Take a photo of a barcode or cover
essinink 's review for:
The Bourne Identity
by Robert Ludlum
3.5 Stars, rounding up because that's what I do for Robert Ludlum. Or, at least it's what I do for Bourne.
The Bourne Identity marked the beginning of an entire era of my reading habits. After reading it early in highschool (freshman or sophomore year) on the recommendation of a friend, I think I ended up reading almost every book Ludlum had ever written. Of course, if pressed to describe these books today, I'm forced to admit they tended to blur together.
Except Bourne.
The Bourne Trilogy has been on my guilt shelf of "I'll reread these someday" since I read them the first time around, and "Someday" turns out to mean "2018."
If it's not quite as well written as I remember, it's still not bad. The first part is the hardest reading, and that mostly due to the contrivances surrounding the 'total amnesiac' trope. The writing rapidly improved once some basic facts were established.
Ludlum excells at bureaucratic intrigue, stepping away from our protagonist's limited view to draw back the curtain for the reader, drip-feeding information until the pieces fall together in the last act.
Our overt antagonist is Carlos (Ludlum's fictionalized interpretation of the real-world Ilich Ramirez Sanchez), a world-class assassin with a fearsome network. Pitted against him, but not knowing why, is the titutular Bourne. Also against Bourne are his unknown (to him) employers. His only ally is a woman he abducts in the early part of the book.
If I had to pick one thing that made Bourne stick with me so long, it's the realism. No, not the tired amnesia trope, but things like the way our protagonist's leg cramps at an awkward moment while he's trying to get Intel. Things like that, coupled with the larger framework the reader is permitted to see, stand out in a genre dominated by seemingly-ageless superspy action heroes.
But it's not perfect, and some of what I think is forgiveable, others might not.
Things I did not like:
First, the character Marie is 100% plot device. She functions as hostage, advocate, and love interest for our amnesiac hero, and displays a frankly ridiculous level of confirmation bias when it comes to her opinions. That said, most characters in this book have problems with confirmation bias, so I suppose there can be forgiveness for the last bit. (Ludlum also lampshades the improbability of Marie's assistance through another character, so at least he was aware of it.)
Second, Amnesia doesn't work like this, but we're all used to the trope at this point, so I guess I have to swallow it. It was much easier when I was 14-15 than it is today.
Am I rounding up on nostalgia? Unashamedly yes. That said, this is still an excellent installment in its genre, and I'm happy to recommend it for that audience.
The Bourne Identity marked the beginning of an entire era of my reading habits. After reading it early in highschool (freshman or sophomore year) on the recommendation of a friend, I think I ended up reading almost every book Ludlum had ever written. Of course, if pressed to describe these books today, I'm forced to admit they tended to blur together.
Except Bourne.
The Bourne Trilogy has been on my guilt shelf of "I'll reread these someday" since I read them the first time around, and "Someday" turns out to mean "2018."
If it's not quite as well written as I remember, it's still not bad. The first part is the hardest reading, and that mostly due to the contrivances surrounding the 'total amnesiac' trope. The writing rapidly improved once some basic facts were established.
Ludlum excells at bureaucratic intrigue, stepping away from our protagonist's limited view to draw back the curtain for the reader, drip-feeding information until the pieces fall together in the last act.
Our overt antagonist is Carlos (Ludlum's fictionalized interpretation of the real-world Ilich Ramirez Sanchez), a world-class assassin with a fearsome network. Pitted against him, but not knowing why, is the titutular Bourne. Also against Bourne are his unknown (to him) employers. His only ally is a woman he abducts in the early part of the book.
If I had to pick one thing that made Bourne stick with me so long, it's the realism. No, not the tired amnesia trope, but things like the way our protagonist's leg cramps at an awkward moment while he's trying to get Intel. Things like that, coupled with the larger framework the reader is permitted to see, stand out in a genre dominated by seemingly-ageless superspy action heroes.
But it's not perfect, and some of what I think is forgiveable, others might not.
Things I did not like:
First, the character Marie is 100% plot device. She functions as hostage, advocate, and love interest for our amnesiac hero, and displays a frankly ridiculous level of confirmation bias when it comes to her opinions. That said, most characters in this book have problems with confirmation bias, so I suppose there can be forgiveness for the last bit. (Ludlum also lampshades the improbability of Marie's assistance through another character, so at least he was aware of it.)
Second, Amnesia doesn't work like this, but we're all used to the trope at this point, so I guess I have to swallow it. It was much easier when I was 14-15 than it is today.
Am I rounding up on nostalgia? Unashamedly yes. That said, this is still an excellent installment in its genre, and I'm happy to recommend it for that audience.