The Rule of Four

Rating:
Summary: A Tribute to Literature, Art and Scholarship.
Review: The Rule of Four in many respects is an entertaining, informative and inspiring piece of literature. One can also perceive in this book a deep respect and a genuine awe for writing and literature in general. In a way, The Rule of Four is a tribute to literature, scholarship, and ultimately, art and beauty. At the risk of sounding old fashion, this novel exalts the power of the written word, how literature, for some, can be an all-consuming activity, taking precedence above even survival itself.

Literature was once viewed in the halls of academia as merely a collage of signs and signifiers, a post-structuralist game of deconstruction for its own sake. In the not so distant past, literature and true scholarship lost its magic, and was unduly relegated to lowbrow modernism, advertising copy, where the rules were tossed aside and the dictate was, "Anything Goes." This book, in many ways, is a backlash to that postmodern sensibility, pulling literature, history and philosophy out of its "meaningless deconstructive hell", realigning art to where it belongs, and that is a royal road, a secret key or direct conduit back to the gods themselves.

To compare this novel to the Da Vinci Code is a great disservice. This book has nothing to do with the alleged bloodline of the Saviour. It has nothing to do with the Holy Grail, Leonardo da Vinci or Mary Magellan. The book does hold a deep Renaissance secret, however, centred during 15th century Florence, but that's its only connection. What this book is about, then, is the power of the written word, and the secrets and passions it contains. The book is about obsession, the almost visceral need for knowledge and the pure delight and suffering one can experience while on that journey. The Sign of Four is also about friendship, enduring friendship, and the sacrifices one makes to ensure friendship lasts.

Close to the end of the book, when the character of Paul finally discovers the "secret" of the Hypnerotomachia, the manuscript under study, he describes Renaissance Florence and its intensely creative period during the late 15th century; this would have to be one of the most entertainingly descriptive monologues that I've ever read about the renaissance.

The Rule of Four is a well-crafted, well-edited and confident piece of fiction. The authors worked on the piece for six year after their graduation from Princeton University. I believe it was time well spent as the book is not only entertaining but also informative, and in the end, inspiring.











Rating:
Summary: Princeton's Preppy Hardy Boys: a missed opportunity
Review: Delighted to see that many of the readers' reviews of this block buster have panned it. What was all the excitement about? How has this title clung to the best-seller lists for so long? Are we all just a bunch of literary lemmings who take the plunge for whatever major publishers and bookstore chains decide to hype these days?

There was a potentially rewarding handful of thematic strands here: addiction of too narrowly specialized scholars to arcane minutia, crimes spawned by academic jealousy, the complex lifecycle of student friendships, etc. But what results should have been titled Princeton's Preppy Hardy Boys Try, and Fail, To Reprise The Name of the Rose! Undergraduates with a limitless command of a vast, interdisciplinary spectrum of esoteric sources? No way. Did the authors actually believe that readers serious enough to want to read a novel about the Hypnerotomachia and Renaissance Italy would be held spellbound by the lore of Princeton's pretentious, and oh so juvenile, dining clubs? Only Ivy wannabes -- say, maybe that's who put this book up there on the NY Times list to ambush me. Thanks a lot, Kids!

Rating:
Summary: Bored
Review: I want to stop reading this book. I'm bored. The characters seem stereotyped. And nothing interesting happens. What happens is not believable. It feels childlike in style.

Rating:
Summary: Building a castle on air
Review: Writers Ian Caldwell and Dustin Thomason state in their "The Rule of Four" that `a riddle is a castle built on air perfectly habitable if you don't look down'. So is their book. You can enjoy it -- as long as you don't think a lot of what you read or don't ask any questions. Otherwise, you'll fall from this castle. There is no doubt that they are extremely smart and educated. Their novel has been largely compared to Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code", Donna Tartt's "The Secret History" and Umberto Eco's "The Name of the Rose".

"The Rule of Four" is not as bad as Brown's `materpiece', but it is not as good as Tartt's and it is hardly comparable to Eco's novel. What one can notice in this book is a confused mix of all these different and unique styles -- if they are good or not is another story. Caldwell and Thomason sat on the fence, undecided if they want to pursue the cheap and disposable Brown or the erudite and crafted Tartt. Eco is even far away from them -- so he is better left alone.

"The Rule of Four" is set in Princeton -- a place the writers know well. And has a background the "Hypnerotomachia Poliphili"; its name means the ''struggle for love in a dream'' of a man called Poliphilo. Paul is having a hard time cracking the "Hypnerotomachia". Apparently they don't have any problems with the fact that book is written in a mixture of Latin, Greek, Italian, Hebrew, Arabic, Chaldean and Egyptian hieroglyphics; and the whole thing may be encrypted in elaborate codes.

Paradoxically the old "Hypnerotomachia" is more interesting and have fresher ideas than "The Rule of Four" itself. The contemporary writers based their narrative in old devices and the very old mechanic of thriller solving, bringing up dead bodies and detectives to Princeton. Moreover, all the characters are very stereotypical representing different social portions. There is also the sweet -- but useless as a character-- girlfriend Katie. Thinking of her, Tom says some of the most embarrassing moments in the book. "If ever there were a time to stay grounded, to resist that struggle and that dream [alluding to the "Hypnerotomachia"] -- if ever there were a time to remember a love that has devoted itself madly to me, to remember the promise I made to Katie -- that time is now." This can break one's heart. Just kidding!

There are also scholars and librarians who are devoted to the old document. But, then again, there isn't a soul inside those characters; there isn't a heart pulsing in their chests. What is left are descriptions and one dimensional people. They don't live, they seek a book. Of course, there are obsessed people -- but even those are human beings, something that none character in this book is.

Caldwell and Thomason seem to be two young kids who spent six years playing with their new videogame. As in this game `people' are not real they only solve riddles -- even those built in the air. It is a good idea that went bad. The old text could have been the raison d'être of a good thriller. The unknown writer of the "Hypnerotomachia" -- whoever he is-- deserved much more.


Rating:
Summary: My first & best suspense/mystery novel
Review: Strong Points of the Book (+ve):
1- Well written. The narration, description & use of language is well employed.
2- Strong vocabulary. I came across words I never saw before, nevertheless it was a mind-opening experience.
3- Unravelling the mysteries of the book. The lead and supporting cast/characters of the book all play a vital role in unravelling the mysteries.
4- The feelings & thoughts projected by the lead character & narrator were very realistic. You can identify with the character very well.
5- The university life the characters lead at university made me want to go there for further studies. Very enjoyable.


Weak Points of the Book (-ve):
1- Strong Vocabulary. For every 4 pages you'll at least come across one term. Frustrating if you'll have to open the dictionary so often, but then, that's my opinion since English is my 2nd language.
2- Flashbacks of the narrator, memories & long descriptions can loose your focus at times.
3- The ending is satisfying but did not quite satiate my curiosity. A second part to the book would be useful.
4- Slow pace of the story sometimes will frustrate you.

Rating:
Summary: Good coming of age story
Review: This is not a DaVinci Code, thank goodness, but rather a thoughtful coming of age story. The writing was alternately stunning and akward, leading me to believe that one of the authors was a better writer than the other?

All in all an enjoyable read.