24 replies to this topic

[doublenoughtspy]

I read an uncorrected proof of Silverfin yesterday.

As an adventure novel, it is fairly entertaining. As a Bond novel there are numerous disappointments - Higson tries too hard.

Higson has a number of the 007 trademarks come from Bond's Uncle Max.

From Max he gets the Bently, his housekeeper May, his gunmetal lighter, and his first inkling of the espionage profession (Max was a spy during WW1), and even the line "I will not spend my days trying to prolong them - I will use my time".

Higson totally ignores Pearson's biography of Bond - no uncle Max was ever mentioned there, Henry Bond does not exist in the Higson universe, etc.

Higson has Bond born in Zurich instead of Germany.

I really don't understand why the most recent continuation authors (Benson, Higson) ignore the auhtors whose footsteps they are following in.

Then again - you can see where the IFP hearts lie - no continuation novel authors are listed when they describe Bond's history on the inside page of Silverfin.

The book was more entertaining than I expected, but without the Sex, Snobbery, and Sadism that made Bond popular - this could easily be a British Hardy Boys novel.

I will be very curious to see how Higson handles Bond's transfer from Eton to Fettes in a future novel.

[David Schofield]

Yes, I expected Higson to try hard. After all, its a thankless task writing a Bond novel - so many people to please - and Higson does have a very profitable career without it. Perhaps unlike Benson who needed the work (and probably explains why IFP went for Benson and not an established writer?

Have no problem with him ignoring Pearson. Pearson took some dreadful liberties with Fleming - suggesting he, not Fleming, was writing the truth, in some cases. Still, its a shame he seems to have ditched Bond being born in Germany: I quite liked the irony of that.

As long, though, as Higson sticks to Fleming facts that's half the battle. Does he say when Bond was born? Fleming, of course, plumps for 1924.

[doublenoughtspy]

I agree with the irony of Bond being born in Germany. Thats one of the reasons I didn't like Higson changing it.

There are no specific dates in the book - it does take place 2 years after Bond's parent's death. The villain does mention a chap named Hitler coming to power in Germany.

[Loomis]

doublenoughtspy,

Anything particularly good about this book? Any surprises or cool elements?

Does Higson do an approximation of Fleming's prose, or does he not even try? (Not saying he should try to write in Fleming's style, necessarily, but I'm wondering whether he does.) Does "Silverfin" have the feel of a prequel to the Flemings?

Finally, does it offer entertainment to adult readers (like the Harry Potters do - so I'm told), or is it a children's book through and through?

[zencat]

Opinions are fine, but let's try and be a bit discreet about how much plot we reveal before publication, guys. (And I'm sure I don't need to mention we can't post excerpts from the proof/book.)

[doublenoughtspy]

Loomis,

I'd say one strong point is the description of boarding school life. As a product of boarding school myself, Higson accurately describes what it is like to essentially be on your own at 13.

Prose wise, he does not have the Fleming sweep, and the brand names are kept to a minimum.

The first paragraph is an obvious homage to Casino Royale. There are bits like that throughout the book - where he puts in events and things that are nods towards events and places in Fleming's life.

Another thing that appealed to me personally is the fact that a lot of events take place in Scotland, and Higson says Bond's father attended the same University I did (St. Andrews.)

Higson does write action well, so those scenes are strong.

To answer your final question - I don't see this book having a lot to offer an adult reader (non Bond fan).

[Loomis]

Thanks, doublenoughtspy. It does at least seem that Higson has tried to please Fleming fans and tie in his work with that of Fleming (to some extent) - and one might have thought that that would have been way down on the list of IFP's priorities. I mean, why bother being faithful to the original literary Bond in any way, shape or form when you're writing for children?

It appears that, instead of a "young Bond" book featuring the cinematic Q, gee-whiz gadgets, and all manner of other things to horrify us purists, we've got a "young Bond" book with May, gunmetal lighters and so on.

Which is nice, no?

[brendan007]

It appears that, instead of a "young Bond" book featuring the cinematic Q, gee-whiz gadgets, and all manner of other things to horrify us purists, we've got a "young Bond" book with May, gunmetal lighters and so on.

Which is nice, no?

For us maybe, but I dont see the target audience having much interest in this at all. I'll bet anyone here 100 bucks that this series flops, big time.

[David Schofield]

For us maybe, but I dont see the target audience having much interest in this at all. I'll bet anyone here 100 bucks that this series flops, big time.

[/quote]

Yes, I'm sure you're right. I don't see there is a children's audience who want to read an adventure story set in the 1930's with all teh historical and technological implications. Still, can it be worse that late Gardner or Benson.
And if Higson is trying to keep in Fleming's universe it will help. And as I'v said in other posts, I'd rather see a juvenile Bond in the 1930's than a pretending-to-be 38 year old Bond in 2005.

But no, I don't see the series as a long-term success, just a curio like Amis, Pearson and Chris Wood's Spy Who Loved Me. Still, an interesting curio is better than Gardner/Benson drivel???

[zencat]

Okay, we get it. You don't like Gardner/Benson. I, for one, would like nothing more than one more book of their "drivel."

But back to SilverFin, it looks like Young Mr. Bond is going to have a bit of competition in '05.

Sixth Harry Potter Book Due Out in July

[Qwerty]

Okay, we get it. You don't like Gardner/Benson. I, for one, would like nothing more than one more book of their "drivel."

But back on SilverFin, it looks like Young Mr. Bond is going to have a bit of competition in '05.

Sixth Harry Potter Book Due Out in July

Oooh, nothing like a bit of competition.

[zencat]

The new Potter book is already the #2 bestseller on Amazon. LOL.

[Genrewriter]

Just #2? Must be something pretty good up at #1.

[David Schofield]

[quote name='zencat' date='21 December 2004 - 19:47']
Okay, we get it. You don't like Gardner/Benson. I, for one, would like nothing more than one more book of their "drivel."

Zencat, I did like early Gardner. If he'd quit after For Special Services with just two books, h'ed have been fine. He tried get a feel for Bond and had good plots here and handled the ageing issue very well. Quickly, however, he lost interest, which as a professional writer is understandable, because he wanted to experiment and you can't do that with Bond. As I said in an earlier post, the best Bond continuations are the Amis one-off and Christopher Wood's Spy (best of two?); its easier to do Bond convincingly once than as a series. As for Benson, regardless of his poor writing, why did we had to have Pierce Brosnan in a Bond book? Why did he feel the need for an EON-Fleming hybrid which never was likely to work? Would you really want anymore of that?

As for Higson, he probably has the enthusiasm to try that bit harder.

Edited by David Schofield, 22 December 2004 - 09:09 AM.

[Loomis]

Zencat, I did like early Gardner. If he'd quit after For Special Services with just two books, h'ed have been fine.

While I've not read all that much Gardner, it strikes me that Benson - his "poor writing" aside - got an awful lot closer to "Fleming's Bond". Benson's Bond may have been, as you put it, Pierce Brosnan (although I'd say that he was only sometimes Brosnan, or an approximation of Eon's then Bond, not always), but at least Brosnan was a Bond - don't know who the hero of Gardner's books is supposed to be at times, but he often comes across as some generic action man, not Bond. Reading Gardner, I find it impossible to imagine his hero as the same guy Fleming wrote about - reading Benson, and ignoring that pesky question of how 007 (and, indeed, the likes of Tiger Tanaka) managed to make it into the 1990s and 21st century without ageing, I do at least catch the odd whiff of Fleming's creation.

he wanted to experiment and you can't do that with Bond.

Experiment with the character, or experiment with the storytelling? Personally, I dislike some of the inventions by Gardner and Benson: adult daughters for Felix Leiter and Fleming's asexual Blofeld (Gardner), a grown-up son for Bond (Benson).... and I'd rather characters like Tanaka and Draco had been left alone. As for Bond, well, I prefer him as a blank canvas, without attempts to graft complicated personal issues onto him and other things that seem to jar with Fleming (such as a fondness for Disneyland) - of course, the films are as guilty of this as the continuation novels (see, for instance, the "sensitive" Bond of THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH). I think, though, that there's scope for innovation in Bond in terms of the stories told and how you tell them - Fleming evidently thought so, too, or he wouldn't have written "The Spy Who Loved Me".

As I said in an earlier post, the best Bond continuations are the Amis one-off and Christopher Wood's Spy (best of two?)

Not read Wood's TSWLM, but I'm with you on "Colonel Sun" - towers over everything by Gardner and Benson put together. Which doesn't mean that Gardner and Benson are entirely rubbish, of course.

[David Schofield]

"While I've not read all that much Gardner, it strikes me that Benson - his "poor writing" aside - got an awful lot closer to "Fleming's Bond". Benson's Bond may have been, as you put it, Pierce Brosnan (although I'd say that he was only sometimes Brosnan, or an approximation of Eon's then Bond, not always), but at least Brosnan was a Bond - don't know who the hero of Gardner's books is supposed to be at times, but he often comes across as some generic action man, not Bond. Reading Gardner, I find it impossible to imagine his hero as the same guy Fleming wrote about - reading Benson, and ignoring that pesky question of how 007 (and, indeed, the likes of Tiger Tanaka) managed to make it into the 1990s and 21st century without ageing, I do at least catch the odd whiff of Fleming's creation."

No, I wouldn't defend Gardner much anyway and I'm sure you're right that his Bond ultimately became an any-man action hero. However, at least in the first two, I get the idea of an older Fleming-Bond which I just don't get with Benson. But as I've said, that's the problem with an established writer taking on someonelse's work: his professional pride demands he put his own stamp on it and why Gardner should have gone after 2. As for Benson - he came to Bond books as great Bond-mind, a leaving/breathing Bond reference book and I'd hoped we'd get that. But to me, he makes no attempt to put anything Fleming-like in his books and misses with Bond as a character: largely, I think, because of the social difference (Fleming lived like Bond) and also because, amazingly, he became influenced by the films. Also, his use of Draco, Tanaka etc is a cheat, a way of saying "look, this is Fleming's Bond because he meets Fleming characters": Gardner never resorted to that.

"Experiment with the character, or experiment with the storytelling? Personally, I dislike some of the inventions by Gardner and Benson: adult daughters for Felix Leiter and Fleming's asexual Blofeld (Gardner), a grown-up son for Bond (Benson).... and I'd rather characters like Tanaka and Draco had been left alone. As for Bond, well, I prefer him as a blank canvas, without attempts to graft complicated personal issues onto him and other things that seem to jar with Fleming (such as a fondness for Disneyland) - of course, the films are as guilty of this as the continuation novels (see, for instance, the "sensitive" Bond of THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH). I think, though, that there's scope for innovation in Bond in terms of the stories told and how you tell them - Fleming evidently thought so, too, or he wouldn't have written "The Spy Who Loved Me"."

Both experimenation with character and storying telling. Both Gardner and Benson loose Flemng's Bond and just end up with modern adventure stories (and not very good one's) starring someone, incidentally, called James Bond.

"Not read Wood's TSWLM, but I'm with you on "Colonel Sun" - towers over everything by Gardner and Benson put together. Which doesn't mean that Gardner and Benson are entirely rubbish, of course."

Loomis, do read Wood, then compare it to Gardner/Benson and realise exactly what potential there could have been for continuation Bond, just like Colonel Sun.

Edited by David Schofield, 22 December 2004 - 01:52 PM.

[zencat]

I do agree that Wood's TSWLM is quite excellent. I'm also a big fan of John Pearson's James Bond The Authorized Biography of 007.

[DLibrasnow]

Just #2?  Must be something pretty good up at #1.

The new Potter isn't released for another six or seven months. Be assured Potter will kick Silverfins butt in 2005.

[zencat]

[quote name='Genrewriter' date='22 December 2004 - 00:31']Just #2?

[DLibrasnow]

I do agree that Wood's TSWLM is quite excellent. I'm also a big fan of John Pearson's James Bond The Authorized Biography of 007.

I personally rank Woods TSWLM as the best of the continuation novels - even better than COLONEL SUN and ICEBREAKER.

[Qwerty]

[quote name='zencat' date='22 December 2004 - 12:49'][quote name='Genrewriter' date='22 December 2004 - 00:31']Just #2?

[DLibrasnow]

Competition is always a good thing Qwerty. Even EON wanted to open against strong competition because they knew that it would draw crowds to the multiplexes. Strong competition has always benefited the 007 franchise.

[Qwerty]

Competition is always a good thing Qwerty. Even EON wanted to open against strong competition because they knew that it would draw crowds to the multiplexes. Strong competition has always benefited the 007 franchise.

Most certainly. While Potter is by far the obvious winner with an already hugely successful 5 books going, I think it will help this series to get going too.

[Mister Asterix]

Anyone who thinks Young Bond is going to compete with Potter sales-wise is kidding themself. No books compete with Potter in the sales department. But kids are capable of reading more than one book and some of those Potterheads may just find young James Bond.

[David Schofield]

I do agree that Wood's TSWLM is quite excellent. I'm also a big fan of John Pearson's James Bond The Authorized Biography of 007.

I personally rank Woods TSWLM as the best of the continuation novels - even better than COLONEL SUN and ICEBREAKER.

Yes, Wood's book is very impressive and, in my opinion, only slightly less than Colonel Sun. I mean, what an effort to take a Roger Moore Bond film, divest it of all the silliness and Moorisms that went with it and replace it with a novel that fits very neatly with the Fleming canon. I find it very disappointing when people do not consider it a "proper" Bond novel when, say, they accept Cold or The Facts of Death!