Fallout

In 1984, Operation Safeguard failed, and, today, Emile Chenard is unleashing his revenge plot on former and current on MI6 agents.

Former agents, William Lindsay, Geoffrey Charlton, and Madeleine Halliwell and current deputy chief of England’s Secret Intelligence Service, Banastre Montjoy, are the targets. Montjoy makes last-minute flight changes and evades assassination, but the others aren’t so lucky. Montjoy is not only the deputy chief of England’s Secret Intelligence Service, but he is also Madeleine Halliwell’s grandson, and he wants revenge. Agents are dead, an innocent man is mistaken for Montjoy and assassinated, Russian cigarettes are turning up at crime scenes, double-agents are emerging, two men are found dead in a river, and now the FBI is involved. The clues are forming an intricate puzzle that is proving difficult to piece together. Will Montjoy find the “bad guy” and avenge his grandmother’s death or have these former MI agents been served karmic justice? William Hunter’s Fallout is a complex, espionage, hitman filled story where secrets are revealed.

Overall, I enjoyed the book. I love that Hunter includes random tidbits about Hemingway, Shakespeare, Churchill and more. I recommend the novel to historical fiction lovers and those who enjoy spy novels.

The book is beautifully written. For example, Hunter describes a cottage in chapter 18 by writing, “the weathered facade of the man’s summer house, chipped and cracked from the constant wind and wet climate of the region, was in desperate need of a new coat of paint.” Not only can Hunter write well, but his storyline is engrossing; in almost every chapter, someone is dead, a clue is found, or a secret is revealed. In fact, readers may need a notepad to keep up. The complex, constant goings-on can also be problematic for readers. There are multiple settings from Moscow to London to Boston to North Carolina; just about every chapter, has a different setting and new characters emerge frequently. Because there is no specific character deemed outright protagonist in the beginning, the reader could become confused–whose side are we on? Not to mention, the constant flashbacks; in these flashbacks, the reader is given hyper-detailed information. For instance, when Emile Chenard enters the story, we are introduced to a scene at a restaurant in Montreal, Canada, but the author flashes back to discuss the character’s father, and how he had been a World War II survivor. I’m not sure this is the time or place to flashback to Chenard’s father.

Again, this is a well-written, engaging story with a satisfying ending, and I commend the author for not adhering to the typical Hero’s Journey plot archetype, but I believe that adding character names as chapter titles or a character map, as well as a general map showing the cities and countries in the book, would enhance comprehension. Now that I’ve read it, maybe it deserves a reread; perhaps, I’ll connect the dots a little better the second time around.