An RAF bomb-aimer in the Second World War, shot down over the Bay of Biscay, Brian Hales has already had to overcome a crisis of conscience when his lover Ronnie ended their relationship and went to prison as a pacifist. The risks of attempted escape are his next hurdle, bringing him into conflict with his superior officers in the prisoner-of-war camp where he is eventually taken. But his most disturbing experience is still to come, when he finds himself falling in love with a young German guard.
An interesting introduction to gay relationships in POW camps, although this one was NOT between prisoners, but between a prisoner and a guard. It serves as a useful thought-piece about how gay men fared in POW camps during the War - the circumspect nature of any relationships, and the constant threat of being denounced.
Unfortunately the author chose the classic ending for the romance - the lovers fearful of their feelings, deny them and chose to spend the forty or so years post-war apart - writing pained letters to each other - so the actual relationship (which could have happened) is denied - the gay men will *never* be in a relationship ending. Sigh. I thought we had moved past this, even in 1997, when the book was published.
Slashreaders LJ: Alrighty well this is an era that has always fascinated me. Not sure why but it does and specifically POW camps, ect. Anyway it is also not something you find a whole lot written about. For the most part I find Seabrooks novel fairly well crafted and thought out. He dealt with the homosexual culture at the time fairly well as opposed to more current ideas, ect.
The two big issues I had with the novel were as follows: One) the romance was rather too idealized and lovey dovey for the situation. I think that Mike Seabrook missed out on a lot of things he could've played with in the unlikely setting for this romance. However on that note I think he also did a very good job of showing a great deal of personality and differences in his characters that made them very solid in a short amount of time. Two) The ending. I suppose on some level I like the fact that it didn't end all 'happy happy joy joy'. However one one level I feel like the ending was very realistic given society and the time period they were in. On the other hand, after all that happened... Yeah I'll leave it at that I don't want to spoil things too much.
Which brings me to the epilogue. I actually finished this book a couple of days ago. I've been trying to work out the meaning of the epilogue since. The conclusion that I finally came to is that it ties in with the title of the novel. However if that is the case, then I find the title to be weak and the epilogue unnecessary. Though either way I suppose it's rather moot at this point.