do you believe in reincarnation?

a good read. not as good as some of the reviews claimed, but interesting nonetheless.

so i think i picked up this book because the most recent book by m.j. rose, "the memorist," was reviewed by cosmo or vogue or glamour or something and given pretty good marks. since "the reincarnationist" came first, and it sounded more interesting to me, i thought i'd give it a shot.

now, initially, two comments about the book caught my eye.

• "One of the most original and exciting novels I've read...I'm sick with envy I didn't think of it myself." - Douglas Preston

i've never read anything by Douglas Preston, but i've always thought that this is one of the highest compliments anyone can pay an author. i've felt it myself often enough. come to think of it, harry potter is a prime example of a story i wish to God i had written. not because of whatever wealth the author may get from book sales or movie rights (because i've actually wished i wrote books that i don't think anyone else on the planet ever read), but more because the ideas are so...thorough. i've said it about lotr as well. these authors created worlds. who does that?!

• "Tale of intrigue that's more believably plotted and better meets its ambitions than Dan Brown's ubiquitous book." - Publishers Weekly

and that right there is a fine example of why i don't put much stock in any sort of reviews, whether they be for books, movies, or tv shows. i'm sorry, as good as this book was (and it was), it was not better than dan brown's work. and i'm not just saying that because i'm rereading "angels and demons" next. lol. dan brown's books are some of the best plotted mystery/suspense books i've ever read. okay, maybe that's an exaggeration, but not by much!

that's not to say that i didn't enjoy "the reincarnationist." after all, it's along the same lines of "the da vinci code" and "angels and demons." as always, it's about a historical cover-up of magnificent religious proportions. in this case, a reporter has "lurches" in which he's sort of taken into a trance-like state and experiences past lives. in one of those past lives, he's a temple priest in ancient rome at the time christianity is beginning to be the "encouraged" religion of the masses. he falls in love with one of the temple priestesses, and she's buried alive for breaking her vow of celibacy (she's sort of like a high-powered nun of the old religion). the priest and priestess plot a scheme in which he'll save her before she runs out of air, but the plan is foiled, they both die, and now his spirit has come back as the reporter to right the wrong that was done way back then. during all this, it comes out that the priestess was guarding some magic "memory stones" which the church wants hidden and about a million rich people and art collectors want to own. so an archeologist finds the tomb where the priestess was buried alive, the stones are found, the reporter starts regressing way more than usual as the story unfolds, and people start dying.

but who's the killer?

there are other plot twists and turns, but that's the gist.

now, i love stories of reincarnation, especially if coupled with historical religious drama and a love tragedy. but for some reason, parts of this book just didn't flow for me. i guess i just wasn't particularly convinced of the love between the priest and priestess, or that the church was really that hell-bent on keeping this a secret. and that's another thing! unlike dan brown's books, we find out the "secret" of this book at the very beginning! the entire rest of the book seems very anti-climactic in comparison.

so in light of all this, i'm currently debating whether or not to read "the memorist." the story line doesn't grab me as much (i think it's about a composer rather than religious persecution), and i'm worried that i'll just be...well, bored.

but i can't get it out of my head now so i may just read it to satisfy my curiosity. and just as a side note, i totally need a bigger bookshelf...