.jpg)
Here are a couple of quick things first. Mr. Collins, a Glock doesn't have an external safety. The primary safety for a Glock is keeping your finger off the trigger until time to fire. Also, semi-automatic pistols have magazines not clips. I'm sure you've heard this ad nauseam from gunnies, but my blog is at least in part a gun blog so.... If your firearms adviser didn't pick up on this stuff you need another.
I understand Collins caught a lot of crap from the Right for the politics in this book. I, politically, consider myself a right leaning libertarian. I can assume what Collins politics are, but making that assumption based on the politics of a character in a book says more about the critic than the writer. Niven's Law. Go look it up. The protagonist in this book was, I understand, intended to be left leaning centrist. That may be how Collins intended to write him, but what I see from my position is a lot farther left than "left leaning centrist". This might put conservatives off. Having said that who really cares. This book takes place some years in the future where the Court is dominated by conservative Justices. With the current occupant of the White House and the uncertainty of who follows, I don't really see that happening but this is fiction and in a way speculative fiction. The politics of the characters don't concern me. The depiction of the Justices don't concern me. The story does and the story is interesting and as well written as what usually comes from Collins. This is the second in a series, and I now I wish hadn't let reviews on Amazon put me off. I read #2 first. The twist in this one was spoiled. This is a good book, and I suggest you read it.
6 comments:
I think writers now use "Glock" almost as a generic term for "pistol". In No Country for Old Men (a book I highly recommend), the bad guy takes a Glock off one of his victims--in 1980. It's a throwaway line and never mentioned again; the author (Cormac McCarthy) could just as easily made it a Browning or a Colt. (Most of his other gun references are correct, so it may have been an editor who substituted "Glock" for "Browning or "Colt".) It's jarring to us, but it's just a product of ignorance. I remember the press reports after the 1993 Waco debacle making reference to David Koresh's "1965 Camaro". As you probably know, Camaros weren't made till the '67 model year.
Nobody can get everything right. The important part is the story.
Agreed but sometimes the mistake is so glaring it ruins your trust in the author and story.
Old 1811 is correct -- I meant "glock" generically as a 9mm. Without my say so, a copy editor capitalized it, making it seem like a glaring mistake. I have since corrected it -- actually, giving in and making it an actual Glock, sans exterior safety -- and recently purchased copies (at least the Kindle version) should be corrected.
As for the politics, I should say that Mickey Spillane, before his death, asked me to complete the unfinished novels in his files. To say Mickey was a conservative is an understatement. He also knew a lot about guns. Yet he trusted me, knowing our politics were not identical, and I have completed eight Spillane "Mike Hammer" novels so far (all in print). I doubt anyone would see Hammer as anything but waaaaay right of center. It's called characterization, and I continue to be grateful for the reviewer's even-handed look at my work.
But, huh -- speaking of mistakes: it's SUPREME JUSTICE, not SUPREME COURT.
Argggh. Corrected.
I'd fire my proofreader except that'd be me.
The glock/Glock problem is yet another example of the elusive nature of perfection.
Post a Comment