40 replies to this topic

[dajman_007]

I haven't read a Gardner novel yet and I was just wondering how you guys thought they compare to Benson and Fleming.
Oh, and flood control SUCKS when you're in a hurry!!!

[zencat]

I prefer Fleming and Benson, but, still, some of Gardner

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

Personally, I'm not a big fan of him. I thought Licence Renewed was good but For Special Services left a sour taste in my mouth. Everyone seems to like it, I just thought it was plain weird. Icebreaker is quite readable as is most of Role of Honor, the beginning seemed a little rushed. Nobody Lives Forever just seemed like a Robert Ludlum novel to me, which I didn't appreciate. I read a few scattered books after the first five, none of them really jumped out at me. Gardner is a capable author, I suppose and I like elements from his stories but overall I would take Benson anyday and Fleming or Markham well over either of them.

[Qwerty]

I like Gardner's novels, at least most of them. I'd rank him pretty much on par with Benson and Amis, and a bit better than Wood, depending on the book.

Some of my favorites of his are:

Licence Renewed For Special Services Icebreaker Nobody Lives Forever Never Send Flowers SeaFire

[James Boldman]

I pretty much agree with Qwerty on this. I love all his work though, not just his Bond work. The Boysie Oakes series, for one, is a great series.
His Bond work is equally good (as Benson and perhaps almost Fleming himself) IMO and I rate both Gardner and Benson very highly, along side each other.
Obvously John's had a lot more experience than any of the others authors, as he completes his 51st book quite soon. But I'd recommend you read all of Gardner's.

My favourites include: Licence Renewed, For Special Services, Icebreaker, Role Of Honour, Death Is Forever, Never Send Flowers and Seafire. I reckon Gardner got better with Bond as he got on, dispite what many may think.

[ComplimentsOfSharky]

I reckon Gardner got better with Bond as he got on, dispite what many may think.

I'll second that, I think he settled into a style a bit more as time went on. I'm still not a huge fan of him though. He's worth reading if you have nothing better to do.

[Qwerty]

I think he did very well at the beginning, kind of got into a lull near the middle and then had a few good books at the end of his reign. It was really a rollercoaster ride from book to book with him often.

[The Silver Beast]

I think he did very well at the beginning, kind of got into a lull near the middle and then had a few good books at the end of his reign. It was really a rollercoaster ride from book to book with him often.

I would agree with that assessment.

[B007GLE]

License Renewed to Nobody Lives Forever are all very good IMO. After that it is much more hit or miss.

One late one that I love is Win, Lose or Die. License Renewed is good but dated.

If you've read all the Flemings then by all means give Gardner a try.

[Cesari]

The three or four first books are not bad. The remaining is rather dull. Awfull plots, too many double triple crosses, fuzzy characters!
I don't like his Bond books an no more his other books like Boatsie Oakes. I find them boring. I read them in french and some in english. Same effect to me in both languages!! ;-)

Edited by Cesari, 15 November 2004 - 05:14 PM.

[James Boldman]

Ah well, each to their own.

Edited by James Boldman, 16 November 2004 - 06:30 AM.

[Zing!]

I have only read nine of Gardner's 007 books so far (plus his two novelizations), but based on what I've read, I would rank Gardner below Amis, but quite a ways above Benson. Gardner - as others have pointed out - is a perfectly capable writer who can weave an interesting plot. But therein lies the problem... "interesting plot" does not do Fleming's James Bond character justice. Fleming's Bond often found himself in an outrageous plot, gloriously described in minute detail. Wonderfully overblown, and yet so darn entertaining. Gardner's Bond books are simply spy novels - and that's okay - for what it's worth. As I've stated in another thread, I find Benson to be "Bond-Lite." His books are too formulaic and follow the EON mold too closely, without the verbose wit of Fleming, nor the plotting of Gardner.

[Harmsway]

I appreciate Gardner more than Benson. Gardner's plotting wasn't the best ever, but at least his prose was more convincing than Benson's horrible movie-adaptation style of writing. The one Gardner I would say that's really worth a read is Nobody Lives Forever. Give it a try - I had a LOT of fun with it.

[Genrewriter]

I like Gardner's Bond novels though I do think he tneded to rely on double and triple crosses too much as well as using pretty much the same description every time someone was shot in the head. That doesn't really bother me but it just sorta stands out after you've read all the books.

As for favorites, I enjoyed everything from For Special Services to Nobody Lives Forever, Death is Forever and Brokenclaw.

[Turn]

I like Gardner's Bond novels though I do think he tneded to rely on double and triple crosses too much as well as using pretty much the same description every time someone was shot in the head.  That doesn't really bother me but it just sorta stands out after you've read all the books.

As for favorites, I enjoyed everything from For Special Services to Nobody Lives Forever, Death is Forever and Brokenclaw.

I've read the first four and half of Nobody Lives Forever and noticed those repetitions, also. The double and triple crosses really become tedious after a while, especially in Icebreaker, which a lot of people here seem to enjoy a lot.

[Qwerty]

[quote name='Turn' date='13 December 2004 - 15:58'][quote name='Genrewriter' date='13 December 2004 - 19:24']I like Gardner's Bond novels though I do think he tneded to rely on double and triple crosses too much as well as using pretty much the same description every time someone was shot in the head.

[IanFleming007]

Gardner's books are very good, not as good as Fleming's (Some are....), but way better then Benson. Gardner had his ups and downs, but his plots were alot better than Benson's "Virus/Bomb destroys world, two countries at war". Gardner's books had a nice mix of literary/movie Bond (working against retraints from publishing company...Benson also had this problem) unlike Benson who's books were pretty much a screenplay of sorts for a new Bond film.

[HawkEye007]

Honestly, I think that the John Gardner books should be looked at for material for Bond films more than Benson's. I really like what both authors did with their respective turns on the series. But, Benson novels feel more like the recent, big budget actions fests the last few movies have been. In my opinion the Gardner novels reflect some grittiness of the Fleming novels and the earlier novels.

Back to the original question though. I like Gardner better than Benson in many respects because his books have a little more variety than Benson. Gardner's are up there with Fleming's, but not at the top of course.

[JKD68]

I read the Gardner novels as they came out. I loved the first 8, but when I got to Brokenclaw, I lost interest halfway through it & never picked up another Gardner after that. Nobody ever talks about Scorpius for some reason. I think it's one of his better ones. Haven't read Benson, but if I do, Zero minus 10 or HTTK would be the only ones I would have any interest in. I read somewhere that those are his 2 most literary/non-cinematic books.

[Tanger]

I quite like the Gardner books. I definitely wouldn't rank them with Fleming and many of them are more akin to Tom Clancy but they definitely are worth a read.

Licence Renewed is a pretty good place to start but I wouldn't call it his best. It has it's moments but there are a few dull patches where you'll probably stop reading.

For Special Services is a cracking read and I myself shot through it in a few hours. Highly recommended - ie. if you read only one, make sure it's this one.

Icebreaker - Hmmm, I have mixed opinions on this. It's just not the classic people claim it is. Like Licence Renewed, it has it's good spots but other bits are just dull. In fact, I don't think I ever finished this one. I think I got about three quarters through it and then gave up. I'll probably give it another go one day but it's really not all that great.

[Qwerty]

Welcome to CBn! I would check out all of the Benson ones if you could, there's quite a variety of them. Many different plots.

[deth]

the only thing I don't like about Gardner are his titles.....

I can't remember which book plot goes with which title.... which I don't find to be a problem with Fleming or Benson

[Qwerty]

the only thing I don't like about Gardner are his titles.....

I can't remember which book plot goes with which title.... which I don't find to be a problem with Fleming or Benson

The worst titles in the cannon by far, but looking at some of the interviews with him, they could have been much worse.

[Loomis]

For Special Services left a sour taste in my mouth.  Everyone seems to like it, I just thought it was plain weird. 

Agreed. It's entertaining stuff, but for me it becomes a little too bizarre and overblown towards the end.

Still, it was nice to see the first three Gardners back in print in an omnibus edition last year. I hope Coronet will republish more of his books (and a Benson omnibus would be great, too).

[JackLordIsFelix]

If you liked The World Is Not Enough, you'll like Gardner's Bond novels. TWINE has the same elements: a "sensitive" Bond, double-crosses, slow pace. Personally, I hated TWINE; I do not have quite the same antipathy towards Gardner's novels -- more of an indifference.

[Snake]

Scorpius surely didn't seem like TWINE, I didn't know how it felt. But Bond seemed more Dalton like. Seeing it was made in 1988. TLD was made in 1987.

[Qwerty]

[quote name='Loomis' date='16 January 2005 - 13:38'][quote name='ComplimentsOfSharky' date='9 November 2004 - 02:05']For Special Services left a sour taste in my mouth.

[DLibrasnow]

Better than Benson (at least Gardner knows how to write and his prose is not as jaw-droppingly bad as Benson's), but not as good as Fleming.

My two favorite Gardner novels are ICEBREAKER and NO DEALS, MR BOND.

[David Schofield]

Better than Benson (at least Gardner knows how to write and his prose is not as jaw-droppingly bad as Benson's), but not as good as Fleming.

My two favorite Gardner novels are ICEBREAKER and NO DEALS, MR BOND.

Yes, Gardner writing ability will always set him ahead of Benson. Benson's plots were - sort of - better than Gardners (certainly post Barbarossa) but so horrible to read in a unique form of bad, uneducated adolscent English. At least Gardner new how to structure a sentence and what to pu tin it even if, msot of the time, it had nothing to do with James Bond

[Jim]

At least Gardner new how to structure a sentence and what to pu tin it even if, msot of the time, it had nothing to do with James Bond

It would be too shabby of me to point out the irony in the presentation of that view.

But then I am shabby.

I revel in it.