What an odd book. Richard Morgan's books always feature heavily on violence and sex, but the Kovacs series seem to hang together a little more coherently than Market Forces - all the way through, there's a sense of viciousness and disgust snarling from the page but I really can't understand about what!
The book tells the story of Chris Faulkner, a Mad Max/Gordon Gecko hybrid who works in Conflict Investment for the Shorn Corporation. The CI arm of the firm bank-roll paramilitary organisations and governments through revolutions in order to capture a slice of the profits afterwards. The Mad Max comparison comes from the way that these CI firms tender for bids, and compete for promotions. They duel to the death in heavily modified cars through a post-economic collapse wasteland inhabited by drug gangs and savages. The Gordon Gecko comparison stems from the fact that the entire world is run with a free markets, winner-takes-all, greed-is-good, kill-or-be-killed ethos. Chris is a star driver who has worked his way up from an unedifying start in the slums (which are called zones in the book) to become the next big thing at a hot-shot investment firm in the City of London. Throughout the book we're treated to his perspective on life, a savaging of free market principles, a savaging of socialism and (being a Richard K. Morgan book) a body count in the hundreds and a detailed sex scene or three.
The author's writing style is typically punchy, brutal and garish - a perfect match for the story. The book is also typically amoral - whilst Chris is the obvious hero of the book, he carries out all kinds of dangerous, illegal and immoral behaviour that it is difficult to empathise with. He starts the story as a tortured soul, not really believing in the things that he does for money. He ends it...well, maybe the best word is 'unconflicted'. He's not a very likeable hero.
And maybe that's the problem with the book. In the Kovacs series, the protagonist is fucked-up and violent but understandably so. He feels betrayed by his superiors, has the woman that he loves torn from his grasp, and is fucked over by life again and again. It's easy to like the man, he's relatively honourable and you can see why he does what he does. Contrastingly, the protagonist of Market Forces is, well, he's a dickhead.
I cannot believe the flimsy reason given in the book for why the bankers involved kill each other for promotions or tenders, and I cannot believe that Chris would really act the way that he does in the book.
The rationalisation for 'road-raging' in the book is that the competition is the only way to provide constant economic growth and the only way out of a post-collapse world. There's a few problems with that.
Firstly, the bankers are supposed to be smart and are portrayed as the ruling caste. Smart ruling-caste tend not to risk their own lives, preferring to risk someone else's life instead. But let's assume that they do want to engage in duels regularly and kill each other. I think it's unrealistic, but it's happened before, I suppose.
Secondly, why do it in car duelling? That seems really odd to me. Again, it's a little bit inconsistent with the setting. I suppose that it's supposed to be a near-future equivalent of jousting, but it comes across as something that, I guess, richer gang members may do - not the ruling-elite.
Thirdly, any firm worth their salt in such a system would develop a team of driving gladiators who would be free of all administrative duties to concentrate on combat for tenders. And they'd develop the cars themselves, given the amount of moeny at stake - even if they didn't really care about their people's lives. They wouldn't run modified production cars - it'd be more of an F1 setup than a touring car setup, surely?
Fourthly, Chris starts out the novel as a confused young man (despite the fact that he's personally killed a bunch of people), with an antipathy towards guns and a fondness for traditional Japanese codes of honour. He ends it as Patrick Bateman, on steroids, but with a heart of gold. Sort-of. I understand that the character development is the main point of the book, but I wasn't really sold on the transformation.
Fifthly, I spent most of the book confused. The acts that the ultra-capitalists carry out are presented very negatively at the beginning of the book. Throughout the story, the firm come across as total, total psychopaths. At the end of the book, the main character has joined in with the general lunacy - but I get the feeling that we are supposed to feel for him and hope that he can do good in the future. Personally, I just wanted nothing more to do with the entire unsavoury world.
Any one of these points would be trivial - but taken as a sum, they prevented me from suspending disbelief enough to really enjoy the book. The author's writing style is as fast-paced and addictive as ever, and I kept turning the pages until the end. At the end of the book though, I was left dissatisfied. Too many internal conflicts and too many black-and-white contrasts that suddenly flipped for no good reason. I liked the book, and it is full of awesome set pieces that belie its previous incarnation as a screen-play - but it's just too much to resolve without some help from the author, I think.