Skip to main content

by Not Really Tom Clancy, Part I

 




Clancy isn't just a (dead) writer, he is a brand. He is the (continuing) spy-thriller factory. 

Clancy passed away in 2013, although the brand lives on. Spy thriller paperbacks with the name "Tom Clancy" prominently displayed on the cover continue to be published.

Clancy invented the memorable character of Jack Ryan, a dedicated espionage professional who repeatedly saved the world from its bumbling politicians and the evildoers they coddle, in novels like THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER. In some of his appearances he is "only" an analyst, though always the crucial one who gets things right. In other novels he has to take a role in the field, and becomes a tough-guy action hero. 

In the Clancy timeline, (the Ryanverse, as it is sometimes called) Ryan eventually becomes President of the United States.  Because that is the natural career path for intelligence analysts. 

That limits the amount of derring-do of which he can be the center. Fortunately, he passes the mantle of tough guy action hero on to his son, Jack Ryan Jr. Many of the Clancy books not written by Clancy involve the escapades of Junior, with a supporting role for Senior in the Oval Office. 

I've been reading one of these books lately.  [Don't judge me.] The cover of this book, published last year, has big red attention-getting block letters that say "Tom Clancy" at the top and the title, "Weapons Grade" below. 

In smaller black letters one then notices, "A Jack Ryan Jr. novel" just above the title and "by Don Bentley," just below it. 

Well, good for Don Bentley.  Gigs can be hard to get.  He's found a good one. Here's hoping he has the opportunity to invent his own universe at some point, outside the Clancy factory.  

Comments

  1. I wonder if a case could be made that the cover of the book you portray violates section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which prohibits ‘‘unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.’’ Without words such as "in the style of" above "TOM CLANCY," it will at least confuse, if not deceive, a buyer who notices the smaller "By Don Bentley." The buyer will wonder, "Who is the author?" Both Clancy and Bentley? Or will he think that "TOM CLANCY" is the title and "Weapons Grade" is the subtitle? I'm no doubt stretching section 5 too far, but what the publisher is doing here is not right.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Agreed (on its being not right). But perhaps Bentley might think "my plot has a few twists and turns, suitable readers should be able to handle a slightly confusing cover!"

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak