Book Review: Chase Brandon’s Kryptos Conundrum
I just finished Kryptos Conundrum, a thought-provoking novel recommended by Matthew Pines, authored by a former senior CIA outreach executive. It’s positioned as a “faction” book—a blend of fact and fiction. However, its literary style is lacking, reminiscent of a comedic scene from The Naked Gun. I see it more as a collection of ambiguous hints about clandestine CIA activities.
The author has participated in a few interviews on Coast to Coast with George Noory, one of which is available on YouTube. In these discussions, he alludes to enigmatic artifacts that imply advanced technology and shares a compelling claim: he found a box containing Roswell-related evidence that reinforced his belief in extraterrestrial life and “ancient astronauts,” though he doesn’t provide specifics. They also delve into the politics surrounding public disclosure.
Overview
The book chronicles a covert history of the CIA, beginning with its inception and projecting ominous events into the early 2020s, extending all the way to the 2150s and the 40th century. While the narrative is infused with fictional elements, it sporadically references real historical figures and suggests shocking events that have remained under wraps.
One lingering question is the book’s overall purpose. Despite being published in 2011, it appears to have been written between 2005 and 2007, while the author was still with the CIA, yet it wasn’t released until after his departure. It could be interpreted as an attempt to polish the CIA’s image, but the text contains instances of illegal actions, fabricated cases against the press, and disinformation—undermining its PR potential. This raises speculation about why it didn’t surface during the author’s tenure.
Fact vs. Fiction: Where’s the Line?
Throughout the book, elements veer into the territory of science fiction and conspiracy theories. Real-life figures are often thinly veiled, sharing similar first names yet altered surnames, with other details aligning closely with their actual counterparts. While some fantastical elements serve clear narrative purposes, the occasional mention of seemingly factual information left hanging suggests these events may have genuine roots. There are even glaring inaccuracies that could easily be identified by a teenager (e.g., Nazis in 1916 or binaural beats in the early 1900s). Given that much of the content seems plausible, it’s hard to tell if these mistakes were deliberate or careless.
Interestingly, several themes resonate with UFO lore, including materials recently published by Elizondo and Lacatski.
It’s often ambiguous which elements belong to fact or fiction, leaning into what “they want you to believe.”
Jonathan Chalmers
The protagonist, Jonathan Chalmers, is portrayed as a senior OSS and later CIA executive, born in 1890. After witnessing the horrors of WWI, he receives supernatural intelligence and a slowed aging process from godlike extraterrestrial beings, as he undertakes a mission to anticipate future threats. Chalmers orchestrates military decisions—including the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki—and later dives into esoteric explorations, beginning with the Roswell incident. He even employs binaural beats to enter trances for insights, despite this technology not being invented until the 1950s or 1960s.
Chalmers seems to epitomize the collective mindset of CIA leadership, depicted as infallible and a vehicle for conveying the agency’s worldview.
However, the portrayal of Chalmers’ character is frustrating. He repeatedly asserts, from the 1960s onward, that the real threat to the U.S. comes not from the USSR but rather from China and Islamic terrorism—hardly prescient after the events that unfolded post-2008. Considering the 2007 economic collapse, one would expect him to address emerging domestic economic adversities.
Timeline
The narrative spans events mainly from the 1940s to
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on “Kryptos Conundrum.” It sounds like a fascinating yet perplexing read, especially given its blend of fact and fiction intertwined with the historical workings of the CIA, all couched in a narrative that dances on the edge of conspiracy theorizing and science fiction.
Your analysis raises intriguing points about the author’s intentions and the book’s potential implications. The concept of a “faction” book—where fact is wrapped in fiction—serves as a double-edged sword: it invites readers to ponder the veracity of certain claims while also allowing space for speculation. The way the author seems to craft a narrative around the CIA’s involvement with extraterrestrial phenomena and covert operations definitely keeps the reader engaged, even if they find the literary execution lacking.
You’ve also highlighted the contrast between Chalmers as an almost omniscient character and the historical failures of intelligence agencies to adequately anticipate threats, which can certainly evoke frustration on the part of the reader. It’s interesting to see how these themes reflect broader critiques regarding governmental authority and the integrity of intelligence operations.
Your points on the timeline and character motivations also spark important conversations about how fiction influences public perception of reality—particularly regarding what a government might want to reveal or keep hidden from the public eye.
The blend of historical figures and the liberties taken with events raises further questions about the reliability of narratives spun by institutions like the CIA. The use of disinformation as a theme in the book reflects real-world concerns regarding media manipulation and the role of agencies in shaping public discourse. It’s astonishing how many layers you’ve peeled back, revealing not only the immediate plot but also the implications of those elements concerning government transparency and accountability.
I’d be curious to hear more about your thoughts on the intersection of myth and historical narrative in the book. Do you think the author effectively critiques the agency’s record, or does it tend more towards glorification despite the acknowledgment of unethical practices? And how do you feel about the portrayal of figures like President Kennedy and the implications of their roles in this narrative?
Overall, your review provides a comprehensive look at “Kryptos Conundrum,” blending commentary on its literary merit with a critical analysis of the themes and messages presented. Thank you for the detailed insights!