Jackdaws

Rating:
Summary: Dispicable
Review: I was looking over these reviews and I noticed one reviewer talking about movie rights. Considering the current state of Hollywood, I wouldn't be surprised if it was picked up, although this is a terrible novel. The first few chapters were highly engaging and full of action, and I easily could imagine a great film based on the book. Little did I know, as I read further, the novel became tedious, repetitive and just plain ridiculous.

The facts at the end of the book state that this plotline was not plausible, mainly due to the protagonist being a high-ranking member of a British-lead Nazi resistance team. I don't have a problem with the female protagonist, but I do have a problem with much else of the book.

Ken Follett prides himself on being an easy read, but the fact is that if your a moderately intelligent individual, you will detest his writing style and vocabulary. I, like many others, didn't formerly understand those who complain if a book is an easy read, because I didn't see any negative ramifications of this. Books like this help you understand.

I can go on and on about this book, including what many other reviewers have said. But rather than wasting both your time and my own, I will allow you to read their's. The anachronisms are all over the novel, and Follett seems like he has no knowledge of his errors. Gay bars in the U.K. in the forties? References to Einstein? If you need further proof, just read the last sentence.

Rating:
Summary: Did Follett write the entire book?
Review: If I was a gambling man, I'd bet some serious money that Ken Follett had a woman write part of this book. Whenever there's extra prose about women's clothing, it is almost always a tipoff that it's a woman doing the writing. In any event, it works in this book. Also, there seems to be almost a focus on homosexual women throughout the story. Easy to scan past. On a high note, I was especially impressed with some of the research into proper radio procedures, telephone systems and equipment of that era, and proper terminology. (yes, the squarish metal thing with all of the rounds inside and that is inserted into a rifle or pistol is called a magazine, not a clip) A bit of a nit pick is the use of PC language sprinkled here and there. What the heck, that's why it's called fiction. Enjoy the book, it will give you a good ride.

Rating:
Summary: Not the best...but very good
Review: I have been a fan of Ken Follett for about 20 years. I have read all of his books except Night Over Water(partially read), Third Twin(started it 3 times), Hammer of Eden and Hornet Flight.

I think he should stick to WWII stories.

I never got into the Third Twin...I tried three times. I know an author never wants to be "type-cast" but this era (WWII) is his. He can enthrall a reader with the characters...the attention to detail...the feeling of BEING THERE. I give credit to The Eye of The Needle for turning me into a reader first and a writer second...it had that kind of an impact on me. Now on to Jackdaws...

I enjoyed the characters immensely and the pace of the book kept you into the story. The connections between the characters were well thought out. As usual, his attention to detail was very well crafted. I only had two main gripes about the book.

The first is the predictability of the storyline. Maybe being a writer I have honed that ability to foresee events before they shape up but I saw most of the events chapters ahead of their occurances. As an example...I knew from their first encounter that Flick and Paul would end up together...there's more but I don't want to ruin it for a potential reader. I was pleasantly surprized in a couple of instances but not a whole lot.

The second was the preoccupation with homosexuality. I chalked it up to "attention to detail," assuming that maybe there was a lot of instances of homosexuality during the war. I am just as open as the next person...but I have to admit for a few chapters I was seriously considering putting the book down and not picking it back up. I understood the character that Greta played and it worked well within the story...and I understand the path used to get there (Flick's brother and his lifestyle)...but Diana and Maude kind of made me ask why. Although going back to my first complaint...I was very surprized by that development, not pleasantly, but surprized nonetheless.

All-in-all it was a good read that I enjoyed. Not on a par with Eye of the Needle, or my other favs Pillars of the Earth and Man From St. Petersburg...but still a very good effort.

Rating:
Summary: Girl Power
Review: Ken Follett has been one of my favourites since the age of 12. I once read an interview on him in which he said something along the lines of, "My aim in constructing sentences is to make the sentence utterly easy to understand...I've failed dreadfully if you have to read a sentence twice to figure out what I meant."
That is exactly how this book works. It's so easy and fun to read...especially if you're a woman who has always wanted some adventure in her life =)
The story takes place during WW2 (like most of Follett's books) and concentrates on the French resistance and British spies working in France.
Felicity "Flick" Clairet is the main character. She's one of the British spies risking her life to bomb German Nazi headquarters. Her husband, who she loved desperately, stabbed her in the back and screwed up a mission. Instead of just walking away with her tail in between her legs, "Flick" decides to take charge of the *impossible* mission...everyone doubts her and expects her to fail but she's detemined.
Suspense, adventure, some sex and love...
If you like women-kick-butt sort of books, you'll *love* this one!

Rating:
Summary: Back to World War II
Review: Like some other bestselling authors (namely John Grisham and Tom Clancy), Follett's last books flopped in the critics' and customers' reviews. "The third twin", "Code to zero" and "Hammer of eden" were thrashed from left and from right, and in my opinion deservedly so. Follett is a talented author, but in these three books it seems he chose subjects that didn't appeal to the general public. Besides, his style of wrtiting was different from the successful one that made books like "Pillars of the Earth" and "Eye of the needle" become most wanted among legions of Follett's fans. It looked like the author himself lost interest in his books, and his fans didn't take it lightly.

These facts may be true, and the proof is that Follett wrote two thrillers in sequence, less than one year apart, going back to the subject and the atmosphere he knows best: World War II. It seems his public liked the change. At least, the reviews are a lot kinder than before.

"Jackdaws" is the story of a group of women lead by secret agent Flick Clairet. Their mission is to parachute into occupied France, and blow-up a telephone exchange that will help provide the security the Allies need on D-day. OK. That's a good subject. The plot in "Jackdaws" is interesting and the pace is very fast. In fact, the very opening scene is a pistol shooting between the Gestapo and agents of the french Resistence. The chapters are all full of action, and Follett doesn't let the rhythm slow down. Yes, it seems he's back on track.

But there are some problems. I was left with the impression that, though the plot is interesting, it's somewhat thin, and Follett had to struggle hard to keep the reader's full-time attention. That's why there are so many cold-blooded murders, shootings, etc. One other problem is about the characters. Flick Clairet and the nazi torturer, Dieter Franck, are both cool (enemies at haeart), but also full of contradictions. Sometimes what they did and said was plainly wrong. And all other characters are shallow to the point of oblivion. Follett tried to spice things up: there's homosexualism, a transexual, one (almost hot) lesbian scene. But it didn't work out as well as he intended, because he concentrated to much of the book's focus on the two main characters.

I give "Jackdaws" 4 stars because, even if it's not Follett's best, it kept me up reading way after midnight. And also because Follett shows that he worries about his readers. It's like he's thinking: "OK, I tried to change subjects, but maybe I didn't do my homework so well. I'll go back to World War II, give my constant readers (as Stephen King would say) two good books on that subject, and then I'll do a better research on future stories that are not about WWII". Let's hope this is true.

Grade 8.3/10

Rating:
Summary: One of Follett's Best
Review: This book harkens back to the superb early Follett novels such as "The Key to Rebecca" and "The Eye of the Needle", dealing with spies against the background of World War II.The plot is well crafted, the characters are interesting and the interest never flags. This is one of those few books I've read where I really hated to see it end. Very fine.

Rating:
Summary: The Dirty Dozen With Chicks
Review: Will the real Ken Follett please stand up? Ken Follett has me confused. The first book of his I read, Code to Zero, was fantastic. The second, Lie Down With Lions, was (and continutes to be) awful. Jackdaws lies somewhere in between, but thankfully leans toward the strong end of the Follett Quality Continuum.

Jackdaws is, without a doubt, a fast-paced and exciting read. At it's core, it sort of like "The Dirty Dozen" with chicks. Feminists, please hold your "NOT HELPFUL!" votes in check for a moment. The reason I say "chicks" is because that's exactly how Follett writes the women of this story. With the exception of Flick, the strongly written heroine, Follett presents his readers with an intriguing set of feminine charicatures that have loads of potential, but never amount to more than self-ambulating window dressing. More on that later.

This isn't a tale of a broad-brush invasion or have exotic locales all over the world, but that is Jackdaws' strength. This is a story about an admirable group of resistance fighters trying to make a difference in their corner of the war, and it ends up rippling to far greater effect. The setting is WWII, Nazi-occupied France just before the D-Day invasion. Flick and her French resistance counterparts seek to knock out the Nazi communications center and come up with an innovative plan to do it: disquise a team of women to infiltrate the comm center dressed as cleaning ladies. Through the story, Flick is unknowingly matching wits with a Nazi intelligence officer, and the cat-and-mouse games begin.

Follett fleshes out his Nazi anti-hero, Dieter, at least as much as any other character, and that makes him interesting. Indeed, he is methodically sadistic in extracting information from his subjects. Follett graphically describes his methods, which are invariably more effective (but no less painful) than the brutal beatings regularly meted out by the Gestapo officers. This proves to be a profound reminder that war is hell, and Dieter is the dungeon-master's model of German efficiency. Though Follett presents Dieter as a human subject, he is far from sympathetic.

The ladies Flick and British intelligence agencies recruit are a motley crew. They're outcasts from general society that have special and/or unique skills. Here's where Follett fell deeply into P.C. mode, trying to fit the square peg of all-inclusiveism into the round hole of a decent plot line. If you think I'm nuts, just bear with me for a moment. Why did Follett feel compelled to include a lesbian and a transvestite on this all-"female" team? It certainly didn't advance the plot, though if he'd worked it right, it could have. The lesbian sub-plot only turned out to be a mere few paragraphs (including a half-dressed encounter) that ended with a "whatever makes you happy" sermon by the squad commander. Do you honestly think that would have flown in the '40s? Probably not, and besides, it sounded so preachy.

When Follett first revealed a transvestite, I was intrigued. I was looking forward to how the team could utilize a cross-dresser's unique "talents and abilities", but again Follett squandered this plot potential. That member of the team's "true identity" is revealed, then "she" is henceforth treated like one of the girls with essentially no issue from the other team members and no big unique pay-off during the mission. Again, this contrived plot line (if you can even call it that) is way too 21st-century-tolerance to be believed in a novel set in WWII. So forced. So sad. With this kind of interpersonal plot line in place, the least he could have done is treated his audience to some realistic dialogue, actions, or reactions.

Shortcomings aside, Jackdaws remains an exciting read. Follett's greatest strength is in his descriptions of the action, and scenes that include running, shooting, and exploding shine. Gratefully, I can say, he gives of plenty of that.

Rating:
Summary: Not Interesting
Review: Ken Follet is usually a great writer. Not this time. His strength is strong interesting characters that you come to care about. Not this time. The first half of the book is mostly page-filler. The second half, the action half, has a weak plot that he supplements with detail about torture.
If you want a great Follet read on WW II, try The Key to Rebecca or other earlier works.

Rating:
Summary: Amateur spies make a fun read
Review: Jackdaws is a book from one of my favourite non-genre categories: World War II spy fiction. I usually find these books to be page-turners, and this one is no exception. Follett ratchets up the tension, sprinkles a couple of interesting characters into the batter, and then hits "blend." The result is a taut thriller that is very pleasing to the palate.

Follett presents a thriller that will make you keep reading, no matter the fact that the light should have been turned off long ago. The plot twists and turns until it's almost pretzel-shaped, with Dieter getting ever closer to his goal. In a way, it is almost reminiscent of The Dirty Dozen, except that the people in question aren't all criminals, their just misfits. They are thrown together in a haphazard manner and expected to pull of a mission in enemy-occupied France. While it is slightly unbelievable, Follett avoids the cliché of having everybody become crack secret agents once they are in France. Mistakes happen, stupid things are done, and Flick ends up having to improvise mightily. I found this a major plus, because you didn't always know what was going to happen, even if the ultimate outcome wasn't always in doubt.

Follett concentrates on three characters: Flick, Dieter, and an American officer named Paul Chancellor, who becomes romantically interested in Flick. This provides a good narrative force for the story, as the viewpoints are limited and we see a lot of the other characters only through these three pairs of eyes. I think it made it more interesting, and it also emphasized the personal nature of the story as Dieter and Flick interact even when they're not together. In fact, while I found Paul interesting in his own right, I think the story would have worked better without him, or at least without his viewpoint. It would have narrowed the focus even further, and made the inevitable meeting all the richer.

Flick is a very dynamic character, well-rounded and interesting to read about. She's torn because she's constantly away from her husband, and she doesn't trust him with the other resistance fighters. He's always been a lady's man. She's also brutally efficient when necessary and she's quick on her feet. I really liked her, and I thought she made a wonderful protagonist. Paul makes a good foil for her, despite what I said above. I did find the sections from his point of view to be kind of dull, though. He doesn't add much to the mix that he couldn't have added as a minor character.

Dieter, on the other hand, is fascinating. He's certainly the villain of the book. He's a Nazi officer through and through. But he's humanized as well. He finds that he's falling in love with his French mistress and he truly seems to care for her. He doesn't know what is going to happen after this invasion, but he ultimately decides that he wants to be with her afterward. On the other hand, he's capable of being brutal (though Follett provides a character in Sergeant Baker, who's just a sadist, as a counterpoint to Dieter). He doesn't like torture despite being good at it, and he even remarks that this makes the best interrogator. If the interrogator enjoys the pain too much, he loses sight of the goal and won't be very efficient. I found him very interesting to read about, despite not liking him in the least. He made the perfect villain, and his fate is actually a little surprising.

Follett falls a little short in the other characters, though, especially the women. The other Germans are rather faceless, but that's their job in the story: to be the strongmen for Dieter to use. But the women, I think, should be more important than they turn out to be. They get a lot of characterization as Flick recruits and trains them, but once they drop into France, they become almost invisible. The only one who gets much characterization is Ruby, and that's because she's effectively Flick's second in command. The others get short shrift, and it's too bad. They appeared to be interesting characters at the beginning. I'm not saying they should be viewpoint characters, but more should have been done with them than actually happened. They fulfill their roles, but they aren't very interesting doing it.

There are some choppy places in the book where Follett's prose and plotting fails him too. At times, Follett over-writes, emphasizing things that don't need to be. He makes a point of saying that only two characters in a scene know something, and then he says it again during the conversation with the other people in the scene. It was distracting. Also, there is one point where Flick and her party shoot two guards, but when Dieter comes upon them, one of them is still alive enough to gasp out what happened. Flick has been shown to be cautious to the point of paranoia and efficient to the point that she never leaves anything done half way. Yet she doesn't slit this guard's throat to make sure he's dead? I didn't buy it. It seemed like the guard was only alive so Dieter could find out what he wanted to know. It smacked of author intervention. Niggling things like this are spread throughout the book, never actually killing it but always sitting in the back of your mind.

Despite these flaws, however, I found I could not put this book down. I raced through it because I wanted to see what would happen next. It is a great example of the genre and an exciting read. If you like this sort of story, you should pick it up.

Warning for the squeamish: there are a couple of torture scenes that you may find unsettling, especially the first one.

David Roy

Rating:
Summary: A great cat and mouse game.
Review: It seems like Jackdaws is the first book I've read by Follett where the center of the story is WWII. Although I have not read many novels regarding this subject matter I will say that I was very impressed at the objective viewpoint the author had on the war. His characters are not merely good and evil; they are human beings in a war fighting for their lives. The people are doing what they think is necessary to win the war and thus end the war. Each character displays the true human quality that we all have about the natural hate for war.

The story is about a Female British Spy named Flick, whose job it is to cripple the communications link between Germany's Rommel and the German forces in occupied France. Without this communications link the occupation would need to route messages by courier thus making it impossible to properly communicate orders, as they need to be given. Flick and her British Superiors have come up with a plan to infiltrate the central communication link in France. The only thing stopping her from severing this link is a determined German operative named Dieter Franck.

The beginning grips you with an intense situation in which the British spy is on a clandestine team of spies carrying out a special operation against the Germans communication facility. Present is the handsome Franck who happens to be in the area checking up on German security. From that moment on the two are mingled in a cat and mouse game not so typical of the WWII spy-thriller genre.

I recommend reading this book if you are interested in the events leading up to D-day. And have enjoyed Follett's work in the past.

Although the reviews make it seem like a book about a bunch of British Female Spies, I tend to disagree. In my opinion the book was mostly focused on the aforementioned characters. Although 5 women accompany Flick, it's evident that she is the story's Protagonist and Franck the Antagonist.