What do you think?
Rate this book
Win a free print copy of this book!
7 days and 08:46:09
50 copies available
U.S. only
The Turing Protocol
Win a free print copy of this book!
7 days and 08:46:09
50 copies available
U.S. only
In the midst of World War II, Enigma codebreaker Alan Turing has created a machine named Nautilus that can send a message back into the recent past. After Turing uses it to help the Allied forces succeed on D-Day, he sees the power (and potential danger) of what he has created. He knows he can only entrust it to one Joan, the mother of his secret child.
Over the next seventy years, the Nautilus is passed down through the Turing family, who all must decide for themselves when to use this powerful invention. Will it save the world - or destroy it?
Over the next seventy years, the Nautilus is passed down through the Turing family, who all must decide for themselves when to use this powerful invention. Will it save the world - or destroy it?
320 pages, Kindle Edition
Published July 29, 2025
23 people are currently reading
2112 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
August 9, 2025
DISCLAIMER: Due to suspicious review activity with this book, my original review was taken down along with others. I have contacted Goodreads and they have confirmed my review DOES NOT go against any guidelines and that I was free to repost it. Anyone else who may have had the same issue, I would recommend reaching out to Goodreads support to confirm that your review isn’t against guidelines ☺️
————————————
I literally never write reviews but I have some thoughts.
We are taking the story of a gay man who was literally prosecuted for being gay and ended up killing himself and suddenly pretending that he had a child with a woman?
… what?
I can’t believe I have to even make the comparison but as a queer woman, I have had to face the dangerous rhetoric of “you just haven’t met the right guy” and “I’ll turn you straight”. This is the same thing. If they were both drunk, consent was not clear and that is never addressed?
Historical fiction is a thing, I can acknowledge that it exists and has a valid place in the world of stories. HOWEVER, Nick has taken the story of someone who was only pardoned in 2013 for his “crime” of being homosexual and spun it for his own mediocre story. There are many gay people I know who don’t even know who Alan is. If there are people reading this who don’t know them a major disservice has been done to his memory. He deserves a lot better than this. Using real figures but keeping them at a distance to establish setting is one thing, writing how Alan Turing, a gay man, experiences having sex with a woman is something else entirely.
The time travel element makes no sense either? Are we living in multiple timelines? Because we see the effects of a bad decision and then we see the Turing family use Nautilus to fix it. So the tragic event happened. But then it just disappears? Because it’s only made clear that the message can go back in time, not everything. It never gets explained or broken down, we just have to accept it. I hate to use the HP universe because I despise JK Rowling, but the way the time turner works in that series makes sense. That would’ve worked better. Would it have saved this book? God no. But it would’ve made it a bit more bearable.
The writing is just bad. It feels like it needed to be a 600-700 page book but Nick couldn’t be bothered putting in that effort to do so. We dawdle on things that don’t matter and we sprint through things that would require more expansion. Every conversation feels the same. There are no unique voices throughout which leads to every interaction feeling monotonous.
I felt icky reading this whole thing. I’m gonna go read some queer stories BY queer people FOR queer people. That’s where your money should go
————————————
I literally never write reviews but I have some thoughts.
We are taking the story of a gay man who was literally prosecuted for being gay and ended up killing himself and suddenly pretending that he had a child with a woman?
… what?
I can’t believe I have to even make the comparison but as a queer woman, I have had to face the dangerous rhetoric of “you just haven’t met the right guy” and “I’ll turn you straight”. This is the same thing. If they were both drunk, consent was not clear and that is never addressed?
Historical fiction is a thing, I can acknowledge that it exists and has a valid place in the world of stories. HOWEVER, Nick has taken the story of someone who was only pardoned in 2013 for his “crime” of being homosexual and spun it for his own mediocre story. There are many gay people I know who don’t even know who Alan is. If there are people reading this who don’t know them a major disservice has been done to his memory. He deserves a lot better than this. Using real figures but keeping them at a distance to establish setting is one thing, writing how Alan Turing, a gay man, experiences having sex with a woman is something else entirely.
The time travel element makes no sense either? Are we living in multiple timelines? Because we see the effects of a bad decision and then we see the Turing family use Nautilus to fix it. So the tragic event happened. But then it just disappears? Because it’s only made clear that the message can go back in time, not everything. It never gets explained or broken down, we just have to accept it. I hate to use the HP universe because I despise JK Rowling, but the way the time turner works in that series makes sense. That would’ve worked better. Would it have saved this book? God no. But it would’ve made it a bit more bearable.
The writing is just bad. It feels like it needed to be a 600-700 page book but Nick couldn’t be bothered putting in that effort to do so. We dawdle on things that don’t matter and we sprint through things that would require more expansion. Every conversation feels the same. There are no unique voices throughout which leads to every interaction feeling monotonous.
I felt icky reading this whole thing. I’m gonna go read some queer stories BY queer people FOR queer people. That’s where your money should go
August 16, 2025
Honestly one of the worst things I’ve ever read, do not waste your time or money on it
August 15, 2025
Spoilers throughout. Sorry for how ridiculously long this is, I had lots of thoughts!
Writing
Whilst Croydon’s use of a third-person, omniscient narration does provide further context for readers unfamiliar with the minutiae of the novel’s changing historical settings, it creates a distance between the reader and the character, which dims its emotional weight. Lack of sustained insight into characters' inner motivations, desires, and feelings is further hindered by continually changing POVs: Alan, Joan, David, and Annabelle. A more deft, or experienced writer — and perhaps more vigorous editing— may have been able to overcome these obstacles and to create a symbiotic narrative which weaves fact and fiction, whilst maintaining emotional depth. Perhaps, by virtue of the reader becoming desensitised to the rather abrupt style, the ‘Turing’ chapters in parts 1 and 2 read as a particularly egregious concoction of tedious historical detail, scraping of Turing's Wikipedia entry, and pseudo-intellectual insight. What should be a pacy, intense read becomes a doldrum of monotony. We are further treated to banal insights into Turing's thoughts and desires, which render a man rich with potential conflict and insights into a one-dimensional parody of intelligent philosophical ruminations that go nowhere.
Finally, a bit of an editing issue; we are told that the Nautilus can only send messages back six weeks (p.119) at the beginning of the novel and then it is inexplicably changed to eight weeks (p.245) once David has control.
Turing
Croydon’s choices pertaining to Turing’s sexuality beget comment; the decision to re-imagine Turing’s sexuality as a gay man in order to have him produce a progeny in David may leave readers bewildered. Whilst there should be genuine pushback on the idea of censoring the creative freedoms of authors, in regards to questioning who is ‘allowed’ to portray certain individuals, we must also question the impact rather than the intent of these choices. Whether or not Croydon intended to question, reduce, or trivialise Turing’s sexuality is impossible to know (though readers are equally allowed to form an opinion). However, the impact of the decision to have Turing have sex with a woman and have found it “enjoyable, much to his surprise” (p.90) must be examined. Novels do not exist outside of the cultural and social landscape – they both inform and are informed – thus this choice can be read as delegitimising the lives and struggles of LGBTQIA+ individuals.
This decision is made more questionable as the sex scene between Turing and Joan is one of only two on-page descriptions; all other sex scenes are ‘fade to black’. Whilst Turing is clearly stated to be gay in the novel, his homosexuality feels tacked on, as he lacks queer community and a desire for men outside of a purely sexual context. Contrasting the intimate detail with which the scene between Joan and Turing is described, the interactions between Turing and Arnold feel perverse, as Turing has a “weakness for young men” (p.109), and he becomes “excited” (p.109) by his “fresh face” (p.110). These descriptions reinforce homosexuality as an indecent perversion; whereas Turing and Joan engage in a more ‘pure’ love, as they are “captivated by each other’s company” (p.19), where Turing gives into Joan’s seduction and “pulled himself closer” (p.89), afterwards “the couple relaxed, holding each other – two people in love, if only briefly” (p.89); thus intimacy and love is contrasted with sexually deviant lust. Croydon strips Turing of his autonomy and maturity, as the narrator is quick to remind the reader of his “naivety” (p.113) in encounters with Arnold. He is further punished by the narrator for having “foolishly admitted” (p.113) to the affair, and thus must “pay the price for his stupidity” (p.113), reducing his choices as a 40 year old man to the mistakes of a child.
The government's explicit involvement in his arrest, as “Menzies had planned” (p.110) the seduction and consequent “betray[al]” (p.112) of Turing by Arnold as a “tool to control Alan” (p. 114) is clear. However, responsibility is washed away as “[t]he government and MI6’s hands were tied”, they had merely hoped to control and not “humiliate” or “incarcerate” (p.114) Turing. Croydon is sure to diminish the government's harm by making clear that “neither the judge, Menzies nor Churchill… understood the effects of the hormones Alan would… endure” (p.114), especially if Turing is to ‘blame’ in the narrative as the “predicament was caused by his own actions and signed confession” (p.114). If the aim was to draw scrutiny on these hypocrises, Croydon’s narration fails to make such explicit, or even reasonably implied.
Croydon’s lack of interest or knowledge of the perils facing gay men (and the LGBTQIA+ community more broadly) in the 1940s is clear as he fails to connect the dots between this new secret of the Nautalis to the fear of arrest for being gay.
“If he was discovered, he would lose Nautilus, probably be imprisoned. He could even be shot as a spy. The thought scared him as he realised that this was no longer a scientific project. The risks were huge; his life depended on secrecy.” (p.43)
A better, or more empathetic writer could have deftly interwoven these two fears, into the base fear at its core, exposure and its ensuing perils. The actions that Alan takes in order to evade the government's knowledge of his Nautilus machine echo the paranoia – real and imagined– faced by LGBTQIA+ people as they fought to live full lives whilst constantly facing a threat of imprisonment, humiliation and abuse by the government.
Women
Croydon’s women do not escape unscathed either, whilst touting them as the exceptions to the vapid norm, they are framed as seductresses whose male love-interests are unable to escape their wiles, reinforcing a type of madonna-whore archetype.
Joan Clarke
Joan is at once girlish and “giggl[ing]” (p.20), as well as the temptress who “transfixe[s]” (p.89) even a gay man with her “naked body” (p.89). Whilst on the surface there may be some liberatory value gleaned from Joan's story of unrepentantly owning her desire and sexuality, and then being steadfast in her decision to not limit her career by becoming mother (by giving her child up for adoption to a loving family), something more is below the surface. Joan is well aware of Turing’s homosexuality when she decides to continue to pursue him, years after their broken engagement, she “forces him to look at her” (p.88) and demands that he “let [her] be with the one person I truly love” (p.88) unconcerned by his lack of desire for her. Here Turing “knew he must try” (p.88) even though he found the experience of sleeping with women “unexciting” (p.88). After falling pregnant and keeping that information from him, she finally reveals her betrayal months after she has given their child up for adoption, refuting his upset by declaring that he is “not built like other people” (p.105) and thus should not have had the opportunity to know his child. Thus, Croydon again flattens and perverts the complexity of a real person's experiences to fit his desire to create a biological heir for Turing. Beyond the reduction of Turing’s sexuality, Croydon transforms Joan Clarke – a real woman – into an archetype reminiscent of manosphere talking points: a manipulative seductress who denies Alan’s parental rights.
Lydia/ Carla
David’s love interests are so similar one may be forgiven for finding them indistinguishable. Both Lydia and Carla are agents, Spanish, and sensual– often reading as an overt male fantasy of the sexy spy who is obsessed with him. Lydia, the “sultry Spanish” (p.149) pursues David, at once teasing and chaste– “Not tonight. We can wait” (p.153) – and then, too overcome by David’s sexual appeal, she breaks into his hotel because she "couldn't wait” (p.153). Carla – Lydias’ colleague – is similarly enraptured by David’s bland Britishness, and takes their first meeting after her friend's death to seduce him. She reassures any of David’s “doubt[s]” (p.206) but the ‘seductress’ is “impossible to resist”(p.206) – she is “totally in charge, he the willing victim” (p.207). Whilst Carla is allowed agency when pursuing pleasure, David does not respect her enough to share the secrets of the Nautilus, instead she is reduced to a dependent as he decides that “she would be protected from that burden” (p.221).
The vast similarities between these two women and their interchangeable impact on the plot call into question why Lydia was killed off. Her death acts as a perfect device to simultaneously humanise David’s “absence from his daughter’s life” (p.6) and to lazily create a ‘grizzled’ and hardened man who must fight to stop his “anger and revenge” (p.193) from “replac[ing his] humanity” (p.193). Carla is also positioned as an obstacle between David and his daughter, Annabelle, by way of her feeling uncomfortable with her father moving on from Lydia, her mother. Thus, Lydia and Carla are both reduced to their core utility in the novel, as symbols of love, grief, anger, and lust. They are fundamentally indistinguishable in regards to personality and function, merely to service the larger plot.
Annabelle
In David’s chapters, Annabelle’s primary function is to firstly forgive him for his lack of parental oversight; and furthermore to encourage his further estrangement. Similar to all other prominent women in the novel, Annabelle has an uncanny ability to ‘see’ the emotions in a man’s eyes, removing his responsibility to express them entirely, and leaving her with the burden of managing them. Thus, Annabelle is parentified at a young age after the death of her mother, and absence of her father to further assuage his guilt – “Annabelle saw the guilt in his eyes, the pain that he was suffering, and wished she could take it away” (p.173) – by giving him permission to essentially estrange her.
It is in Annabelle’s chapters that readers are most keenly treated to the downfalls of Croydon’s ‘realism’ as readers are treated to Croydon’s fairly clear bias towards the Conservative Party in the UK. Unlike other novelists who fictionalise real world figures to at least retain the pretense of ambiguity in their political leanings, Croydon has no such qualms. This reads as a rather ill-advised piece of realism throughout the latter half of the novel, as readers are forced to contend with Croydon’s admiration of the Tories, making the final chapters a bit of a stomach-turning slog for those not politically aligned.
Croydon is fairly transparent in his attempts to write Annabelle as a ‘liberated’ modern woman from the prologue, as readers are given a fairly lacklustre opening call to arms.
“It came down to belief. Belief in herself, belief in her own ability to use the power safely, responsibly, not just for her, not just for her family or even her country, but for all mankind.” (p.2)
However, just from this line alone, we see how Annabelle failed in the mission achieved first by Turing, then by David to uphold the Turing Protocol.
Rule 1 “Nautilus must never be used for personal gain” (p.243)
Rule 2 “Nautilus should only be used when it’s possible to change the outcome” (p.243)
Rule 3 “must only be contemplated to change a global horror, or mass destruction” (p.243)
Annabelle’s first use of the Nautilus is in order to change history so that David will not catch Covid 19– “I want to use Nautilus to warm me and therefore you” (p.259) – even after having already “called in a favour” (p.259) to skirt existing lockdown rules to visit David in hospital in Spain. David’s subsequent death is therefore utilised as a battering ram to punish her ‘selfishness’ and hubris in believing that she could save his life, a lesson that did not need to be learnt by either male guardians of the machine.
“This time she would respect her father’s wishes. It was time to let go, to stop trying to manipulate history” (p.264)
Turing and David are able to understand the nuance and weight of responsibility placed upon them as guardians of the Nautalis; and yet are able to forge ahead boldly and alone whilst wielding its power competently. Conversely, Annabelle initially uses the machine for personal gain, against the better judgement of her father. Thus the female guardians of the Nautilus are typified first by their refusal to engage, and then by Annabelle’s misuse.
When Annabelle does eventually use the machine for the ‘right’ reasons, she must employ the direct aid of her husband and the government. Thus failing twofold by confirming its existence to the government, and in allowing a non-guardian into the fold. This feels uncomfortably like Croydon is proclaiming that women are incapable of holding guard to the standard set by their male counterparts. Annabelle having “no… ambition” (p.271) is further illustrated through her ‘failing upwards’ into becoming “Secretary of State for Health and a member of cabinet" (p.271) merely because she lacked the backbone of her Tory colleagues who were “unhappy with Boris Johnson” (p.271) and subsequently left the party.
Final points
Overall, this novel has high aspirations that Croydon’s writing prowess is incapable of achieving. Thoughtful questions are hinted at, but readers must investigate in their own time if they wish to find meaningful insight. Finally, the basic premise of the novel – the idea of Turing having a biological lineage which holds the power to change history – relies on outdated and conservative ideals that nourish modern-day elitism. These ideals of lineage and legacy through bloodline inevitably harken back to the divine right of a few over the many.
Why should the bloodline of Turing have some special access to history-changing machinery? They had no tangible connection to Turing outside of their blood; his ideals were not shared through actual conversation and connection, so how can we ensure that their “personal agenda” (p.243) would always align with the “interest of humanity” (p.243)?
Ultimately, if Croydon was so interested in asking the question on nobody's lips – what if Alan Turing had a child? – why not also create a new history in which Turing is allowed to be happy? To find love (with a man!) and connection to his children and friends, where his Turing Protocol can be enshrined in their upbringing rather than merely assumed as a side effect of carrying his DNA? Why continue to write about his suffering when you could have found room for joy or justice?
Writing
Whilst Croydon’s use of a third-person, omniscient narration does provide further context for readers unfamiliar with the minutiae of the novel’s changing historical settings, it creates a distance between the reader and the character, which dims its emotional weight. Lack of sustained insight into characters' inner motivations, desires, and feelings is further hindered by continually changing POVs: Alan, Joan, David, and Annabelle. A more deft, or experienced writer — and perhaps more vigorous editing— may have been able to overcome these obstacles and to create a symbiotic narrative which weaves fact and fiction, whilst maintaining emotional depth. Perhaps, by virtue of the reader becoming desensitised to the rather abrupt style, the ‘Turing’ chapters in parts 1 and 2 read as a particularly egregious concoction of tedious historical detail, scraping of Turing's Wikipedia entry, and pseudo-intellectual insight. What should be a pacy, intense read becomes a doldrum of monotony. We are further treated to banal insights into Turing's thoughts and desires, which render a man rich with potential conflict and insights into a one-dimensional parody of intelligent philosophical ruminations that go nowhere.
Finally, a bit of an editing issue; we are told that the Nautilus can only send messages back six weeks (p.119) at the beginning of the novel and then it is inexplicably changed to eight weeks (p.245) once David has control.
Turing
Croydon’s choices pertaining to Turing’s sexuality beget comment; the decision to re-imagine Turing’s sexuality as a gay man in order to have him produce a progeny in David may leave readers bewildered. Whilst there should be genuine pushback on the idea of censoring the creative freedoms of authors, in regards to questioning who is ‘allowed’ to portray certain individuals, we must also question the impact rather than the intent of these choices. Whether or not Croydon intended to question, reduce, or trivialise Turing’s sexuality is impossible to know (though readers are equally allowed to form an opinion). However, the impact of the decision to have Turing have sex with a woman and have found it “enjoyable, much to his surprise” (p.90) must be examined. Novels do not exist outside of the cultural and social landscape – they both inform and are informed – thus this choice can be read as delegitimising the lives and struggles of LGBTQIA+ individuals.
This decision is made more questionable as the sex scene between Turing and Joan is one of only two on-page descriptions; all other sex scenes are ‘fade to black’. Whilst Turing is clearly stated to be gay in the novel, his homosexuality feels tacked on, as he lacks queer community and a desire for men outside of a purely sexual context. Contrasting the intimate detail with which the scene between Joan and Turing is described, the interactions between Turing and Arnold feel perverse, as Turing has a “weakness for young men” (p.109), and he becomes “excited” (p.109) by his “fresh face” (p.110). These descriptions reinforce homosexuality as an indecent perversion; whereas Turing and Joan engage in a more ‘pure’ love, as they are “captivated by each other’s company” (p.19), where Turing gives into Joan’s seduction and “pulled himself closer” (p.89), afterwards “the couple relaxed, holding each other – two people in love, if only briefly” (p.89); thus intimacy and love is contrasted with sexually deviant lust. Croydon strips Turing of his autonomy and maturity, as the narrator is quick to remind the reader of his “naivety” (p.113) in encounters with Arnold. He is further punished by the narrator for having “foolishly admitted” (p.113) to the affair, and thus must “pay the price for his stupidity” (p.113), reducing his choices as a 40 year old man to the mistakes of a child.
The government's explicit involvement in his arrest, as “Menzies had planned” (p.110) the seduction and consequent “betray[al]” (p.112) of Turing by Arnold as a “tool to control Alan” (p. 114) is clear. However, responsibility is washed away as “[t]he government and MI6’s hands were tied”, they had merely hoped to control and not “humiliate” or “incarcerate” (p.114) Turing. Croydon is sure to diminish the government's harm by making clear that “neither the judge, Menzies nor Churchill… understood the effects of the hormones Alan would… endure” (p.114), especially if Turing is to ‘blame’ in the narrative as the “predicament was caused by his own actions and signed confession” (p.114). If the aim was to draw scrutiny on these hypocrises, Croydon’s narration fails to make such explicit, or even reasonably implied.
Croydon’s lack of interest or knowledge of the perils facing gay men (and the LGBTQIA+ community more broadly) in the 1940s is clear as he fails to connect the dots between this new secret of the Nautalis to the fear of arrest for being gay.
“If he was discovered, he would lose Nautilus, probably be imprisoned. He could even be shot as a spy. The thought scared him as he realised that this was no longer a scientific project. The risks were huge; his life depended on secrecy.” (p.43)
A better, or more empathetic writer could have deftly interwoven these two fears, into the base fear at its core, exposure and its ensuing perils. The actions that Alan takes in order to evade the government's knowledge of his Nautilus machine echo the paranoia – real and imagined– faced by LGBTQIA+ people as they fought to live full lives whilst constantly facing a threat of imprisonment, humiliation and abuse by the government.
Women
Croydon’s women do not escape unscathed either, whilst touting them as the exceptions to the vapid norm, they are framed as seductresses whose male love-interests are unable to escape their wiles, reinforcing a type of madonna-whore archetype.
Joan Clarke
Joan is at once girlish and “giggl[ing]” (p.20), as well as the temptress who “transfixe[s]” (p.89) even a gay man with her “naked body” (p.89). Whilst on the surface there may be some liberatory value gleaned from Joan's story of unrepentantly owning her desire and sexuality, and then being steadfast in her decision to not limit her career by becoming mother (by giving her child up for adoption to a loving family), something more is below the surface. Joan is well aware of Turing’s homosexuality when she decides to continue to pursue him, years after their broken engagement, she “forces him to look at her” (p.88) and demands that he “let [her] be with the one person I truly love” (p.88) unconcerned by his lack of desire for her. Here Turing “knew he must try” (p.88) even though he found the experience of sleeping with women “unexciting” (p.88). After falling pregnant and keeping that information from him, she finally reveals her betrayal months after she has given their child up for adoption, refuting his upset by declaring that he is “not built like other people” (p.105) and thus should not have had the opportunity to know his child. Thus, Croydon again flattens and perverts the complexity of a real person's experiences to fit his desire to create a biological heir for Turing. Beyond the reduction of Turing’s sexuality, Croydon transforms Joan Clarke – a real woman – into an archetype reminiscent of manosphere talking points: a manipulative seductress who denies Alan’s parental rights.
Lydia/ Carla
David’s love interests are so similar one may be forgiven for finding them indistinguishable. Both Lydia and Carla are agents, Spanish, and sensual– often reading as an overt male fantasy of the sexy spy who is obsessed with him. Lydia, the “sultry Spanish” (p.149) pursues David, at once teasing and chaste– “Not tonight. We can wait” (p.153) – and then, too overcome by David’s sexual appeal, she breaks into his hotel because she "couldn't wait” (p.153). Carla – Lydias’ colleague – is similarly enraptured by David’s bland Britishness, and takes their first meeting after her friend's death to seduce him. She reassures any of David’s “doubt[s]” (p.206) but the ‘seductress’ is “impossible to resist”(p.206) – she is “totally in charge, he the willing victim” (p.207). Whilst Carla is allowed agency when pursuing pleasure, David does not respect her enough to share the secrets of the Nautilus, instead she is reduced to a dependent as he decides that “she would be protected from that burden” (p.221).
The vast similarities between these two women and their interchangeable impact on the plot call into question why Lydia was killed off. Her death acts as a perfect device to simultaneously humanise David’s “absence from his daughter’s life” (p.6) and to lazily create a ‘grizzled’ and hardened man who must fight to stop his “anger and revenge” (p.193) from “replac[ing his] humanity” (p.193). Carla is also positioned as an obstacle between David and his daughter, Annabelle, by way of her feeling uncomfortable with her father moving on from Lydia, her mother. Thus, Lydia and Carla are both reduced to their core utility in the novel, as symbols of love, grief, anger, and lust. They are fundamentally indistinguishable in regards to personality and function, merely to service the larger plot.
Annabelle
In David’s chapters, Annabelle’s primary function is to firstly forgive him for his lack of parental oversight; and furthermore to encourage his further estrangement. Similar to all other prominent women in the novel, Annabelle has an uncanny ability to ‘see’ the emotions in a man’s eyes, removing his responsibility to express them entirely, and leaving her with the burden of managing them. Thus, Annabelle is parentified at a young age after the death of her mother, and absence of her father to further assuage his guilt – “Annabelle saw the guilt in his eyes, the pain that he was suffering, and wished she could take it away” (p.173) – by giving him permission to essentially estrange her.
It is in Annabelle’s chapters that readers are most keenly treated to the downfalls of Croydon’s ‘realism’ as readers are treated to Croydon’s fairly clear bias towards the Conservative Party in the UK. Unlike other novelists who fictionalise real world figures to at least retain the pretense of ambiguity in their political leanings, Croydon has no such qualms. This reads as a rather ill-advised piece of realism throughout the latter half of the novel, as readers are forced to contend with Croydon’s admiration of the Tories, making the final chapters a bit of a stomach-turning slog for those not politically aligned.
Croydon is fairly transparent in his attempts to write Annabelle as a ‘liberated’ modern woman from the prologue, as readers are given a fairly lacklustre opening call to arms.
“It came down to belief. Belief in herself, belief in her own ability to use the power safely, responsibly, not just for her, not just for her family or even her country, but for all mankind.” (p.2)
However, just from this line alone, we see how Annabelle failed in the mission achieved first by Turing, then by David to uphold the Turing Protocol.
Rule 1 “Nautilus must never be used for personal gain” (p.243)
Rule 2 “Nautilus should only be used when it’s possible to change the outcome” (p.243)
Rule 3 “must only be contemplated to change a global horror, or mass destruction” (p.243)
Annabelle’s first use of the Nautilus is in order to change history so that David will not catch Covid 19– “I want to use Nautilus to warm me and therefore you” (p.259) – even after having already “called in a favour” (p.259) to skirt existing lockdown rules to visit David in hospital in Spain. David’s subsequent death is therefore utilised as a battering ram to punish her ‘selfishness’ and hubris in believing that she could save his life, a lesson that did not need to be learnt by either male guardians of the machine.
“This time she would respect her father’s wishes. It was time to let go, to stop trying to manipulate history” (p.264)
Turing and David are able to understand the nuance and weight of responsibility placed upon them as guardians of the Nautalis; and yet are able to forge ahead boldly and alone whilst wielding its power competently. Conversely, Annabelle initially uses the machine for personal gain, against the better judgement of her father. Thus the female guardians of the Nautilus are typified first by their refusal to engage, and then by Annabelle’s misuse.
When Annabelle does eventually use the machine for the ‘right’ reasons, she must employ the direct aid of her husband and the government. Thus failing twofold by confirming its existence to the government, and in allowing a non-guardian into the fold. This feels uncomfortably like Croydon is proclaiming that women are incapable of holding guard to the standard set by their male counterparts. Annabelle having “no… ambition” (p.271) is further illustrated through her ‘failing upwards’ into becoming “Secretary of State for Health and a member of cabinet" (p.271) merely because she lacked the backbone of her Tory colleagues who were “unhappy with Boris Johnson” (p.271) and subsequently left the party.
Final points
Overall, this novel has high aspirations that Croydon’s writing prowess is incapable of achieving. Thoughtful questions are hinted at, but readers must investigate in their own time if they wish to find meaningful insight. Finally, the basic premise of the novel – the idea of Turing having a biological lineage which holds the power to change history – relies on outdated and conservative ideals that nourish modern-day elitism. These ideals of lineage and legacy through bloodline inevitably harken back to the divine right of a few over the many.
Why should the bloodline of Turing have some special access to history-changing machinery? They had no tangible connection to Turing outside of their blood; his ideals were not shared through actual conversation and connection, so how can we ensure that their “personal agenda” (p.243) would always align with the “interest of humanity” (p.243)?
Ultimately, if Croydon was so interested in asking the question on nobody's lips – what if Alan Turing had a child? – why not also create a new history in which Turing is allowed to be happy? To find love (with a man!) and connection to his children and friends, where his Turing Protocol can be enshrined in their upbringing rather than merely assumed as a side effect of carrying his DNA? Why continue to write about his suffering when you could have found room for joy or justice?
August 14, 2025
ANYONE WHO HAS STUMBLED ACROSS THIS REVIEW DO NOT READ THIS BOOK IT'S SO BAD
Guys I'm being so real right now that finding out this book was written by the CEO of QBD (a very prominent bookshop within Australia) suddenly makes so much sense because I usually trust QBD and their recommendations but having this recommended to me genuinely makes me distrust the company. Genuinely this was poor enough I might stop buying from them. Is he making the employees recommend this? Because there is no universe where this book is a best seller otherwise. And the fact all the 5 star reviews are coming from accounts with no other books reviewed ... shady if you ask me.
The whole 'cracker of Enigma' turned time travel inventor is quite an interesting premise but holy moly was it not written well. Very slow-paced for what is pitched as a thriller and the plot crawls along so slowly you can hardly tell its happening. Just because time is physically passing does not mean plot is happening! And this book shows that very clearly.
I have had a interest in Alan Turing and his story since I was in high school, which is what prompted me to read this, but the way this book portrays him genuinely makes me feel sick in the mouth. The portrayal of his relationship and especially the sex scenes in the book are quite disturbing. Not only is writing a sex scene involving a real person who actually existed quite strange and weird, portraying Turing as so heterosexual is literally an attack on his memory. I can't believe someone could write a story about a man who basically saved the world during WWII and was thanked by his country by BEING CHEMICALLY CASTRATED AND THEN COMMITTING S*ICIDE AND NOT BEING PARDONED UNTIL 2013 and portray him as so heterosexual. Turing had quite a close relationship with one of his female colleagues, likely more of a lavender marriage situation than anything, but portraying him this way just left me feeling uneasy
To add to this, the way his death is treated is completely out of line. Its an insult to Turing's memory and the societal prejudice he had to endure and the homophobia that continues to talk the lives of queer people in the twenty-first century. I sincerely hope no members of the Turing family stumble across this book because they do not deserve that.
Overall the book is sloppy writing-wise, plot-wise, and characterisation-wise. I would give this 0 stars if I could, but I can't so here we are.
Guys I'm being so real right now that finding out this book was written by the CEO of QBD (a very prominent bookshop within Australia) suddenly makes so much sense because I usually trust QBD and their recommendations but having this recommended to me genuinely makes me distrust the company. Genuinely this was poor enough I might stop buying from them. Is he making the employees recommend this? Because there is no universe where this book is a best seller otherwise. And the fact all the 5 star reviews are coming from accounts with no other books reviewed ... shady if you ask me.
The whole 'cracker of Enigma' turned time travel inventor is quite an interesting premise but holy moly was it not written well. Very slow-paced for what is pitched as a thriller and the plot crawls along so slowly you can hardly tell its happening. Just because time is physically passing does not mean plot is happening! And this book shows that very clearly.
I have had a interest in Alan Turing and his story since I was in high school, which is what prompted me to read this, but the way this book portrays him genuinely makes me feel sick in the mouth. The portrayal of his relationship and especially the sex scenes in the book are quite disturbing. Not only is writing a sex scene involving a real person who actually existed quite strange and weird, portraying Turing as so heterosexual is literally an attack on his memory. I can't believe someone could write a story about a man who basically saved the world during WWII and was thanked by his country by BEING CHEMICALLY CASTRATED AND THEN COMMITTING S*ICIDE AND NOT BEING PARDONED UNTIL 2013 and portray him as so heterosexual. Turing had quite a close relationship with one of his female colleagues, likely more of a lavender marriage situation than anything, but portraying him this way just left me feeling uneasy
To add to this, the way his death is treated is completely out of line. Its an insult to Turing's memory and the societal prejudice he had to endure and the homophobia that continues to talk the lives of queer people in the twenty-first century. I sincerely hope no members of the Turing family stumble across this book because they do not deserve that.
Overall the book is sloppy writing-wise, plot-wise, and characterisation-wise. I would give this 0 stars if I could, but I can't so here we are.
August 8, 2025
300 pages of slop. This is possibly one of the worst books I’ve ever read.
August 14, 2025
Nick croydon is effectively using his position of power as ceo of qbd against the staff AND authors - e.g my friends store got called out company wide for not selling 1 by midday, and all authors that have left a review about it have previous & upcoming book of the month titles!! Not just that but I know so many people who have left bad reviews here and they're struggling to get their accounts back due to supposed suspicious activity. Embarrassing.
August 12, 2025
so bad it's not even entertaining. I beg of you to spend your time better than falling for the definition of a nepo baby cash grab. he couldn't even write a good picture book and he wants to do a historical fiction time travel novel? crazy man. anyway it's funny how almost all the good reviews have no profile picture and no other reviews and how lots of the negative reviews disappear. weird huh.
August 8, 2025
I normally love a good historical fiction/thriller! Got it for a lovely price, hardcover too!! But unfortunately this feels like a complete cash grab, no real heart or talent within the story-writing. Maybe impressive to those new to reading, but as a seasoned book-lover this lacks absolutely everything that’s essential to a good book!! Very disappointed and hopefully can get a refund. I would not recommend this book.
August 13, 2025
More like The Boring Protocol.
August 26, 2025
I do wonder if there’s anything to be said here that hasn’t been in the reviews that came before mine.
Slowing getting back into my passion for reading, my local bookstore (I don’t have to say which one) tends to be on top of me any time I’m in store (please don’t perceive me) but I’ve had good recommendations in the past. This was not one of them, they insisted and I relented.
Now I’m not saying there couldn’t be a really good story here because in the right hands there might be ??? Nick Croydon isn’t the right hands.
I’ve seen articles and mentions that Turing’s character potentially agreed/entered into a lavender marriage as the concept ?? where this having a child unfolded but from reading the book and assuming the most basic concept of a lavender marriage, this is not it!!! I do believe if the book was written well while also understanding the nuances of that type of relationship in the historical context there might be some substance to this story. But this story is shallow and of no meaning, it’s poorly written, and real life people completely misunderstood. The queer community plays no role and wasn’t given any consideration, and from a simple google search I’ve come to understand the Alan Turing did have community and pride in who he was. The very “real” five star reviews left here points out that this book is historical FICTION and while that may be true, you can not take such important queer figure in history and remove the substance of who he is as a person to fit a poorly underdeveloped plot. I do think it’s comical Croydon has written about Turing in these homophobic undertones like someone had a gun to his head. Why not write about someone fictional in this historical accurate timeline, or there could have been an adoption, or a properly thought out and developed lavender marriage. There would have been many creative avenues to venture without this complex person being so misrepresented.
I don’t really want to touch on Turing’s death being used as political conspiracy except to say that he killed himself after living through really horrific circumstances and was only pardon for his “crimes” in 2013 and this fictional ending Croydon has written with his full chest is an insult. Well that’s all a moot point now. If you’re reading this and believe this book was five stars I think you need to reevaluate your life because there is serious issues within our society that this blatant homophobia is okay with you (and the writing was so bad you might need more help than what is readily available to you)
I’m disappointed I’ve spent my money on this.
Slowing getting back into my passion for reading, my local bookstore (I don’t have to say which one) tends to be on top of me any time I’m in store (please don’t perceive me) but I’ve had good recommendations in the past. This was not one of them, they insisted and I relented.
Now I’m not saying there couldn’t be a really good story here because in the right hands there might be ??? Nick Croydon isn’t the right hands.
I’ve seen articles and mentions that Turing’s character potentially agreed/entered into a lavender marriage as the concept ?? where this having a child unfolded but from reading the book and assuming the most basic concept of a lavender marriage, this is not it!!! I do believe if the book was written well while also understanding the nuances of that type of relationship in the historical context there might be some substance to this story. But this story is shallow and of no meaning, it’s poorly written, and real life people completely misunderstood. The queer community plays no role and wasn’t given any consideration, and from a simple google search I’ve come to understand the Alan Turing did have community and pride in who he was. The very “real” five star reviews left here points out that this book is historical FICTION and while that may be true, you can not take such important queer figure in history and remove the substance of who he is as a person to fit a poorly underdeveloped plot. I do think it’s comical Croydon has written about Turing in these homophobic undertones like someone had a gun to his head. Why not write about someone fictional in this historical accurate timeline, or there could have been an adoption, or a properly thought out and developed lavender marriage. There would have been many creative avenues to venture without this complex person being so misrepresented.
I don’t really want to touch on Turing’s death being used as political conspiracy except to say that he killed himself after living through really horrific circumstances and was only pardon for his “crimes” in 2013 and this fictional ending Croydon has written with his full chest is an insult. Well that’s all a moot point now. If you’re reading this and believe this book was five stars I think you need to reevaluate your life because there is serious issues within our society that this blatant homophobia is okay with you (and the writing was so bad you might need more help than what is readily available to you)
I’m disappointed I’ve spent my money on this.
August 17, 2025
If I could give this book negative reviews, I would. Controversy aside - I do believe this book is poorly written and not at all fleshed out. It’s nepotism at its finest. I feel so bad for those QBD employees being forced to upsell it.
September 23, 2025
It is absurd that this is being pushed as some kind of four quadrant hit. Despite not being my cup of tea, I will write the most honest and positive recommendation that I can, because, I generally believe there is an audience for most books, and most of the five star ratings here have all the authenticity of a five star review of Fifty Shades gushing over its usefulness on a high school reading list.
This book is flat out *not for me*.
If good prose is important to you, this book will not deliver- the style admirably rises to utilitarian on occasion, but generally lags, feeling like someone’s first trunk novel. And no shame, aye? We all have one, it just normally isn't subject to an aggressive marketing campaign that positions it at the vanguard of a popular bookstore chain’s sales for the month.
The dialogue is also at best boilerplate Hollywood, "'allo old chap" and "'ow you doin' guv'nor?" at least in the early England sections. It feels very reminiscent of the more mediocre sections of exposition during the first Captain America movie. Once again, there can be a place for this overt and cartoonish dialogue that lacks human authenticity- Matthew Reilly has made it his bread and butter, however those books have impeccably structured action and pacing, making a virtue of the direct and the obvious in service to their big-screen style spectacle. This is quite a talky book, so it proves to be a hindrance. Also, the reviews positioning this as containing a swoon-worthy romance must be reading something else- banter and human dialogue are the heart and soul of that genre and is not to be found here.
This book’s greatest strength and weakness is the detail it includes. It takes the lesson that detail provides authenticity and dutifully follows it off a cliff early in the second chapter. In most cases this is a detriment to the story- no matter how well a hotel is described, and how much (incomprehensible to me, someone who has never been to England) detail is provided, I will not care if I do not care about the characters.
However.
There has been a lot of negative, and I promised a recommendation at the start.
If you happen to be someone for whom none of this is a detriment, if you are the sort of person who peruses the history section of their local bookshop, thumbing their nose at the needless human digressions provided by Peter Fitzsimmons, if what you really want is blow by blow descriptions of historical events (X moved to this position, Y responded here, these were the casualties), Nick Croydon is your man. I haven’t read anything like this as far as incorporating play-by-play, dry military action into fiction, I guess because rules about readability and pacing typically dictate that the human element must be stronger. As stated earlier, this is not my cup of tea, and I struggle to imagine there are many people out there who would view this as a virtue, but also: somewhere out there is an audience for every book, and maybe there are a quiet few who read this and think, “yes. Finally, a book for me.” You are a strange few, if you do exist, but I concede that you may find enjoyment here. (This snippet of an interview highlights where this book’s interests lie: https://youtu.be/66jh9WkFOKs?t=76.)
The subject matter here naturally requires a far, far defter hand, if it is to be covered at all, but the aim of my review has been to present this book in an as charitable light as possible while being honest.
The approach taken to marketing this has been one that I find at best fascinating, and at worst comically misjudged. The best-case scenario for this novel would have been that it ended up pushed surreptitiously to the new release wall where those who would find some enjoyment may stumble across it, and where it may appear later as a free gift with purchase with the author’s far better second book. Because writing is a craft, one that takes stubborn determination to hone, both strengthening and working to keep the door to creativity open, and the critical blade sharp (for when it comes time to whittle). I find this book’s reception heartening, because it proves that art is not dead, and people are not blind sheep to be led through the nose by marketing.
To the author: good effort, keep championing the cause of brick-and-mortar bookstores and local authors. Lick your wounds and keep writing, even if you don’t publish (it is good for the soul). The short story format can do wonders for learning the craft of fiction. And perhaps lay off the marketing a tad with the second book.
This book is flat out *not for me*.
If good prose is important to you, this book will not deliver- the style admirably rises to utilitarian on occasion, but generally lags, feeling like someone’s first trunk novel. And no shame, aye? We all have one, it just normally isn't subject to an aggressive marketing campaign that positions it at the vanguard of a popular bookstore chain’s sales for the month.
The dialogue is also at best boilerplate Hollywood, "'allo old chap" and "'ow you doin' guv'nor?" at least in the early England sections. It feels very reminiscent of the more mediocre sections of exposition during the first Captain America movie. Once again, there can be a place for this overt and cartoonish dialogue that lacks human authenticity- Matthew Reilly has made it his bread and butter, however those books have impeccably structured action and pacing, making a virtue of the direct and the obvious in service to their big-screen style spectacle. This is quite a talky book, so it proves to be a hindrance. Also, the reviews positioning this as containing a swoon-worthy romance must be reading something else- banter and human dialogue are the heart and soul of that genre and is not to be found here.
This book’s greatest strength and weakness is the detail it includes. It takes the lesson that detail provides authenticity and dutifully follows it off a cliff early in the second chapter. In most cases this is a detriment to the story- no matter how well a hotel is described, and how much (incomprehensible to me, someone who has never been to England) detail is provided, I will not care if I do not care about the characters.
However.
There has been a lot of negative, and I promised a recommendation at the start.
If you happen to be someone for whom none of this is a detriment, if you are the sort of person who peruses the history section of their local bookshop, thumbing their nose at the needless human digressions provided by Peter Fitzsimmons, if what you really want is blow by blow descriptions of historical events (X moved to this position, Y responded here, these were the casualties), Nick Croydon is your man. I haven’t read anything like this as far as incorporating play-by-play, dry military action into fiction, I guess because rules about readability and pacing typically dictate that the human element must be stronger. As stated earlier, this is not my cup of tea, and I struggle to imagine there are many people out there who would view this as a virtue, but also: somewhere out there is an audience for every book, and maybe there are a quiet few who read this and think, “yes. Finally, a book for me.” You are a strange few, if you do exist, but I concede that you may find enjoyment here. (This snippet of an interview highlights where this book’s interests lie: https://youtu.be/66jh9WkFOKs?t=76.)
The subject matter here naturally requires a far, far defter hand, if it is to be covered at all, but the aim of my review has been to present this book in an as charitable light as possible while being honest.
The approach taken to marketing this has been one that I find at best fascinating, and at worst comically misjudged. The best-case scenario for this novel would have been that it ended up pushed surreptitiously to the new release wall where those who would find some enjoyment may stumble across it, and where it may appear later as a free gift with purchase with the author’s far better second book. Because writing is a craft, one that takes stubborn determination to hone, both strengthening and working to keep the door to creativity open, and the critical blade sharp (for when it comes time to whittle). I find this book’s reception heartening, because it proves that art is not dead, and people are not blind sheep to be led through the nose by marketing.
To the author: good effort, keep championing the cause of brick-and-mortar bookstores and local authors. Lick your wounds and keep writing, even if you don’t publish (it is good for the soul). The short story format can do wonders for learning the craft of fiction. And perhaps lay off the marketing a tad with the second book.
August 25, 2025
I was really gripped reading this. I did wonder at the accidental pregnancy involving a gay man, but there is a way to message the past..I just went with it!!! I think it would be a great way to learn our history, all the events are here! And there are characters to watch and follow…lots of good eating…and imagine having the responsibility; what wouldn’t you warn yourself about? I would do need the protocol!!!
August 8, 2025
What a fantastic debut with such a bold and unique premise — What if you could send a warning to your past self to
prevent global catastrophe?
The Turing Protocol isn't your typical time travel tale. It blends historical fact with a chilling “what if?” scenario that had me hooked. The idea of altering the course of history through a single message was absolutely fascinating.
The first half unfolds slowly, but stick with it — the second half is a full-blown page-turner. I loved the mix of espionage, political intrigue, and the clever use of real-world historical events. The alternating timelines and points of view gave depth to both the characters and the stakes, painting a complex and compelling picture of a world on the brink.
An intelligent and thought-provoking read that had me thinking long after the final chapter. I’ll be keeping an eye out for whatever Nick Croydon writes next.
Thanks to the team at @affirmpress for this gifted copy.
prevent global catastrophe?
The Turing Protocol isn't your typical time travel tale. It blends historical fact with a chilling “what if?” scenario that had me hooked. The idea of altering the course of history through a single message was absolutely fascinating.
The first half unfolds slowly, but stick with it — the second half is a full-blown page-turner. I loved the mix of espionage, political intrigue, and the clever use of real-world historical events. The alternating timelines and points of view gave depth to both the characters and the stakes, painting a complex and compelling picture of a world on the brink.
An intelligent and thought-provoking read that had me thinking long after the final chapter. I’ll be keeping an eye out for whatever Nick Croydon writes next.
Thanks to the team at @affirmpress for this gifted copy.
September 12, 2025
Did not finish. Never caught me or kept me interested. One of the truly boring books I've had the misfortune of reading.
August 27, 2025
Edit: My original review (as well as many other reviews that rated this novel with one star) was taken down while the book was being investigated for "suspicious activity," which I find extremely bizarre since l actually read the book and shared my honest feedback. Goodreads even confirmed that my review did not breach any guidelines and that I was free to repost it once the investigation ended. So, here I am reposting my review, one that was already fully compliant with Goodreads' guidelines.
What should actually be flagged as suspicious are the brand-new accounts with only one book on their profile (this novel) giving it 5 stars. To me, that sounds a lot more like an inside job. Anyways 🤷🏻♀️
Review: It's hard to shake the feeling this book is being pushed more by corporate enthusiasm than actual reader interest. And I get it - marketing departments love a CEO with a debut novel. But booksellers and readers? We just want a story that works, and this one doesn't.
What should actually be flagged as suspicious are the brand-new accounts with only one book on their profile (this novel) giving it 5 stars. To me, that sounds a lot more like an inside job. Anyways 🤷🏻♀️
Review: It's hard to shake the feeling this book is being pushed more by corporate enthusiasm than actual reader interest. And I get it - marketing departments love a CEO with a debut novel. But booksellers and readers? We just want a story that works, and this one doesn't.
August 11, 2025
I got recommended this book when I was browsing in a bookshop last week and I can say it was a great recommendation. It only took me 2 days to read it! This book is not only a historical fiction but it's a thriller with some love and a great twist! I enjoyed the time travelling and if you love history it is packed with 80 years of history in there. You won't know what's real and what's fiction and the way it's written it felt so real. The staff told me there is a book 2 coming and I'm excited to see what unfolds in book 2.
September 1, 2025
as a fan of both sci-fi and history, this book should have ticked the right boxes for me, but unfortunately it did not deliver. did this book see an editor or have a sensitivity read??
September 16, 2025
Big thanks to Affirm Press for sending us a copy to read and review.
The world has a timeline that is punctuated and defined by many conflicts, events and tragedies.
Political, economic and religious catalysts contributing to most with greed not far away.
Could a Time Machine prevent or minimise impacts?
The brilliant mind of Alan Turing comes to life as he creates a machine that can send messages into the recent past.
A machine that diverts the course of history in World War Two.
The secrets and powers of the machine known as Nautilus is passed down through the generations to selected family members.
Son David used it when the world was governed by fear with extreme terrorism.
Now grand daughter Belle has to make one of the most important decisions of her life…..
A tense and riveting read that mixes fact with fiction seamlessly.
It evokes the imagination and reminds us what a fractured and tumultuous world we live in.
Meticulously researched and entertaining.
Would you change history if you could?
The world has a timeline that is punctuated and defined by many conflicts, events and tragedies.
Political, economic and religious catalysts contributing to most with greed not far away.
Could a Time Machine prevent or minimise impacts?
The brilliant mind of Alan Turing comes to life as he creates a machine that can send messages into the recent past.
A machine that diverts the course of history in World War Two.
The secrets and powers of the machine known as Nautilus is passed down through the generations to selected family members.
Son David used it when the world was governed by fear with extreme terrorism.
Now grand daughter Belle has to make one of the most important decisions of her life…..
A tense and riveting read that mixes fact with fiction seamlessly.
It evokes the imagination and reminds us what a fractured and tumultuous world we live in.
Meticulously researched and entertaining.
Would you change history if you could?
September 20, 2025
What a rubbish book. DNF
Read
August 31, 2025DNF. wasn't enjoying the writing at all
July 11, 2025
DISCLAIMER: I have never written nor published a book, so I'm not in a position to scoff at anyone who has. These are only my opinions.
What would you do if you held the future of the world in yesterday's hands?
The Turing Protocol is both speculative and historical, and ponders how the world would be if we had the ability to turn back time. Based in fact, and spanning from WWII to 2022, the novel explores the work of Alan Turing during his time at Bletchely Park and the ramifications that may have occurred if he had gone on to invent a machine that could send messages back in time. How might the world have changed?
The premise for this novel is great. And the first part was really intriguing. But the entire middle section felt like I was making a really boring sponge cake, following a really boring recipe. There is just a sequence of life events of the main characters that didn't include the use of the Nautilus machine at all. In fact, it is only used four times throughout the 313 pages. But when it is used, the narrative is engaging and the what ifs really intriguing.
If Croydon had left out all the mundane timelines and concentrated on the use of the machine, he would have had a great novel. I just didn't need to know about every crossing of the road, every bike ride, every walk through the park - none of which had any bearing on the plot development.
Read it, don't read it. You won't be worse off, but you probably won't be very enriched either.
What would you do if you held the future of the world in yesterday's hands?
The Turing Protocol is both speculative and historical, and ponders how the world would be if we had the ability to turn back time. Based in fact, and spanning from WWII to 2022, the novel explores the work of Alan Turing during his time at Bletchely Park and the ramifications that may have occurred if he had gone on to invent a machine that could send messages back in time. How might the world have changed?
The premise for this novel is great. And the first part was really intriguing. But the entire middle section felt like I was making a really boring sponge cake, following a really boring recipe. There is just a sequence of life events of the main characters that didn't include the use of the Nautilus machine at all. In fact, it is only used four times throughout the 313 pages. But when it is used, the narrative is engaging and the what ifs really intriguing.
If Croydon had left out all the mundane timelines and concentrated on the use of the machine, he would have had a great novel. I just didn't need to know about every crossing of the road, every bike ride, every walk through the park - none of which had any bearing on the plot development.
Read it, don't read it. You won't be worse off, but you probably won't be very enriched either.
October 1, 2025
The Turing Protocol: A Corporate Ego Trip Masquerading as Literature
Let’s be clear: The Turing Protocol isn’t just a bad book—it’s a masterclass in everything wrong with vanity publishing, corporate overreach, and historical disrespect. Written by the CEO of QBD and reportedly forced onto staff to sell, this isn’t a novel—it’s a hostage situation in paperback form.
The prose is bloated, the pacing is glacial, and the plot is a tangled mess of tech jargon and philosophical posturing that thinks it’s profound but reads like a TED Talk transcript run through a malfunctioning chatbot. The characters are so flat they make cardboard look three-dimensional. Dialogue? Robotic. Stakes? Manufactured. Emotional resonance? Nonexistent.
But the real jaw-dropper—the part that takes this from “bad” to “morally repugnant”—is the fictionalization of Alan Turing. A real man. A brilliant mind. A gay icon who was chemically castrated by the British government for his sexuality and driven to suicide. And what does Croydon do? He rewrites Turing to have sex with a woman and father a child. That’s not speculative fiction. That’s historical mutilation. It’s the literary equivalent of erasing a scar and calling it progress.
This isn’t just tone-deaf—it’s grotesque. It’s rewriting queer trauma for narrative convenience, and it’s unforgivable. Turing’s legacy deserves reverence, not revisionist fanfic dressed up as a thriller.
And let’s talk about the dystopian irony: QBD staff, actual booksellers who care about literature, were reportedly required to push this book. Imagine being passionate about storytelling and being told to sell a CEO’s self-indulgent AI mess that tramples on queer history and reads like a LinkedIn post with delusions of grandeur.
If you’re looking for a gripping AI thriller, look elsewhere. If you’re looking for a thoughtful exploration of ethics and consciousness, look elsewhere. If you’re looking for a book that respects its subject matter and its readers, look anywhere else.
This isn’t literature. It’s a vanity project with a hardback cover and a marketing budget. And it deserves every one of its one-star reviews.
Let’s be clear: The Turing Protocol isn’t just a bad book—it’s a masterclass in everything wrong with vanity publishing, corporate overreach, and historical disrespect. Written by the CEO of QBD and reportedly forced onto staff to sell, this isn’t a novel—it’s a hostage situation in paperback form.
The prose is bloated, the pacing is glacial, and the plot is a tangled mess of tech jargon and philosophical posturing that thinks it’s profound but reads like a TED Talk transcript run through a malfunctioning chatbot. The characters are so flat they make cardboard look three-dimensional. Dialogue? Robotic. Stakes? Manufactured. Emotional resonance? Nonexistent.
But the real jaw-dropper—the part that takes this from “bad” to “morally repugnant”—is the fictionalization of Alan Turing. A real man. A brilliant mind. A gay icon who was chemically castrated by the British government for his sexuality and driven to suicide. And what does Croydon do? He rewrites Turing to have sex with a woman and father a child. That’s not speculative fiction. That’s historical mutilation. It’s the literary equivalent of erasing a scar and calling it progress.
This isn’t just tone-deaf—it’s grotesque. It’s rewriting queer trauma for narrative convenience, and it’s unforgivable. Turing’s legacy deserves reverence, not revisionist fanfic dressed up as a thriller.
And let’s talk about the dystopian irony: QBD staff, actual booksellers who care about literature, were reportedly required to push this book. Imagine being passionate about storytelling and being told to sell a CEO’s self-indulgent AI mess that tramples on queer history and reads like a LinkedIn post with delusions of grandeur.
If you’re looking for a gripping AI thriller, look elsewhere. If you’re looking for a thoughtful exploration of ethics and consciousness, look elsewhere. If you’re looking for a book that respects its subject matter and its readers, look anywhere else.
This isn’t literature. It’s a vanity project with a hardback cover and a marketing budget. And it deserves every one of its one-star reviews.
September 24, 2025
Alan Turing, a brilliant mathematician, developed a machine during the Second World War that played a crucial role in cracking Enigma messages sent by German military forces. What if Alan Turing had also invented a machine capable of sending messages that will enable historical events to be reshaped?
'The Turing Protocol' by Nick Croydon is a ‘what if’ historical novel.
To ensure the machine would only be used when humankind was severely threatened, Turing decided only one family should know how to operate it and an honour code should be in place: the Turing protocol.
The author blends real-world events with imaginative twists that fascinate. It was a while before I accepted the implausible plot developments and sat back to enjoy the absorbing romp.
In the prologue, we are introduced to Annabelle who, in March 2022, is watching television at her flat in London. Ukrainian soldiers are fighting Russian invaders street by street, house by house. The war is intensifying by the hour. She has no solution. But she does have access to power – a technology, unknown to any other person alive – enabling her to reshape this war.
Before we hear her decision to operate the machine, we are transported back to June 1938. Alan Turing is receiving his PhD from Princeton University. He turns down a lucrative research position at Princeton and returns to England where he’s headhunted for a hush-hush job at the Code and Cypher School, Bletchley Park, Buckinghamshire.
Alan and Annabelle never meet but they are linked by being an owner of the machine Alan invented. Nick Croydon’s exciting part thriller, part science fiction fantasy leads us from 1938 to 2022 via Churchill, Hitler, Osama bin Laden, MI6 and the CIA.
October 15, 2025
I read Nick Croydon's book "The Turing Protocol" with a lot of interest. The idea of a message sending time machine is intriguing because it allows readers to join the author in exploring the concept of "20/20 hindsight" across a wide range of historical crises dating back to WWII.
Interestingly, Croydon places an 8-week limitation on the extent of such time travel which adds a sense of urgency to the plot especially as it pertains to the critical interventions preceding D-Day and 9/11. Moreover, I particularly liked the recognition of the necessity of incorporating a self-destruct option into the design of such a powerful invention. This manifests itself, very powerfully, in the very last line of the novel.
The author is also courageous in crediting Alan Turing with the creation of this incredible machine, as a lot is already known about the life and achievements of this remarkable scientist. Croydon does a good job of merging the plot of his fictional story with the historical record and providing continuity across two generations of Turing's hypothesised descendants. In general, the plot is populated with interesting and likeable characters spanning more than eight decades and communicates a nice blend of their personal lives with their intended roles in influencing history via the use of the Nautilus time machine.
Interestingly, Croydon places an 8-week limitation on the extent of such time travel which adds a sense of urgency to the plot especially as it pertains to the critical interventions preceding D-Day and 9/11. Moreover, I particularly liked the recognition of the necessity of incorporating a self-destruct option into the design of such a powerful invention. This manifests itself, very powerfully, in the very last line of the novel.
The author is also courageous in crediting Alan Turing with the creation of this incredible machine, as a lot is already known about the life and achievements of this remarkable scientist. Croydon does a good job of merging the plot of his fictional story with the historical record and providing continuity across two generations of Turing's hypothesised descendants. In general, the plot is populated with interesting and likeable characters spanning more than eight decades and communicates a nice blend of their personal lives with their intended roles in influencing history via the use of the Nautilus time machine.
September 23, 2025
This is my first review. When I've loved a book I often read the reviews to take on others' thoughts, like a virtual book club, but I haven't taken the plunge to write my own yet. This one left me wanting more, and I felt the need to share my disappointment.
The premise I could accept and the story was engaging enough if you're willing to suspend disbelief, but the writing I found got a bit tedious. There was virtually no character-building; everything we know about a character we are told rather than shown, with all the richest descriptive language saved for unnecessary details like what someone cooked for dinner. A whole lot of action happened in a very short space but it was boring because I couldn't really sympathise with any of the characters.
I love time travel stories, but I was bothered that Croydon made absolutely no effort to address the paradox that's created when someone acts in the past to change the past (the new past action negating the events that led to the decision and actions to change the past). I was looking forward to seeing how he handled it, but in fact he blatantly ignored it, which I felt was quite lazy, especially when trying to sell the idea of it happening in the real world related to familiar historical figures and events.
The premise I could accept and the story was engaging enough if you're willing to suspend disbelief, but the writing I found got a bit tedious. There was virtually no character-building; everything we know about a character we are told rather than shown, with all the richest descriptive language saved for unnecessary details like what someone cooked for dinner. A whole lot of action happened in a very short space but it was boring because I couldn't really sympathise with any of the characters.
I love time travel stories, but I was bothered that Croydon made absolutely no effort to address the paradox that's created when someone acts in the past to change the past (the new past action negating the events that led to the decision and actions to change the past). I was looking forward to seeing how he handled it, but in fact he blatantly ignored it, which I felt was quite lazy, especially when trying to sell the idea of it happening in the real world related to familiar historical figures and events.
September 4, 2025
I enjoyed this book a lot. I am a fan of historical fiction, but I don't usually read books that are heavily set in wars. Surprisingly, I did not find the war details too dragging; on the contrary, I think they help to ground the narrative. I was pleasantly surprised by the pace and the number of years the book covers. When I first picked up the book, I thought it would be all about Turing, but there are actually three protagonists from different times that drive the story forward. I especially enjoyed the second half of the book, probably because I have lived through many of the historical events it describes.
I've read a few of the reviews here, and I want to clarify that Turing is gay in the book, but above all is a brilliant mind, which I love. He is represented as a full, round human being. The legal struggles he endured in life are also in the book, and the fact that he died in suspicious circumstances is used as part of the plot.
If you like historical fiction with a bit of sci-fi, I think you will enjoy the book.
I've read a few of the reviews here, and I want to clarify that Turing is gay in the book, but above all is a brilliant mind, which I love. He is represented as a full, round human being. The legal struggles he endured in life are also in the book, and the fact that he died in suspicious circumstances is used as part of the plot.
If you like historical fiction with a bit of sci-fi, I think you will enjoy the book.
September 7, 2025
I rated this 3 stars primarily due to the very thought-provoking premise. As the blurb on the cover asks "If you had the power to change history, would you dare?"
That alone enticed me to read this one.
Alan Turing, primary inventor of the Enigma machine that played a vital role in WWII, invents another machine - Nautilus - that enables messages to be sent back in time, to warn and change events.
The moral conundrums this type of machine creates - the rules surrounding its use, how often it can be used, the reasons for its use - provide plenty of fodder for the reader's mind to consider. I did find the events in history selected for the machines use also quite interesting to consider.
What marked this down for me was the novel felt quite high level, glossing over the top of things, rather than digging deeper into those moral issues. I also would have liked to read more surrounding world events where the choice not to use the machine were decided, and the internal debate leading to those decisions too.
That alone enticed me to read this one.
Alan Turing, primary inventor of the Enigma machine that played a vital role in WWII, invents another machine - Nautilus - that enables messages to be sent back in time, to warn and change events.
The moral conundrums this type of machine creates - the rules surrounding its use, how often it can be used, the reasons for its use - provide plenty of fodder for the reader's mind to consider. I did find the events in history selected for the machines use also quite interesting to consider.
What marked this down for me was the novel felt quite high level, glossing over the top of things, rather than digging deeper into those moral issues. I also would have liked to read more surrounding world events where the choice not to use the machine were decided, and the internal debate leading to those decisions too.
August 10, 2025
Did an AI write this? Because it sure didn’t feel human.
I don’t even know where to start. The Turing Protocol is like someone fed every tech-thriller cliché into a blender, hit purée, and forgot to add a plot. I kept waiting for it to get good. Spoiler: it didn’t.
The characters? Imagine if cardboard cutouts could spout philosophical nonsense about artificial intelligence while simultaneously having zero personality. The “brilliant” hacker protagonist reads like a Reddit thread come to life, and the villain might as well have twirled a digital mustache.
Croydon clearly thinks he’s saying something deep about consciousness and ethics, but it’s buried under so much jargon and overwritten prose that I started skimming by page 50. By page 200, I was actively rooting for the AI to wipe out humanity just to end the book.
If you’re into plot holes, robotic dialogue, and the literary equivalent of a blue screen of death, this one’s for you. Everyone else—abort mission.
I don’t even know where to start. The Turing Protocol is like someone fed every tech-thriller cliché into a blender, hit purée, and forgot to add a plot. I kept waiting for it to get good. Spoiler: it didn’t.
The characters? Imagine if cardboard cutouts could spout philosophical nonsense about artificial intelligence while simultaneously having zero personality. The “brilliant” hacker protagonist reads like a Reddit thread come to life, and the villain might as well have twirled a digital mustache.
Croydon clearly thinks he’s saying something deep about consciousness and ethics, but it’s buried under so much jargon and overwritten prose that I started skimming by page 50. By page 200, I was actively rooting for the AI to wipe out humanity just to end the book.
If you’re into plot holes, robotic dialogue, and the literary equivalent of a blue screen of death, this one’s for you. Everyone else—abort mission.
October 16, 2025
This book is awful. I couldn't finish reading it because it was so poorly written and the plot was barely there. The characters were so 2 dimensional and it was like they had the personality of a wet sock. There were so many plot holes as well, like trying to warn the past about 911 which would surely cause a paradox. All that aside, this book is a travesty to the lgbtqia+ community. The audacity to straight wash such a prominent historical gay figure who was persecuted and committed suicide as a result of that is disgusting. To make matters worse, this book was only published because Nick Croydon has a position of power in the book world as the CEO of QBD books and used that to get this swill printed. A real spit in the face to serious authors. This book is not worth the paper it's printed on and I regret spending any time spent trying to read it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews