11 replies to this topic

[Qwerty]

Following up past theads... how old were you when you first read The Man From Barbarossa? Any interesting stories to share related to the book?

[dogmanstar]

The Man from Barbarossa was the last Gardner I got around to reading. So, I guess I was in my early 30's. In other words, I had read all the others and just didn't have time/interest to get deep into that one. Two things struck me as really strange about it and that helped me put it off till the end:
1. The opening seemed very depressing for a Bond. Actual historical genocide seems really deep and unexpected when I sit down with my 007.
2. I found the part of the plot where James is held captive to be part of a film crew to be really flimsy. It just seemed Gardner needed to have Bond there for the plot to advance and he could not find a real good way to get him into the story.

[Jim]

I read it when it first came out and whilst reading it, the army coup against Gorbachev took place, that day; given the plot of the book (such as it's ever made out, which is moot), this seemed very timely, almost spooky. One of the few Bonds I've only read once - "bitty" would sum it up. Might give it another go soon; it may have improved.

[Loomis]

Never read it or even (it seems to have vanished from the face of the earth) seen it, but I gather that it's Gardner's attempt at an "interesting" and "experimental" book, yes?

[dogmanstar]

Jim, I remember the army coup day very well. I remember I was driving home from college in a rural part of Western New York State and there was nobody on the road. I was glued to the radio, wondering if this was going to have major implications especially regarding who was in control of the nuclear weapons. I had to keep changing stations as I had trouble with reception. And I just remember the thirst for more information and wondering how it would all work out . . . .(Days before cell phones and all that)

[Jim]

Never read it or even (it seems to have vanished from the face of the earth) seen it, but I gather that it's Gardner's attempt at an "interesting" and "experimental" book, yes?

Experimental, certainly, even if it's not really that far divorced from the Gardner norm - Bond is part of a group of agents drawn from a number of differing countries, some or all or none or some or all or none or some or one or three of whom turn out to be a traitor or not a traitor or some sort of fish. From memory there are at least three other books where this teamwork thing occurs. Lengthy scenes in hotel rooms, unsubtle references to contemporary politics (as I observe above, right on the wire close, this one) and a dull girl. Very Gardner.

Probably something he was itching to write but it doesn't sit easy with the expectations of a Bond book. Perhaps that's all for the good, but the remaining Gardners retreated into the largely conventional.

[dogmanstar]

Never read it or even (it seems to have vanished from the face of the earth) seen it, but I gather that it's Gardner's attempt at an "interesting" and "experimental" book, yes?

Yes, experimental. More atmospheric and political than most--dealing with Nazi war criminals who escaped to the West. I felt and still feel it's more of a spy story looking for a Bond--you could almost take Bond completely out of the picture and still have the main thrust of the story. I like the book, despite that; it's just odd man out in my view of the Gardner canon.

[doublenoughtspy]

I read it when it came out, so I was 22 or so.

I kept thinking, wow, this is very unusual. I've only read it once but I did like it.

[Jim]

I felt and still feel it's more of a spy story looking for a Bond--you could almost take Bond completely out of the picture and still have the main thrust of the story.

Yes, that's a very good description - the central character could be called pretty much anything but he just so happens to be James Bond.

I might have been reading one of Gardner's other, non-Bond, books and it felt like that at times. Although I only read The Secret Generations and wasn't tempted by that, or The Man from Barbarossa, to read much more other than his Bonds.

As I say, may go back and have another poke around it one day.

[Bryce (003)]

'91 - Spring if I recall correctly, so I was 23. This was before we fans were aware of the ensuing legal problems and were all hoping for Dalton's return as 007 on the big screen.

I also remember that Gardner was in bad health at the time, hence the lack of either creativity/flavor of what 007 was supposed to be IMO.

As mentioned above, it was not a bad spy story, but just sort of generic.

I just pulled my copy from the "Bryce Vault" to double check the year but also noticed that of my Bond novels, it is the most pristine and still stiff in the binding. I believe I've read it twice but not in the last ten years. Perhaps longer.

Hmmmm....I've got some more travels coming up and was thinking about taking along one of the Gardner books. Maybe this just might fit the bill.

[ACE]

Wow, this thread has a good response, better than others of it's ilk.

My Gardner Greatest Hits here



I got this book from Murder One bookshop in Charing Cross Road in the summer of 1991 (or Spring?). The title had been announced and while I had taken a break from Bondage, discovering new things, I kept my hand in. Mind you, the silence in 1991 was deafening with no longed for third Dalton film.

I eagerly rushed home to read it but having been disappointed by the last few Gardner Bonds, knew I would be panning for gold amidst the silt. I know Gardner considered it his favourite book in the series but I never quite understood it. Why, when they discovered they'd kidnapped the wrong man, did they continue with the show trial? And would the trial of a Nazi-war criminal be that big a newstory worldwide that it could distract governments and resonate with foreign policy? All the accoutrements Gardner had given Bond, making him his own, as it were, were junked. There are some lovely moments - the memory of the assassination in LA, some of the supporting characters, the topical reveal - but it never made sense to me. Echoing Icebreaker with yet another villainous organization, The Scales Of Justice (after BAST, The Society Of The Meek Ones), it never held up for me. I always felt Gardner, like a lot of thriller writers, could not get over the end of the Cold War, and while there was an attempted coup in Russia at the time, Gardner's wariness about the fall of the Iron Curtain was indicative of the staid incompetence of Western Intelligence at the time (and now? Always tasked and resourced at the wrong target).

The uneveness of the Gardner books never dampened my enthusiasm for reading the new adventure of the literary Bond. However, I consider The Man From Barbarossa the weakest Bond novel ever written: not because it was not formulaic Bond but because, for me, it was very muddled storytelling. Sorry to its fans and sorry to Mr Gardner.

[Harmsway]

I have THE MAN FROM BARBAROSSA, but I've never bothered to read it. I've not really liked any of the Gardners I've read, so I've never been inspired to devote any time to it (especially since it's considered one of his weaker novels).