The power of a child’s imagination is a wonderful and fascinating thing. Michael Frayn’s most recent novel, “Spies,” plays on this concept to create a Tom Sawyer-like adventure of two children in London during World War II.

Stephen Wheatley, the main character and narrator of the story, hails from the present day, and decides to revisit his childhood home in London. Upon going home, the memories of an event that changed his life resurface, and the story stems from this flashback.

The young Stephen, about ten, is a boy from a lower-middle-class family. His best friend of the same age from across the street, Keith Hayward, is a strapping young man from a rich household.

Keith leads the duo, concocting wild scenarios and adventures for the two to fill their free time with. Their neighbor is a murderer and an ape-like creature roams the golf course in the world that Keith creates.

Stephen follows Keith on each adventure, acting as a sidekick as well as an audience for Keith’s wild imagination.

The novel tells the story of their last and greatest adventure together, which hinges on the notion that Keith’s mother is a spy for the Germans.

Watching her every move, the two follow her to the market and post office, and log all of her actions in a logbook. Their adventure becomes all too real when the children find out that Keith’s mother is genuinely up to something.

Interestingly enough, Frayn said in a recent interview on NPR’s Weekend Edition program that he has mulled over the idea for the book for many years. Most of the events in the book parallel similar events that took place in his childhood, which does give the novel a very realistic feeling, despite shortcomings in the writing and plot.

“Spies” initially reads like a mystery novel, but as Frayn’s attempts at creating suspense are rather kitschy, it seemed as if he was confused about where the plot was going. Much of the suspense that Frayn does manage to create for the readers is usually either an obvious red herring or a simple musing of the young and na‹ve Stephen Wheatley.

Frayn’s style of writing is inconsistent and heavily melodramatic, with some passages sounding as though they came straight from a contemporary romance novel. At points I felt very impatient with his lengthy descriptions and trite attempts at metaphor.

Though his descriptions and characterizations are well-wrought, the narrative trick of switching between the old and young Stephen, who narrates the novel both from the third and first person, becomes rather annoying.

One aspect of the novel I found particularly exciting was the relationship that Frayn develops between the two main characters.

Frayn develops Keith as fearless almost to the point of ruthlessness, while Stephen is portrayed as weak and cowardly.

These roles change throughout the course of the novel, and the development of each character is written into the novel seamlessly and at a pleasantly moderate speed.

Overall, though, the book was a giant disappointment. I wouldn’t recommend this novel, but I do think one may find pleasure in reading some of Frayn’s other works, especially his plays.