Jump to content


Photo

The Samantha Weinberg CBn Interview


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#61 Brisco

Brisco

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 220 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 01 November 2005 - 04:36 AM

Will somebody please tell me why Samantha decided Bond wasn't really called Bond. We know him as Bond, James Bond. To me, someone's trying to be too clever for their own good - and unnecessarily so.

View Post


I don't think the problem rests with Ms. Weinberg or with Bond not being named Bond; I think it rests with the conceit that Fleming was writing the chronicles of an actual agent.

I dislike that aspect of Pearson's book, but don't let it get in the way of my enjoyment of that book. And I dislike it here, but now that I have the book, I see that it doesn't really affect the story itself, just the interchapters.

Anyway, that particular conceit that I dislike was created by Fleming himself, in one of his less brilliant moments, IMHO, when he mentioned it in the obituary in YOLT, which always struck me as highly unrealistic. I think it was intended as a cute throwaway joke, not dogma dictating the literary future of his creation. But IF it were true, though, that he was chronicling the life of an active agent in his books, then it makes PERFECT sense to me that the name would be changed. I mean, it would HAVE to be, right? You can't really be a SECRET agent if everyone knows your real name. (People would probably go around saying things like "I know you! You're that secret agent! That ENGLISH secret agent! From ENGLAND!" all the time!)

So, at the risk of sounding heretical, I think that Ms. Weinberg may have actually IMPROVED on the great Ian Fleming (to whom I mean no disrespect) in this one particular aspect, in making that little joke of Fleming's seem remotely plausible.

But I'd be much happier if the whole thing could have been chucked out from the start, and we could just enjoy Pearson's bio and The Moneypenny Diaries as further fictions within the fictious world of 007 and not have to pretend like they're "real." (I think I'm on the same page as you with that, right David?)

But it's really not that big a deal, and I can't wait to dive into The Moneypenny Diaries in earnest. I may not like that one little aspect, but I don't think it's going to seriously hamper my enjoyment.

Brisco

Edited by Brisco, 01 November 2005 - 04:36 AM.


#62 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 25814 posts
  • Location:Studio City, CA

Posted 04 November 2005 - 07:31 PM

Samantha has broken down and joined CBn HERE. :)

#63 Double-Oh Agent

Double-Oh Agent

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4324 posts

Posted 05 November 2005 - 06:36 AM

I don't like the idea that Bond is not 007's real name either, but I have to admit it does make sense.

That was a good interview zencat. By the way, I hope IFP is not dismissing the continuation novels as you said they might be doing, but unfortunately it certainly seems that way.

As for The Moneypenny Diaries, when I first heard about the subject, I was less than thrilled. I wanted (and still do) a regular, full-on Bond adventure, not one with a young Bond or a second-hand telling of 007's exploits. As a result, I was torn with indecision on whether to get The Moneypenny Diaries. However, after reading the CBn interview, my interest has been piqued. I will be sure to get a copy (like others when it becomes available in the U.S.) What intrigued me the most from the interview was the stuff mentioning that what happened to Bond between On Her Majesty's Secret Service and You Only Live Twice will be revealed.

The book sounds promising and I look forward to reading it. It will be a good bridge to tide me over till we will get the next Bond novel.

#64 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 25814 posts
  • Location:Studio City, CA

Posted 06 November 2005 - 12:22 AM

I don't like the idea that Bond is not 007's real name either, but I have to admit it does make sense.

That was a good interview zencat. By the way, I hope IFP is not dismissing the continuation novels as you said they might be doing, but unfortunately it certainly seems that way.

View Post

Did I suggest that? Didn't mean to. On the contrary, it seems IFP is back in the continuation novel business in a big way. Young Bond, Moneypenny Diaries, and the centenary book in 2008 (featuring the adult Bond). Great things happening in the world of the literary Bond, IMO.

#65 David Schofield

David Schofield

    Commander

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3026 posts

Posted 06 November 2005 - 04:43 PM

Will somebody please tell me why Samantha decided Bond wasn't really called Bond. We know him as Bond, James Bond. To me, someone's trying to be too clever for their own good - and unnecessarily so.

View Post


I don't think the problem rests with Ms. Weinberg or with Bond not being named Bond; I think it rests with the conceit that Fleming was writing the chronicles of an actual agent.

I dislike that aspect of Pearson's book, but don't let it get in the way of my enjoyment of that book. And I dislike it here, but now that I have the book, I see that it doesn't really affect the story itself, just the interchapters.

Anyway, that particular conceit that I dislike was created by Fleming himself, in one of his less brilliant moments, IMHO, when he mentioned it in the obituary in YOLT, which always struck me as highly unrealistic. I think it was intended as a cute throwaway joke, not dogma dictating the literary future of his creation. But IF it were true, though, that he was chronicling the life of an active agent in his books, then it makes PERFECT sense to me that the name would be changed. I mean, it would HAVE to be, right? You can't really be a SECRET agent if everyone knows your real name. (People would probably go around saying things like "I know you! You're that secret agent! That ENGLISH secret agent! From ENGLAND!" all the time!)

So, at the risk of sounding heretical, I think that Ms. Weinberg may have actually IMPROVED on the great Ian Fleming (to whom I mean no disrespect) in this one particular aspect, in making that little joke of Fleming's seem remotely plausible.

But I'd be much happier if the whole thing could have been chucked out from the start, and we could just enjoy Pearson's bio and The Moneypenny Diaries as further fictions within the fictious world of 007 and not have to pretend like they're "real." (I think I'm on the same page as you with that, right David?)

But it's really not that big a deal, and I can't wait to dive into The Moneypenny Diaries in earnest. I may not like that one little aspect, but I don't think it's going to seriously hamper my enjoyment.

Brisco

View Post


Yes, Brisco, you're right - with little thought, both the Pearson and Weinberg books could have been continuations which would have fitted seamlessly within the established Fleming universe. Makes it even more grieving that they weren't: both are good books - despite Moneypenny becoming more "physical" in this novel, I can still see her Fleming origins.

On the YOLT Fleming issue, Brisco, try this: sure, Fleming suggests the adventures of Bond have been written about BUT he doesn't say it was by HIM (with titles such as CR, Moonraker, etc)., or that Bond was called Bond in them. Could it not be that - the exact opposit of the Diaries - in the Fleming-Bond world of the 50s a series of novels based upon the adventures of James Bond were written by Joe Bloggs starring Perigrin Carruthers????

Edited by David Schofield, 06 November 2005 - 05:59 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users