs. the church were driven to the forefront. On the other hand, The Rule of Four is a story revolving around characters and relationships, with an ancient text and its effect on the lives of these characters operating in a prominent but supporting role.
The differences between the two are evident right off the bat -- The Rule of Four doesn't take long to show the reader that it's going in a different direction than Dan Brown's work. Not surprisingly, most of the negative reviews for ROF focus on how it's not as exciting as the other two. If you look at this book on its own, I think you'll enjoy it.
As a recent college graduate, the attention to the lifestyle and the relationships in such an atmosphere struck a chord with me. It was easy to relate to the characters, despite their academic achievements and their ensuing encounters. I think the farther removed from the age of the characters the reader is, the less he/she will enjoy it, and that's to be expected, and perhaps a criticism of the versatility of the authors. But I have to give them a pass on that considering it was their first effort.
In terms of the writing, (it's unfair to compare the plots, but comparing the writing to that of Dan Brown I feel is fair game), it is much deeper emotionally and stylistically much more attractive. For such young writers, a lot of the life lessons and wisdoms are incredibly profound. I don't really get why this book is taking so much heat for being boring and slow -- I think the pace fits the plot. Writing-wise, I would favor in a heartbeat a style that takes time to establish characters, surroundings, setting, etc. over a book that blatantly drops irrelevant (at the time) information on pg. 50 in an obvious effort to foreshadow events on page 400 and writes its way out of corners through unbelievable plot twists and conveniently instantaneous problem-solving skills on part of the characters.
If you don't get anything out of the characters/relationships angle, so be it. But at least give the book a chance without making the misguided comparisons to Dan Brown.
Rating:
Summary: complete waste of time!
Review: I would rather read about hippopotamus erotica than the hypnerotomachia. It was a complete waste of time. It is boring and hard to follow. In fact, the sale of book has been outlawed in 39 states for being so bad, I hear. I read Brown, Clancy, Crichton, Grisham and King among others, and "the rule of four" guys couldn't even carry their pencil boxes. If you want to be disappointed, read this book!
p.s. I watched paint dry for an hour one time on a dare and that was more fun than the time that I spent with this book.
Rating:
Summary: Murder and Mayhem at Princeton
Review: Most people who take up this book will have heard that the plot centres round a mysterious medieval manuscript, a group of four college buddies, and a great deal of murder and mayhem. There is code-breaking, symbolism, conspiracy and betrayal. Of course there are shades of Dan Brown, with more than a cursory nod to that populariser of the historical mystery, Umberto Eco, and his ur-text, "The Name of the Rose." But what may be less well known is that "The Rule of Four," is also a novel about the nature of friendship and the process of coming of age. It's a campus novel with (I bet) some autobiographical touches thrown in. Along with the influences mentioned above, I would definitely add Donna Tartt's "The Secret History." So if you're looking for a good summer read that's not too demanding, reasonably well written and has a good plot to commend it, you cannot go wrong with this book. However, if you do happen to read it, would you be good enough to explain what the title means?!!
Rating:
Summary: Still not sure
Review: So, I read this one and it took me a couple of weeks which is unusual for me. If I like it, then I can finish it in a day or two. The beginning kept me interested but the middle was extremely boring at times and it skips from past to present a lot. I found myself skipping pases on more than one occasion. But, I did make myself finish it and I did like the ending. Overall, the book the book is based on is hard to pronounce, its draggy, and basically written for more poeple attending Harvard who have way more education than necessary.
Rating: 
Summary: Affected writing, and overdose of Princeton
Review: Synopsys:Story revolves around the lives of four undergrads in their final year at Princeton University. Two of them are trying to interpret a 15th century text, Paul for his thesis and Tom to carry on the work started by his dead father. The text is composed of numerous riddles based on renaissance literature that are solved as the plot progresses. Positive: The basic premise of solving ancient puzzles to arrive at an unknown treasure hasn't worn its welcome ... yet. Negative: Far too detailed, often irrelevant, descriptions of Princeton buiildings, life, and traditions. I found them boring. The puzzles and riddles that are the highlight of this book are seldom worked through interactively for the reader's benefit. Typically, the brainy character (Paul) solves them on his own time and then launches into dull descriptions of what the encrypted text reveals when the solution is used as a cipher. In this respect "The Da Vinci Code" is far superior. The writing is often too pretentious, the kind with words from an SAT list and frequent metaphors for life and love. Example: "The butt of every triangle becomes the heart of another, until the roof of reality is a tessellation of love affairs. Taken together, they have the pattern of netting; and behind them, I think, is Love."
|
