leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (01/17/86)
THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER by Tom Clancy
Berkley Books, 1985, $4.50.
A book review by Mark R. Leeper
Suppose you want to learn about life on a whaling vessel a century ago.
What is the best reference book to read? (And don't you ask yourself that
all the time?) My sources tell me that the best reference work is MOBY
DICK. Every once in a while a novel comes along that is so well researched
it is an education to read it as well as reading an entertaining story.
What must be a best-selling novel--based on the number of people I have seen
reading it--as an education in submarine warfare as well. The book is
Clancy's THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER.
The story deals with a great Soviet submarine commander who has had all
of his roots to the USSR destroyed by failings in the Soviet system. His
wife was killed by a drunken doctor's malpractice, but the doctor is the son
of a high Party official so nothing can be done. She might have been saved
but for the unreliability of Soviet drugs. So Marko Ramius has had it with
the USSR and decides to use his command of the Soviet submarine RED OCTOBER
to get revenge. With a complete plan he turns his submarine west, north of
Scandinavia, and toward the Western Hemisphere.
THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER combines a good, though not great, thriller
with a good, though not great, education on modern naval warfare. I read
the book on vacation all the time wishing I had my copy of THE U.S. WAR
MACHINE by Ray Bonds to add even more detail and illustration, but Clancy
writes with complete credibility about matters of defense I would not have
dreamed were public knowledge. One never gets the feeling that Clancy's
technical detail is anything but flawless.
One does get the feeling, however, that THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER, like
the film THE FINAL COUNTDOWN, is as much an ad for the U. S. Armed Forces as
it is a piece of dramatic narrative. One almost feels sorry for the Soviets
in this book as they are so thoroughly out-gunned and out-thought by the
Americans that one wonders why they bother opposing the John-Wayne-like
Americans at all. We see none of the incompetence of the aborted Iranian
hostage rescue. Americans are killed by mechanical failures, but not nearly
so spectacularly as the Soviets are. (Hey, in this book when the Soviets
have a mechanical failure, they do it up right. I rarely go back to read a
scene a second time. But this one scene is far and away the most
enthralling in the book. If you don't want to read the whole book, have
someone who has read it point out this scene.)
THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER is a good story and an enjoyable book to read.
What makes it as popular as it is is a little tough to understand. It is
just a very readable text on naval warfare wrapped in a moderately good
story. Rate it a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeperbarb@oliven.UUCP (Barbara Jernigan) (01/27/86)
> > THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER by Tom Clancy > Berkley Books, 1985, $4.50. > A book review by Mark R. Leeper > > ...One almost feels sorry for the Soviets > in this book as they are so thoroughly out-gunned and out-thought by the > Americans that one wonders why they bother opposing the John-Wayne-like > Americans at all. The Soviets *did* have a few aces in the hole, however -- which I refuse to spoil. Nevertheless I admit a certain disparity between technical levels. Whether or not this is accurate -- I suspect it might be, from other things I have heard -- I cannot swear, and I really didn't find this a detraction from my enjoyment of the book. > THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER is a good story and an enjoyable book to read. > What makes it as popular as it is is a little tough to understand. It is > just a very readable text on naval warfare wrapped in a moderately good > story. Rate it a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale. > Mark R. Leeper I don't know, I'd give it a 3+. It's been a long time since I've read a book that kept me on the edge of my seat as well as RED OCTOBER. Perhaps I enjoyed it mostly because of its 'completeness'. Clancy has carefully thought out his details, from the way a submarine is put together to the way a navy is put together to the way a government is put together to the careful dance on coals between nations. The only other book I've read that gave me a such a sense of completeness was _The Mote in God's Eye_ by Niven and Pournelle. A friend complained about the one-dimensionality of characters. I argue that we are only given a brief view of them within a singular situation. Also, this is not the type of book to go into great details of character -- firstly there are too many participants. And I personally believe there was enough characterization -- built mostly from events in the character's life rather than: "...," he thought. RED OCTOBER is a pro-military book, it cannot be denied. But it is a rousing good suspense/action/adventure tale. And, now that it's in paperback, certainly worth the read. (My husband and I, after reading his parent's copy, felt it was worth getting in hard-bound -- a rare concession on our parts, even if bought at Crown Books.) That's my twenty-five cents. Barb P.S. Mark mentioned a shade of surprise that so much technical data was allowed. The original hardbound was published by the Naval Institute Press -- their second fiction in over 100 years. (Another seal of approval, I think.) My personal theory, as all the information contained in the book *is* in the public domain -- though recently and not generally announced so -- was to defuse (obliquely) the Walker spy case. "If the technical information appears in a popular piece of fiction, it can't be *all* *that* sensitive." Comments, anyone?
jrrt@mtuxo.UUCP (r.mitchell) (01/29/86)
THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER by Tom Clancy
A book review by Mark R. Leeper
...One almost feels sorry for the Soviets
in this book as they are so thoroughly out-gunned and
out-thought by the Americans that one wonders why they
bother opposing the John-Wayne-like Americans at all.
The Soviets *did* have a few aces in the hole, however -- which I
refuse to spoil. Nevertheless I admit a certain disparity between
technical levels. Whether or not this is accurate -- I suspect it
might be, from other things I have heard -- I cannot swear, and I
really didn't find this a detraction from my enjoyment of the book.
-- Barb Jernighan
First, a disclaimer. Everything I write is my own opinion and does
not necessarily represent official Navy policy and opinion.
Second, a declaration. I spent four years as a Weapons and Operations
officer on a ballistic missile submarine. I maintain contacts with
the sub community.
Third, a caution. I really liked THFRO, enough that after reading
a friend's copy, I purchased the book in hardcover. I'm biased.
There *is* a clear disparity between the technical levels of the
Russian Fleet and the American one, at least if one can believe the
reports in generally-available documents like JANE'S, AVIATION WEEK
AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY magazine, and so on. The difference might be
exaggerated a bit in THFRO, for dramatic appeal, but not much.
THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER is a good story and an enjoyable
book to read. Mark R. Leeper
I agree. After reading it, I went out and splurged on a bunch of
other submarine-related fiction (THE GOLD CREW; RUN SILENT, RUN
DEEP, etc). Clancy's book is by far and away the best-written of
them all. His attention to detail isn't obtrusive, just convincing.
That's all scenery, though, the best part of the book is the story.
The broad scope and numerous characters do limit the amount of
characterization somewhat. Perhaps I was reading things into the
characters, by endowing them with characteristics of Navy people I
know whom they resembled. Nonetheless, the book gives enough subtle
information that I never felt the characters were cardboard.
The best part of the book, though, was the suspense (what is Clancy
up to...?), and the satisfying wrap-ups of each plotline. I'd give
THE HUNT FOT RED OCTOBER at least 3 of -4-to-+4.
P.S. Mark mentioned a shade of surprise that so much technical
data was allowed. The original hardbound was published by the
Naval Institute Press -- their second fiction in over 100 years.
Oh? I was under the impression Clancy's was the first. What *was*
the first fiction the NIP published?
My personal theory, as all the information contained in the book
*is* in the public domain -- though recently and not generally
announced so -- was to defuse (obliquely) the Walker spy case.
"If the technical information appears in a popular piece of
fiction, it can't be *all* *that* sensitive."
Perhaps this is better discussed in net.politics. For now, though,
I'll mouth off here. The information isn't that recent, and
although sub capabilities aren't generally topics of press
conferences, articles in AW&ST, NEWSWEEK, and THE NEW YORK TIMES
over the years have said just about anything Clancy did. Also, I
don't agree with your theory. My personal understanding of Naval Security
philosophy is that classified information is very highly regarded --
people's lives and American security are at risk -- so keeping
classified material classified is a job taken seriously.
*Technical* classified material is treated even more gingerly than
*political* classified material.
Besides, although I don't know the publishing industry well,
wouldn't the lead-times required for publishing a novel, suggest
Clancy wrote it all before the Walker case broke?
Rob Mitchell {allegra,ihnp4}!mtuxo!jrrt
Es un entreverado loco, lleno de lucidos intervalos.
(He is a muddled fool, full of lucid intervals. *Don Quixote*)