I could just gush and gush and gush about ‘The Half Life of Valery K’, because I am an absolute devotee of Natasha Pulley and this book does everything that you expect from a classic Pulley novel: perfectly pitched diction and dialogue, and a considered tone that assumes suspension of disbelief and veers just this side of magical realism (there is no crossing over into actual fantasy here, which has typically been a feature of Pulley’s other work).

I find Pulley’s usual compelling style here; elements of high pathos that have been employed in previous novels serve to heighten our sense of the characters’ lovesickness, their unspoken, cloaked romantic feelings for one another, as has often been the way with Pulley’s two male protagonists.

Pulley’s clarity is, as always, razor-sharp, and makes for an easy read – not by any means facile, but rather, I mean a read that you can fall for and let consume you totally. Here, her plot is as cohesive and as consistent as, say ‘The Bedlam Stacks’; it’s full of surprises, which often catch you off-guard. Then, when your disbelief at the revelation settles, each plot point – like a breadcrumb trail – betrays itself as having been priming you for the next one and, indeed, the final scene.

I think the final episode is necessary in every way - though it seems so incongruous – because Pulley does need to throw the East into contrast through juxtaposition to the West. Whether added in the final drafts given the context of the atrocities Russia is committing in Ukraine, or whether the novel was always written with such an ending, by doing so, Pulley raises questions over whether KGB or Russian nuclear scientists should be represented as sympathetic and what British culture looks like when it is held up against Stalinism. With this novel, Pulley succeeds in establishing a space for discourse of contemporary conflict and warfare.

At heart, this is a character study, and a romance. Yet those elements are intrinsically linked to the novel’s setting. And in 2022, that asks readers to be cognisant of current hostilities in Eastern Europe and North Asia, but also sensitive to the 1950s/60s historical framing of the narrative, which carries a different ethical rhetoric. We should not suspend our modern intellect and feelings, but I think Pulley asks that the reader hold both in our minds as we read ‘The Half Life of Valery K’ in 2022.

Ultimately, how can I summarise my enjoyment of the novel, except to say that this is my die-happy-now moment? Even if I never ever get another Netgalley ARC approved, my life as a reader is complete and the privilege of reading an early copy of Natasha Pulley’s latest book has been priceless. My deep gratitude is due to Bloomsbury Publishing Plc for providing me with an advanced digital copy in exchange for my honest opinion.

I completely love Pulley's writing and have been a fan since I first read The Watchmaker of Filigree Street. I love the complexity of her stories (this one is not as complex as The Kingdoms - but what could be, to be honest) and I always enjoy learning things. I learned a lot about nuclear contamination in this one. It's set in the 20th century so much more 'modern' than her other work, although still quite mysterious (to most British readers one assumes) as events occur in the former Soviet Union. Valery's life before the book begins is slowly revealed and he's a complicated character who, like his new friend Shenkov, has very definitely done terrible things. I suppose one of the themes is whether good people can do bad things and still be good people? And whether bad things done in your youth overshadow everything else - and whether you can make up for any of them by doing good things. I'm not saying the book answers these questions - in fact, it probably doesn't. It's interesting as well that both Valery and Shenkov could easily, in another book, be antagonists.

I do wonder how Pulley would deal with an m/m relationship in an even more modern setting, where the jeopardy would be lessened and the thing that prevents characters being together has to be less - societal. I'd also be interested to read something with a female protag. I feel like the women in her stories get side-lined in a slightly awkward way.

I did think Valery's reaction to the standard mid-century sexism on show in 60s Britain was interesting. I also liked the way Pulley uses British idioms - she doesn't try to do any kind of 'translation of vernacular speech' from Russian - I think this works well - a bit like all the very British jokes you get in Asterix books - they're not straight translation of the original French puns and jokes, because wordplay doesn't always translate. So what you get is a very convincingly informal style of thought/speech, even if it’s not remotely like Russian.

There's an odd thing about 'mister' which - in Russian, people's actual names are gendered, aren't they? As in your surname is a patronymic, but how it is presented depends on your own gender. So the idea that 'Comrade' is gender neutral is kind of irrelevant, isn’t it? Because your title doesn’t need to gender you, your own name does that. I found this a bit confusing, although it's presented as a thought of Valery's and I suppose perhaps one would be so used to this naming convention that one wouldn't even consider it, and then gendered titles would seem more noticable.


Anyway this is a very long and meandering review, sorry. I did really enjoy this and am already looking forward to the next one. Thanks for letting me read it!

Trying to objectively review this is hard, because The Half Life of Valery K completely enveloped me for the day and a half it took me to read it, and gutted me on a range of levels..
Natasha Pulley's writing remains exemplary - her characterisation is so thoughtful and complex. Her characters may not always be "loveable", but they read as cohesively as real people. (Also, I adored Albert. I'm predictable like that).
People may comment on the similarities to The Kingdoms, character dynamics wise, but this felt like a very different book indeed - I'm not even sure how to compare the two. Having its roots in real events really changes the manner in which this tale is impactful - I found myself moved even by the author's note at the end.
Natasha Pulley is now two-for-two on five-star reads for me - I can't wait to devour whatever she comes up with next (and to finally get around to The Watchmaker of Filigree Street trilogy).

A new and very different thriller from Ms Pulley.

It's Russia 1963, and former scientist Valery Kolkhanov is suddenly released from the Gulag in which he has been imprisoned for years. He is taken to a mysterious, unnamed town hidden in a forest ravaged by some unknown catastrophe. It soon transpires that using his former skills, Kolkhanov is expected to study the effects of radiation on local animals, while being supervised by Shenkov, a member of the KGB, . His work soon raises many more questions than answers.

And so the reader is drawn into a shadowy, oppressive story of conspiracies, relationships and secrets. I'm a fan of Natasha Pulley's previous books, and happily jumped at the chance of a Netgalley ARC of her latest work.

Frankly. I struggled.

This book is nothing at all like anything she has written before. It's a thriller, apparently based on a true story, a sort of Chernobyl conspiracy story. The research seems, mainly, spot-on, although I was rather puzzled by some language-related repartee between characters. The story moves along at a fair pace, albeit with some fairly dense patches of science talk. As ever, the author's descriptive prose paints a detailed and immersive world, and the characters are well-developed and three-dimensional.

Kolkhanov is another of Pulley's damaged characters. A trend running through all her books is that of a gay couple, with a straight outsider drawn into their world, causing heartache and strife . Here we have Kolhanov and Shenkov, with Anna, his soon-to-be ex-wife. I'm not a student of Russian history or society, but some of the motives and behaviours of the characters, brought up and living in the 1960's Cold War Soviet Union, just didn't square with me.

Also, that ending. Let's just say I found it confusing and frustrating. Possibly, this was the author's intention, but ultimately I felt short changed. So many questions.

I'd encourage fans of Natasha Pulley's previous books to give this one a go. Also fans of Cold War thrillers. For myself, I'd like to give it another go, in print form, and see if a second reading improves my understanding of the story.

Valery K is affected by psychological issues from the gulag that he was imprisoned in, in order to serve the rest of his prison term as a scientist. He is assigned to monitor radiation levels in mice, among other duties which involve going out in the Land Rover.
This is a fascinating novel, not my usual read at all, but I read it with great interest. I liked the character of Valery K, and I thought that it was very realistic that he should react that way to the effects of the gulag. Thank you to netgalley and the publishers for giving me a copy of the book.

I have yet to be disappointed by a Natasha Pulley novel, this does not break that run. I'm a big fan of her writing style so will happily read pretty much anything she writes in any setting or genre.
Pulley seems to specialise in writing likeable, damaged characters that aren't necessarily likeable in their actions. This time we have Valery, a radiobiologist "freed" from a gulag to go work in the mysterious City 40 surrounded by a dying forest, and Shenkov, a KGB agent who is much nicer than he's allowed to be.
Valery is initially equally pleased to return to the outside world and cautious of doing anything that might send him back to the gulag. But as he settles in and his unexpected friendship with Shenkov develops, Valery realises that the secrets being kept are far more numerous and lethal than he believed possible.
I can't comment on how realistic the setting is but it works very well for a tense, claustrophobic cold war mystery. The actions of everyone are equally infuriating and, also understandable. It is made clear early on what happens to anyone who gives off the faintest whiff of dissent.
The dynamics between Valery and Shenkov might be a little similar to those seen in previous works but it is also surprisingly tender - two men both broken and traumatised in different ways.
Natasha Pulley's gentle and slightly whimsical writing style disguises quite a dark setting.
Unputdownable, tense & slightly stressful - I very much enjoyed reading The Half Life of Valery K

Valery, a nuclear scientist, is taken from his imprisonment in a freezing gulag, without notice, to City 40, a secret soviet nuclear research facility. He soon discovers that the KGB are playing down the amount of radiation & what happened at the site previously.
Unbelievably, although the characters & storyline are fictitious, the place really exists.
This is different from the Natasha Pulley books I’ve read previously but I do love the way she incorporates real places/events with a little humour & a fab story!

I like the only Natasha Pulley novel I've read (The Kingdoms), so I was very excited to be approved for her next novel. My partner really loves Pulley, and has all of her previous novels, so we read this one in tandem. But where I thoroughly enjoyed The Kingdoms, The Half Life of Valery K fell a little flatter, for several reasons.
My partner is Russian, so in reading this, there was a lot of insight available to me about Russian culture and Soviet structures which meant that there were a lot of things I found to be less than believable, and which actively angered my partner - a passing thought by the main character that perhaps there had been a mixup between nuclear and nautical (words which are nothing alike in Russian) or the suggestion of a Leningrad accent (which doesn't exist) or mixing up the ending of a patronymic and a surname - all of which could easily have been picked up by a sensitivity reader with Russian expertise.
One of the points my partner made, which I thought was really excellent, was that a lot of this nonsense could have been avoided if the main character was English, or some other non-Soviet background. Then a lack of knowledge about accents, language, surnames, locations of Chelyabinsk, etc, could all be handwaved away under the label of 'foreigner'. This isn't unusual in Pulley's work either, so it's notable that this decision wasn't made this time.

I have a pretty strong reaction to the main romance also - a KGB officer and a gulag prisoner? Really? That's kind of in poor taste, isn't it?

Overall, this was an interesting book set against the backdrop of a very real nuclear incident. It was really interesting in terms of the layers of secrecy and betrayal and the terror of living in a world where anybody could be a KGB informant. But there were just too many things that made me go 'huh?' to immerse myself fully in this story. I did like the pet octopus, though.

If someone said that you'd be reading a book about a nuclear plant disaster, worse than Chernobyl then I'd say, I'd probably give it a miss in the current climate. However, I am so very glad to have read "The Half Life of Valery K" by Natasha Pulley, as only she can turn something depressing like that into a page-turner. Now there possibly are a few fantastical inventions such as Boris the rat that brings Valery nails or Albert the octopus that can change the tv channel and adjust the temperature of his tank, but these are light relief. Fascinating!

I love Natasha Pulley's books, and this one was a fabulous read. The Soviet setting, the gulag, KGB, the nuclear reactors - it has it all. As always, the characters are the bedrock of the novel, and move everything forward. The central character of Valery, the biochemist who has been deeply damaged by his six years in a gulag, is very sympathetic, and is fascinating in the way he doesn't react to events the way people think he should, but are perfectly logical to him. Plus I learnt a lot about nuclear science and its history in the 20th century, which was very absorbing.

This book sits a bit oddly for me, in that while I was actually reading it, I enjoyed it quite a lot but once finished, my brain started to worry on it a bit and I ended up dropping it from 4* to 3*. This wasn't an overly tough sell for me, as I've pretty much read everything this author has written and enjoyed/loved much of it, but coming hot on the heels of what I think is a much better book (The Kingdoms), The Half Life of Valery K was ultimately a little of a letdown.

The basic premise is that our protagonist, the eponymous Valery, is a zek - in other words, an intellectual who's been sent to the gulag - who one day finds himself being shipped off to a city in the middle of nowhere. Since his research was on the effects of radiation on people, he suspects that he's about to become a human guinea pig in exposure trials, as his experiences as a prisoner have left him in a perpetual state of waiting for the other shoe to drop. There's also a chilling aside from his time as a research assistant in pre-war Germany, working on similar experiments without seemingly truly understanding just what's going on.

Valery has, however, been recruited because of his scientific expertise and quickly falls into the routine of lab work while also struggling with the level of secrecy within which both this work and the whole city exists. The people of the city are, of course, safe from radiation because Moscow says they are, despite all evidence to the contrary! The KGB are represented there by Shenkov, whose character is where things start to fall apart a little for me - a tough act to manage, in terms of humanising someone in this kind of role, to be honest. In some ways, a more unrequited relationship based on Valery's mixed feelings towards Shenkov would probably have been more convincing than how it all unfolds (imho, of course).

So, a bit of a mixed bag - enjoyable at the time but tending to leave a bit of a nasty after-taste. I'd like to see a bit more even-handed treatment of female characters, to be honest, with both Valery's supervisor and Shenkov's wife being there to cause problems at times but then be sidelined when inconvenient. The latter, in particular, deserved a better ending than the off-page one she got.

I received a free copy of this book from the publisher, via Netgalley. This is my honest review of the book in question.

Thank you NetGalley and the publisher for providing me with an advanced copy in exchange for an honest review!

I love Pulley. I love Pulley a lot actually. She’s the author of The Kingdoms, a book I gave 5 stars to which is why I wanted to read this book too. Pulley has a way of writing intricate stories with language that feels very accessible; it’s light yet holds a lot of beautiful prose. This book was not an exception to that, but there were some things I felt were lacking in this book.

The romance wasn’t particularly… exciting. Or more specifically, the love interest wasn’t that interesting. Shenkov took a liking to Valery WAY too early for no apparent reason, which threw me off a bit since he had absolutely no reason to it except for it being more convenient for the story. His only characteristic throughout the book was “soft” which usually isn’t a bad thing, but Shenkov felt so bland. He never showed any other sides of him, he was just kind of there, being soft. And as a KGB officer, his character felt a bit unrealistic honestly. I understand Pulley had to make Shenkov soft because otherwise she would have to romanticize an actual KGB security officer, but I could not see Shenkov take someone out the back and shoot them. I think I would have wanted to see more of that supposedly “unfeeling” exterior before we got to see his sweet side. I think that would have worked better for both Shenkov’s character and the romance. I also don’t really understand his relationship with his wife. I’m pretty sure he loved her romantically? Yet he cheated on her with other men? I’m not here to judge, but I didn’t particularly like that. I felt like Anna deserved better.

The setting was what drew me in; I ADORE stories about secret government projects, especially if it’s based on true events! Pulley really nailed that part of the book, but I feel like the whole historical aspect felt a bit naïvely written. Pulley shows some of the darker sides of the Soviet Union, but they were used as shock factors, and if you know anything about the Soviet Union, they weren’t particularly shocking. I’m not educated enough on the subject to point out specific inaccuracies, but the way Valery acted would not have worked in real life. I could not believe what he got away with honestly. I don’t mind historical fiction that isn’t 100% accurate (I’m here for entertainment after all) but this is pretty recent history, and it felt a bit inappropriate to use this side of history to tell a story without accurately including the bad parts. It just doesn’t seem fair to the people who lived through it.

I wouldn’t call this a bad book, it was honestly really entertaining and there were things I enjoyed like the octopus (so cute!??) and Valery (I like how Pulley writes pathetic men lol), but some things just felt a bit off. Like the mister = penis comment? And the ending with the English couple… That was so odd I’m not really sure what to do with that. But Pulley is still such a talented author and I’m looking forward to reading more of her in the future.

I did not breeze through this as I do most books.
I had to concentrate on it, the talk of all the radiation, and different ways things work... it was interesting stuff.
Pulley never fails to deliver on an excellent story, and this ticks all the boxes for me.
Characters with a past I could really get behind, and feel myself caring what happened.
Moments of much welcome light relief.
Science that I didn't know I needed in my life.
Such good stuff.

With everything going on with Russia at the moment I did slightly struggle at the beginning with this novel however Pulley has done it again with another excellent novel that is going to be on my best books of the year.

The Half Life of Valery K is more thriller-like than I have seen from Pulley before with less magical realism. And yet this book is so compelling that once I was invested in the story I really struggled to put it down. I really loved Valery as a protagonist and thought Pulley did a wonderful job of creating a character with PTSD and the audience being with Shenkov trying to be there for Valery. I was also a big fan of Shenkov and enjoyed watching the slow burn romance between the two characters change and grow. There's also a great cast of side characters throughout the book and as always Pulley's women are wonderful.

The plot is well-paced throughout and even when there were flashbacks, I felt these gave more depth to the story as we see how our main protagonists got to where they are now. I have seen people struggle with the ending but I think to keep the novel in its realms of realism I believe that was the only way it could end. Natasha has clearly done a lot of research into this time period and Russia and it felt very true to the time.

Overall Pulley never fails to amaze me with her skill and her creativeness. all the stars and another book to add to my all time favourite shelf

The Half Life of Valery K is an odd book because, on finishing it, I was full of the usual Pulley-related feelings. And then I thought about it more.

It’s one of those awkward ones where I did still like the book, but it has parts which I disliked on a spectrum ranging from slightly to intensely. And I never thought this would be something I’d say about a Natasha Pulley book, but here we are.

THE GOOD.

Pulley’s writing. This is an obvious place to start because, as ever, the writing in this book was brilliant. It sucks you in, in a quietly magical way. You can see yourself standing in the snow alongside Valery and Shenkov. On strength of writing, I’d say Natasha Pulley is one of the best authors around at the moment.

The characters. The characters are part of the writing too, really, because it’s that writing that brings them to life. Every one of them is vibrant and full of life, they jump off the page and you can’t help but root for them, to want them all to live. Valery and Shenkov were, of course, the most prominent, but Anna is also well fleshed out (possibly more so than most of Pulley’s other women characters… woops. I’ll come to this in a moment).

The mystery. Okay, so it wasn’t a hugely mysterious mystery by about the halfway point, so really this book was slightly more like a thriller. A slow-paced thriller, to be sure, but pretty thrilling nonetheless. It even had me questioning, at points, whether Valery and Shenkov would make it out okay.

THE BAD/LESS GOOD/SLIGHTLY AWKWARD.

Equating gendered terms of address with calling someone “penis”. I am as confused as you are. This was an entirely nonsensical and pointless conversation in the book—not least because these are all characters for whom gendered terms of address is something entirely normal (and probably not escaped by using “comrade” because, guess what, that’s only not gendered in English because English mostly lacks gendered nouns!). This was the quote:

“every single person reminded every single time they were named of that one part of them that defined everything they were meant to be, and nobody ever seemed to sit back and say, but we would never call anyone Penis Harrison; how’s mister any different?”

Equating “mister” with “penis” seems quite ciscentric to me and that’s the absolute kindest interpretation I can think of (feel free to imagine the less kind ones). The other is that this is somehow some clumsy way of saying Valery doesn’t identify as a Man, but I think that might be giving a bit much credit.

The gulag. Natasha Pulley’s writing doesn’t lend itself to brutality. Yes, The Kingdoms was, at times, pretty harsh, but it was told in such a way that you were somewhat removed from it. You could see the harshness, but at a distance. And that worked, for The Kingdoms. It does not work here. Because Valery is supposedly sent to the gulag—and this is where he’s spent a good few years at the start of the book—but it feels somewhat played down, to say the least. It feels like “oh the gulag wasn’t so bad actually”.

Misogyny. Five Natasha Pulley books in and there’s a pattern emerging: for every gay couple there is, a woman is shafted and/or presented as despicable. Think Grace in Watchmaker (nasty), Pepperharrow in Pepperharrow (shafted), Agatha in The Kingdoms (nasty, shafted), and Mina in Bedlam Stacks (shafted, but at least still living). They all have a similar character type and they are all there to prevent the main couple from getting together. Please also note that they are, more often than not, the sole, and at all vaguely prominent, female character in the book. Frankly, at some point, you have to wonder about Pulley’s internalised misogyny. For reasons which I will elaborate on in the next point, I think Anna in this one is shafted more than most. She is presented as an ambitious scientist, but one who has no real motherly feelings, despite the four children she and Shenkov have produced. She’s cold, but nice enough. And, for a lot of the book, I thought she might prove me wrong about Pulley and misogyny. Then, the ending.

The ending. Skip this paragraph if you don’t want spoilers because boy will there be spoilers here. The setting is this: Valery and Anna have devised a way of getting themselves, a bunch of villagers who are human experiments, Shenkov and the children all out of City-40. Here’s the rub: Anna is still there! Ostensibly in the way of Valery and Shenkov’s happy ending. Here’s the second rub: Anna has terminal cancer, and was in the process of divorcing Shenkov anyway. What happens? Anna has a sudden about-face and decides to develop motherly feelings and stay back with the children for no explicable reason. Shenkov, who has radiation sickness at this point, cannot persuade her otherwise, so he and Valery go on ahead. There is no later indication that Anna makes it out and, truthfully, Shenkov seems to forget all about it. And this is why I would say that Anna suffers the worst in terms of Pulley’s propensity to shaft women who are in the way of her couples. Everything that has been established about Anna, and about Shenkov too, is overturned in these last 30 pages, for no apparent reason. Because Anna is already dying, she and Shenkov were divorcing, so why shove her (and the children) aside like this? I refuse to believe Shenkov would have allowed it, but, barring one comment right at the end almost as an afterthought, he seems happy enough to. It just makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I also don’t think Anna would have actively stood in the way of Valery/Shenkov in the same way as, say, Grace, but then what do I know. Apparently nothing, if Pulley still feels the need to pretty much kill her off.

So, while I gave this book 5 stars initially, I think in retrospect, it doesn’t merit that. I enjoyed it still, yes, but there were so many issues I had with it by the end, that it’s hard to convince myself it deserved those 5 stars. It was, overall, a little disappointing.

What a genius Miss Pulley is?! This is a big change in direction for her books and you can tell this from the cover alone. It gives off thriller vibes and while yes this is indeed a more adventure/spy/cold war novel, you still have the core essences of her work - strong characters, writing that can melt you, a sense of love and hope that shines from the pages.

‘The Half Life of Valery K’ captured my attention right from the start and it became one of those books you want to race through but can't. You need to put it down every so often as you want the magic to last for as long as possible. I still finished it over 24 hours but it was a leisurely read as I wanted to savour it.

This book deals with the crux of the Cold War - a countries nuclear capacity and the efforts a country will go to in order to make sure that advances and projects remain secret. Now I am a graduate of Soviet studies and I hadn't heard about this part of Russian history. Fair enough I studied mainly social history but you would think I would have known about it, but it meant I have learnt something new and I spent many of those reading breaks googling! But that's why I love historical fiction as you learn as you read. I did read a review where someone mentioned that it wasn't a realistic portrayal of Soviet history as it wasn't a lot more unpalatable in it's telling of the story.

Oh and don't be scared of the science in this book - Pulley manages to make it all understood in a detailed but impressively easy way!

Valery is a special character. Flawed and human at the same time. Fragile but moral.

I just adored this book!

2.75? Maybe? This is a difficult one to rate but the best way I can justify it is I felt this book was just a little off. It’s a compelling setting and topic - Soviet mid century nuclearisation is so interesting - but the characters are all using British-isms, the violence isn’t really interested in being violent, it’s just happening and I felt like Valery and Shenkov were weak main characters.

Valery’s naivety just didn’t work considering every other narrative choice in this book. He doesn’t understand social cues but he can manipulate characters when the plot needs him to and he’s very blasé about murder but it’s oh so evil to experiment on human beings! In general the book is very understated about the violence. Actually, so much of this book is understated. It’s nearly 400 pages but the detail is all in the scientific aspects and not in the plot or the character work or the tension. I just felt very unsatisfied by the end, especially with how easily things feel for Valery and Shenkov because the book doesn’t actually spend time making the climax feel climatic.

Once again, the setting works so well and I really enjoyed the main idea of an irradiated city and experimentation with radiation but it’s not backed up by enough of a plot or characters that it felt worth it. It feels like such a waste of a good idea. It’s easy to get through, I kept picking it up and it’s compelling but the ending left a sour taste in my mouth, reminded me once again of Pulley’s resistance to writing fleshed out women and tied up far too neatly. I just wanted so much more from this.

This was a really enjoyable read and quite interesting given the current war that Russia is involved with. I have never read a novel set in the Cold War period and so this was a fascinating read for me. It was well written with a good storyline and well developed characters in a compelling setting. It was an unpredictable and riveting read. One of the best books I have read this year.