Opis:

It is impossible to discuss Simon Toyne’s debut novel Sanctus without making certain comparisons to a very famous conspiracy thriller that is seemingly loved and loathed in equal measures the world over. Superficially, Sanctus seems to resemble The Da Vinci Code in both plot and structure. For instance, the novel begins with an inexplicable death shrouded in mystery but clearly portentous of things to come. Also like The Da Vinci Code, Sanctus involves a fanatical order of disturbed monks willing to torture and murder if it means protecting their secrets. But beyond the initial set-up, the resemblances to The Da Vinci Code quickly dwindle. In fact, I found Simon Toyne’s novel to be much more enjoyable than Dan Brown’s; better written and more imaginative, despite following a fairly hackneyed set of rules for conspiracy thrillers.

Simon Toyne employs a very cinematic prose style that, for the most part, I found very appealing. Every scene is described with both precision and style; at no point did I feel that the author was wasting his words on unnecessary description nor sacrificing beautiful prose for expedience’s sake. Toyne’s writing style also lends itself extremely well to a fast-paced page-turner; every scene was packed full of action and nearly every chapter ended with a cliff-hanger that encouraged me to keep reading even when it was past my bedtime.

Overall, I feel that Sanctus’ biggest strength is balance. Toyne manages to balance an incredible amount of exposition with a fast-paced, high-action plot. Unlike Dan Brown’s novel, which predicates its story on real-world history, settings and organizations, Toyne’s novel is entirely fictional. But despite the fact that the setting and the main religious order are not real, Toyne describes everything with such authority that I actually found myself Googling “Ruin, citadel, Sacrament” because the world-building in Sanctus is so believable. Toyne injects just enough romance into the story without bogging the plot down with unnecessary tension. His characters are rich without being either caricatures or unrelatable. He drops enough plot bread-crumbs so that the reader neither becomes frustrated nor figures out the ending before he’s ready.