Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Penguin Classics (1994), Paperback, 208 pages
Description
London's suspense thriller focuses on the fine distinction between state- justified murder and criminal violence in the Assassination Bureau--an organization whose mandate is to rid the state of all its enemies. For more than seventy years, Penguin has been the leading publisher of classic literature in the English-speaking world. With more than 1,700 titles, Penguin Classics represents a global bookshelf of the best works throughout history and across genres and disciplines. Readers trust the series to provide authoritative texts enhanced by introductions and notes by distinguished scholars and contemporary authors, as well as up-to-date translations by award-winning translators.
User reviews
LibraryThing member lkernagh
Left unfinished at the time of London's death in 1916, this "thriller" - for lack of a better word - was completed by Robert L. Fish and published in 1963. Some say that this book eerily foreshadowed the conspiracy theories that abound regarding the assassination of President Kennedy that occurred
The copy I read included an indication at the end of the story as to where London had stopped writing and Fish had picked up the story to complete it. It also contained some of London's story notes and a possible ending written by Charmain London, Jack's second wife. To give Fish credit, he managed to take London's unfinished manuscript and carried on with London's writing style, giving the story a cohesive flow to it. It appears, based on London's story notes that Fish deviated from London's proposed story arc. While I will never be able to compare London's ending to Fish's, I am not sure I would have appreciated the ending that London was proposing. I really did not like the ending written by Charmain, either, although it was more in fitting with the story as London had envisioned.
Overall, an interesting story that tends to find itself veering away from the chase at hand to delve into high brow theoretical discussions of morals and philosophy with statements like this one:
"The world is founded on morality. Without morality the world would perish. There is a righteousness in the elements themselves. Destroy morality and you would destroy gravitation. The very rocks would fly apart. The whole sidereal system would fume into the unthinkableness of chaos."
The following quote sums things up beautifully:
"It is the chaos of super-thinking," she said helplessly. "It is ethics gone mad."
Show More
later that same year. My first impression upon reading this story was one of surprise. Having only previously read The Call of the Wild, this one, filled with philosophical, moralistic and socialistic ideals was a bit unexpected. The story definitely has a dated quality to it, and some of the finer details don't work very well upon examination, but I get the impression that London chose to write this story more as a vehicle to communicate his ideals than as a mere work of cloak and dagger vigilantism fiction. To that end, it does stand up to the test of time and rings as true today as it probably would have back at the start of the 20th century when London was writing it. If you are going to read it, don't expect to be blown away by the plot, the dialogue or the characters. The plot has some good bits but after a while, I could see how the 'game' was going to play out, just not the fine details on how it was going to get to its final conclusion. I found the characters to be rather flat and prone to repeating their lines and behaving rather 'lunatic' to choose London's own term to describe the majority of them. It is an okay piece of thriller story but I think it might readers will get more out of the story if they read it as a manifesto of sorts: London's manifesto against a social machine of such perfect creation that it can only be destroyed by destroying it creator. The copy I read included an indication at the end of the story as to where London had stopped writing and Fish had picked up the story to complete it. It also contained some of London's story notes and a possible ending written by Charmain London, Jack's second wife. To give Fish credit, he managed to take London's unfinished manuscript and carried on with London's writing style, giving the story a cohesive flow to it. It appears, based on London's story notes that Fish deviated from London's proposed story arc. While I will never be able to compare London's ending to Fish's, I am not sure I would have appreciated the ending that London was proposing. I really did not like the ending written by Charmain, either, although it was more in fitting with the story as London had envisioned.
Overall, an interesting story that tends to find itself veering away from the chase at hand to delve into high brow theoretical discussions of morals and philosophy with statements like this one:
"The world is founded on morality. Without morality the world would perish. There is a righteousness in the elements themselves. Destroy morality and you would destroy gravitation. The very rocks would fly apart. The whole sidereal system would fume into the unthinkableness of chaos."
The following quote sums things up beautifully:
"It is the chaos of super-thinking," she said helplessly. "It is ethics gone mad."
Show Less
LibraryThing member RussellBittner
This little novelette is a fun – but also challenging – piece of work. Is it Jack London’s best work? No. Far from it. But it was sufficiently stimulating to get me to go back and read his short story “To Build a Fire” – which I consider to be one of the finest in American literature,
Whatever you may think of the conceit of this story – and there are many here who question it, and who also suggest that the story falls flat at the end (which I quite disagree with) – I can’t help but be impressed by London’s command, given the brevity of his formal education, of some major ethical and metaphysical concepts. These are naturally and fluently brought out in the several discussions among the members of the Assassination Bureau, Ltd. – the eponymous title of this novelette.
Does The Assassination Bureau, Ltd. move a reader in the same way that “To Build a Fire,” White Fang or The Call of the Wild might? No. Certainly not. But the swan’s song work of a writer of Jack London’s stature – not to mention Robert L. Fish’s work in completing the story – are certainly worth an adventurous reader’s attention.
RRB
Brooklyn, NY, U.S.A.
07/06/14
Show More
and which I first read over thirty years ago.Whatever you may think of the conceit of this story – and there are many here who question it, and who also suggest that the story falls flat at the end (which I quite disagree with) – I can’t help but be impressed by London’s command, given the brevity of his formal education, of some major ethical and metaphysical concepts. These are naturally and fluently brought out in the several discussions among the members of the Assassination Bureau, Ltd. – the eponymous title of this novelette.
Does The Assassination Bureau, Ltd. move a reader in the same way that “To Build a Fire,” White Fang or The Call of the Wild might? No. Certainly not. But the swan’s song work of a writer of Jack London’s stature – not to mention Robert L. Fish’s work in completing the story – are certainly worth an adventurous reader’s attention.
RRB
Brooklyn, NY, U.S.A.
07/06/14
Show Less
LibraryThing member antiquary
Very interesting concept, unfortunately left incomplete by London, and finished by Fish, known for rather feeble humorous mysteries (Schlock Holmes) and more serious Brazilian detectives stories. In the story, Ivan Dragomiroff runs the highly organized assassination bureau, which undertakes to
Show More
assassinate prominent people for a fee --but only if he decides they need killing. The story begins with his being hired by an anarchist to kill a brutally anti-radical police chief, for $10,000, but he indicates he would do the king of England for half a million. He indicates in the past he has worked for ordinary business competitors or the like as well as anarchists. Then he is hired to kill himself, on the argument he has too much power. He duly sets his own organization against himself. This edition is linked to a film version based on the 'idea" of the book and starrng, among others, my favorite Diana Rigg (aka Mrs. Peel of The Avengers). Show Less
LibraryThing member LeslitGS
Ivan Dragomilov runs a well-put-together business, organized to perfection, taking in ample profits and, to his mind, improving the world. Ivan Dragomilov is the creator of the Assassination Bureau. Clients pay fees to shuffle someone off this mortal coil, but it is only done after the Bureau
It's an interesting story--not an action novel, by any means. London provides you with well enough action to keep things moving, but he does not shy away from talking. Which he would have been wrong to do, given the philosophical nature of not only the bureau, but each character placed within the story. There are hardly any pages lacking extended conversations, and with the assassins themselves being highly educated middle-class men, they tend to get sidetracked. It reminded me of an open discussion in a lecture hall, with kind an polite people decrying other's inadvertant missteps, offering their own and participating in an honest give and take. At the same time, there are people being murdered right and left, and the reader is asked to realize that these seemingly sane people sitting around debating the moral center or lack thereof of the universe are the men that go out and kill people.
The main reason we see little of the action is that we are following not Dragomilov but Winter Hall, the young man who proved the Bureau's wrongness but became good friends with its leader in the process, and Grunya, Dragomilov's niece and Hall's love, when she is with him. Hall sets out to follow his new friend, hoping to dissuade the man's fervent belief that he must now die by the hands of the bureau or at least protect him until the year is over and he is released from the contract. Grunya does not know everything at first, but sets out to find and protect her uncle from the foreboding and mysterious company.
Anyway. I liked the book. It's a little heavy at times, but it reminded me somewhat of The Man Who Was Thursday [Chesterton], where it's like a game of madness run by these clean, polite madmen who seem as though the could pass a pleasant conversation on the sidewalk with you. Weird.
Sidenote--it's not just by Jack London. He actually never finished it. It was finished by Robert L. Fish going from London's notes. Personally, I did not notice the change. But I'm not exactly the most aware person. You know?
Show More
itself ascertains the morality of the situation. Things get a little hairy then, when a young philosopher comes in and sets a fee on Dragomilov's head and then goes about proving the kill to be, in fact, a right. It's an interesting story--not an action novel, by any means. London provides you with well enough action to keep things moving, but he does not shy away from talking. Which he would have been wrong to do, given the philosophical nature of not only the bureau, but each character placed within the story. There are hardly any pages lacking extended conversations, and with the assassins themselves being highly educated middle-class men, they tend to get sidetracked. It reminded me of an open discussion in a lecture hall, with kind an polite people decrying other's inadvertant missteps, offering their own and participating in an honest give and take. At the same time, there are people being murdered right and left, and the reader is asked to realize that these seemingly sane people sitting around debating the moral center or lack thereof of the universe are the men that go out and kill people.
The main reason we see little of the action is that we are following not Dragomilov but Winter Hall, the young man who proved the Bureau's wrongness but became good friends with its leader in the process, and Grunya, Dragomilov's niece and Hall's love, when she is with him. Hall sets out to follow his new friend, hoping to dissuade the man's fervent belief that he must now die by the hands of the bureau or at least protect him until the year is over and he is released from the contract. Grunya does not know everything at first, but sets out to find and protect her uncle from the foreboding and mysterious company.
Anyway. I liked the book. It's a little heavy at times, but it reminded me somewhat of The Man Who Was Thursday [Chesterton], where it's like a game of madness run by these clean, polite madmen who seem as though the could pass a pleasant conversation on the sidewalk with you. Weird.
Sidenote--it's not just by Jack London. He actually never finished it. It was finished by Robert L. Fish going from London's notes. Personally, I did not notice the change. But I'm not exactly the most aware person. You know?
Show Less
Awards
Language
Original publication date
1963
Physical description
208 p.; 7.76 inches
ISBN
0140186778 / 9780140186772