Lewis Weinstein's Reviews > A Perfect Spy

A Perfect Spy by John le Carré
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
2231715
's review

it was ok
bookshelves: crime-and-thrillers, to-read
Read 2 times. Last read November 18, 2017 to November 25, 2017.

Years ago I read this and gave it 5*****. I tried to re-read it (it's included reading for our Oxford course next summer), but found it disjointed and extremely difficult to follow, with little in the way of cohesive plot. Occasional paragraphs/pages were full of tension and beautifully written but there were not enough of these. I put it aside after 142 pages.
26 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read A Perfect Spy.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

Finished Reading
July 1, 2009 – Shelved
December 5, 2011 – Shelved as: crime-and-thrillers
November 18, 2017 – Started Reading
November 25, 2017 – Finished Reading
January 25, 2023 – Shelved as: to-read

Comments Showing 1-5 of 5 (5 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Ken (new)

Ken Hulse there is not better writer than John Le Carre in this genre. I wish there was one who was at least similar enough to start to fill those shoes but all I see is run shoot Bond type silliness around


message 2: by Thelma (new)

Thelma Funny, isn't it, how our tastes change? Sometimes I find I'm just not in the proper mood, other times I am just amazed I was ever interested.


message 3: by Susan (new)

Susan Lerner Louis, was just curious about the Oxford course you mentioned?


message 4: by Jim (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jim There's a video version by the BBC with Peter Egan playing Magnus and Ray MacAnally playing his father, Rick. It so happened that I watched that I guess three times over the years before reading the book. So I knew the outline and didn't get lost in the flashbacks. But there was so much more in the book. I gave the book 5 stars. Loved it. I've read most of Le Carre's books--all of the Cold War era ones--and I think this is his best.


Greg Agree, Lewis, some passages great, but they are too few.


back to top