I usually link to the official author or publisher’s site for books I’ve read, but for The Manchurian Candidate, by Richard Condon, I’ll use Wikipedia. (Go there for quick plot summary, if you don’t know the basic thread.) After all, I had the pleasure of reading a 1959 first edition from McGraw-Hill, which no longer publishes such fiction. This copy will remain on the shelf.
I saw the original movie (1962) several years ago, and I liked the thriller in black and white. The book is remarkably adroit, and quite a bit deeper. Maybe that should not be a surprise; all good books should exploit the range that print pages offer. But if you think about the kind of book that turns into a movie now (see: Michael Crichton), I find Candidate a remarkable book in many ways. I’m going to have to look around for Condon’s other novels.
About the movie… the 1962 version garnered a 94 on Metacritic for the video release. Much more can be found on the film’s IMDB page. The 2004 version received a 76 on Metacritic, which probably isn’t too bad for a remake. Jonathan Demme as director is a good sign as far as I’m concerned, though I’ve never seen this version.
The original movie was the first time I ever learned that Angela Lansbury had a real acting career before Murder, She Wrote on TV. Sue me… that’s just a sign of when I grew up. But what a rip-roaring character, both on screen and in the pages.
Manchuria really must have been a more resonant term in 1959, when the tensions of McCarthy-ism (a driving force in this book, under a different name) made anything remotely Communist a bogeyman for scaring more than just the children. The book leads into the 1960 election, so it’s told as if it were current events, not history. Candidate sparks now, but I think the flint edge must have been even sharper when first published.
A worthy read.