*** Warning: This review contains spoilers!! ***
I picked this book off our home bookshelf. I don't usually read thrillers - so I am certainly not the target audience for this book - but since it was written by a childhood friend of Ken's, I figured I'd give it a shot.
Mostly, reading this book felt just like watching an action movie. Everything that transpired was easily envisioned on a big screen, and the book even included what I consider the superfluous yet obligatory romance between the male lead and a supporting female character.
Just like a Hollywood movie, we are treated to a number of clichés. The investigative team included such stereotypical characters as an imposing ex-Marine, a computer science nerd, and a flaky yet intuitively intelligent woman. The evil mastermind is wealthy, powerful, and polished. The romance is revealed in a dramatic rain-soaked scene, and important people who want things done want them done "yesterday!".
I was occasionally put off by what seemed like excessive explanation. For example, when Jordan tries to barricade himself into a room, he "grabbed several crowbars and wedged them inside the metal handle and across the divider beside the door. It worked like a barricade in an old castle - as the door was pushed forward (or pulled from the outside), the bars caught on the metal handle and the wall, preventing further movement." (Pg. 324) Seems like the author could have simply written, "He barred the door with several crowbars."
At other times, I found myself confused about the lack of explanation. When Jordan is working a mission, he finds himself betrayed, the other person screaming, "You think I have no way to send message?" (Pg. 160) But, how did the guy send a message? Maybe I missed it, but when every other development in the book was so well-explained, it was all that much harder to blindly accept a gap in the chain without knowing how it got there. Also, I never did understand why all the higher-ups were so slow to accept the evidence that seemed to point pretty obviously to Savas's conclusions. With all the evidence, the push-back Savas received seemed like manufactured drama.
Most disappointing, though, was the de-evolution of Rebecca Cohen. She started out as the sharpest, most intelligent member of the team. But, once she was in a relationship with Savas, she became a helpless victim, internally calling out, "John, please, help me..." (Pg. 289) rather than trying to help herself in some way. In the dramatic climax full of action, every man had an active role to play, except Rebecca, who is only there to be saved.
So, all that aside, I'm still giving this book an "I like it" rating because, well, I did enjoy reading it. It's a good read. It was well-paced with developments that continuously drove the plot forward. There is a whole slew of interesting, named characters who play only supporting or minor roles at best; that kind of over-complication usually annoys me, but in this case, I feel the author did a really good job introducing characters, setting up their contexts, and integrating them into the story. Most chapters were relatively short, which made for good reading for me because, with two small children, I can usually only read for 5-20 minutes at a time. And, given the complexities of religion and Savas's personal history with it, I liked that his struggle with religion was not blithely reconciled in the end.
HI Irene - thanks for the review. I'm actually on board with a lot of your criticisms, especially w.r.t. Rebecca. My only 'excuse' is that it was a premise based novel that was cast as a "traditional" thriller, at least what I imagined one to be. Stepping into fiction from twenty years of science papers had me very reluctant to just write as I wanted (not sure I knew what I wanted!). So, I sought to write within the constraints that I had grown up with in the genre, thinking "this is what people want."
ReplyDeleteI now feel that this was a big mistake on several fronts, and hopefully my future books will be less hamstrung by those tropes (although nothing is really new under the sun).
You didn't talk much about the premise and, in particular, what led to the basic plot and conflict between the leads. I'd be interested to know what you thought of that (especially since the driving force behind Gunn's actions and Savas' internal turmoil is what gave birth to the novel).
Finally, indeed it was imagined as a film. That was on purpose as this is how I experienced thrillers and why I think they so often can be adapted to film. However, that kind of action is also something that comes easiest to me in writing for whatever reason. :)
So minus the core character motivation and modern religious/political element, you got to core aspects of the book accurately, and nailed, alas, it's greatest weaknesses.
I give this review, therefore, 3.5 stars. ;)
That was the author, Erec, by the way. :)
DeleteHi Erec!
ReplyDeleteI didn't know you knew about this little blog of mine. :) Well, thanks for checking in!
You are right, I did not give adequate space in my review for discussion of the premise or motivation of the characters. While reading your book, I actually wrote down a few notes relevant to those questions, but ended up not including them because - even with my spoiler warning - I didn't want to give too much away. Sometimes if I think a book actually isn't worth reading, I'll just lay it all out. But with a 3-4 star rating, I really didn't want to reveal too much because part of the fun of reading a thriller is not knowing what is going to come next!
First, let me say, now knowing that you were purposely writing a "traditional" big-screen thriller... You definitely nailed it!
So, I liked that Savas was struggling with his religion because, otherwise, it would have been entirely too hypocritical of him to harbor so much hatred against Muslims. Any time he internally raged against Jordan - e.g., on page 177, "How came to be this man, Husaam Jordan, who practiced, even celebrated a religion that had spawned such hatred and monstrosities?" - I thought, "Uh... What about the Inquisition and the Holy Crusades? Does Savas have the same incredulity for every Christian?" Of course, Savas did have to deal with the personal emotions stemming from his son's death. But I was especially pleased to read (on page 230) of Jordan using the Christianity argument against Savas (finally!), and Savas pointing out that he was not actually a firm believer in Christianity. The religious struggle is fitting, too, because if Savas was completely non-religious, he perhaps would not have been able to admit that there can be good in a religion despite the evils that some may do in its name.
I liked the parallel (antiparallel?) between Gunn and Savas. Here are two men who both experienced life-changing loss on 9/11, but they chose to use their hate in completely opposite ways. One rises above and tries to fight the bad guys within the confines of law and society, the other sinks down to the level of the bad guys. Gunn as a vigilante-gone-overboard was a bit over-the-top in terms of him and his organization being able to get away with so much - but of course it was perfectly fitting for a Hollywood blockbuster.
I also liked the reference to old Norse mythology - a cool way to weave in some academia! I knew nothing about it, and again, I would have mentioned it in my review, except part of the satisfaction of reading the book was not knowing what the title even meant, and finding that out in bits and pieces.
Should I read your more recent book? Ken said your sci-fi book is totally different, and I probably read sci-fi even less frequently than thrillers, so again, I know I'm not the target audience. :P
Erec says (not sure how to get my Google name to show up on this blog!):
ReplyDeleteHi Irene - I had read the blog in the past, but found it recently again because of the All Powerful Google. I have some saved searches to troll the jungle of the web in search of reviews of my novels. Yes, I am one of those ultra-insecure writers, I'm afraid! "Don't read the reviews. Don't read the reviews..."
Your notes on keeping spoilers low makes a lot of sense. Some reviewers have raised that topic in a somewhat veiled way (some just put everything on the table). The religious conflict really came naturally from how I imagined his character to develop. And because of his wounds, the "problem of evil" isn't going away for him anytime soon.
And Ken is right - the other books are completely different (which pretty much assures my doom in terms of audience and $$ for my efforts: no branding!) In fact, they are as different from each other as from Ragnarök. What can I do? That's just how I roll. ;)
But seriously, it was constraining to 'write to formula'. Certainly different genres, like different styles of music, have certain expectations and character, but those have broadened a lot since the thrillers of the 1970's I grew up with. And that especially is true regarding the characterization of women. I must say, Cohen was stuck in the 70's (although, technically, I think the novel passes the Bechdel Test - just barely).
READER in that regard might as well come from another planet (ha ha). But from the completely unbiased perspective of the author, I'd definitely recommend that you read it! I will say it's not standard scifi. Skim the goodreads reviews and I think you'll see that. Especially the end, which seems to polarize people a good bit! (but it's different!)
JUNK MAN is an all boys novel for the most part (numbering 2), but it is so weird that it's a genre unto itself. THE CATERPILLAR AND THE STONE is a "love storybook": so you tell me!
All the books are currently having giveaways on Goodreads if you are interested!
Hi Erec!
ReplyDeleteYou should be able to log in when you are commenting, assuming you have a Google account or one of the other acceptable logins like WordPress or AIM...
I am sure that if I were an author, I would feel compelled - utterly COMPELLED - to read reviews, but then would not have a thick enough skin to handle them. :P Perhaps it's just as well that I'm limited to the blogosphere and not published!
I'm so glad you decided to chime in on my blog, because it's very interesting to hear about the author's perspective and motivation.
I see what you mean about not having a particular brand! I noticed that some of your reviewers on Amazon said they enjoyed this book so much that they are looking forward to a sequel, or at least to another similar book. I wonder how they felt if they did pick up another book of yours and found it was totally different!
I'm not sure what you mean by "boys novel" - you mean a book that is meant to appeal to boys? That sort of intrigues me!
I have a list of sci-fi books that I keep "meaning to read" because Ken thinks they're great, and I want to see what all the fuss is about, but somehow, I never get around to reading them... I'll add your book to that list. ;)
That list will likely keep me in undeserved company! Junk Man is a "boys novel" only in that it's mostly focused on the interaction of two people, both XYs. But not really a boy's novel otherwise, I don't think.
ReplyDeleteFinally, on the login, each time I post it says I'm logged in via Google, but as "unknown". There is even a "Sign out" option next to it. Perhaps I should do that and sign back in and all will be fixed. Next time! - Erec