by Sapper
Firstly I will talk a bit about this book. The first Bulldog Drummond book was published in 1920 and several subsequent books were published as well as movies made of it. The protagonist is Hugh "Bulldog" Drummond, a WWI veteran. The author of the book was also a WWI veteran.This book is about Drummond who puts an ad in the paper because he had nothing to do and was seeking someone to call for him if they had any problems or something that needs solving or investigating. So a woman replies and from there the story starts. I will just break down the plot. Carl Peterson has hatched up a dastardly plan to overthrow England and revolutionize it into a Bolshevic republic. But this was just Peterson's cover plan. He really did not care anything about England for better or worse, he was just in in for the money, and with his right hand man Henry Lakington, they would toy with the fate of an entire nation to achieve this end.
I read this book, and it took me several weeks. I bought it with a set of 6 other classic books. To be honest, I really did not like it much. It seemed like a piece of the most corny things I have ever read. All the characters seem to stereotypes. For instance, the woman Phylis, would swoon at the site of Drummond and say the most typical things ever. And Drummond is really a man's man, he seem to be the ultimate man ever. He learnt a whole bunch of fighting skills from all his buddies, the could wrestle a gorilla, he had the most deft of instincts and reactions. He is basically indestructible.
There are also question marks with the plot. Say one part where Drummond is tied up. He tricks the guard buy saying he has money in his pocket. And he can only get to it if he unties it. Then this guard, a German, unties Drummond and tried to get to it. And of course, how surprising, Drummond knocks him out. Come on! If the guard had any sense, he would knock Drummond out cold THEN get the money. And this is another form of English idolization, showing the Germans as stupid. It is not realistic.
The plot itself was meant to be very grand with the revolution of all of England. But it did not feel grand at all, it felt like a bunch of thugs going at each other. Like I will go to this house and beat up this bloke, then because the other group of guys are pissed, they hatch a clever plan and beat up those other guys. Ridiculous. It is trying to portray something intricate and complex into a brash and brutish approach to problems. Even the attempt at intricacy can be seen through as having little substance.
I can go on and on about how bad this is but what is the point. I got to thinking that maybe it was written at that period of time where things were simpler, that the capacity of imagination of human behavior was perhaps not as complex. But then again I think, there are so many better book written before that time. This book seems like a cheap imitation of Sherlock Holmes, there is no cunning at all. And where there is some semblance of wit and devise, it is absolutely ridiculous that one can see clearly through it for the absurdity. I feel it was written very mechanically, like the author was saying "now there needs to be some clever ploy here" and so "insert clever ploy". It is a collective of cliche moments strung together by paper thin story. Utter waste of my time.
I read this book, and it took me several weeks. I bought it with a set of 6 other classic books. To be honest, I really did not like it much. It seemed like a piece of the most corny things I have ever read. All the characters seem to stereotypes. For instance, the woman Phylis, would swoon at the site of Drummond and say the most typical things ever. And Drummond is really a man's man, he seem to be the ultimate man ever. He learnt a whole bunch of fighting skills from all his buddies, the could wrestle a gorilla, he had the most deft of instincts and reactions. He is basically indestructible.
There are also question marks with the plot. Say one part where Drummond is tied up. He tricks the guard buy saying he has money in his pocket. And he can only get to it if he unties it. Then this guard, a German, unties Drummond and tried to get to it. And of course, how surprising, Drummond knocks him out. Come on! If the guard had any sense, he would knock Drummond out cold THEN get the money. And this is another form of English idolization, showing the Germans as stupid. It is not realistic.
The plot itself was meant to be very grand with the revolution of all of England. But it did not feel grand at all, it felt like a bunch of thugs going at each other. Like I will go to this house and beat up this bloke, then because the other group of guys are pissed, they hatch a clever plan and beat up those other guys. Ridiculous. It is trying to portray something intricate and complex into a brash and brutish approach to problems. Even the attempt at intricacy can be seen through as having little substance.
I can go on and on about how bad this is but what is the point. I got to thinking that maybe it was written at that period of time where things were simpler, that the capacity of imagination of human behavior was perhaps not as complex. But then again I think, there are so many better book written before that time. This book seems like a cheap imitation of Sherlock Holmes, there is no cunning at all. And where there is some semblance of wit and devise, it is absolutely ridiculous that one can see clearly through it for the absurdity. I feel it was written very mechanically, like the author was saying "now there needs to be some clever ploy here" and so "insert clever ploy". It is a collective of cliche moments strung together by paper thin story. Utter waste of my time.
No comments:
Post a Comment