Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

The Impossible Job: Never Dream of Dying


223 replies to this topic

#1 Mister Asterix

Mister Asterix

    Commodore RNVR

  • The Admiralty
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 15519 posts
  • Location:38.6902N - 89.9816W

Posted 02 March 2009 - 02:07 PM

Now on the CBn front page:
Posted Image
Part 5 of Jacques Stewart's Benson Book Review Series


#2 Joyce Carrington

Joyce Carrington

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4631 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Posted 02 March 2009 - 05:08 PM

“Later, after Fenna had caught her breath and calmed down, she snuggled next to the computer monitor set on the CBn main page, and said, “Don’t you dare leave, Jim. Don’t you dare.”

:(

#3 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 02 March 2009 - 05:30 PM

It's a good book. Very Fleming. I mean, Draco's in it and everything. If you're a bloke, some passages will probably give you a funny but nice feeling. And I like it that 007 saves the lives of the Coen Brothers.

#4 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 02 March 2009 - 05:32 PM

If you're a bloke, some passages will probably give you a funny but nice feeling.

I'd like more explanation of this. :(

#5 Doctor Shatterhand

Doctor Shatterhand

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPip
  • 634 posts
  • Location:Stafford, Virginia (near Washington, D.C.)

Posted 02 March 2009 - 07:03 PM

You don't believe in coming straight to the point, do you? I was looking forward to a critique of the book, instead I have to wade through a river of nonsense. 12 paragraphs before your critique even begins is a bit over-the-top. Next time listen to your school teacher and edit out the parts that bore the reader.

BTW, this is just my opinion.

#6 marktmurphy

marktmurphy

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9055 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 02 March 2009 - 09:34 PM

Blimey- the impossible read more like! My eyes pricked up (yes, I've now decided that's possible) when I saw a new feature from Jim had popped up on the front page so I clicked through. Having had my fingers (eyes?) burnt before, however, before reading I scrolled down just to see how long I would be there. And down. And down. And down. Skip to the end: he didn't like it. Not exactly a Bruce-Willis-was-dead-all-along-he-was-dressed-up-as-his-dead-mum twist there, then!
Perhaps I'll read it in installments over the next few months, but in the meantime: perhaps get an editor, old chap?

#7 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 02 March 2009 - 09:41 PM

Jim, you are a funny :(er but I sometimes wonder why you visit the forums, given that you hate them.

#8 Hitch

Hitch

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1219 posts

Posted 02 March 2009 - 09:54 PM

*prods screen*

Yes, CBn is still free and not pay-per-view. Amazing. I hope that the article prompts Bond fans to buy Mr Benson's work and judge for themselves.

Jim, does your wife know that you've been rogering the English language? That was positively Shakespearean. Have a smartie.

#9 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 02 March 2009 - 10:18 PM

Jim, does your wife know that you've been rogering the English language?

I think Jim's wife is just glad he's not twisting and pulling her nipples like radio control knobs.

#10 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 02 March 2009 - 10:23 PM

So I guess THE MAN WITH THE RED TATTOO's up next. I wonder what Jim thinks of it. (As if I didn't know.)

#11 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 03 March 2009 - 02:30 AM

Has Jacques Stewart gone insane? :(

#12 David Schofield

David Schofield

    Commander

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3026 posts

Posted 03 March 2009 - 09:00 AM

While it is clear that Mrs Jim is totally redundant as Jim seems quite capable of fulfilling his own needs, anyone who has read Benson and now reads Jim's essay will know that Jim is in a different class as a wordsmith. And remarkly accurate, and brilliantly witty, in his observations.

Other than his clear limitations (that as polite as I can be) as a writer, my greatest annoyance with Benson is the repetition of the very conceit that he is truthfully writing Fleming-Bond, and that, conversely, John Gardner didn't. Though this seems to be a view that only holds with Benson's American peer group. ("Hey, Al. Benson's got James Bond. James Bond is now an American! And so is Pierce Brosnan...!). To write Fleming-English (that is, about Fleming's England) would be hard enough for a 50s Brit: for a Chicago drama teacher it seems well-nigh impossible.

And yet, had Benson approached the task as what is should have been - published fan-fiction - he would have travelled better. As has been suggested on these boards about a paperback series about Craig's Bond, had Benson sold himself as the writer of the non-filmed adventures Pierce Brosnan-Bond all would have, pretty much, been forgiven. As fan-fic, Benson could have worked within his limitations. As it was, he got all pretentious - Fleming Bond now returns under the guidance of a Bond historian after years away under the guidnance of an increasingly cynical John Gardner - insiting he was writing the "real thing". When the opposite was true.

Because ultimately, as an uber fan and writer of fan-fic, Raymond Benson has a fantasy figure in James Bond, and his books tell us that he clearly want to be :(ed by James Bond. At least Jim is his own fantasy figure, though I am quite sure he :)s himself long and often.

#13 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 03 March 2009 - 09:49 AM

Jim, I would like to inform you that one of these days, by the end of next week at the very latest, you will receive a letter from my barrister to the effect that he's going to sue you on behalf of me for the loss of 2 (in words: two) testicles that his client has lost by laughing them off on the early morning of March the 3rd, 2009 while reading an article titled 'The Impossible Job: Never Dream of Dying' authored by Mr. Jaques Steward. The indemnity his client has to receive as compensation for this loss would be the sum of 6.000.000,- pounds sterling per testicle i.e. a sum of 12.000.000,- pounds sterling or inflation-adjusted 90 percent of the European GDP by the time the courts decide this case.

I'll forward my bank account number to your pm-box so you can already start amortising the sum.

#14 Joyce Carrington

Joyce Carrington

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4631 posts
  • Location:Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Posted 03 March 2009 - 12:18 PM

Has Jaques Stewart gone insane? :)


No, he was always this brilliant.

Seriously Jim. I agree with most of what you've written, not all - sometimes you seem a bit too harsh (but that's my opinion :(). But the way you've written it is just... great. :)

#15 spynovelfan

spynovelfan

    Commander CMG

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5855 posts

Posted 03 March 2009 - 12:51 PM

Jim, what did you hope to achieve with this piece? What goal did you have in mind?

#16 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 03 March 2009 - 12:58 PM

Jim, what did you hope to achieve with this piece? What goal did you have in mind?

Testicle robbing, apparently. And it worked, he's got mine.

#17 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 03 March 2009 - 01:08 PM

Jim, what did you hope to achieve with this piece? What goal did you have in mind?


He must be trying to crash the CBn server. :(

#18 Simon

Simon

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5884 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 03 March 2009 - 02:57 PM

Superb.

As ever.

#19 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14266 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 03 March 2009 - 03:47 PM

Jim, what did you hope to achieve with this piece? What goal did you have in mind?


As with any review, it is a vanity piece and more about the reviewer than the reviewed.

#20 spynovelfan

spynovelfan

    Commander CMG

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5855 posts

Posted 03 March 2009 - 04:10 PM

Is that really the case with all literary criticism, though? How about it being constructive criticism about the work itself? Here's some John Bayley I'd like to show you.

Oh, I enjoyed a lot of it, and it made me laugh and think and there's a lot of brilliant insight into the genre and James Bond... but it seemed to me to be close to bullying. Sorry, but it did. You don't know Raymond Benson personally (I hope), but you must know that several people who frequent this place do, and that at some stage he may see this - is quite likely to, if I know writers. If, hypothetically speaking, IFP were to ask him to write another Bond novel and he accepted the job, and he then sent you an email saying, in effect, I've read some of your criticisms and would like you to read this book and tell me what you make of it (I said it was hypothetical)... how would you reply? Why would it be different to what you've done here? Benson has, after all, written several Bond novels, which you haven't - you think his heart might not have been in this one, but if I gave you a deadline to finish your Bond novel, what would it look like? Say the deadline is the end of June. It's easy to criticise, and you do it well... but to what purpose?

'Yes. I'm a dreadful hypocrite, I know. I say so in the piece. I'm wasting my life on this stuff. I loathe opinion. Have at me.'

Do what you like, of course. But it just seems to me to be an awful waste of your energies, and terribly negative and somehow just plain old discourteous to a fellow writer and human being. Why not concentrate on writing articles celebrating Bond novels you do enjoy, like the splendid piece on TMWTGG - or finishing your own? What would you think if I were to write a review of your own efforts along the lines you've done here? I know, I know. You wouldn't care less.

Sorry, but it left a sour note for me, brilliant as it was. I went back and read your first piece in this series - the difference in tone, and in the respect paid to the writer being criticised, is quite palpable. You've already predicted such a reaction in the piece, admitted you're wasting your time and it's opinion and so on, heading off any meaningful discussion beforehand by saying you simply won't care what anyone reading it thinks. I do wish you would.

#21 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 03 March 2009 - 05:18 PM

I'm somewhat certain that Jim had already put up a review of NEVER DREAM OF DYING here on CBn a few years ago. I had a look for it and can't find it, so it may be that it's no longer available or that I'm mistaken and he's never favoured us with any other piece on NDOD (or perhaps it's that, erm, I just can't find it), but this latest offering gave me a strong sense of déjà vu, and I'm not sure what it does other than recycle old criticisms wrapped up in a helluva lot of padding.

In this case, though, Jim's absolutely right that it's "more about the reviewer than the reviewed" - a lot more. Taken in that spirit, it's a veritable banquet of Pure Jim™ with a few passing thoughts on a Bond continuation novel sprinkled in. And those who like that sort of thing will like it a lot.

#22 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 03 March 2009 - 05:22 PM

I agree with SNF but to be honest, I think anyone who is not already familiar with Jim would have stopped reading before they got to the review part. I'm not even sure anyone is even reading it as a review. It seems to me more like an internet version of a Jim stand-up comedy routine. He could take any one of us and do the same.

Oh, and it was funny. I was sniggering.

#23 Trident

Trident

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2658 posts
  • Location:Germany

Posted 03 March 2009 - 05:33 PM

Is that really the case with all literary criticism, though? How about it being constructive criticism about the work itself?


I get what you're going at with that. But as things are at the moment, there is really only little chance that Benson will ever return as Bond author. So the constructive side of a criticism of a book penned nearly ten years ago is bound to fall short in any case. Especially as the subgenre Benson started out with is unlikely to attract him any more.

It's debatable if this subgenre really was fit to bring the best out of Benson as a writer. But I think it's sure that he picked it himself and did so because he cared very much for his topic and character. Perhaps cared for it even too much.

In my view Benson's quality as author really should be judged by his original works. That his commissional work would always be under harsh criticism he was certainly aware of himself from the start, having Gardner's example vividly in mind. I for one was happy to have Benson take over on a most thankless task and, naturally, was underwhelmed in the end nonetheless. It's what us fanboys will never be content with: the object of our worship, the source of our frustration. As a writer I hope Benson isn't offended by this schizophrenic attitude. As a fanboy I hope he understands it.

#24 Santa

Santa

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6445 posts
  • Location:Valencia

Posted 03 March 2009 - 05:37 PM

In my view Benson's quality as author really should be judged by his original works. That his commissional work would always be under harsh criticism he was certainly aware of himself from the start, having Gardner's example vividly in mind. I for one was happy to have Benson take over on a most thankless task and, naturally, was underwhelmed in the end nonetheless. It's what us fanboys will never be content with: the object of our worship, the source of our frustration. As a writer I hope Benson isn't offended by this schizophrenic attitude. As a fanboy I hope he understands it.

You put it very nicely :( .

#25 Safari Suit

Safari Suit

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5099 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 03 March 2009 - 05:41 PM

Wonderful. Though perhaps there should be an abridged version which reads:

Ultimately, it exists


Wouldn't be as much fun though. But still funny.

#26 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

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

Posted 03 March 2009 - 06:08 PM

Oh, I enjoyed a lot of it, and it made me laugh and think and there's a lot of brilliant insight into the genre and James Bond... but it seemed to me to be close to bullying. Sorry, but it did. You don't know Raymond Benson personally (I hope), but you must know that several people who frequent this place do, and that at some stage he may see this - is quite likely to, if I know writers. If, hypothetically speaking, IFP were to ask him to write another Bond novel and he accepted the job, and he then sent you an email saying, in effect, I've read some of your criticisms and would like you to read this book and tell me what you make of it (I said it was hypothetical)... how would you reply? Why would it be different to what you've done here? Benson has, after all, written several Bond novels, which you haven't - you think his heart might not have been in this one, but if I gave you a deadline to finish your Bond novel, what would it look like? Say the deadline is the end of June. It's easy to criticise, and you do it well... but to what purpose?

I think everyone needs to operate on the assumption that everything they write on the net, whether it be on a main page or forum, will absolutely be read by the person they are talking about (I discovered this the hard way). Whether it be Raymond Benson or David Arnold or Daniel Craig -- you ARE addressing the person directly. This is not a private conversation. So, yes, consider the purpose of what you write and how it impacts that person (personally or professionally) -- because it does. Also consider the picture you're painting of yourself. Before I hit the submit button I always ask myself why I'm posting this and how committed I am to it, especially when it's a criticism. If it's only because I think it makes me sound smart, I tend to delete it.

I'm actually not talking specifically about Jim here -- I haven't read his review because I already know what I think of this book. :) I'm taking about those who make it their "style" to only ever offer snarky criticisms. Sometimes it's just because they are young and feel anonymous and see others doing it. Yes, it's very easy to write "he sucks" (or worse). But know one day you might have to explain it to the person face to face, or get knocked on your :( for it.

#27 Hitch

Hitch

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1219 posts

Posted 03 March 2009 - 06:56 PM

As I said, I hope that the article prompts Bond fans to buy Mr Benson's work and judge for themselves. Apropos of nothing, I respect anyone who can earn a living from the pen - except for those tabloid journalists who are fond of publishing scurrilous and hurtful lies. :(

#28 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14266 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 04 March 2009 - 07:53 AM

OK

I was looking forward to a critique of the book, instead I have to wade through a river of nonsense. 12 paragraphs before your critique even begins is a bit over-the-top.


The flaws of the "piece" are the flaws of the book. This is the structure. This is part of the joke. All a lot of pointless foreplay leaving one unfulfilled. It's not easy being this horrible, y'know.

but this latest offering gave me a strong sense of déjà vu, and I'm not sure what it does other than recycle old criticisms wrapped up in a helluva lot of padding


The flaws of the "piece" are the flaws of the book. This is the structure. This is part of the joke. Loads of the same old stuff as before, unnecessary padding. It's not easy being this horrible, y'know.

Skip to the end: he didn't like it. Not exactly a Bruce-Willis-was-dead-all-along-he-was-dressed-up-as-his-dead-mum twist there, then!


The flaws of the "piece" are the flaws of the book. This is the structure. This is part of the joke. Far too much pratting about until an unsurprising ending. It's not easy being this horrible, y'know.

I must make my subtleties more blatant. Next time I shall do words of one syllable. Or, given the setting, haiku. On reflection, that's not a bad idea at all. Well done me. A new game to play.

At least Jim is his own fantasy figure


At least someone gets the joke.

Oh, I enjoyed a lot of it, and it made me laugh and think and there's a lot of brilliant insight into the genre and James Bond... but it seemed to me to be close to bullying. Sorry, but it did. You don't know Raymond Benson personally (I hope), but you must know that several people who frequent this place do, and that at some stage he may see this - is quite likely to, if I know writers. If, hypothetically speaking, IFP were to ask him to write another Bond novel and he accepted the job, and he then sent you an email saying, in effect, I've read some of your criticisms and would like you to read this book and tell me what you make of it (I said it was hypothetical)... how would you reply? Why would it be different to what you've done here? Benson has, after all, written several Bond novels, which you haven't - you think his heart might not have been in this one, but if I gave you a deadline to finish your Bond novel, what would it look like? Say the deadline is the end of June. It's easy to criticise, and you do it well... but to what purpose?


Noted. The "piece", such as it is, was written in the throes of the depressingly cretinous stuff that was appearing here in the light of the release of Quantum of Solace. Its intention, aside from playing a comedy game with structure which I appear to have been alone in enjoying, was indeed to demonstrate how absurd internet criticism can be - it is, indeed, deliberately extreme, but perhaps no more extreme than some of the unmitigated pus that was being bandied about about mr Forster or Mr Bradley or Mr White and Ms Keys. By focusing on a different subject, I would have intended to draw that out and have people think. Timing was against me for many reasons particular to me - you make an especially pertinent point about deadlines! - and now, the moment lost, it probably does stand as knocking at an already well-opened door. Whilst I wouldn't readily accept a charge of bullying, if you do believe that there is material in there that is personally abusive to Mr Benson as a person, rather than abusive to the qualities of the enterprise that he took part in (the flaws of which cannot all be his responsibility), I am happy to remove.

Also consider the picture you're painting of yourself.


S'up in the attic and it looks frightful, I assure you.

#29 Simon

Simon

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5884 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 04 March 2009 - 09:39 AM

The "piece", such as it is, was written in the throes of the depressingly cretinous stuff that was appearing here in the light of the release of Quantum of Solace.

Ah, indeed.

In fact, such was the level of the cretinous that I found my posting dropped to something like 0.05 per day.

#30 Loomis

Loomis

    Commander CMG

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 21862 posts

Posted 04 March 2009 - 10:47 AM

Jim,

Noted. What I will say - and I'm sure I'm not alone in this - is that I always welcome new material from you, be it a short post advising us that the latest film you've seen is LETHAL WEAPON 2, or a lengthier opinion (dirty word, apparently) piece. I have no such anticipation for the output of the "They should of gotten Amy Whitehouse instead of this stragling the cat from Alice Keys and Jack Wade" brigade.

Now, imagine (if you can bring yourself to pretend to care for a fleeting moment) my disappointment when you gave me this, the CBn equivalent of an especially self-indulgent John Bonham drum solo circa 1974. Is it virtuoso stuff? Absolutely it is, as always. Is it someone doing what he does best? Sure. (I mean, I assume that writing is - in terms of "creative or skilled stuff" - what you do best - unless, of course, you have a genius for, say, boxing that you've kept quiet about here.) On the other hand, boy, is it tough to take. All in one sitting, that is.

Now, I imagine that Benson never intended NEVER to be read in one sitting (although, of course, it can be). Perhaps you feel that, Benson's intentions aside, there's only so much of the novel that you can stomach before you have to put it down and pursue something more interesting like, oh, I dunno, watching yer grass grow or allowing your eye to rest on my thoughts on how RAMBO V should turn out.

Thing is, though, Benson's is the book, yours is the review of it. Then again, you never promised us you'd follow convention, so, erm, as you were.

And you know none of us would part with you for the world, Jimbles, you old so-and-so, you. :(