Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site oliven.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!glacier!oliveb!olivee!oliven!barb
From: barb@oliven.UUCP (Barbara Jernigan)
Newsgroups: net.books
Subject: Re: THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER by Tom Clancy
Message-ID: <497@oliven.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 27-Jan-86 13:46:04 EST
Article-I.D.: oliven.497
Posted: Mon Jan 27 13:46:04 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 30-Jan-86 01:24:19 EST
References: <1566@mtgzz.UUCP>
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 59

> 
> 		    THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER by Tom Clancy
> 			 Berkley Books, 1985, $4.50.
> 		       A book review by Mark R. Leeper
> 
> ...One almost feels sorry for the Soviets
> in this book as they are so thoroughly out-gunned and out-thought by the
> Americans that one wonders why they bother opposing the John-Wayne-like
> Americans at all.  

The Soviets *did* have a few aces in the hole, however -- which I refuse
to spoil.  Nevertheless I admit a certain disparity between technical
levels.  Whether or not this is accurate -- I suspect it might be, from
other things I have heard -- I cannot swear, and I really didn't find
this a detraction from my enjoyment of the book.

>      THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER is a good story and an enjoyable book to read.
> What makes it as popular as it is is a little tough to understand.  It is
> just a very readable text on naval warfare wrapped in a moderately good
> story.  Rate it a +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.
> 					Mark R. Leeper

I don't know, I'd give it a 3+.  It's been a long time since I've read
a book that kept me on the edge of my seat as well as RED OCTOBER.

Perhaps I enjoyed it mostly because of its 'completeness'.  Clancy has
carefully thought out his details, from the way a submarine is put together
to the way a navy is put together to the way a government is put together
to the careful dance on coals between nations.   The only other book
I've read that gave me a such a sense of completeness was _The Mote in God's 
Eye_ by Niven and Pournelle.

A friend complained about the one-dimensionality of characters.  I argue
that we are only given a brief view of them within a singular situation.
Also, this is not the type of book to go into great details of character --
firstly there are too many participants.  And I personally believe there 
was enough characterization -- built mostly from events in the character's life 
rather than: "...," he thought.

RED OCTOBER is a pro-military book, it cannot be denied.  But it is a
rousing good suspense/action/adventure tale.  And, now that it's in
paperback, certainly worth the read.  (My husband and I, after reading
his parent's copy, felt it was worth getting in hard-bound -- a rare
concession on our parts, even if bought at Crown Books.)

That's my twenty-five cents.

Barb

P.S.  Mark mentioned a shade of surprise that so much technical data was
allowed.  The original hardbound was published by the Naval Institute Press
-- their second fiction in over 100 years.  (Another seal of approval, I
think.)  My personal theory, as all the information contained in the book
*is* in the public domain -- though recently and not generally announced
so -- was to defuse (obliquely) the Walker spy case.  "If the technical 
information appears in a popular piece of fiction, it can't be *all* *that* 
sensitive."

Comments, anyone?