jpbeardly's review against another edition
4.0
A great read largely based on fact. You get the best of all world's. Gunfights, spy world intrigue, fishing and Hemingway, what more could one ask for?
rumbledethumps's review against another edition
3.0
Based on the real-life story of Ernest Hemingway's amateur spy ring in Cuba during the Second World War, *The Crook Factory* is Dan Simmons' fictionalized version of the events that took place in 1942-43 in and around Hemingway's Cuban villa.
]It is meticulously researched and a good story, but it fell flat for me in a couple of ways. First, there are a few too many winks at the reader, statements made by characters of the mid-20th century that any reader in the 21st century would know to be wrong. One particularly clunky example:
"'Rather more [J Edgar Hoover's] style to haul you up in front of a Senate committee investigating Communist infiltration and discredit you or send you to jail'
'There's no such thing as a witch-hunt committee like that,' said Hemingway."
Second, it felt at times that nothing of what Simmons found in the archives was left out of the book. The story is fascinating, but the way it is presented, it is overburdened by detail and research. As he has Hemingway state at one point, "Only you have to avoid showing off... parading all the things you know like marching captured soldiers through the capitol."
In his other historical fictions, *Drood* and *The Terror*, Simmons does an excellent job of not letting his research get in the way. *The Crook Factory* was originally published in 1999 (this is a re-release by Mulholland Books), and maybe, by the time he wrote the later novels, Simmons learned how to incorporate his research more naturally into the narrative.
Perhaps the best review is done by the narrator himself. At the end of the book, he is reflecting on his time with Hemingway, and the best way to write about it. "In later years, Hemingway was quoted as saying that a novel was like an iceberg--seven-eighths of it should be invisible.... I knew that I would never be good enough as a writer to tell the story that way."
]It is meticulously researched and a good story, but it fell flat for me in a couple of ways. First, there are a few too many winks at the reader, statements made by characters of the mid-20th century that any reader in the 21st century would know to be wrong. One particularly clunky example:
"'Rather more [J Edgar Hoover's] style to haul you up in front of a Senate committee investigating Communist infiltration and discredit you or send you to jail'
'There's no such thing as a witch-hunt committee like that,' said Hemingway."
Second, it felt at times that nothing of what Simmons found in the archives was left out of the book. The story is fascinating, but the way it is presented, it is overburdened by detail and research. As he has Hemingway state at one point, "Only you have to avoid showing off... parading all the things you know like marching captured soldiers through the capitol."
In his other historical fictions, *Drood* and *The Terror*, Simmons does an excellent job of not letting his research get in the way. *The Crook Factory* was originally published in 1999 (this is a re-release by Mulholland Books), and maybe, by the time he wrote the later novels, Simmons learned how to incorporate his research more naturally into the narrative.
Perhaps the best review is done by the narrator himself. At the end of the book, he is reflecting on his time with Hemingway, and the best way to write about it. "In later years, Hemingway was quoted as saying that a novel was like an iceberg--seven-eighths of it should be invisible.... I knew that I would never be good enough as a writer to tell the story that way."
writer_matt's review against another edition
4.0
I'm a huge Hemingway fan, have been since my my senior year in High School when I had to read one of his short stories for my Advanced English class - I immediately couldn't get enough. The summer after high school I binge read almost all of his novels. In university, I took every class that had him on the syllabus, including a single author class - which was like heaven.
I know a lot of people criticize his treatment of women, his vague and obtuse writing style, his hyper-masculine characterization - and I will admit, there is a lot to criticize. But in the end, he'd just a damn good writer.
And so, when I stumbled across this book in a tiny bookstore in Guelph, I was blown away by the whole conceit of the book. Hemingway as an amatuer spy. Fighting Nazis in Cuba. And being persecuted by the FBI and other secret spy agencies.
It combined so many things I love. Hemingway. World War II stories. Spy thrillers.
I was so excited.
And for the most part, the book lived up to that excitement. The characterization of Hemingway is perfect - the moody, obsessive writer with a pretty obvious drinking problem. However, while the image of Hemingway the novel casts is perfect in almost every way, there are a few obvious issues: Hemingway still comes across as a joke - his mission in Cuba to sink German U-Boats seems ridiculous. There is no rhyme or reason for it. The books casts it as something that he came up with one day while lying next to his pool in a drunken stupor. There was never any actual discussion as to why he wanted to do this thing. What was the real push for him. I had a hard time connecting to that aspect of the novel - I wanted to understand why he wanted to do this.
My other main issue with the novel was the narrator. I had just a hard time understanding why he was doing the things he was doing. Why did he suddenly fall under the spell of Hemingway - and it really is written as though the writer casts a spell over those that come close to him. Why did Lucas suddenly decide to become a disciple of Hemingway when he spends the majority of the early parts of the novel whining about having to be in Cuba babysitting Hemingway. The sudden shift in characterization was so strange and odd. Even after the death of the boy, which was meant as a turning point for Lucas, he continued wishing he had nothing to do with Hemingway. And yet, 100 pages later, Lucas is suddenly pro- Hemingway. It was just too sudden and odd for me.
But enough of what I didn't like, for now. What did I like? Everything else! The pacing of the spy thriller was perfect - it was just fast enough that I wanted to keep up, and slow enough that I could go back and figure things out before the next big dramatic moment happens. In some ways, it reminded me of an Alan Furst novel or a Len Deighton - but in Cuba.
The incredible detail of the novel blew me away - clearly Simmons spent a long time researching the novel. There were tidbits of Hemingway in there that I had never heard of before. I loved that aspect of the book.
It was especially nice to see Hemingway through a new set of eyes - Lucas, a man who had never read a fictional novel in his life, was the perfect subjective observer to give us a fresh look at Hemingway and his struggles with alcohol, mental health, and what was clearly a unique form of obsessive compulsive.
But, I have to wonder, was Lucas believable? I am not entirely sure I really connected with his character. He seemed to know his profession - but that profession was oddly placed here. The rationale for many of his actions left me puzzled or cold. Why did he torture the Nazi spy in the way he did? It was needless and disturbing (and slightly homophobic).
Finally, I need to say something about the epilogue. It troubled me. It struck me as superfluous. I didn't need it. I didn't need to see how each character made out after the events in Cuba played out. If Simmons had left it at the last moment Lucas and Hemingway see each other, it would have been perfect. A neat little story all wrapped up - and in fact the book felt finished at that point, but suddenly I had 30 pages to go of material I was not really sure why I was reading. It felt clumsy and awkward. But, then again, Lucas as narrator admits his shortcoming as a writer and narrator, because he doesn't really know when to end the story.
But Simmons should. He should know that the book didn't need that extra material. It took away from the story - it took away from the adventure in Cuba and left the reader with a feeling of distance from what had happened in the last 500 pages.
Do I recommend the book? Yes. Absolutely! But maybe, if you just want a really good spy thriller, skip the last 30 pages. But if you want a pseudo Hemingway biography that felt awkward at times, be sure to read those 30 pages, with reservation.
I know a lot of people criticize his treatment of women, his vague and obtuse writing style, his hyper-masculine characterization - and I will admit, there is a lot to criticize. But in the end, he'd just a damn good writer.
And so, when I stumbled across this book in a tiny bookstore in Guelph, I was blown away by the whole conceit of the book. Hemingway as an amatuer spy. Fighting Nazis in Cuba. And being persecuted by the FBI and other secret spy agencies.
It combined so many things I love. Hemingway. World War II stories. Spy thrillers.
I was so excited.
And for the most part, the book lived up to that excitement. The characterization of Hemingway is perfect - the moody, obsessive writer with a pretty obvious drinking problem. However, while the image of Hemingway the novel casts is perfect in almost every way, there are a few obvious issues: Hemingway still comes across as a joke - his mission in Cuba to sink German U-Boats seems ridiculous. There is no rhyme or reason for it. The books casts it as something that he came up with one day while lying next to his pool in a drunken stupor. There was never any actual discussion as to why he wanted to do this thing. What was the real push for him. I had a hard time connecting to that aspect of the novel - I wanted to understand why he wanted to do this.
My other main issue with the novel was the narrator. I had just a hard time understanding why he was doing the things he was doing. Why did he suddenly fall under the spell of Hemingway - and it really is written as though the writer casts a spell over those that come close to him. Why did Lucas suddenly decide to become a disciple of Hemingway when he spends the majority of the early parts of the novel whining about having to be in Cuba babysitting Hemingway. The sudden shift in characterization was so strange and odd. Even after the death of the boy, which was meant as a turning point for Lucas, he continued wishing he had nothing to do with Hemingway. And yet, 100 pages later, Lucas is suddenly pro- Hemingway. It was just too sudden and odd for me.
But enough of what I didn't like, for now. What did I like? Everything else! The pacing of the spy thriller was perfect - it was just fast enough that I wanted to keep up, and slow enough that I could go back and figure things out before the next big dramatic moment happens. In some ways, it reminded me of an Alan Furst novel or a Len Deighton - but in Cuba.
The incredible detail of the novel blew me away - clearly Simmons spent a long time researching the novel. There were tidbits of Hemingway in there that I had never heard of before. I loved that aspect of the book.
It was especially nice to see Hemingway through a new set of eyes - Lucas, a man who had never read a fictional novel in his life, was the perfect subjective observer to give us a fresh look at Hemingway and his struggles with alcohol, mental health, and what was clearly a unique form of obsessive compulsive.
But, I have to wonder, was Lucas believable? I am not entirely sure I really connected with his character. He seemed to know his profession - but that profession was oddly placed here. The rationale for many of his actions left me puzzled or cold. Why did he torture the Nazi spy in the way he did? It was needless and disturbing (and slightly homophobic).
Finally, I need to say something about the epilogue. It troubled me. It struck me as superfluous. I didn't need it. I didn't need to see how each character made out after the events in Cuba played out. If Simmons had left it at the last moment Lucas and Hemingway see each other, it would have been perfect. A neat little story all wrapped up - and in fact the book felt finished at that point, but suddenly I had 30 pages to go of material I was not really sure why I was reading. It felt clumsy and awkward. But, then again, Lucas as narrator admits his shortcoming as a writer and narrator, because he doesn't really know when to end the story.
But Simmons should. He should know that the book didn't need that extra material. It took away from the story - it took away from the adventure in Cuba and left the reader with a feeling of distance from what had happened in the last 500 pages.
Do I recommend the book? Yes. Absolutely! But maybe, if you just want a really good spy thriller, skip the last 30 pages. But if you want a pseudo Hemingway biography that felt awkward at times, be sure to read those 30 pages, with reservation.
verkisto's review against another edition
4.0
It's no secret that Dan Simmons does a lot of research before writing a book. It's no secret because Simmons lets you know throughout the book that he did that research, because if he found some interesting factoid that's only tangentially related to the story, it's going to go into the narrative. It's both the best and the worst thing about reading a Simmons novel, because while it definitely adds something to the story, all of it together bloats up the book something awful.
Interestingly, Simmons paraphrases one of Hemingway's adages about writing -- it should be like an iceberg, where only 1/8th of the story should be visible -- but doesn't quite seem to do it himself. This is ironic, but not so much as Simmons also paraphrasing Hemingway's feelings about ending a novel, during the two epilogues that seem superfluous.
While I was reading it, I started doing a little research of my own to see how much of the story is factual, and I ran across something Simmons said about the novel, that it's 95% factual. At the time, I found myself wondering why Simmons didn't just write a nonfiction book about it, but later in the story, he paraphrases Hemingway again, having him talk about why he writes fiction instead of nonfiction. There, readers, was my answer, and I was okay with it.
The story isn't really quite four stars for me, because it feels overlong and over-detailed, but neither is it just a three-star book. I can't round it down for its faults, because despite those faults, it's still a Dan Simmons book, which means it's compelling, interesting, and thoughtful. I prefer his genre stories to his history stories, but I can't deny he's a good writer, no matter what he writes.
2020 Popsugar Reading Challenge: A book set in a country beginning with "C"
Interestingly, Simmons paraphrases one of Hemingway's adages about writing -- it should be like an iceberg, where only 1/8th of the story should be visible -- but doesn't quite seem to do it himself. This is ironic, but not so much as Simmons also paraphrasing Hemingway's feelings about ending a novel, during the two epilogues that seem superfluous.
While I was reading it, I started doing a little research of my own to see how much of the story is factual, and I ran across something Simmons said about the novel, that it's 95% factual. At the time, I found myself wondering why Simmons didn't just write a nonfiction book about it, but later in the story, he paraphrases Hemingway again, having him talk about why he writes fiction instead of nonfiction. There, readers, was my answer, and I was okay with it.
The story isn't really quite four stars for me, because it feels overlong and over-detailed, but neither is it just a three-star book. I can't round it down for its faults, because despite those faults, it's still a Dan Simmons book, which means it's compelling, interesting, and thoughtful. I prefer his genre stories to his history stories, but I can't deny he's a good writer, no matter what he writes.
2020 Popsugar Reading Challenge: A book set in a country beginning with "C"
skolastic's review against another edition
3.0
A fun premise but ultimately a pretty generic thriller. I think Simmons and I are quits.
samhouston's review
4.0
Think what you might about Ernest Hemingway’s writing, personality, attitude toward women, etc., there is no denying that the man lived life to the fullest. And, of course, he went out with a bang, further ensuring his legendary status in the world of American literature. But, as detailed in the Dan Simmons novel, The Crook Factory, there is much more to the Hemingway life story than most realize.
Lest readers be left wondering how much of the novel is based on fact, Simmons adds this clarifying note at the end of the book: “The incredible story of Ernest Hemingway’s Cuban spy-catching, submarine-chasing, World War II adventures in my new novel, The Crook Factory, is – I think – all the more incredible for being 95 percent true.” He then goes through a list of plot twists and main characters that are based on “confirmed fact.”
Fictional FBI man Joe Lucas, under direct orders from J. Edgar Hoover, is in Cuba to keep tabs on Hemingway and the little network of spies Hemingway is running there. Hemingway, although he is a little suspicious of Lucas, only knows that the U.S. ambassador to Cuba will not approve the operation unless Lucas is part of the team. He is not particularly happy to have Lucas on board, and, in turn, Lucas is unhappy because he thinks he has been assigned simply to “babysit” Hemingway long enough to keep him out of trouble – or from embarrassing the U.S. government.
But then people start dying. And everything changes. In this world of agents, double-agents, traitors, and professional killers, all Lucas knows is that someone wants Ernest Hemingway – and him- very, very dead. Now, if he can figure out why, he might be able to save both their lives.
The Crook Factory is a superb World War II thriller that will, I think, leave the reader with a new appreciation for just what a wild man Ernest Hemingway really was. Its seamless blending of fact and fiction includes appearances by the likes of: Gary Cooper, Marlene Dietrich, Ingrid Bergman, Hoover, John F. Kennedy, Ian Fleming, and other figures from both sides of the war.
The author’s account of Hemingway’s end is both so touching and so disturbing that readers will long remember it. That such a famous man could have been so ill-treated by the medical community and his own government is shocking. This, in combination with the incredible “missions” undertaken by Hemingway’s Crook Factory, make for engrossing reading.
I do, however, have one word of warning. The story involves a tremendous amount of infighting between Hoover’s FBI and the other intelligence agencies of the U.S. and Britain, and Simmons spends way too many pages explaining how it all happens - and why. Several long sections within the book’s first two hundred pages read more like mind-numbing pages from a bad history textbook than like content from a war thriller. But don’t give up because the last 350 pages or so will greatly reward your patience.
Lest readers be left wondering how much of the novel is based on fact, Simmons adds this clarifying note at the end of the book: “The incredible story of Ernest Hemingway’s Cuban spy-catching, submarine-chasing, World War II adventures in my new novel, The Crook Factory, is – I think – all the more incredible for being 95 percent true.” He then goes through a list of plot twists and main characters that are based on “confirmed fact.”
Fictional FBI man Joe Lucas, under direct orders from J. Edgar Hoover, is in Cuba to keep tabs on Hemingway and the little network of spies Hemingway is running there. Hemingway, although he is a little suspicious of Lucas, only knows that the U.S. ambassador to Cuba will not approve the operation unless Lucas is part of the team. He is not particularly happy to have Lucas on board, and, in turn, Lucas is unhappy because he thinks he has been assigned simply to “babysit” Hemingway long enough to keep him out of trouble – or from embarrassing the U.S. government.
But then people start dying. And everything changes. In this world of agents, double-agents, traitors, and professional killers, all Lucas knows is that someone wants Ernest Hemingway – and him- very, very dead. Now, if he can figure out why, he might be able to save both their lives.
The Crook Factory is a superb World War II thriller that will, I think, leave the reader with a new appreciation for just what a wild man Ernest Hemingway really was. Its seamless blending of fact and fiction includes appearances by the likes of: Gary Cooper, Marlene Dietrich, Ingrid Bergman, Hoover, John F. Kennedy, Ian Fleming, and other figures from both sides of the war.
The author’s account of Hemingway’s end is both so touching and so disturbing that readers will long remember it. That such a famous man could have been so ill-treated by the medical community and his own government is shocking. This, in combination with the incredible “missions” undertaken by Hemingway’s Crook Factory, make for engrossing reading.
I do, however, have one word of warning. The story involves a tremendous amount of infighting between Hoover’s FBI and the other intelligence agencies of the U.S. and Britain, and Simmons spends way too many pages explaining how it all happens - and why. Several long sections within the book’s first two hundred pages read more like mind-numbing pages from a bad history textbook than like content from a war thriller. But don’t give up because the last 350 pages or so will greatly reward your patience.
More...