The review that I just submitted to the Penguin First To Read website, verbatim:
Dear Penguin Publishing Group,
It's clear that you selected this book for republication in English at a time when its subject matter, an autocratic President, would resonate with the American public. The concept is established well by the author. However, that's the only reason I would give this book any more than 0 stars. The devolution of a national crisis to executive action, with conspiratorial undertones throughout–that's right in my political-thriller reading interests. The tantalizing tidbit that it's a Democratic President who brings this about, instead of the current resident of the White House, made me interested to see how the author went about it. That this novel was written in 2006 was a bit of a drawback, but after the previous Republican President, I could see how it might be an interesting story. However...
I beg you not to publish this book, especially in the form (a galley proof?) that I was provided as an advance reading copy. The execution of the concept is awful, to say the least. The book is far too long, probably by 200-300 pages, for the plot and action conveyed. There are numerous inconsistencies throughout that plot and action, in some places as if the author forgot what he wrote maybe a hundred pages previously. One of the lead characters is named Dorothy, which is itself statistically improbable in the U.S. after "The Wizard of Oz" was adapted for the movies, and then the author nicknames her "Doggie"? The author's depiction of a black family in the Bronx is outright stereotyped and racist. There are a number of Britishisms mixed with their Americanism counterparts that will be off-putting to the American reading public ("sacked" instead of "fired," "flat" instead of "apartment"), especially for a novel set in the U.S. That might be attributed to the translator, who seems to have selected what is simply the wrong word in many locations where it's clear what the author intended to say, and the translated words would be vaguely similar but convey a very different meaning. It took me a while, but I finally recognized that the name of one of the militias, "White-headed Eagles," should actually have been translated as "Bald Eagles"–we don't call them "white-headed eagles" in the U.S.
Unbelievably, after a long slog through eventually irrelevant details, the entire backstory and plot are summarized in Chapter 40. Authors worth their salt don't just dump the entire story on the reader in a fraction of the book's chapters, scattered at the beginning and the end of the novel, with the bulk of relevant and motivating information delivered just prior to the conclusion. If I was to recommend this novel to friends, not only would that lose me many friends, but I would still insist that they read only the first five and last five chapters–the remainder of the novel is useless and inconsequential filler.
Was I the novel's editor, I would be far more heavy-handed than this author's editor dared to be. I would strip the story down to probably four of the written chapters, have those chapters rewritten for clarity, and have someone else (not the original author) rewrite the rest of the story around those key plot points. I would bring the story into the Trump era, which is far more plausible than a Democrat instigating a national emergency. I would rely far more heavily on the author's Appendix than the author seemed to do, and with a broader scope on the repercussions among the American public. But with all of that, it would be my novel instead of the present author's, "based on a concept by" that author.
I urge you not to publish this book. This novel needs heavy editing and rewriting if you're aiming for the sophisticated political-thriller-reading American and British public. Otherwise, you'll tax their (our) patience with all of that off-topic filler and the numerous mistranslations. You have the opportunity here to damage the writer's reputation as a "New York Times Bestselling Author" (I have never heard of him before, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything). You have the opportunity here to damage the reputations of both the translator and the novel's editor (if there was one, which isn't at all clear from the finished product). And finally, you have the opportunity to damage your own reputation as a publisher of laudable (let alone salable) political thriller fiction that captures the American public's imagination and provides a culturally relevant point of discussion about what's really going on around here right now.
Sincerely,
Matthew Garcia
matt.e.garcia@gmail.com