Scotch on the Rocks

by Osmond

From the blackened, crumbling tenements of Glasgow come ugly rumours...An army of separatist fanatics, recruited from the razor gangs of Europe's most violent city and funded and armed by an unknown power, are standing ready - waiting for the moment to strike.Is the Nationalist tide about to turn? Will Prime Minister Harvey avert catastrophe...?The possibilities of a civil war in Britain have never been so graphically portrayed.

Genres: Fiction, Thriller

Paperback

First published January 1, 1971

Reviews

[Laura]

N/C: I can't do it! It's not just that I've had enough political mudslinging for one month I also didn't like the writing. Couldn't become invested in any of the characters because of the jumping from one character to another without preamble. It has been consigned to the uncompleted pile having reached its 3rd strike on the first attempt.

[Nicholas Whyte · Rating 3 out of 5]

http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1882933.html[return][return]A Conservative prime minister, having failed to secure an majority for his party at Westminster, finds himself dealing with a Scottish Nationalist Party leader who is ascendant in Scotland; can a slide towards independence be bought off with an offer of maximised devolution? Obvious fantasy, dear boy.[return][return]This novel was co-written by a future Tory cabinet minister and leadership candidate over forty years ago (published in 1970, though reference to the success of devolution in Ulster indicates it was written in 1968 or before). It is the third an a trilogy of novels set in the near future (ie the late 1970s) about a Conservative government dealing with imperial retreat (I have read the second one, in which Hong Kong is handed over to China after threats of nuclear war, but have not read the first which is about Rhodesia). My introductory line was a little misleading: the hung parliament at the start of the novel comes after two Tory terms rather than three Labour ones, the SNP hold the balance of power at Westminster and so can demand devolution as the price of support for a minority government, and there is of course no devolved Scottish administration already in place. This is more or less incidental detail, of course: the most interesting departure from today's debate is that I don't think the word "referendum" appears once in the novel. Back in the 1960s, the will of the people was deemed adequately discernable from the results of elections to the House of Commons.[return][return]I can't strongly recommend Scotch on the Rocks as literature. The connection between the high politics of Westminster and the low politics of security forces fighting nationalist extremists doesn't mesh particularly well thematically, with the one connecting character being the only woman of significance in the narrative, an earl's daughter who has gone radical. It seems more of a goodbye to the characters established in the previous two books than a terribly robust story in its own right. But it's interesting as a political prediction by one of the more reflective (if not necessarily effective) thinkers in recent British politics. It's also noteworthy that the extremists defeat the British establishment and the SNP, despite having sold out by accepting devolution, end up running an independent state that others have actually fought for. It's absurdly easy to get hold of this second-hand, and rather thought-provoking reading for today's political analysts.

[Nicholas Whyte · Rating 2 out of 5]

http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1882933...

A Conservative prime minister, having failed to secure an majority for his party at Westminster, finds himself dealing with a Scottish Nationalist Party leader who is ascendant in Scotland; can a slide towards independence be bought off with an offer of maximised devolution? Obvious fantasy, dear boy.

This novel was co-written by a future Tory cabinet minister and leadership candidate over forty years ago (published in 1970, though reference to the success of devolution in Ulster indicates it was written in 1968 or before). It is the third an a trilogy of novels set in the near future (ie the late 1970s) about a Conservative government dealing with imperial retreat (I have read the second one, in which Hong Kong is handed over to China after threats of nuclear war, but have not read the first which is about Rhodesia). My introductory line was a little misleading: the hung parliament at the start of the novel comes after two Tory terms rather than three Labour ones, the SNP hold the balance of power at Westminster and so can demand devolution as the price of support for a minority government, and there is of course no devolved Scottish administration already in place. This is more or less incidental detail, of course: the most interesting departure from today's debate is that I don't think the word "referendum" appears once in the novel. Back in the 1960s, the will of the people was deemed adequately discernable from the results of elections to the House of Commons.

I can't strongly recommend Scotch on the Rocks as literature. The connection between the high politics of Westminster and the low politics of security forces fighting nationalist extremists doesn't mesh particularly well thematically, with the one connecting character being the only woman of significance in the narrative, an earl's daughter who has gone radical. It seems more of a goodbye to the characters established in the previous two books than a terribly robust story in its own right. But it's interesting as a political prediction by one of the more reflective (if not necessarily effective) thinkers in recent British politics. It's also noteworthy that the extremists defeat the British establishment and the SNP, despite having sold out by accepting devolution, end up running an independent state that others have actually fought for. It's absurdly easy to get hold of this second-hand, and rather thought-provoking reading for today's political analysts.

[Ian · Rating 3 out of 5]

The recent UK general election of 2015, in which the pro-independence Scottish National Party won a large majority of Parliamentary seats in Scotland, reminded me of this largely forgotten political thriller, written in the 1960s by Douglas Hurd, who became a Conservative cabinet minister a couple of decades later. Set in what was, at the time, a few years into the future (i.e. the 1970s) the novel imagined a nationalist rebellion breaking out in Scotland. I must have read this 40 years ago at least, but it sticks in mind fairly well. Partly this might be because in the novel the first place seized by the rebels was, bizarrely, my own home town - the small West Highland town of Fort William. (I suppose rural based insurgencies were not uncommon across the world in those days). As I recall the plot contains a fair dollop of Cold War politics, which would undoubtedly date it, but I also remember it as a decent thriller incorporating Glasgow gangsters, communist plotters, renegade army officers and M.I.5 agents. The book was made into a BBC TV series, which caused a big political row at the time, and in the end the BBC had to promise never to show the series again!

I saw Douglas Hurd being interviewed on TV the day after the 2015 election, and he was asked about this book. Hurd claims that former SNP Leader Alex Salmond described the novel to him as "a cracking read" or words to that effect. If you are thinking of reading it, I suppose now is quite a topical time!

[Duncan Maccoll · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant, brilliant book by minor English politician :-). It represents the time in which it was written and suffers from being rather out of date politically. Still, well worth reading, I recommend it highly.