More Than You Can Say

Meh. That was my first reaction when I finished the book.
Since I have been out of reading for so long, and my main bulk of reading is not done in the department of this particular genre, I cannot say whether my 'gulping' of the book, i.e. reading it cover to cover fairly quickly, is due to the writer's abilities of pulling a reader in or my need to know the end (and no, I cannot jump to the end and just be done with it, I have the compelling urge to travel the literary road completely, start to finish). So the first, and one of the only, point for this book is the way it dragged me in and made it hard for me to put down. As a result, I finished reading it at 3 in the morning.

It is an easy read, fairly straight forward (in general), show more and moves along quite quickly. You don't tread in place for very long, or at all. However, it does leave some scenes wanting, though it is not plagued with the had-an-idea-so-I-ran-with-it-but-forgot-to-go-back-and-add-details feeling.

I do not expect every adventure/mystery novel to be a completely surprising. They rarely are anymore, the basic twists and turns are pretty much expected. However, too blatant foreshadowing ruins even the most trivial story lines. First Person Narration is mostly hurt (if not mostly plagued) by it, because once a character hints at a possibility and then ignores it, big, red, neon signs are lit up "danger, danger". When it is repeated, it also makes the character seem, well, to put it bluntly, dumb. Add to that a character whose mantra is "don't think", and you, as a reader, get the feeling that someone offended your intelligence.

Also, I know that most books have an agenda, a point, other than the plot, that they want to get across. Well, not books, but their writers. I'm aware that the matter of subtlety in this matter has been lost, or, rather, the ability to pass said point elegantly. While some books shove it down your throat, others, as this book, manage to make it quite delicate. Problem was, that while delicate, a) it could be seen a mile away (though I've already mentioned the subtlety issue); and b) it was not compelling.
I did not read the opening notes (I never do before I read the book, a clean start), so I did not know what he was aiming at, but it was pretty clear almost for the start. To make it clear, he's trying to make a point about PTSD and the society's handling of army veterans in general. While it was obvious he aimed at these issues, I felt he missed them. I felt the main character was messed-up before he joined the army (with the very little information we have on how he was before), and afterwards he just seemed psychotic regardless of his service. I think bringing this very important issue on the table requires a different genre altogether, or a longer and more psychological book, one that isn't focused on the action, but rather the REaction.
Despite the good intentions and the characterization of a man incapable of real emotional connection who's trying not to think, it didn't come off as a PTSD, but rather as an obnoxious and unrelatable character. It (the book, the story, the character) needs more depth, more poking fingers into the unpleasant places. More rawness, jabbing a hot poker into the wound. It's a bit too willy-nilly on this important issue.

I have trouble with books where I find the main character unpleasing. It is a serious problem when the terms I'd use to describe a character are: Stupid, emotionally numb, and psychotic. Of course, when we're talking about a character who is supposed to evoke empathy, it is even worse.

At the end, despite all that happened and could happen, two things occurred that annoyed me:
1. A forced happy ending - I am quite allergic to those, especially in non-romance literature (not that the forced happy endings in romance don't give me the hives, it's just they are more genre acceptable). While I guess some would argue it is not necessarily a happy ending (it is quite an open one), I still feel it is, especially because it feels forced. It doesn't feel natural, just sort of a filler to tie a loose end and to give hope to our beloved hero. I would see it end in a completely different way.
Mind you, I am talking strictly about the last chapter, an afterward of sorts, and not the resolution of the mystery plot. It (i.e. mystery plot) was resolved, if not to my satisfaction, to an expected and presumable outcome (if you accept the premises in the plot up until then, that is).
2. Despite all that has gone through, despite all the realizations and enlightenment our hero had gone through, he has not evolved or grown one single centimeter. He stayed the same, but, mainly because of point 1, it doesn't seem like a human being that got stuck in place, rather like a book character that has not evolved. And in such a story, with such revelations, progress must be made.

To sum it up: I didn't like the main character, the moral seemed forced, and the ending fake. However, it is written in an engaging way, and the action plot is quite an interesting one (though not entirely innovative). I probably will not read this book again, but I cannot say that I would stay away from other books by the same writer. show less

Probably my least favourite novel by Torday, but still a good read because of the author's ability as a storyteller. The main character is a former soldier, struggling with post-army life. That in itself may be enough to explain my relative lack of interest. War and fighting are major themes in human history but, nevertheless, they are themes that I generally try and avoid.

Torday is hitherto best known for writing comic novels, like his best-selling debut 'Salmon Fishing in the Yemen'. In subsequent novels he has endeavoured to add some weighter ingredients to the mix. In 'More Than You Can Say' he appears to be using the thriller genre as a vehicle for pondering such big issues as the rights and wrongs of western intervention in Iraq show more and Afghanistan. I say "appears" because it probably lacks sufficient tension for a thriller, not least because I could see where it was heading from quite early on. It begins looking like a fairly typical Torday tale of a man in his thirties with lots of life issues. When the hero ends up walking from London to Oxford for a bet, it seems the reader is in line for the sort of humorous scrapes encountered in the authors earlier works. Gradually, though, the tone darkens until the central character is caught up in a major incident in central London which forces him to revert to his instincts as a professional soldier against the promptings of his heart. show less

This is a very entertaining story about an ex-soldier suffering from PTSD and making bad choices in his life. It's a fast read, touching lightly on issues such as the treatment of soldiers and the war on terror.

A book which takes an unexpected turn early on, this book’s best feature for me was its unpredictability. No hint is given on the cover as to the subject matter, and as the story progresses it is never clear how ‘safe’ it will turn out to be (though the style tended to suggest a ‘lite’ version of a contemporary issue was being presented).

It was a straightforward and quick read – I got through it in a day – and it kept me guessing to the end. I would perhaps have liked to get to know the protagonist Richard a bit better: despite this being a first-person narrative, he never came across as a three dimensional character, more as a guy being buffeted about by events. On the other hand, the story features a character called show more Eck. Nobody expresses any surprise at this. Are there really people out there called Eck? Top marks for inventiveness either way. show less

I think this one is the best out of Paul's work.

It is about Richard Gaunt, an ex-Army Londoner who due to misadventures at a gambling club in London is kidnapped walking to Oxford and taken to a house and (almost forced) to marry a women he never met for money.

Things are not what they appear, and who is this mystery woman? Is she from Afghanstan? Is she a terrorist? What is going on?