Something about 
early twentieth century arts and culture fascinates me. I like my so-called high culture as much as my pop culture and early twentieth century arts and culture loved to combine avant-garde ideas with popular culture. Some years ago I read Michael Chabon’s The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay. It told the tale of America’s burgeoning comics industry but Kavalier & Clay was something more than just a paen to superheroes. Chabon had managed to write a novel about the twentieth century and about twentieth century America, in particular. Small, personal stories had been woven into a giant tapestry. Kavalier & Clay was astounding. Beautifully written and intricately plotted, it delivered both as a literary novel and as fast-paced action/adventure. I loved it.
Glen David Gold’s Carter Beats the Devil was published around the same time as Chabon’s novel. Like Kavalier & Clay, Gold’s novel revolves around the idea of escapism in one way or another. Mainly taking place in 1920s America, Gold’s book deals with illusionist Charles Carter who suddenly finds himself in trouble when President Harding dies shortly after having participated in one of Carter’s illusions. Cue chapter upon chapter filled with vaudeville acts, flappers, Russian anarchists, baffling illusions, quirky scientists, and a lot of card-shuffling. It should be entertaining and it is entertaining – but unfortunately I have read Chabon’s novel which not only shuffles similar cards better but also pulls off far bigger sleights of hand.
I did enjoy the book, though. I liked the description of vaudeville performers travelling around trying to entertain people but gradually seeing their audience fall prey to moving pictures (and, later, television). I liked reading about how illusionists worked: the patter, the agility, the teamwork behind the scene and how illusions were constructed (although they are rarely explained in the novel). I just have two main problems with CBTD. Firstly, the novel is too long for its plot. Gold tries to go for a Wilkie Collins-esque vibe and also gives world-building a fair go, but this results in a book about 150 pages too long. Secondly, the writing style is clunky at times. I know some people do not care about writing styles, but I do. I am one of those people who really do not care about the plot as long as the book is well-written (I like Alan Hollinghurst, for heaven’s sake).
At the end of the day, Carter Beats the Devil was an entertaining read but it was definitely not The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay (which you should read if you haven’t already).
Next: Jonathan Coe’s first novel, The Accidental Woman.
Kavalier & Clay made me cry. I recently picked up in a Charing Cross bookshop ‘The Magic Wand’ (1942), a trade paper for magicians, so I would be intrigued to compare the daily grind of 40s British illusionists with their earlier American cousins… Also, I know it doesn’t do to judge a book by them, but that cover is gorgeous!
I thought CBTD was perfect! Maybe I’m blinded to its flaws because I was so into all the name-dropping he does about historical San Francisco and the Bay Area. There are a lot of great cameos in the book if you look carefully, too–I remember a small, hidden cameo by the Marx brothers in particular.
have you read Sunnyside, Gould’s latest book, about Chaplin? I didn’t like it nearly as much. too long, too slow.
I agree about the clunky writing and poor editing of Carter Beats the Devil. I read it a couple of years ago and really *wanted* to like it — I loved the setting so much — but found the execution very disappointing. On the subject of magicians might I recommend “The Man who Was Magic” by Paul Gallico — a sinister and strangely compelling kid’s book.