9 replies to this topic

[[dark]]

I may be having an off week, but I'm up to chapter 10 of No Deals, Mr. Bond and I can't quite understand the whole Operation Cream Cake scheme. Or maybe it's simply another labyrinthine Gardner plot.

Spoilers ahead for those who have not read this book.

I get the concept of Emilies (where young women working in secret services around the world are seduced by spies and ultimately defect). M suggests, however, that Operation Cream Cake reversed this scheme.

From what I gather, five children (four females and one male) of several British sleeper agents were instigated in an Emily scheme to entrap senior officers of the H.V.A. However, their covers were inexplicably (at least at this point in the novel) blown and the opening chapter of the book outlines Bond's extraction of two of these children.

Now, in chapter 10, Bond is being interrogated by Colonel Maxim Smolin (007 is under the impression that Smolin, a G.R.U. mole within H.V.A. exposed the girls). Smolin - who then reveals himself as a double agent - tells Bond that he blew the girls' cover moments before the K.G.B. did the same and that it is the K.G.B. who are currently offing the Emilies. Smolin also claims the male Emily has defected with his target.

I'm surprisingly enjoying No Deals, Mr. Bond (I think the title had put me off), so I want to make sure I understand the whole scheme before proceding. Without any spoilers, can anyone tell me if I've got it the story straight?

[Jim]

As far as I remember, yes.

But expect it all to change again in about three chapters' time. And then again at least twice before it all comes to a stop.

[Mercator]

I would put a spoiler on this. Anyone who has not read the book will have it blown for them!

Yes, I think you have it right so far, [dark].

[[dark]]

Thanks, guys. No Deals, Mr. Bond is a more complex novel than, say, Nobody Lives For Ever, his previous book. I think the constant use of aliases is throwing me off a bit as well. I've flown through almost half the novel in just two days, so perhaps I need to slow down and take it in a bit more.

[Double-Oh Agent]

You've got it all straight, dark. Well-summed up.

No Deals, Mr. Bond is the worst Bond title in the series, which was not Gardner's idea, by the way. Blackfriar would have been a much better title.

[Jim]

Thanks, guys. No Deals, Mr. Bond is a more complex novel than, say, Nobody Lives For Ever, his previous book. I think the constant use of aliases is throwing me off a bit as well. I've flown through almost half the novel in just two days, so perhaps I need to slow down and take it in a bit more.

I think you're giving it the attention that it deserves.

[[dark]]

Thanks, guys. No Deals, Mr. Bond is a more complex novel than, say, Nobody Lives For Ever, his previous book. I think the constant use of aliases is throwing me off a bit as well. I've flown through almost half the novel in just two days, so perhaps I need to slow down and take it in a bit more.

I think you're giving it the attention that it deserves.

Touché, Jim. Touché.

[[dark]]

Finished No Deals, Mr. Bond on Monday. I've only read the preceding Gardners (along with Never Send Flowers and his adaptation of GoldenEye), but No Deals, Mr. Bond is among the better of his books I've read (alongside Icebreaker, Nobody Lives For Ever and Never Send Flowers).

Minor spoilers abound for those who haven't read it.

Like so many of his other novels, it suffers from a twist or two too many...

Spoiler

...Inspector Murray's betrayal being a step too far here...

...and his villains are rather similar from book to book. It also seems as if Bond spends half the book being dragged by his ear from location to location by other characters (Murray, Smolin, Chernov). And the novel's most interesting character - Smolin - disappears soon after he becomes so.

Still, I admire the book's low-key approach. There's no impending nuclear war or mass genocide. It's pretty scaled back. And the novel's final chapters are probably among its best.

Oh, the only thing that would have redeemed that God-awful title would be if it appeared in a particularly pertinant piece of dialogue, which, of course, it never does.

Also, there are some curious similarities between No Deals, Mr. Bond and Devil May Care. The extraction of tongues is used in both (curious that IFP would let this slip; although the Gardners/Bensons seem to be becoming more of a footnote in literary Bond history) and M's odd tendency to withhold information from Bond during his briefing (purely, it seems, for the sake of delivering twists later in the books).

In all, it's worth a read, despite some over-elaborate plotting.

Next, Scorpius.

[chrisno1]

You've got it all straight, dark. Well-summed up.

No Deals, Mr. Bond is the worst Bond title in the series, which was not Gardner's idea, by the way. Blackfriar would have been a much better title.

For me the first of Gardner's really horrible novels,although he has a nice turn of phrase when describing some of the action scenes. I like your alternate title.
Gildrose was so full of %$@# when choosing titles. I always believe the author should own his work and be allowed to name his own product. Imagine if Decca had insisted on calling Let It Bleed COUNTRY STONES....uugghh i shiver...

[Mr. Blofeld]

I get the concept of Emilies (where young women working in secret services around the world are seduced by spies and ultimately defect). M suggests, however, that Operation Cream Cake reversed this scheme.

From what I gather, five children (four females and one male) of several British sleeper agents were instigated in an Emily scheme to entrap senior officers of the H.V.A. However, their covers were inexplicably (at least at this point in the novel) blown and the opening chapter of the book outlines Bond's extraction of two of these children.

Sounds like a potential Quantum scheme, don't you think?