One learns over time
Damn. The way the book was going I was sure Fields had upgraded his proofreading team. But I caught an error, and in the process finally discovered what I must have missed before now - Kindles can provide two-way communication! That's a face-palm moment for me. Here's the error (find it if you want)): undo is used instead of undue. That's the error. Silly, right? But I can't help it - I got very well trained and love the language we speak. So once again, I urge Mr. Fields to upgrade his proof readers - unless he has a purpose to keep such errors in place. For me, being on the advance reader teams for a number of authors, I'm grateful to have discovered how I can communicate.
Fields has one other minor weakness,but it's only visible to those who have read his other books: once he has created a character (usually a minor one), he sticks with that introductory paragraph if he has to re-introduce. It's akin to something that happens in The Last Insurgent - something very familiar from the past pops up into prominence for Nadia Picard (the female half of his protagonist duo). And here's where I urge Mr. Fields to make a change.
The change? Drop out of the "let's write about secret independent government-paid assassins" genre. Perhaps they exist, and my dislike for them is, in effect, my effort is digging my head beneath the ground. But it strikes me that we have no way to say they do or don't other than the words from a number of popular authors. I mean, it makes for good reading (and make no mistake, this IS good reading), but living in a world where disinformation and conspiracy theories are tearing at cooperation and bipartisanship, any writer who continues to write about them needs to recognize that they are contributing to the chaos that envelops us.
And of rant. But as taut as this one is, tracing a hold- out IRA insurgent as he tries to take out the President in a final, ultimate act of terrorism, I want more Sean Kruger and/or company. Serial killers, embezzlers and even spies are known to exist. Venturing into the world of Wolf, however, forces the reader to accept that there are government killers. Maybe there are - but no one has offered definitive evidence. To me, it's a much bigger problem than misusing an adverb or repeating a character description.
How do I then justify my rating? Simple. J.C. Fields tells a very good story! Provided, of course, that you can deal with lots of deaths, some improbable location shifting by characters who are in the US one moment, then the UK, then back, and so on. Once you can suspend any dispelief, Fields has you on a string and reels you in. There's no evidence that he worked for any of the intelligence agencies he writes about, but he's mastered his craft well enough that it doesn't matter.
At present there's no clue about his next book. Will it be a Wolf novel? Kruger? Someone else? Regardless, I'll be reading it.