Ron Freeman
Autore di The Titanic Plan
Opere di Ron Freeman
Etichette
Informazioni generali
Non ci sono ancora dati nella Conoscenza comune per questo autore. Puoi aiutarci.
Utenti
Recensioni
Statistiche
- Opere
- 4
- Utenti
- 44
- Popolarità
- #346,250
- Voto
- 3.5
- Recensioni
- 2
- ISBN
- 8
I must begin by disputing the choice of title. This is NOT about the Titanic! Yes, the tragic incident features as the climax of the novel, and in the hands of a more experienced author we might have had a genuinely insightful version of the events surrounding that terrible event. It seems to me that the author has simply made an opportunity out of the sinking of that ship to help promote his book. Using the word ‘Titanic’ in the title, together with a cover image depicting a four-funnelled liner at sea, does hold promise that this will be a story exploring the background to that terrible maritime event. Given that the main character is Archie Butt, a real figure who was genuinely a victim of that disaster, and that other characters include J. Pierpoint Morgan and John Jacob Astor, then I was understandably anticipating a well-constructed imagining of a plot to sink the Titanic that was the culmination of political manoeuvring within the elite of American high society.
Don’t get me wrong – there is plenty of political intrigue in the bulk of this novel to satisfy those of us with a penchant for historical machinations of that sort, but the actual methodology of setting the scene to prove that the Titanic sinking was not an accident is completely absent! I don’t think it would be classed as a plot-spoiler to say that an incident where someone places a bag of dynamite in a cargo hold (which then gets discovered and thrown overboard) constitutes evidence of a successful plot to sink the ship. And yet the unfortunate MD of the White Star Line, J. Bruce Ismay, who famously joined the women and children in a lifeboat, is depicted as a serious villain, hand-in-glove with those plotting against our hero. This is a major ask for the reader to accept, with the explanation for the incident being hinted at as a political expedient by the author. Sorry, but I can only see this as a cop-out: a missed opportunity to deliver a reasoned and rational argument for powerful men to commit dreadful acts in the pursuit of both corporate and personal gain.
To be fair, this is a book that has been written about American history by an American. I’m from Britain and so the historical aspects of this novel were largely lost on me. On the other hand, I admired the author’s subtle layering of elements of the plot in the first half of the book. I did begin to appreciate the personalities of the era, and to understand how divisions in class at the beginning of the twentieth century had some common elements in British history. All of this was commendable, and the fictional strands that brought intrigue and mystery to drive the story forward were well-placed. At times I did feel that the author had possibly gone into too much detail, slowing down the story, and losing the impetus as a result. His main character of Archie Butt was also a little too ineffectual at times, but this may have been a deliberate contrast to give him a little more glorification at the end. Sadly, I did not feel much sympathy for the character as a result, and that, together with a storyline that seemed to be wading through treacle for so long, tended to make me wonder where the author was taking us. In my view the book is too long, and would have benefitted from some serious trimming.
Finally, I must concur with another reviewer and highlight a big irritation of mine when reading: typos. This (Kindle edition) book is littered with them! For example, we had ‘foreword’ instead of ‘forward’ and ‘earthy’ instead of ‘earthly’. This alters the meaning of words completely, thus making the reader stop and re-think the sentence. Missing words, mis-placed words, and odd punctuation all combine to present a document that looked as if it had completely escaped the proof-reader. Letting your manuscript be published to such a poor standard is an insult to the reader, and reflects badly on the author. Also, the iceberg... Yes, THAT iceberg! It is described as ‘towering some 55 feet over the ocean’. That may or may not be a typographical error, but it doesn’t come across as much of a threat, especially when the author later describes the lifeboats being lowered to the water ‘a good 75 feet below.’ You do the math! Research is important, and when you want your reader to lose him or herself in the spectacle of the moment, you also need to get the scale correct. Not the right sort of first impression, Mr Bockman!
So, for me, it was disappointing. The biggest plus has to be that the author has written intelligently about an important period in American history that makes for a far more interesting read than a book of non-fiction. By doing so he has helped to widen our interests, and to encourage discussion. Such a result is to be commended, and I thank the author for that.
… (altro)