This was my American Eye column (or in this case, Middle Eastern Eye) for Shots magazine number 10.
The link that once led to it leads now to nothing but an error message, so I've reprinted it here:
THE WAR WITH NO PEACE
It's unlikely there's a more
intractable geo-political problem, at least on this planet, than that of Israel and Palestine. Not only is it a tragedy of epic
proportions within its own lands, but it is a root motivator of much
of the extremism that sees itself transformed into terror around the
world. It is a conflict which forces the United States government
into positions that may flow contrary to its overall best interests,
and sometimes contradict much of its stated foreign policy goals. It
is also such a tinder box issue in America that it takes a certain
amount of courage simply to approach it in a balanced way.
It is surprising how few writers who
operate in the espionage genre have delved into the issue itself,
which is why two recent novels by very different sorts of novelists
are so fascinating to compare. Actually, that one of those two
should be Robert Littell is no surprise at all. Littell is one of
America's very best spy novelists: one of the first to be compared to
both John LeCarre (when he wrote The Defection Of AJ Lewinter) and to Norman Mailer (with his massive CIA novel
The Company). If there is a big three of American espionage, Littell
would have to be there along with Charles McCarry and Alan Furst (and
Furst, thus far, has dealt exclusively in the past). Vicious
Circle is a novel firmly grounded in the world of intelligence, with
its focus on the hunt for an American-born fundamentalist rabbi and
leader of the settlement movement, who is kidnapped and held for
ransom by a legendary Palestinian assassin.
Richard North Patterson, on the other
hand, is best-known as a writer of legal thrillers, though
following the course of his career, his
best work has usually been done on the political side; I once said
he's much closer to writers like Allan Drury (Advice and Consent)
than to, say, John Grisham or Scott Turow, with whom he's more
usually compared. So with that interest in politics, it's not
shocking that he chooses the Arab-Israeli conflict as the basis for a
thriller, but what is fascinating is the way he frames his book
within the boundaries of the courtroom genre in which he's worked. A
moderate Israeli prime minister is assassinated in San Francisco, and
a Palestinian woman is accused of having masterminded the killing.
For her defense, she turns to a prominent local attorney, with whom
she had a secret affair in law school, and who is, of course, Jewish.
On the face of it, very different
books. Indeed, Patterson's follows his template, which is that of a
lawyer, sometimes a lawyer turned politician, engaged in a battle
where his loyalties to individuals will be set against both his
self-interest and usually his overall aim. It breaks the mold in that
the lawyer in question, David Wolfe, is not one of the small circle
of characters who recur in Patterson's other novels, and which is one
of the things that keeps them interesting, even when the people
themselves seem too good to be true. The story becomes, for a long
while, Wolfe's own initiation into the intricacies of the conflict,
forcing him not so much to choose sides as to reconsider the whole
element of sides themselves. Which is, in the end, what Patterson
has set out to do. The title of the book reflects the fact that both
the Jewish people and the Palestinians are exiles, and winds up
taking a very balanced perspective on the roots of the conflict, or,
more importantly, the prospects of solution for it. Patterson's is a
very liberal approach, recognising common ground, common struggles
and common humanity, and what he is at greatest pains to reveal is
the way that the conflict has become self-perpetuating, with vested
interests of both sides with no desire to see it stop at anything
short of total victory.
But the novel itself remains a
typically Patterson courtroom battle, with the resolution very much
one of personal betrayal, which is the core of all his novels that do
resolve themselves in courtooms, rather than the political process.
As is frequently the case, the ultimate villain is pretty obvious
early on, but the reader is given plenty of uncertainties along the
way. That he chose not to pursue this issue with a series character
like President Kerry Kilcannon (as I said, most of Patterson's books have
featured a cast of recurring, and often interlocking, characters) is
significant in itself, and a signal of how intractable he finds the
situation. Thus when Wolfe goes to Israel, his education becomes the
readers, and there really isn't too much point to the trip other than
that.
Littell's book is much more grounded in
the world of intelligence, and where Wolfe's attempts to get to the
root of the intelligence are an issue for him and his client, in
Littell's book the workings of intelligence agencies (and the
Palestinians own equivalent) are the core of the story. Its ultimate
point, however, is very close to Patterson's, in that his extremist
rabbi and Palestinian kidnapper are inevitably drawn together, closer
and closer, to the point where their enmity becomes
self-contradictory. At the heart of both books is a real sense, an
outsiders' sense, that these two peoples are indeed more similar than
different, and that a solution is possible. If Littell's ultimate
twist turns out to be a personal one, and perhaps not totally
convincing in terms of execution, if not character, it is the
solution to which he has been building all through the story.
Perhaps because his books deal with intelligence professionals,
rather than lawyers, Littell may have more faith in the ultimate good
intentions of such men.
That the crime and espionage genre
should be the place such issues are addressed is fascinating in
itself. Speaking about a McCain rally, where the candidate himself
repudiated calls by Mitt Romney and Rudi Giuliani for 'more
Guantanamos' by asking if America really wanted a 'second Spanish
Inquisition', Matt Taibbi reflected that it's a strange world where
speaking out against the Inquisition can be seen as an act of political
courage. This is more evident for Patterson, who, as a lawyer has
presented a balanced case. It's more bleak for Littell, who has laid
out the details on the ground, and sees the most promising future for
the enforcers, not the peace-makers. These are two informed and
revealing books, and make a finely matched pair.
Mike, a handful of reviews of THE GOLIATH BONE view it in a distressingly literal way -- namely, doing the math on how old Hammer would be. How old was Poirot? How old was Nero Wolfe and for that matter Archie Goodwin? Christ, how old was Robin Hood? When exactly did Mike Hammer become realistic?
ReplyDeleteYou know very well that the young, intense crazed-avenger Hammer appears only in those early books and, spottily, in the 1962-1970 novels. (THE TWISTED THING is actually a late '40s novel.) The Hammer of GOLIATH BONE is a much tougher extension of the young Hammer into mature age than the Hammer of THE KILLING MAN or BLACK ALLEY (the latter uses recovery from gunshot wounds as a substitute for old age).
In GOLIATH BONE, Mickey was reacting to 9/11 through Mike. He was a contemporary author, responding to current events, through his signature character, with whom he strongly identified. It frustrates me that some reviewers miss the nice resonance that the "murdered friend" Mike is avenging this time around is Manhattan. And that they can't relish a story that provides a classic character with a final case (as was the case with Poirot and Morse, for example).
Your entire heroes-never-die premise is clever but false, since of course this book is not about the death of Hammer at all. I'm proud of GOLIATH BONE and find it disappointing that some Spillane fans carry so much baggage along that they can't enjoy the ride.