heritage's review against another edition
2.0
A plane bound for Istanbul is hijacked by Armenian terrorists, but it doesn't go according to plan. The ensuing investigation uncovers a very dark operation that's been a little too successful over the years.
Set in 1975 in a fictional, Eastern European country which the author describes as "the intersection of Poland, Slovakia, Ukraine, Hungary, and Romania", this novel has two noticeable features: a complex plot and an unusual structure. The complicated plot is almost a given considering it's an espionage novel. However, like most plot-driven novels, it comes at the expense of character and narrative style. While we get a lot of back-story and exposition, it doesn't feel like character-building in the literary sense--just the basics to keep everything moving forward.
The structure is a bit of a head-scratcher. It is a multi-point-of-view novel. The novel starts with a first-person, present-tense narrative about a Militia officer boarding the fateful plane for a conference in Istanbul. The main point of view is a third-person, past-tense account concerning one of the investigators of the aforementioned hijacking. A secondary point of view is also a third-person, past-tense narrative set in 1968 and concerns a young man struggling with his political and personal ideals. A third point of view is a first-person, present-tense narrative set about a week after the hijacking concerning another Militia officer, who just also happens to figure into the hijacking investigation in the main narrative. All of this structure serves to take crucial plot elements and conceal them from and reveal them to the reader. And, as can be imagined, it's all rather forced and not exactly playing fair with the reader. The big cheat comes close to the end with a final, first-person, present-tense narrative from a completely new point-of-view character which would have cleared up much of the mystery if the novel had just been from this point of view all along. Convenient for the writer that it wasn't, otherwise it would have been a much shorter novel than it already is.
That's not to say the structure doesn't have a purpose. In a postmodern sort of way, that last point of view gets across a writer's struggle when arranging any complex plot: there are always some things you can never fully account for, no matter how hard you try to take everything into consideration. And, if the plot seems a little incredulous, remember that it, too, is part of the postmodern slant to this novel. Now the reader knows what it's like being an intelligence officer, having to piece things together and weigh the information and current thinking of the times when evaluating a story. Still, I think these little points will be lost on most readers, and the ones who may appreciate them will be disappointed with the rest of the novel.
It's a quick read, and a bit of a distraction from the everyday, but it doesn't seem destined to garner much of a following. And, it doesn't have as much emphasis on atmosphere as his previous ones. Not good enough to wholeheartedly endorse, but worth the effort if you've already read the preceding three novels in the author's Yalta Boulevard Sequence.
Set in 1975 in a fictional, Eastern European country which the author describes as "the intersection of Poland, Slovakia, Ukraine, Hungary, and Romania", this novel has two noticeable features: a complex plot and an unusual structure. The complicated plot is almost a given considering it's an espionage novel. However, like most plot-driven novels, it comes at the expense of character and narrative style. While we get a lot of back-story and exposition, it doesn't feel like character-building in the literary sense--just the basics to keep everything moving forward.
The structure is a bit of a head-scratcher. It is a multi-point-of-view novel. The novel starts with a first-person, present-tense narrative about a Militia officer boarding the fateful plane for a conference in Istanbul. The main point of view is a third-person, past-tense account concerning one of the investigators of the aforementioned hijacking. A secondary point of view is also a third-person, past-tense narrative set in 1968 and concerns a young man struggling with his political and personal ideals. A third point of view is a first-person, present-tense narrative set about a week after the hijacking concerning another Militia officer, who just also happens to figure into the hijacking investigation in the main narrative. All of this structure serves to take crucial plot elements and conceal them from and reveal them to the reader. And, as can be imagined, it's all rather forced and not exactly playing fair with the reader. The big cheat comes close to the end with a final, first-person, present-tense narrative from a completely new point-of-view character which would have cleared up much of the mystery if the novel had just been from this point of view all along. Convenient for the writer that it wasn't, otherwise it would have been a much shorter novel than it already is.
That's not to say the structure doesn't have a purpose. In a postmodern sort of way, that last point of view gets across a writer's struggle when arranging any complex plot: there are always some things you can never fully account for, no matter how hard you try to take everything into consideration. And, if the plot seems a little incredulous, remember that it, too, is part of the postmodern slant to this novel. Now the reader knows what it's like being an intelligence officer, having to piece things together and weigh the information and current thinking of the times when evaluating a story. Still, I think these little points will be lost on most readers, and the ones who may appreciate them will be disappointed with the rest of the novel.
It's a quick read, and a bit of a distraction from the everyday, but it doesn't seem destined to garner much of a following. And, it doesn't have as much emphasis on atmosphere as his previous ones. Not good enough to wholeheartedly endorse, but worth the effort if you've already read the preceding three novels in the author's Yalta Boulevard Sequence.
speesh's review
2.0
I really not sure I know what to feel about this one. Apart from a certain amount of disappointment.
Come on Olen, I know you can do better than this.
To be honest, I'm not even completely sure I know what it was all about. Which is why I'm a little disappointed, as I was tremendously impressed by and thoroughly enjoyed the two previous books of his I've read.
Istanbul Variations really is nowhere near as good as it should have been, based on that previous experience. Nowhere near as mind-bogglingly good and memorable as they were, or this should have been. It's only because I'm holding the book in my hands right now, that I can remember what happened. In fact, I think I feel really rather ambivalent about it. Take it or leave it. As detached from the story as the story seemed detached from me, the reader. There was very little feeling of involvement got out of me, the reader. It was all seemed more than a little 'at arm's length'. Like watching the story unfold while being the other side of a misty window from it. Rather than being in the room with it. If you understand what I mean.
I'm guessing (and of course no doubt guessing wrongly), but it seemed like he wrote a full story, then took out a lot of the explanations and plot detail, in an attempt to make it seem a lot more exciting, pacey, lean and interesting. Like it would be a challenge to us, to do some work to figure it all out. But I think he left too much out. Perhaps not to the detriment of the tale. But to the detriment to gaining my involvement, making me care. I kept going back over a section to see if I'd missed the line that would make the difference. Never found it.
What's it about?! Istanbul, 1975, Cold War (eastern) Europe, airport, hi-jack, plane crash, investigation, Prague Spring, treachery, dredging up the past, mind-control…and that's where it left me behind.
However, as I so much enjoyed the others I have read, and because I have a couple more up on the shelf there - I will give more Olen Steinhauer a go.
Come on Olen, I know you can do better than this.
To be honest, I'm not even completely sure I know what it was all about. Which is why I'm a little disappointed, as I was tremendously impressed by and thoroughly enjoyed the two previous books of his I've read.
Istanbul Variations really is nowhere near as good as it should have been, based on that previous experience. Nowhere near as mind-bogglingly good and memorable as they were, or this should have been. It's only because I'm holding the book in my hands right now, that I can remember what happened. In fact, I think I feel really rather ambivalent about it. Take it or leave it. As detached from the story as the story seemed detached from me, the reader. There was very little feeling of involvement got out of me, the reader. It was all seemed more than a little 'at arm's length'. Like watching the story unfold while being the other side of a misty window from it. Rather than being in the room with it. If you understand what I mean.
I'm guessing (and of course no doubt guessing wrongly), but it seemed like he wrote a full story, then took out a lot of the explanations and plot detail, in an attempt to make it seem a lot more exciting, pacey, lean and interesting. Like it would be a challenge to us, to do some work to figure it all out. But I think he left too much out. Perhaps not to the detriment of the tale. But to the detriment to gaining my involvement, making me care. I kept going back over a section to see if I'd missed the line that would make the difference. Never found it.
What's it about?! Istanbul, 1975, Cold War (eastern) Europe, airport, hi-jack, plane crash, investigation, Prague Spring, treachery, dredging up the past, mind-control…and that's where it left me behind.
However, as I so much enjoyed the others I have read, and because I have a couple more up on the shelf there - I will give more Olen Steinhauer a go.
smartipants8's review
4.0
Not bad at all - had never heard of this writer and bought the book because it was about Istanbul and I was about to go there. I enjoyed the twists and turns but mostly I enjoyed knowing it was about places I was visiting at the time. A main character that was gay was a refreshing twist too.
margardenlady's review against another edition
4.0
This was an audio book that had multiple voices reading it. Kind of different ...and good, except for the times that the audio tone quality changed and it sounded tinny. Not sure why that happened.
Anyway, this was an interesting story about war, spies and revenge. Events from 1968 play out in chapters alternating with 1975. A recently released prisoner is befriended by a recently discharged Soviet soldier in '68, in '75 a passenger flight is hijacked and destroyed by Armenian rebels. How are the two linked? Well written with interesting insights into the human spirit engaged in inhuman acts.
Anyway, this was an interesting story about war, spies and revenge. Events from 1968 play out in chapters alternating with 1975. A recently released prisoner is befriended by a recently discharged Soviet soldier in '68, in '75 a passenger flight is hijacked and destroyed by Armenian rebels. How are the two linked? Well written with interesting insights into the human spirit engaged in inhuman acts.
darwin8u's review against another edition
4.0
Steinhauer takes a helluva lot of risks with this novel and almost pulls them off. A hyper-original espionage/crime/revenge thriller set in Steinhauer's imaginary Eastern/Soviet Bloc country (smells like a mix of Hungary and Slovakia). Steinhauer has a genius for characters and he has developed many fantastic ones throughout his 36 Yalta series. IN Liberation Movements he throws a couple huge curves into the series. His two main characters are a gay secret police protégé and a revenge-seeking homicide detective. This isn't your mother's spy novel. Liberation Movements is sometimes a bit jumpy and the non-linear, multiple POV, narrative distracts a little from the setting, but again, I love to see Steinhauer experiment with the spy/crime format. Whatever points he loses because of its messiness, he more than makes up for because of his novelty and originality.
More...