It is period of 1950's and we follow ageing British reporter as he tries to keep at least a pretense of normal life in the world engulfed in ugly civil war. French are still fighting for their colonial possessions, locals are fighting against each other because everyone (including the French) is aware that French dominance in Indochina is for all means and purposes over and they will go home very soon.

In the middle of all of this American mission comes in, group of young, adventurous men and women, full of ideals and on a crusade of sorts, crusade to stop the Communism from establishing foothold in Indochina. They don't want to deal with the French nor with the local French allies (because of their colonial roots) and they especially don't want to deal with the Communist organization (or anyone leaning towards them). So they start engagement with the other militias and paramilitary forces, some with rather weird political and religious agendas. But without knowledge of the terrain and the people and not willing to learn from their predecessors can this mission truly achieve anything except accidental mayhem?

And when you put in the middle of all of this love drama you get the powder keg just ready to go off.

I watched the movie version on more than one occasion but book is much deeper. Constant introspection of our main story teller, British reporter Fowler, shows us a man that is aware he is growing old and needs to make something of his own life. So when he starts the contest with very young Pyle from American mission over a woman Fowler's being living with for months he steps on a very dark path.

Graham Greene captures how at its core people are generally selfish. People will help others but there is always a goal to achieve, reason why people do what they do. And when one is in position of despair as Fowler is, middle-aged man in remote foreign country where he finally found comfort with Phuong, young local woman, then lots can happen, and nothing good. When Phuong slowly gets taken over by Pyle, prosperous young man working in diplomatic team, Fowler decides to do what is necessary.

If you are looking for an excellent character drama then look no further. Book is full of great observations of the power change during the 1950's, French forces engaged in what they themselves call unnecessary and half-hearted conflict that buries the French soldiers for no reason in a far away country while waiting for politicians to swallow their pride and sign the treaty so they can go home. We see locals as people aware that all of the foreigners present are there just for a very short time, trespassers that conquered the country for a while but have no role in true power play - various private militias and ethnic groups will continue the true fight for the control of the area and to achieve that everything is allowed - crime, smuggling, inter-tribal killings and of course gaining support from the same foreigners while they are useful.

It is just astounding how powers to be get involved into conflicts in remote countries of no strategic meaning (as Vietnam war will prove when it ended, since Singapore and Malaysia together with Thailand remained pretty much under Western influence) without any knowledge of locals, their points of view - they just decide to meddle and unfortunately cause the chaos and more mayhem and more casualties until one day they lose interest and just move out. Someone might call it neo-colonialism but to me it is just case of elephant in glass shop. These powers are not interested in those remote areas, they just want to show their might.

Excellent book in more than one way. Do note that this is slow-burner with lots of comments on the politics of 1950's, society in general and interpersonal relations. It is a very interesting spy novel with espionage pushed to back and people and their relations set at front.

Recommended to fans of thrillers and character drama. ( )

Incredibly well-written, like everything I've read by him (4 or 5 at this point (2023), but very cynical. And this one especially hard to like the narrator. he narrator is really like a self-righteous asshole and for the first 50%-70% of the book I assume we're supposed to regard him as deeply flawed. But then I come to believe we're supposed to find him jaded but still the one who we identify with. That's kinda tough, he's a real jerk. I'm a bit of an Anglophile and not "rah-rah" about America, but GG seems to REALLY hate Americans.
I preferred the narrator of "Comedians" who was flawed and super jaded / cynical but you could relate to him. ( )

Beschreibt das Dreiecks-Verhältnis zwischen einem britischen Journalisten, einem US-amerikanischen Agenten und deren vietnamesischer Gliebten während des ersten Indochinakriegs... Durchaus spannend, wie alle Graham-Greene-Bücher, aber letzlich wirken die Figuren zu konstruiert und stereotyp... ( )

This novel still holds a lot of historical value. Reading this as an older adult, it was easy to identify with Fowler's character too. ( )

Beginning with the end and then unspooling the events that preceded it, Greene offers a history lesson from a place and time not included in general education: Viet Nam during French occupation. Is it a who done it, or the examination of one man's insistence not to become engaged in the politics of the place he loves? Both and more.

Distinctive characters represent fading European colonialism (journalist Thomas Fowler), and the rise of American democracy (Alden Pyle) in competition for the love and loyalty of the beautiful and enigmatic (to westerners) culture and land of Viet Nam (Phuong).

( )