David's Reviews > The Spy

Outside of the "food fetish" (apparently, authors can't even mention dining without annoying you)comment, I think this is a very cogent review. I truly believe one has to allow themselves extra degrees of "suspension of disbelief" in ALL of Cussler's work. It seems like their are aspects in every novel (his own cameos, for example) that are intended to tear down the fourth wall and begin whispering (or maybe, in this case, shouting) asides to the audience. Certainly, a little of that goes a long way and it probably wouldn't be missed (except by Cussler and a few in the know) if it were not present. I really like your reviews of late (outside of criticizing the literary menus)and perceive them of value--even when our tastes differ. I suspect they do not on this book.

Johnny wrote: "Outside of the "food fetish" (apparently, authors can't even mention dining without annoying you)comment, I think this is a very cogent review. I truly believe one has to allow themselves extra deg..."

In regard to my "food fetish" you have to admit, well, you don't have to but ought to-- that Parker uses what his private detective is eating for nothing more than filler. His books would be about ten-twelve pages shorter if Spenser wasn't such a pig. He stops for hot dogs, bagels, donuts, Chinese, etc. and spends a great deal of time discussing it when it does nothing to advance the plot or even the setting about 98% of the time. Once in awhile, he's having a meal with a client or something.. but who cares what Spenser is eating on a stakeout?? In one Spenser book, I think I counted more than a dozen references to food. Our brother James hit it square on the head.. "The man likes food.. look at his picture on the back cover!!!"

On the other hand, we have Cussler. Cussler's efforts (in the series review this discussion has arisen from) are to make Bell seem like something above the ordinary. Given Bell's background (wealthy heir of a banker) we can expect him to have certain culinary tastes. In some places it adds to the background. It offers flavor. However, when Bell reserves a meal for the next day, spending time to inquire of a waiter, etc. it didn't help.. it bogged the story down. The only thing was that is gave us the picture of Bell as a spoiled high society fellow.

James Bond novels tend to flaunt his style and taste, but usually without detracting from the action. Parker is awful about this while Cussler crosses the line (for me) occasionally. The food thing gets annoying at time..

I'm reading a novel right now called "The Bite" by Michael Crow and one section of the book makes a big issue of having a number of Stoufer frozen dinners in the freezer, how bad hospital food is, and how the girlfriend brought Thai food that had to be warmed in the microwave. None of that bothered me because each of the foods mentioned had a place in the plot and the story that made sense-- wasn't showing off his knowledge of cuisine, wasn't writting filler.. just advanced his plot. Parker and Cussler fail to mention food in such a manner to advance the plot. Instead, Parker's usage of food tends to do to the plot what cement overshoes do to gangsters-- drowns it in non-essential and boring details.

David wrote: "Johnny wrote: "Outside of the "food fetish" (apparently, authors can't even mention dining without annoying you)comment, I think this is a very cogent review. I truly believe one has to allow thems..."

I don't get bothered by the food thing because it adds verisimilitude to the story. One of the modern tendencies is for authors to mention specifics (brands, types, locations, products, etc.) in order to get away from the old vague tendency to say, "After a breaking our fast, we proceeded to heath where a most remarkable discovery occurred..." or "Our post-prandial promenade was as undistinguished as the dinner at our club..." or "The stake-out took so long the interior of our car was filled with fast-food wrappers..." or "Garcon! Get me your finest bottle!" I'm exaggerating, of course, but if I'm really inside the head of these guys, I should be interested in what they're interested in. If they eat a bowl of chili in Cincinnati, I want to know that it's got spaghetti in it. Otherwise, it sets off my "Hey! He's just using a map and a guidebook as his source for this city's background!" alarm. If they grab a doughnut in Southern California, I want to know that they've got the class to go to a mom and pop (probably Asian) doughnut shop rather than Dunkin Donuts. If they're on the east coast, it seems like most people prefer Dunkin (yecch!) If he goes to a grocery store in the South, I like to have the author "waste" the space to tell me it's a Kroger or a Publix as opposed to a Jewel in the Midwest or Safeway/Ralph's/Albertsons west of the Mississippi.

I agree that it's a matter of texture and that it can be overdone. It just seems like I read a complaint about it every other week. So, since I complemented the review and did something I rarely do (flagged it as a "Like"), I thought I'd do my typical thing of throwing a dart at one balloon, at least. Wouldn't you hate to be one of my students? No praise without a comment!

Okay, here's an example of my complaint--

Bell gets on board a train.. Goes to the dining car. Asks if Shad is in season and is told that it is. Asks for Roe, and told that is is available. Orders it for breakfast the next morning in advance. Is told that the breakfast car would be a different dining car, but because Bell is such a V.I.P. the waiter will make certain some is set aside for him.


This exchange offers a minor amount of texture to the story because Bell is riding with a special railroad pass issued to the detective agency and railroad employees are trying to keep him happy. It also illustrates his high-class upbringing and culinary tastes. However, it is done in such a way as to seem overly contrived.

I agree that those food details sometimes add texture (dare we say flavor) and sometimes are overdone. I may be overly sensitive to it at times, but Parker overdoes it terribly and Cussler occasional strays into culinary nonsense detail in order to help us remember that Bell is a high-society gentleman who has stooped to living amongst the "common man."

Parker's Spenser novles offer details that sometimes relate to some place he is visiting. For example, in New Orleans he may go in search of Gumbo.. and that adds flavor background to the story. However, getting up and eating a bagel with cream cheese in the morning, and then stopping for lunch at a hot dog stand doesn't add much to the story (unless it is a particular hot dog stand or it is used to illustrate how me might meet his nutrtional needs on a stakeout, etc.) The fact that he sat at a diner and ordered Strawberry pie because it was in season doesn't flesh out the story, it fleshes out the author or character's waistline. The fact that he ordered a danish for breakfast means little.

As stated, Cussler isn't nearly as bad as Parker about this.. and the reason you read a complaint about every other week is that I keep trying to like the Spenser novels more and keep finding cheap copies at the library sale.

Of course, I would be foolish not to admit that my own personal "Battle of the Bulge" might make me more sensitive to the issue. {grin} I agree with everything you said about adding texture to a story with details about shopping, dining, etc. I just don't feel that Parker and Cussler do it very well.

In the current novel I am reading, Food keeps creeping into the story but it has a place. In one section, the hero and his partner debate the wholesomeness of Mickey D's and Burger King type food as the partner cosumes mass quantities. It has to do with characterization and promotes the story. It also serves to show the relationship of the partners. Though I've already seen a discussion of Hospital Food, two different discussions of fast, greasy good, a discussion of frozen dinners (brand named) and Thai food, each time the mention advances the story and doesn't distract one bit. so, it isn't as if it is the mere mention of food I am complaining about.. Rather its overuse to a minor extent by Cussler and to a grand extent by Parker, two authors that I read a great deal of.. (though I have to admit I'm pretty burnt out on Cussler)...

Now, I have to ask.. is anyone else besides Johnny and myself reading this? Do you find that some authors use dining as "filler" at times?

Bro,
I find that very few people on goodreads.com actually comment on the reviews. But I know some are reading them because I end up with "Likes" sometimes months after I've written them. So, good luck on getting a discussion going.

The truth is that I think only four people follow my feed, but I write up the books for my benefit. I want to be able to go back and see what I've read. On two occasions, I lost my notes (or don't remember where I filed them) on library books I had read and was able to connect the dots I needed from my goodreads.com review.

The irony of this is that I started doing this because a former seminary colleague asked me if I kept a database of books I had read. I told him I didn't and he told me that he kept one of books he had read, but that he hadn't set it up to take notes. Well, I found goodreads and started to use it. I saw that it worked for me and invited him to follow my reviews. He read two or three of them and said, "That just doesn't work for me!" and cancelled his membership. I was so ticked off. This guy has used up hours and hours of my time getting my take on various books and theological issues and then, he unsubscribes from my list. I don't expect people to read everything I write. I try to skim all those I follow, but I don't read every review thoroughly. Nonetheless, I wouldn't unsubscribe unless the person was only recommending porno and cookbooks.

I see some problems with the system in general.. for example, once in awhile, I get a ton of updates indicating that some of my "friends" (who appear to be people I don't know who just decided they liked me or the types of books I read) have marked a huge number of books as "to-read" I don't do that and only see the wisdom if you are looking for a particular book. For example, at the library sales I have found books that were part of series and bought them cheap, only to have to scour the used bookstores, Ebay, or Amazon looking for the sequel. (I try not to read books that are obviously part of an ongoing series until I have at least the first two in hand)... So, I can see how one might like to use Goodreads to mark what you want to read so that you can find it when you are standing in a bookstore. However, it doesn't help me to see what others have marked as "to-read."

On the other hand.. after reading a few reviews I tend to know what other people like or don't like and that is helpful. I doubt I would read the book on Rhetoric in Ezekiel that you are reading-- even though I am currently teaching a study on the book of Ezekiel (just finished chapter 9) However, some of the crime stuff you like I'm going to like, and I obviously picked right by sending you the Doom Brigade book. At least it didn't spend a lot of time talking about food-- just booze--{grin}