What do you think?
Rate this book
Trinity's Child: A Novel
In the midst of a Third World War nuclear holocaust, a United States president battles his successor to preserve humanity, Russia is in turmoil, and a B-52 carrying nuclear warheads and an ill-assorted crew heads toward the U.S.S.R
400 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1983
5 people are currently reading
328 people want to read
About the author
William Prochnau
9 books6 followersWilliam Walter Prochnau was an American journalist and war correspondent.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
July 12, 2015
I used to think Nevil Shute's novel "On The Beach" was the best Cold War novel I ever read. After reading "Trinity's Child", I have changed my mind.
Prochnau basically takes the best elements of "Fail-Safe," "The Day After," and, yes, "On The Beach" and mix them together into an incredibly unique and original plot centered on a preemptive Soviet nuclear strike brought on by Soviet militants. As the President struggles to contain escalation, a B-52 departs Fairchild Air Force Base in Spokane, Washington minutes ahead of the Soviet strike, which it barely survives, leaving its crew the sole survivors of Fairchild's nuclear response squadron. The President soon goes missing as he attempts to leave Washington, D.C. in the wake of the Soviet attack. His successor is the Secretary of the Interior, eighth in the line of succession. A U.S. Navy admiral code named "Harpoon" greets him as he boards his E-4 command plan in Batan Rogue, Louisiana, and subsequently tries to get him to deescalate--but will he, especially when he is stung by American losses and turns a receptive ear to a hawkish colonel? Or will both "Harpoon" and a SAC general code named "Alice" (whose post is SAC's "Looking Glass" command plane) succeed in making the new POTUS see the awful truth as to how "winning" is not an option in a nuclear war?
The B-52, code named "Polar Bear One," sets off on what looks like a suicide run into the USSR--or will they after they wipe out four Soviet MIGs with one of their own bombs and see the horror they carry in the plane's bomb bay?
Questions like this will keep you turning the pages until "Trinity's Child" reaches its climax.
I noted several "shout outs" to "Dr. Strangelove" (see one of the book quotes posted here), "On The Beach" (again, see the quotes), and even Nevil Shute, "On The Beach"'s author (in the novel a radio broadcast from New Zealand gets picked up where Shute is being discussed, presumably because of "Beach"). I even detected a subtle nod to "Fail-Safe" (which I won't give away because it would be a spoiler).
The only plot point that puzzled me concerned a nuclear aircraft carrier apparently sailing alone on her shakedown cruise. I do not think flattops sail without escort, even when on a shakedown cruise. "Harpoon," however, notes to the new president that warships scatter during nuclear exchanges. Even so, I am puzzled that not even so much as one destroyer remained with the carrier for anti-sub duty.
Trivia bits: the president is watching an episode of "Mission: Impossible" when he is alerted to the Soviet attack. "Impossible" star Martian Landau played the president in "Trinity's" fine TV movie adaptation "By Dawn's Early Light." Jonestown is also mentioned during an exchange between the B-52's pilot and co-pilot. Believe it or not, Powers Boothe, who played Jim Jones in "Guyana Tragedy," portrays the pilot in "By Dawn's Early Light" (incidentally, the pilot's name is Kazaklis in the novel, but is renamed Cassidy in the movie). Finally, Kazaklis joking refers to "Polar Bear One" as "Strangelove Airlines." Quite a bit of gallant gallows humor on his part!
Prochnau basically takes the best elements of "Fail-Safe," "The Day After," and, yes, "On The Beach" and mix them together into an incredibly unique and original plot centered on a preemptive Soviet nuclear strike brought on by Soviet militants. As the President struggles to contain escalation, a B-52 departs Fairchild Air Force Base in Spokane, Washington minutes ahead of the Soviet strike, which it barely survives, leaving its crew the sole survivors of Fairchild's nuclear response squadron. The President soon goes missing as he attempts to leave Washington, D.C. in the wake of the Soviet attack. His successor is the Secretary of the Interior, eighth in the line of succession. A U.S. Navy admiral code named "Harpoon" greets him as he boards his E-4 command plan in Batan Rogue, Louisiana, and subsequently tries to get him to deescalate--but will he, especially when he is stung by American losses and turns a receptive ear to a hawkish colonel? Or will both "Harpoon" and a SAC general code named "Alice" (whose post is SAC's "Looking Glass" command plane) succeed in making the new POTUS see the awful truth as to how "winning" is not an option in a nuclear war?
The B-52, code named "Polar Bear One," sets off on what looks like a suicide run into the USSR--or will they after they wipe out four Soviet MIGs with one of their own bombs and see the horror they carry in the plane's bomb bay?
Questions like this will keep you turning the pages until "Trinity's Child" reaches its climax.
I noted several "shout outs" to "Dr. Strangelove" (see one of the book quotes posted here), "On The Beach" (again, see the quotes), and even Nevil Shute, "On The Beach"'s author (in the novel a radio broadcast from New Zealand gets picked up where Shute is being discussed, presumably because of "Beach"). I even detected a subtle nod to "Fail-Safe" (which I won't give away because it would be a spoiler).
The only plot point that puzzled me concerned a nuclear aircraft carrier apparently sailing alone on her shakedown cruise. I do not think flattops sail without escort, even when on a shakedown cruise. "Harpoon," however, notes to the new president that warships scatter during nuclear exchanges. Even so, I am puzzled that not even so much as one destroyer remained with the carrier for anti-sub duty.
Trivia bits: the president is watching an episode of "Mission: Impossible" when he is alerted to the Soviet attack. "Impossible" star Martian Landau played the president in "Trinity's" fine TV movie adaptation "By Dawn's Early Light." Jonestown is also mentioned during an exchange between the B-52's pilot and co-pilot. Believe it or not, Powers Boothe, who played Jim Jones in "Guyana Tragedy," portrays the pilot in "By Dawn's Early Light" (incidentally, the pilot's name is Kazaklis in the novel, but is renamed Cassidy in the movie). Finally, Kazaklis joking refers to "Polar Bear One" as "Strangelove Airlines." Quite a bit of gallant gallows humor on his part!
July 12, 2020
I saw the HBO movie "By Dawn's Early Light" when it was relatively new and I was 7 or 8 years old, and was always curious about the book (Trinity's Child).
Reading it, and recently rewatching a chunk of the movie my feelings on the book are.... mixed.
It's a great idea and structure in it's broad brush strokes. In particular the primary arcs around the conflicted psychology of a B-52 crew, the stress and insanity of a nuclear war under lost and confused communications and lack of authority.
But where this book falls short is in the details as it walks an awkward line between drama and techno-thriller. It tries to be technical and feel "accurate" but even an amateur like myself can pick at the details pretty easily, and it makes it feel like more of a day-time soap-opera than it does a grim cold-war-turned-hot story. The dialogue in the first 2/3rds or so of the book also felt stilted and simultaneously overly dramatic and formal. Add in a lot of oddly placed flashbacks, some characters remaining nameless but others getting seemingly superfluous detail, and it was a bit of a mess at times.
One curious observation is that the dialogue became much improved and more fluid and believable towards the end of the book.... almost felt like a different author entirely.
Anyways, the short version is that I liked it a fair bit, but probably won't be revisiting it anytime soon.
(Sidebar: I think the HBO movie from the early 90s did a great job adapting it, and for all it suffered from some overcooked melodrama as did the book, it conceptually holds up)
Reading it, and recently rewatching a chunk of the movie my feelings on the book are.... mixed.
It's a great idea and structure in it's broad brush strokes. In particular the primary arcs around the conflicted psychology of a B-52 crew, the stress and insanity of a nuclear war under lost and confused communications and lack of authority.
But where this book falls short is in the details as it walks an awkward line between drama and techno-thriller. It tries to be technical and feel "accurate" but even an amateur like myself can pick at the details pretty easily, and it makes it feel like more of a day-time soap-opera than it does a grim cold-war-turned-hot story. The dialogue in the first 2/3rds or so of the book also felt stilted and simultaneously overly dramatic and formal. Add in a lot of oddly placed flashbacks, some characters remaining nameless but others getting seemingly superfluous detail, and it was a bit of a mess at times.
One curious observation is that the dialogue became much improved and more fluid and believable towards the end of the book.... almost felt like a different author entirely.
Anyways, the short version is that I liked it a fair bit, but probably won't be revisiting it anytime soon.
(Sidebar: I think the HBO movie from the early 90s did a great job adapting it, and for all it suffered from some overcooked melodrama as did the book, it conceptually holds up)
May 9, 2020
I found this book in a pile of books donated to our Little Free Library. Trinity's Child is a 1983 novel that tells a day long nuclear war between the United States of America and the USSR. The military action is seen through the eyes of a B52 bomber crew. There's political intrigue between an unnamed POTUS, the Soviet premier, and a presidential successor. Prochnau obviously did his research as it's easy for the reader to suspend disbelief and get into this Cold War thriller.
October 3, 2014
This is the original book that was made into the film "By Dawn's Early Light". The story is similar, but was simplified slightly in the film, and has some slight differences.
The book aims to describe a realistic sequence of events that could lead to a escalating nuclear exchange between the USA and the USSR (as it was during the 1980s when the story is set). The focus is on the American commanders who respond to a surprise Russian attack, and the crew of a B-52 bomber that is scrambled when the first wave of missiles is detected. The story essentially moves between the two sets of characters, demonstrating how things could quickly get out of control, explaining the way in which the two forces existed in a state of stalemate based on the hope that neither would ever actually push the 'big red button'.
The story is incredibly tense and will keep you reading to see how events unfold. For me the most memorable parts of the book are the attitudes of the various servicemen and women who know that they are going to die as a result of their actions, but carry out their duties anyway. It might be a slightly outdated story now, but it's a very powerful one.
The book aims to describe a realistic sequence of events that could lead to a escalating nuclear exchange between the USA and the USSR (as it was during the 1980s when the story is set). The focus is on the American commanders who respond to a surprise Russian attack, and the crew of a B-52 bomber that is scrambled when the first wave of missiles is detected. The story essentially moves between the two sets of characters, demonstrating how things could quickly get out of control, explaining the way in which the two forces existed in a state of stalemate based on the hope that neither would ever actually push the 'big red button'.
The story is incredibly tense and will keep you reading to see how events unfold. For me the most memorable parts of the book are the attitudes of the various servicemen and women who know that they are going to die as a result of their actions, but carry out their duties anyway. It might be a slightly outdated story now, but it's a very powerful one.
November 14, 2025
Roman Williama Prochnaua, inače poznatog američkog novinara i publiciste, postao mi je poznat kao proza koja je ekranizovana u veoma zanimljivom televizijskom filmu koji je za HBO snimio Jack Sholder.
Struktura filma A HOUSE OF DYNAMITE Kathryn Bigelow me je podsetio na ovaj televizijski film, i to je me je podstaklo da pročitam roman koji mi pre toga nike bio na nišanu.
I, moram priznati da je reč o veoma zanimljivom romanu koji se bitno razlikuje od Sholderovog filma. Dok film ima zanimljivo profilisane, pre svega zanimljivo postavljene konflikte, u romanu su oni bitno drugačiji i ne samo da su situaciono već i stilski interesantno postavljeni.
Prochnau svakako nije napisao ujednačeno delo i njegov roman nije savršeno balansiran, ali ono što jeste je zanimljiv rukopis koji čini da sve deonice romana - uz rezerve prema formi pre svega - budu jako interesantne za čitanje.
I roman prati nekoliko paralelnih radnji. U jednoj imamo posadu bombardera B52, ikonične letelice koju znamo iz Kubrickovog STRANGELOVEa i koja je već osamdesetih kada je pisan roman bila manje bitan deo američke nuklearne trijade. U drugoj pratimo američkog predsednika a u trećoj nekoliko garnitura dežurnih oficira i njihovu reakciju na iznenadni nuklearni napad iz SSSR.
Slično filmu A HOUSE OF DYNAMITE imamo okolnost da je krenuo iznenadni napad, doduše ovde se zna od koga, sa kojim ciljem i kojim željama i imamo različita viđenja koliko daleko treba otići u reakciji, a sve to u raznim sferama američke civilne i vojne moći.
Iako u filmu Kathryn Bigelow nemamo razrađenu temu ekipe u bombarderu ali imamo likove u bombarderu B2 koji je na dežurstvu, u suštini imamo i taj aspekt, spremnosti junaka da izvedu napad ako do naređenja dođe.
Kod Prochnaua se postavlja pitanje kakav je ovo roman? Šta čitamo?
On je u tom pogledu jako zanimljiv jer je u neku ruku reč o vojnom tehnotrileru u maniru Toma Clancyja, doduše mnogo pre nego što će on postati aktuelan. Roman je pisan 1983. i govori o bliskoj budućnosti. Međutim, ovo svakako nije tako redukcionistički postupak kakav ima Clancy.
Naprotiv, naime, pored celog tog vojnog imaginarija, procedure, postupaka, koje Prochnau veoma dobro poznaje (iako ima par neobičnih Easter Eggova koji su me zbunili, ali to je nešto što je više za ljubitelje i poznavaoce vojske i rata) ovde imamo i jednu zanimljivu egzistencijalističku dimenziju promišljanja nuklearnog rata koju bih nazvao gotovo balardovskom.
Naročito se balardovskim segmentom može smatrati segment sa posadom B52 koja je već i u STRANGELOVEu imala tu dimenziju gubitka razuma, ali ovde se dešava nešto drugo u psihološkom pogledu, gde su junaci već načeti presijom svoje profesije, ali onda u trenutku opšte destrukcije loše podnose njenu egzistencijalističku dimenziju.
Naime, Prochnau polazi od objektivne premise da je nuklearni rat nešto gde će ljudi prosto biti žrtvovani, u milionima i da on zbog razornosti oružja i linearnosti njegove primene ima praktično jasnu štetu koju proizvodi, pa samim tim i ljudske žrtve. Međutim, isto tako se kreće od premise da će sami učesnici nuklearnog rata biti žrtvovani jer će oni kao piloti strategijske avijacije, operatori balističkih raketa, oficiri na komandnim mestima itd. biti mete, i da će moći sa sigurnošću da računaju da će oni i njihovi bližnji biti prvi pobijeni.
Ta pomisao da su svi koji vode nuklearni rat u stvari u jednoj relativno kratkoj deonici između života i smrti je vrlo potentna i Prochnau je živopisno razvija.
Premisa po kojoj sovjetski Premijer pokušava da proizvede jednu kontrolisanu nuklearnu razmenu sa ciljem da uspori napredovanje SAD i da onda usled destrukcije, ta kontolisana razmena počinje da se otima kontroli, a da onda junaci svaki na svoj način pokušava da je zauzda, ali naravno uz razne prepreke među kojima su "jastrebovi" na obe strane, deluje možda prejednostavno, pa gotovo i banalno u odnosu na onu egzistencijalističku dimenziju.
U raznim slojevima romana ima cinizma, ima sočnih, visceralnih opisa života pre rata, a i tokom njega, i nekako ova trilerska potka deluje "premalo" u odnosu na ove snažne elemente koji pokreću roman u smeru nečega mnogo meditativnijeg.
Ipak, na kraju, uz sve disbalanse koje to proizvodi, zapravo ja ne mogu da kažem da TRINITY'S CHILD u čitanju knjige sugeriše kroj koji je na kraju Sholder imao u filmu BY DAWN'S EARLY LIGHT.
Prochnauov roman je svakako po motivima bogatiji i adaptacija Briana Gilberta je više nego redukcionistička a o izmeni pojedinih elemenata da ne govorimo.
Teško je poverovati da ovakav susret Ballarda, Clancyja a možda ponegde i Conrada može imati smisla, ali uprkos nesavršenosti te lančane reakcije ovo je veoma ubedljiv roman o dubokoj suicidnoj ideaciji nuklearnog rata.
Istovremeno, ovo je svakako i triler koji je uzbudljiv, a u rešavanju nekih problema veoma kreativan. Čak bih rekao da Prochnau kao pisac hladnoratovskog tehnotrilera, ako ovaj roman silom uguramo u to, automatski spada među maštovitije i ubedljivije pisce.
Kao i mnoga dela koja mešaju žanr sa višim književnim ambicijama, tako i TRINITY'S CHILD na neki način ne može baš zadovoljiti svakoga. Ako bih birao one kojima bi manje odgovarao to su onda svakako čitaoci romana na aerodromima jer bi njihovom trilerskom senzibilitetu toliki egzistencijalizam mogao biti odbojan.
U svakom slučaju, ovaj rukopis je bio zver koja nije pripitomljena i ostao je takav do danas. Čitalac u svakom slučaju iz ovoga neće dobiti nešto jednostavno i sterilno.
Struktura filma A HOUSE OF DYNAMITE Kathryn Bigelow me je podsetio na ovaj televizijski film, i to je me je podstaklo da pročitam roman koji mi pre toga nike bio na nišanu.
I, moram priznati da je reč o veoma zanimljivom romanu koji se bitno razlikuje od Sholderovog filma. Dok film ima zanimljivo profilisane, pre svega zanimljivo postavljene konflikte, u romanu su oni bitno drugačiji i ne samo da su situaciono već i stilski interesantno postavljeni.
Prochnau svakako nije napisao ujednačeno delo i njegov roman nije savršeno balansiran, ali ono što jeste je zanimljiv rukopis koji čini da sve deonice romana - uz rezerve prema formi pre svega - budu jako interesantne za čitanje.
I roman prati nekoliko paralelnih radnji. U jednoj imamo posadu bombardera B52, ikonične letelice koju znamo iz Kubrickovog STRANGELOVEa i koja je već osamdesetih kada je pisan roman bila manje bitan deo američke nuklearne trijade. U drugoj pratimo američkog predsednika a u trećoj nekoliko garnitura dežurnih oficira i njihovu reakciju na iznenadni nuklearni napad iz SSSR.
Slično filmu A HOUSE OF DYNAMITE imamo okolnost da je krenuo iznenadni napad, doduše ovde se zna od koga, sa kojim ciljem i kojim željama i imamo različita viđenja koliko daleko treba otići u reakciji, a sve to u raznim sferama američke civilne i vojne moći.
Iako u filmu Kathryn Bigelow nemamo razrađenu temu ekipe u bombarderu ali imamo likove u bombarderu B2 koji je na dežurstvu, u suštini imamo i taj aspekt, spremnosti junaka da izvedu napad ako do naređenja dođe.
Kod Prochnaua se postavlja pitanje kakav je ovo roman? Šta čitamo?
On je u tom pogledu jako zanimljiv jer je u neku ruku reč o vojnom tehnotrileru u maniru Toma Clancyja, doduše mnogo pre nego što će on postati aktuelan. Roman je pisan 1983. i govori o bliskoj budućnosti. Međutim, ovo svakako nije tako redukcionistički postupak kakav ima Clancy.
Naprotiv, naime, pored celog tog vojnog imaginarija, procedure, postupaka, koje Prochnau veoma dobro poznaje (iako ima par neobičnih Easter Eggova koji su me zbunili, ali to je nešto što je više za ljubitelje i poznavaoce vojske i rata) ovde imamo i jednu zanimljivu egzistencijalističku dimenziju promišljanja nuklearnog rata koju bih nazvao gotovo balardovskom.
Naročito se balardovskim segmentom može smatrati segment sa posadom B52 koja je već i u STRANGELOVEu imala tu dimenziju gubitka razuma, ali ovde se dešava nešto drugo u psihološkom pogledu, gde su junaci već načeti presijom svoje profesije, ali onda u trenutku opšte destrukcije loše podnose njenu egzistencijalističku dimenziju.
Naime, Prochnau polazi od objektivne premise da je nuklearni rat nešto gde će ljudi prosto biti žrtvovani, u milionima i da on zbog razornosti oružja i linearnosti njegove primene ima praktično jasnu štetu koju proizvodi, pa samim tim i ljudske žrtve. Međutim, isto tako se kreće od premise da će sami učesnici nuklearnog rata biti žrtvovani jer će oni kao piloti strategijske avijacije, operatori balističkih raketa, oficiri na komandnim mestima itd. biti mete, i da će moći sa sigurnošću da računaju da će oni i njihovi bližnji biti prvi pobijeni.
Ta pomisao da su svi koji vode nuklearni rat u stvari u jednoj relativno kratkoj deonici između života i smrti je vrlo potentna i Prochnau je živopisno razvija.
Premisa po kojoj sovjetski Premijer pokušava da proizvede jednu kontrolisanu nuklearnu razmenu sa ciljem da uspori napredovanje SAD i da onda usled destrukcije, ta kontolisana razmena počinje da se otima kontroli, a da onda junaci svaki na svoj način pokušava da je zauzda, ali naravno uz razne prepreke među kojima su "jastrebovi" na obe strane, deluje možda prejednostavno, pa gotovo i banalno u odnosu na onu egzistencijalističku dimenziju.
U raznim slojevima romana ima cinizma, ima sočnih, visceralnih opisa života pre rata, a i tokom njega, i nekako ova trilerska potka deluje "premalo" u odnosu na ove snažne elemente koji pokreću roman u smeru nečega mnogo meditativnijeg.
Ipak, na kraju, uz sve disbalanse koje to proizvodi, zapravo ja ne mogu da kažem da TRINITY'S CHILD u čitanju knjige sugeriše kroj koji je na kraju Sholder imao u filmu BY DAWN'S EARLY LIGHT.
Prochnauov roman je svakako po motivima bogatiji i adaptacija Briana Gilberta je više nego redukcionistička a o izmeni pojedinih elemenata da ne govorimo.
Teško je poverovati da ovakav susret Ballarda, Clancyja a možda ponegde i Conrada može imati smisla, ali uprkos nesavršenosti te lančane reakcije ovo je veoma ubedljiv roman o dubokoj suicidnoj ideaciji nuklearnog rata.
Istovremeno, ovo je svakako i triler koji je uzbudljiv, a u rešavanju nekih problema veoma kreativan. Čak bih rekao da Prochnau kao pisac hladnoratovskog tehnotrilera, ako ovaj roman silom uguramo u to, automatski spada među maštovitije i ubedljivije pisce.
Kao i mnoga dela koja mešaju žanr sa višim književnim ambicijama, tako i TRINITY'S CHILD na neki način ne može baš zadovoljiti svakoga. Ako bih birao one kojima bi manje odgovarao to su onda svakako čitaoci romana na aerodromima jer bi njihovom trilerskom senzibilitetu toliki egzistencijalizam mogao biti odbojan.
U svakom slučaju, ovaj rukopis je bio zver koja nije pripitomljena i ostao je takav do danas. Čitalac u svakom slučaju iz ovoga neće dobiti nešto jednostavno i sterilno.
January 5, 2016
2 histoires en parallèle dans ce livre. Celle, intéressante du processus d'escalade nucléaire et les tentatives pour le stopper. Celle profondément ennuyante de l'équipage du b52.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 13, 2021
Awesome book!
January 20, 2022
Excellent even in the 21st century
March 22, 2021
I can’t decide whether this book is a diatribe against the arms race and nuclear war, or an outright pacifist scree. I have read the book and watched the spin-off movie, “By Dawn’s Early Light,” also written by Prochnau. Each has their advantages and disadvantages, with the book providing more psychological insight and the movie offering more drama and tension. But a major difference between the two is that in the book, Russia starts a premeditated, first-strike nuclear attack against the U.S., whereas in the movie Russia mistakenly responds errant rebel missiles. In writing the book, Prochnau could have used a good editor and fact checker, a condition partly corrected in the movie.
A major fallacy of the book is that the U.S. is asked to accept the annihilation of 30 – 40 million of its citizens, and that they should only respond by killing an equal number of Soviet citizens. What super power would agree to such terms? What happened to MAD, mutually assured destruction, which was so supposed to act as a deterrent to any country starting a nuclear war?
There are a number of instances where the narrative appears illogical or mistaken. They include:
1. There seems to be wholesale mutiny of American and Soviet officers. Military men are trained to follow orders, and this has never happened in any war.
2. The author uses what he calls a Yiddish term, Melech hamafis, and he translates as king of death. The correct expression, malach hamaves, is Hebrew and means angel of death.
3. At one point, Harpoon, a high-ranking naval officer, decides to polish his shoes using his starched white shirt. Really?
4. In order to save fuel, the pilot of the B-52 decides to jettison his nuclear ordinance. So someone else can find it and use it?
Prochnau attempts to describe the follies of nuclear war. Yet I find it hard to agree that those who find themselves attacked should turn the other cheek in order to avoid a further nuclear holocaust.
A major fallacy of the book is that the U.S. is asked to accept the annihilation of 30 – 40 million of its citizens, and that they should only respond by killing an equal number of Soviet citizens. What super power would agree to such terms? What happened to MAD, mutually assured destruction, which was so supposed to act as a deterrent to any country starting a nuclear war?
There are a number of instances where the narrative appears illogical or mistaken. They include:
1. There seems to be wholesale mutiny of American and Soviet officers. Military men are trained to follow orders, and this has never happened in any war.
2. The author uses what he calls a Yiddish term, Melech hamafis, and he translates as king of death. The correct expression, malach hamaves, is Hebrew and means angel of death.
3. At one point, Harpoon, a high-ranking naval officer, decides to polish his shoes using his starched white shirt. Really?
4. In order to save fuel, the pilot of the B-52 decides to jettison his nuclear ordinance. So someone else can find it and use it?
Prochnau attempts to describe the follies of nuclear war. Yet I find it hard to agree that those who find themselves attacked should turn the other cheek in order to avoid a further nuclear holocaust.
July 23, 2025
Escrita por William Prochnau, La Hija de Trinidad narra el inicio de una guerra mundial nuclear y sus efectos inmediatos, tras el bombardeo de la otrora URSS a EE. UU.
Si bien la trama es interesante, el ritmo de la novela es lento debido a que W. Prochnau entra en demasiados tecnicismos militares que realmente no tienen un peso en la historia, y que incluso por momentos hace que se pierda el hilo de lo que está ocurriendo.
El desarrollo de los personajes no es profundo en cuanto a contexto se refiere (con alguna que otra excepción innecesaria), pero muestra los conflictos que enfrentan los militares y políticos entre el entrenamiento recibido y el ver realmente las consecuencias de un holocausto nuclear. En mi opinión, esto es probablemente el mejor elemento de la novela.
En resumen, La Hija de Trinidad no es una mala novela y la trama es interesante, pero es innecesariamente extensa. Sin embargo, si tienes un interés particular por lo que podría suceder en una guerra nuclear, es un libro que debes leer.
Si bien la trama es interesante, el ritmo de la novela es lento debido a que W. Prochnau entra en demasiados tecnicismos militares que realmente no tienen un peso en la historia, y que incluso por momentos hace que se pierda el hilo de lo que está ocurriendo.
El desarrollo de los personajes no es profundo en cuanto a contexto se refiere (con alguna que otra excepción innecesaria), pero muestra los conflictos que enfrentan los militares y políticos entre el entrenamiento recibido y el ver realmente las consecuencias de un holocausto nuclear. En mi opinión, esto es probablemente el mejor elemento de la novela.
En resumen, La Hija de Trinidad no es una mala novela y la trama es interesante, pero es innecesariamente extensa. Sin embargo, si tienes un interés particular por lo que podría suceder en una guerra nuclear, es un libro que debes leer.
January 20, 2022
Read this many years ago, dont remember a huge amount about it other than the breathtaking suspense and some vivid scenes, which I wont mention here due to spoilers. Its an oldy but if memory serves a REALLY good cold war Nuclear Holocaust story. Without Spoiling it this IS NOT A Post Nuclear Holocaust book nor is it one of those stories that gets so close to Nuclear Armageddon before the Hero Intervenes at Zero Hour to save to the day. This is the World in the Throws of A Nuclear War
January 17, 2018
I feel as if I'm giving this a great disservice with only a 3 star rating, but somehow I found the tone ... impenetrable is too strong. But foggy, certainly. Even though it was a powerful work, the lens didn't quite seem tuned to me, I feel as if I missed a lot of nuance. Perhaps one to come back to on a rainy day. it's certainly not a happy, sunny book.
December 31, 2022
There aren't many nuclear war procedural works-- it's basically this and Failsafe.
Prochnau is a good author but there's too many issues with it for me to rate it higher than 3/5. I'd still recommend it for anyone interested in nuclear war, but know this isn't much more realistic than any given airport thriller.
Prochnau is a good author but there's too many issues with it for me to rate it higher than 3/5. I'd still recommend it for anyone interested in nuclear war, but know this isn't much more realistic than any given airport thriller.
February 7, 2018
Eerily prophetic for something written in 1984.
June 9, 2018
Not bad, I suppose.
January 18, 2025
A fast paced Cold War doomsday book, which was adapted into the HBO movie By Dawn's Early Light, basically the last WWIII movie to come out as the wall fell.
November 16, 2025
Great book, very suspenseful. I've read it multiple times.
October 12, 2012
An absolutely chilling story about a paranoid Soviet Union's desperate gambit to end the arms race of the 1980s by launching a limited nuclear strike at the US. Of course it doesn't quite work out the way the Soviets planned and things quickly escalate out of control. There's a three part story going on in this book. First, the President, who ordered a limited counter strike at the Soviet Union, is trying to quickly negotiate a cease fire with the Soviet President. Then he goes missing and is believed dead when his helicopter crashes while attempting the leave Andrews Air Force base. Second; when a low yield nuclear device strikes north-west Washington it kills the Vice President and most of the cabinet. An alternate E-4 (a specially equipped 747 used for the President in the event of a nuclear attack) has picked up the Secretary of the Interior in Baton Rouge and has quickly sworn him is as President. The new President quickly finds himself under extreme political and military pressure; some advising him to settle things down and turn off the war before all life is destroyed. Others are advising him to go with the "Grand Tour" where the US launches every nuclear weapon in her arsenal at the Soviet Union for a decisive victory. The third part of this story involves a B-52 bomber crew and their struggles with carrying out the orders to strike their assigned targets and their own morality.
What I find most intriguing about this book is that it was written in 1983; the same year that the Soviet Union almost struck at the US for real. Once because of a satellite malfunction and once because of Ronald Reagan's involvement in Operation Able Archer.
A gripping and terrifying tale that is most disturbing because it could actually happen.
What I find most intriguing about this book is that it was written in 1983; the same year that the Soviet Union almost struck at the US for real. Once because of a satellite malfunction and once because of Ronald Reagan's involvement in Operation Able Archer.
A gripping and terrifying tale that is most disturbing because it could actually happen.
June 11, 2014
This story was set in the early 1980s and the cold war had just become very hot. It is reminiscent of parts of the movies “Failsafe”, “Dr. Strangelove” and “WarGames” – i.e. the insanity of war. While it is a bit melodramatic (I guess a bit of melodrama can be excused when the world is on the brink of nuclear annihilation) and a bit dated, it is also very disturbing – that “winning” the war at all costs is more important to some than saving humanity. In this story, the world did not learn from the genocide of WWII and instead of creating ovens for a group of people, it had created an oven for the entire world. All in all, not a bad story for its time.
March 13, 2010
A book about WWIII. Terrific and terrifying book. Made me depressed to think mankind is one push of the button from annihilation. I found it interesting that the character coaxing the pretend president is known as "The Librarian." This book is a must read. Hollywood produced a movie from it called "By Dawn's Early Light." The movie was well done. They left out the part of Polar Bear One's fly-by over Hawaii. This could have made the movie even better. I highly recommend this book.
June 18, 2011
I read this during the height of the cold war and still consider it to be an excellant and sobering read. some day I will have to watch the film based on it.
September 7, 2019
Scary damn book to stay up at night to read. Didn't translate well to the hbo movie.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews