55 replies to this topic

[zencat]

So I'm starting to see some online catalog information on the Penguin UK edition of Devil May Care and it all says the following:

"by Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming."

A very strange description, don't you think? Writing AS Ian Fleming? What does this mean exactly? Typically this indicates the use of a pen-name. "Raymond Benson writing as David Michaels" on the Splinter Cell novels for example.

Is it possible they're going to do a lost manuscript type of deal? A lost "Ian Fleming novel" as envisioned by Sebastian Faulks?

[[dark]]

The way the IFP marketing department is handling stuff these days, I wouldn't put it past them.

But why get a respectable name author to write under that guise?

[zencat]

It could just be for the presentation of the book itself. Kind of like how The Seven Per Cent Solution is a book by John H. Watson (as edited by Nicholas Meyer), but everyone knows it's a novel by Meyer. Maybe Faulks sets his book up as being a "lost Fleming novel" he discovered while researching another book in...Paris maybe. But now we're into Moneypenny Diaries territory.

But it does seem unlikely they'd take this approach. You don't see any of this "as Ian Fleming" business on the U.S. Doubleday material.

[OmarB]

The Covert One and Bourne books are still coming out with Ludlum's name on them even though he's long gone and respected authors like Gayle Lynds Eric Van Lustbader are writing them.

I'm gonna say it's a name recognition thing.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Maybe it'll be

Ian Fleming's
James Bond 007
in
Sebastian Faulks'
Devil May Care
?

[Blofeld's Cat]

Is it possible they're going to do a lost manuscript type of deal? A lost "Ian Fleming novel" as envisioned by Sebastian Faulks?

Perhaps Faulks found it on his desk like Fleming found Michel's The Spy Who Loved Me.

[AgentPB]

Maybe it'll be

Ian Fleming's
James Bond 007
in
Sebastian Faulks'
Devil May Care
?

I think thats to much like the movies for them to borrow it completely like that.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Maybe it'll be

Ian Fleming's
James Bond 007
in
Sebastian Faulks'
Devil May Care
?

I think thats to much like the movies for them to borrow it completely like that.

Well, something like that, anyway.

[Skudor]

That's an odd way of describing it.... Sounds like he'd be taking Flemings name as his pen name... perhaps I should write a play under the name Shakespeare. Weird.

[Righty007]

Maybe it'll be

Ian Fleming's
James Bond 007
in
Sebastian Faulks'
Devil May Care
?

I think thats to much like the movies for them to borrow it completely like that.

You sure about that?

[[dark]]

I daresay we'll see something like that for Devil May Care.

[K1Bond007]

I wouldn't expect a new James Bond novel by Sebastien Faulks to have the words "Ian Fleming" on the cover of the first edition to be honest. They didn't do it with Amis, they didn't do it with Gardner, and they didn't do it with Benson. However, that said, it is Ian Fleming's Centenary so all bets are off.

[Jim]

I wouldn't expect a new James Bond novel by Sebastien Faulks to have the words "Ian Fleming" on the cover of the first edition to be honest. They didn't do it with Amis, they didn't do it with Gardner, and they didn't do it with Benson. However, that said, it is Ian Fleming's Centenary so all bets are off.

On the centenary basis, as you say, I think it's eminently probable. But if they do go down that line, the cramming of three names (presuming that if Ian Fleming is there, James Bond will be) and the title may look a bit of a mess, or unutterably dull like that yellow one above.

[Loomis]

So I'm starting to see some online catalog information on the Penguin UK edition of Devil May Care and it all says the following:

"by Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming."

A very strange description, don't you think? Writing AS Ian Fleming? What does this mean exactly?

Why so surprised, zenmeister? Hasn't Faulks said all along that he wrote DEVIL MAY CARE in the style of Fleming? Didn't he say recently (you'll know more about this than I since I think you alerted us to the interview in the first place ) that he'd written the book to formula, following steps outlined by the Ianmeister himself?

The "by Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming" credit is a way of acknowledging that. It's an announcement that this isn't a Sebastian Faulks novel. I mean, it is, obviously, but then again it isn't. It's not supposed to be taken as one of his serious pieces of work. I believe Graham Greene used to divide his output into what he called his "novels", i.e. the would-be great works that he'd be remembered for, and his "entertainments", i.e. his less worthy and heavy stuff. I think Faulks is doing something similar here: he's trying to tell us that he did DEVIL MAY CARE as a bit of a lark, as a sort of fun experiment, and that it's the literary equivalent of a singer doing a "cover version" of a song by someone else. Or of Anna Nicole Smith doing a photoshoot as Marilyn Monroe, or Gus Van Sant's PSYCHO. Evidently they're making this an explicit part of the marketing of DEVIL MAY CARE, which is probably a sound move.

It would seem that the whole selling point of DEVIL MAY CARE is that it's More Fleming Than Fleming™, and that the reader will be invited to pretend that it was a lost manuscript. They didn't do this with Gardner or Benson for the obvious reason that those authors were aiming to create a new, separate series of Bond novels. However, DEVIL MAY CARE has been announced as a one-off (at least, I think it has) to celebrate Fleming's centenary, so I won't be surprised if Fleming's name is all over the damn thing, and probably in much larger letters than Faulks' on the front cover.

But imagine if Craig had decided to base his performance on Bond solely on that of Connery, to the point of doing nothing more nor less than an outright Connery impersonation. "ALBERT R. BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS PRESENTS DANIEL CRAIG AS SEAN CONNERY IS JAMES BOND IN IAN FLEMING'S CASINO ROYALE."

[stromberg]

Codename Theory, anyone?

[OmarB]

I wouldn't expect a new James Bond novel by Sebastien Faulks to have the words "Ian Fleming" on the cover of the first edition to be honest. They didn't do it with Amis, they didn't do it with Gardner, and they didn't do it with Benson. However, that said, it is Ian Fleming's Centenary so all bets are off.

Dude, I'm gonna have to disagree. Fleming's name appeared on Gadner's books till about half way thru his series. Heck, the cover from above shows it clearly. It was on later reprints that Flem's name was removed to let Gardner's series stand on it's own.

[zencat]

I wouldn't expect a new James Bond novel by Sebastien Faulks to have the words "Ian Fleming" on the cover of the first edition to be honest. They didn't do it with Amis, they didn't do it with Gardner, and they didn't do it with Benson. However, that said, it is Ian Fleming's Centenary so all bets are off.

Dude, I'm gonna have to disagree. Fleming's name appeared on Gadner's books till about half way thru his series. Heck, the cover from above shows it clearly. It was on later reprints that Flem's name was removed to let Gardner's series stand on it's own.

Only in the U.S. In the UK, Fleming's name didn't appear on the covers of the Gardner books, hardcover or paperback.

Loomis...points well made above.

[Skudor]

Loomis makes a good point. This could well work as marketing.

Perhaps the novel even ties Bond closer to Fleming - making Fleming something of a Watson to Bond's Holmes. Not as a character throughout the novel, but more as a narrator of his secret friend's adventure. Lost manuscript and all that.

It is all for Flemings centenary after all.

[David Schofield]

Shouldn't worry about it too much; I doubt there's much to the notion of the book being credited as "Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming", even for all the gimicky Centenary idea.

Faulks is an established writer. A solid name. I do not feel there is any need for contrivances. Even to the extent of it being passed of as a newly discovered Fleming manuscript, in the style of all those John H. Watson unpublished stories that have littered the marked since Conan Doyle death

It would be nice, though, to think that IFP could get the notion across of it being Fleming's Bond in Flauks' "Devil May Care" in a somewhat more subtle way than the covers of the Gardner and Benson books. I mean, James Bond: Ian Fleming's, obviously. Surely.

[Loomis]

Shouldn't worry about it too much; I doubt there's much to the notion of the book being credited as "Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming", even for all the gimicky Centenary idea.

Faulks is an established writer. A solid name. I do not feel there is any need for contrivances.

Agreed that Faulks is an established writer and a solid name (far more so, in fact, than I and many others could have even dreamed of for the 2008 Bond novel), but if my suspicions re: DEVIL MAY CARE are correct, the whole project is one giant - and audacious - contrivance. And it may even be a world first: a famous novelist penning an entire book in the style of another famous novelist.

Of course, it's practically compulsory for every new Bond novelist/screenwriter/director to claim that he or she is "going back to Fleming", "taking the Bond of the original Fleming novels", and so forth, as though valiantly rescuing the character from decades of abuse at the hands of hacks who didn't know one end of Fleming from the other. Heck, if the Jinx film had ended up being made, no doubt we'd have had Halle Berry or Stephen Frears (who was scheduled to direct before the plug was pulled) insisting that the thing was basically "Fleming" at its core.

So when Faulks initially talked about Fleming, I assumed he meant that he'd dutifully read his novels - or the main ones, at least - and acknowledged the timeline and things like Bond's marriage to Tracy; and that he hadn't written something that might as well be thought of as a followup to THE MAN WITH THE RED TATTOO, but a book that vaguely slotted into the Fleming universe a la COLONEL SUN. What's only recently dawned on me, though, is that Faulks has apparently not merely paid lip service to the idea of "Fleming's Bond", but has deliberately set out to forge the Mona Lisa.

Presumably, he's in it largely for the challenge, and it's a huge one, far more than a simple matter of chucking in plenty of sentences like "M puffed at his pipe as Bond looked into those damnably clear grey eyes in that lined sailor's face and thought about the gunmetal sky outside and how women should mind their pots and pans". Huge even for a writer as great as Faulks (and, yes, I think he may be a genuinely great writer). I mean, could, say, Prince have recorded an album in the style of Hendrix, to the point where it could have been taken for the work of Hendrix himself? I don't know, maybe he could have done - maybe he has done. But I doubt it. Imitating another writer over even a few lines or paragraphs is difficult enough - a seamless imitation, that is; imagine trying to do it over the course of an entire novel.

Now, perhaps I'm exaggerating the degree to which Faulks intended to ape Fleming's penmanship - obviously, none of us has read the book, so it's all speculation. But if he's indeed done what I'm beginning to suspect he's done, and if he's done it well, then we're probably talking about something that's genuinely, as Michael Winner would say of a particularly good pudding, historic.

[K1Bond007]

I wouldn't expect a new James Bond novel by Sebastien Faulks to have the words "Ian Fleming" on the cover of the first edition to be honest. They didn't do it with Amis, they didn't do it with Gardner, and they didn't do it with Benson. However, that said, it is Ian Fleming's Centenary so all bets are off.

Dude, I'm gonna have to disagree. Fleming's name appeared on Gadner's books till about half way thru his series. Heck, the cover from above shows it clearly. It was on later reprints that Flem's name was removed to let Gardner's series stand on it's own.

They didn't do this on the first edition UK ones. Those were all done in Chopping's style till No Deals Mr. Bond (I think) and even then they didn't include "Ian Fleming" or "James Bond". Only the US and paperback editions did it and those were abysmal as far as cover art goes because of all the text they put on it. See the Role of Honor example above.

[OmarB]

I wouldn't expect a new James Bond novel by Sebastien Faulks to have the words "Ian Fleming" on the cover of the first edition to be honest. They didn't do it with Amis, they didn't do it with Gardner, and they didn't do it with Benson. However, that said, it is Ian Fleming's Centenary so all bets are off.

Dude, I'm gonna have to disagree. Fleming's name appeared on Gadner's books till about half way thru his series. Heck, the cover from above shows it clearly. It was on later reprints that Flem's name was removed to let Gardner's series stand on it's own.

Only in the U.S. In the UK, Fleming's name didn't appear on the covers of the Gardner books, hardcover or paperback.

Loomis...points well made above.

That's great man but I live in the US and the versions I have are the ones with Fleming's name on them. I'll claim ignorance but what I said still stands that Fleming's name appeared on Gardner's books.

[spynovelfan]

I think they are going to do this. Faulks was suggested for the gig by his agent, Gillon Aitken (who is a literary adviser to Ian Fleming Publications). Aitken is also Samantha Weinberg's agent, and remember they initially presented the Moneypenny Diaries as being the real woman's diaries, 'edited' by Kate Westbrook. Faulks has said that he read all of Fleming's book, used the same writing routine as Fleming, read his article on writing a thriller, and that the result is '80 percent Fleming'. Barbara Broccoli is quoted as saying the book is indistinguishable from a lost Fleming manuscript. So I suspect they are considering pulling the same or a similar stunt - basically the Flashman stunt. I wonder if it's possible that Faulks actually uses 'Ian Fleming' as a pseudonym, just as Amis used Markham, and they put it on the front, and have an introduction by him talking about how he was invited to write a coffee-table book on Fleming and went down to the archvies, and lo and behold, look what he found. And we all know it's him and it says so on the copyright page, but that's the hook for the publicity.

[Hitch]

Faulks is an established writer. A solid name. I do not feel there is any need for contrivances. Even to the extent of it being passed of as a newly discovered Fleming manuscript, in the style of all those John H. Watson unpublished stories that have littered the marked since Conan Doyle death

Agreed. It's a terrible idea. Hackish in the extreme.

[David Schofield]

I think they are going to do this. Faulks was suggested for the gig by his agent, Gillon Aitken (who is a literary adviser to Ian Fleming Publications). Aitken is also Samantha Weinberg's agent, and remember they initially presented the Moneypenny Diaries as being the real woman's diaries, 'edited' by Kate Westbrook. Faulks has said that he read all of Fleming's book, used the same writing routine as Fleming, read his article on writing a thriller, and that the result is '80 percent Fleming'. Barbara Broccoli is quoted as saying the book is indistinguishable from a lost Fleming manuscript. So I suspect they are considering pulling the same or a similar stunt - basically the Flashman stunt. I wonder if it's possible that Faulks actually uses 'Ian Fleming' as a pseudonym, just as Amis used Markham, and they put it on the front, and have an introduction by him talking about how he was invited to write a coffee-table book on Fleming and went down to the archvies, and lo and behold, look what he found. And we all know it's him and it says so on the copyright page, but that's the hook for the publicity.

Thing is, Spy, the Monneypenny Diaries worked as you describe above because no one knew it was coming. No one knew who Westbrook/Weinberg was. They did not know that IFP had sanctioned the book. They did not know it was not a documenatry about a real secretary working for MI6 in the 50s. When the book was published, the cover was very quickly blown.

Now consider Faulks. Many non-Bond fans know he has been approached to WRITE a novel. They know he is a novelist. And they know that whoever different he has found this from his usual work, he has enjoyed writing the book!

Now if I were going down the route you suggest, I wouldn't waste money pushing Faulks as the writer, who turns out not to be! I'd get a hack, though clever writer, leave his name off the book, and push the whole thing as a wink-wink "newly discovered Fleming".

Do do it you way sounds, well, twee.

And, of course, as Faulks himself has said, the book is set in 1967. So IFP then say that even though Fleming snuffed it in 1964, he left a manuscript specifically dated to take place in 1967 Faulks has unearthed ... I think not.

[zencat]

And, of course, as Faulks himself has said, the book is set in 1967. So IFP then say that even though Fleming snuffed it in 1964, he left a manuscript specifically dated to take place in 1967 Faulks has unearthed ... I think not.

Oops. Now there's a point.

[Scrambled Eggs]

Now if I were going down the route you suggest, I wouldn't waste money pushing Faulks as the writer, who turns out not to be! I'd get a hack, though clever writer, leave his name off the book, and push the whole thing as a wink-wink "newly discovered Fleming".

Nail on head. Not having Faulks's name on the cover takes away the point of commissioning him in the first place.

I can see why Faulks or his agent might want the disclaimer "writing as Ian Fleming" put in. It just makes it clear that this isn't a Sebastian Faulks novel "proper". If any lit crits dislike the book, well its that old misogynist drunkard Fleming's fault, not Sebastian's.

But I'd be amazed if Faulks's name isn't on the cover. All the prestige he lends to the project would vanish if his name gets pushed aside by some trite marketing gimmick.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Maybe a Chopping-esque cover could give it Fleming-esque appeal?

[Loomis]

And, of course, as Faulks himself has said, the book is set in 1967. So IFP then say that even though Fleming snuffed it in 1964, he left a manuscript specifically dated to take place in 1967 Faulks has unearthed ... I think not.

Oops. Now there's a point.

Perhaps they won't actually go down the well-worn Lost Manuscript™ route. No introductory stuff by Faulks about how he was going through his Aunt Edna's belongings or was approached by shadowy figures "working for the British government" who asked him to take care of a package of notebooks. Instead, there may just be an unspoken invitation to the reader to, like, pretend that Fleming had lived until at least 1967 and had written the book that he's now holding. Don't see a problem with that. I mean, one always has to suspend disbelief when reading a novel anyway, so I'd guess that most people would be able to enjoy something let's-pretend-Fleming-penned without too many difficulties or the requirement for some kind of watertight backstory.

Obviously, we all know that Faulks "has been approached to WRITE a novel", that "he has enjoyed writing the book", and so on, but then again we also know that Daniel Craig is a professional actor who beat out dozens of other candidates for the role, but come November next year we won't care about any of that as we settle down to watch as he passes himself off as a person called James Bond who doesn't actually exist. I don't see any of this "Sebastian Faulks AS Ian Fleming" business as being any different, or any more bizarre or confusing.

[Loomis]

Now if I were going down the route you suggest, I wouldn't waste money pushing Faulks as the writer, who turns out not to be! I'd get a hack, though clever writer, leave his name off the book, and push the whole thing as a wink-wink "newly discovered Fleming".

Nail on head. Not having Faulks's name on the cover takes away the point of commissioning him in the first place.

I can see why Faulks or his agent might want the disclaimer "writing as Ian Fleming" put in. It just makes it clear that this isn't a Sebastian Faulks novel "proper". If any lit crits dislike the book, well its that old misogynist drunkard Fleming's fault, not Sebastian's.

But I'd be amazed if Faulks's name isn't on the cover. All the prestige he lends to the project would vanish if his name gets pushed aside by some trite marketing gimmick.

I don't think anyone's suggesting that Faulks' name won't be on the cover, though, or that he'll be somehow robbed of praise by being asked to pretend that he had nothing to do with the book. My suspicion is that Faulks' name will indeed be on the cover, but that Fleming's will also be there, combined with Faulks' in a make-believe joint writing credit and probably in larger letters.

One of the genius marketing moves by the makers of BORAT was that Sacha Baron Cohen did all his interviews in character, but I doubt that the people behind DEVIL MAY CARE will go as far as that, with Faulks on chat shows actually pretending to be Fleming! An amusing idea, though.

I can see why Faulks or his agent might want the disclaimer "writing as Ian Fleming" put in. It just makes it clear that this isn't a Sebastian Faulks novel "proper". If any lit crits dislike the book, well its that old misogynist drunkard Fleming's fault, not Sebastian's. Agreed.