Did you enjoy the ending of your book? Why or why not? Describe an alternate ending and why it would or wouldn't be as good a choice as the ending the author chose.

This post is due by Friday, 5/20, at 3:15 p.m.

Seniors: Book Trailer due 5/18
Juniors: Book Trailer due 5/25


I strongly encourage you to respond to questions asked in comments to your initial posts. Use the blog as a venue for discussion.

Friday, November 12, 2010

Angels & Demons
By Dan Brown
Pg. 624

The antagonist is Maximilian Kholer and he is drivin to destroy the Vatican because he is in the Illuminati, a group of scientists that is against the church, and he was crippled because when he was young he got sick and his parents wouldn't save him from being crippled. They wouldn't allow doctors to use medicine to heal him. Instead they relied on God to save him. He didn't agree with this and he thought he shouldn't be crippled. I don't think he is satisfied because in the end he gets killed and it ends all of what he was trying to do. I thought it was pointless for him to try to go to the church to kill the Camerelengo since he died for it, but he was also in the Illuminati, so for that reason it could have been justified because he was doing it for a larger reason which was to destroy religion. He is a multifaced character and he has several reasons to cause the problems he caused. In the end, all he wanted was money, and he ended up dying because of it so it didn't justify the means.

1 comment:

  1. Angels and Demons reminds me of the Da Vinchi code. Where he pieces together clues through out the movie and then draws a conclusion to how each crime came about. Stories like these foreshadow about upcoming events that are the key to solving the "puzzle".
    If you haven't seen the movie, I'd recommend it!!!


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.