If you love stories which have a bit of sarcasm mixed with wartime drama, Alistair MacLean is the author for you. I grew up reading quite a lot of MacLean's works and I must admit they are still a delight to read today. His work, which featured plots and characters worthy of a James Bond novel, was popular in the 60s and all the way into the 70s (hardly a surprise given the trends of the mood of the era, right?). Well, here's the book I wanted to mention today – The Golden Gate.

The book is essentially an action-packed thriller. Imagine that world leaders are being held hostage on the San Francisco's Golden Gate bridge. MacLean builds up to the ambush rather well at the beginning of the novel and describes the hostage situation as dire and almost impossible to resolve. That's how he builds his plots. Throw in state-of-the-art security and the coolest bodyguards money can buy and MacLean will still come up with a way for cunning villains to find a way around them. The concept of the folks being held on the bridge where the bad folks have hooked up explosives and whatnot seems pretty scary even today. However, picture how that novel would have been received then. People are pretty scared about the Cold War, the talk of nuclear weapons and spies coming over from other countries. Thus, this type of storyline must have really captured the reader's imagination.

Well, who's going to save these captured delegates? How in the world will they get out of it? If you are unfamiliar with MacLean, now you have an idea about his storytelling methods. He sets up a vital situation or horrid problem and the rest of the novel is about resolving it. He also loves building up the villains. Alright, so he focuses mostly on a few guys at the top level of the villain hierarchy. But these are the guys who receive most of his attention. I say most because the main protagonist is the man who is propped on a pedestal and described as the ultimate hero. And whilst he creates a sense of urgency in the hostage situation, he also takes his time revealing the hard-to-kill and super-cunning hero. And of course, within that hostage situation the hero and main villain will try to outwit each other before coming to a full on showdown.

Is it the plot that makes this books a good read? Or is it his witty narration? For me, it's almost always one or the other. At times, it feels like the plot is loosely put-together and MacLean is banking on the characters to hold the novel together. Admittedly, he has a flair for creating interesting main characters that the reader will love to bits or hate with a vengeance. So, if bits of the plot are getting tiresome, you can be assured that the characters will keep you entertained. And of course, the author has a great sense of humor, if nothing else, you will love the book for its dry wit.

There were two aspects I didn't like about the novel – the main female character and the top villain. It is actually quite annoying the way MacLean portrays women as helpless or ditzy in his novels. Yes, the man is sexist and that does come through in his novels. Well, this is evident in all of his books so it is not exclusive to this book. I guess the rule here is that if that style of sexism bothers you, you will not enjoy this book. However, if you would rather overlook that because the humor and male characters are well-worth the read, then do give the book a shot. The other aspect that bugged me was the main bad guy. MacLean doesn't usually draw characters with shades of gray in them and this seemed to be one instance when he was playing around with the idea. Thus, at times I felt that the bad guy had a history or past that would justify or at least make the reader understand his motives. Or at least, for once let the readers know that the villain was not evil personified. My complaint is that MacLean appears to have had a change of heart about this concept halfway through the novel. Thus, the man's nature is a bit ambiguous at the beginning and, as the novel progressed, he becomes decidedly more evil. It was not a gradual revelation; rather, it felt more like the author got bored of that particular angle and simply opted for an about-turn in character development. That, I must say, was a disappoinment.