Last Book That You Read- Fiction

Finished Eric Van Lustbader's 6th Bourne continuation novel, The Bourne Dominion.

Good read. Nothing special, just like his 5 previous efforts but still quite readable.
EVL's Bourne is quite lethal and very dangerous, however Ludlum wrote Bourne as basically perfectly lethal.
By comparison EVL's Bourne, one believes could be bested.
EVL's Bourne gets into tight spots, but always finds a way out, usually leaving a trail of bodies in his wake. This is Bourne for sure,but EVL gives the impression that his Bourne, could have got killed. Bourne's enemies do get close. EVL has compromised a bit of the Bourne mystique - namely that Bourne is without equal and everything that suggests. This may be nitpicking but I was more in awe of Ludlum's Bourne that EVL's Bourne.
Ludlum's Bourne struggled with his memory, his purpose, who to trust, what to do etc, but when it came to field execution and performance, he was untouchable. He was the ultimate super-agent killer - the most accomplished agent-assassin one could imagine.
It was unthinkable that any one individual or group, could best this Bourne in any fight, weapons or otherwise strategic encounter. And Ludlum made it believable. He sold it. One believed that this Bourne was the ultimate calculating killing-machine and without peer. In any situation, Bourne's enemies were always over-matched and stood no chance. Ludlum found other ways to create suspense and left us only to marvel at Bourne's superior skills.
Now, EVL does make an effort in this regard. Bourne's "peers" and enemies do regard Bourne's talents with requisite awe. His rep and legend status are intact in that regard. They know he can't be bested, however when Bourne is engaged, (and in EVL's books it happens frequently), even though he always prevails, his enemies do seem to get closer to hurting him than they should.
EVL does write quite compelling female characters for Bourne to cavort with- both femme fatales and allies.
Bourne is not a serial seducer like movie-Bond but he does effortlessly attract women to him. Like Bond, Bourne uses this trait to strategic advantage, but doesn't leave himself quite as vulnerable as Bond does.
Women are not a Bourne vice. Bourne really has no vices. Still the female characters that EVL creates are quite impressive in their own right and Bourne is not entirely invulnerable to their charms or machinations, but he generally manages to sort them out and form the right alliances.
Bourne and Bond, at least in the books are quite different. Bond though terribly proficient, is still vulnerable. He will have some close calls.
Bourne on the other hand is basically a reluctant super-killer, practically unkillable. He's not motivated by any duty. He basically wants out but can't pull it off. This is what makes him interesting IMO. The world's deadliest killer, but one who wants no part of the world that he has been thrust into. Almost like Wayne Gretzky not wanting to have been a hockey player or Babe Ruth, not wanting to have been a baseball player.
The EVL Bourne books btw are free of the Damon/Greengras films political pretentions. In the books, Bourne is just a guy trying to get by and get out.
Although I do notice a trend in the more recent books, towards Bourne almost fatalistically resigning himself to the notion that he is stuck in this violent world, and that he won't be able to disappear - that events will always draw him back in.
This might be EVL's way of establishing that Bourne won't be getting closure again anytime soon, so that the Bourne licencees can keep pumping out new books and movies.
Ludlum on the other hand, gracioulsy retired Bourne after the third book allowing him to settle in with his wife and live happily ever after - his violent past behind him.
But with Ludlum long dead and buried, the new gang, running both the films and books, have violently yanked Bourne from his peaceful existence. They've brutally killed his wife and hurled him back into the fray. It seems there shall no longer be peace for Jason Bourne.
It seems that publishing and film forces, have compelled Bourne to fully assume the "Identity", until they tire of him. They are the new Treadstone. Bastards! 8)
I hope at least, that when they are done with him, the poor guy might be allowed a new wife and a second chance to peacefully disappear into retirment again.
Unlike Bond he really doesn't want this life.

Re-reading The Crucible - Arthur Miller

... for school which I have to say I'm annoyed that I had to but a new copy as my other copy has been misplaced with all my annotations. Really I'm just reading it for the basis of our context study which concerns me because I am centering way too much in my research on the witchhunt/McCarthyism symbolism throughout ... which is all well and good until I get a prompt where I can't write on that so much ... *headdesk*

However it is a nice re-read for the fourth time as I'm picking up a lot more from it than I did the other times - and naturally it is increasing my dislike of Parris ... but oh well.

Good work Fae. I've never read the Crucible, but if by some chance it tries to spin McCarthy as a witch-hunter, you could always give it proper context and extol his virtues as the 1950's bane of Hollywood commies, of which there were plenty.

That's what I'd do. Happy to help. :)

Oh I know about the context - we've studied in class I'm just adding extra depth to it such as going into the Hollywood blacklists blah blah ... it goes on for a bit. I had all my info in my old copy ... but as I can't find that ... arrr

But thanks, timmer :)

Currently reading The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Heinlein. Took a while to get past the artificial first person future slang he uses (similar but less extreme than Clockwork Orange) but it's a good sci-fi exploration of Heinlein's ideals without the pro-military jingoism that puts so many intellectuals off of Starship Troopers

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

but it's a good sci-fi exploration of Heinlein's ideals without the pro-military jingoism that puts so many intellectuals off of Starship Troopers

Wasn't STARSHIP TROOPERS satire?

No, you're thinking of the Verhoeven movie. That was satire. Heinlein was serious. But then the book and movie have several key differences.

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

Currently reading The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Heinlein. Took a while to get past the artificial first person future slang he uses (similar but less extreme than Clockwork Orange) but it's a good sci-fi exploration of Heinlein's ideals without the pro-military jingoism that puts so many intellectuals off of Starship Troopers

There's quite a bit of politics that I remember not loving once you get past halfway, but geezus, what great SF concepts! That's the only Heinlein I've ever reread for pleasure (and have done so maybe a half-dozen times.)

Basically if you're a libertarian, you'll love it, and if not, well.... but yes, great SF! It took me a while to even come to terms with the fact that Heinlein was accounting for the fact that once you spend any amount of time in space, or on the Moon, you basically can't go back to Earth. I mean, its true, but damn SF never recognizes that because, well, there goes the genre, right?

I had already read stuff that went heavy on that 'you can't come back' notion. Ben Bova wrote a number of short stories and a pair of novels about Chet Kinsman, and the second novel deals with how he has been on the moon so long his heart will not stand up to earth gravity for any period. They put him in some kind of ekoskeleton thing so he can walk among us, but it takes a serious toll on the guy.

Just writing about this makes me wonder if these books are as good as I remember ... I must have read MILLENNIUM, the last Kinsman book, 15 times in the 70s and 80s ... I remember highlighting it with magic marker and making detailed journal entries about how I wanted to adapt it as a film (alternate reality, since it had an active manned US space program that progressed, unlike ours.)

Allan Steele really learned from reading Heinlein, but his stuff (at least the stories taking place in the next couple of decades) really is a lot more accessible to me. ORBITAL DECAY and LUNAR DESCENT are clearly inspired by Heinlein, but the politics are more a typical presentation, with the characters mostly working class types.

x

If some Waterstones are any indication, hard SF is positively extinct.

x

I have Heinlein's STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND on my shelf. Hope to get to it one of these days, probably next spring. Now I'm taking another stab at Fowles' DANIEL MARTIN, probably to be followed by some Neal Stephenson (ANATHEM or REAMDE).

The problem with hard sci, is that the standard model of physics is beginning to show its age. The well has been run dry, and there's only so many viable ideas left. On the other hand, soft-sci is suffering from uncurbed imagination.

Erica Ambler wrote:

Heinlein's Starship Troopers impressed me, it's the first of his novels that I've read, he seems to have gone out of fashion. Certainly hard to find in Blighty.

BTW, I went into Barnes & Noble intending to ship a load of SF back to the UK, but they had no John Varley at all. Is hard SF endangered?

Maybe they saw that horrid tv adaptation of OVERDRAWN AT THE MEMORY BANK and drew the wrong conclusions about Varley.

Finished reading Lee Child's WITHOUT FAIL today. I decided to give Lee Child a try since I've heard so many good things about him. The book was good enough for me to probably read some more of his works; a decent page turner.

I'm almost finished with ATLAS SHRUGGED. I've now gotten to John Galt's 55-page speech :roll: (roughly page 950) and hope to have the book finished by the end of October if not sooner. Ayn Rand has some good ideas, but somebody needs to tell this woman that brevity can be her friend. I could chop this book in half and still not miss any of the essence or basic meaning. Good book but needlessly drones on.

Actually I always thought somebody needed to tell that woman that sexually satisfied women don't care about all the crap in her book. Wasn't there somebody around recently who volunteered for such tasks? To late now of course... ;)

Got my run of this....consider her a female version of The Punisher...

tis have been Robert Harris' Fatherland

I read that a few years ago. I remember enjoying it.

It's done quite well, almost like Len Deighton's SS-GB building up this 'realistic' world that wasn't. One of Harris' better efforts.

WITHOUT WARNING :4*:
By John Birmingham

http://www.amazon.com/Without-Warning-John-Birmingham/dp/0345502892

An "alternate history" novel, it imagines what would happen if suddenly the United States simply vanished. People who have been wishing for just such a scenario might want to rethink their position when reading what John Birmingham plausibly lays out as possible, realistic scenarios and consequences. Part 1 of 3 (next novel is AFTER AMERICA, and the third one, ANGELS OF VENGANCE, is coming soon).

“John Birmingham’s ability to seamlessly merge the gritty realism of Tom Clancy with the raw speculation of Michael Crichton is like no other author I’ve ever read. Brilliant, nail-biting, thoughtful, and excruciatingly pertinent to our times, his latest novel, Without Warning, is simply a tour de force, a true classic in the making. It should be required reading for the entire world.”
–James Rollins, New York Times bestselling author of The Last Oracle

“What would happen if America vanished? Some would like to find out, but John Birmingham’s Without Warning suggests that the Pax Americana would soon be sorely missed. It’s a gripping story, for Americans and non-Americans alike.”
–Glenn Reynolds, InstaPundit

“A modern, even postmodern alternate history where the people who wish the United States would go away get what they wished for, and the consequences are meticulously, horrifically worked out in compelling detail through the eyes of a medley of interesting, well-developed characters and tightly plotted action.”
–S. M. Stirling, author of Island in the Sea of Time

x