May, 2007

I was sceptical about The Righteous Men from the moment I read the strapline across the top: “The Greatest Challenger To Dan Brown’s Crown”.

Aw, shite. Not another Da Vinci Code rip-off.

The Plot

The plot centers around Will Monroe, a rookie journalist at the New York Times whose wife is inexplicably kidnapped while he’s out obsessively working on a story. As he desperately tries to find and save his wife, he also needs to work out what the connection is between two unrelated murders he covered recently.

Interestingly, Will’s investigations lead him to an Hassidic neighbourhood in New York where he finds his wife’s captors and is promptly given a hiding by them.

Just to confuse matters, Will starts receiving cryptic clues by text message that seem to be guiding him. With the help of the text messages and his hot ex-girlfriend, Will has to find his wife before time runs out.

The Verdict

To be fair, The Righteous Men beats the Da Vinci Code for more realistic characters. You can empathise with Will Monroe more than you could with Dan Brown’s characters. His back story is more developed and you find yourself thinking about how you’d react in the same situation. You can also see his conflicts whenever he has to call upon his former girlfriend for help in decoding the text messages he’s been receiving.

I would say for the first two thirds of the book, I was completely drawn in. The last third, I had started to guess at how the story would end. Let’s just say that the storyline takes a weird and wonderful flight of fancy and becomes completely detached from reality.

The increasingly bizarre events and ever more unlikely climax ruin the book in my opinion. I won’t spoil the ending here, but maybe we can discuss it in the comments. If you want to avoid spoilers, don’t go any further.

Tuesday, May 29th, 2007 // Book Reviews

Well, I couldn’t let this week pass without some comment on the restoration of the Assembley.

Is this the beginning of a bright new future for Northern Ireland? That was the burning question yesterday. It’s really too early to tell, but surely the signs are hopeful?

I’m not sure what to make of Ian Paisley in the role of First Minister. Let’s face it, the man made his career out of opposing whoever held this (or equivalent) role in the past. In bringing down just about every ‘moderate’ attempt at peaceful governance, Paisley was the anarchist, the mixer, the organ grinder. He effortlessly roused the passions of paranoid Protestants in bigotted tirades against Catholics/Nationalist or anybody who looked at him squinty.

And now he’s the head honcho?

Over the last few years, The Reverend Paisley has had plenty to say about the IRA and Sinn Fein gaining the trust of the people. Today, Ian Paisley still has a long way to go before he has my trust. Too many stunts, posturing and double-speak from Paisley have left me rightly suspicious of his intentions for this Assembley.

My hope for the future is that Paisley decommissions his bigotted rhetoric the same way the IRA put their weapons away. Is it too vain to hope that he has seen the damage he has done to Northern Ireland and that in this late stage of his career (and life) he wants to finally be a force for change?

I hope so. Peace be with you, people…

Wednesday, May 9th, 2007 // Northern Ireland: Politics