Dave's Free Press: Reviews

being why I think things suck and/or rock


Recent posts


Recently commented posts


Journals what I read

books sci-fi alcohol electronics fantasy film geeky music thriller crime tv meta kindle theatre horror whisky baen maths comedy pubs beer rum food software literature clothes review-of-reviews rsnapshot foreign magazines transport opera tequila shorts spam electronics ww2 biography gin religion cooking hotel brandy psephology museum
Sun, 19 May 2013

The Apocalypse Codex, by Charles Stross

This fourth book in Stross's Laundry series is, apparently, like the previous ones, written in a pastiche of some other author's style, but this time it wasn't one that I recognized. It's also a damned fine read.

Many series get tired after a while, as the characters stop developing or worse, develop into one-dimensional archetypes. This doesn't happen here. We learn and see more of both the characters and institutions. We also have a well-developed antagonist, one who is (of course, this is a Laundry book) utterly evil, but for the best of reasons and thinks he is on the side of the angels.

However, I feel that the ending was rather rushed and not particularly believable. No sensible bad guy would leave one half of his Doomsday Device utterly unguarded, especially when he knows that the opposition are in the field. And the idea of the double double-cross and subtle but quick manipulation by the Black Chamber of institutions and individuals is frankly silly. For that I deduct one star. I'd deduct more except that the rest of the book is so gloriously fun to read, deftly combining horror, action and comedy as we have come to expect from the series.

I recommend this book, provided that you have read the previous installments. If you haven't, then you should read them first.

Posted at 19:07 by David Cantrell
keywords: books | comedy | horror | sci-fi
Permalink | 1 Comment

All the failings of the ending are entirely characteristic of Modesty Blaise books, so were PROBABLY intentional. Which you may or may not consider a defence.

Posted by Dr Rick on Mon, 20 May 2013 at 17:06:08

Sorry, this post is too old for you to comment on it.