Espionage Aficionados discussion

This thread is specifically to discuss the prose craftsmanship, writing style, and other novelistic techniques of author John leCarre.

The plots of his works can also be touched upon, as well. Certainly they can.

But for anyone interested in authorial matters, this is where you can get into fine-grain details about the writing itself; or matters related to his career.

Since my profile is set to 'private' it occurs to me that my own appraisals of each of the major LeCarre novels may be reclusive to view. Here are the links, in case anyone's bored enough to rummage around in my remarks...

Call for the Dead
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Smiley's People
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Honourable Schoolboy
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
A Small Town in Grmany
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
The Spy Who Came in from the Cold
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
A Perfect Spy
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
The Looking Glass War
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

I'm glad you've started this thread, Feliks, thank you.

Let me hobble out to left field to run a flag up the foul pole.

Start with the climb with E. Howard Hunt; famous as a Watergate burglar, he was a prolific author and, obviously, an operative. As well, you might recall that in the wake of the 911 attacks, the intelligence community turned to Hollywood for likely terrorist scenarios. There’s a mix, I’d argue, between art and deception.

It's here, in the connection between writing and espionage that Mr. Cornwell’s role in MI5 and 6 might be examined. My dear Wikipedia reminds me that in 1999, John Michael Ward Bingham, 7th Baron of Clanmorris, who worked for MI5 and wrote 17 spy novels, was the inspiration for George Smiley (who of course was not a writer). Lord Clanmorris mentored Cornwell into le Carre.

While I may not be telling you anything you don't already know, it's the point I wish to make that matters, which is, that writers are necessary creatures hired into intelligence services.

Does that mean that during his employment Cornwell didn’t venture into the field? No. That’s research. What about case interrogations? Same thing. Interviews are the core of complex “plots.” Tapping phones? Experience lends itself to repertoire.

A mind as subtle as Cornwell’s could organize and vivify the disparate elements of intelligence collection. A house robbery in Phoenix, a vehicle accident on Connecticut Avenue in the nation's capital, and a death threat to a family member in New York, might appear to be separate events, unless the writer maps the travels of a half-remembered double agent.

The possibilities of characterization based on observation might steer recruitment (assuming the snitch isn’t as simple a swine as wine, women, and song). Elements of character might even be predictive. Absent the gore of psychology 401, a good story explains through action the abstractions of the DSM-5.

So, to my question. If you were the boss on the seventh floor, and you had a guy like Cornwell marching into the office, would you assign him to prepare a dossier or would you hand him a .22 loaded with bird shot?

I've never been all that concerned with this author's biography, myself. For one thing, how are we to know? We're merely the lay public. What do we ever get told? Nothing. Secondly, his writing really speaks for itself. However he came by his source-knowledge, is not for me to say. But the real-life intelligence community around the world, has long since confirmed aloud, the general accuracy of his fiction. Other authors have done so, too (fiction and nonfiction). But no matter---the writing itself, is good enough for me.

The writing itself is good enough for me, too. But I'm a busybody always trolling around for the bit of direct knowledge not imparted by the publishing world. Who knows who's out here on Goodreads, or what they may know.

And I like to speculate. Just because Donald Trump is an ass doesn't make opinions junk talk.

Opinions are meant to provoke different ways of thinking. Stimulate, might be a better word.

But I take you're point that I'm off topic. I'll go into the grain tomorrow.

Not at all--the question is squarely enough on topic. It's fine. Nothing at all wrong with it. I was just rendering my own personal opinion. Let further replies come trickling in.

For 'hidden byways' of knowledge you may want to join the "Anarchist Fiction" readers' group or the one called "Underground Knowledge". You can find these two using 'search' in the 'groups' section.

About a third through Our Kind Of Traitor and am , frankly, underwhelmed. Not least because of lazy research: a character describes Kandersteg, where I happen to live as 'very touristic'. Compared to many other Swiss Alpine villages eg Zermatt or Grindelwald, it is anything but that! The character also describes her boyfriend liking off piste skiing there. Again, anyone who has ever been to Kandersteg knows there's very little downhill, it's almost all Cross Country stuff there.
Will finish the book, but am currently disappointed. Anyone else agree/disagree?

Yes it's probably my least favourite Le Carre. Apart some interesting revelations about how Oligarchs shift their money around I don't recall anything memorable

Here's a review of the TV production of Le Carre's The Night Manager from the CIA's Studies in Intelligence:

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-fo...

I quite enjoyed this mini-series.

Michael
http://michaelconnick.com

Michael, thanks for the review. I also enjoyed the mini-series. I started the novel shortly after it came out, but I accidentally left it in a hotel room when I was about 25% into it. I never got back to the book, and was grateful for the tv series.

I recently offered some thoughts on Le Carre's "A Most Wanted Man" over on my blog.

I think it is excellent. Link below:

https://stevegoblefiction.wordpress.c...

The BBC has announced another Le Carre TV adaption, this time it's a 'Spy Who Came In From The Cold' remake.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. To me the book is almost perfect and doesn't need any adaption otherwise it just infiltrates my own version. In addition, it's already been done once and quite a decent attempt it was too.

What's everyone else's view?

I am all for it. The production team behind "The Night Manager" series is behind it, so I expect it to be good. A mini-series gives them more room to hit all the themes as opposed to tightening it all down for a two-hour theatrical release. And I think a TV product just might spark interest in the books; I had a couple of friends get interested in reading Le Carre because of "The Night Manager" series.

So, as long as they don't cock it up ...

True Steve. I enjoyed the Night Manager but it was unforgettable like the Tinker, Tailor 70s productions. It was flashy and stylistic but the dialogue lacked the depth of Le Carre. I doubt they will attempt to recast it in another era like The Night Manager though. In summary, I'm 'cautious'.

Should read as 'wasn't unforgettable'. IMO of course

Hmmm. Seems to me we are drowning in media lately. Eh, does anyone read printed books anymore? Does anyone talk about books anymore?

Not just on this 'website' (which is steadily declining in conversation) but in real life.

When was the last time you saw an actual book in someone's hand?

Feliks wrote: "Hmmm. Seems to me we are drowning in media lately. Eh, does anyone read printed books anymore? Does anyone talk about books anymore?

When was the last time you saw an actual book in someone's hand?

+++++++++++
Answer: A few days ago, I saw a young lady reading a book on the subway. For me, that was very heartening to see.

Aye. Its obscure. I've read it though and reviewed it. I like it well enough for what it is; as I state in my review Le Carre could have turned his hand to any genre and done well. He's a sensitive observer of human nature in any capacity.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

I forgot that I even created this thread! Interesting.

LeCarre is an artisan for sure; your questions are good ones.

The description of hills and school surely comes from 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy'. That prep school is where Rhino has taken a job to heal up after his release from the Czechs.

I think LeCarre doesn't write obscurely merely for the sake of being 'impenetrable' or 'difficult' or anything like that. I don't believe he chooses his chapter openings --or other ornate passages -- by chance or by whim; I don't believe he proceeds in an unstudied manner. He's well-read; he understands technique; he knows pacing and structure. He knows the moods he wishes to create; he knows how to misdirect and meander; but always towards a purpose.

In 'Tinker, Tailor' LeCarre starts off with Rhino because that is the 'top layer' of the story; just as Leamas and Avery were before him in each of their tales. The mission of each of these agents is the 'case' at hand; Smiley is the framing device until "Smiley's People".

LeCarre simply must start with Rhino because at the end of the tale, his denoument bookends the last few pages of the catharsis that is mandatory at book's end. Smiley takes second seat because his story is an ongoing one until he confronts Karla; and also Smiley himself is never violent.

Speaking for myself, I would say the mini-series in both cases did not make me understand the plots better but they simply narrated the story freshly, visually, and cleanly in the way that good adaptations do. It is wonderful to put faces to characters one only knows by their names read on a page.

Better still, to see fine actors --old friends in many cases --take the characters and lend their visage to each of them. Alexander Knox as 'Control' and Ian Bannen as Jim Prideaux (Rhino). Phenomenal. Storied actors with long histories of success attached to their names.

I encourage anyone enjoying this thread to ferret out any of my Karla trilogy reviews if you wish to kick around the topic some more.

Another way to think of Smiley is to recall how Conan Doyle articulated Sherlock Holmes --or, name any pulp author you wish, such as Hammett or Chandler's templates. The 'framing device' of all 'serial heroes' is arranged by necessity into habitual patterns. In Conan Doyle for instance, Holmes embarks on hundreds of cases --and resolves them --but without himself ever really being engaged emotionally. His own story arc, the yearnings of his own life, are set aside while he solves the problem. Cases come to him from complete strangers, as they do for all detectives; but the detective himself is just a receptor or receptacle. His life is 'on hold'. It is this format into which LeCarre enters, but being a modern novelist he performs much better under the constraint. Smiley is a strong part of each of the main segments of the trilogy (his issues with Anne and his superiors, never-ending; similar to Holmes' struggles with cocaine, for example) but Smiley himself does not take center-stage (does not meet his 'Reichenbach Falls') until 'Smiley's People'. It's the only way to structure it; to draw out the series; and if you think about it this inflexibility dominates practically everything we see nowadays since 'serialization' is so rampant. This precept accounts for all the remakes and reboots in the superhero movie genre; it poses all the issues of how 'Superman' and 'Batman' never age or marry or procreate. They can't; their role is simply 'framing device' for fights and chases and amazing feats of derring-do. That's why they're so hollow and empty. They don't enjoy real lives; they're just bizarre agglomerations of x-ray vision and flight and judo and uniforms-under-their-street-clothes. We have a mania for serial heroes which hasn't flagged since Victorian times.