The Spy Who Came In from the Cold (George Smiley, #3) in Around the World in 80 Books

Sep 02, 2012 Greer rated it really liked it

Shelves: 2012-books

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. In our cynical era, with widespread public awareness of U.S. government sanctioned waterboarding, it's tough to appreciate what a truly revolutionary spy novel The Spy Who Came in From the Cold was in 1963. John le Carre gave us spies for a Western democracy (Britain) who are capable of being just as cruel and duplicitous as their Communist counterparts, if they believe the end justifies the means. Each of the main characters operating in this tainted environment represents a different approach. In our cynical era, with widespread public awareness of U.S. government sanctioned waterboarding, it's tough to appreciate what a truly revolutionary spy novel The Spy Who Came in From the Cold was in 1963. John le Carre gave us spies for a Western democracy (Britain) who are capable of being just as cruel and duplicitous as their Communist counterparts, if they believe the end justifies the means. Each of the main characters operating in this tainted environment represents a different approach. The protagonist Alec Leamas is a burned-out, nihilistic British spy who goes on one last mission for revenge against the East German spymaster who has murdered many of his operatives. His target Mundt is an opportunistic and anti-Semitic sadist who adapts himself to whichever system will benefit him the most, whether that is Nazism, Communism, or democracy. Fiedler, who is the real target unbeknownst to Leamas, represents the true believer - someone who justifies his actions because he espouses the Communist system. Leamas' naive lover Liz Gold is motivated by love and humanism, but these noble sentiments are used as weapons by Leamas' British puppet-masters and Mundt.

Leamas is a sympathetic character, particularly in glimpses of his humanity (his feelings for Liz, his attempt to save Fiedler once he realizes that they've both been played by Leamas' superiors). But he also cynically accepts Fiedler's death as the cost of doing business -- Mundt is useful to Britain, so no matter how reprehensible he must be supported. However, he is redeemed somewhat by sacrificing himself after Liz is killed in their escape attempt. In the end, I believe he was mostly motivated by a need to save her, and once this was impossible, no longer cared whether he lived or died. One also feels sympathy for Fiedler -- he truly believed in the East German government, but the lingering anti-Semitism of his comrades is at least partly responsible for his murder. Fiedler is a fascinating character -- capable of humanity (he seems to genuinely like Leamas, and argues for Liz to be sent home). But in the end he is also a killer and oppressor, likely responsible for the imprisonment of many of the intellectuals Liz is told about when she is taken to the prison. Does truly believing in the Communist philosophy and the rightness of his actions (that the persecution of individuals is appropriate if done for what he believes is the benefit of the masses) make his actions any less reprehensible than those of Mundt or the Leamas' superiors?

George Smiley is the greatest enigma, barely appearing in person but responsible for bringing Liz to the awareness of the East Germans and thus allowing for the triple cross. Was he used by Control like Leamas, or was he one of those pulling the strings? ...more

Like · see review