In the real academic world, symbology is seldom used to describe those of us who engage in the scholarship of discovery and interpretation in the areas of literary and artistic criticism (not to be confused with book reviews). The term most apt to describe what Langdon does (usually in a puerile way, however) is semiotics. While one does encounter the word symbology in reference works such as we'll examine below, the difference between the two words is itself symbolic of the vast chasm that separates the superficial fictional world of Dan Brown and the real, less glamorous and relatively inaccessible world of serious scholarship. To sum it up, the word symbology does not show up in job descriptions or job announcements.
This blog post is intended to help shed some light on what real symbology entails and to encourage the intellectually inclined fans of Dan Brown to explore genuine sources of information which Dan Br0wn often alludes to or enumerates, but seldom seems to have digested. I shall in a moment offer some titles that will set you on the path to a lifetime of delightful discoveries that will, I hope, lead you far above and beyond what Dan Brown's novels have inspired you to explore.
The most succinct definition of semiotics I can offer is this:
Semiotics studies how humans create, interprete and transmit meaning and even what it means to mean something. The objects of its study are -- anything and everything to which meaning is, or can be, ascribed.
The champion of semiotics is Umberto Ecco, whose academic work A Theory of Semiotics
was first published in 1976. However, an excellent primer is Daniel Chandler's more recent work Semiotics: The Basics
. Ecco is best known to the public as the author of The Name of the Rose 
which became a very popular movie 
starring Sean Connery. He later wrote Foucault's Pendulum 
-- the latter being the most intriguing fiction dealing with esoterica I have ever encountered, with The Shadow of the Wind 
coming in close behind.However, in order to begin to understand or engage in semiotics in an educated way, one needs to acquire the tools.
I suggest beginning with the collection of essays known as Man and His Symbols, edited by Carl Jung. It is a collection of five major essays and a concluding chapter by different authors (only the first chapter is by Jung). One quote alone suffices to show its value as a primer for the study of symbols:
"It is not easy for modern man to grasp the significance of the symbols that come down to us from the past or that appear in our dreams. Nor is is easy to see how the ancient conflict between symbols of containment and liberation relates to our own predicament. Yet it becomes easier when we realize it is only the specific forms of these archaic patterns that change, not their psychic meaning" (p. 156).
In addition to this classic primer, I suggest reputable dictionaries of symbols. They really do exist. I do not refer to those entertaining but sketchy Victorian inventories about what this-or-that means in one's dreams.
Let's look at two serious dictionaries and one encyclopedia. The first is Jean E. Cirlot's work with the straightforward title: A Dictionary of Symbols. It contains enough material for a lifetime of study, particularly if one extends his reading to the works he cites in his bibliography. Imagine finding a citation dealing with the meaning of mirrors only to discover their connection with memory, water, the moon...
The next offering is more an encyclopedia than a dictionary and is beautifully illustrated with hundreds of color plates -- and it isn't expensive. It was authored by Alexander Roob and published by The Hermetic Museum as Alchemy and Mysticism. Jungian in its approach, it includes a responsible treatment of the symbolic system of Freemasonry and has a useful index and bibliography.
Finally, I recommend a dictionary by Penguin called simply Dictionary of Symbols. It is the work of two authors, a fact that gives it advantages and disadvantages. The chief disadvantage is that that quality of information is uneven since there seems to have been no one, controlling editorial mind to mediate between them; at times this results in entries whose information is a bit off the mark (judging from references about subjects I am more familiar with). Ironically, the advantages are also a result of its dual authorship since many of the entries on related subjects complement each other and round out the perspective of the reader.
Even though all these recommendations, except for Jung's work, are reference works, they make for enjoyable and profitable reading. I often spend hours reading entries on related subjects, going from one to another reference work, noting other books to read as I examine the bibliographies.
Finally, don't forget to follow this blog -- or at least post a comment or ask a question.
