3.5 Stars
Author Paul Watkins clearly is a writer of talent. His work, The Forger, has all of the elements for a suspenseful, engaging read of art fraud, albeit for a noble cause, set just before and during the occupation of Paris. The story he shares should be a book read with great zest, and anticipation as horrible risks are run in the face of arguably the most organized and voracious art thieves in history.
The Author is meticulous with detail, and setting. He also creates characters with depth, complex pasts, and unexpected conduct. The descriptions of the craft of forging an internationally known piece of art are more detailed than I have ever read in any novel. Often the great forgery ends with the final brush stroke imitated on canvas of an age to convince, surrounded by a time worn, worm eaten frame. Not so with this story. A forger requires much more than great skill and the ability to mimic. He must be able to tangibly create the passage of time. This must be done for every one of the senses, not just that of the eyes. The means by which this is done is truly fascinating.
The Authors style is relaxed, his book is not rushed, and it has the cadence of a deliberate, planned passage. And this is where I felt the book was mismatched. The story is one of deception, whether of art or people. The action takes place in the midst of a World War. If there is a time when pace is to favor the swift with unanticipated changes and improvisations, war certainly provides the setting. I never felt that caught up in the pressure the book unfolded its tale with. Paris may have been an open city, however the risks taken by the primary characters matched those taken much closer to the front.
The Author also used certain historical characters that were almost too much. His story worked with the people he created, I dont feel it needed the addition of notorious celebrity. And as I have mentioned previously, the explanation of the forging process was extremely detailed, with almost a checklist like precision. When a forgery is presented and the list is repeated almost verbatim it seemed unnecessary. It seemed the proof should be in the outcome, was the work accepted as genuine or not?
There were also a few too many revelations, and an event or two that the story did not need. They came across as a bit cliché, and the writer did not need to use them. The book is a good read, and my impression may place me in the minority.