Book: The Alamut ambush - Livre d'Or








Miscellaneous. Eclectic. Random. Perhaps markedly literate, or at least suffering from the compulsion to read any text that presents itself, including cereal boxes. * Blogroll * Strange words * More links * Bookies * Microblog * Recent comments * Humans only * Second degree * By topic * Cool posts * Writing * New post

Tags

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



livredor
Book: The Alamut ambush
Monday, 11 February 2008 at 09:47 pm
Tags:

Previous Entry Next Entry


Author: Anthony Price

Details: (c) 1971 Anthony Price; Pub Futura 1981; ISBN 0-7088-1497-2

Verdict: The Alamut ambush is exciting and intricate.

Reasons for reading it: I really enjoyed The labyrinth makers by the same author. Plus, it's always a bonus to find an old-fashioned paperback that is small enough to fit in a handbag and is comfortable to read.

How it came into my hands: Birthday present from rysmiel

I didn't adore The Alamut ambush quite as much as the earlier volume. But it's still very good, and for quite a lot of the same reasons. It's a really amazing story, with loads of tension and excitement; I would even say that tAA is more exciting and action-filled than tLM, and I was quite scared in several places. Probably the best thing about it is that when the intelligencer characters solve the mystery, you can really believe that it's because of their ability and brains, and not just by authorial fiat. The atmosphere and background detail are really impressive, the sense of justified paranoia and the complicated and shifted alliances and double-crossing particularly.

I think the main reason I was less enamoured of the book is that Audley gets rather less stage time, and Roskill is not such a delightful viewpoint character. (I really hope I can justifiably infer that he survives at the end, though!) Also, the scene in Mary Hunter's room where the major enemy spy just happens to show up and just happens to be forced into a position where he is prepared to discuss his plans in detail is a little too pat. It feels like the scene in an Agatha Christie or similar mystery where the detective gathers the whole family together and explains how he solved the crime. But that's a minor flaw and doesn't at all detract from the wonderful plot twists and the completely believable fear of the assassin on the loose.

The characterization is of a very high standard. Even though I wanted more of Audley I really appreciate the way that the other spies have such distinct characters, approaches, and motivations and loyalties. That said, Price does the one thing I was really hoping he wasn't going to do, namely turning Faith into a girl and then dropping her from the story. I really liked Faith in tLM, I liked the way she was portrayed as a woman civilian in a man's professional world but still a real, three-dimensional person with her own intelligence. In tAA she's just generic arm candy for Audley, providing emotional colour by shrieking at appropriately scary moments. Then again, there are two intelligent, sensible, well-drawn women in the book, namely Isobel Ryle and Mary Hunter, so that somewhat makes up for the loss of interest in Faith.

There's also a really offensive bit of dialogue, which isn't a big part of the book, but to see something like this in a book published in 1971 is really appaling:
"He'll be there about ten thirty – he's currently wooing a doctor in Bart's"
"A doctor?"
"A female doctor, man – there's nothing odd about Jake."
Now, it's made clear elsewhere that it's Audley the character who is homophobic, not the author. But to be making that kind of joke, which relies on the idea that nobody could ever possibly imagine that a woman could be a doctor in the seventies (incidentally some thirty years after my grandmother qualified as a doctor, and it wasn't news then), is abyssmal. (I'm also kind of uncomfortable with seeing words like wog and gyppo slung around, but that is probably realistic for the period and it is condemned by the most sympathetic characters.)


Whereaboooots: East Firle
Moooood: contentcontent
Tuuuuune: Burning Airlines: Identikit
Discussion: 2 contributions | Contribute something
Tags:

Previous Entry Next Entry




Contribute something
View all comments chronologically



lethargic_man: default
From:lethargic_man
Date:February 12th, 2008 09:33 pm (UTC)
41 minutes after journal entry, 10:33 pm (lethargic_man's time)
(Link)
Now, it's made clear elsewhere that it's Audley the character who is homophobic, not the author. But to be making that kind of joke, which relies on the idea that nobody could ever possibly imagine that a woman could be a doctor in the seventies (incidentally some thirty years after my grandmother qualified as a doctor, and it wasn't news then), is abyssmal.

I got caught out by a riddle that relied on the fact a doctor was a woman in the nineties, and I'd had a female doctor living across my parents' back fence when I grew up. It's not that being a female doctor is inconceivable, it's just that the default interpretation kicks in really fast in cases of gender-neutral speech.

The second speaker in the above quote would probably have figured it out a few seconds later, but the first speaker explains it before he gets a chance. (He says, not having read the book, therefore not really having a leg to stand on.)
(Reply to this comment) (Thread)
cartesiandaemon: default
From:cartesiandaemon
Date:February 13th, 2008 02:35 am (UTC)
5 hours after journal entry
(Link)
Oh, that's interesting. I think I heard someone talking about the labyrinth makers in a completely different context, and it sounded interesting, but now I can't find it. It's on my list of interesting things, but not what I heard, so I've no idea why I felt I should read it, or even if that was something else entirely. But apparently, maybe I should.
(Reply to this comment) (Thread)



Contribute something
View all comments chronologically