What do you think?
Rate this book
The Einstein Legacy
Ex-FBI agent Mark O'Bryan and beautiful reporter Jennifer Winslow discover that Kurt Von Richter, the head of a huge industrial empire, possesses a weapon that can alter the nature of reality
272 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1987
6 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 of 1 review
September 30, 2022
The Einstein Legacy
was published in 1987. It’s sort of a time capsule of ideas, notions of what technology might look like in the near future, villains hell-bent on world domination, action and adventure, thriller-esque stories. It had some events and twists in there that took me by surprise, such as when . Plenty of action that clips along. Familiar themes of good vs. evil.
But then there’s some other stuff such that this book doesn’t really age particularly well and probably wouldn’t appeal to most. It leads me to this weird dichotomy of judging it by standards older and newer if that makes any sense.
This book has, as I mentioned, a villain seeking to control the world through recreating a long-lost hidden theory that Einstein fictionally came up with but then tried to hide because he figured humanity wasn’t ready for it because it could be weaponized. Problem is he’s a mustache-twirling, I-am-so-smart-and-powerful-that-no-one-is-better-than-me-and-I-deserve-the-whole-world-dammit kind of villain. It’s almost a caricature by today’s standards. Imagine Doctor Evil, only attempting to be serious. It worked pretty well back then. Now… not so sure. Oh and there was the aspect of his personality where he was a sex-crazed maniac who Did not particularly need that.
The second issue is that the female character is not as well drawn out or written as the strong character she should/could have been. For example, the back cover introduces the three main characters, the antagonist and the two protagonists. The antagonist’s description is “Master of a huge industrial empire—and a slave to obsessions he cannot touch. […].” Okay, fine. He’s the bad guy and he’s got a weird flaw. Then we have the male protagonist, described as “A professional lawman, a cynic, and an idealist. […].” Okay, cool. No problem. Then the female protagonist is “The ravishing reporter who watches a routine feature explode into the story of a lifetime. […].” Now, granted, the author may not have created the content of the back cover. But the same sort of thematic issue gets into the book, too. She’s an object of desire first, then an intelligent, strong, and resourceful reporter. To be fair, I think the author tried to make her interesting and developed for her career and capabilities, and to make her an equal teammate with the “lawman.” And she was, after all, So the more I think about it and write this, I think he tried (just my opinion), but it fell short. Other female characters were also just objects.
Anyway, this had some good thriller elements and a good pace, but it’s just one of those literary bottles of wine that turned a bit.
But then there’s some other stuff such that this book doesn’t really age particularly well and probably wouldn’t appeal to most. It leads me to this weird dichotomy of judging it by standards older and newer if that makes any sense.
This book has, as I mentioned, a villain seeking to control the world through recreating a long-lost hidden theory that Einstein fictionally came up with but then tried to hide because he figured humanity wasn’t ready for it because it could be weaponized. Problem is he’s a mustache-twirling, I-am-so-smart-and-powerful-that-no-one-is-better-than-me-and-I-deserve-the-whole-world-dammit kind of villain. It’s almost a caricature by today’s standards. Imagine Doctor Evil, only attempting to be serious. It worked pretty well back then. Now… not so sure. Oh and there was the aspect of his personality where he was a sex-crazed maniac who Did not particularly need that.
The second issue is that the female character is not as well drawn out or written as the strong character she should/could have been. For example, the back cover introduces the three main characters, the antagonist and the two protagonists. The antagonist’s description is “Master of a huge industrial empire—and a slave to obsessions he cannot touch. […].” Okay, fine. He’s the bad guy and he’s got a weird flaw. Then we have the male protagonist, described as “A professional lawman, a cynic, and an idealist. […].” Okay, cool. No problem. Then the female protagonist is “The ravishing reporter who watches a routine feature explode into the story of a lifetime. […].” Now, granted, the author may not have created the content of the back cover. But the same sort of thematic issue gets into the book, too. She’s an object of desire first, then an intelligent, strong, and resourceful reporter. To be fair, I think the author tried to make her interesting and developed for her career and capabilities, and to make her an equal teammate with the “lawman.” And she was, after all, So the more I think about it and write this, I think he tried (just my opinion), but it fell short. Other female characters were also just objects.
Anyway, this had some good thriller elements and a good pace, but it’s just one of those literary bottles of wine that turned a bit.
Displaying 1 of 1 review