Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.46 AVERAGE
3.46 AVERAGE
Hitler was collecting countries like stamps. How long before he had the full set? Transcription by Kate Atkinson
I was swept into Transcription, enthralled with Kate Atkinson's atmospheric and witty writing, the recreation of England during the rise of Hitler, and the espionage ring with its vivid characters and uncertain alliances.
The novel opens in 1950 with twenty-eight-year-old Juliet working in post-war London for the BBC.
"There was a better life somewhere, Juliet supposed, if only she could be bothered to find it." Transcription by Kate Atkinson
Julie fingers her necklace of pearls, which she admits she took off a dead woman who was heavier to lift than she looked. We learn that Julie tells lies to strangers. She sees a man she used to know by two names, who tells her "I think you have confused me with someone else." And in a local cafe, a strange man observes her "in a way that was extremely disconcerting." Julie reflects on her time with MI5 during the war ten years previous, when she was a transcriptionist typing recordings of traitorous conversations.
Juliet's life working for MI5 alternates between boredom and mystery. She is never completely filled in on the operations, merely does as she is told. She drifts along with whatever comes, even into a mock engagement with a coworker who shows no physical interest in her. She is given a fake identity as part of a sting operation. She is a natural liar and playactor.
The future of England at stake, with Fascists sympathizers and Communist sympathizers and loyal royalists endeavoring for the prize.
This England, is it worth fighting for? Transcription by Kate Atkinson
The novel ends with unexpected turns of events.
"It was all such a waste of breath. War and peace. Peace and war. It would go on forever without end." Transcription by Kate Atkinson
I am so happy to have finally read Atkinson. I can't wait to get a hold of her previous books.
I received a free ebook from the publisher through NetGalley in exchange for a fair and unbiased review.
I was swept into Transcription, enthralled with Kate Atkinson's atmospheric and witty writing, the recreation of England during the rise of Hitler, and the espionage ring with its vivid characters and uncertain alliances.
The novel opens in 1950 with twenty-eight-year-old Juliet working in post-war London for the BBC.
"There was a better life somewhere, Juliet supposed, if only she could be bothered to find it." Transcription by Kate Atkinson
Julie fingers her necklace of pearls, which she admits she took off a dead woman who was heavier to lift than she looked. We learn that Julie tells lies to strangers. She sees a man she used to know by two names, who tells her "I think you have confused me with someone else." And in a local cafe, a strange man observes her "in a way that was extremely disconcerting." Julie reflects on her time with MI5 during the war ten years previous, when she was a transcriptionist typing recordings of traitorous conversations.
Juliet's life working for MI5 alternates between boredom and mystery. She is never completely filled in on the operations, merely does as she is told. She drifts along with whatever comes, even into a mock engagement with a coworker who shows no physical interest in her. She is given a fake identity as part of a sting operation. She is a natural liar and playactor.
The future of England at stake, with Fascists sympathizers and Communist sympathizers and loyal royalists endeavoring for the prize.
This England, is it worth fighting for? Transcription by Kate Atkinson
The novel ends with unexpected turns of events.
"It was all such a waste of breath. War and peace. Peace and war. It would go on forever without end." Transcription by Kate Atkinson
I am so happy to have finally read Atkinson. I can't wait to get a hold of her previous books.
I received a free ebook from the publisher through NetGalley in exchange for a fair and unbiased review.
Wederom een prachtig boek van Kate Atkinson (Life after life staat heel hoog in mijn lijstje beste boeken). Er wordt wat minder met de tijd gespeeld dan in dat boek, maar met hoofdstukken '1981', '1950', '1940', '1950', etc wordt het hele verhaal mooi vormgegeven. Sommige hoofdstukken verwijzen naar dingen die eerder zijn gebeurd, maar later worden beschreven, en sommigen eindigen met een echte cliffhanger (waarna de tijd weer naar het heden vooruit schiet). Plot: spionnen, tweede wereldoorlog, BBC, en uiteindelijk toch een fijn onverwachte plotwending (en veel zinnen tussen haakjes)
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Loveable characters:
Yes
Original story line but at times it dragged a bit. Still, it was better than a three star so I am being generous with a four.
funny
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Found myself think of it when I wasn't reading. Quite good.
English spy novel with so many references (Shakespeare, Scarlet Pimpernel, Chekhov, Kipling, Clue, etc.). Charming.
3.5 / 5.0
This book reminded me a lot of a Johh Le Carre (JLC) novel. It's an admittedly facile comparison, based predominately on "Transcription" and most JLC book being about British Cold War spy craft. But it's also, in part, a comment on smaller elements of the novel. Both Atkinson and JLC seem to take pleasure in their characters' names (e.g., Peregrine Gibbons, Myles Merton, Godfrey Toby v. George Smiley, Peter Guilliam). And "Transcription," like a good JLC book, has glimpses of more than spy craft. Atkinson uses her protagonist, Juliet Armstrong, to demonstrate the deflation and depression perhaps felt after WWII. Juliet is, in 1950, generally indifferent to others, constantly in motion, and passively aware of her own sorrow ("How little it takes to make some people, Juliet thought. And how much it takes for others." 232). As we later learn, she's in somewhat of a bind--obligated to maintain her work as a mole, but no longer passionate about the ideology that originally inspired that decision. But, there's more to it than just that--she's continually mentioning, and mourning, the loss of those around her, both during the war (her colleague, Cyril; her friend, Clarissa; a fighter pilot she dated; Mrs. Scaifie's maid) and after (her colleague, Joan; Trude). Maybe "Transcription" is about reminding us of the violence of WWII at home, and its reaches into the years following the action.
I'd never read Atkinson before, and thought her writing in "Transcription" was mostly good. The reccuring "Can I tempt you?" was a clever device--initially used as a secret code, Atkinson uses the phrase throughout the novel, as a passing phrase to reengage the reader's attention. The book felt a little over written in parts; I found the somewhat frequent parentheticals--used by Atkinson to describe Juliet's thinking--a little cumbersome, perhaps filling in for a failure to more capably develop the character. (Although I did enjoy the following, silly, completely unnecessary one: "(What was an actuary? Juliet wondered. It sounded as if it belonged in a zoo, along with a cassowary and a dromedary.)" 221). And, in other parts, Atkinson seemed a little too self-aware, having characters refer to the events of the plot as though they were explicitly part of a fictional storyline: "Come now, quite enough of exposition and explanation. We're not approaching the end of a novel, Miss Armstrong." 318.
And I liked how low-level and banal the spy craft seemed to be. Juliet's visit to Betty, working as a waitress in Brighton, and to Trude, uncommunicative and dying alone in a hospital, seemed to underscore that point. In making the espionage of the novel so forgettable and small, Atkinson seemed to be possibly highlighting the sadness and frivolity of it.
There's a big twist in the last 20 pages--Juliet is revealed to be a mole (along with Myles Merton, Oliver Alleyne, and perhaps others), working for the Russians. Since the novel is written from Juliet's perspective, this twist is doubly surprising--as the reader, we feel privy to Juliet's knowledge and motives, and our ignorance of her true identity is unexpected (i.e., she knows more than she tells us, the reader). I imagine some readers will find the twist to be frustrating (it's pretty difficult to predict) and lazily done (Atkinson, instead of answering all our questions, has Juliet ask them herself (e.g., whether Godfrey Toby was also a mole) and leave unanswered). I didn't really mind that, too much; I thought it was an interesting plot decision, although I wish she'd developed it a bit more. I did, however, dislike the ending in 1981 England--Atkinson seems to, in the span of a half page, kill off Juliet (she takes steps "down the long dark tunnel," and doesn't respond to people seeing if she's alright). I'm not really sure what the reader gains by killing off the protagonist in the last page--it felt like Atkinson was just trying to end the book as quickly and simply as she could.
This book reminded me a lot of a Johh Le Carre (JLC) novel. It's an admittedly facile comparison, based predominately on "Transcription" and most JLC book being about British Cold War spy craft. But it's also, in part, a comment on smaller elements of the novel. Both Atkinson and JLC seem to take pleasure in their characters' names (e.g., Peregrine Gibbons, Myles Merton, Godfrey Toby v. George Smiley, Peter Guilliam). And "Transcription," like a good JLC book, has glimpses of more than spy craft. Atkinson uses her protagonist, Juliet Armstrong, to demonstrate the deflation and depression perhaps felt after WWII. Juliet is, in 1950, generally indifferent to others, constantly in motion, and passively aware of her own sorrow ("How little it takes to make some people, Juliet thought. And how much it takes for others." 232). As we later learn, she's in somewhat of a bind--obligated to maintain her work as a mole, but no longer passionate about the ideology that originally inspired that decision. But, there's more to it than just that--she's continually mentioning, and mourning, the loss of those around her, both during the war (her colleague, Cyril; her friend, Clarissa; a fighter pilot she dated; Mrs. Scaifie's maid) and after (her colleague, Joan; Trude). Maybe "Transcription" is about reminding us of the violence of WWII at home, and its reaches into the years following the action.
I'd never read Atkinson before, and thought her writing in "Transcription" was mostly good. The reccuring "Can I tempt you?" was a clever device--initially used as a secret code, Atkinson uses the phrase throughout the novel, as a passing phrase to reengage the reader's attention. The book felt a little over written in parts; I found the somewhat frequent parentheticals--used by Atkinson to describe Juliet's thinking--a little cumbersome, perhaps filling in for a failure to more capably develop the character. (Although I did enjoy the following, silly, completely unnecessary one: "(What was an actuary? Juliet wondered. It sounded as if it belonged in a zoo, along with a cassowary and a dromedary.)" 221). And, in other parts, Atkinson seemed a little too self-aware, having characters refer to the events of the plot as though they were explicitly part of a fictional storyline: "Come now, quite enough of exposition and explanation. We're not approaching the end of a novel, Miss Armstrong." 318.
And I liked how low-level and banal the spy craft seemed to be. Juliet's visit to Betty, working as a waitress in Brighton, and to Trude, uncommunicative and dying alone in a hospital, seemed to underscore that point. In making the espionage of the novel so forgettable and small, Atkinson seemed to be possibly highlighting the sadness and frivolity of it.
There's a big twist in the last 20 pages--Juliet is revealed to be a mole (along with Myles Merton, Oliver Alleyne, and perhaps others), working for the Russians. Since the novel is written from Juliet's perspective, this twist is doubly surprising--as the reader, we feel privy to Juliet's knowledge and motives, and our ignorance of her true identity is unexpected (i.e., she knows more than she tells us, the reader). I imagine some readers will find the twist to be frustrating (it's pretty difficult to predict) and lazily done (Atkinson, instead of answering all our questions, has Juliet ask them herself (e.g., whether Godfrey Toby was also a mole) and leave unanswered). I didn't really mind that, too much; I thought it was an interesting plot decision, although I wish she'd developed it a bit more. I did, however, dislike the ending in 1981 England--Atkinson seems to, in the span of a half page, kill off Juliet (she takes steps "down the long dark tunnel," and doesn't respond to people seeing if she's alright). I'm not really sure what the reader gains by killing off the protagonist in the last page--it felt like Atkinson was just trying to end the book as quickly and simply as she could.
adventurous
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
A probably quite realistic 1940s spy novel with an interesting but also frustrating female main character
I really enjoyed this book. The enjoyment was enhanced by the reader of the audiobook with a British accent. There is some jumping back and forth that made it important to pay attention- thank goodness for the rewind feature.