Popular Culture Review Vol. 27, No. 1, Winter 2016 | Page 81

Published reviews of Inferno were generally negative. One  reviewer  wrote,“It  is   hard  to  explain  his  [Brown’s]  record-breaking  popularity,”  citing New Yorker comments about  “dead”  dialog  and  writing  without  distinction  (Bush  36). Other reviewers acknowledged the success of the techniques that Brown uses to package a popular novel. He  continuously  “peels  the  onion,”  presenting  pieces  of  the  puzzle, clues, or brief bits of information to engage the readers. Chapters are short (3-4 pages, 750- 1000 words). This  disclosure  of  “novelistic  nanobytes,”  tweets,  and  verbal  emoticons can occasionally lead to a significant leap in the number of clues or actions, while plot development becomes tighter as more clues are released. In effect, the clues and the plot have a symbiotic relationship—the plot cannot develop without being shored up by numerous static and actionable clues. Repetition is a key tactic that Brown uses to move along the story. For  Brown’s   Inferno is  a  story  with  a  moral,  similar  to  that  of  Dante’s  Inferno which is comprised of cascading stories with specific, detailed morality lessons culminating in a single moral outcome—Satan at the bottom of the descent, but with a sanctioned pathway to redemption and salvation. Traditional oral narratives use repetition of phrases, themes, or dialog so that the listener comprehends the account to create a credible whole—a shared understanding of the “rest  of  the  story.”  Repetition is characteristic of the oral tradition,  but  its  continuous  use  in  Brown’s  Inferno reflects internal comments by Robert Langdon  and  other  characters  that  add  little  to  the  novel’s  pace. Often these comments lead to or are a part  of  “cliffhangers”  that  skip  from  chapter  to  chapter. Character or Plot? Amazingly, what often attracts people to popular literature is a defined protagonist whose characterization is well developed. But in the Robert Langdon series, that development is not possible because the focus is on solving a modern mystery in atmospheric, medieval settings—in a highly compressed period of time. At first, Langdon is not even sure what he is being pressed to solve, but the power of the chase overrides any psychological development. The little that we know about Langdon (claustrophobic, loves his Harris tweeds and antique Mickey Mouse watch) comes from cinematic portrayals of a likeable, approachable, erudite but practical professor who has enough freedom to fit in brief mysterious academic escapades while still teaching at a prestigious school. Instead, the reader is immediately drawn into dramatic descriptions of medieval Italian art, history, and culture (which he or she should know, but does not) that create a backdrop for a brilliant and mysterious female assistant, diabolical stormtrooper-like assassins and henchmen, chase scenes, and shadowy underworld characters. The art, history, architecture, and travels from Florence to Venice to Istanbul create a vivid, detailed travelogue. However, the repetition  of  the  technique  can  slow  the  plot’s  movement,  even  though  some  of  the   background provides critical clues. An interesting twist on the scarcity of character development surrounds Zobrist, the eccentric, villainous,  visionary  scientist  who  embraced  Dante’s  works  to  become  the   proposed  salvation  for  earth’s  Malthusian  apocalypse. From a developmental perspective, the character most closely associated with Inferno is Zobrist since he seldom appears without making reference to the poem (Parker and Parker 178). 80