Since I am an Amazon Prime member, I can "borrow" on book a month from Amazon. I came across this novel and, as I LOVE all things post-apocalyptic, how could I pass on a novel called "The End: A Post-Apocalyptic Novel"?
As soon as I figured out an EMP attack caused by a nuclear weapon explode over the U.S. was the apocalytpic event, I was reminded of One Second After. That novel tells the story of a small town after an EMP attack. The forward is written by Newt Gingrich. I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I vote issues, not party lines. However, One Second After, as you might infer from the forward's author, was pretty heavy on agenda-based rhetoric. Despite warnings to myself not to, I read Mr. Gingrich's forward before reading One Second After. It completely colored my take on the book and gave it a "Reefer Madness" tone...I was unable to read it critically because I was constantly telling myself the author was over-exaggerating to get his point across, essentially using scare tactics.
Sadly, a similar thing happened with The End. There was definite some propaganda and agenda promotion going on. The early parts of the book included scenes in which Republicans warned Democrats of the dangers of an EMP attack but the Dems seemed to shrug it off or not take the action the G.O.P. seemed necessary. Also similar to One Second After, the setting for the the main character in The End is very idyllic. The former was set in a quaint, rural college town while the latter was a wealthy suburb in San Diego. Another common factor was that the "bad guys" were "Others", i.e. non-Whites.
The difference between the two is that while, to me, the characters in One Second After seemed to embody the ideals of the author the characters in The End had their own agendas.
The book switched between 3 main story lines, each with a different character taking on the lead role. However, the over-arching main character is Gordon Van Zandt.
Gordon is an ex-Marine who, after an incident in Fallujah, has become disillusioned with the ideals the military supposedly stands for, has become a well-to-do web developer and is married with 2 kids. Whereas he once dedicated his life to defending all those who needed him...life now finds him jaded and only willing to defend those to whom he has a direct responsibility: family and close friends.
His brother, Sebastian, is currently a Marine. He's following in his older brother's footsteps but will eventually have his own bones to pick with the military.
Brad Connor, the Speaker of the House, finds himself thrust into a position of power after a nuclear attack on D.C. kills the president and vice-president.
Gordon focuses on taking care of his family. President Connor focused on re-building the nation. Sebastian is somewhere in the middle.
Breaking down the novel this way allowed me to really get into the characters and forget about whatever political influences existed (or at least that I THOUGHT existed) at the start of the book.
The story-telling was actually very good. There were moments where I was extremely tense wondering what would happen next as well as a few "Oh Shit!" moments.
Toward the end of the novel, I started to feel like Gordon was making some decisions that seemed inconsistent with how he'd behaved earlier in the book. It could have been on purpose. The added stress and injuries he sustained could have been the catalyst for him making poor decisions near the end of the book. Either way, I found myself saying, "Gordon would never do that!"
That goes back to my earlier point -- I really got into these characters. They're well written.
My main gripe is a gripe that I had with One Second After as well as some other post-apocalyptic novels: the time frame!
The events of this book happen over a 5 week period! Now, I know we are dependent on electricity. However, I think it would take much longer than 5 weeks before the total breakdown of society...before a group of people chase down 2 women and literally rip them apart for stealing food (when they had guns and could've just executed them...especially since they had "laws" with consequences for, you know, stealing food).
That took me back to the "preachy" and "Reefer Madness"-ness of this book. I got so involved in the characters that I forgot about it. Then towards the end, that feeling came back. I felt as if the author was exaggerating the fallout of such an attack as a means to drive the point home. However, it could be a plot device or just bad story-telling.
Do I think that society could and would collapse in the aftermath of an EMP? Probably. However, I also think that it would take more than 5 weeks for that to happen. There are other related issues (nuclear plants melting down and the resulting radiation sickness, hunger, etc.) that would speed up the breakdown of society. I just think it would take more than 5 weeks. You kind of lose track of time while reading the book and I was shocked at the end when Gordon talks about how only 5 weeks have passed (yup, THAT was one of my "Oh Shit!" moments...but not in a good way).
I gave the book 4-stars so clearly none of those things were dealbreakers for me. When you read a lot of post-apocalyptic fiction, you start to take pieces of every novel and form a picture in your head of what a realistic post-apocalyptic world would be. More realistic novels like On The Beach, Earth Abides, and The Road give you some ideas while unrealistic (i.e. zombies, robots, vampires) novels like I Am Legend give you others.
At the end of the day, I read these kind of books for 2 reasons: I find them very enjoyable...and the subject scares the bejesus out of me! I enjoyed The End and it definitely made me uncomfortable.