Šalininkas

I went into it expecting something say more in Vietnam, more about the war but it was really about one man's journey into finding his own identity - east Vs west, Vietnamese Vs Americanised, revolutionary Vs coloniser, sympathizer. It is well written, clever and thought provoking. It just wasn't what I wanted and I am not so much into satire in books. I have given it a 2.5 for my own personal enjoyment, it is not a reflection on how good the book is or isn't. Perhaps had I gone into it with more accurate expectations I would have enjoyed it more? I just found it very annoying that you have this guy who called himself a communist but there was nothing communist about him. He was in love with capitalism. He well supposedly a double agent but what did he really do but just do what his boss told him to do? He lived an easy life and he enjoyed it. He happily escaped to America and lied to himself continuously. Which is the whole point of this book. It's called the sympathiser for a reason. I just couldn't sympathise with him! 

4.25It took a while for this to get going, and even though I've already seen the limited series on HBO, once it picks up it is a really entertaining read. So many emotions felt and much to consider after reading this. Nguyen's style of writing reminds me of Charles R. Johnson's Middle Passage—tons of details packed into every line and highly creative and witty metaphors.Even though the book is heavily satirical, there are very direct critiques of reactionary institutions and individuals complicit with the western imperialist agenda. Churches, educational institutions, and media (three examples of ideological state apparatuses according to Louis Althusser) are the targets of his most scathing critiques. This is one of the things I appreciated the most about the novel and why, beyond its entertainment value, it is certainly worth engaging with.However, I think Nguyen opens his work up to being weaponized by those same institutions. In the context of the United States, where anti-communism is pervasive and Vietnam is still used as a cautionary tale about why revolution "doesn't work," the novel feeds into the narrative that communist movements are inherently authoritarian and that they inevitably betray their principles. Is there a serious attempt to grapple with why post-revolutionary societies faced the pressures that they did? I would say there isn't.Overall, a funny, smart, and insightful read.