Espionage Aficionados discussion

The Telegraph UK and The Guardian UK are --as I recall--a couple of those British newspapers which (as opposed to something like the London Financial Times) cast journalism in a very dubious light.

The trendy, never-ending 'top ten' and 'top twenty' lists which issue from these rags are infuriating, more-often-than-not.

Take a look at the Telegraph's 'Top Twenty Spy Novels'.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what...
Of all time? Think about the enormity of that statement.

I myself, find fully half of this list ridiculous. I'm almost ready to send the editor of this piece a ...piece of my mind about it.

I can only give faint praise to this gentleman for at least getting the most fundamental 'basics' correct:
~the #1 most ideal John LeCarre work is cited.
~Joseph Conrad is mentioned.
~At least one Len Deighton novel is mentioned (but the wrong one).

Specific gripes:
~as usual, 'Bourne Identity' is included when it hardly needs to be. The book is negligible, no better than any other Ludlum work. Its the movies which give this title the peer pressure it wields.
~one Ian Fleming / James Bond novel is mentioned (thank you) but it doesn't specifically need to be this one. The movie outshines the book. 'Doctor No' is a Bond book which at least matches the Bond movie.
~Helen MacInnes: sorry, no. Just no.

Pleasant surprises:
~W. Somerset Maugham's 'Ashenden' makes the cut! Astounding. (but it's not a novel--rather, a book of short stories)
~John Buchan is cited, but he really doesn't need to be. He isn't the first author of international intrigue, it's a common mistake to assume as such. Oppenheim would have been better.
~Erskine Childers makes the cut. Beautiful.
~Eric Ambler cited--great, but why 'Journey into Fear'? Somewhat ridiculous.

The editor's overall mistake is multi-variate
I've already noted where 'got it right'.

But when he fumbles, it is because he...
...chooses from an obscure author rather than a famous one (Anthony Price)
...chooses a decent title from a decent author but the choice is a book which was un-impactful ('Berlin Game' instead of 'Ipcress File')
...chooses a decent title from a decent author but not a pioneering work (Littell's 'The Company' is a very late-period arrival)
...chooses a 'contemporary popular' title which only has pop-cult cachet ('Bourne')

His criteria should have strictly been: the books that had the most influence.
Example: 'The Man Who Was Thursday' or 'The Mask of FuManchu'

p.s. credit to group member (and Graham Greene fan) 'Greg' for this link

Some titles on the list are relatively recent in the scheme of things, when compiling a 'best of' list, one published as recently as 2010. Might this be a nifty way of promoting a new book?

Feliks is right: it's an ODD list. Mostly in the choice of work by the the authors, but some of their author/titles don't belong in such rarified heights.

Feliks, for comparison, do you have an easy link to where you've tried your hand at a similar list?

Greg wrote: "Some titles on the list are relatively recent in the scheme of things, when compiling a 'best of' list....?"

Agreed. Nothing recent should be included. These johnny-come-lately titles are not impacting any audience or readership, much less the geopolitical 'world at large'. Compare these fly-by-night works to 'Spy Who' by LeCarre--that book blew the lid off the intel community.

I question the 'chops' of this editor. What are his credentials to make a list for such an esoteric topic, anyway? Is he just "the go-to guy", their "pop-trend watching-type guy" typically chosen by Telegraph to generate any ole' list on any ole' subject? I wonder whether he is personally, a longtime reader of the genre? Or is he just a guy who reads any much-marketed thriller like the Bourne series?

Like I usually say, 'Bourne' is deeply flawed and simply caught a fluke pop fanbase who never were devoted fans of Ludlum (or any other thriller) author prior to the movie release. Ludlum struggled for 20+ yrs to come up with the formula and it was corny as hell: amnesia? Sheesh. [such a contrivance would have made W. Somerset Maugham blush to the roots of his hair.] And yet...it makes this guy's list of twenty all-time greatest espionage books. Why? The revenue it earned? Apparently so.

No-Oil: yes, in my other group I took a tentative 'whack at it'. Here's how I started out:

The Spy (James Fenimore Cooper)
The Great Impersonation (E. Phillips Oppenheim)
The Riddle of the Sands (Erskin Childers)
The Man Who Was Thursday (Chesterton)
The Secret Agent (Conrad)
The Mask of Fu Manchu (Sax Rohmer)
Ashenden (Maugham)
A Coffin for Dimitrios (Ambler)
The Quiet American (Greene)
Doctor No (Fleming)
The Ipcress File (Deighton)
The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (LeCarre)
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (LeCarre)
The Manchurian Candidate (Condon)
Marathon Man (Goldman)
Raise the Titanic! (Cussler)
The Ugly American (Lehman)
Death of a Citizen (Hamilton)
The Day of the Jackal (Forsythe)
The Brotherhood of the Rose (Morrell)
Gorky Park (Cruz Smith)
Six Days of the Condor (Grady)
Black Sunday (Harris)

You can see, (I think) that the Telegraph allowed some very shocking omissions. For example, LeCarre coined the definitive 'mole' story with 'Tinker Tailor'...why on earth would you overlook that? Why neglect 'Jackal' for pete's sake? Some of these others...left out probably because they just aren't timely to today's sales. 'Condor' was friggin' ground-breaking for the wrinkles it added.

The omission of "Day of the Jackal" alone proves your point. Read it before seeing the movie--and both were five star.

Feliks best-of spy novels list which includes
Ashenden
Dr. No
The Ipcress File
The Manchurian Candidate
Marathon Man
The Day of the Jackal
Six Days of the Condor

I have in paperback: Ashenden, Dr No, The Ipcress File, ( none of which I've read yet) & a slim book of a film critic study of The Mancurian Candidate by Greil Marcus.

I also have on DVD the film of The Manchurian Candidate, and Marathon Man, The Day of the Jackal, and Three Days of the Condor, which was based on the novel Six Days of the Condor.
I have the film Funeral In Berlin, the sequel to The Ipcress file. I love both of these. From memory I think there was a third Harry Palmer film with Michael Caine, is that right?

In the unusual book by Graham Greene, A World of My Own: A Dream Diary, (contains a lot of espionage scenarios) he mentions his friend Claud Cockburn in several dream notation scenarios. Some of the dream memories are funny in their strange quirkiness. I mention Claud Cockburn as to lead to the book Corruptions of Empire, collected articles by Claud's son Alexander Cockburn. One of the articles, which I originally read in a magazine, is called The Secret Agent, on Ian Fleming's relationship with the CIA and the British Secret Service. Alexander Cockburn claims Fleming 'has much to answer for. Without Fleming we would have had no OSS, hence no CIA. The cold war would have ended in the early 1960s.' The article goes on to say, in 1958, Fleming wrote Dr No, about Cuba. 'Having proposed a fictional Caribbean missile crisis, Fleming followed up in person. In the spring of 1960 he was taken to dinner at the Washington home of Senator and Democratic presidential candidate-elect Jack Kennedy.'

the other Harry Palmer novel-movie-adaptation was more ambitious than the earlier two. It was adapted into a 'black comedy', 'Billion Dollar Brain' starring Michael Caine and the great Karl Malden

Good production values and fairly comical and amusing. A unique plot as well.

I've started reading the Ipcress File. Early into the story is says: 'All people under long-term surveillance had bird names.' Raven, Housemartin, etc.
Question: In the TV mini-series, Person of Interest, a main character has given himself the name Harold Finch. He changes it to other bird names when necessary through the series.
Is this coincidence, or could it be the writers tipping their hat to the Ipcress File, or a traditional practice in the espionage world?

Neat, but I think its merely coincidence. After all, one can't even be sure (these days) that a screenwriter has even heard of 'Ipcress File'. I even remember a Disney movie which featured this same trick.

Thanks though--good man

Feliks Dzerzhinsky
p.s. last night, emergency-response authorities in my city sent out an 'extreme alert' to all citizens

This 'extreme alert' ....asked all residents to help track down an alleged criminal suspect. It provided all his vital statistics in the message and a link to his photo.

First, I don't trust the NYPD in anything. They're just a hairsbreadth away from being stormtroopers, in my opinion. Second, why enlist my inevitably clumsy help in apprehending anybody? Everyday citizenry are not trained and not professional.

BBC Radio 4 Book of the Week. Beginning this week the first of five episodes of John le Carre reading The Pigeon Tunnel.

sorry, I couldn't attach the link.

Greg,

Thanks for the tip on the BBC Radio 4 version of The Pigeon Tunnel: Stories from My Life.

Here is a link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07tzrwc . Click on the square under "1 of 5" for a popup player. As of today, it says that there are 22 days left to listen.

Thanks cool breeze, for adding the link. You're brilliant. Although these posts expire after a time, they may be available later in their podcast archives. The Bookclub author interview podcasts are all permanently available.

You guys are way ahead of me. For Fleming, the first book, Casino Royal, takes the prize. He doesn't toy with Bond, but describes him as a "brute," which wins him my plaudits. Full stop.

I keep getting stuck on The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, Feliks. I understand how a person that's been "blown" would have to go to some lengths to win the hearts of the other side. But, it's a Cold War tale, and who, then, had the time for such degradation? And what was the target again? (I know you'll correct me.) Was Night Watchman a knock off of "Cold"? A closer to real life example is Dick Ellis; read, Spy Catcher.

Where was Tears of Autumn on the lists? "Now, as Luong slept, Christopher took the envelope out of his coat pocket. He put the stamp pad inside with the money, sealed it, and dropped it over the side of the boat." I've never read a more fully realized chapter.

Why was it Alan Furst didn't come up?

Feliks, re: cops. I'm headed up to NYC tomorrow, dinner at Odeon Thursday, a stomp around my old Nassau St. neighborhood; my heads gonna be on a swivel.

More on IEDs: MSNBC - Rachel Maddow was (is?) the first to raise questions about the variety of explosives used in the several attacks, implying that there were other actors.

Greg, Alexander C. was a bit whack, a polemicist in reporter's drag. (Very opinionated, me) Re: OSS/CIA, Fleming was a distant guest. The real player, IMHO, was Dick Ellis, the actual SIS power behind BSC. He and John Pepper. It's the (ringer) Stephenson who takes the credit for OSS/CIA. Surely the Donovan cult was a driver, as was Joe-1. BTW, Andrew C. was a better reporter than his brother. And Andrew's wife, Leslie, was the best of the whole bunch, though limited by TV.

Fire at will.

Jeff,

Good catch! No Charles McCarry on either The Telegraph's or Felix's list? That's not right, although I would have probably picked a different book than The Tears of Autumn.

Not sure how to reply to this potpourri of remarks, Jeff Shear. Nassau Street--that's in Fidi, yes? Near Delmonico's? Hope you have a grand meal wherever you choose.

The Telegraph list, re: why Alan Furst did not appear--well, I'm sure I don't know. It's a suspiciously contrived list, as we've concluded. Half of the selections are utterly recent in vintage and thus have no standing or reputation; so why are they mentioned at all? The editor needs to be taken out into an alley and smacked around. Even if we allow that somehow, he tripped over some recent-release titles which he (as a connoisseur) feels are of stellar-but-unknown quality (despite their necessarily being 'late entries' and out-of-era) how does that earn them spots among such distinguished company as John leCarre? When there are other more genuinely earth-shattering titles omitted, such as 'Jackal'? It all makes no sense.

'Tears of Autumn' by Charles McCarry, on the other hand--is a fine book and may very well be a personal fave of a number of readers--but I see no reason why that would merit an 'automatic' slot. It's too little-known. Be fair.

LeCarre's 'Spy Who'. Not sure I follow the disjunct you describe. I will have to place my next set of remarks in a spoiler tag to avoid killing the story for newbies. (view spoiler)[Anyway, the dissolution of Leamas under the direction of his chief ('C' or 'Control') are/were pretty standard espionage maneuvering. Why do you feel there 'wasn't time for it'? There was unlimited time. Interrogations, debriefings, security clearances, & background checks, were part of the daily routine. They still are. Now, If you remember, Control broaches to Leamas at the beginning of the story that one of our deep-cover agents is close to being exposed. There's a cunning prosecutor on the other side (Fiedler) who is suspicious of our 'mole'. Control desperately needs Leamas to somehow deflect attention away from our agent. Leamas has to lay a phony trail, plant some kind of red-herring. Defecting to the other side is the best way to inject such false evidence. As long as Leamas' plausibility can't be broken by Fiedler, the British mole can go on working. The only thing that would be better would be if Fiedler was entirely discredited himself, or even extinguished. That's what the story ultimately comes down to: Leamas realizes that Fiedler is so good at what he does--so committed to his ideals--that in the end there's no way to get the job done other than to simply burn him. And it's actually what Control wanted all along. Leamas feels sick about it; especially since our mole over there is a scumbag (this was revealed in the previous novel, 'Call for the Dead'.) (hide spoiler)] Does that help?

cool breeze wrote: "Good catch! No Charles McCarry on either The Telegraph's or Felix's list?..."

McCarry is a fine author but in a narrow, twenty-seat ranking I really can't in good conscience choose him for a slot that might need to be taken up by Joseph Conrad, for example.

Harkening back to what I feel is the proper criteria for a list like this: a book's impact and influence. Recognition. How widely was a title read? How many spin-offs did it spawn? Film adaptations? What changes did it wreak in the genre? Is it a milestone of any kind?

As good as McCarry is, he is just not a 'household name'. Compare him to someone like Richard Condon. There's no way any of McCarry's enjoyable books, can lay a finger anywhere on the hem of something like 'Manchurian Candidate'. The reputation just isn't there.

Feliks, If we're doing household names, McCarry's out. Too bad,
though. I've still got lists of books you've offered still to be read. But there's a pun here, so I'll stop.

Nassau and Beekman. Used to be called Old Newspaper Row, 23 papers published down there. When that was home, it was the financial district, where those who died on Saturday would not be found until Monday. Kinda deserted.

Cool Breeze, which McCarry?

(I'm off until Monday!)

Jeff,  Alexander C can do no wrong. 'A bit whack' hmmm, maybe. I can't see a whack factor. I think he's very astute. Certainly got the Reagan Thatcher era sorted. I'd like to know more about his father Claud. The whole family sounds pretty talented.
In Corruptions of Empire, the Deep Background section, the essay Heatherdown, about his school days is great.

Feliks, 'suspiciously contrived list', I wish I'd said that. Perfect. In these last few weeks I've seen three 'best of lists'. One was 'the Best Westerns', then this 'Best Spy Novels', and today BBC Culture on FB had 'The 100 best British Novels'. I counted 19 on the list published between 1990 - 2015. You should check it out, but maybe put some breathing space between it and the Best Spy List. It is embarrassing. For 'best of lists' to keep any credibility there has to be, as Feliks said,  a proper criteria for lists as standard.

Now, a bit of Manchurian Candidate paranoia. Last night after reading your comment mentioning The Manchurian Candidate I dug out the BFI Film Classics title by Greil Marcus covering both the film and the book and the influence it has had on the wider culture. The film starred Frank Sinatra. Then this morning I started chapter six of The Ipcress File, Palmer arrives in Beirut, it says 'In Room 624, bars of sunlight lay heavily across the carpet. The hotel intercom hummed with old tapes of Sinatra, but he was losing a battle with the noise of the air-conditioning.'
The Manchurian Candidate was first published 1959
The Ipcress File was first published 1962.
The film of The Manchurian Candidate released Oct. 1962
The film of The Ipcress File was released 1965

Fine commentary in #19. But not sure I get the significance of the Deighton/Condon release dates. Sinatra was of course, a worldwide phenomenon for decades long before 'Manchurian' was released. Deighton might well have mentioned him for innumerable reasons besides his casting in 'Manchurian' just a few years before...what nuance are you trying to point out? Thanks

Greg wrote: "I've seen three 'best of lists'. One was 'the Best Westerns', then this 'Best Spy Novels', 'The 100 best British Novels'...."

Aha! Just as I insinuated earlier in my OP. Compulsive 'list making' is an involuntary mass-reflex these days, running rampant throughout the most specious quarters of popular culture. There's whole websites devoted to ranking and listing 'top ten', 'top twenty', etc. We have David Letterman to thank for this, I imagine.

Greg wrote: "and today BBC Culture on FB..."
Ugh!

Does anyone know if any of Charles McCarry's spy novels have been adapted for the screen and/or TV? I speak as a fan who has most of the Paul Christopher Series in my library.

Sorry if this question isn't exactly germaine to the topic of this forum. But when I saw it mentioned here that Charles McCarry didn't merit a mention on the list of the Top 20 Spy Novels, I felt compelled to ask the above listed question.

Perfectly suitable question...

KOMET,

Wikipedia says "The film Wrong is Right (1982), starring Sean Connery, was loosely based on McCarry's novel, The Better Angels (1979)". IMDb also lists a guest appearance as himself on the Charlie Rose TV series and a writing credit on a drama called "Article II" which is categorized as "in development". Article II, directed by Lorna Davis, is described as "A political drama about two friends who becomes rivals for the presidential election, which itself is hampered by computer fraud", so it appears to be based on Shelley's Heart.