Writer’s style is not engaging or entertaining for me. He’s probably good for military technical buffs.This guy is a popular best selling author. But not for me. I assume his fans are those who love to think and talk about military technical stuff - with a story to go along with it. The author is regularly welcomed aboard jets, submarines, and destroyers. Admirals and generals give him access, Pentagon officials debrief him, and many of his books are required reading at military colleges. So I assume he is accurate about these things.MY PROBLEMS:There were too many characters to keep track of. And for each character, I only knew them through their work. There was no emotional development of characters, no seeing their feelings. I felt like this was “bring your daughter to work day,” and I was going along with my dad (and many other dads) listening and watching as they did their work and attended meetings. I wasn’t excited about anything. Parts were boring. I listened to the sonar guy for a while, then I listened to the captain of a ship for a while, then I listened to the Russian leaders meet and talk about what to do, then I listened to the CIA meet and talk about what to do, then a guy calls another guy talking about what to do. Throughout the book the reader is jumping around among different groups of military and political people.I want interesting characters to watch, characters that pull me in emotionally. I want witty, interesting, or enlightening dialogue. I want interesting events that move the plot along. There were two interesting major climactic resolutions, but it took way too long to get to them, with nothing else good along the way. It was just watch the guys work. My mind wandered too often, and I wished it would be over.I saw the movie many years ago and loved it. The movie had a very different feel, and it ended sooner than the book. I think the movie was one of those “inspired by” movies rather than “based on” the book. In the BOOK Jack and other U.S. leaders all believe Marco (the captain of the RO) wants to defect, and they have a plan and prepare for it. In the MOVIE, Jack believes Marco wants to defect but another US commander doesn’t. The commander plans to blow up the RO, and Jack has to convince him not to. At one point Jack lies to the US commander saying I know Marco so well that I know he will turn left at the next something. Jack was bluffing. But when Marco coincidentally turned left, the US commander cancels the order to attack. That scene was so intense that I still remember it all these years later. Nothing like that was in the book.Anyway I wanted to try Tom Clancy, which is why I read this, but I won’t be reading any more.STORY BRIEF:The book is set around 1983, during the days of the “Cold War” between the U.S. and the USSR. It illustrates some of the thinking back then with nuclear threats on both sides. This is one of many books in the Jack Ryan series. Jack is an analyst for the CIA. The Red October is the name of a Russian submarine. The captain of the RO does not follow orders and is on the run from other USSR subs and ships. Jack is the first one to suggest the captain might want to defect. The U.S. navy and the Russian fleet are all trying to find the RO.NARRATOR:The narrator J. Charles spoke too quickly. It was jarring to concentrate on his speed of talking. Even between scenes and chapters there were almost no pauses.DATA:Unabridged audiobook reading time: 16 hrs and 47 mins. Swearing language: strong, including religious swear words. Sexual content: none. Setting: Around 1983 U.S., USSR (Russia), and the Atlantic Ocean. Book copyright: 1984. Genre: military historical fiction. Ending: happy for the good guys.
Assuming the Wikipedia entry on the novel to be correct in an unattributed assertion, Tom Clancy hadn't submitted the manuscript of this book, his first novel, anywhere else before giving the U.S. Naval Institute Press a look at it. He was probably lucky in that, as was the press, for Clancy's novel was different enough from other military thrillers of the time that he quite likely would've received rejections and may have given up. (J. K. Rowling, among others, faced the same rejections but persisted; her first novel, though represented by an agent, was turned down by a dozen more likely British publishers before finding a home at a small house called Bloomsbury, which gave it an initial print run of only 1,000.) When the Naval Institute hardcover of The Hunt for Red October came out, I was working at a small bookstore that had decided to stock a few copies. My father had served on submarines in two wars and had raised me on tales of the "silent service," and I even knew of the Naval Institute, because my father often passed me copies of their Proceedings. So I bought one of those copies, reveled in it, and soon passed it along to my father, who also admired it (or else I bought it for him and he soon lent it back to me).In a way, then, my father and I contributed to creating a monster. This book became a great success in its paperback edition, and Clancy went on to become a brand, a machine, an industry. The later books of his that I've read or looked into have exploited the methods of The Hunt for Red October but lack its relatively sleek efficiency. One of them, The Sum of All Fears, was more than 500 pages longer than this novel; I tolerated it mainly because it filled a good deal of my time during a depressed period.All of Clancy's books may fulfill a rather fundamental desire. Men and machines and conflict have together been the stuff of some of our stories since the Iliad (yes, mechanisms and weaponry must be counted a feature of that tale too, considering the role played by chariots, swords, and even the shield of Achilles). Clancy lacks a good deal in comparison to Homer, of course: the other realms of life introduced by the Odyssey, for instance, not to mention what some critics since Matthew Arnold have labeled the nobility of Homer's writing. But if Clancy's fictional technique is limited and pretty old-fashioned in most ways, he did develop something notable in Red October, a particular demonstration that our machines are now complex enough that their capabilities and our interactions with them make them akin to genuine characters: they're important instruments in the story, though not yet agents of their own. If even Homer understood that in his way (recall that Patroclus borrowed the armor of Achilles and for a time scared the Trojans with the deception), Clancy deserves credit for bringing the recognition up to date.
What do You think about The Hunt For Red October (1999)?
I read all but a couple of Clancy's Ryan/Clark books and find them good in the extreme. I do prefer Vince Flynn and Brad Thor, but they're somewhat different (well their characters are closer to Clark than Ryan). In this one Ryan still hasn't actually started his political career... But he does get drawn into the danger, again.Jack (an annalist for the CIA)manages to get tagged to fly photos to the UK...from there he ends trying to convince the powers in charge that a Russian sub captain is trying to defect, not get close enough to the US (with the revolutionary new quiet drive Soviet sub) to launch an attack on the country. High level attitude? Sink the sub... Jack needs to convince everyone otherwise.Thumbnail synopsis but...if you've managed to get by till now without seeing the movie and you're thinking of reading the book I don't want to ruin it for you.Enjoy.
—Mike (the Paladin)
As a mega fan of the movie "The Hunt for Red October" I had high hopes for finally getting around to reading the novel.I am happy to say that I was not disappointed in the slightest. In fact, much the opposite. This book was even better than I thought it would be. It was a can't stop reading kind of book for me. The last half was very different from the last half of the film, but in a very good way. I still love the film even with the differences from the book, but this just made one of my top five books list, maybe even at the number one slot.I give it 6 Stars!
—Justin
I agree Julie. It's a ripping yarn of a story. Your post is quite timely for me. The film, starring Sean Connery screened on my local TV network one week ago, would you believe?
—☼♄Jülie
