speesh's reviews
416 reviews

The first thing I thought about this one, was that there's more than a hint of The Rockford Files about it. Terry McCaleb used to be in the FBI, but now lives on a boat he's slowly repairing, has had a heart transplant and has a slightly quirky mate living on a boat further along the marina. There isn't a quirky father popping round, but his father is still a presence in his life.

The premis of the book is, that McCaleb has recently had a heart transplant. The donor, it seems was murdered and McCaleb gets contacted by the sister of the donor and asked to investigate her murder, as the Police seem to have drawn a blank and may, or may not, have put it to one side as merely a 'wrong place, wrong time' kind of crime. Initially reluctant, McCaleb eventually allows guilt and/or feelings for the sister and the orphaned son of his donor, to win him over and he begins to investigate using his previous experience, and not the least contacts, to slowly begin to realise that there is perhaps more to this than at first meets the eye.

Whilst I got this for free - I got first dibs on the collection of a friend of my father-in-law's who died a year or so ago - I knew something of Michael Connelly before starting Blood Work. I remember reading one of his, The Poet, many years ago and whilst I couldn't remember anything of the plot, I went into reading this with a good feeling and remembering that I had enjoyed that book, which was why I chose to take this book when offered after all.

Well, there's no denying it's nicely written and well-plotted and I developed some sympathy for McCaleb's investigation, reasons and methods, there's just too little happening over too long a period for it to be anything other than mildly diverting. It was only after around 250 pages that something(s) really started to happen. Now the strands will finally start coming together and making sense, I thought. But then I thought; what strands? Nothing I can think of so far that he has described often in almost pedantic detail could be worthy of being pulled together. But then, that could be a sign that instead of being overly long and a bit dull, Connelly has been unbelievably clever, pulled the wool over our eyes and is about to pull the rug out from our feet (think those two will work together)! Yes, that must be it. He's actually a genius, when I was thinking he wasn't.

However, the surprise, the 'this is the who and the why' wasn't that much of a surprise. Not worthy of all the struggle and the investigation and the pages and pages of minutiae I had waded through. Not a slamming the book on the old coffee table, with a series of expletive deletes of surprise - as has happened before recently and as the wife has grown to love…As well plotted as it is, it is rather, how can I put it, emotionlessly done? Rather like putting a difficult, 10,000 piece jig-saw together, than getting swept up on a wave of emotion and logical progressions before being dropped from a great height onto the beach of realisation...erm… I felt it should have been more of a roller coaster - than a slow train - to an ending and a shocking revelation of who it was that had done it and why. Someone we'd overlooked in the course of reading? Someone we'd forgotten about or dismissed? I just thought that the final revealing and the after the event, had a little too much of the 'meh' to it.

If you're a Michael Connelly fan, this wouldn't I guess, disappoint. If you're not, it probably isn't the best place to start. Good job I got it free.

I would imagine, if you are like me of a certain age, and you have done a Michael Caine impression, you have probably done him as either his character from Zulu, or one of his early spy films. And they, The Ipcress File, Funeral In Berlin, etc, were written by one of the masters of the genre, Len Deighton.

Deighton along with le Carré, defined the later Cold War, spy-era, nipping back and forth over/under the Berlin Wall, novel. Deighton, for me, always felt a little more working class in his focus, and really, all the more realistic for that.

I had the feeling I'd read most of Len Deighton's outstanding work (apart from the cookery books!). But, it seems, not this one. No reason other than never got round to it I guess. I read a lot of Len Deighton in my youth. I remember spending the whole of one Sunday in the '80's reading 'Winter' from start to finish. Couldn't put it down, fascinating. This one I got this from the collection of a friend of my family here in Denmark, who passed away last year.

Rather disappointingly then I find it's not one of Deighton's best. Beginning in 1979, all the elements are there - the premis that Churchill met with Hitler just after the outbreak of WWII, where Churchill, in order to placate Hitler and 'save' Great Britain, agreed to a long list of outrageous demands largely amounting to saving our own skin and selling our allies past, present and future, down the river. Then there's a film being made, based on uncovered evidence of American GIs stealing Nazi (already stolen) art, gold and artifacts, including quite probably, the evidence of the above meeting. The British Secret Service and the CIA are, of course, interested. The British for obvious reasons, the CIA because of the possibility the Russians are involved somewhere or other down the line (we're still in the Cold War period here, don't forget). But everything feels like it's relegated to a sideshow amongst many other sideshows. Nothing stands up and grabs you. Seems like there's plenty going on, but it's not of much consequence, not of enough interest and just not strong enough, I'm afraid. I really didn't find myself caring an awful lot about any of the characters or predicaments.

I actually kept thinking how much better this story would have been, handled by one of the modern spy writers I'm currently enjoying reading. Jon Stock, for instance. And in Deighton's characters 'Boyd Stuart' (the British spy) and his MI6 chief 'Sir Sydney Ryden', dare I say I saw a distant pre-echo (if such a thing is possible) of Jon Stock's 'Daniel Marchant' and 'Marcus Fielding'? I'd take that as flattery, were I Jon Stock.

Unfortunately, XPD just doesn't all come together like a classic Deighton should. There are still moments of the classic Deighton style. His way of revealing a surprise, almost in passing, then, a few paragraphs later, making reference in some way to the development, from a slightly different angle as it were, blowing the whole thing up in your face again, is wonderful. Pure Deighton, pure genius. It's just that here such moments are few and far between and not enough to pull this up and away from being a run of the mill Deighton. Sorry about that.

Quite a mixed bag of a book this. Whilst the novel goes back and forth between the time periods the story needs to cover, the chronological order is: Pre-History. Medieval Middle Ages. Second World War. Modern day. Quite a spread and unusually (from my point of view anyway) all set in France. Though all the better for that, I say.

It is however, a bit of a mixed success. The story hangs around a series of interlocking cave chambers that are discovered in modern times, with cave paintings that are the rival to or better than, those found at other comparable sites like Lascaux. The new cave system's paintings near the French village of Ruac (which seems to be a fictional place) are, apart from being much better, also much, much older. But why have the caves remained hidden until now? Our 'guide' through the story, Luc Simard is an archaeologist called to a Monastery where a rare book is found that needs de-coding and preserving. By accident, he and his friend, an expert in book preservation, stumble across the caves nearby the Abbey and make the link between the paintings and the book - and a secret many people have and still are fighting and killing to protect.

It is all handled quite effectively. The pace is excellent, with a measured build up to around the middle of the novel, where the hero is beginning to put deus and deus together and realise he's neither alone in his quest, nor safe. From there, it goes up several gears and becomes quite a tense race to the final conclusion.

Whilst technically it is all handled very well, it doesn't really reach the peaks it could have done. It stays in the lowlands. It doesn't really develop the series of interesting incidents with possibilities, into anything more substantial. I think this might be to do with trying to touch too many novel-type bases. It's part Clan of the Cave Bear, part medieval mystery whodunnit - drags in the Templars of course - part WWII drama and part modern day suspense novel. I was left a little not let down, but just feeling 'oh well', when I finished. I am going to recommend it to you, but more as a diverting and reasonably interesting read for a couple of days, rather than a novel that will change your life or live on in your memory longer than it took to read this...

It's not often you meet a character in the first few pages of a book you just know you are going to like, care about and want to follow in all future books...which you decide you're going to have to be buying even though you're only 10 pages in to the first one.

'Hero of Rome's Gaius Valerius Verrens, Tribune of the XXth Legion, stationed in first century Britain, is one of those characters.

My paperback version of 'Hero of Rome', looks great, feels great, smells and probably even tastes great as well. It can't be underestimated, whether you realise it or not, how the physical 'presence' of a book can affect your perception of it, both before and during the reading. Many times, you can and should judge a book by its cover. With 'Hero of Rome', the good feeling of quality starts even before I read a word. Just holding the book, feeling and looking at the cover, I knew I was going to enjoy this one.

It is obvious Douglas Jackson has, as the inside cover puts it; 'turned a lifelong fascination for Rome and the Romans' into an elegant, engaging and almost effortless style of writing. Easily conveying the story, bringing out the different characters - Roman, Celtic, Briton - and making you care about their stories and their lives. I was so bound up in the story at one point that, even though I knew this is the first in a series of novels involving (at least some) of these characters, at one point during a battle, when I had no idea of the outcome, I said to myself (there was a handball game - I live in Denmark - on in the background); "ok, if he scores a goal in the next 2 minutes, the character survives". I really felt as though they needed the help of an external, 21st Century power. That, for me, is good writing. Couldn't guess where it was going, didn't want to - didn't dare take my eyes off it.

Gaius Valerians Verrens, is a Tribune in the Roman Army stationed in Britain. He is looking forward to going back to Rome and continuing his career in Law and Politics. He's not a reluctant hero in any way, possessed by self-doubts and all the other nonsense authors usually load onto their characters, thinking it gives them depth and, character. But Valerius does have perhaps a more 'mature' and well-rounded view of why he and his countrymen are in Britannia and there's a sense that he actually seems to care about how the Britons feel about the Romans. That and he's a bloody good soldier who doesn't mind 'cleaving someone to the breastbone' as my old hero Robert E. Howard used to put it.

The Britons and Celts can also be said to be looking forward to him - and all the other Romans - returning to Rome. Perhaps more so. Britannia has been under Roman occupation for a number of years now, but that doesn't mean that all the local population is happy with that. Romans are good for trade, whether you're Roman or Briton, as some realise, but others want them gone and the old ways back. The Druids as guardians of the old knowledge are roving the land spreading dissent and bringing the situation to a boil. Valerius begins the story by getting involved with the 22nd Legion in battles against the locals in the south west of Britain, just over the (modern) border in what is now Wales. However, while the Legions have plans to move north west and finish the troublesome Druids once and for all, Valerius is detailed to go east, to 'Colonia', north east of Londinium. Ostensibly a mission to reconnoitre and repair the roads, he finds the local Roman garrison have gone more than a little bit native and are looking a little past their best. Valerius is in for a surprise. In many ways. Especially when 'Rome', as in the Emperor back in Rome, decides that their investment in Britain isn't turning out to be such a good idea after all and the local people suddenly find that they are going to be made to pick up the bill. With interest. Turns out, the Romans have had their eyes on not so much the green and pleasant land, but the gold that they think lies under it. It has cost a lot of Sestertii to invade Britain and now the Romans have decided they want their investment back. The Britons are not in the slightest bit happy about this, as you can imagine. The new Roman ways have steamrollered over the ages-old Celtic beliefs and customs and so, egged on by the Druids, Boudicca becomes a violently eloquent spokeswoman for that unhappiness. While Valerius is buffeted about Britannia by his leaders and the natives, Douglas Jackson subtly builds up the undercurrent of tension and atmosphere that leads to a momentous final battle, with an effective, concise and controlled style.

So, 'Hero of Rome', pretty much has it all. There are goodies. There are baddies. There are baddies who might be goodies and other 'goodies' who are worth not turning your back on. In fact, Valerius finds out very quickly that not all his enemies are the ones outside, spreading dissent. But he also finds he has friends in the most unexpected of places - and at the most unexpected times. All this and the descriptions of Roman life, art and industry, the interaction between the Roman occupiers and their new British subjects and thoughts of both sides on the benefits or otherwise of the arrangement, are especially well done. Most thought provoking, if you ask me. I hate it when reviewers say things like 'an evocative recreation of Roman Britain'. I mean, how do they know? Unless they have a time machine we don't know about, they have no idea about how life really was back then, the - as XTC once so eloquently put it; 'smell, touch, taste.' We can make guesses and I suppose some guesses make more sense than others. And I'm far from being anywhere near an expert on Roman Britain. I just like reading books on the subject and dreaming a little. I like history and history from a long time ago precisely because of the uncertainty of how it really was back then. Because then there is room for me to dream and imagine how it was, using the author's work as a guide. Douglas Jackson is one of the best guides you could hope to come across.

The whole of 'Hero of Rome' has a nice flow to it. There's a confidence and an understated surety running through the whole of this involving story. A trust, it felt like. That Douglas Jackson knows his subject, has absorbed it and is writing a story in a very natural way, without pushing his knowledge and research up in your face. Make sense? I don't know, it's hard trying to grab and tie a nuance down, but that's kind of how it felt. It also felt satisfyingly plotted and logical in its development, the whole full and well rounded, but with masses of promise for the future story developments. You like Valerius and want to join his adventures again. Maybe it's because some of the central themes - most developed out to a conclusion, some not and some maybe for later enjoyment - are strong enough to carry us through a story no matter when it is set, that make it easy for a 21st Century me, relate to and understand fully the motivations of not just a 4th Century Valerius, but also the Britons, Druids, Boudicca - and all those caught in between.

This has been my first encounter with the Roman world of Douglas Jackson. And it won't be the last. 'Hero of Rome' is as good a piece of Historical Fiction as you're likely to come across. And the really good news, for me anyway; it's only the start of our adventures together.

This is the first Philip Kerr book I have read. I am, for some unfathomable reason, interested in the period in Europe and Germany in particular, between the First and Second World wars.

I enjoyed 'If The Dead Rise Not', not least because it felt like it was adding some nuances of colour to a previously black and white dominated memory world. I feel like, that because there wasn't - so much - colour film around in those days, when we now read about those days, during and just before WWII, our imagination is in black and white. What I'm clumsily trying to say, is that now, writers like Philip Kerr are bringing subtle colours into the previously faded, sepia-toned black and white photo memories.

The story centers around a German ex-Police Detective called Bernie Gunther. The book begins in 1934 and if you know your German history, it is only a year or so since the Nazis came to power. If you really know your German history, you will know that the Third Reich removed the Weimar Republic and after the Nazis came to power, Germany became an extremely unpleasant place to be for Jews, Communists and everyone else the Nazis didn't like, which included previous supporters of the Weimar Republic. Like Bernie Gunther. As the book starts, Gunther is working as a private detective of sorts at a big hotel in Berlin. He becomes involved in investigating a couple of murders, which lead him to uncover, or at least suspect, a plot to siphon money from the building of the Olympic Games facilities for 1936. He gets involved with two of the hotel's guests and their paths cross many times, for good and bad and again much later, 20-odd years later, when he has ended up in Cuba, in the years before the revolution there.

As a description of the character of Bernie Gunther, I can't do better than the Daily Telegraph's "In Bernie Gunther, Kerr has created a plum example of that irresistible folk hero, the detective who is the only honorable man in a wicked world"

Interestingly enough, it just so happened that I was reading 'The Coming of the Third Reich' by Richard J. Evans at the same time as reading this. The first part deals with the events leading up to the Nazis coming to power. So I can confirm, as much as I'm sure confirmation was needed, that all facts are present and correct. Philip Kerr uses the situation in Germany, to show how ordinary people reacted to the extraordinary situations they now found themselves in. In some it brings out the good, in others it of course created the perfect place for the free reign of the bad. Whilst some of his characters are, at least in part, Jewish, this isn't a story about the Jewish situation. Probably as this is a subject best covered elsewhere. Obviously the anti-Jewish aspects of the Nazi's regime even in their early days, is touched upon (as it is unavoidable in a story set in Europe in this period), though it isn't the main motivation for his characters' actions. The characters here are by and large reasonably ordinary people, dealing with an extraordinary situation and doing what a lot of people must have done while their masters were playing politics with their lives; just getting on with it.

If there absolutely has to be a 'but' within my enjoyment of this book, and I fear there absolutely has to be, it is the almost constant wisecracking. Both in what Bernie Gunther says and thinks. I sometimes thought it was a little too much. I'm not saying, that there wouldn't have been a lot of black humour at the time, as Germans in general and perhaps especially the Berlin urban sophisticates Philip Kerr writes about, came to terms with what they'd let themselves in for, by either voting for, or not resisting enough (as Kerr writes: "Quite a few of them (Nazis) ... Seemed to have a flair for persuading Germans to go against their own common sense"). On the positive side, I got a sense that his characters joked about life to alleviate their current situation, with perhaps the underlying hope that 'it can't go on like this, it can't last' and I'm sure that was a real feeling. Black humour would be understandable and perhaps necessary to retain your sanity and I'm guessing that because everything else has been so obviously well-researched, he has also researched and found that this amount of wise-cracking, from big-city Germans throughout Berlin, is authentic. However, sometimes it feelt too much. Sometimes it feels more like Philip Kerr has written it in because he, Philip Kerr, liked writing it, more than 'Bernie Gunther' would have either had the character to say it, or have found it necessary, or that its inclusion helps the plot development. It is enjoyable to read and I'm not saying it wouldn't have been the case, or that all Germans did, or do, fit their stereotype as humourless automatons. I found it a little distracting on occasions.

I was also not entirely sure why the story ended to move some 20 years into the future to 1954. Obviously, by mentioning what has happened to the main characters - who somewhat fortuitously have all found themselves on Cuba at exactly the same time - in half dozen lines at a time flashbacks, does save a lot of time (ours' and the author's) and space, but why, wasn't entirely clear to me. Maybe because two of the people involved in the German part of the story are American. Or maybe I missed something.

On the whole positive, with a few negatives. So I'm giving it a rating a little over half way and enough to make me trying others by Philip Kerr.

As a final thought, I wouldn't have thought it a bad idea, to have added a bibliography at the end. I'm sure his research material would make equally interesting reading. For people like me anyway.

Well, well. How much did I enjoy this?

Plenty.

Let's see: Spies. The Second World War. Spies. The Cold War. Spies. The 1960's. Spies. Yup! Everything set fair for me to enjoy this one.

And I did.

If I might give you some advice based on my reading of this one; have a good grip on this book right from the start.

For, after just a few pages, there I am, staring blankly at the page I just read, blinking, with my jaw bouncing back up off floor. And I'm wondering; 'The hell happened there?! Did he just...? But I thought...? Did that really...' 'Cat, meet pigeons' indeed. And you're only 13 pages in. Ha! Excellent stuff.

Yes, you know you're in unchartered enjoyment territory when a book throws a huge great spanner in your works, even before you've got the works in gear.

It wouldn't be easy describing the plot without giving away the start. Which is essential for what follows. However, the plot summary on the back of the book does do an excellent job of sidestepping the shock at the start. It gives nothing away, while giving a reasonably full synopsis of the story. I can't do better, so here's what my copy of the paper book says;

"British agent Paul Dark has had a stellar career - until now. A Soviet defector has credible information that there is a double agent within MI6, and Dark finds himself in the frame. Arrest could be only moments away. Worse, he has discovered that everything he has believed in for the last twenty-four years - the very purpose that drives him - has been built on a lie. Now he wants answers, no matter what he has to do to get them."

Free Agent is a satisfyingly well-plotted story that has its roots in the confusion and panic in Germany - and Europe in general - after the end of the Second World War. And of course the start of the Cold War. New ideologies are forming, becoming entrenched and making both sides vulnerable. To both sides. The main story takes place in 1969. Beginning in England, but then taking us out to Nigeria, during its civil war with those trying to break away and form a new country; Biafra. Here, the conflict is on the surface a civil war involving the potential breakaway of the Biafran province from Nigeria. But it is (naturally) being used as a playing field for the Eastern and Western colonial powers - old and new - to do more than just rattle their sabres. I loved the description the book quotes as being from a Swahili saying, that 'when two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.'

The book for me brought back many interesting youthful memories - and some shocking images. And, I'm ashamed to admit, some rather tasteless 'jokes'. We didn't know better. I remember the trauma of the Biafran conflict, the harrowing images and the British attempts at salvaging (for the British) a rapidly deteriorating situation (I also realised I remember Wilson's 'warship diplomacy', in trying to solve/end the Rhodesian 'problem' as well). In fact, there were many times during reading the reading of 'Free Agent' where I had to pause and let up some of my own memories bubble up, memories that Free Agent had reminded me I'd forgotten were there.

The story moves at a good pace, though never too fast to be trivial. There are twists and turns, but thanks to a well-constructed and believable plot, feel natural and never forced. There are also interesting ideas and themes that are given time to develop and come to fruition - while always retaining the book's urgency and the hero's need for solving his own personal issues, in what becomes a rather hectic race against time. In Paul Dark, I think Jeremy Duns has created a very interesting, complex character. With Dark, what you see isn't always what you get and I don't think I'm giving too much away if I say that he is a character I thought I shouldn't really sympathize with, but did. And a character I was and am, interested in finding out more about. More about his motivations, his past, his present and hopefully his future - however long that future might be.

I thoroughly enjoyed this story and look forward to reading more about Paul Dark. And Jeremy Duns is a really interesting Tweeter too - as of course befits a fellow Englishman now sensible enough to be living in Scandinavia!

*I would like to point out that the Goodreads language description for this paperback version, says 'Croation'. This is decidedly not the case!

'The Coming Of The Third Reich' is definitely not one for the faint-hearted. It's probably the book the word 'thorough' was invented for. If you've read Ian Kershaw's 'The End', as i did recently, you know the kind of thing I'm talking about. If you've read that and thought it went into the most minute detail, wait until you get to grips with this one. But it has to be a huge book, dealing as it does with hugely difficult themes; like trying to tie down just why in Germany after the First World War, the circumstances were ready to let the Nazi Party firstly, come into being and secondly, come to power. As anyone with even the most limited knowledge of this period might instantly suspect and this book proves; there are no simple, short, easy answers when trying to get inside the minds and psyche of a people in a time that seems here to be so staggeringly different from ours' now. We hope. 

This book, the first in a trilogy, covers the period from the unification of Germany and the formation of the second 'Reich' in 1871, to the Nazis full assumption of power and declaration of the 'Third Reich' in 1933. Any investigation into 'why' has to of course look a lot further back than the period after WWI and the manufactured feeling of being 'stabbed in the back' and being hard done by, by the terms imposed upon Germany by Britain and France at Versailles. Why the Germans felt so wounded, so determined to exact revenge and so determined it should never happen again, requires some pretty exceptional vision and scholarship - and Richard J Evans provides it. And then some.

'The Coming Of The Third Reich' covers everything before, after and during the Nazis rise to power. He looks at every level and aspect of German society. Sounds like tough going, eh? It isn't. Despite the book's dry-sounding thoroughness, Richard Evans' style of writing is always open and inviting - the only way I can think of describing it. Reading never feels like a chore. It is presented in a satisfyingly logical manner and interesting details and insights are always just around the corner. The clear, patient and concise style is never tiring and never feels like it's saying 'Academics Only.' Just thinking about how he began researching this and how he managed to hold control of the whole in his mind, is just awe-inspiring. This really is, setting the subject matter aside, an incredible work of art. However you want to look at it.

It isn't going to be a book for everyone. It isn't a book you're going to read in one or two sittings and say 'a real page turner - couldn't put it down.' The range and amount of information is very nearly overwhelming. But stick with it and it will reward you in the end. To use a cliche, it reads rather like watching a car crash. Where you know the outcome. And you know the outcome is bad. But you can't take your eyes off it.

If anyone wants to go deeper, much deeper into the background surrounding and the history behind the Nazi's becoming the dominant party in German government in 1933, then this is the book for them. There is so much here to wonder at, marvel at, puzzle over and understand, that it will surely help make reading of other World War II histories more rewarding.

The second in Richard Evans' series is 'The Third Reich in Power 1933-1939, How The Nazis Won The Hearts And Minds Of A Nation', the third 'The Third Reich at War, How The Nazis Led Germany From Conquest To Disaster.' As this one is so rewarding, it seems churlish not to follow on with the others.

It is impossible to give this anything other than five stars. Though this feels nowhere near enough for such a book.

So, two days in the company of policeman Detective Tom Bishop. Not the most pleasant of experiences for him - but a fast-paced, tense, amoral, dark and gritty, ultimately thrilling roller-coaster ride for us.

The story is based in and around Bishop's Police Station in...well, we aren't told, as far as I can see. It's a violent, no-name city that could be many places (just hope it isn't near you or me). Perhaps Luke Preston deliberately doesn't say where it IS set, so that we can think 'this could be near me!' If he named the city, we could easier hold it at arm's length by telling ourselves 'Sheesh! They've got it bad there, thank goodness it isn't near me!' But by not defining it, it COULD be near you or me. Helps the story hit home.

Tom Bishop is a cop not just on the edge - but over it and half way down the other side looking up. He is a tough as nails, old school cop on the inside. A tough as nails, shoot first and 'Questions? The fuck are they?' afterwards, on the outside. And he's the good guy. Indeed, often the only way to tell the difference between him and the criminals he's mixed up with, is the Police badge he's carrying. And even then you're not sure.

After a violent robbery goes down, that he's just too late on the scene to prevent, it becomes clear that not just has 15 million Dollars gone missing, but that the perpetrators are more than likely Policeman. His colleagues. He knows them. But perhaps more worryingly; they know he knows. What to do? Join them? Try and beat them? Joining them would be the easy way out. But luckily for us, that's not Bishop's style.

As the story develops, friends turn to enemies and in the pursuit of the truth - and something that might resemble justice - a whole lot of moral lines get blurred almost to invisibility. Nothing matters to Bishop but stopping the corrupt Police officers. From getting to the evidence and the witnesses of course. But mostly from stopping them getting to him! His colleagues have been so corrupt, so long, that he, Bishop, seems like the one in the wrong.

Dark City Blue is a (not so) pretty, tough, no-nonsense kind of a story. About a tough, no-nonsense kind of a character. So the writing style mirrors this. Clipped, hard and effective. Never uses three words where two will have more punch.

"She looked at the crumpled bill as if it had just taken a shit on the rug. 'You pigs are all the same.'"

What's not to like? In the Acknowledgements - you do read Acknowledgements, don't you? - I thought it was perhaps confirmation of this mirroring, that Luke Preston writes thanks to "Gareth Beal: My editor, who killed all the words that didn't matter." Every word matters here, there's no room for passengers, word-wise. It is a style that perhaps sometimes needs getting accustomed to. But when you've read a few pages, you get a lot out of it. And I felt that as the novel progresses and we learn more about Bishop and his life, the story and prose became a little warmer, more nuanced. Again, just like the character of Bishop develops. Both still retaining all the original shoot-to-kill attitude of course. I find it is a style where you - or your own mind and powers of association - do almost as much work as the author does in the writing.

It is a provocative way of telling the/a story, but then it is a provocative story. Nihilistic even. Like Bishop. In many ways the book reminded me of another of my favourite authors; Mark Timlin. And that's a (very) good thing. His 'Nick Sharman' stories also explore the life and hard times of a(n ex-) Policeman. One who'd not exactly seen better times, but certainly times better than the, erm... 'problematical' ones the stories had him set in.

Like I say, despite the tale being told like it's got a gun to its head, I do detect a little compassion hidden under all Bishop's scar tissue. Compassion might be a weakness in his world, but he does almost develop a conscience, of sorts. Perhaps, beneath all the grime and under all the cuts and scars, bullets and bruises, there does lurk an idealistic policeman. Is this why he chooses to keep going? Why he chooses not to take the money and the easy - less painful - way out. Even if that is the hard choice. If nothing else, Dark City Blue is about Bishop's choices. Between doing right by your colleagues, and doing right in the 'wrong' way. Choosing how far to go wrong, to do the right thing. I think ultimately, the key to Bishop's character, why he chooses to do what he does, might lie with his daughter. Them finding each other and Bishop maybe wanting to prove to her he wasn't such a bad father-figure to have found after all.

Actually, I read Dark City Blue on my iPhone Kindle app and I did think that at the end of this book there should perhaps be a sign 'now wash your hands.' I cleaned the screen of my iPhone, just in case.

It is an unsettling story, if reality is really like this. But compulsive because of it. And a lot of fun.

It must be a little unusual when a book begins with the death of the main character and the book's driving force. In 'The Dying Light's case, David Eyam. A phenomenally intelligent man, not always easy to like or love, but certainly one of the leading brains of his, or many other, generations. A government advisor at the time of his death, he has uncovered a very worrying secret. A secret plan, directed from the very heart of government, with the help of those at the top of big business, to track and trace, control and nullify the opinions and will of the people. A plan to watch over people, right under their noses.

Whilst the book opens in a perhaps little unusual way, unfortunately the story is all too depressingly real and possible. It is what reviewers call 'timely.' In that everything to fulfill the warnings the book is making, is already with us and it is a situation we are already willingly sleepwalking into. I think, at the heart of the book it revolves around the 'if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about' mantra, sold to us as being for our own safety and ultimate benefit by corporations and politicians. And that we are too numb to do anything but buy.

The book has a perhaps very serious and concerning message behind and under it, but it is also a well-written, carefully thought out and plotted thriller. Languid and evocative in parts, hectic and tense in others. Information is revealed slowly and peeled away in layers to get at the full truth underneath. I did feel it sagged a little in the middle sections and there were a couple of times where I thought I was getting to the conclusions a long time before the characters really should have been, given their intelligence and access to all the same facts as me, but it picks it all up again and runs away with the prize towards the final 'that'll show them they can't muck around with us' climax. I'll certainly be looking for more books by Henry Porter. I'll recommend you do too.

There was a lot to be liked and enjoyed in this one.

But there was also a fair amount I was actually quite disappointed about.

Early on, it seemed almost as if it was going to be a mix of 'Catch 22' and Len Deighton's Harry Palmer, Daniel Craig's James Bond and Jason Bourne.

Whilst it started well;

"You're booked on a US chopper tomorrow."
"Don't tell me it's got a Ukrainian crew?"
"It's got a Ukrainian crew. But don't worry, the pilot never takes a drink before lunchtime."
"What time's the flight?"
"Depends what time lunch finishes."

And despite clearly the book's best intentions - it never quite got there.

All the main characters come with a lot of dirty baggage from other wars; the ones you've heard about and, perhaps more dangerously; the ones you haven't. Through the use of flashbacks and moving backwards and forwards, the story tries to explain reasons for characters' behaviour and motivations. Unfortunately, these I found more irritating than explanatory, or particularly successful. When they work in the way they're written, there is a real dream-like feel to them, as if they're trying to remember, piece together the meaning behind actions - an often painful remembrance of past events sparked by an event happening in the here and now. That's good. But often confusing, often even irritating, I found. I kept wishing they wouldn't keep slowing the whole thing down and that the story would just get on with it. When the characters are discussing past events, when that is used as explanation, it works much better. More revealing more slowly, more tantalising, I felt.

It is a thriller, I guess, though it can move quite slowly. At times in Afghanistan, at times in Pakistan at times in Scotland and London, the book explores the characters' background for their tangled espionage-linked lives and why and when and for whom, espionage becomes 'terror'.

"'They've got it into their heads that there is no law but the discretion of the United States. They're bypassing the regular operations of intelligence, military and law-enforcement agencies and stovepiping raw intelligence to the very top. The politicians are picking and choosing without any realistic evaluation. They're conjuring threats out of thin air. They're going to invade Iraq.'"

Yes, it's always easy to have 20/20 hindsight and be clever after the event, but from what we now know and indeed saw in those UN debates, then that seems about as concise a summing-up of what happened as you're ever likely to see. Why they did it, is another matter. What matters here is that they did, and people like the book's Jonah, Nor and Miranda, are the ones caught up in middle of the confusion and terror and revenge and war.

'A Loyal Spy' wants to be much more than just a seat of your chair white-knuckle ride thriller. I've read plenty and have got plenty waiting for me to read up there on the shelf. It was, a reasonably even-handed discussion of the whole situation of this 'war on terror', or of many of the wars and terrors since the collapse of Yugoslavia. But...there always came a 'but...'

I just felt a little let down, I suppose. By a few of things. The flashbacks, the unnecessary and grating sex-scenes and a bit of a damp ending (in more ways than one). The whole story felt like it more or less fizzled out, even though the action was hectic and almost apocalyptic. There were times when he seemed to be getting to grips with peeling away the layers to get at something really worthwhile and important. But those times weren't often enough and didn't go far enough down into the black heart of the matter. Instead of peeling away layers, it seemed like only scratching the surface.
I kinda expected more, or better, after a good start and the long, long build-up and ground-laying, character-wise. And the 'hero' with a black-sheep 'brother' situation, was done recently much more convincingly by Jon Stock, in my opinion. All in all, I felt the book and the characters and the good parts deserved better than they got in the end.