I was a little unsure of how I would feel about reading this, as I am wary of interacting with anything that over-simplifies the current global context of Islam vs well everything and anything else. But, I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised and glad of the way in which Laurence skilfully handled the depiction of a fictionalised islamic uprising in Europe against the backdrop of a mystery in Istanbul.
The mystery starts with the discovery of a decapitated body in Istanbul. The body is one of a researcher: Alek whose death comes as a deep shock to his friend and colleague: Sean who is summoned to Istanbul by the British Consulate to identify the body. Sean, is still grieving for the death of his wife who died whilst in Afghanistan. I wasn't sure that this was entirely relevant to the story. I understand that the reasoning may have been to provide some context to Sean's slight antipathy towards Muslims - but I don't think it was strong enough or relevant. However, his grief does explain to some extent Sean's sense of urgency to find out exactly what happened to Alek and whether Alek's discovery of something of historical and religious significance was the reason why he was killed.
The setting of the first half of the novel in Istanbul is incredibly detailed and really does add a sense of "exoticism" to the pacing and action of the novel. My one gripe was that things seemed to move a little too fast and I found myself having to go back a chapter or two to understand the connection between certain characters or events. Sean is aided in his mission by a British official: Isabel. I found her quite annoying, her mannerisms were cloying and a little one-dimensional. And the relationship which blossoms between Sean and Isabel seemed a little hasty, it certainly put the question of Sean's grief regarding his wife to bed rather conveniently.
It's clear that Laurence is extremely fond of Istanbul, his descriptions of the city, the people, the ambience is very clear and lucid. I think without these descriptions, the novel would have suffered, especially as the narrative around Alek's discovery is steeped in religious and cultural discourse. Both what is discovered and the implications for the Christian and Islamic worlds are huge, so the setting helps to calm the reader from overthinking about the ramifications.
After their return to London from Istanbul, I found that my apprehension regarding any potential for simplistic demonisations of Islam had largely disappeared. The real villain of the piece and his motivations for trying to launch an airborne plague which could have squarely been blamed on Muslims attending a demonstration become clear. In a twitter exchange with Laurence, he remarked that his motivations for writing this book along with an article he wrote about Islam, the Crusades and the historical significance of Vladimir Dracula are purely based on his desire to expose those who seek to cause trouble and who want to make things worse. And I have to agree, interestingly I took from the villainry of the Istanbul Puzzle, the right wing demagogues in American politics and their embeddedness with the Tea Party movement and obstructions to attempts to seek peace within American domestic politics and abroad. There are certainly trouble-makers who come in all different shapes and sizes and are motivated by different agendas. It would be foolhardy to take a piece of well-written fiction as evidence of being for or against something, if we strip away the wider gloabl context of radicalised Islam and the threat this presents to everyone (including non-radical Islam), then the Istanbul Puzzle stands on its own two feet as a good thriller. Considered in the context of radicalised Islam however and recent geopolitics, then we would have to be careful that dogma does not take over rational thought.
I have read some other reviews comparing or at least hinting at the similarity of style between The Istanbul Puzzle and Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. I think that would be an unfair comparison, as the "believeability" of the Istanbul Puzzle is far higher than the Da Vinci Code. The Istanbul Puzzle, thanks to the skill of Laurence is also not as controversial as the Da Vinci Code. When you consider their writing skills, you being to realise how clunky and clumsy Dan Brown is, whereas Laurence is more subtle and nuanced. I do have a few criticisms which I think other readers will also pick up on, namely that the discovery of the mystery is not as climatic as I would have liked. Also I think Sean and Isabel's characters do need some refinement. Apart from that, as a debut thriller, the book is good.
A great thriller, a promising first in a series of The X Puzzle series ( I understand that Laurence is working on The Jerusalem Puzzle next).
For alternative reviews from Amazon bloggers, see here. I think Bibi's review is pretty strong.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AIKG7TPNTLXV8/ref=cm_pdp_rev_title_3?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview#RCVFY1G98WLCF
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A2RDZYGFMVL87I/ref=cm_pdp_rev_title_1?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview#R3JB6X0VYDOEDR
The mystery starts with the discovery of a decapitated body in Istanbul. The body is one of a researcher: Alek whose death comes as a deep shock to his friend and colleague: Sean who is summoned to Istanbul by the British Consulate to identify the body. Sean, is still grieving for the death of his wife who died whilst in Afghanistan. I wasn't sure that this was entirely relevant to the story. I understand that the reasoning may have been to provide some context to Sean's slight antipathy towards Muslims - but I don't think it was strong enough or relevant. However, his grief does explain to some extent Sean's sense of urgency to find out exactly what happened to Alek and whether Alek's discovery of something of historical and religious significance was the reason why he was killed.
The setting of the first half of the novel in Istanbul is incredibly detailed and really does add a sense of "exoticism" to the pacing and action of the novel. My one gripe was that things seemed to move a little too fast and I found myself having to go back a chapter or two to understand the connection between certain characters or events. Sean is aided in his mission by a British official: Isabel. I found her quite annoying, her mannerisms were cloying and a little one-dimensional. And the relationship which blossoms between Sean and Isabel seemed a little hasty, it certainly put the question of Sean's grief regarding his wife to bed rather conveniently.
It's clear that Laurence is extremely fond of Istanbul, his descriptions of the city, the people, the ambience is very clear and lucid. I think without these descriptions, the novel would have suffered, especially as the narrative around Alek's discovery is steeped in religious and cultural discourse. Both what is discovered and the implications for the Christian and Islamic worlds are huge, so the setting helps to calm the reader from overthinking about the ramifications.
After their return to London from Istanbul, I found that my apprehension regarding any potential for simplistic demonisations of Islam had largely disappeared. The real villain of the piece and his motivations for trying to launch an airborne plague which could have squarely been blamed on Muslims attending a demonstration become clear. In a twitter exchange with Laurence, he remarked that his motivations for writing this book along with an article he wrote about Islam, the Crusades and the historical significance of Vladimir Dracula are purely based on his desire to expose those who seek to cause trouble and who want to make things worse. And I have to agree, interestingly I took from the villainry of the Istanbul Puzzle, the right wing demagogues in American politics and their embeddedness with the Tea Party movement and obstructions to attempts to seek peace within American domestic politics and abroad. There are certainly trouble-makers who come in all different shapes and sizes and are motivated by different agendas. It would be foolhardy to take a piece of well-written fiction as evidence of being for or against something, if we strip away the wider gloabl context of radicalised Islam and the threat this presents to everyone (including non-radical Islam), then the Istanbul Puzzle stands on its own two feet as a good thriller. Considered in the context of radicalised Islam however and recent geopolitics, then we would have to be careful that dogma does not take over rational thought.
I have read some other reviews comparing or at least hinting at the similarity of style between The Istanbul Puzzle and Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. I think that would be an unfair comparison, as the "believeability" of the Istanbul Puzzle is far higher than the Da Vinci Code. The Istanbul Puzzle, thanks to the skill of Laurence is also not as controversial as the Da Vinci Code. When you consider their writing skills, you being to realise how clunky and clumsy Dan Brown is, whereas Laurence is more subtle and nuanced. I do have a few criticisms which I think other readers will also pick up on, namely that the discovery of the mystery is not as climatic as I would have liked. Also I think Sean and Isabel's characters do need some refinement. Apart from that, as a debut thriller, the book is good.
A great thriller, a promising first in a series of The X Puzzle series ( I understand that Laurence is working on The Jerusalem Puzzle next).
For alternative reviews from Amazon bloggers, see here. I think Bibi's review is pretty strong.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/cdp/member-reviews/AIKG7TPNTLXV8/ref=cm_pdp_rev_title_3?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview#RCVFY1G98WLCF
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A2RDZYGFMVL87I/ref=cm_pdp_rev_title_1?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview#R3JB6X0VYDOEDR
No comments:
Post a Comment