Sarkanā Džoana

by Jennie Rooney, Dženija Rūnija, Vilis Kasims (Translator)

Ir 1937. gads. Pasaule dzīvo pārmaiņu priekšnojautās. Vēl nav noslēgts Molotova-Ribentropa pakts, vēl joprojām daudzi tic, ka Padomju Savienība vedīs cilvēci pretī gaišajai nākotnei...
Džoana ir jauna meitene, kuru sajūsmina Kembridžas studentu dzīve, mācības un iespēja izrauties no mierīgās, paredzamās ikdienas. Negaidīta iepazīšanās ar žilbinošo krievieti Sonju un viņas brālēnu Leo Džoanai paver gluži jaunu pasauli. Kreisi noskaņotā Leo harizmai un aizrautībai meitene nespēj pretoties. Šķiet, arī Leo interesējas par Džoanu, bet vai tās ir patiesas jūtas? Ne privātā, ne valstiskā mērogā vairs nav viegli saprast, kurš ir draugs un kurš - ienaidnieks.
Pabeigusi studijas, Džoana sāk darbu metālu izpētes laboratorijā, kur viņai ir piekļuve valstiski svarīgai slepenai informācijai. Dienu no dienas jaunajai sievietei jāatbild uz vissarežģītāko jautājumu: ko tu esi gatavs maksāt, lai paliktu patiess pats pret sevi?
Draudzība, mīlestība, nodevība, augstas likmes... Lappusi pēc lappuses atklājas Džoanas dzīve - aizraujoša, bīstama, neparasta.

Grāmatas autore Dženija Rūnija (Jennie Rooney) ir vēstures un angļu valodas pasniedzēja. "Sarkanā Džoana" ir viņas trešais romāns. Tā iedvesmas avots ir ilggadējās VDK spiedzes - latviešu ieceļotāja meitas Melitas Norvudas - dzīvesstāsts.

Genres: Historical Fiction, Fiction, Espionage, Thriller, Mystery, World War II, Book Club

384 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2013

About the author

Jennie Rooney was born in 1980 and grew up in Liverpool, Zambia and Bromley. She attended Newstead Wood School in Orpington, before reading History at Cambridge University. She taught English for a while in a primary school in France before training as a solicitor in London and Paris. Her first novel, Inside the Whale, was written during this time and was published by Chatto & Windus in 2008, and was shortlisted for the Costa First Novel Award, the Waterstones New Writer of the Year Award, and was a Richard and Judy Debut Book Club choice. Her second novel, The Opposite of Falling, is also published by Chatto & Windus.

She now lives in West London, where she writes and teaches History and English. She is also a regular creative writing tutor for Skyros Writers' Lab and is a patron of the National Academy of Writing. She is currently working on her third novel and a screenplay.

Reviews

[Pam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although this novel has a true story at its heart, it is not a non-fiction novel such as Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood. I think it would have been better sticking closer to the real spy, Melita Norwood, an English woman outed by a KGB defector in the 1990s. The real British spies of the thirties through the Cold War have always made for fascinating reading. Ms. Norwood’s story was unique because she was a woman, she stuck with her story of passing on atomic bomb secrets to Russia “to make it fair” and remained in England to be caught in old age.

Red Joan shifts between her impressionable youth and her ultimate interrogation by MI5 in her late 80s. Young Joan is so terribly naive and those early parts of her life are handled like a romance novel. Old Joan interests me more but is still hard to fathom. Maybe that’s the point.

[Susan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Based on the real life story of Melita Norwood, an eighty seven year old woman who was unmasked as the KGB's longest serving British spy in 1999, this is a flawless novel. Joan Stanley is a loving grandmother, living quietly in the suburbs, but she has a dark secret and it is about to come and haunt her. When she reads of the death of her old acquaintance Sir William Mitchell, she realises "they" have finally come for him, after all these years. If they came for him, they will come for her and, indeed, she is soon arrested and interrogated by MI5.

This novel swops effortlessly between the present, and Joan's interrogation, and flashbacks to her earlier life and her meeting with exotic Sonya Galich at Cambridge in 1937. We read of Sonya and her cousin, Leo, a known communist sympathiser. Joan is a naive young girl, but a totally sympathetic character. Everything that happens to her is realistic, from her crush on Leo to her wartime work in atomic research, working with Professor Max Davis. Throughout the entire book, Joan has a very personal viewpoint - good and bad, individual responsibility and love for the people she knows. One of the most poignant relationships is actually between Joan and her son, Nick, and her guilt at disrupting his life and her desire to protect him. In the end, you feel Joan may have been misguided, guilty or innocent, but she is basically a good person. This is a moving and intelligent book, beautifully written and totally believable. It would be an excellent, thought provoking novel for reading groups and I recommend it highly.

[Yvonne · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved, loved, loved this novel.
The spy thing provides the background but this is the story of one woman's life which shows us what made her the person she was. We see her as a daughter, a best friend, a lover, a scientist, a wife and a mother... and a traitor.
This is a very well-structured novel with excellent characterisation. Clearly very well researched. It examines the nuances of motivation and conscience. Great stuff. Highly recommended.

[Ints Brunenieks · Rating 4 out of 5]

Šī grāmata nav Džeimsa Bonda stila grāmata ar slēpšanos un pakaļdzīšanos, šaušanu un intrigām. Grāmatas aizraujošā anotācija sākotnēji lika vilties. Šī varētu būt kā praktiskais piemērs Suvorova grāmatai "Spiegošanas pamati" .
Patiesībā grāmata ir par cilvēka iekšējo pasauli un lielajām izvēlēm lielo vēsturisko pārmaiņu kontekstā. Grāmatā 80 gadu vecumā tiek aizturēta Anglijā dzīvojoša sieviete, kura kādā savas dzīves posmā ir nodevusi valstiski svarīgu informāciju PSRS. Nedēļu ilgās pratināšanas gaitā Džoanna atceras un daļēji arī izstāsta visu savu dzīvi no jaunības līdz pat mūsdienām. Patiesībā spiegošana ir tikai kā dekorācija, lai atspoguļotu cilvēka psiholoģiju.
Grāmatā saistoši bija pavērot Džoannas personiskos pārdzīvojumus un konkrētās rīcības iemeslus. Kā vienkārša bet gudra meitene nonāk līdz spiegošanai PSRS labā. Izrādās, ka tas nav pat finansiālais ieguvums. Jau iepriekš biju domājis, cik gan grūti vienkāršam cilvēkam ir pieņemt pareizos lēmumus lielajos vēstures notikumos, it īpaši pie varu pārmaiņām pasaules politikā. Šī grāmata vēl jo vairāk lika par to aizdomāties.
Grāmata par draudzību un nodevību, par patiesu mīlestību un piedošanu.
Līdz piecām zvaigznēm pietrūka pavisam nedaudz.

[Morgan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Based on true events.

Red Joan is the fictionalized story of Melita Stedman Norwood who at the age of 87 was accused of being a Soviet spy during the Cold War.

While it appears that she did what she was accused of doing my take-away is that Melita was a naive young woman who did the wrong thing for (in her estimation) the right reasons.

The film “Red Joan” w/Judi Dench is based on this book.

Of special interest is Melita’s obituary in “The Guardian” in June 2005.

[Vibhu Mahajan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I immensely enjoyed this book. Being a political science degree holder, I'm always fascinated by anything related to WWII and especially espionage.

This book is a twist about the inner struggle of a British woman, Joan Robson, who becomes a Soviet spy as soon as the US drops the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Throughout the book, you see her starting her journey as a naive doe-eyed college student who befriends an enigmatic Russian named Sonya. She is quickly drawn into communist rallies and talks, while at the same time the police is keeping tabs on any communist activity unbeknownst to her or anyone until she is in her 80's when MI5 finally catches up to her. Joan works as an assistant to a secret government organization working on the atomic bomb in Britain. During the war, she smuggles bomb-making secrets to the Soviets through the help of her communist friends. After the war, she lives in hiding in Australia but is somehow encouraged to come back to the UK after some time. It is at this point that her secret history unravels.

The writer flip flops between MI5 questioning Joan, and then Joan reminiscing about that scene in her mind, struggling to figure out what to say and whether to say anything at all. The inner turmoil of a young girl growing up in the 30's and 40's in Britain surrounded by war is clearly illustrated in the writing. Joan wants to do what's right. She believes in her heart that she is doing exactly that even when she is questioned by MI5 later on. How could she spy against her own home country? Joan still believes the communist propoganda and that she only wanted to play fair. It wasn't fair that only America had the bomb...the Soviet Union needed it to even the playing field as a deterrent so Hiroshima and Nagasaki never happened again.

As a reader, I really started to relate to Joan. Even though I didn't agree with her communist beliefs, I felt I could put myself in her shoes and see how easily swayed I could have been in those days if I was alone at University with no friends and family around to protect me from the charismatic Soviet sympathizers. Joan never really sees herself as belonging to Russia as a spy. She has such a hard time admitting to herself that she committed treason, and she always justifies it as "doing the right thing". But she knows that her actions have consequences and she will address them when the time comes.

The writing was excellent and I could keep up with all the back and forth time lapses. The author titles all the chapters with the day of the week and time of questioning so you know how far you are along the interrogation of Joan by MI5 in present day. I also liked the character development and how people she thought she knew changed. Joan still gave Sonya the benefit of the doubt at the end even though she knew that Sonya had betrayed her. The clues were all there. Joan always saw the good in people and was loyal to her friends to the end. I liked that the author spent time researching the book and it was based on true events.

I would recommend this book to a friend. I read it really fast as I found the history of espionage intriguing. Don't expect James Bond with fast cars and martinis. Expect an emotionally charged book on why people do the things they do and even when faced with a trial and prison, do not waver in their convictions.

[Bettie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Book at Beachtime

Eleanor Bron and Olivia Hallinan read Jennie Rooney's thriller.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/...

A novel loosely based on this woman's exploits:

British spy Melita Norwood helped speed up USSR's atomic bomb programme. Melita Norwood, the "granny spy" who passed Britain's nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union, helped speed up Stalin's atomic bomb programme by five years, according to a controversial new biography.



Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...

Solid 3* but maybe I would have preferred the non fiction:

[Belinda Vlasbaard · Rating 4 out of 5]

4,25 sterren - Nederlandse paperback

Een flink aantal jaren geleden herhaalde de BBC weer eens een serie over het vooroorlogse leven van studenten in Cambridge. Thema was de populariteit van het communisme onder de studenten. Wie deze geschiedenis een beetje kent, kon alle hoofdpersonen thuisbrengen: de ‘Cambridge Spy Ring’ van roemruchte Britten uit de hogere klassen die in hun studententijd werden geronseld als spionnen voor de Sovjet-Unie. De ‘grote vier’ Anthony Blunt, Guy Burgess, Kim Philby en Donald Maclean kwamen voorbij, en een aantal onbekendere personen. Goede documentaire trouwens.

Voor de Britten is dit aspect van hun geschiedenis een korstje waar ze maar aan blijven pulken en waar ze romans, toneelstukken en filmscripts over blijven produceren.

Gebaseerd is dit boek, volgens het nawoord op het waargebeurde verhaal van een onbekende vrouwelijke spion, Melita Norwood, die in 1999 op 87-jarige leeftijd werd ontmaskerd. De Britse schrijfster, die zelf in Cambridge gestudeerd heeft, kwam dit verhaal op het spoor via een krantenbericht met de geniale kop ‘The Spy Who Came In From The Co-op’.

Door ingenieus heen en weer te springen tussen heden en verleden, wordt het verhaal verteld van de eveneens 87-jarige Joan, die op een ochtend bezoek krijgt van de Britse inlichtingendienst. Anthony Blunt komt, vermomd, in de roman voor, als jaargenoot en bekende van Joan.

Er wordt ook iets gesuggereerd over een personage in wie kenners van de ‘Spy Ring’ Guy Burgess kunnen herkennen, die als dubbelspion zowel voor de Russen als de Britten actief was. Je zou ook mogelijk enige overeenkomst te zien tussen Joan en John Cairncross, een spion die Britse atoomgeheimen doorsluisde.

Het grote verschil is dat de mannen in de ‘Cambridge Spy Ring’ mannen waren, met alle privileges van dien, en Joan niet. Joan kon als studente natuurkunde geen graad behalen, want een ‘diploma’ was het hoogst bereikbare. Dit werkte spiontechnisch gezien in haar voordeel. Zij kon zonder problemen papieren kopiëren; iedereen ging ervan uit dat een meisje toch niet begreep waar de berekeningen over gingen.

Rode liefde gaat echter niet over spionage en zelfs niet over politiek. Joan Stanley was geen communiste. Haar humanistische, vaag socialistische ideeën had zij van huis meegekregen en voor de rest was het eigenlijk een kwestie van toeval. Als zij haar ‘handler’ nooit had ontmoet, was zij niet verliefd geworden en had haar leven er anders uitgezien. Hoe het toeval iemands persoonlijke geschiedenis beïnvloedt, en hoe elke beslissing consequenties heeft, toont deze roman helder aan.

Ik ben geen communist maar geloof wel in een gesloten beurs systeem, ruilhandel. Zodat we delen wat we hebben.

  

[Francesco · Rating 3 out of 5]

A metà tra il romanzo storico e un thriller sulle premesse della Guerra Fredda, questo romanzo riesce a deludere sotto entrambi i fronti.
Come romanzo storico è pessimo perché, pur essendo ambientato prevalentemente tra il 1935 e il 1945, non restituisce affatto l'atmosfera di quegli anni e anzi in diversi passaggi si prende delle "licenze poetiche" non necessarie nemmeno a rendere la storia più accattivante. I personaggi, inoltre, non sono né totalmente inventati (ma interagenti con reali figure storiche) né "versioni romanzate" di persone realmente esistite. La protagonista è sì ispirata a Melita Norwood ma l'autrice ha costruito un personaggio decisamente differente.
Proprio per questo motivo il libro è deludente anche come thriller di spionaggio: perché Joan è sì un pezzo cruciale della rete di spie del KGB e contribuisce sì al contrabbando di progetti segreti per la costruzione della Bomba Atomica, ma viene ribadito a più riprese come lei non sia veramente una sostenitrice del comunismo in quanto tale. Il suo principale cruccio è che "le informazioni dovrebbero essere condivise" e solo quando diventa "evidente" che gli USA intendono usare la bomba come deterrente anche contro i russi si lascia convincere. Poi però ci viene detto che è convinta che il comunismo "sia solo stato applicato male", quindi deve anche avere abbracciato certe idee politiche andando oltre a un semplice socialismo.
Per carità, il libro scorre ed essendo raccontato su due piani temporali (quello che accadde durante la Guerra e quello che accade nel 2005 quando l'MI5 la interroga) è anche interessante vedere come pian piano le domande degli agenti le fanno rivivere eventi ormai quasi dimenticati - o forse è la lettura in parallelo di IT che me lo ha fatto apprezzare particolarmente. Purtroppo la protagonista mi è sembrata troppo inconcludente e troppo poco "scaltra" come spia - magari ha pesato anche l'inconscio parallelo con The Americans, ma Joan è davvero troppo idealista e ingenua per essere la spia inglese del KGB più longeva.

[Elizabeth Ducie · Rating 5 out of 5]

There’s not been a huge amount of publicity for Jennie Rooney’s third novel, ‘Red Joan’. I’d never heard of it, not of Rooney herself, until it was nominated as our monthly read by one of the members of my book club, and she only found it via a small article in a Sunday newspaper. This understated arrival seems most appropriate for such a well-written and gently presented novel. With its beautifully-designed cover, credited to Suzanne Dean, it suggests a quiet, well-behaved story about quiet, well-behaved characters, despite the title.

But appearances can be so deceptive. The book packs a real, if somewhat genteel, punch. It is inspired by the story of 87 year old Melita Norwood who, in the 1990s, was uncovered as one of the most important spies of the Cold War era. However, in the authors’ notes, Rooney emphasises that Joan is not Melita and her story is very different.

Joan’s quiet widowhood in Kent revolves around art classes and visits from friends and family, until one day, at the age of eighty-five, she is accused by MI5 officers of passing secrets to the Russians during the 1940s and 1950s. For the reader, it is quite clear, even from the start, that she is guilty. However, this is a character-driven story, based more on the how and, most importantly, the why, rather than on the what. Told through a series of flash-backs to the investigators and in the presence of her son, Nick, Joan is torn between telling the truth and protecting her friends, former colleagues and her son. We meet Joan’s glamorous, self-centred friend Sonya and her cousin Leo, who is Joan’s first love. Both are damaged, compelling characters and it is easy to see how Joan is drawn to them. We watch Joan with her boss Max, as he falls in love with her and she dares to hope there can be life and love after Leo.

I have only two niggles with the book; firstly, it is all written in the present tense, including the flashbacks. Some readers dislike this style intensely. I certainly found it distracting on occasion. Secondly, the police report after Max’s interrogation seemed unrealistic in its sarcastic comments, inappropriate in a formal document.

But these are minor issues only. ‘Red Joan’ is a beautifully-narrated story. Details are released slowly, expertly, when they can no longer be hidden. It is a book that could raise questions in readers’ minds; it certainly did for our book group. Is Joan a traitor; or a heroine? Is it ever justified to ‘betray one’s country’? How should crimes which are more than a half a century old be dealt with by the authorities?

Having now discovered Jennie Rooney, I’m off to read her first two novels as well.

[Ieva · Rating 3 out of 5]

Šķiet, ka grāmatai ir nepareizs mārketings. Tā tiek pieteikta kā vēsturisks spiegu romāns - bet drīzāk tas ir attiecību romāns ar vēsturisko spiegu piešprici. Visa pamatā ir nevis spiedzes pārliecība, bet ļaušanās smadzeņu skalošanai no ļoti harizmātiska vīrieša un draudzenes puses, un romāna gaitu nosaka attiecības ar tiem diviem, nevis kas cits.
Turklāt, latviešu publika tika uzkurināta, uzsverot, ka spiedzes tēla pamatā ir latviešu izcelsmes konkrēta sieviete - Melita Norvuda, taču diemžēl tas pats ir tik ļoti nosacīts (tik vien, ka reālā un romāna spiedzes ir strādājušas pie eksperimentiem, kam bija jārada britu atombumba un nav pieķertas līdz viņu 80+ gadiem), ka nākas vilties.
Tā kā gaidīju kaut ko pavisam citu, vīlos.

[Clive Grewcock · Rating 3 out of 5]

We saw the film version recently, and yes I know you cannot criticise Judi Dench, but crikey what a turgid film. I decided to borrow the book the film was based on from the library mainly because I was staggered that a story inspired by the true story of Melita Norwood could make such a dire film.
So perversely I wanted to check that the book wasn't as dull as the film. It turns out that whilst the book is flawed in places, with several flaky plot points, the good news is that the book is miles better than the film.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

From BBC Radio 4 Extra - Book at Beachtime:
A knock at the door threatens Joan Stanley's 50-year-old secret.

From ImdB:
The story of Joan Stanley (Dame Judi Dench), who was exposed as the K.G.B.'s longest-serving British spy.

[Romanticamente Fantasy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Churchill tossisce. «Sa cosa state facendo, professo­re?»
Max si interrompe. Sbarra gli occhi. «Sì, signore. Cer­to che lo so.»
«E pensa mai a come verremo giudicati dalle genera­zioni future?»
«Sì, signore.»
Churchill si rilassa sulla sedia ed estrae una scatola di fiammiferi. Ne tira fuori uno, lo accende, poi pesca un sigaro dalla tasca e avvicina la fiamma a un’estremità. «E la notte riesce a dormire?»
Max gli rivolge un mezzo sorriso. «Non dormo da an­ni» risponde.
«Ah, benvenuto nel club. So bene cosa vuol dire.» Churchill si concentra sul sigaro, se lo infila in bocca e tira avidamente finché non si accende. Max si schiarisce la voce, avendo perso il filo del di­scorso. «Non intendevo spaventarla» prosegue Churchill nel suo modo ben articolato di parlare. «Volevo solo assicu­rarmi che questa cosa non fosse costruita da un mostro. Se mi avesse detto che dorme come un sasso tutte le not­ti senza pensare minimamente al prodotto finale, proba­bilmente sarei tornato a Londra con la sua lettera di di­missioni in tasca.»
Max sorride nervosamente. «Ci sono altre applicazio­ni per questa ricerca» afferma. «Mi piace pensare che porterà del bene nel mondo. Dopo la guerra.»
.
Un necrologio sul Daily Telegraph, che parla di Sir William Mitchell, deceduto serenamente nel sonno, sta per cambiare la vita di una ottantacinquenne che abita in una piccola villetta in periferia. Joan Stanley non si fa illusioni: alla fine la verità è venuta alla luce, e ora verranno a prendere anche lei. E infatti, poco dopo, alla sua porta bussano due agenti dell’MI5, che la portano a Londra per interrogarla. Non è pentita di ciò che ha fatto, il suo unico rimpianto e che ora Nick, l’amatissimo figlio che ha adottato con il marito, verrà a conoscenza della verità nel peggior modo possibile e la giudicherà. Perché quella donna che dipinge acquerelli e cura il suo giardino è stata parte di un progetto che ha fatto la storia e ha cambiato il volto del mondo. Un’arma che avrebbe solo dovuto servire da deterrente e che, quando è stata usata su Hiroshima, l’ha convinta a prendere una decisione con cui ha dovuto venire a patti per tutto il resto della sua vita.

Attraverso la narrazione di continui flashback, ripercorriamo con Joan la sua vita, la vediamo iscriversi a Cambridge, una delle pochissime donne ammesse, e incontrare Leo e Sonya Galich, due cugini molto affascinanti che simpatizzano per il comunismo. La vedremo partecipare a riunioni politiche, senza mai aderire agli ideali dei suoi amici, ma viverle come un modo per stare vicino al ragazzo di cui si è innamorata, Leo. Se lei, per gran parte della storia, si aspetterà una dichiarazione d’amore, per il lettore appare evidente che i suoi ideali e la politica sono ciò che Leo ama di più. Pur con la sua grande intelligenza, Joan è un’ingenua, specie per quanto riguarda la sua amicizia con Sonya, che lei considera la sua migliore amica, ed è incapace di percepire quello che veramente la giovane russa sente verso di lei. Sonya è una donna passionale, che ha verso il cugino un atteggiamento possessivo che Joan non nota e che la porterà a fidarsi di lei, prendendo una decisione che influirà su tutta la sua vita. L’inizio della guerra vede Leo lontano, al confine, e Joan inserita in un progetto ammantato di segretezza, capeggiato dal professor Max Davis. La simpatia che questi sente verso di lei farà in modo che la giovane si trovi nella condizione di venire a conoscenza di formule e progetti estremamente riservati.

Nonostante si parli di spie, questo non è un libro di azione, anzi, la prima parte è davvero molto lenta e a mio avviso penalizza alquanto la lettura.

Il personaggio di Joan appare lontano dalla scaltra spia che ci aspettiamo: è semplicemente una donna che si è trovata nel posto giusto e nella condizione ideale per copiare documenti che ben pochi avrebbero potuto vedere. Una donna che non è grado di capire quando viene manipolata, che mette la sua fiducia in mano a persone che si riveleranno bugiarde e gelose. Non prende una decisione in base ai suoi ideali politici perché, sulla scia dell’orrore per lo sgancio di quella bomba che non avrebbe mai dovuto essere usata, la sua coscienza le dice che è la cosa giusta da fare. Avendo collaborato al progetto si sente colpevole, e solo più tardi si renderà conto di quali orribili conseguenze il suo gesto abbia portato. Eppure una parte di lei sarà sempre convinta di avere agito nel modo corretto, è una persona che ha tentato di fare del suo meglio, convinta di avere evitato, a torto o a ragione, la morte di molte persone. Non è una donna dal sangue freddo né particolarmente coraggiosa, anzi, al primo accenno di pericolo scappa.

Se il personaggio di Joan non brilla per scaltrezza, quello di Sonya dipinge una donna che persegue i suoi obiettivi e che ha per Leo un insano sentimento. Sarà bravissima a impedire che lui e Joan si avvicinino troppo e quando si accorgerà di non poterlo più fare, preferirà metterlo in una situazione pericolosa pur di non perderlo.

Basato sulla figura veramente esistita di Melita Norwood, questo libro ci racconta i retroscena di una ricerca che ha portato nelle mani dell’uomo una grande forza distruttrice. Uomini spinti a correre una folle corsa per paura che il nemico potesse arrivare prima di loro a dei risultati, e convinti che una volta finita la guerra questa scoperta avrebbe portato dei benefici all’umanità, forse, senza valutare davvero quali sarebbero stati i risultati.

Un libro ben scritto, che racconta la storia di una protagonista che ha preso una decisione seguendo il suo cuore, riuscendo a non farsi scoprire per decenni, non tanto per essere stata brava nel cancellare le tracce, ma solamente perché la sua figura è stata sottovalutata in quanto donna.
.
Lucia63 - per RFS

[Doreen · Rating 3 out of 5]

In 2005, Joan Stanley, an 85-year-old widow and grandmother, is accused of passing atomic secrets to Stalin’s Russia during the Cold War. In five days of interrogation by MI5, Joan relives her days at Cambridge (where she became friends with two cousins and communist sympathizers, Leo and Sonya Galich), and her work as a secretary in a lab researching the components of nuclear technology. During her questioning, she is joined by her son Nick, a barrister who is totally unaware of his mother’s wartime activities.

Although the book deals with espionage, it is not an action-packed spy thriller. It is more of a psychological study which examines how a person could come to betray one’s country by revealing state secrets to a foreign power. The author indicates that her book was inspired by the true story of Melita Norwood, an 87-year-old Brit who, in 1999, was revealed to have served as a spy for the KGB.

Joan is a very naïve girl when she arrives at university. For example, she falls in love with Leo and the two have a sexual relationship, but he never tells her he loves her. Years later, she still “wants him to run after her, catching her in his arms and kissing her in a blaze of sunlight like a princess in a fairy tale, and declare that he loves her.” Her sheltered life until she leaves for Cambridge may account for this youthful naivety, but it is incredible that as an octogenarian she believes she can hide the truth from her son and MI5. She is also not very astute when it comes to judging people. Sonya, for instance, behaves strangely several times and even tells Joan, “’I’m a chameleon. Surely you know that by now.’” Nevertheless, in all their years of friendship, Joan never guesses the truth about this woman who convinces her to aid her cause; in fact, her typical response is to feel “guilt for having worried, even momentarily, that Sonya was not to be trusted.” These traits are not what one would expect in a spy and so are somewhat problematic in the novel.

The reader does come to see Joan as a good person who is torn between loyalty to her country and a need to do what she believes is right: “she recognizes for the first time that she is in a unique position to make things fair. To make the world a safer place. To do her duty, as her father once told her she must.” The justifications she uses for her actions are revealing: “[S]he tells herself that what she is doing is not really that significant. It is how she justifies what she is doing, being careful always to make sure that none of the intelligence she passes on is information that she actually seeks out. It is information that is given to her, one way or another; it passes into her knowledge, and then it drops out again. She shares it rather than steals it . . . ” Despite her faulty rationalization, Joan can be admired for her qualities as a mother: she loves her son a great deal, feels guilt at disrupting his life, and has a strong desire to protect him.

There are some weaknesses in this book. A message is waiting for Joan at her mother’s home even though Joan never told anyone she was going there. Later, a second message from another person reaches her there. Joan’s job at the lab presents issues. Would the recommendation of a British internee in an internment camp in Canada be sufficient to get her the job? Would she have been so easily given security clearance since her attendance at communist rallies was known? Is it logical that a secretary rather than another scientist would go on a trans-Atlantic trip with the director of the research facility at which she works?

The book is not flawless, but it gives one pause to think: Is it possible “to be certain of the things you would do and the things you would not do”? “Where does responsibility begin, and where does it end?”

Note: I received an advance reading copy of this book from the publisher vy.ia NetGalley.

Please check out my reader's blog (http://schatjesshelves.blogspot.ca/) and follow me on Twitter (@DCYakabuski).

[Gunita Nagle · Rating 3 out of 5]

Spiegu romāns gan mazliet smaržo pēc dāmu parfīma, bet tik un tā aizraujošs. Ar nepacietībā trīcošām rokām grāmjot pēc šīs grāmatas, biju naivi cerējusi, ka Kembridžā vēsturi studējusī autore būs vairāk izmantojusi padomju spiedzes (rakstīts, ka latviskas izcelsmes, latviešu sociāldemokrāta Aleksandra Zirņa meita) Melitas Norvudas dzīvesstāstu. Bet, nē, romāna uzbūvei izmantotas ir, piemēram, spiegu savaņģošanas shēmas. Mazliet traucēja, ka romānā ir pārlieku daudz izmantota fantāzija. Līdz galam neizpratu, kā gan Lielbritānijā dzīvojoša sieviete var līdz sīkām detaļām uzzināt, ka Lubjankā nogalināts komunisma idejām līdz nāvei uzticīgais Leo. Kāpēc Džoana, jau apzinoties staļinisma represiju apmēru, turpina nodot dokumentu kopijas caur Sonju Maskavai. Kā gan viņas draugam Viljamam izdodas no cietuma izpestīt spiegošanā apsūdzēto Maksu? Man nepatīk, ja pēc romāna izlasīšanas ir pārāk daudz neatbildētu jautājumu. Turklāt vienkāršāk ir izdomāt dzīvesstāstu spiedzei, kas bija vīlusies padomju Krievijas īstenotajā politikā. Grūtāk saprast, kā Norvuda līdz pat kapa maliņai varēja palikt uzticīga komunismam.

[Evija · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ja vajadzētu šo grāmatu raksturot vienā vārdā, es teiktu - dāmīšromāns. Patiesībā jau nebija slikts, ja vien uzraksti uz vāka un anotācija nemudinātu gaidīt pavisam citādu stāstu. Ja man saka, ka grāmata būs par latviešu izcelsmes spiedzi, kas Padomijai pārdeva atombumbu, es sagaidu nianses par to, kā tas varēja notikt, kādi bija sadarbības tīkli, emocionālā spriedze, taču šī sižeta līnija attīstīta ļoti vāji, tā vietā daudz vairāk pieminot mīlestības fineses un māsīcas ūdeļādas kažoku. Es uz vāka liktu aprakstu, kas varētu skanēt aptuveni tā - latviešu meitene, kas iemīlējās padomju zēnā un tādēļ gluži nejauši kļuva par spiedzi. Tas būtu daudz tuvāk patiesajam grāmatas sižetam.

[Liene · Rating 5 out of 5]

Uz vēstures fona veidots stāsts par apstākļu sakritībām, izvēlēm, rīcību un sekām. Ko darītu tu?

[Sintija Meijere · Rating 3 out of 5]

Autore iedvesmojusies no reālas personas dzīvesstāsta - Melita Norvuda (dzim. Zirnis), kuras tēvs bija latvietis (!) 40 gadus bija VDK spiedze Lielbritānijā un Aukstā kara laikā nodeva PSRS slepenu kodolinformāciju. Norvuda tika atmaskota tikai 90tajos, kad viņai pašai bija jau tuvu 90 gadiem.
Grāmatā ir interesanta vēsturiskā līnija - sieviešu izglītības iespējas, komunisms, fašisms, atombumbu vēsture, 2.Pasaules karš.
Tomēr kaut kas man līdz galam nesaslēdzās - nezinu, vai autores rakstības stils, vai spriedzes trūkums vai varoņi.
Stāsts ļoti interesants, bet kaut kas man pietrūka.
3,5 ⭐️

[Ape · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really engrossing thriller, not just the spy mystery part, but also about life. I found those parts particularly poignant, the life, birth, death and the not-life. Also the questions of how well do you know your parents, how much of their past do they actually owe you (thinking of how Joan's son, Nick reacts to a lot of the revelations about her youth) and the reasons for people doing seemingly "terrible" things.

Joan goes to Cambridge university in the the 1930s to get a science degree (well, certificate, as women couldn't get degrees then) and whilst there she gets to know Sonya, a Russian who has been living in the UK for years having fled the motherland. Her cousin, Leo is also there, having fled Russia to Germany, then leaving Germany in disgust at the growth of facism. He is now an idealist communist, earnest and unable to see anything bad about the mother country or Stalin's regime. The three spend a lot of time together, then when Joan leaves the uni, the second world war starts and she gets a job at a science lab. She's hired for her studies, and yet, as the lady in the building, her job is making the tea, filing and being a PA for the scientist in charge of department. These are the good old days when women are really underestimated, undervalued and patronised. And in such a position, they can potentially make the best spies.

This tale actually starts off when Joan is in her 80s and MI5 have just realised that she may have been heavily involved in espionage. They've got a week to get the story out of her, before her name is to be given to the House of Commons. So it flicks between the treatment of this old, suspected spy, and her story working through going to university to whether she did or didn't turn to spying (you'll have to read it to find out), as well as her son, a lawyer, and his reactions to the accusations and realisation that he doesn't know everything about his mother. There is sadness in here, especially chronologically at the end of her life, yet because the story flicks between now and the 30s and 40s, the book actually ends in a really positive place for her, looking forward to the future and hopefully some proper happiness. Even though there's a bittersweet feel as we do know how it's all going to work out.

[Kristīne · Rating 5 out of 5]

Grāmata ir burvīga.
Bet nelielu vilšanos grāmatas beigās sagādāja autores piezīmes, kurās viņa atklāj, cik maz kopīga ir Melitai Norvudai ar grāmatas Džoanu. Piezīmes pamanījos izlasīt pirms pabeidzu grāmatu un tas visu sabojāja. Zaudēju sajūsmu un ticību.
Grāmatā Džona tiek attaisnota vai vismaz autore liek just līdzi Džoanai un uztvert viņu kā situācijas upuri ar cēliem ideāliem, bet Melita esot bijusi pārliecināta komuniste un spiedze līdz "kaulam".
Es biju sajūsmināta par to attaisnojumu, kādu autore ir izdomājusi, noticēju, ka tā ir bijusi īstā Melitas rīcības motivācija un tad piedzīvoju tādu vilšanos.
Bet visu cieņu autorei par ieguldīto izpētes darbu grāmatas rakstīšanā. Parasti tieši tās grāmatas, kurās autori atzīstas, ka grāmata neskaitāmas reizes rediģēta, pārrakstīta un piedzīvojusi vairākus melnrakstus, rezultātā ir lasāma un baudāma ne tikai pašam autoram un vēl kādam, bet piedzīvo lielu lasītāju mīlestību.

[Egita · Rating 5 out of 5]

Spiegu romāns ar reālās dzīves prototipu, manuprāt, ļoti labs. Ja gribētu būt piekasīga, varbūt arī atrastu kādu vājo punktu sižeta līnijās un galvenās varones īpašībās, bet lai nu paliek.

[Nova · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant! Absolutely loved it! This book is set during the Cold War when Russia, the US and England are developing the atom bomb.

[Nadia · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this, however I had seen the movie before so I knew what to expect.

Joan’s moral struggle was well written, in both timelines.

Some parts were slow, and the ending a bit vague leaving it open to the reader to interpret, but it was still well written and impactful.

[Gretchen Bernet-Ward · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rather than air-raids, food coupons and bombed out buildings, this story is character-driven, an emotional account of the Cold War, an internal struggle between what is right and wrong, Joan Stanley justifying the creation of the atomic bomb and her part in it. As a spy she finds fear and romance along the way, but in the end does she embrace vindication or repentance when she is caught?

I enjoyed this story and put another book on hold to finished it, however, it took a while to get my head around Joan Stanley’s rationale. Growing up, I had heard about the Official Secrets Act and censored letters from my father who was in the second world war, but never about spies selling secrets: I gleaned by inference that espionage was bad news for all sides. Joan appears to live a long and charmed life in this regard.

After a sheltered schooling, Joan attends Cambridge University where she meets flamboyant student Sonya; and she is easily swayed by Sonya’s handsome cousin Leo Galich. Slowly Joan is groomed to become a spy and eventually steals top secret documents. While her resolute decision to help the war effort unfolds beautifully and logically (to Joan at least) I couldn’t help thinking “Surely she isn’t that naive?” But she is, and this propels the story.

That, and romance. This is where cousin Leo comes in. What can I say about earnest socialist Leo? He is easy to picture—any handsome, charismatic, idealistic Uni student would fit his mould. I can excuse Joan’s love-struck crush on Leo but not her belief in her new friend Sonya, a powerful influence. I thought Joan’s shared fur coat was a nice touch, it was the innocent thread throughout the story but it spoke volumes about their personalities.

Joan (loosely based on real spy Melita Norwood) specialises in theoretical physics and when she gets a job in a metals research facility, the touch-and-go desire with Professor Max Davis is well done. I liked the transitions between past and present, particularly her struggles with son Nick who wants her to denounce the spying allegations, but she's resistant and gradually the reasons unfold. Well worth reading!

More on my blog with fur coat image
https://thoughtsbecomewords.com/2020/...

[Lindsay · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was one of the lucky First Reads winners of this book. This is an updated review, because it stuck with me more than I expected it to, so I felt like it needed to be bumped up to 4 stars, and also because I wanted to expand on my opinions a bit.

First of all, I really enjoyed the premise of this book, even though it wasn't quite what I had been expecting. I figured it would be more of a spy novel than the character driven book that it ended up being, but it still really worked. I found it very interesting how despite the fact that the reader immediately knows that Joan is guilty, this book still manages to make her seem surprisingly sympathetic. Her motives are made very clear, and the whole situation becomes wonderfully ambiguous, attesting to the fact that life is very rarely black and white.

As others have mentioned, the tense is somewhat annoying in this book. Writing the whole thing in the present tense seemed like a poor choice to me, given how focused on flashbacks the story is. It could have been improved, I think, by distinguishing more between the past and present.

A couple of things did bug me about this book, including Joan's relationship with Leo. She comes across seeming very weak-willed and is so completely sucked in by him that it was actually pretty frustrating. However, Max provided a nice contrast to Leo, and I definitely appreciated his character. The other thing that irritated me from a writing standpoint is the fact that Joan whispers almost everything she says. The number of times I read "she whispered" was unbelievable. It's even in the blurb on the back of the book! "Joan's voice is almost a whisper". Speak up, Joan!

Anyway, like I said, this book made more of an impression on me than I'd initially realized, and it ended up being a really enjoyable read. I was very lucky to have won it.

[Linda Vituma · Rating 4 out of 5]

Vai drīkst ielikt 1 zvaigznīti par neizlasītu grāmatu? Intriģējošs sižets, aktuāla tēma, motivācija izprast jauna cilvēka prāta darbību UN pilnīga nespēja noturēt uzmanību tekstam. Valods pliekanuma, sižeta uzbūves, literāro dāvanu trūkuma dēļ...? Sakiet, lūdz, kurā tieši brīdī esmu kļuvusi tik cimperlīga?Viena no retajām neizlasītajām grāmatām. Sēroju.

Papildināts: Gadījums, kad filma ir labāk par grāmatu. Rets, bet gadījums. + 1 zvaigznīte par to.

Vēlreiz papildināts: Vēl viena zvaigznīte par wikipēdijas rakstu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melita_... un faktu, ka Melitas tēvs bija latvietis. Skarbi.

Atkārtoti papildināts: Ja par grāmatā uzrunātām tēmām domāšana turpinās vēl un vēl, grāmata IR pelnījusi vēl vienu zvaigzni. Lūk, kas nedod man mieru: uzlūkojot sirmo kundzi, klausoties viņā, lasot nākamo grāmatu - Starp divām pasaulēm. Kalpības gadi un citi raksti - rodas netīkama sajūta, cik ļaunums ir klātesošs un varens mūsu ikdienā. Cik ļoti ļaunums realizējas un cik ļoti nolemti tas var izskatīties, būt. Un cik grūti saprast, cik ļoti bail kļūst. Par sevi - vai spēju atpazīt ļaunumu, vai spēju neļauties tam, vai spēju nerīkoties tajā.

[Cait · Rating 5 out of 5]

THIS WAS AMAZING.

The framing device was really well executed, it meant we got the POV of Joan at the time & in hindsight. Seeing her son's opinions was also an interesting addition.

At some points I was a bit incredulous at the fact that Joan a) seemingly had no idea that giving secrets to Russia wasn't a bad idea - though I did like that she was giving them up because she thought it was the morally correct thing to do, rather than for money or because of blackmail - and b) was so naive about Sonya & Leo.

and actually, UGH LEO. THE WORST. There was so much slimy manipulation. Like, at first it was obvious that he was just a douchebag who was playing around, but later on it was just blatant and gross and poor Joan.

I wish there had been more of Max, he was an interesting character. Same of William, his motivations are never really explained.

But yes: this was a communist spy novel that didn't really conform to the cliches and it was great for it.

[Rachel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic! I listened the second part of the book in a day, I couldn't stop.
Juliet Stevenson is an excellent audio narrator - she switches between young and old Joan seamlessly.
The only tiny grating issue about the book is the number of times Joan's beating heart is referenced. Annoying by the end.

Now I'm going to google the true story and inspiration behind this book.

[Shoshana G · Rating 5 out of 5]

Loosely inspired by the story of KGB spy Melita Norwood, this novel tells the story of Joan Stanley, an elderly woman who wakes up one morning to British Security Services knocking on her door asking questions about her involvement with a recently deceased suspected Communist spy. The week long interrogation delves into her studies at Cambridge, her past love for a Communist agitator, and her friendship with the bewildering Sonya. This book does a remarkable job of creating a sympathetic connection with Joan, as well as bringing up the moral grays of a conflict that we usually view in black and white. I loved it.