I’m not an adventurous sort. My idea of adventurous is going out to eat at a restaurant that I’ve never been to before. Actually, nowadays, in this CoI’m not an adventurous sort. My idea of adventurous is going out to eat at a restaurant that I’ve never been to before. Actually, nowadays, in this Covid-19 era, going out to eat at all is too adventurous for me. I think we’ve physically eaten in a restaurant three times in the past two years, and all three times I wanted to keep running to the bathroom to check my temperature. I am not a thrill-seeker.
And yet, I love reading about actual thrill-seekers. I love reading about real-life adventures. It quenches some kind of deeply latent thirst in me. I will never climb Mt. Everest, but I love reading about it in Jon Krakauer’s “Into Thin Air”. I will never be a fire-fighter, but I’ll read Sebastian Junger’s “Fire”. I will never go on an Antarctic expedition, but I will fantasize about the experience by reading Julian Sancton’s “Madhouse at the End of the Earth”.
Okay, so “fantasize” is the wrong word. Sancton’s book is an account of the 1897 Belgian science expedition to Antarctica on the ship Belgica, commandeered by Adrian de Gerlache. It tells the trials and tribulations of the crew as they become stuck in the ice, literally go mad from some strange disorder, and attempt to escape the ice to safer waters and warmer climes.
It’s nothing to fantasize about, really. What with all the smelly sailors who don’t bathe for months, the below-freezing temperatures for a majority of the year, having to eat raw penguin and seal meat, and the months of complete darkness because there is literally 24 hours of night. Not to mention the scurvy. Holy shit, there’s not enough Tylenol in the world for that.
And yet, I love reading about it. These were manly men, doing manly things. They weren’t fluffy marshmallows who sat on a couch for six hours eating Doritos and playing “Call of Duty”. These weren’t snowflakes who waited hours in line at the Apple store because their iPad was acting up. These weren’t lame-os who thought going to Bed Bath & Beyond with their significant others on a Saturday afternoon was a fun time.
No, these were MEN. M.E.N.
A lot of whom died young. And/or broke and alone. So there’s that.
But they took risks, which is something I think that we have lost as a culture. It isn’t even a gender thing, as I think risk-taking and the adventurous spirit has been sapped from all of us, male and female. Maybe it’s because there are no new frontiers anymore. There are no new unexplored sections of the planet, no places on the map that say “Here there be monsters”.
I will continue to live vicariously through books like Sancton’s because I sure as hell won’t be getting on a boat anytime soon. Or going out to eat. Or going to see a movie, or concerts, or any place where there are more than ten people congregated.
James Rollins is shaping up to be one of my new favorite authors, but it’s not necessarily because he’s the greatest writer or that he is in any way oJames Rollins is shaping up to be one of my new favorite authors, but it’s not necessarily because he’s the greatest writer or that he is in any way original. Indeed, Rollins could never be accused of either one of those things.
What makes Rollins so damn readable and addictive is the same reason that authors like Blake Crouch, Clive Cussler, and Michael Crichton are all best-selling authors: they are the perfect combination of smart and fun.
One has to be smart (and, perhaps, a little crazy) to incorporate solar flares, dark matter, the lost continent of Mu, an impending nuclear war between China and the U.S., giant krakens, a psychotic Navy SEAL who is secretly a member of the KKK, a hero that is a former-astronaut-turned-submarine-captain with a dog named Elvis, and time warps all in the same novel and, miraculously, make it all work.
And, damn, does it work beautifully in “Deep Fathom”, published in 2001.
Never mind that Rollins “borrows” heavily from authors like Tom Clancy and Stephen Coonts. Or that whole sections of the novel are blatant rip-offs (I’d graciously call them “homages”, but I’d be simply deluding myself) of James Cameron’s brilliant 1989 sci-fi underwater actioner “The Abyss”. I mean, honestly, it’s almost plagiarism, from the psycho Navy dude to the world on the brink of war to the mini-sub battles and even to the dramatic CPR scene. All that was missing was Ed Harris’s wonderful overacting and screaming, “DAMMIT, WOMAN, YOU’VE NEVER BACKED AWAY FROM ANYTHING IN YOUR LIFE NOW FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!” as he heroically tries to resuscitate his ex-wife-whom-he-still-loves, played by the comatose-looking-even-when-she’s-awake Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio.
Fuck it, I didn’t even care. I loved “Deep Fathom”. Sue me....more
I haven’t seen the film adaptation of Steve Alten’s “Meg” yet, but I think it would be difficult, as a film producer, to simulate the winning formula I haven’t seen the film adaptation of Steve Alten’s “Meg” yet, but I think it would be difficult, as a film producer, to simulate the winning formula of Alten’s series of giant shark thrillers, which is an unlikely pairing of pulpy action-adventure silliness with intelligent science. Think Michael Crichton, Clive Cussler, and Peter Benchley, all of whom did it equally well, to varying levels of success.
Book 4, “Hell’s Aquarium”, is perhaps the point in the series when Alten (and you knew this was coming) “jumped the shark”. Granted, for a series about a giant prehistoric shark, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
The good things about “Hell’s Aquarium” certainly outweigh the bad. Among the good things: lots more giant sharks, all new prehistoric underwater monsters, and more death-defying underwater rescues by Jonas Taylor (who is getting up in years) and his son, David, who appears to be shaping up to be the next-generation hero.
The not-so-good things about the book: most of the female characters (Terry Taylor, wife of Jonas, and Danielle Taylor, daughter) get short-changed in this one. It’s essentially a testosterone fest. The one major exception, of course, is Angel, the female megalodon who has been the grande dame throughout the series. There’s also her daughters, who are just as nasty. (It does seem, at times, that Jonas spends more time with this shark bitch than he does with his own wife. Just sayin’...)
There’s also the afore-mentioned “jump the shark” moment, which comes near the end, which I don’t want to spoil for the reader. All I’ll say is that if you’ve loved the old-fashioned monster-movie silliness of the series thus far, the “jump the shark” moment may simply be an inevitability, and a welcome one at that. I, for one, loved it, despite its somewhat ridiculous implausibility. That just added to its charm, I suppose.
Alten delivers the goods, again. On to Book 5: “Nightstalkers”... ...more
Apparently, hunting prehistoric giant sharks can save a marriage. This is the adorable take-away from Steve Alten’s ridiculously pulpy novel “The TrenApparently, hunting prehistoric giant sharks can save a marriage. This is the adorable take-away from Steve Alten’s ridiculously pulpy novel “The Trench”, which is the second book in his strangely addictive MEG series. (The first book is now a major motion picture starring Jason Statham.)
I’m not sure why I love these books so much, although I’m thinking part of the reason is because Alten is a much smarter writer than he lets on. He tells a damn good fish story, with plenty of action and sea-faring adventure, but he also interjects enough fascinating facts about marine biology and paleobiology to sound legitimate.
In “The Trench”, several years have passed since the events of “MEG”: Jonas Taylor is now married to Terry Tanaka. The expensive maritime institute facility built specifically to hold Angel, the captured megaladon, needs serious maintenance work, more than the institute’s budget allows. A billionaire named Benedict Singer makes a generous proposal to help save the facility. Unfortunately, it would entail splitting up Jonas and Terry for several weeks as Terry takes on a position of consultant for an underwater expedition to the Mariana Trench, led by Singer.
The Taylors aren’t doing so well. Since Terry’s miscarriage, Jonas and Terry have felt themselves drifting. Jonas buries himself in work, feeling angry and guilty all the time. Terry struggles with the uncomfortable thoughts that Jonas is partly to blame for the miscarriage, because it was the stress of worrying about her husband’s state of mind that contributed to losing the baby. Perhaps, she thinks, a period of time apart may be helpful.
Unbeknownst to everyone, however, Singer is actually an evil Bond villain bent on world domination. He’s on a hunt for a rare element that can only be found in the Trench (of course). He’ll stop at nothing to get it, including sacrificing his entire crew of Russian mercenaries and kidnapped scientists, as well as Terry, to a bevy of underwater dangers.
Meanwhile, in spectacular disaster movie pyrotechnics, Angel breaks out of her confines, killing many innocent bystanders along the way. Like a giant salmon, she’s heading back to the Trench to spawn.
It’s up to Jonas, and his wise-cracking sidekick Mac, to save the day. And Terry.
What can I say? This book is friggin’ awesome......more
Unless you are a die-hard pre-Civil War U.S. Naval history buff (which I am not), you probably haven’t heard of of the United States South Seas ExplorUnless you are a die-hard pre-Civil War U.S. Naval history buff (which I am not), you probably haven’t heard of of the United States South Seas Exploring Expedition of 1838 (The U.S.Ex.Ex. for short). It is probably not mentioned in a lot of textbooks, even if some of its many discoveries are. There are, according to Nathaniel Philbrick, some very good reasons for this.
Philbrick’s wonderful book, “Sea of Glory”, is perhaps the most comprehensive and honest (and quite possibly only) account of the four-year expedition. While an exciting story of maritime adventure, Philbrick’s book is also a story of incompetence, pettiness, and blatant politicizing of an event that should have been a moment of pride for the United States and its navy. Instead, it was probably its most embarrassing and controversial.
The Expedition, which was comprised of six ships and 346 men, was the largest scientific expedition of its kind in history. That, alone, is historically significant. It is, however, what the Expedition helped to create in the subsequent years that is truly impressive.
As Philbrick describes it, “By any measure, the achievements of the Expedition would be extraordinary. After four years at sea, after losing two ships and twenty-eight officers and men, the Expedition logged 87,000 miles, surveyed 280 Pacific islands, and created 180 charts---some of which were still being used as late as World War II. The Expedition also mapped 800 miles of coastline in the Pacific Northwest and 1,500 miles of the icebound Antarctic coast. Just as important would be its contribution to the rise of science in America. The thousands of specimens and artifacts amassed by the Expedition’s scientists would become the foundation of the collections of the Smithsonian Institution. Indeed, without the Ex. Ex., there might never have been a national museum in Washington, D.C. The U.S. Botanic Garden, the U.S. Hydrographic Office, and the Naval Observatory all owe their existence, in varying degrees, to the Expedition. (p. xix)”
So, why haven’t you heard of it?
Philbrick gives several reasons:
1)The expedition took many long, long years to get going.
It also had its roots in some very controversial theories which are, today, considered ridiculous pseudo-science. The idea for the expedition had its genesis as early as 1824, with the theories of two men, John Cleve Symmes and Jeremiah N. Reynolds, who believed (based on little to no scientific evidence) in the idea that the Earth was hollow, and that there were openings at either pole through which, it was believed, ships could traverse. This “Hollow Earth” theory was, strangely enough, extremely popular at the time. So popular, in fact, that Congress during the John Quincy Adams presidency actually began serious talks on an expedition to the South Pole.
The idea didn’t get very far beyond the talking phase, unfortunately. President Andrew Jackson, who prided himself on being an anti-intellectual and anti-science president, originally poo-pooed the idea as frivolous and a waste of money and resources better used for domestic issues.
Of course, like the Space Race of the 1950s, numerous European countries, including Great Britain, were gaining a lot of press for their scientific explorations of the South Pacific and attempts at exploring Antarctica. Jackson wanted in on the action, and he suddenly became a pro-science advocate. Congress eventually approved the expedition for $150,000, which was a lot of money back then. Unfortunately, the expedition hit a few more roadblocks before it began.
It would not be until 1838, under the presidency of Martin Van Buren, that the expedition would finally get underway.
2) The Expedition was under the leadership of an inexperienced commander who was not well-liked at all, exhibited narcissistic tendencies, and consistently made questionable decisions based on his own inflated sense of importance.
Charles Wilkes was, by his own admission, a naval greenhorn when he was chosen (by a strange set of circumstances) to lead the expedition. After being chosen, Wilkes himself said, “[T]here are very many reasons that crowd upon me why I should not accept it. (p. 47)”
While it’s impossible to know exactly what was going through his head at the time, Wilkes probably felt that he was too young. He had only been on one other voyage prior to this. He also had a young family at home, with a wife pregnant with his third child. All of these were good reasons why he shouldn’t have led the expedition, but certain members of the Navy and politicians in Washington, D.C.---including President Van Buren---clearly saw something in Wilkes that he didn’t see in himself.
No one saw the true Wilkes: a man beset with insecurities, lack of confidence, and petty jealousy for anyone who was, in any way, more knowledgeable or experienced at anything. Rather than listening and learning from his more-seasoned officers and crew, Wilkes made their lives a living hell, for no apparent reason.
While an intelligent man, Wilkes’s major weakness was a complete inability to admit when he made a bad decision. As Philbrick writes, “Some leaders have the ability to step back from even the most volatile situation and assess, as best they can, what really happened. Wilkes, on the other hand, epitomized what has been called the “emotional mind”. He responded to situations quickly and passionately. Even if subsequent events proved that his initial response was unwarranted, he clung like a bulldog to his first impression. (p. 110)”
Wilkes was also notorious for being quite liberal doling out punishment involving the whip. The Navy had very strict guidelines as to how often and how many lashes was appropriate. Wilkes consistently defied and ignored these guidelines.
Needless to say, Wilkes made many enemies on the four years at sea, many of whom would seek redress at the end of the expedition.
3) The return home, rather than being a joyous celebration, was a turbulent affair of courts-martial, jurisdictional in-fighting about the scientific bounty, and political squabbling.
Secretary of the Navy Abel Upshur had it in for Wilkes, calling for a court martial of the Expedition’s commander. Some later saw this as a mistake, as a general court of inquiry would have been more effective.
While this was going on, confusion abounded as to what to do with all of the scientific artifacts, data, and documentation collected by the Expedition. The United States, at this time, did not have an adequate national storehouse for this kind of stuff.
“No one had anticipated that one voyage could have possibly generated such a massive amount of material, “ writes Philbrick. “The number of ethnographic objects alone was staggering: four thousand pieces, a third more than the total number of artifacts collected during all three of Cook’s voyages. Indeed, the ethnographic collection of the U.S. Ex. Ex.... is now thought to be, according to anthropologist Adrienne Kaeppler, the largest ever made by a single sailing expedition. (p. 332)”
Storehouses, institutes, and scientific think tanks had to be especially created to handle this overflow of information; buildings and organizations that would later be the foundation for the Smithsonian Institute.
The maritime adventures and explorations described in “Sea of Glory” are reason enough to read the book, but Philbrick is as dedicated to preserving the integrity and memory of the admirable (and humanly flawed) men in the story as he is in documenting the history and the scientific achievements of this fascinating expedition. Sometimes, the humanity of historical events are drowned out and suppressed by timelines, facts, and data. Philbrick’s talent is never forgetting that real, emotional men and women are at the heart of these events....more
I wrote a paper on Herman Melville’s “Moby Dick” for my senior year AP English class and received an “A+” for it... WITHOUT HAVING READ THE DAMNED BOOI wrote a paper on Herman Melville’s “Moby Dick” for my senior year AP English class and received an “A+” for it... WITHOUT HAVING READ THE DAMNED BOOK! Not bragging (okay, maybe a little...), but it’s a testament to two things: 1) the great in-depth class discussions about the book in Mr. Milheim’s class from which I took copious notes and 2) my talent for bullshit. I could write a paper on any topic, not knowing anything about said topic, and make it sound great, by simply bullshitting my way through it. This is pretty much how I made it through college... But that’s beside the point.
The point is: I have never actually read “Moby Dick”, and I kind of feel guilty about that. It is, after all, one of those American Literature “classics” that many learned people revere, talk about, and quote from constantly. I consider myself a pretty well-read person, but never having read “Moby Dick” is, in my opinion, a glaring shortcoming on my part.
I know, I probably shouldn’t feel that guilty. Lots of people haven’t read it either. Probably for the same reasons I could cite for not finishing it: Melville’s tendency to interrupt the narrative with chapters describing whale physiognomy, types of whaling vessels, the history of the whaling industry, etc.; the slow build of character introductions and scene-setting; the complete inability to find any relevance to my own life.
I mean, seriously, what do 19th-century Nantucket whalers on a voyage to hunt down an elusive whale have anything to do with me?
The question is meant to be rhetorical, although the answer is a definite “nothing”.
Still, if I had read Nathaniel Philbrick’s “In the Heart of the Sea” before attempting “Moby Dick”, I may have had a better appreciation for Melville’s classic, and I may have actually finished it.
Here’s why, in reasons listed in importance from least to most:
1) I probably could have skipped over some of the chapters in Melville’s book in which he writes about the different types of whales in the sea, the brief history of the whaling industry, and the different types of boats. Philbrick does a fantastic job of incorporating all of that in this book, and he has the benefit of writing his book with a 21st-century knowledge. Philbrick’s information is, at the very least, up-to-date. Not that I probably would skip those parts, but having a better understanding of what Melville was talking about may have helped me slog through some of the more boring long-winded chapters to the heart of the novel.
2) Philbrick helps answer the question, “Why should I be interested in a book about whalers from Nantucket?” The simple answer is that the whaling industry was, in its heyday, a major player in the global economy and of major importance for the economy of the fairly-new United States of America. Nantucket, Massachusetts---being at the center of this lucrative whaling industry---was one of the most important cities in the United States at the time. Knowing how important whaling was to our nation’s financial success in its early years may have gone a long way in enticing me to read further in Melville’s book.
3) Knowing that “Moby Dick” was based on an actual incident, and a terrifying and sad one at that, would have given me that spark of interest to read further. I’m sure it was mentioned at some point during Mr. Milheim’s class discussions that Melville based his novel on the very real story of the whaleship Essex, which, in November 1820, was struck not once but twice by a sperm whale in the middle of the Pacific. It may have been mentioned, but it didn’t fire my imagination at the time. Perhaps it was because I didn’t know the full story, which Philbrick so wonderfully elucidates in grand detail. If I had known that the motivation behind “Moby Dick” was a true story that makes “Jaws” seem tame and that involves cannibalism on the high seas, I would have devoured that novel.
The weirdness and the creepiness of the Essex tragedy probably trumps its historical significance, but Philbrick writes the story as if it is still vitally important. In a sense, it still is, especially knowing what we now know about the environment, how ecosystems thrive, how we are decimating animal species into extinction horrifically, especially whales, and how intricately the global economy is intertwined with environmental issues.
Clearly, Philbrick is conscious of all that, but if that was his sole intent, it would be a whole lot of preaching to the choir for most readers.
I think Philbrick just knows a damn good story when he hears one, and the Essex tragedy is still a damn good story.
So good, in fact, that it has encouraged me to finally give “Moby Dick” the chance it finally deserves. ...more
Jon Land, a prolific author who has written numerous books in numerous series, began a series in the 1980s featuring an ex-military war hero named BlaJon Land, a prolific author who has written numerous books in numerous series, began a series in the 1980s featuring an ex-military war hero named Blaine McCracken. Silly name aside, McCracken is a hero in the same vein as Clive Cussler's Dirk Pitt, with a little bit of James Bond and Indiana Jones thrown in, as well. Apparently the market for men's action-adventure was not nearly saturated enough back then, because Land went on to write eleven books in the McCracken series.
"The Alpha Deception" is actually the second book in the series, but it's the first I've read. Don't worry, though, because you probably don't need to read the first book to understand what's going on. While I enjoyed the book, I couldn't help but feel that Land took a "kitchen sink" approach to writing it. Basically, he threw a lot of stuff into it, some of which works, some of which didn't.
Without giving too much of the plot away, the book involves a particle beam weapon that can destroy entire cities from orbit, a rogue group of Soviet hardliners bent on destruction of the U.S.A., a precious and rare gem that may or may not have come from the lost continent of Atlantis, Hasidic Jew assassins, a sea monster, and a Native American named Johnny Wareagle who can talk to animal spirits (of course) and has the magical ability of sneaking into any office anywhere in the Pentagon.
Having just written that, I'm surprised that this is not a Thomas Pynchon novel.
This book is silly and ridiculous, but it's also harmless good fun. If you enjoy Clive Cussler, you'll probably like this series by Land. ...more
So, I’m berating myself that I have only recently discovered the joys of reading Clive Cussler. Seriously, Clive, where have you been all my life?
“NigSo, I’m berating myself that I have only recently discovered the joys of reading Clive Cussler. Seriously, Clive, where have you been all my life?
“Night Probe!” is the third Cussler novel I have ever read, and it’s the sixth to feature his beloved action hero, Dirk Pitt. It’s clear to me now why so many people love the Pitt series.
Strange name aside, Dirk Pitt is a pretty lovable hero. Tough but funny, charismatic but serious when he needs to be, Pitt is basically an American James Bond minus a political agenda. His sole motivation is the thrill of the hunt and the adrenaline rush of adventure. Pitt was into extreme living long before anyone was into “extreme” anything.
Cussler’s novels are ridiculously good fun. They are not meant to be anything more. Matthew McConaughey’s attempt to bring Pitt to the big screen in “Sahara” (which was the second attempt to adapt a Cussler novel to the big screen, the first being “Raise the Titanic!” in 1980, starring Richard Jordan as Pitt) captured some of the fun of the series but apparently didn’t bring the fan base (or the box office revenue) expected.
I think part of the reason for the movie's lackluster success is that Cussler’s machine gun pacing and clever plotting didn't translate well. Not a prose stylist by any stretch of the imagination, Cussler nevertheless tells a damn good story. It’s perhaps no wonder, then, that other best-selling action/adventure authors like Tom Clancy have often cited Cussler as one of their inspirations as writers. Cussler is like Hemingway with a helluva lot more testosterone and minus the literary pretension.
The plot of “Night Probe!” hinges on two tragedies that occurred in May 1914, one fictional and one real. The fictional tragedy was the passenger steam locomotive The Manhattan Limited that went over a bridge and plunged headlong into the Hudson River, killing everyone aboard. Pieces of the train washed ashore but the majority of the wreckage was never discovered. The real-life tragedy was the accidental sinking of the ocean liner RMS Empress of Ireland in the Saint Lawrence River. Of the 1,477 passengers on-board, only 465 survived. It is considered the largest maritime accident in Canadian history in terms of casualties.
In a cosmic twist of fate, two copies of a significant document known as the North American Treaty were lost to history in these tragedies. Mysteriously, all traces and mention of the treaty were purposely erased from history at the behest of the parties involved, namely the British and American governments.
Fast-forward to 1989, when an intrepid naval commander named Heidi Milligan, conducting research on something seemingly unrelated, uncovers mention of the treaty. Her sleuthing attracts the attention of the British government, who activates a retired spy named Brian Shaw to stop her from discovering more.
Unfortunately for Shaw, Milligan shares her information with Dirk Pitt, who is as intrepid if not moreso.
Amidst this ensuing cat-and-mouse, international relations between the U.S. and Canada are becoming strained, to say the least. When Quebec freedom fighters unsuccessfully attempt to assassinate Quebec’s Prime Minister, it opens the door for a national secessionist movement in the Canadian government’s parliament. The U.S. will be hit hard by a potential secession of Quebec from Canada, due to a new discovery of underwater oil wells within Quebec waters. The U.S. is already facing a major oil shortage and skyrocketing oil prices, so Quebec’s secession could result in an economic disaster.
When the President of the United States discovers that the North American Treaty was, essentially, a bill of sale negotiated between President Woodrow Wilson and King George of England to sell Canada in its entirety to the U.S. for one billion dollars of 1914 money, Pitt and his team at the National Underwater and Marine Agency (NUMA) are immediately called in to retrieve the North American Treaty from one or both wrecks, if possible.
Hot on Pitt’s trail, of course, is Shaw and a psychotic Canadian mountie improbably and sadly named Floss Gly. The clock is ticking...
As ridiculous as the plot sounds, Cussler makes it seem believable. Of course, anyone who actually lived through 1989 would notice the glaring historical inaccuracies. One must keep in mind that Cussler published the book in 1981, so the events in the novel were set nine years in Cussler’s future.
If you’re good at suspending some of your disbelief and enjoy an exciting action/adventure now and then, pick up an early Cussler novel if you’ve never done so. You may be pleasantly surprised. ...more
I will read any book that has the audacity to include an exclamation mark in its title, and Clive Cussler has written several with that distinction.
“I will read any book that has the audacity to include an exclamation mark in its title, and Clive Cussler has written several with that distinction.
“Pacific Vortex!” was, apparently, Cussler’s first novel he ever wrote featuring his hero Dirk Pitt, but it was the sixth book published. Cussler himself considers it one of his less-stellar works, referring to it as “a few hours of entertainment and, perhaps, even a historic artifact of sorts” in his foreword.
Having read several of the other Dirk Pitt novels, I can attest that “Pacific Vortex!” is definitely not Cussler’s best work, but as a pulpy action-adventure that pays homage to such unbelievable pulp novel heroes like Allan Quatermain and Doc Savage, as well as nods to contemporary action heroes like James Bond and Indiana Jones, it is sheer silly good fun.
The plot involves a nuclear sub that mysteriously disappears in what is called the Pacific Vortex, a section of the Pacific Ocean just off the coast of Oahu in which several dozen ships have disappeared over a 30-year period, much like the Atlantic’s Bermuda Triangle. (Don’t bother googling Pacific Vortex, by the way, as it is completely fictional...)
Via a series of strange events, Dirk Pitt finds himself personally involved in the naval search for the sub and investigation of the Pacific Vortex. The clock is ticking as the U.S. must beat the Russians to the site.
Upon arrival to the last known coordinates of the sub, Pitt and the Navy discover a long-lost underwater island, which may hold the secret to the Pacific Vortex!
Of course, there is an evil villain, an underwater lair, scantily-clad women, fisticuffs and shoot-outs galore, and enough testosterone to fill three books.
It’s easy to gripe about the misogyny in this book: women are either sluts, secretaries, or damsels in distress. Sometimes they’re all three. But it’s important to keep in mind the inherent misogyny of the entire genre and the fact that Cussler admits that this was his first novel and not up to par. Not that that’s an excuse, mind you, or in any way a condoning of it. It’s simply a fact.
If misogyny is a deal-breaker for you, then early Cussler may not be the best choice. To be fair, Cussler’s portrayal of female characters eventually did evolve somewhat in later books....more
Clive Cussler's novel "Raise the Titanic!" screams manliness.
Written in 1976, "Raise the Titanic!" was the fourth book to feature Cussler's manly herClive Cussler's novel "Raise the Titanic!" screams manliness.
Written in 1976, "Raise the Titanic!" was the fourth book to feature Cussler's manly hero, Dirk Pitt. Rugged, taciturn, ex-Navy, knows a lot about boats. Also: charmer with the ladies, who don't really figure much in the book. Women have three purposes: secretarial, sexual, or villainous. It's not that Cussler doesn't like women, it's just that he doesn't have a lot of things for them to do, and he's not quite sure what to do with them when they're there. Granted, this is Cussler in '76. I'm sure he's evolved somewhat.
Sexism aside, Cussler can write a pretty damn good maritime action/adventure yarn. I don't even like boats, and after the first 20 pages or so, I was ready to set sail into a hurricane on a dinghy and man the rigging. (I have no idea what I just wrote there…) Seriously, I still don't have a clue what "port" or "starboard" mean, but it doesn't matter. Cussler's vast knowledge of sea-faring only enhances the pleasure of reading this book, even for land-lubbers like myself.
The plot: a rare element known as byzanium is needed in a top-secret government project called The Sicilian Project. It just so happens that, in 1912, a large amount of byzanium was crossing the Atlantic in the cargo hold of a deluxe cruise ship on its maiden voyage. The ship was the Titanic. (Yes, the same ship on which Kate Winslet and Leo DiCaprio met, fell in love, and had sex in a car. According to history, the ship hit an iceberg and sank, never to be found again, until Bill Paxton discovers it many decades later, with funding from James Cameron.) In a series of interesting and somewhat coincidental events, the Titanic is discovered, and a race ensues between the U.S. and the Soviets. Dirk Pitt, a courageous jack-of-all-trades and manly man, leads the expedition to retrieve the Titanic and raise it from its watery grave in order to secure the byzanium. Little things like Soviet assassin spies, hurricanes, and naked women won't get in his way.
Did I mention this book is a testosterone-laden manly Manfest?
There are some weird things about it. One is that it was published in '76, but it takes place in the "present" of 1987. I'm not sure why Cussler chose to set it in a near future, although I'm sure the fact that the technology for underwater retrieval needed for raising a ship like the Titanic probably wasn't around in '76, or it was still in its early stages. In any case, the 1987 setting threw me off a bit. Interestingly enough, the socio-political issues Cussler writes about in his future aren't that completely far off from the real 1987. Weird.
Another weird thing is that, at the time, the Titanic had not been discovered. I can't recall exactly when it was discovered, although I'm pretty sure it was in the early '80s, because I was in elementary school at the time and remember it being in the news. I was fairly certain that scientists would discover that it was full of underwater alien eggs, and that they would hatch and multiply and eventually eat everyone in the world. (I think the movie "Alien" scarred my childhood. I curse my father for letting me stay up late and watch that damn movie…) Anyway, interesting to note that Cussler kind of predicted the discovery of the Titanic. Weird.
Overall, I was pretty taken in by "Raise the Titanic!" It's everything a manly techno-thriller should be: exciting, action-packed, full of good ol' fashioned fisticuffs, gunplay, and explosions. And some sexy ladies, of course....more
I have never read a Clive Cussler novel until "Treasure of Khan", which is, I think, the 20th novel in his long-running Dirk Pitt series. My Cussler dI have never read a Clive Cussler novel until "Treasure of Khan", which is, I think, the 20th novel in his long-running Dirk Pitt series. My Cussler deprivation is not due to any calculated or irrational dismissal of the author; I just never got around to reading him. Starting with the 20th book in the series is probably not wise, as Cussler has reached that "I can basically write a 200-page shopping list and any publishing company will publish it" status, which is never a good thing. For proof, see anything by James Patterson.
Cussler also has a co-writer for this one (his son, Dirk Cussler), which, in my opinion, is ALWAYS a red flag. When well-known authors start writing "with" other people, it usually means they have become so lazy that they can't come up with any new ideas of their own, or they wrote a quick outline for a novel and had someone else actually write it. Again, see James Patterson.
So, truth be told, I was a bit leary about this one, and I didn't have high expectations. Consider my surprise and delight that I actually enjoyed the book.
I'm not going to lie: it starts slow. The real action didn't kick in until around page 150 (out of 600), the first 150 pages devoted mostly to scene-setting and necessary (but excruciatingly dry and, at times, textbook-like) backstory. I'm guessing Cussler books all follow a similar formula: at some point in history, a ship carrying treasure or objects of vital importance is lost; fast-forward hundreds of years to modern times when a clue is uncovered that reveals the possible whereabouts of said lost ship; adventurer and treasure-hunter Dirk Pitt and his crew go off to find it, only to encounter numerous obstacles and nefarious villains trying to prevent him from finding it.
I'm guessing each Cussler book is a "fill in the blank" in terms of historical period, lost treasure, modern-day clue, and nefarious villain. In this case, the book starts with a dying Genghis Khan in the 13th-century. The treasure is the long-lost burial place of Khan. The modern-day clue is a scroll found on the body of a dead archaeologist. The villain is a mysterious multi-billionaire who has access to untapped oil riches in Lower Mongolia and a giant gun that can create earthquakes.
Yes, it's pretty silly. It's part Indiana Jones and part James Bond, and it's all ridiculous, but it's good, clean fun. While it's not exceptionally good writing, it's good enough that it makes me want to go back and read Cussler's early work, when he wasn't just getting published on his name alone....more
"Ship of Gold in the Deep Blue Sea" by Gary Kinder reads like a Clive Cussler novel but is actually nonfiction.
Kinder tells an exciting well-research"Ship of Gold in the Deep Blue Sea" by Gary Kinder reads like a Clive Cussler novel but is actually nonfiction.
Kinder tells an exciting well-researched story about the 1857 sinking of the Central America, an American passenger ship, off the coast of North Carolina. Roughly 400 people perished, and several millions of dollars worth (adjusted) of California gold was lost in treacherously deep waters. It was apparently the worst maritime disaster until the Titanic, and until the 1980s, no one knew exactly where it was.
Not that it mattered, because the technology didn't exist to retreive anything from that depth. That is, not until an intrepid and ingenuous engineer named Tommy Thompson (an OSU grad, no less) was struck by the "treasure-hunting" bug and set out on a well-funded expedition with state-of-the-art underwater submersible and artifact retrieval technology.
This is a great sea-faring adventure told extremely well. The first part literally grabs the reader and doesn't let up, as Kinder describes the events of the hurricane that leads up to the sinking of the Central America. Kinder uses first-hand narratives to capture the emotionally draining stories of the survivors.
The second part, equally fascinating (although admittedly not as exciting) tells the story of Thompson's attempt to get his expedition underway. Rounding up legal teams and scrounging up fund-raisers may be exciting to some, but at times these parts do drag.
Thankfully, Kinder knows how to keep the reader engaged and never dwells too long on the boring bits. There are a few scenes of suspense, when rival treasure-hunters (some not as legal-minded as Thompson) attempt to horn in on their scene. The climactic "discovery" and recovery scene is well worth the wait.
This book is probably what James Cameron's "Titanic" could have been if it wasn't bogged down by the stupid love story. "Ship of Gold" is just pure manly adventure story. ...more
Loading...
