Richard Doyle (2) (1948–2017)

Excellent disaster novel - surprisingly readable forty-five years after it was written. Tells the story of a combined storm surge and high tide innundating a woefully underprepared city of London. The disaster is primarily seen through the eyes of the city engineer Derek Thompson, who had unsuccessfully tried to goad his superiors and local politicians into making preparations, but also in a series of vignettes of ordianary people meeting the brunt of the disaster. While it uses many of the now-familiary disaster tropes (the politician more interested in his own advancement than in public safety, the high death count amonst minor, and some major, characters) it's well researched and well written. Unsurprisingly for a book of it's era female characters are mainly in supporting roles. I dug this out to re-read after the recent 92021) flooding in China when the horrifying footage of people trapped on underground trains made me think - now where have I come across this before.., there's also a nod to the Ronan Point collapse which I wasn't aware of when I first read this in the 1970s. The author re-wrote this as "Flood" in 2002 (post Thames barrier), which version was made into film/miniseries with Richard Carlyle in 2007 - I've not read or seen either.… (plus d'informations)

In 1953 a combination of factors led to a huge storm surge moving down the east coast of Great Britain. The surge made it as far as the Thames Estuary and caused some flooding around London. It could have been worse, but World War II was recent enough that London had no grand illusions about being invulnerable. The response was the planning of a mighty barrier to be built across the river that could be raised and lowered depending on the conditions. Work on it started in 1974. Alas, complacency had perhaps started to settle by then, thirty years after the war and twenty years after the floods of 1953. And so construction on the Thames Barrier dawdled. It went over budget and over schedule, and was used as a bargaining piece by the increasingly bold unions. To hasten work on the project would mean giving in to the unions or spending large sums of money. So no one did.

The Barrier was finally operational in 1982, eight years after work started on it, and was officially opened in 1984. Enter Deluge. It was written in the mid-1970s, when work on the Barrier was starting to stall. It is not so much a novel as a question. And the question is: “How stupid would all you politicians and unionists feel if a massive storm surge were to hit London in those few years between when the Barrier was supposed to be finished and when it was actually finished?” The cynical answer, it suggests, is not stupid at all. Everyone who survived would be too busy congratulating themselves on getting through the crisis to worry about the fact it could have been averted.

Sitting here, thirty years after the Barrier was finished, it's a tricky message to appreciate. Did people back then genuinely believe that the Barrier would go so astonishingly over schedule that one of these once-in-a-millennium floods could happen before it was finished? Obviously it's theoretically possible; even if the Barrier was only finished one day late then there could be a biblical deluge on that single night when the Barrier should have been there but wasn't. But it would be unlikely.

So then, as an advert for the Barrier and an attack on modern complacency, Deluge didn't really work for me. But what about the trappings used to convey these messages? It's standard disaster-thriller fare told through the eyes of a couple of people in the disaster control room and a few more groups dotted around the flooded areas, and with a few vignette-episodes thrown in for good measure.

Perhaps the most notable aspect of the plot is its GRR Martin-esque mortality rate. Pretty much immediately the water overflows the banks, major characters start dying. And virtually every subplot in the flooded areas ends with the characters in question dying. And even being away from the water doesn't guarantee safety. The human antagonist — a slimy politician who delays warning the public about the incoming water — realises his actions were political suicide, and so drives home and commits conventional suicide.

Perhaps because the author was so keen to convey a message (always dangerous in fiction), the writing often come across as forced. I suppose I was hoping for some trashy B-movie style disaster fiction fun. The fiction here isn't disastrous, but, unfortunately, nor is that fun.… (plus d'informations)

In 1953 a combination of factors led to a huge storm surge moving down the east coast of Great Britain. The surge made it as far as the Thames Estuary and caused some flooding around London. It could have been worse, but World War II was recent enough that London had no grand illusions about being invulnerable. The response was the planning of a mighty barrier to be built across the river that could be raised and lowered depending on the conditions. Work on it started in 1974. Alas, complacency had perhaps started to settle by then, thirty years after the war and twenty years after the floods of 1953. And so construction on the Thames Barrier dawdled. It went over budget and over schedule, and was used as a bargaining piece by the increasingly bold unions. To hasten work on the project would mean giving in to the unions or spending large sums of money. So no one did.

The Barrier was finally operational in 1982, eight years after work started on it, and was officially opened in 1984. Enter Deluge. It was written in the mid-1970s, when work on the Barrier was starting to stall. It is not so much a novel as a question. And the question is: “How stupid would all you politicians and unionists feel if a massive storm surge were to hit London in those few years between when the Barrier was supposed to be finished and when it was actually finished?” The cynical answer, it suggests, is not stupid at all. Everyone who survived would be too busy congratulating themselves on getting through the crisis to worry about the fact it could have been averted.

Sitting here, thirty years after the Barrier was finished, it's a tricky message to appreciate. Did people back then genuinely believe that the Barrier would go so astonishingly over schedule that one of these once-in-a-millennium floods could happen before it was finished? Obviously it's theoretically possible; even if the Barrier was only finished one day late then there could be a biblical deluge on that single night when the Barrier should have been there but wasn't. But it would be unlikely.

So then, as an advert for the Barrier and an attack on modern complacency, Deluge didn't really work for me. But what about the trappings used to convey these messages? It's standard disaster-thriller fare told through the eyes of a couple of people in the disaster control room and a few more groups dotted around the flooded areas, and with a few vignette-episodes thrown in for good measure.

Perhaps the most notable aspect of the plot is its GRR Martin-esque mortality rate. Pretty much immediately the water overflows the banks, major characters start dying. And virtually every subplot in the flooded areas ends with the characters in question dying. And even being away from the water doesn't guarantee safety. The human antagonist — a slimy politician who delays warning the public about the incoming water — realises his actions were political suicide, and so drives home and commits conventional suicide.

Perhaps because the author was so keen to convey a message (always dangerous in fiction), the writing often come across as forced. I suppose I was hoping for some trashy B-movie style disaster fiction fun. The fiction here isn't disastrous, but, unfortunately, nor is that fun.… (plus d'informations)

Published in 1978, at the time the issue of the Thames Barrier was a hot topic, and the issue of flooding was on everyone's mind. The book describes the build-up of the storm surge and the increasingly severe effects on London very well. As the disasters increase in magnitude, the scale of it all might be questioned, but it is still believable. The story of the passengers trapped deep in the flooded tube station will be frightening for anyone who uses the Underground on a regular basis. The absence of computers or mobile phones can make the story a little dated, but still well worth a read for any one who lives or works in London (or who likes disaster stories in general).… (plus d'informations)