Scan barcode
tinabaich's review against another edition
4.0
The Trinity Six by Charles Cumming is a novel of espionage and intrigue. After the death of his friend Charlotte, Professor Sam Gaddis becomes embroiled in the search for the sixth Cambridge spy. The novel is based on the real-life Ring of Five, a group of British men who went to Cambridge University and were recruited as Soviet spies. They became known as the Magnificent Five. Suspicions regarding a sixth man are long-standing, and many have searched for him.
Gaddis’ search for the sixth man leads him to a Brit named Thomas Neame and then Russia, Germany, and Austria. British intelligence is onto him though and a female agent, Tanya Acocella, is assigned to get close to him and undermine his search. Tanya ends up being crucial to Gaddis’ survival.
I was fully engrossed in Gaddis’ journey and whether or not the story of Edward Crane, the supposed sixth man, would ever come out. I was on the edge of my seat wondering whether Sam Gaddis’ search would merely be stymied or if he would lose his life in the quest. Cumming constructed an excellent story with completely plausible twists and turns. If you are a fan of spy novels and suspense, I would definitely recommend The Trinity Six.
http://iubookgirl.blogspot.com/2011/03/review-trinity-six.html
Gaddis’ search for the sixth man leads him to a Brit named Thomas Neame and then Russia, Germany, and Austria. British intelligence is onto him though and a female agent, Tanya Acocella, is assigned to get close to him and undermine his search. Tanya ends up being crucial to Gaddis’ survival.
I was fully engrossed in Gaddis’ journey and whether or not the story of Edward Crane, the supposed sixth man, would ever come out. I was on the edge of my seat wondering whether Sam Gaddis’ search would merely be stymied or if he would lose his life in the quest. Cumming constructed an excellent story with completely plausible twists and turns. If you are a fan of spy novels and suspense, I would definitely recommend The Trinity Six.
http://iubookgirl.blogspot.com/2011/03/review-trinity-six.html
bookclubdropout's review against another edition
5.0
A cracking read, this spy thriller has shocks and twists aplenty in the search for a sixth member of the Cambridge spy ring
hellofred99's review against another edition
3.0
Goodness, I don't need to know every time somebody googles something
caitlinxmartin's review against another edition
2.0
I think my expectations were too high for this book. It sounded great from the blurb and I was excited when I got it via LibraryThing Early Reviewers so I read it right away, finished it, and thought, "meh."
I've never really been into espionage thrillers. When I was growing up it was mostly James Bond and I've always thought he was kind of a wanker. He's a misogynist psychopath paid to kill with a bunch of silly gadgets and fancy cars and the requisite bimbo. Even though Sean Connery is the best Bond ever, I still don't really like the character. Most other espionage thrillers are in a similar vein or they've got heroes like Jason Bourne who isn't really a hero, but rather a superhero. This is also a series where the movies are better than the books (which I can't get through).
So why was I excited about this book?
Well, it was compared to John le Carre's George Smiley books and it's about the possibly sixth member of the Trinity Five - a particularly fascinating group of men. I thought there'd be a bit more history in it since its main character is a professor of Russian history. Not so much.
Don't get me wrong - this book is well-written and probably an entertaining thriller if you like the victim of espionage side of things which I don't really. It's not a bad book - just not the book for me.
I've never really been into espionage thrillers. When I was growing up it was mostly James Bond and I've always thought he was kind of a wanker. He's a misogynist psychopath paid to kill with a bunch of silly gadgets and fancy cars and the requisite bimbo. Even though Sean Connery is the best Bond ever, I still don't really like the character. Most other espionage thrillers are in a similar vein or they've got heroes like Jason Bourne who isn't really a hero, but rather a superhero. This is also a series where the movies are better than the books (which I can't get through).
So why was I excited about this book?
Well, it was compared to John le Carre's George Smiley books and it's about the possibly sixth member of the Trinity Five - a particularly fascinating group of men. I thought there'd be a bit more history in it since its main character is a professor of Russian history. Not so much.
Don't get me wrong - this book is well-written and probably an entertaining thriller if you like the victim of espionage side of things which I don't really. It's not a bad book - just not the book for me.
rwlock's review against another edition
3.0
Sometimes hard to follow all the details, would likely be more enjoyable knowing and understanding the historical context. Decently interesting otherwise.
greggmpls's review against another edition
3.0
I won this book in a Goodreads First Reads Giveaway. Thanks!
While this was a quick and pretty enjoyable read, there really isn't anything groundbreaking or earth shattering in the story. To me, this was something of a reworked Odessa File with some The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, and a bit of The Janus Man thrown into the mix.
If you like Cold War and Post-Cold War spy novels, you will probably be entertained by this.
While this was a quick and pretty enjoyable read, there really isn't anything groundbreaking or earth shattering in the story. To me, this was something of a reworked Odessa File with some The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, and a bit of The Janus Man thrown into the mix.
If you like Cold War and Post-Cold War spy novels, you will probably be entertained by this.
emmkayt's review against another edition
4.0
Tautly written British spy yarn. Convenient coincidences and thinly written women aside, this was very well done and hard to put down. I'd definitely look for more by Cumming on the strength of this one.
speesh's review against another edition
3.0
Anyone who is in any way interested in spies, spying and the world of espionage in general, has surely read at least one of John le Carré's genre defining classics. Not the later gardening and Panama nonsense, but the unforgettable Cold War, 'Smiley' intrigues.
Especially if you're English, that is.
And if you are lucky enough to be English and of a certain age, then you probably already have the whole '30's Cambridge spy ring, the old boy network running the country from their hushed, mahogany and teak Club in The City, the Cold War and the whole East vs West thing as a big game, already with you when you read a book like this. You don't need the spy world explained to you again from scratch. You know what a 'dead letter-box' is, you know what 'tradecraft', 'Moscow Centre' and 'C' are. The author can, with a nod and a wink and relatively few words, have you with him and get on with other things. You understand the world he is writing about and what I can well imagine would seem a rather unbelievable, class-ridden, privileged, strange world - makes perfect sense.
(However, that could be surely be why a non-middle-aged, non-English person would get nothing from, for example, the recent (poor) 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy' re-adaption. My Danish wife, for example).
But one big problem the way I see it, is like this: How much is fact and how much is John le Carré fiction become fact in our collective recollection? I can imagine that it might also be a problem for any new authors wanting to write a novel set in this world: Do you write about actual institutions, actual events and run the risk that no one believes the world you're describing, or do you use some of le Carré's inventions, base your fiction on fiction and have your readers assume you're writing about the truth.
Basically what I mean is, that all novels written into this particular period of the spy genre, surely have to be compared in some way or another, with the world le Carré created. How they stand up to that comparison is, unfortunately, how we then rate them. "It's good, but it's not as good as le Carré." "It's better than le Carré." "It's unrealistic (doesn't use le Carre's world)" That kind of thing. Maybe.
Whatever your opinions or experience of le Carré and the spy genre, it's well worth giving Charles Cummings' 'Trinity Six' a go. it won't disappoint. It is set in the recent past, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, but is actually all about the present day repercussions from events that took place over the eighty years up until the fall of Communism. A middle-aged, recently separated from his wife academic, a lecturer in Russian affairs and part-time writer, gets dragged into present day intrigues and puts himself unknowingly in danger by getting himself caught up in other, old spy games. We travel around in Europe (surely a little less exciting since the fall of the Berlin Wall?) and we meet a variety of nice, not so nice and not so sure if they're nice, characters. There are young spies, middle-aged spies and un-reformed old Cambridge spies. It's very nearly bang up-to-date, technology-wise, but with enough links back to the good old spying glory days, to satisfy those still missing decent books about the Cold War - me, for instance. It's nicely paced and focussed, it doesn't dash unnecessarily about all over the place, it stays believable and has some decent twists, turns and revelations. Of course, the ordinary person caught up in an extraordinary world the don't understand, is nothing new, but the intrigue is genuine and there's some nice moments of suspense and uncertainty.
'Trinity Six' is a good, enjoyable read which often feels like an Alan Furst, (obviously set today rather than between the wars). That's absolutely ok with me. For those of us who have read le Carré's spy books, there's no avoiding the fact that it's not quite be up there with the Master's best. But if you haven't read le Carré, you may actually be the lucky ones and so 'Trinity Six' is an excellent entré to the mirror world of British old-school espionage.
Especially if you're English, that is.
And if you are lucky enough to be English and of a certain age, then you probably already have the whole '30's Cambridge spy ring, the old boy network running the country from their hushed, mahogany and teak Club in The City, the Cold War and the whole East vs West thing as a big game, already with you when you read a book like this. You don't need the spy world explained to you again from scratch. You know what a 'dead letter-box' is, you know what 'tradecraft', 'Moscow Centre' and 'C' are. The author can, with a nod and a wink and relatively few words, have you with him and get on with other things. You understand the world he is writing about and what I can well imagine would seem a rather unbelievable, class-ridden, privileged, strange world - makes perfect sense.
(However, that could be surely be why a non-middle-aged, non-English person would get nothing from, for example, the recent (poor) 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy' re-adaption. My Danish wife, for example).
But one big problem the way I see it, is like this: How much is fact and how much is John le Carré fiction become fact in our collective recollection? I can imagine that it might also be a problem for any new authors wanting to write a novel set in this world: Do you write about actual institutions, actual events and run the risk that no one believes the world you're describing, or do you use some of le Carré's inventions, base your fiction on fiction and have your readers assume you're writing about the truth.
Basically what I mean is, that all novels written into this particular period of the spy genre, surely have to be compared in some way or another, with the world le Carré created. How they stand up to that comparison is, unfortunately, how we then rate them. "It's good, but it's not as good as le Carré." "It's better than le Carré." "It's unrealistic (doesn't use le Carre's world)" That kind of thing. Maybe.
Whatever your opinions or experience of le Carré and the spy genre, it's well worth giving Charles Cummings' 'Trinity Six' a go. it won't disappoint. It is set in the recent past, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, but is actually all about the present day repercussions from events that took place over the eighty years up until the fall of Communism. A middle-aged, recently separated from his wife academic, a lecturer in Russian affairs and part-time writer, gets dragged into present day intrigues and puts himself unknowingly in danger by getting himself caught up in other, old spy games. We travel around in Europe (surely a little less exciting since the fall of the Berlin Wall?) and we meet a variety of nice, not so nice and not so sure if they're nice, characters. There are young spies, middle-aged spies and un-reformed old Cambridge spies. It's very nearly bang up-to-date, technology-wise, but with enough links back to the good old spying glory days, to satisfy those still missing decent books about the Cold War - me, for instance. It's nicely paced and focussed, it doesn't dash unnecessarily about all over the place, it stays believable and has some decent twists, turns and revelations. Of course, the ordinary person caught up in an extraordinary world the don't understand, is nothing new, but the intrigue is genuine and there's some nice moments of suspense and uncertainty.
'Trinity Six' is a good, enjoyable read which often feels like an Alan Furst, (obviously set today rather than between the wars). That's absolutely ok with me. For those of us who have read le Carré's spy books, there's no avoiding the fact that it's not quite be up there with the Master's best. But if you haven't read le Carré, you may actually be the lucky ones and so 'Trinity Six' is an excellent entré to the mirror world of British old-school espionage.
robchilver's review against another edition
4.0
I gave up in the end. Far too slow and plodding and the 'reveals' of the twists were too obvious and poorly handed. A shame.