5. Divergent

Name : Divergent
Writer : Veronica Roth
Publishing year :  2012
Language : English
Type :  Novel, Bestseller
How come ? : I marked it as "to read" back in the Hunger Games era when the comparison between the books was too common on forums and websites. It resurfaced however when the actress cast to play the heroine Beatrice (Shailene Woodley) was cast to play Hazel Grace from TFioS. Since I'm going to watch both movies anyway (after the Hunger Games movie success, I highly suspect that Divergent is set to be a big blockbuster, and Shailene is set to be the next Jennifer Lawrence maybe ? Maybe). So I might as well read the book before the movie is released, that is in 2014, just to give myself enough time to forget it so as not to repeat the Hunger Games movie tragedy.
Must. Not. Read. Books. Days. Before. The. Movie's. Release Date.
Estimated time : Around 12 hours.
Main themes : Post-apocalyptic World, Romance, War, Family, Sense of belonging.
Recommended for : Sci-fi fans (although the book isn't exactly sci-fi), people who loved Hunger Games/hated Hunger Games/Didn't read Hunger Games, someone with 12 hours to spare on reading another post-apocalyptic novel.
The book in a few words : The adventure of a girl who got entangled in issues bigger than her as she tried to balance out her inherent anomaly, her romantic feelings and her sense of belonging.
The synopsis : In a post-apocalyptic world, the city of Chicago is divided into Factions : Tribes or guilds that lace people with one of the five common tendencies : Selflessness, Curiosity, Courage, Honesty or Sociability. Beatrice is 16 years-old girl who was born and raised in Abnegation, the faction of the Selfless. She, however, never felt as selfless as she is expected to be. She struggled to fit in but it was clearly impossible for her to dissimulate in the community of grey and self-denial. The Faction Choosing Ceremony approaches, and the choice she'll make will decide her life.


The Rating : Not Bad 6.5/10

The Review :

It's impossible to start without mentioning the HIGH similarity between this work and the Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins. Not only because of the general feeling of reminiscence the novel invokes while reading it, but also because once the comparison is stricken, you can obviously see who gets all the superlatives.
So, Beatrice (or later, Tris) is a 16 years old young girl born in a post-apocalyptic USA where she gets through trouble because she is not like other girls from her faction and will get involved in political issues that are far bigger than her little worries. She must fight the evil that is the Erudite faction, hand in hand with Four, her love interest. I can use the same sentence to describe (Spoiler Alert) The Hunger Games just by replacing faction with district and Erudite with Capitol. The novel makes little effort to distinguish itself in the genre, and when it does, I didn't like it. Let me explain.
One of the main delights of reading Sci-fi is getting to imagine a world far beyond our mundane reality, where was we know and what what's possible is no limit to trance an extraordinary storyline. Divergent, however, takes so little from this bless, and implements too little Sci-fi elements that makes it lingers somewhere between the present as we know it and the future as we expect it to be, which leaves a lot to be desired. There is much room for possible improvement but Divergent doesn't seem to bother exploiting it.
What's more, the pace of the story which some find exciting and absorbing, is quite unstable : dull at times, very charged at others. I know it's supposed to be that way (it's neither pure action nor pure narration), but the novel seeks comfort in less fevered scenes that sometimes don't quite fit in the narrative logic, and I even daresay some parts were kind of unnecessary. They only made the work longer, and thus boring at times.
My other complaint is the female narrator. Before I get shot by a thousand (?) feminists, my complaint isn't about the use of a female voice narrator, actually Hazel Grace, the other girl that Shailene will play, is a perfect example of what a narrator girl should be like (The author is, however, a man). My complaint is the blatant oxymoron of what the author imagined the heroine to be like and how it ended being. She was supposed to be a "tough" girl with a rather flat girly side (illustrated by this quote from the book "Can you be a girl for a few seconds ?" ) which we perfectly understand as Tris isn't your typical silly girl, but as soon as the romantic side explored, we see a stereotypical girl act girly whenever Four is around. Although the author tries to redeem the previous image of Tris later on, she just doesn't seem real to me anymore. But I'm wondering : Is that just her fate ? The same things weirdly arrived to (spoiler alert) Katniss once the third book picked up pace, Katniss being the kind of girl I wanted it to be in the first two books. Maybe Mrs. Roth just accelerated the process and destroyed my little fantasy of Tris being actually a Badass Girl. She even seemed inconsistent at times as a character : She instantly recognized Al's feelings for her (Al being another contradictory character), but she took WAY too much time (around halfway through the book) to figure out that Four feels the same for her, although any reader would have concluded by that time that they are both falling in a sloppy love story that the author will unwisely focus on the second half of the book. I just kept reading with a sadness growing me while I watch all my expectations hammered by the merciless ordinarily and the lack of subtlety of the narration. It felt unadorned and plain, sloppy. And of course the final blow was when the effect of the serum was annulled by .. the power of love ? OH COM"OOOOOON. That's .. that's .. that's Twilight.
One more thing : Some expressions are irritatingly repeated throughout the book, leaving the bare style even more exposed. Tris "bites her lips" in every chapter at least two times, and when she looks at someone's eyes, they always "look like dark pits". Also, when she cries, "her eyes burn", and that was uncomfortably repeated in every scene involving crying, almost crying, and feeling like crying. The prize of the the least impressing style this year goes to .... Veronica Roth.
Those were the bad points that Divergent scores, but since I gave it 6.5 it means it has some shiny bits scattered along the 150 pages. One is definitely the -at times- witty dialogue, I even chuckled at some parts. So there go some deserved credit to Mrs Veronica.
The premise of the book and the first part is actually good (although SO reminiscent of The Hunger Games) and the faction thing is very nicely thought of, I ended up asking myself what faction will I choose, only to end up to the conclusion Four makes : why not all of them ? Foreshadowing, foreshadowing everywhere.
Speaking of foreshadowing, the book is not so smart about keeping its secret hidden, as you can probably guess the next thing to happen (which surprises me since I read everywhere that the book is full of surprises).  I mean, whenever Danger sets around the Dauntless, it pops to my mind that it's her that's talking (meaning she'll stay alive) and there is a second and a third book, means he'll stay alive :p The rest of the characters were cold-bloodedly killed by Veronica because she didn't like them or didn't know what to do with them.
My last thought is that the book could have been better in many ways, at least at quilting the holes in the narratio, characters and pace, I mean just by the ideas that were in, and more effort by the author to actually add description to her novel, maybe it would have felt better. I still have my hopes at the move, though, the book is perfectly set for such medium, and I hope the set designers would put more effort to illustrate the world and animate the characters that Veronica Roth neglectfully briught to life to the boo that's trying too hard to be the next Hunger Games. (Both books share a 4.4/5 rating on Goodreads, what the world had come to ..).


Favorite character : 
All the characters weren't developed well (except Tris which unnaturally transformed as the book went on) so it's hard to have any special appreciation for one of them really. But I'll go with Christina just because she got most of the good lines in the book. She was made selfish by the author (she didn't have to make her take the flag, I thought).
More on the quotes part :p


Favorite passages : 
The book isn't sharply written. The language isn't especially beautiful and the only thing that deserves a shout-out is the rare use of sarcasm in the book. Some sentences were good, but most of the work seemed like someone who tells you what happened to him last week.


"Leaving us with Eric is like hiring a babysitter who spend his time sharpening knives"

"He smiles at me. I wonder if throwing up at him will do me any good"

"Awkwardness aside, it is nice to be liked."

""You weren't allowed to have pets ?" Christina demands, smacking the table with her palm. "Why not ?"
"Because they're illogical," Will says matter-of-factly. "What's the point of providing food and shelter for an animal that just soils your furniture, makes your home smell bad, and ultimately dies ?""

"They don't want you to act in a certain way. They want you to think in a certain way. So you're easy to understand. So you won't pose a  threat to them"

""Hey now," says Christina, brushing Will's shoulder with her finger. "This is supposed to be a lighthearted session of symbolic document destruction, not a political debate""

"I never used to understand why people bothered to hold hands as they walked, but then he runs one of his fingertips down my palm, and I shiver and understand it completely."

""Like you don't want to know what his fears are. he acts so tough that he's probably afraid of marshmallow and really bright sunshines or something. Overcompensating""

"She sets her hands on my shoulders. "Can you be a girl for a few seconds ?"
"I'm always a girl." I frown.
"You know what I mean. Like a silly, annoying girl."
I twirl my hair around my finger. "Kay."" : This one actually got me.

3. Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus

Name : Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus
Writer : John Gray
Publishing year :  1992
Language : English
Type : Non-fiction
How come ? : It's just a book that always existed in my to-read list. I don't remember why I added it to my list but anyway, it's one of the most read non-fiction books of all times.
Estimated time : 6 hours.
Main themes : Relationships of Men and Women.
Recommended for : Couples of stereotypical profiles. People who had to choose between reading this and 50 shades of Grey.
The book in a few words : The solution of all couple problems in one book. Or something like that.

The synonpsis : How to explain the wide difference between men and women in every aspect of life ? How come all men and women conform to a set of general concepts (aka stereotypes) that make very generalization possible ? The answer lays here in the book : if we thought of men and women as two different races, everything becomes clear and understandable, doesn't it ?

The Rating : Mediocre 5/10

The Review : 

What to expect from a book that sold millions of copies worldwide and allegedly helped millions of couples to overcome their relationship problems ? Absolutely nothing.
I, for starter, had no idea what the book is about and how it is written. I knew it dealt with the differences between genders (blatantly told by the title), and since it's a book that I heard of when I was still little, it must have been/be famous and good. Well I don't think it is.
Let me get one thing out of the way : I didn't read the entire book. When I said I'll read a book every week, I definitely didn't have in mind this ... kind of books. So although I tried, I couldn't finish it. (to make up for this, I'll read two books next week or something).
Now let the rant begin !
Let's talk about reason #1 I couldn't finish the book : WHY DO YOU, JOHN, REPEAT THE SAME IDEA 33 TIMES ? I know that if he didn't, the size of the book would have diminished considerably (Maybe then I would have read it entirely, maybe). But repeating one freaking idea for SEVEN PAGES is either a work of an idiot or a work addressed to an idiot, which is bad either ways.
Millions of copies have been sold, millions.
Another thing that especially bugged me was the fact that the book is SELLING COMMON SENSE ! I mean telling men to "listen to their wives instead of ignoring them" and telling women to "talk less when their husbands seem focused on a problem" isn't exactly a revolutionary idea for me. My world wasn't shaken by this idea. My life didn't change after reading that. It's just awful.
I mean for people who don't realize that "listening to their partners while they're talking and expressing love to them is good", they should not be reading this book, so I would highly suggest a book that's called "Common Sense for everyone" that I myself will write, and become a best-selling author. I can even borrow some sentences from this book like "Understanding, trust, compassion, acceptance, and support are the solution, not blaming our partners". I know, total hit.
What's worse than selling common sense is selling disinformation.
If it wasn't thanks to this book, I wouldn't have known that I as a man, all I care for is solving problems and misinterpreting women. Moreover, men are by nature selfish, egocentric and achievement-oriented, they prioritize success over love, and solving problems over having human relationships. I learnt also that women are on the other hand selfless, love-oriented and think of socialization and connections as their reason of being. I was an ignorant, and this book opened my freaking eyes.
And of course, for every feminist out there who fight for equality, in addition to what preceded, Mr. Gray tells us that "We have forgotten that men and women are supposed to be different". That's right. Even if you want to argue, Mr. Gray brilliantly points out ever brilliantly that women talk a lot and need to be "cherished and saved" while men don't express themselves and need on the other hand to help and save their princesses from Planet Venus. After all, and like the book sharply illustrates, if it wasn't for men looking at the beauty of Women of Venus through the Telescope they invented, they weren't be motivated to build spaceships to come and complete them. Women on the other hand didn't build anything, they just felt that there are some "wonderful creatures" that will come and help them with "strength and competence", so they went shopping to prepare for this visit. Gender stereotypes IN YO' FACES Y'ALL ! Nothing is better in relationships literature than making all the generalization out there. And Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus does them all.
One more thing, the book actually doesn't make ANY scientific reference .. Psychology, physiology, sociology, anthropology .. they might seem to you as a must to write a rigorous book about gender differences and relationships within society, but Mr. Gray can't but to prove you wrong, wrong, wrong. His personal ideas are superior, and thus a science by their own merit. He even invented the "Venusian/Martian Phrase Dictionary" .. which is a brilliant method to understand what women say in a more understandable manner. Who needs the scientific method when he has the Gray methods!
The thing is, I actually gave this book 5/10 rather than some 1/10 or something .. but then again, I have my reasons. One is the the book is actually funny to read, (I don't mean like, funny. I mean you laugh at its often stupid content. The author, him, is as funny as a piece of wood) I got several times surprised of how daring the author is to make reference to some obviously erroneous stereotypes. I also laugh when he, after repeating the idea like twenty times, illustrates it with a "real life case" with names like Mary and Tom. I found that unexpectedly hilarious. Like "before Mary discovered the Martian culture, she used to get mad at Tom for not listening to her. Now that she knows about the secrets of Martians, she no longer talks to Tom when he's in his cave of problem-solving. She's more supportive and more understanding now". I'm pretty sure this book changed the life of Mary and Tom times and times again. It's not that useless after all.
A second thing is that when you read a book so devoid of new ideas, it makes you grateful that the world has more than that to offer, thus it increase your general feeling of happiness, which is a desirable effect of any book (all backwards, but still).
But when I look at it differently, and although I think of myself as a rather odd representative of the Men class (being much less interested in these relationships at my age for one), the book sometimes, weirdly enough, kind of tells the truth. Although maybe most generalizations are false, some of them actually true, and when the book points them out, it's not hard to think of real-life cases that actually fit the description of their respective gender (women that are whinny, men that are absorbed by their work ..). In fact, although the book has no scientific background, it hits the mark at times successfully.
So between the hilariously redundant and the oddly true, the books lingers in the zone of "mediocre". Maybe one day when I'm in the midst of a relationship, I'll read it and I'll understand more my Mary. Or maybe not. Probably not.
I feel sorry that "John + Color Name" reputation has been harmed a bit. To have a poplar name and a color family name doesn't necessarily imply you're a good writer. With all due respect, Mr. John Gray.

Favorite passages : 
I would have copy-pasted the whole thing here, but I don't think it will fit (and there are the copyright issues and stuff) .. So please be contented of these few gems of wisdom (I'll quote only from the beginning because I wasn't motivated enough to do so once I passed the first fifty pages) :


"Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus is a manual for loving relationships in the 1990s."
Face it, you'll never be as straightforward as this guy. Honesty, modesty and what-the-heck-is-that-ty.

"I make many generalizations about men and women in this book."
Thanks goodness you said it yourself.

"They [Men] donʹt read magazines like Psychology Today, Self, or People. They are more concerned with outdoor activities, like hunting, fishing, and racing cars. They are interested m the news, weather, and sports and couldnʹt care less about romance novels and self‐help books. They are more interested in ʺobjectsʺ and ʺthingsʺ rather than people and feelings. Even today on Earth, while women fantasize about romance, men fantasize about powerful cars, faster computers, gadgets, gizmos, and new more powerful technology. Men are preoccupied with the ʺthingsʺ that can help them express power by creating results and achieving their goals."
Wooow. Thanks for defining me, sir John Gray.


"Everything on Venus reflects these values [love, communication, beauty, and relationships]. Rather than building highways and tall buildings, the Venusians are more concerned w th living together in harmony, community, and loving cooperation. Relationships are more important than work and technology. In most ways their world is the opposite of Mars. [..] Venus is covered with parks, organic gardens, shopping centers, and restaurants."

Woooow. Thanks for defining women for me, sir John Gray.


"And for him to feel good about himself he must achieve these goals by himself. Someone else canʹt achieve them for him. Martians pride themselves in doing things all by themselves. Autonomy is a symbol of efficiency,power, and competence."
Defining redundancy.

"[after a couple other examples, this one is my favorite]ʺI want to forget everythingʺ translated into Martian means ʺI want you to know that I love my work and my life but today I am so overwhelmed. I would love to do something really nurturing for myself before I have to be responsible again. Would you ask me ʹWhatʹs the matter?ʹ and then listen with empathy without offering any solutions? I just want to feel you understanding the pressures I feel. It would make me feel so much better. It helps me to relax. Tomorrow I will get back to being responsible and handling things.ʺ"
I think I have some learning to do.

1. L'Empire des Anges - Bernard Werber

Name : L'Empire des Anges (The Empire of the Angels)
Writer : Bernard Werber
Publishing year :  2000
Language : French
Type : Recommended / Novel / Best-Seller
How come ? : A friend of mine (Ahmed), gave it to two friends of mine (Inas and Soukaina) in a time when I was deciding to start reading books. That instantly created in me a will to read this book especially after the two girls insisted about how AWESOME this book was and how I, heck, how everyone should read it because it's that good. After two months or so later the early friend offered me the prequel to read (Les Thanatonautes) and short after he offered me the sequel, this book. I can't miss the chance of reading a book with real pages, especially if it is that good of a book.
Estimated time : About 14 hours. I'm pretty slow in french (Pathetically 2mins/page, that's SLOW)
Main themes : Life beyond Death, Superstitions, Reincarnation, Existentialism, Existence, Alchemy, Freewill
Recommended for : People with liberal tendencies  people who love to ask the questions they can't answer, people who enjoy references, people who like multibranched stories, people who crave philosophical and existential debates because they're sick of banal conversations, and people who like original stories.

The book in a few words : You want a story to tell you the answers to ALL the questions you asked ?

The synopsis : Micheal Pinson is a curious guy. Probably not the bravest nor the boldest, but he's easily intrigued by the thrill of discovering the unknown. Along with his friend who's much more adventurous and openly defiant than him, he'll live a one-of-a-kind adventure.
An adventure that will start the moment he'll die.

The Rating : Excellent 9/10



The Review : 

In one word : Triumph.
I had a rough idea what the novel was about upon overhearing the two previously mentioned girls talking about it on more than one occasion : It's supposed to deal with the theory of reincarnation, some angels that do or do not believe in God, and something about freewill. So I had already had high expectations about this novel because of the constant praise it received and because the late theme (freewill) being one of my favorites. It's one of those rare instances when you have high expectation on something and it doesn't let you down, better yet, exceeds those expectations somehow.
Although the book is unfortunately not Perfect (for reasons stated below), I don't think I have ever read/will ever read something like it. It had scored many victories on many levels that it's hard to label it anything but ingenious and brilliant.
First of all, the language is a perfectly silent tool in the hands of mister Werber, and nothing more than a tool. That's one the points that won me over : A sober language without any devotion to the style itself (although you can easily notice the present intention by the writer to make the style easy and low-lying). The focus was however on terminology : as the novel switch from one field of the human experience to another, the vocabulary required for it rises to surface at almost a fluent motion, you can notice the transition but it feels almost spontaneous and natural. Those transitions and travels for one domain to another in one of the better elements of the book, as for a book to mix too many semantic fields and keeps its consistency and binding is a feat by itself, but far from its best. Next to this idea itself comes the things I appreciated most : The use of References. References galore all over the place. What's more clever is the two-folded use of this device through the novel : First in the insertion of fictive writing within the realm of the story (Edmond's Encyclopedia, the interviews with anonymous passengers at the beginning), it's just so amazing and so amusing to use quotes that had never been said, which is a clever way for the writer to introduce ideas while distance himself from them, by creating the ephemeral illusion that's it's actually someone else's idea ! Edmond's encyclopedia was by far my favorite part of the book as it kicked off. This "reference" of absolute and relative knowledges was not only one of the guiding lines of the whole plot, but also an insight to the writer's mind as of writing the previous/next passage. The encyclopedia is the reference for the writer (when he quotes experiments and/or scientific facts), written by the writer. It just can't get any more better.
Second, there were many references to the real world. Actually as I read through, I noticed that most of the base content of the novel is "borrowed" from as many Cultures and Lores as you can imagine. Almost every principle, every idea is a reference to a certain ideology. Heavily based on Buddhist and Kabbalic ideas of reincarnation, the writer offers an "alternative" to the dichotomy of Heaven/Hell in the alleged afterlife. It's not an original idea, as it is the case for many other ideas scattered around being inspired by established beliefs (especially "Nature-friendly" ones, like Buddhism and Hinduism), the book ultimately delivers an amalgam of folklores and mythologies. Admittedly, the base of the intellectual content of the story is the human historical culture and a layered interpretation of alchemy, but Werber does a fantastic job sewing the pieces he liked most together. Actually, that's the ingeniousness of his story-craft. He deserves all the credit for creating such vibrating, courageously different characters with actual flaws and a real rate of change over time. The characters grow as they live on, and at some point they become believable.
As said above, the variety in the themes of interest of the abounding number of half-leading half-supporting characters makes it hard for any reader not to relate to at least one of them. Riddled by love, haunted by loneliness, passionate about computers, puzzled by existence or taken by a burning curiosity to discover the unknown, you have a fair chance to find a character who's like you, and this character will bring passages and lines that you'll definitely enjoy. Werber is an everyone pleaser, and the creativity needed to create such pleasantly diversified characters and their stories should be highly raved as they were the transmitters of the whole momentum of the story. Good job, Werber.
(And let me just don't forget the fact that HE MENTIONED MY FAVORITE BOOK OF ALL TIMES IN HIS BOOK .. instantaneous virtual high five for inserting Flowers for Algernoon !).
The last triumphant element I want to point is the foreshadowing : I smiled many times as I reread the name of an old character mentioned briefly beforehand or noticed the return of an object/theme from the early pages, which provokes such nice reaction. The loops in the plot lines are a variation of this technique, as if stories tend to repeat themselves, unbeknownst to you. The many hints sprinkled all the long lead definitely to the ending (that was kind of expected, but perfectly done), but it doesn't spoil any of the joys of pushing the limits of the Terra Incognita with the passively curious Micheal, the unconditionally bold Raoul, and a plethora of their friends and foes, the rest of the cast, for a unique adventure through time and space and dimensions ..

Spoiler alert : The ending was awesome.

It would have been ideal if that was it, but as much as I yearned for it, the book wasn't perfect, not for me anyways. But to give it justice, it's hard to write a perfect story that tries to give "answers to everything you ever asked" without being inconsistent. I don't think there will ever be a universally perfect book so that's not what I based by rating on for sure, my standards are pretty humble and I'm easy to amaze as long as you hit all the right strings and you avoid touching the wrong ones. Sadly, I couldn't enjoy the symphony of the brilliant book without stumbling upon some off-tune chords. The book claims to endorse scientific rigor and approach, but at some times it just becomes absurd and inconsistent (Observing the photons -infinitely small- by the naked eyes by Angels who don't have any enhanced visual capacities, feeling speed and acceleration although not having any sense of time ..). This kind of little inconsistencies with the referential set by the author himself (the "rigorously scientific" approach) kind of disappointed me, especially that they can be easily avoided. Then there is some perspective issues that kind of bothered me too. Although the universe of the novel evolves and expands, the frame of reference of the protagonist doesn't heel accordingly. For many times, I felt like the author forgot that many of the auxiliary characters DO have their freewill (and their guarding angels as well), and when he doesn't notice that, it all seems awkward (Many auxiliary characters were used just to advance the story of the "clients" of Micheal, which is not only inconsistent, but uncool as well). In the same line of thoughts, I didn't get how many people did believe in guardian angels and prayed for them, while none of them practically prayed God ! Which is way more than acceptable in the geo-politico-tempo-social context of the novel. That's not how we keep our novel agnostic, bald Bernard.
There is also the fact that there are many rules that the angels have to follow, but there is practically NO consequence whatsoever to disobey them (both rules of "Heaven" were constantly broken by Micheal and Raoul : "granting all wishes" and "not descending to earth"), but nobody seems to be bothered at all, which made me wonder why he did introduce them at all. Another remark is that although there were too many ideas in the head of our amazing author (not being ironic here), he didn't have to push the ones that didn't fit in the encyclopedia into characters that appeared and vanished without leaving any mark on the story line, which is kind of a waste (and I always hate waste when it comes to tightly written stories like this one, you know better Werber). More isn't always better.
Finally which is why I settled on 9 and not 9.5, is the ridiculous fight scene. Oh my God. I frankly understand that the author wanted its masterpiece to be perfect (and therefore exhaustive) and that why it included elements from all Genres ranging from eroticism to esoterism and from psychological to romantic, but I didn't appreciate at all the combat/action element. I literally tried to forget the scene after I read it. It didn't make any sense in the context of the seriousness and the grandness of the story, and what's worse, left too many loose ends (The fighter Marilyn Monroe with a sword of Love and a shield of Humor -You can't be more ridiculous, honestly- against an army lost souls injected with an unjustifiable need to attack -revenge, okay. But why in the outer space a billion kilometer away from Earth ? Why Werber, why ..- roaming angels to make them I-don't-know-why-and-how fallen angels .. no thank you).
All in all, the combat scene was just a huge turn-off, just like in -spoiler alert- the prequel. Thank goodness this part was short, or else the review would have been more severe.

So to sum up, although many of the concepts on the story lack originality (everything from the Reincarnation cycle to the ascendance in the levels of existence to the meaning of numbers), the way it was presented along with the few original concepts made this novel a real intellectual treat. The diversity of the characters and their choices  in life is just another proof of mastery and artfulness of this bald man. Many of the passages were so intelligently written I wanted to rip them off the book and inject them in my mind so I can generate their likes. I wrote that long ranting paragraph not because I didn't enjoy this piece of awesomeness, but because I did. It's just so wise and knowledge-imbued that it creates in you a want to read and read about all cultures and all wisdoms and all ideas of the philosophers and the preachers and the scientists and the historians. To be able to put this much intellectual seeds into mere 440 pages is wondrous..
Unearthly wondrous.
What if Bernard Werber is actually a medium and this book is a clever way to hide the secrets and the many truths from the Heavens, dictated by a real angel ?
Ok, just kidding.
And definitely worth re-reading. Maybe a re-review will be written someday, too.

Favorite character : 
Edmond Wells. Because he's writing THE Encyclopedia, simply put.
He's not directly implied in the events.and when he does appear, he's always poised and know-what-to-do kind of guy, which creates a very good balance for the other characters who are all too-something.
And I believe he's the writer's projection in the story, after all, he's the one who guides, he's the one who knows, and he's the one who's preferred making the world(s) better rather than just know more for himself.

Favorite passages : 
"Un jour, on meurt."
Source : individu interrogé dans la rue au hasard d'un micro-trottoir

"A 22 heures 59, pour la première fois de ma vie, je pense que "C'est peut être quand même bien ma planète". "

"Je ne savais pas qu'au Paradis aussi on pouvait se passionner pour l'infomatique."

"Encyclopédie :
Réalité : " "La réalité: c'est ce qui continue d'exister lorsqu'on cesse d'y croire" énoncait l'écrivain Philip K. Dick. Il doit donc exister quelque part une réalité objective qui échappe aux savoirs et aux croyances des hommes. C'est cette réalité-là que je veux comprendre et approcher."
Edmond Wells, Encyclopédie du Savoir Relatif et Absolu, tome IV