There are parts of this book that just refuse to fade away; if not for anyone else, then for me alone. I like spies who are cold and calculating like Michael Reynolds (although his abilities in the story have been eclipsed by the incomparable Count) but have a tinge of humanity that peeks out of their wolf's clothing.MacLean has a way of hooking readers from page one and hardly anything can beat the prospect of a spy a few steps beyond the Iron Curtain. Club the scenario with the ice-cold weather, the Doberman Pinschers, the Berettas, the terrifying, torturing, inhuman monsters from the Hungarian AVO (Koko and his ilk), the choking, policed atmosphere and you have the best Cold War fiction in your hands.In many of his books, MacLean has made his wartime loyalties quite clear. In 'Guns of Navarone,' he praises the Germans in more than one place for their efficiency and in this book, he has openly defended the young Soviet Union for the formative stage it was going through. Despite the tedium of the long discourse between Jansci and Reynolds on the pros and cons of Communism – which is said to be not very well-received at that time – the book has few moments of ennui. I hate the ending and whenever I re-read it, I avoid the last few pages. It's just too painful to see a near-invisible silver line out of a cloud of death, loss, separation and excruciating pain.
I thought I had read all of his books as a teen but came across this as an ebook title in our library. I often thought about whether anyone read any MacLean these days, as he was very popular in the 60s and 70s. Several of his books were made into big movies back then. This was the first of his books I had read in 40 years. I wonder now if I would enjoy re-reading him having just finished this one. The book has plenty of action, but it's interspersed with pages and pages of philosophizing and political debate...much of it very dated, of course, as it's set in Cold War Hungary. Parts of it read like if Ayn Rand wrote a James Bond pastiche. So this might not be the best MacLean to start with, but parts of it reminded me why I liked him so much growing up.
What do You think about The Last Frontier (1984)?
What I disliked about this book:The protagonist is unconvincing in his 'best man for the job' designation. He makes basic and glaring errors repeatedly (he basically blunders through the entire book), he is subverted within a few days by his Hungarian contacts (suggesting the UK didn't bother to screen agents), and he becomes emotionally involved with a woman in the middle of a job (see: romance novels for men). Sure, it's fun in an outlandish James Bond sense, but laughable in a practical sense
—Jonah
What can you say about Alistair MacLean? He's a great storyteller, but not such a good writer? Does that chime with you? I enjoy his books but sometimes find the narrative irritating and repetitive. He handles action very well and understands pace. Characterisation, which is the element of fiction I most enjoy, is thin almost to the point of stereotype. In this tale of a Cold War spy sent on an impossible mission (of course), his protagonist is put through the mincer in so many ways. He survives torture, extreme physical and mental torment etc, etc. I 'found' this old paperback amongst the books I've bought but yet to read and took it with me to read whilst away on a trip where my wife was fully engaged in other activities. It filled a space of time for me, but this type of fiction has probably had its day and had more significance and meaning when it was produced (the edition I read was published 1968) at the height of the tensions between East and West.It recalled many similar novels and passed a few hours in a hotel lounge. But, if you like your fiction full of improbable challenges with your hero set against unlikely odds, you'll probably enjoy this one.
—Stuart Aken
