How had I never read this before? Was absolutely certain I'd read all the original Bond's as a teen (i.e., a half century ago), but none of these storHow had I never read this before? Was absolutely certain I'd read all the original Bond's as a teen (i.e., a half century ago), but none of these stories sounded even remotely familiar. Which is just as well, as there's no reason to ever reread these tales; there's little enough reason to read them once, other than to scratch that "completist" itch.
Three of the five stories are generally spy/assassin related (one of which takes place in "exotic" Vermont), while the other two are just bad marriage soap opera dramas, one a vaguely Agatha Christie-like mystery ("The Hildebrand Rarity") and the other ("Quantum of Solace") frequently described as "similar to W. Somerset Maugham," so note to self - avoid reading Maugham.
As to Fleming's writing style, the less said the better. Among other sins, he's a glutton for adverbs - his characters shake doubtfully, nod amiably, say sorrowfully, smile prettily, and at one point even chuckle bonhomously. He also misspells the name of then-CIA director Allen Dulles ("Alan"), which seems unforgivable for an espionage writer and former spook himself.
That said, Fleming as always shines in his titles, and so at least provides here names for three future Bond films - none of which had ANYTHING to do with the short tales here. (Same is true for Fleming's only other short story collection, which gave us "Octopussy" and "The Living Daylights.") ...more
"WE STAND NOW where two roads diverge. But unlike the roads in Robert Frost’s familiar poem, they are not equally fair. The road we have long been tra"WE STAND NOW where two roads diverge. But unlike the roads in Robert Frost’s familiar poem, they are not equally fair. The road we have long been traveling is deceptively easy, a smooth superhighway on which we progress with great speed, but at its end lies disaster. The other fork of the road—the one ‘less traveled by’—offers our last, our only chance to reach a destination that assures the preservation of our earth."
Rachel Carson wrote those words over 60 years ago, but they remain truer - and more frightening - today than ever. At the time, she focused her attention solely on the excessive use of pesticides, herbicides and other chemical "-cides" in the control of insects vis-a-vis agriculture, forestry and public health; which seems almost quaint today in comparison to the far greater list of threats currently facing the planet - animal-spread pandemics, climate change (did you see where Venezuela just became the first country to lose all of its glaciers?), forever chemicals, microplastics, biodiversity loss/mass extinctions, ad f'ing infinitum.
But what I found most surprising (and ultimately discouraging) here is that people were actually shocked by her book when it came out, and the government - multiple governments! - actually listened. In large part due to Carson's writings and the nascent environmental movement they helped launch, between 1963 (shortly after publication) and 1974, a combination of both Democrat and Republican administrations managed to pass the Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act, as well as create the Environmental Protection Agency. But can we look forward to anything like that happening today, with our fractious partisan politics and a presidential candidate who is determined to roll back environmental protections completely if reelected? Because the root problems identified by Carson in the 1950s are the same ones we are dealing with today - greedy corporations (staffed by "scientists" and lobbyists who put profits and job security ahead of legitimate problem-solving); an ignorant (if not outright science-denying) populace; and a head-in-the-sand belief that "everything will be okay."
I only read this book as Carson had gotten an extended shout-out in The Book of Eels: Our Enduring Fascination with the Most Mysterious Creature in the Natural World for her work as an oceanographer, which I hadn't known about - mainly because I hadn't really known anything about this amazing woman other than that she had written this particular book, which I then figured it was probably high time I read. But I came to it with limited expectations, expecting a touchy-feely "Walden"-esque vibe - I certainly didn’t expect to be either shocked or angered by some 70-year-old problems that I figured had apparently been largely resolved in the meantime.
But man, was I wrong.
THAT SAID, HOWEVER: Carson was - and surprisingly, still is - not without her detractors. When I searched for this book at our library, it also surfaced something called Silent Spring at 50: The False Crises of Rachel Carson, written and published by the right-wing CATO Institute. Which (because I generally like to hear both sides of any position) I also borrowed; but also which (because I quickly realized that life's too short) I frankly am not going to actually read beyond its jacket blurbs, which disputed most of Carson's findings, basically noting that DDT was/is an apparent Godsend; bird populations in fact thrived at the time; and cancer is, like, no big deal. So since I'm not reading it, I won't properly review it, other than to go ahead and call a resounding "bullshit" on the whole thing.
Eric Ambler is one of those "golden age" names you often hear in the same sentence as others like Deighton, Hall, Higgins, Innes, MacInnes, MacLean, eEric Ambler is one of those "golden age" names you often hear in the same sentence as others like Deighton, Hall, Higgins, Innes, MacInnes, MacLean, etc. - except that while I knew the name, I knew absolutely none of his books. However, after reading the wonderful Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang: The Boom in British Thrillers from Casino Royale to The Eagle Has Landed back in 2018, I started looking for him in the cavernous racks of McKays Used Books, and so found and read the enjoyable Passage of Arms a few years back...but then lost track of him until recently finding both this book and A Quiet Conspiracy,* (which I brought home for a grand total of $1.05).
So…fun story, and unique in that you don't actually learn what the "plot within the plot" is - is it a spy story, a heist, a political thriller? - until the last 40 pages.** And it also offers a nice change of scenery from the CIA-, KGB- and MI6-heavy plots that tend to dominate the genre, in that it focuses exclusively on the Turkish intelligence and police services. Anyway, will continue to watch for other Amblers if and as they land on the shelves, and of course still have Conspiracy to get to - but no rush; these books are generally light fillers best saved for when one needs a break between weightier readings. * For some reason, these are both old British editions of the books - no idea how they ended up in Manassas. But they were easily recognizable as such, since traditional British book design - much like traditional British cuisine, (and with apologies to my English friends) - is known more for its stodgy functionality than cutting-edge creativity.
** Unless, of course, you've ever seen or even heard of the 1964 movie (view spoiler)["Topkapi" (hide spoiler)], which is based on this book but basically gives away the WHOLE IDEA in not only the film's trailer, synopses, etc., but also the title itself…so, basically everything....more
(Another obscure end-of-December title; I like ending the year with something weird, and then beginning the next with some guaranteed winners - which (Another obscure end-of-December title; I like ending the year with something weird, and then beginning the next with some guaranteed winners - which thanks to our local B&N closing and so offering everything at half off, I now have plenty of!)
Despite his global fame during the first third of the 20th Century, there are surprisingly few decent biographies of Roy Chapman Andrews, most of which are aimed at a younger audience, (probably due to the dinosaur connection). And frankly this one didn't really strike me as a fully "grown-up" bio either, probably due to its uninspired writing style and constant reference to its hero as "Roy." Still, an adequate - if workmanlike - portrait of the man, at least until something better came along.
PERSONAL COMMENT: As a former graphic designer, I always pay attention to the dustjackets of these older books; and aside from the WTF?? 1970s typography here, I kinda liked this one. There's a nice Warholian feel to the solid colors overlaid on a B&W photo (although I really wish they'd done his assistant's robe as well) that makes me want to get out my silkscreen and do a whole series of 19th-20th century explorers, à la Andy's Marilyn Monroe prints. The whole thing also nicely wraps around to the back cover and its shocking orange camel…
[image]
…undisturbed by any back cover text (and when's the last time that happened?). Also - anyone else remember those old-school corners we used to use to paste photos (often square back then) into photo albums? Good times…
(Purchased online as a withdrawn book from the Sam Houston State University Library in Hunsville, Texas)...more
First read this (and saw the Academy Award-winning movie) nearly 50 years ago, but then recently saw my son in a community theatre production down in First read this (and saw the Academy Award-winning movie) nearly 50 years ago, but then recently saw my son in a community theatre production down in New Market, Virginia (where he played Charlie's father) and was surprised by how much I had forgotten, and so thought i'd revisit the book.
While the larger story of Charlie Gordon is as touching and ultimately tragic as ever, parts of it haven't aged particularly well. The frequent use of "retard" and "moron" by the scientists themselves is jarring to today's ear; Charlie's rather bizarre explorations of his burgeoning sexuality seemed (to me at least) overly melodramatic if not downright bizarre; and the whole middle section seemed to be more preachy than dramatic.
But with the entire book presented as Charlie's self-written "progress reports," the first section where he morphs from a severely handicapped young man to a full on genius is well-handled, and then the final section where he loses it all again is genuinely heart-breaking. So while I don't feel this has held up as well as other books of that period dealing with similar subjects (I'm thinking right now of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest), it probably still deserves its standing as a genuine classic. And so I'm leaving my original 4-star rating (based solely on my half-century-old memories) rather than drop it down to the 3 stars it probably more realistically deserves.
Merged review:
First read this (and saw the Academy Award-winning movie) nearly 50 years ago, but then recently saw my son in a community theatre production down in New Market, Virginia (where he played Charlie's father) and was surprised by how much I had forgotten, and so thought i'd revisit the book.
While the larger story of Charlie Gordon is as touching and ultimately tragic as ever, parts of it haven't aged particularly well. The frequent use of "retard" and "moron" by the scientists themselves is jarring to today's ear; Charlie's rather bizarre explorations of his burgeoning sexuality seemed (to me at least) overly melodramatic if not downright bizarre; and the whole middle section seemed to be more preachy than dramatic.
But with the entire book presented as Charlie's self-written "progress reports," the first section where he morphs from a severely handicapped young man to a full on genius is well-handled, and then the final section where he loses it all again is genuinely heart-breaking. So while I don't feel this has held up as well as other books of that period dealing with similar subjects (I'm thinking right now of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest), it probably still deserves its standing as a genuine classic. And so I'm leaving my original 4-star rating (based solely on my half-century-old memories) rather than drop it down to the 3 stars it probably more realistically deserves....more
Don't remember a thing about this, or even reading it in the first place - but my old Taiwan diaries show that I apparently did. So - listing it, but Don't remember a thing about this, or even reading it in the first place - but my old Taiwan diaries show that I apparently did. So - listing it, but no rating because...well, obviously....more
Just reread Max Barry's excellent Providence, and wanted to find some other books with sentient spaceships, so Google pulled up this one. But, yeah...Just reread Max Barry's excellent Providence, and wanted to find some other books with sentient spaceships, so Google pulled up this one. But, yeah...this is one big wedge of poorly aged 1960's cheese, from its cover with the bombshell blonde and lawn-dart rocket ship to…whatever the hell was going on around page 80, when I finally bailed.
Basically a collection of short stories published from 1961-69, the overall plot (such as it is) follows the "brainship" HX-834 and its "brain" component Helva as she cycles through various human "brawn" partners to cruise the galaxy and share such dramatic space adventures as providing physical therapy to children, delivering embryos to sterile planets, or…well, that's as far as I got. Too much '60s dialogue ("let's cut the chitchat!"), and frankly - and I know this will sound bad - too many female characters getting over-emotional, particularly Helva herself.
Also - "Helva"? Not a particularly great name, but certainly better than "Acorna," the heroine of another of McCaffrey's ten book series. Yikes.
(I actually read the library's paperback "pocket book" copy, not Kindle - but this is the only GR listing that had the proper cover)...more
"Every man has his own underworld and a part of him never leaves it."
With his first-person, hard-boiled persona, Quiller is the most noir of all the 6"Every man has his own underworld and a part of him never leaves it."
With his first-person, hard-boiled persona, Quiller is the most noir of all the 60s spies, and Hall really begins finding his voice with this second Quiller book,* (although he has yet to start using the paragraph-long run-on sentences that are half the fun of his later stories), moving away from the retro Nazi-hunter plot of the previous book and dropping Quiller into Vietnam-era Southeast Asia.
The plot is good-but-not-great, and despite being famous as the "cerebral spy who never carries a gun," Quiller gets himself into a number of situations where he would have done far better with less thinking and more shooting - just sayin'. Other plot points hinge on dumb luck and questionable choices, (at one point, Quiller realizes the only way not to lose the bad guy he's trailing is to hop in the car with him - where he is immediately captured), but hey…it was the '60s, man.**
So anyway...a 3+ story, rounded up for signalling the potential of what was to come. Dude definitely deserves more recognition today.
(One minor - okay, pretty major - kvetch: Hall throughout refers to Beijing-controlled Communist China as "The Republic of China" [ROC; i.e., Taiwan], instead of the proper "People's Republic of China" [PRC]. Isn't that what editors are for?) ___________________________________
* This was the second Quiller book in the "original" series; i.e., books 1-10 published pretty much biannually from 1965-1981 and all titled "The (Adjective-Noun)"; e.g., The Berlin Memorandum, The 9th Directive, etc. At that point, Hall took a needed four year break before returning for another nine books all titled "Quiller Something-or-Other", (Quiller Salamander, Quiller Bamboo, etc.).
** Interesting to note that Hall published his first Quiller book the same month Ian Fleming published his last Bond novel. Also interesting - the layout and execution of the whole assassination plot here has a very "Dealey Plaza, 1963" feel to it - I've got to believe this is what Hall was going for here, as he probably started writing this barely a year after Dallas.
PERSONAL NOTE: My book was a nice leather-bound first edition, picked up for a buck or two at our local used book store; it has an embossed "Wilmington Public Library" seal halfway through, but no signs of a book pocket on either the front or back inside covers - pretty sweet.
I know others may disagree, but I'm sorry - this was just a total waste of time. It was like an endless Forrest Gump story without any of the interestI know others may disagree, but I'm sorry - this was just a total waste of time. It was like an endless Forrest Gump story without any of the interesting plot points - shrimp, Elvis, tennis, Vietnam, et al. Even the bit about Joanne, "the chicken with a college education" (which is always mentioned in any description of this book) only appears well beyond the 3/4's point for just a coupla pages and otherwise plays absolutely no role in...well, was gonna say "the plot," except that is just being WAY too generous.
If you haven't already, PLEASE read True Grit - it is an outstanding book and one of the best Westerns out there. But then take my advise and tell Mr. Portis "thank you and goodbye," because based on this and Dog of the South, ol' Charlie is the Billy Ray Cyrus of Southern lit - an absolute one-hit wonder....more
Surprisingly good mid-60s spy story, introducing the redoubtable Mrs. Pollifax…how had I never heard of her before??
The story description mentions "a Surprisingly good mid-60s spy story, introducing the redoubtable Mrs. Pollifax…how had I never heard of her before??
The story description mentions "a quick trip to Mexico" - and quick it is, as the majority of the book unexpectedly then takes place in Albania, (where it reminded me at times of Alistair MacLean's The Secret Ways).
Gilman went on to write 13 more "Pollifax" stories between 1970 and 2000 (by which point, Mrs. P should realistically be…around 95??), and I will certainly be reading at least a few more of them, especially the three back-to-back, mid-80s books set in Asia (China Station, Hong Kong Buddha and Golden Triangle). However, like spending time with most old people (myself foremost among them), doing so in small and well-spaced doses is probably the best way to ensure maximum enjoyment....more
Have read a half dozen or so other "Quiller" books, so when I saw that Hoopla had this first story, I figured I should give it a listen to see how QuiHave read a half dozen or so other "Quiller" books, so when I saw that Hoopla had this first story, I figured I should give it a listen to see how Quiller got started.
Well, this wasn't bad, but it was a very different Quiller. First, it is not a Cold War story, but is one of the earlier "let's round up those remaining Nazi" books like, say, Marathon Man. As such, it's not really a spy story, but almost a detective story, with Quiller working together with the German police. There were some common Quiller elements here - in particular, a LOT of car and foot surveillance (including the obligatory car chase that ends in flames) - but otherwise, I have to say this was just very different from Hall's subsequent books, and as such not really much of an indicator of what was to come.
I also realized here that, much like James Bond, Quiller is apparently immortal. This story is set in 1965, and has Quiller remembering his experiences during WWII. So assuming we was a young 18 in 1945 (although he was probably older), he was already at least 35 in this story - which would put him in his late-60s by his final book in 1996. I haven't read any of the last few books, so not sure if Hall was writing in real time, but I do believe Quiller Bamboo (1991) takes place in a post-Tiananmen China - i.e., after 1989 - and so Quiller would have been at least late-50s by then. I therefore found it mildly amusing that this book ends with Quiller's rumination that "I must be getting old. Getting old." Because, well…apparently not.
Back to the whole Nazis thing - this takes place a full 20 years after the end of the war, and yet the West was apparently still worried that surviving Nazi elements might somehow rise back into power. I therefore couldn't help mentally comparing this to our current situation here in the U.S., where it is all-too-depressingly feasible that our own far-right, proto-Fascist fringe that continues to worship at the alter of Donald Trump might continue to be a threat to American democracy two decades hence...a most unsettling thought...
FINAL NOTE: This book was also the basis of the one and only Quiller movie, 1965's "The Quiller Memorandum." It is available in full on Youtube, but PLEASE don't waste your time - it is just awful. No action, Quiller is an American no less, and rather than being introspective, intense and deadly, he is just kind of smarmy and feckless. Two big thumbs down!!...more
Well, THAT was disappointing. Having recently read Bond vs. Bond: The Many Faces of 007 (an overview of the Bond character in the original books, subsWell, THAT was disappointing. Having recently read Bond vs. Bond: The Many Faces of 007 (an overview of the Bond character in the original books, subsequent books, and movies), I thought it might be interesting to try one of the more highly-recommended post-Fleming books; and as this was both the first, figured this would be a good place to start.
I haven't read a "real" Bond book in decades, so maybe they were always this bad - silly, sexist, and generally stupid - but at least the Fleming books were all classics; however, Colonel Sun can't claim that status or authorship, and so has to be judged on its own merits - which are few indeed.
The plot is low-risk by Bond standards - the Chinese try to sabotage a Russian conference and pin it on the Brits - and while the name implies a cool Asia-based story, the whole thing takes place in the Greek islands, (one of the few areas of the world in which I have zero literary interest). Bond himself remains just an awful spy, good only at getting caught and then escaping - the latter only because he has so much damned practice. Once they finally appear, both main villains - the ex-Nazi von Richter and the endlessly-"yellow" Colonel Sun (so yes, add "racist" to "sexist and stupid") - can't help endlessly explaining their plans to Bond, so that they come across as less genuinely evil than pure Dr. Evil. It also doesn't help that narrator Simon Vance's Greek/German/Chinese accents are both bad and confusing, so that I was often not sure just who was speaking.
Anyway…that's if for me and Bond, at least for a while. The only other "new Bond" I've read was the even worse License Renewed (and I just have to again note that the lead female character here was named "Lavender Peacock"), and so the only book remaining that I might EVER consider reading now is the slightly-better-reviewed and much more recent Carte Blanche…but not for a good while at least, since it will take more than a few vodka martinis to get the taste of this stinker out of my mouth....more
Ugh...once again, Laumer is all over the place, plot-wise - I won't even try to summarize. So really just 2 stars for the story itself.
But Laumer's whUgh...once again, Laumer is all over the place, plot-wise - I won't even try to summarize. So really just 2 stars for the story itself.
But Laumer's whole concept of "the Blight" (which would have been a far better title that "the Imperium" for this series) is actually pretty cool, and ahead of it's time in taking on the multiverse. Basically, think of each universe as a straight line running through time parallel to all other universes. Well, in one of those universes, a pair of scientists came up with a way to travel perpendicular to those timelines, allowing them to travel between universes. Problem is, in their early experiments they basically screwed up royally, wiping out thousands of universes running "close to" our own, and so leaving us as basically an island surrounded by an unstable wasteland of destroyed universes - the Blight.
So 4 stars for the Blight itself, lifting this book to an average (if wholly-undeserved) 3. And with that I have now finished the original "Imperium" trilogy...but there's NO WAY I'm going anywhere near the 4th and final book in the series, written 22 years after Assignment (and nearly 20 years after Laumer's debilitating stroke), and dealing with, well, this:
Dumb, dreky fun from Laumer - as with much of his fiction, this is pretty bad, but in the best possible way. A good example of his "everything but theDumb, dreky fun from Laumer - as with much of his fiction, this is pretty bad, but in the best possible way. A good example of his "everything but the kitchen sink" style of sci-fi world building, Laumer throws in random scenes set in weird worlds the way Star Wars tosses off a place like Kamino or Utapau - for the sheer joy of creating it, (except that Laumer was doing it a full decade before Lucas filmed his first text crawl).
One note of actual interest here: a mere 20 pages before the end, Laumer drops this sentence:
But nobody, even someone who had only talked to me for five minutes three years before, could pretend to have forgotten my face: black-skinned, scarred, one-eyed.
I remember the scars and the lost eye - but "black-skinned"? Could Laumer way back in '67 have perceived his interplanetary Odysseus as black, and then never dropped any mention of it until this throwaway line at the end? How cool (and ahead of his time) if that was actually the case - that yes, the hero* was in fact black, but that it just didn't matter to the story one way or the other. Now that's a future I could get on board with.
* Named for some ungodly reason "Billy Danger"...yeah, I have no idea what he was thinking here....more
His Holiness' first memoir, written only three years after escaping Tibet and setting up his government in exile. As such, much more "unfiltered" thanHis Holiness' first memoir, written only three years after escaping Tibet and setting up his government in exile. As such, much more "unfiltered" than his later books, such as Freedom in Exile....more
Well, I've read the graphic novel (all our library had in print), seen the movie ("Payback," the Mel Gibson version, not Lee Marvin's "Point Blank"), Well, I've read the graphic novel (all our library had in print), seen the movie ("Payback," the Mel Gibson version, not Lee Marvin's "Point Blank"), and read a couple of the sequels - so figured it was finally time to listen the real McCoy - McParker? - now that I've figured out Hoopla and Bluetooth and my new car, (first stick shift in 30+ years, but figured it was time to teach the boys!).
And gotta say after all that, it was pretty much what I expected - although still surprisingly dark (compared to the movie) and with a much more abrupt and inconclusive ending, (again, compared to the movie). But there's a reason people are still reading and watching Parker - he really is one of the classic noir characters, from his first appearance here in 1962 until his 24th and final appearance in 2008.
INTERESTING (?) TRIVIA: There have been a number of movies made from Parker books over the years, although people don't generally realize it - and for a very good reason: Stark wouldn't allow any filmmaker to use the name "Parker" unless they committed to making a series of films. And so we ended up with "Point Blank" where Marvin's character was renamed Walker; "The Split" (Jim Brown/McClain), "The Outfit" (Robert Duvall/Macklin), "Slayground" (Peter Coyote/Stone), "Payback" (Gibson/Porter), and then finally just "Parker" in 2013* - coming out well after Stark/Westlake's death (also in 2008). But seems like Hollywood at least planned to adhere to Stark's wishes, since at the time this was meant to be a series vehicle for star Jason Stetham. Sadly, however, the film failed to score well enough at the box office, and so those sequels were never made, (at least until Parker gets resurrected again for a new generation, probably starring some millennial punk like Dane DeHaan or Shia LeBeouf - boo).
* In amongst all these, there were also two French movies more loosely based on Parker books, in which the character was renamed Siegel and Georges. These do not count....more
Loading...
