Customer Reviews

The Assassination Bureau, Ltd. (Thorndike Classics)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

London supposedly "wrote himself into a corner" in the plot of this story, or else he hadn't the time to finish it, but the resolution by Fish is not only an entertaining conclusion (despite a certain abrupt removal of a key character), but is so similar to London's writing style and his familiarities so that the author transfer is indeterminable. The best part of the book as a whole, as all Londonites will agree, is the simple philisophical dialogue exchanged between characters. For those who are seeking a die-hard, man vs. nature conflict, you still won't be disappointed with the primitiveness of the characters (philisophical, mad, and fanatic) and their interaction with a civilized world that doesn't quite match the truths that they hold to be dear. An excellent read.

I would compare it to Chesterton's The Man Who Was Thursday. Sometimes it seems like a silly game, at other times it's the answer to deep philosophical questions. You must suspend your belief a little and accept the premises. The Assination Bureau is based on certain rules. It tries to perform social rights by doing what could well be considered wrongs: executions of anti-social baddies. But there's a big difference between murder-for-hire (no matter how "justified") and capital punishment by a real government. Playing by the rules of the game, London sets up a clever situation where the organization must destroy itself to be true to its own principles. But as men of principle and reason they whole heartedly embrace their own destruction. Should rationality be held to be of a higher importance than life? Is playing by the rules more important than survival? When does rationality become irrational or irrationality look rational? Though not always convincing, this book asks and answers many interesting questions.

This book reads a little bit like a precursor to the novels of Ayn Rand. A group of men espouse almost impossible ideals, and then try to live up to them at any cost--or in this case, kill or die for them. The title refers to a group of well educated idealists at the turn of the century who are contract murderers, but only if they agree that the murder is morally justified. A potential client visits them and offers a contract--to kill the head of their agency. Strangely, the executive, Ivan Dragomiloff, finds this to be justified, sends out the order for his own death, and then spends the rest of the book in a deadly cat-and-mouse game with the men he has trained so well. This book was made into an entertaining, but not very deep, movie, around 1970, starring Oliver Reed, Telly Savalas, and Diana Rigg.

This book is one of the most interesting and mind grabbing that I have ever read! It brought me back from a reading hitus that I had suffered for over a year; it reminded me of how much I love books!

The story is about Dragomiloff creating his bureau and justifying the assasinations they carry out. One man challenges him and proves Dragomiloff that his bureau's work is wrong. This causes Dragomiloff to send his bureau after himself, for his assassination.

This book is truly one of his best ever and should be read by everyone, espically the people who think that London writes only about the artic. This is an intreaguing read full of twists and turns. I would reccomend it to anyone.

the plot in this book is very interesting. the bureau in question is adminitrated towards killing people who "deserves" it. their clients have to convince the leader that the person deserves to be killed. a man shows up and convinces the leader that it is HIM (the leader) that deserves to be killed, and this person agrees at last. interesting concept. but after a while the plot gets less interesting. L doesn't seem to manage his own idea, and things end up just sort of happening. not his best.

Jack London stopped writing this book, because he felt he couldn't resolve the situation satisfactorly. I believe that could be because the entire book is based on a very weak and confusing premise. What was the argument that convinced the head of the Bureau that their work was wrong? I read the passage which presented the argument several times, and I am still unclear on this point. Almost 60 years after London's death, Robert Fish, supposedly using the notes of London and London's wife, took on the chore of completing this chase drama and wrote approximately the last 60 pages of this 160 page story. At the end of the book, we are told at what point Fish took over from London and London's and his wife's notes are given. What I find very interesting, is that Fish's ending is a vast improvement on the notes. I am a London fan and collect his first editions, but I beleive if he had completed this book following his notes, it might have been his worst effort. Fish, at least, keeps the excitement high as he picks up the pace of the chase, and brings it to a logical conclusion. But, I still wouldn't recommend this book to anyone other than London fanatics, mainly because of the inadequate and incomprehensible premise the resulting story is based on.

I read this book after seeing the movie because I'm an Oliver Reed fan, like so many books, the movie version is so different. But I still enjoyed reading this book, written a long time ago (for me) some parts were quite difficult to read in this drama about a group of assassins who are payed to kill their leader, the film continues in a chase to find the member of the bureau who would kill Dragomiloff the leader, or to see if he successfully managed to eliminate all of them. Seeing the film first, I do prefer the film but still find this a very enjoyable read.

Apparently, this unfinished novel was found in the deceased Jack London's trunk. Trying to cash in on JL's name, Robert L. Fish, "finishes" the book. Well, there's a reason London gave up on it and threw it in the trunk in the first place... It's terrible.

Billed as an assassination bureau with a conscience, its chief, Ivan Dragomiloff decides whether the assassinations are "justified." Eventually, someone submits an anonymous name for termination, which Dragomiloff dutifully accepts. Well, he's the target. London quickly paints himself into a corner and the novel deteriorates into idiocy.

At a mere 178 pages it was hard to NOT finish even if you realize about half way through you're wasting your time. Some novels are better left unread. This is one of them.

This is a good read. It is a wild tale of madness and morality. It is only vaguely like the film . I couldn't tell where the original finished and the modern author finalised the story.

I just stubled upon this little paperback sometime in middle school. And although I'm nont a real Jack London fan or anything, this is a great book. I've just finished reading it for , like, the 5th time now (I finally bought it not too long ago) How this book didn't become a movie is completely BEYOND me! Anyhow, find it and read it...it's really, really good.:)