Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.46 AVERAGE
3.46 AVERAGE
I had to read another Atkinson to rid myself of the foul taste of the Jackson Brodie novels. This did the trick. Spies, double agents, and general good fun.
I was sad that this was a total disappointment for me! Atkinson's Life After Life was one of my favorite books the year it came out, but looking back I wasn't wild about A God in Ruins, so maybe LAL was the outlier for me. Anyway, the story of Transcription was just ok, and the plot really dragged for much of it. I'd heard there was a good twist at the end, which kept me going, but that was a bit of a letdown too, especially in the context of a war. I found the male characters oddly hard to keep track of, maybe partially due to their secretive natures, and I'm pretty sure I missed the significance of the "flamingo," although it was interesting to see that side of the war as well.
I did find some of the narrator's asides funny, although they lost their sparkle with repetition. My favorite part was when the book captured moments of the war when it looked probable Britain would be invaded, which is not something I think about often.
I did find some of the narrator's asides funny, although they lost their sparkle with repetition. My favorite part was when the book captured moments of the war when it looked probable Britain would be invaded, which is not something I think about often.
Transcription is one of those books that you maybe do not want to put away. Much of that is probably because of Kate Atkinson's style of writing, which felt like an invitation to read on a little bit longer. I liked the plot and enjoyed the subtlety in it, however the ending left me a little bit disappointed, which is why I gave 4 out of 5 points.
I began the book as a recommendation, and one that i am very glad for! Kate Atkinson is a superb author, and Transcription is a superb work!
Juliet Armstrong, a naive young girl; fresh and idealistic, is recruited to be a spy! No! A stenographer of sorts. She diligently transcribes intelligence stolen from the Fifth Column. Surrounded by a group of men that seem to want her for something (And no, not her womanhood, which she is rather serious about at least one of them taking seriously!), and forces that should get her down seem to be warded off. Who is protecting her? Who wants her? And for what?
Juliet's first foray, and the brilliant success she has, as a spy does seem to go to her head, and while the reader isn't looking she has been taken control of by more than one influence. Constantly 'My girl', but never leaving you to feel that they are more than Her Men...
Written in beautiful layers, with no awkward juxtaposition as one threads into the other, and times melt into each other. The final stages become faster, as the true plot is revealed and you almost read over it in your own bemusement! Juliet's own panic and confusion become your own.
And Her Men. Godfrey into his mist, and Perry's words her last.
I appreciate the spirit in which it was written. Bits and bobs of information get declassified and Atkinson thinks "that'll make an excellent story!" Names changed and the intelligence treated as paint on a smooth canvas, roughening only when further, wilder brushstrokes are applied. Her thorough research really pulled me in: from the steps and side doors of the Brompton Oratory at which I've stood, to Dolphin Place which you can Google and into which you can clearly see the story unfolding! And even to Manchester, of fond memory to me.
Unfortunately it was handed to me: a slow reader at the best of times! And so the next time I pick up a Kate Atkinson it will be when I know that there will be no new job rush, no Christmas season prep, sunny summer afternoons, and a well stocked fridge.
February!
Juliet Armstrong, a naive young girl; fresh and idealistic, is recruited to be a spy! No! A stenographer of sorts. She diligently transcribes intelligence stolen from the Fifth Column. Surrounded by a group of men that seem to want her for something (And no, not her womanhood, which she is rather serious about at least one of them taking seriously!), and forces that should get her down seem to be warded off. Who is protecting her? Who wants her? And for what?
Juliet's first foray, and the brilliant success she has, as a spy does seem to go to her head, and while the reader isn't looking she has been taken control of by more than one influence. Constantly 'My girl', but never leaving you to feel that they are more than Her Men...
Written in beautiful layers, with no awkward juxtaposition as one threads into the other, and times melt into each other. The final stages become faster, as the true plot is revealed and you almost read over it in your own bemusement! Juliet's own panic and confusion become your own.
And Her Men. Godfrey into his mist, and Perry's words her last.
I appreciate the spirit in which it was written. Bits and bobs of information get declassified and Atkinson thinks "that'll make an excellent story!" Names changed and the intelligence treated as paint on a smooth canvas, roughening only when further, wilder brushstrokes are applied. Her thorough research really pulled me in: from the steps and side doors of the Brompton Oratory at which I've stood, to Dolphin Place which you can Google and into which you can clearly see the story unfolding! And even to Manchester, of fond memory to me.
Unfortunately it was handed to me: a slow reader at the best of times! And so the next time I pick up a Kate Atkinson it will be when I know that there will be no new job rush, no Christmas season prep, sunny summer afternoons, and a well stocked fridge.
February!
adventurous
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Oooh, it pains me to give Kate a 2. Now part of this is probably my fault, when I heard she was writing a book about WW2 espionage I was expecting a nice long meaty saga, so my disappointment began at seeing how short this was. I wonder if I had read it without any prior expectations it would have made a difference, I don't know. It was of course, full of bright and sparkly writing, often very funny. But I just had trouble connecting with both the story and the characters, (although I did sort of like Juliet). I found some of the male characters to be so similar I got them mixed up. In fact I frequently went back and reread because I was confused and figured I'd missed something. Which happens when I am slightly bored and tending to skim a little. Which is terrible, its Kate, who I love. So I am going to put this on the shelf, leave it alone for awhile and attempt a reread at a later date.
I’d say this was more of a 3.5 for me because it came nowhere close to Life After Life but it was good. This took a while to really grab my attention, then held it for a nice long time, but the end felt disappointing somehow. I couldn’t understand much of the subterfuge at the end, although I’m also not as familiar with the history of the 50s as I am of WWII. And i felt like there were quite a bit of British-isms that I wasn’t picking up on the meaning of. Overall, though, I like the way Atkinson plays with time, information, and language.
Just stab me in the eyes with a fork because that would have been more enjoyable than reading this book. I can’t for the life of me figure out why I let it consume over a month of my time. I don’t quit books, (I know I should) but I will going forward. The story is unbearably boring, the characters lifeless. The use of three separate timelines makes it way more difficult to follow then it need be and I could never tell the male characters apart. It just drags on, and on without ever accomplishing anything or peaking my interest. The premise is a great one and so much COULD have been done with it so it’s disappointing that this was the end product. Transcription was the worst book I have ever had the displeasure of reading and in all honesty I celebrated when I finished. Hopefully someday I can muster the courage to read another novel from Kate Atkinson’s because I hear they are quite good. But this one, was not for me.
I always love Atkinson's work, and though not my favorite of hers, this book had moments of language play that were wonderful.
Life After Life and its companion A God in Ruins are among my favourite novels, so I was anxious to read Atkinson’s latest book. Unfortunately, it proved not to be as masterly.
In 1940, 18-year-old Juliet Armstrong is recruited by the Secret Service. Her job is to transcribe recordings of meetings between British Nazi sympathizers and Godfrey Toby, a British spy posing as a Gestapo agent. Later, MI5 puts her out in the field, infiltrating another group of Hitler supporters. The novel then switches to 1950 when Juliet is a BBC producer, but her work during the war comes back to haunt her. She receives a note with a threat: “’You will pay for what you did’” (186). Who is threatening her and why does a former colleague refuse to admit knowing her?
The novel emphasizes how truth is lost in wartime. Juliet believes “that appearances were invariably deceptive” (188) and this belief is reinforced when she is told that “’The mark of a good agent is when you have no idea which side they’re on’” (116). Juliet lies easily when first interviewed for a position with Secret Security, but she is accepted anyway; her interviewer “knew everything about her – more than she knew herself – including every lie and half-truth she told him at the interview. It didn’t seem to matter. In fact, she suspected that it helped in a way” (37).
When first sent into the field and given a false identity, she is advised, “’And remember, if you’re going to tell a lie, tell a good one. . . . It can be a difficult concept, fabricating a life – the falsehoods and so on. Some people find it challenging to dissemble in this way.’” Juliet’s reaction is telling: “Not me, Juliet thought” (80). Looking back at the war, Juliet comments, “The war had made the world weary of facts” (178) because “People always said they wanted the truth, but really they were perfectly content with a facsimile” (185).
By the end of the war Juliet knows “she has moved away from [truth]” (19). The problem is that, after adopting so many identities during the war, she seems to have lost herself: “There had been other identities too, although she never owned up to them in public. And then there was Juliet Armstrong, of course, who some days seemed like the most fictitious of them all, despite being the ‘real’ Juliet. But then what constituted real? Wasn’t everything, even this life itself, just a game of deception” (259)?
One is left wondering how truthful Juliet is. There’s an episode with earrings that shows her to be untrustworthy. And ten years later, she continues to deceive. She admits to lying in her BBC interview and she destroys incriminating evidence to protect herself and a colleague: “It was not the first time she had destroyed evidence of wrong-doing and she supposed it wouldn’t be the last” (214). At the BBC, she rewrites children’s radio histories to enliven them, often leaving out details, so one cannot help but wonder if she is leaving out details about her life. Since her name is closely associated with a dramatic script, is Juliet playing a role? Of course, Juliet is not the only enigma. Juliet’s colleagues (Godfrey Toby, Peregrine Gibbons, Miles Merton) also remain largely unknown, as befits spies.
The problem is that it is difficult to emotionally connect with Juliet. At the beginning, she is so naïve. Her age explains her innocence, but surely she should have realized the truth about Perry much sooner. And throughout her wartime activity, she makes frivolous comments. She thinks of her role as an adventure, as she is told to do; though one incident makes her aware of the fatal consequences of her spying, her comments and interior dialogue suggest little true change in her attitude. Would someone having to clean up after a killing actually quote Shakespeare: “She would have to clean again. And Again. Out, damned spot” (284)? Something seems missing, perhaps some warmth in her personality? Juliet even refers to this: “The unfathomable hollow inside her would never be filled” (171) and “She sometimes wondered if there was some emptiness inside that she was trying to fill” (205).
There are wonderful touches of humour. Juliet’s thoughts during Perry’s courtship, for example, are hilarious. What is missing is tension; for a spy thriller there is little danger except in a couple of episodes. And because of the first chapter, the reader knows that Juliet survives. The pacing is also uneven; for long stretches, nothing happens. Though this shows spy work is often mundane, unlike what James Bond films might suggest, such plotting does little to maintain the reader’s interest.
The book has the literary allusions I love, quite a few surprises, and several layers: “’There can be many layers to a thing. Like the spectrum of light’” (312). Unfortunately, the book just didn’t resonate with me; it didn’t have the emotional impact of Atkinson’s other World War II novels. Juliet ends up feeling that people are often pawns in “someone else’s great game” (313) and in some ways I feel the reader is manipulated by how information is divulged and withheld. I do think, however, that I might re-read the book because, like Juliet misses and misconstrues details, I might also have done so. I guess I’d be a lousy spy!
Please check out my reader's blog (https://schatjesshelves.blogspot.com/) and follow me on Twitter (@DCYakabuski).
In 1940, 18-year-old Juliet Armstrong is recruited by the Secret Service. Her job is to transcribe recordings of meetings between British Nazi sympathizers and Godfrey Toby, a British spy posing as a Gestapo agent. Later, MI5 puts her out in the field, infiltrating another group of Hitler supporters. The novel then switches to 1950 when Juliet is a BBC producer, but her work during the war comes back to haunt her. She receives a note with a threat: “’You will pay for what you did’” (186). Who is threatening her and why does a former colleague refuse to admit knowing her?
The novel emphasizes how truth is lost in wartime. Juliet believes “that appearances were invariably deceptive” (188) and this belief is reinforced when she is told that “’The mark of a good agent is when you have no idea which side they’re on’” (116). Juliet lies easily when first interviewed for a position with Secret Security, but she is accepted anyway; her interviewer “knew everything about her – more than she knew herself – including every lie and half-truth she told him at the interview. It didn’t seem to matter. In fact, she suspected that it helped in a way” (37).
When first sent into the field and given a false identity, she is advised, “’And remember, if you’re going to tell a lie, tell a good one. . . . It can be a difficult concept, fabricating a life – the falsehoods and so on. Some people find it challenging to dissemble in this way.’” Juliet’s reaction is telling: “Not me, Juliet thought” (80). Looking back at the war, Juliet comments, “The war had made the world weary of facts” (178) because “People always said they wanted the truth, but really they were perfectly content with a facsimile” (185).
By the end of the war Juliet knows “she has moved away from [truth]” (19). The problem is that, after adopting so many identities during the war, she seems to have lost herself: “There had been other identities too, although she never owned up to them in public. And then there was Juliet Armstrong, of course, who some days seemed like the most fictitious of them all, despite being the ‘real’ Juliet. But then what constituted real? Wasn’t everything, even this life itself, just a game of deception” (259)?
One is left wondering how truthful Juliet is. There’s an episode with earrings that shows her to be untrustworthy. And ten years later, she continues to deceive. She admits to lying in her BBC interview and she destroys incriminating evidence to protect herself and a colleague: “It was not the first time she had destroyed evidence of wrong-doing and she supposed it wouldn’t be the last” (214). At the BBC, she rewrites children’s radio histories to enliven them, often leaving out details, so one cannot help but wonder if she is leaving out details about her life. Since her name is closely associated with a dramatic script, is Juliet playing a role? Of course, Juliet is not the only enigma. Juliet’s colleagues (Godfrey Toby, Peregrine Gibbons, Miles Merton) also remain largely unknown, as befits spies.
The problem is that it is difficult to emotionally connect with Juliet. At the beginning, she is so naïve. Her age explains her innocence, but surely she should have realized the truth about Perry much sooner. And throughout her wartime activity, she makes frivolous comments. She thinks of her role as an adventure, as she is told to do; though one incident makes her aware of the fatal consequences of her spying, her comments and interior dialogue suggest little true change in her attitude. Would someone having to clean up after a killing actually quote Shakespeare: “She would have to clean again. And Again. Out, damned spot” (284)? Something seems missing, perhaps some warmth in her personality? Juliet even refers to this: “The unfathomable hollow inside her would never be filled” (171) and “She sometimes wondered if there was some emptiness inside that she was trying to fill” (205).
There are wonderful touches of humour. Juliet’s thoughts during Perry’s courtship, for example, are hilarious. What is missing is tension; for a spy thriller there is little danger except in a couple of episodes. And because of the first chapter, the reader knows that Juliet survives. The pacing is also uneven; for long stretches, nothing happens. Though this shows spy work is often mundane, unlike what James Bond films might suggest, such plotting does little to maintain the reader’s interest.
The book has the literary allusions I love, quite a few surprises, and several layers: “’There can be many layers to a thing. Like the spectrum of light’” (312). Unfortunately, the book just didn’t resonate with me; it didn’t have the emotional impact of Atkinson’s other World War II novels. Juliet ends up feeling that people are often pawns in “someone else’s great game” (313) and in some ways I feel the reader is manipulated by how information is divulged and withheld. I do think, however, that I might re-read the book because, like Juliet misses and misconstrues details, I might also have done so. I guess I’d be a lousy spy!
Please check out my reader's blog (https://schatjesshelves.blogspot.com/) and follow me on Twitter (@DCYakabuski).