You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
heritage 's review for:
Liberation Movements
by Olen Steinhauer
A plane bound for Istanbul is hijacked by Armenian terrorists, but it doesn't go according to plan. The ensuing investigation uncovers a very dark operation that's been a little too successful over the years.
Set in 1975 in a fictional, Eastern European country which the author describes as "the intersection of Poland, Slovakia, Ukraine, Hungary, and Romania", this novel has two noticeable features: a complex plot and an unusual structure. The complicated plot is almost a given considering it's an espionage novel. However, like most plot-driven novels, it comes at the expense of character and narrative style. While we get a lot of back-story and exposition, it doesn't feel like character-building in the literary sense--just the basics to keep everything moving forward.
The structure is a bit of a head-scratcher. It is a multi-point-of-view novel. The novel starts with a first-person, present-tense narrative about a Militia officer boarding the fateful plane for a conference in Istanbul. The main point of view is a third-person, past-tense account concerning one of the investigators of the aforementioned hijacking. A secondary point of view is also a third-person, past-tense narrative set in 1968 and concerns a young man struggling with his political and personal ideals. A third point of view is a first-person, present-tense narrative set about a week after the hijacking concerning another Militia officer, who just also happens to figure into the hijacking investigation in the main narrative. All of this structure serves to take crucial plot elements and conceal them from and reveal them to the reader. And, as can be imagined, it's all rather forced and not exactly playing fair with the reader. The big cheat comes close to the end with a final, first-person, present-tense narrative from a completely new point-of-view character which would have cleared up much of the mystery if the novel had just been from this point of view all along. Convenient for the writer that it wasn't, otherwise it would have been a much shorter novel than it already is.
That's not to say the structure doesn't have a purpose. In a postmodern sort of way, that last point of view gets across a writer's struggle when arranging any complex plot: there are always some things you can never fully account for, no matter how hard you try to take everything into consideration. And, if the plot seems a little incredulous, remember that it, too, is part of the postmodern slant to this novel. Now the reader knows what it's like being an intelligence officer, having to piece things together and weigh the information and current thinking of the times when evaluating a story. Still, I think these little points will be lost on most readers, and the ones who may appreciate them will be disappointed with the rest of the novel.
It's a quick read, and a bit of a distraction from the everyday, but it doesn't seem destined to garner much of a following. And, it doesn't have as much emphasis on atmosphere as his previous ones. Not good enough to wholeheartedly endorse, but worth the effort if you've already read the preceding three novels in the author's Yalta Boulevard Sequence.
Set in 1975 in a fictional, Eastern European country which the author describes as "the intersection of Poland, Slovakia, Ukraine, Hungary, and Romania", this novel has two noticeable features: a complex plot and an unusual structure. The complicated plot is almost a given considering it's an espionage novel. However, like most plot-driven novels, it comes at the expense of character and narrative style. While we get a lot of back-story and exposition, it doesn't feel like character-building in the literary sense--just the basics to keep everything moving forward.
The structure is a bit of a head-scratcher. It is a multi-point-of-view novel. The novel starts with a first-person, present-tense narrative about a Militia officer boarding the fateful plane for a conference in Istanbul. The main point of view is a third-person, past-tense account concerning one of the investigators of the aforementioned hijacking. A secondary point of view is also a third-person, past-tense narrative set in 1968 and concerns a young man struggling with his political and personal ideals. A third point of view is a first-person, present-tense narrative set about a week after the hijacking concerning another Militia officer, who just also happens to figure into the hijacking investigation in the main narrative. All of this structure serves to take crucial plot elements and conceal them from and reveal them to the reader. And, as can be imagined, it's all rather forced and not exactly playing fair with the reader. The big cheat comes close to the end with a final, first-person, present-tense narrative from a completely new point-of-view character which would have cleared up much of the mystery if the novel had just been from this point of view all along. Convenient for the writer that it wasn't, otherwise it would have been a much shorter novel than it already is.
That's not to say the structure doesn't have a purpose. In a postmodern sort of way, that last point of view gets across a writer's struggle when arranging any complex plot: there are always some things you can never fully account for, no matter how hard you try to take everything into consideration. And, if the plot seems a little incredulous, remember that it, too, is part of the postmodern slant to this novel. Now the reader knows what it's like being an intelligence officer, having to piece things together and weigh the information and current thinking of the times when evaluating a story. Still, I think these little points will be lost on most readers, and the ones who may appreciate them will be disappointed with the rest of the novel.
It's a quick read, and a bit of a distraction from the everyday, but it doesn't seem destined to garner much of a following. And, it doesn't have as much emphasis on atmosphere as his previous ones. Not good enough to wholeheartedly endorse, but worth the effort if you've already read the preceding three novels in the author's Yalta Boulevard Sequence.