Is it a coincidence that I have read two books over the last two weeks that have competing story-lines vying for prime time? Is this a trend?
A close relative stuck this book in my hand and said, “You’ve dabbled in the corporate game, read this book.” So I did. And I enjoyed the boardroom intrigue of Nick Conover, CEO of a major office furniture manufacturer in the Midwest, facing the hollowing out of manufacturing in North America replete with outsourcing, layoffs at home, take-overs, sell-offs and executive suite allegiance-shifting that can raise even a reader’s blood pressure. Then another story began to hover for prominence, a crime and its cover-up involving Nick. It reminded me of the TV series Columbo, when we know whodunnit at the outset and the tension hovers around let-see how-the-cops-figure-out-how-he-dunnit. And then to compound the situation, in keeping with the stock advice to thriller writers of “place your protagonist in a sticky situation, then make it worse, then make it even worse, and more...until the reader is screaming for reality to return”, the crime story veers off into a Fatal Attraction type scenario with a final Hollywood-style conflagration where everyone is at risk until the neglected and suppressed cop, Audrey, pulls off a winner.
I wished the second strand had not been included, although I understand why: this is a thriller, and certain rules of the game have to be followed, even though they can be melodramatic and distort what was otherwise a well-grounded and realistic human drama.
I found Nick and Audrey and their respective family scenarios well developed although some other aspects were shallow. For instance, I couldn’t understand how a drunk former accountant could immediately spot a flaw in a corporate sale contract that none of the other sober ones could, and how an unemployed manager would be having dinner in the town’s fanciest restaurant; recurring melodramatic statements like “the hand that held her was also the hand that held the gun,” were a bit of a turn off too. And yet, some truisms about corporate life were nicely slid in: “Corporations are about continuity, capital markets are about creative destruction,” and “Bosses have bosses. There was always somebody whose ass you had to kiss.”
Although I read this page-turner very quickly and was engaged throughout, I had to ask myself why I was left feeling ambivalent in the end. Is it because corporate worlds, police-procedurals and psychopathic thrillers don’t mix very well? Or is it because, in combining all three, we sub-optimize the individual components?