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

Timeline of Gardner novels


26 replies to this topic

#1 CasinoKiller

CasinoKiller

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 145 posts

Posted 27 May 2011 - 06:34 PM

I've never really read the Gardner Bond books, though I've heard a great deal about them. However I've heard a lot of contradictory stuff bout them and how they relate back to Fleming's work.

For starters, I read somewhere that while the books are set in the 80's and feature Bond at the same age he was in the Fleming books, its set in the same continuity as the Fleming books. But then I read somewhere else that his books portray an older Bond in his 50's. Can someone clarify?

Also, are there lots of references to the Fleming books and stuff. And do they tie into the movie canon in any way?

#2 OmarB

OmarB

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1151 posts
  • Location:Queens, NY, USA

Posted 27 May 2011 - 07:10 PM

The easiest way to think of Gardner's run is that it's a different universe from Ian's. Think of it as DC Comic's regular continuity as opposed to a book like Kingdom Come. It's all the same heroes and villains as you remember them, but they are older. It's close enough to the original that you can assume it's the same universe but further on, or you can take it as a universe that's similar.

It's Ian's Bond, but no more than middle aged though he's managed to make it to the 80's. Gardner's Bond is also more health conscious, working out more, maintaining his training with SAS and such the like. It's Bond reflecting the period, much like Fleming's Bond encapsulated the era quite well.

He's still the same guy, likes the finer things in life, women, a bit of a gear-head (as Bond always should be).

#3 Donovan Mayne-Nicholls

Donovan Mayne-Nicholls

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 381 posts
  • Location:Santiago, Chile

Posted 27 May 2011 - 08:09 PM

I've never really read the Gardner Bond books, though I've heard a great deal about them. However I've heard a lot of contradictory stuff bout them and how they relate back to Fleming's work.

For starters, I read somewhere that while the books are set in the 80's and feature Bond at the same age he was in the Fleming books, its set in the same continuity as the Fleming books. But then I read somewhere else that his books portray an older Bond in his 50's. Can someone clarify?

Also, are there lots of references to the Fleming books and stuff. And do they tie into the movie canon in any way?


Fleming's Bond was in his thirties throughout 1953-66. Gardner was expressly forbidden from touching the age issue but I've always felt his Bond is more mature, as if perenially in his forties now (it never says Bond is still in his thirties, this has been an assumption made by many. As a matter of fact, the fisrt book, Licence Renewed brings us up to speed about what happened to Bond through the 70's, so he's stating that it's the same guy and a decade or so has passed since we last saw him). There's a beautiful homage to Fleming when Gardner mentions Bond has started collecting first editions of books as an investment (Fleming did so) and I guess Gardner's personality permeates into the character to an extent. After all, Gradner didn't die in his mid-fifties from abusing his health. I see it as if by the final novel, Cold, Bond is in his late fifties-early sixties. I don't think it stretches credibility that badly.
Benson's books, on the other hand, apart from being incredibly bad, cannot be taken as anything other than a reboot. Bond behaves more childishly than he ever did in Fleming's and he reverts all the changes the character suffered through Gardner's tenure. Gardner's Bond was promoted to Captain in '89 but Benson magically turns him into a Commander again. At the end of Cold, Bond is about to be arrested for acting outside British jurisdiction. None of this is never addressed by Benson, which I'd be fine with if only he didn't insist in proving he's the ultimate Bond fan by making references to Gardner's books. I was pleasantly surprised to rediscover that Gardner even got to reference Colonel Sun in his final novel when I reread it (I'd forgot). Gardner knew his Bond well but he didn't show it off all the time. I'd the pleasure of having correspondence with Mr Gardner before he died and he reamins one of my childhood heroes.

#4 Bill

Bill

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 257 posts
  • Location:Levittown, New York

Posted 28 May 2011 - 05:30 AM


I've never really read the Gardner Bond books, though I've heard a great deal about them. However I've heard a lot of contradictory stuff bout them and how they relate back to Fleming's work.

For starters, I read somewhere that while the books are set in the 80's and feature Bond at the same age he was in the Fleming books, its set in the same continuity as the Fleming books. But then I read somewhere else that his books portray an older Bond in his 50's. Can someone clarify?

Also, are there lots of references to the Fleming books and stuff. And do they tie into the movie canon in any way?


Fleming's Bond was in his thirties throughout 1953-66. Gardner was expressly forbidden from touching the age issue but I've always felt his Bond is more mature, as if perenially in his forties now (it never says Bond is still in his thirties, this has been an assumption made by many. As a matter of fact, the fisrt book, Licence Renewed brings us up to speed about what happened to Bond through the 70's, so he's stating that it's the same guy and a decade or so has passed since we last saw him). There's a beautiful homage to Fleming when Gardner mentions Bond has started collecting first editions of books as an investment (Fleming did so) and I guess Gardner's personality permeates into the character to an extent. After all, Gradner didn't die in his mid-fifties from abusing his health. I see it as if by the final novel, Cold, Bond is in his late fifties-early sixties. I don't think it stretches credibility that badly.
Benson's books, on the other hand, apart from being incredibly bad, cannot be taken as anything other than a reboot. Bond behaves more childishly than he ever did in Fleming's and he reverts all the changes the character suffered through Gardner's tenure. Gardner's Bond was promoted to Captain in '89 but Benson magically turns him into a Commander again. At the end of Cold, Bond is about to be arrested for acting outside British jurisdiction. None of this is never addressed by Benson, which I'd be fine with if only he didn't insist in proving he's the ultimate Bond fan by making references to Gardner's books. I was pleasantly surprised to rediscover that Gardner even got to reference Colonel Sun in his final novel when I reread it (I'd forgot). Gardner knew his Bond well but he didn't show it off all the time. I'd the pleasure of having correspondence with Mr Gardner before he died and he reamins one of my childhood heroes.



#5 Bill

Bill

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 257 posts
  • Location:Levittown, New York

Posted 28 May 2011 - 05:58 AM

The Gardner novels and the Benson novels are in direct continuity to the Fleming books.

As for your comments, Donavan, I respectfully disagree. While it has been a while since I read Cold Fall (the US title), I do not remember Bond's pending arrest, and if there was one, it did not appear to be anything that could not be resolved, off screen, if you will. What I do remember is Bond getting ready to meet a new M at the end of the book.

While Benson did "demote" Bond back to a Commander, it was only because it sounded better--it was not a deliberate attemp to undo Gardner. Benson had tremendous respect for what Gardner did, and his referencing the Gardner books only enforces that. While he did not continue the Two Zeros section that Gardner established (which he admitted to me in a letter was only put into the books to reflect what was really happening in the real world) nothing in the Benson books contradicts this. Indeed, he even ensured that Gardner's statement that Marc Ange Draco was dead was directly addressed in his books.

The Benson books are no reboot, and for that matter, neither are the Amis, Gardner, Faulks and Higson books. ALl fit into one continuity, and there really is nothing in the Brosnan film novelizations by Gardner and Benson that do not allow for those books to fit into that same continuity. The Pearson book and the Moneypenny Diaries do fit into their own unique niche as they claim to be "real" and not fiction.

It appears as if Carte Blanche will be a true reboot, and I am keeping an open mind about that. While I hate the reboot concept, I will give it a shot.

Now, while you may have your opinion about the Benson books, others should in no way be put off from reading them. They are all excellent. Benson succeeds in making Bond as viable in the post Cold War as he was in the Cold War. He rewards long term fans with continuity references, but much like the Russell T Davies era of Doctor Who, you do not need to be that type of fan to appreciate them. Newbies can come into the books without a problem. Benson knows Bond's character inside and out, and it shows, and he has some terriic villains and supporting characters. He really fleshes the new M out, but also gives the original a strong role in his books. Benson makes the female characters very realistic as well. His plots are believable. All of his short stories and novels have been collected as The Union Trilogy and Choice of Weapons and are well worth anybody's time.

#6 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

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

Posted 28 May 2011 - 08:39 AM

Interesting points, all.

My impression was that the Benson Bond does come across as more energetic and thereby ostensibly younger than the Gardner one - but maybe that's just the net effect of Mr Benson surrounding his Bond with a bit more movie gee-whiz and not clothing him in cavalry twill trousers, blazers and rope-soled sandals; also, whatever the merits of what actually does happen, more things do seem to happen in Mr Benson's books which would require a bit more energy than Mr Gardner's sitting around in hotel rooms and suspecting everyone would seem to expend.

Fixed-ish point in a changing age is probably the wisest approach, and not to let it bother one.

#7 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

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

Posted 28 May 2011 - 02:20 PM

I've never really read the Gardner Bond books, though I've heard a great deal about them. However I've heard a lot of contradictory stuff bout them and how they relate back to Fleming's work.

For starters, I read somewhere that while the books are set in the 80's and feature Bond at the same age he was in the Fleming books, its set in the same continuity as the Fleming books. But then I read somewhere else that his books portray an older Bond in his 50's. Can someone clarify?

Also, are there lots of references to the Fleming books and stuff. And do they tie into the movie canon in any way?

Bond is moved forward into the 80s. His age is never mentioned. Some things from Fleming are mentioned (like Tracy), but years are never mentioned. They do not tie into any film continuity (apart from the LTK novelization). It's a very loose continuity, not unlike how the films did it up to CR. Same Bond. Same approximate age. New decade.

#8 Dustin

Dustin

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5786 posts

Posted 28 May 2011 - 03:05 PM

Some fans even read Gardner as if Bond has hardly aged at all. While my own impression was always reading about an older Bond it was possible to ignore the hints and just follow another Gardner Bond book without heed for such clumsy concepts as age and date-of-birth. The timeline was fairly flexible and grew all the more nebulous with the number of adventures of Gardner's Bond. You could read the last with a Bond in his early sixties or in his early forties in mind, it was entirely up to you.

#9 Donovan Mayne-Nicholls

Donovan Mayne-Nicholls

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 381 posts
  • Location:Santiago, Chile

Posted 28 May 2011 - 05:02 PM

The Gardner novels and the Benson novels are in direct continuity to the Fleming books.

As for your comments, Donavan, I respectfully disagree. While it has been a while since I read Cold Fall (the US title), I do not remember Bond's pending arrest, and if there was one, it did not appear to be anything that could not be resolved, off screen, if you will. What I do remember is Bond getting ready to meet a new M at the end of the book.

While Benson did "demote" Bond back to a Commander, it was only because it sounded better--it was not a deliberate attemp to undo Gardner. Benson had tremendous respect for what Gardner did, and his referencing the Gardner books only enforces that. While he did not continue the Two Zeros section that Gardner established (which he admitted to me in a letter was only put into the books to reflect what was really happening in the real world) nothing in the Benson books contradicts this. Indeed, he even ensured that Gardner's statement that Marc Ange Draco was dead was directly addressed in his books.

The Benson books are no reboot, and for that matter, neither are the Amis, Gardner, Faulks and Higson books. ALl fit into one continuity, and there really is nothing in the Brosnan film novelizations by Gardner and Benson that do not allow for those books to fit into that same continuity. The Pearson book and the Moneypenny Diaries do fit into their own unique niche as they claim to be "real" and not fiction.

It appears as if Carte Blanche will be a true reboot, and I am keeping an open mind about that. While I hate the reboot concept, I will give it a shot.

Now, while you may have your opinion about the Benson books, others should in no way be put off from reading them. They are all excellent. Benson succeeds in making Bond as viable in the post Cold War as he was in the Cold War. He rewards long term fans with continuity references, but much like the Russell T Davies era of Doctor Who, you do not need to be that type of fan to appreciate them. Newbies can come into the books without a problem. Benson knows Bond's character inside and out, and it shows, and he has some terriic villains and supporting characters. He really fleshes the new M out, but also gives the original a strong role in his books. Benson makes the female characters very realistic as well. His plots are believable. All of his short stories and novels have been collected as The Union Trilogy and Choice of Weapons and are well worth anybody's time.


Read carefully, I didn't say the WERE a reboot and also, my name is DONOVAN, not Donavan. I said they couldn't be taken as anything but. In the same way, somebody once mention that even though they didn't break continuity, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan's films were a sort of new beginning. Believe me, I've read Benson as carefully as I did Fleming. Benson was instructed he could reference or ignore anything from other continuation writers. He should've done either, not both. He references Fleming too much. Bond's supposed to have remained friends with the Governor of Bahamas, a minor character in the grand scheme of things, and yet the character remains nameless. He brings too many past characters, reminding us how old Bond would be by now (Gardner killed Draco off eraly in his series) and worst of all, he turns them into caricatures. He even gives us Q scenes! There were never Q scenes in the books. Q does not appear in any of Fleming's (and if you're even thinking of saying that he's Mayor Boothroyd, I suggest you go and read Fleming). Also, his "jokes" are remarkably bad. He brought Fleming elements to prove his respect of the canon, blah, blah, blah. In ZMT he has Bond go back to the Walther on his own accord but one novel later Bond's upgraded to the P99 just because EON did! same with mentioning Brioni! It reads so tacky, Fleming's references never felt like product placement. He brings back the 00 section without any real explanation. ZMT could have had at least one chapter devoted to explaining the restructuring of MI6 but Benson isn't interested in espionage. His plots are parodic in the way Flint or UNCLE or even the comic strip was (FoD and DS are actually ripoffs of Lawrence's Deathmask and Double Jeopardy). He has no ideas so he feels he has to milk every Commonwealth issue (Hong Kong, Cyprus, Gibraltar).
Benson's first book could have been a good book. It's got a good plot but Benson's just not capable of delivering a properly written work. FoD is embarrassingly bad and NDoD goes one step further. Stupidest plot in the whole series, Bond acting like a complete fool for a female character who's not that special (Benson's women may be empowered in the way Americans like them to be but they are not special), an absolutely repelent masturbation chapter and two beloved characters disgraced. In short, Benson has no prose. He writes novels the way screenplays are written: endless, flat description (unless you're Mr Haggis, who believes himself to be writing novels). Excellent? If they were, they'd have been discovered outside the fan community by now. I realise I'm in a minority and there's an inordinate number of people here who really like Benson but that's a moot point. Fans are prone to liking all that's official. Had you read any Benson prior to his Bond novels? Of course not, he hadn't written any fiction. You bought the books because they had the words JAMES BOND in big letters on the cover. So did I. Le Carré es excellent, Deighton is excellent, Forsyth is very good.

#10 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

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

Posted 28 May 2011 - 06:57 PM

...which makes me wonder: Where does Wood fit into all this? Does James Bond, the Spy Who Loved Me have a place in between Colonel Sun and Licence Renewed?

#11 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

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

Posted 28 May 2011 - 07:10 PM

...which makes me wonder: Where does Wood fit into all this? Does James Bond, the Spy Who Loved Me have a place in between Colonel Sun and Licence Renewed?

I really wouldn't try to "fit" things together. Each author inhabits his own universe, just as each actor inhabits his own "era." They link up in some ways (Tracy and Felix), but Bond has always had a very loose continuity (until recently).

I'm always a little baffled that this seems to baffle some people.

#12 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

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

Posted 28 May 2011 - 08:01 PM

Oh, I'm not baffled; just sort of trying to imagine a way in which the continuations would fit together, somehow...

...well, the good continuations, at least. ;)

#13 Klaus_Hergesheimer

Klaus_Hergesheimer

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 33 posts
  • Location:Nebraska

Posted 28 May 2011 - 08:11 PM

I think it really depends on how you read them and in what order. I just finished going through all the Gardner novels directly after reading the Fleming books and Colonel Sun. So logically I just kept thinking this was the same Bond, only aged. In fact for most of the books I had AVTAK Roger Moore in my head since I felt Bond was a bit older in these. To me it just made sense. I could certainly see if you just picked one of the Gardner books up and read it you can see Bond at any age.

And personally I don't put the movie adaptations in any sort of timeline. You could, but I never do.

I gather I shouldn't be too excited to go on to reading the Benson novels...?

#14 zencat

zencat

    Commander GCMG

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

Posted 28 May 2011 - 09:10 PM

Oh, I'm not baffled; just sort of trying to imagine a way in which the continuations would fit together, somehow...

...well, the good continuations, at least. ;)

Yeah, it is fun to think of them this way. I like to factor in the original strips as well. That fills in the 70s nicely (the "Madam Spectre" era). Even the graphic novel Permission To Die gives him the ASP (Gardner's gun), so you can look at that as a mission between books. And I believe Q'ute shows up in a strip at some point. So there we go. :)

#15 Bill

Bill

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 257 posts
  • Location:Levittown, New York

Posted 29 May 2011 - 06:21 AM

Donovan:

First, forgive me for getting your name wrong. I was very tired when I posted last night, and did not proof read what I had done before I posted it.

Also, it was clear by your comments that you thought the Benson books were a reboot. Just to be clear, I take reboot meaning a complete restart for the series. With the films, we did not have a reboot until 2006's Casino Royale. AS I stated, the books up until this point are not reboots. All do fit into one continuity, albeit a loose one, as Zencat points out. Carte Blanche promises to be a complete reboot. Once I read it, I will be able to see how well Mr. Deaver succeeds in doing so.

Now, I would like to address your unfair comments about Raymond Benson. Just so you know, I am not a casual fan, but one who has been into Bond for over 30 years.

I have read all of the books except for the last two Moneypenny Diaries, which I intend to as soon as I have the time (I received them as a Christmas present). I am as well versed in the books as you claim to be. While we would not have Bond if not for Fleming, all of his successors gave us worthy adventures (except Devil May Care, which reads like a parody. Despite it being written by a renowned author, it is by far the least worthy in the series. It also makes the critical error of portraying the CIA in a negative light, operating in shades of grey which is something that Fleming would never have allowed. Considering that it was deliberately meant to fit into the time frame of the 1960s alongside the latter Fleming stories, someone dropped the ball in allowing it to be published as it was).

Now John Gardner was a successful author in his own right before the Bond series, and he brought experience to his books, and they truly benefited from that experience. While he was a bit excessive in using the double-triple agent theme on more then one occasion, they are well written and I will always be grateful to Gardner for providing us with new adventures every year at a time when EON could not. Also, his portrayal of Bond as a true Cold Warrior was right in line with the politics of the time.

Raymond Benson's books came out when Bond was bigger then he had been since the 1960s--not to put the Moore and Dalton films down, but my perception of the late 1990s and Bond was due to the internet and alternative media outside of the traditional network TV and trade publications. Bond was more relevant in pop culture then he had been in 30 years.

I am sure that IFP saw that, and wanted Raymond Benson to emulate the films as much as possible in the books. Thus, Bond was using the P99! Q's scenes are expanded! He had a car that had a special paint job allowing for it to appear different colors! M was a woman! And---that's about it. The fact of the matter is that the Bond films will always be more popular then the books to the mainstream public. John Gardner and Raymond Benson were clearly working with that in their minds. There are several articles on this site that point out how the films influenced Gardner's writing. While the Benson books do seem to be similarly influenced, the fact it no more then Gardner. Indeed, while High Time to Kill is excellent, and would make a terrific film, it would be quite an unusual Bond film given that much of it takes place climbing the mountain.

As for your comments about how the books are nothing more then endless flat descriptions, are you serious? Just look at his characters. First, the Fleming characters are fleshed out--the passage with Sir Miles Messervy in The Facts of Death serve to develop the character in much the same way that Gardner had done. When Felix returns in that same book, he is a real flesh and blood character. Tiger Tanaka's reappearance in The Man with the Red Tattoo gives us another opportunity to really know one of Fleming's best creations. While I was not happy when Draco became a villain, Benson handles it well and believably--after all, despite being Bond's father-in-law, he always was a gangster, a criminal and killer. As for Boothroyd, while the films obviously made Q out to be a far more significant character then Boothroyd is in the books, there is enough to support Q and Boothroyd being the same character. I am sure there are plenty of discussions in these forums alone addressing that.

Benson's other characters are also well developed. All of his Bond girls, especially the Doubleshot twins and Tylyn are real women, while still managing to fit into their role as Bond girl. Thus, I am not sure how "special" you would like them. As for the "repelent" (sic--maybe you should have run your post through Spellcheck as well?!) "masturbation chapter", I think I know what you mean. While I was not offended at it, it did seem a little out of place in a Bond book. Ironically, the Fleming sex passages were the most explicit in the novels--tame by other modern writing standards, but not compared to the other Bond authors (except the Wood novelizations). Raymond Benson gave us far and away the most explicit scene in the books. It was the only instance when such a scene appeared, and it was not written lightly--there was a specific reason that Benson included it, which I remember reading about, which I cannot recall it now.

As for his "milking" every Commonwealth issue, the fact is that Benson had to do so to keep Bond's role as a British agent realistic and relevant without being too outlandish--another way that he differs from some of the films. He did not make Bond an anti-terror expert as Mr. Deaver seems about to do, as all of his original Bond novels save the last were published before September 11, 2001. However, his Bond does fight terrorism, i.e. the Union, in much the same way that Fleming's Bond did with SPECTRE. While Islamic terrorism has been around for a very long time, with Gardner allying them with his new SPECTRE, the fact is they may not have worked as a consistent enemy in the Benson Bond books, as they may have been too horrifying to a public which was not focused on their threat. Islamic terrorism is now far more of a concern then when Benson wrote the books so it will be interesting to see how Deaver addresses this.

Despite not having written any novels prior to Bond, he has done so since, and he is a damn good writer. All of his Bond books are terrific. So, once again, I implore anyone reading these posts to give Benson a shot. Seek out his collections. They are worth it.

Finally, while I admit that I used to be a sucker for any official Bond product, that is no longer the case. I had real reservations with rebooting the film series, and while I enjoyed Casino Royale (largely due to Craig, who is terrific in both of his Bond films and that the film does adhere largely to the book), I think Quantum of Solace, for the most part, was atrocious. I addressed Devil May Care here, and while I like Gardner a lot, he was not perfect--I remember being very disappointed in Brokenclaw, for example. Still, I am a fan, and am looking forward to Carte Blanche and even Bond 23.

Edited by Bill, 29 May 2011 - 07:53 PM.


#16 Professor Pi

Professor Pi

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1430 posts

Posted 29 May 2011 - 04:17 PM

In John Gardner's second book, "For Special Services", Bond meets (and beds!) both Blofeld's daughter and Felix Leiter's daughter. So he is at least 20 years older in the Gardner books. So Gardner definitely picks up where Fleming left off.

Benson's first short story references Irma Bunt (OHMSS), and Bond's college-age child from Kissy Suzuki (YOLT).

Figure Bond is probably no older than Connery is now. :D

#17 chrisno1

chrisno1

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 931 posts

Posted 31 May 2011 - 05:24 PM

Wow, there are some very long posts here, particularly from Bill and Donovan, I don't want to start the debate all over, but rather wish to address the original question.

Gardner's novels are based in the 1980s. He even mentions the political climate and various heads of state (Win Lose or Die and Scorpius both feature Margaret Thatcher). They are a direct follow on from the Fleming novels (although not Colonel Sun or The Authorised Biography, which are never referenced as far as I recall) and while he doesn't specifically mention Bond's age it is quite clear he is late middle aged, certainly during Licence Renewed:

"Bond had even managed to alter his lifestyle, very slightly, adapting to the changing pressures of the 1970s and early 1980s: drastically cutting back - for most of the time - on his alcohol intake, and arranging with Morelands of Grosvenor Square for a new special bland of cigarettes, with a tar content slightly lower than any currently available... Minute flecks of grey had just started to show in the dark hair, which still retained its boyish black comma above the right eye. As yet no plumpness had appeared around the jowls and the line of the jaw was as straight and firm as ever."

Gardner always insisted he tried to think of the Fleming novels as being based in the 1960s and early 1970s, fitting rather more with the movie franchise than the literary one. This doesn't quite tie in with Fleming's references to Bond's wartime Naval career and Gardner avoids this topic altogther; even in the afore mentioned Win Lose or Die, which is set at sea, it is not specifically stated Bond was ever in the Second World War, although he probably saw active 'commando' service during the Falklands.

The final pages of Cold see Bond off to meet a new, female M (who has already been introduced to us in the movie tie in Goldeneye). Gardner is very careful with his film adaptations, trying to meld them with his own series of novels. So Leiter suffers amputations again etc etc.

As for Benson, well, despite Bill's claims, I can't recall him ever directly referencing a Gardner novel, not even when he meets Felix Leiter in The Facts of Death (I think Mr Big gets a sentence, but there's precious little information about why Felix is now wheelchair bound. I'm not even sure his daughter is mentioned - and Bond spent a whole adventure in her company!).

My abiding memory of Benson's work (and I read them all earlier this year) is that he's at pains to reference Fleming constantly to build James Bond's character. The first chapter of Zero MInus Ten has something like half a dozen clear nods to the original novels. He also includes elements which we are familiar with from the film franchise - scenes in Q Branch, Q, sudden seductions, every plot is a rip off from the SPECTRE trilogy, a female M - and this makes his stories much more contemporary. However, there is little or no suggestion that this James Bond is any older than the one presented by Fleming, or at least Gardner's in Licence Renewed. Given that so many other characters from Fleming's books return to Benson's pages, I can only assume he chose to consign Gardner, Amis et al to the dustbin and simply carried on from a vague year any time after Golden Gun. He's definatley older, that's hinted at in Zero MInus Ten, but it isn't clear how much older. It's a 'reboot' of sorts, bringing the original model up to date, but it's exactly the same character, unlike Deaver's recent creation who is not.

Curiously, for an author who is very much influenced by the movie Bond in his storytelling, Benson's three movie adaptations completely ignore his own stories and very rarely touch on the past history of James Bond. They tend to sit alone from all that swirls around them.

#18 Bill

Bill

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 257 posts
  • Location:Levittown, New York

Posted 31 May 2011 - 09:44 PM

Good post, chrisno1.

I am at work now so I cannot reference my Benson books. I am 99.9 % certain Raymond Benson makes a direct reference to Beatrice from Win, Lose or Die and Cold Fall (by far, Gardner's best Bond girl) and I am fairly certain there is a reference to Flicka from the Gardner books as well. (And are you sure there is no reference to Cedar Leiter?) While there are certainly more Fleming references, I am fairly certain Gardner is referenced in other places by Benson as well. The Benson books are in direct continuation of the Gardner books--they are not meant to an alternate continuation series of the Fleming books. As Benson's first Bond novel was published 16 years after Gardner's first one, direct references to Bond's age were muted, as it became increasingly difficult to believe a World War II veteran was still an active SIS agent.

The novelizations do make reference to the rest of the series. Tomorrow Never Dies addresses one which helps to reconcile an inconsistency with the books and films, which is too cool to just paraphrase here. I will discuss it once I have the chance to consult the book!

Edited by Bill, 31 May 2011 - 09:46 PM.


#19 Bill

Bill

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 257 posts
  • Location:Levittown, New York

Posted 01 June 2011 - 05:16 AM

Just got home and checked my TND novelization.

The passage is from CH 4 of the book:

"Bond once had a bad habit of telling people he had been to Cambridge. He remembered trying to impress Miss Moneypenny by telling her that he took a first in Oriental languages there. It wasn't true."

This passage occurs after Benson summarizes Bond's educational background as laid out by Fleming, where he explicitly states that Bond did not have "proper schooling" after Fettes. It also puts the book right into both film and literary continuity--and explains why Bond cannot read the keyboard at Wai Lin's HQ later in the book/film, despite the boast to Moneypenny in the film You Only Live Twice--all this in three sentences. Not bad! (Yes, this still does not explain 007 seemingly attending Cambridge with Hosain from the film The Spy Who Loved Me, but it's a start!)

#20 Dustin

Dustin

    Commander

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5786 posts

Posted 01 June 2011 - 08:09 AM

(And are you sure there is no reference to Cedar ?)


I think it's TFOD. The Texas adventure FSS is mentioned
expressly, I think even with Bond and Felix discussing it. But no reference to Felix's daughter, oddly enough.

#21 Bill

Bill

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 257 posts
  • Location:Levittown, New York

Posted 01 June 2011 - 08:32 AM

Thanks, Dustin. Maybe mentioning Cedar was too painful for both father and suitor!

#22 chrisno1

chrisno1

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 931 posts

Posted 01 June 2011 - 09:53 AM

Just got home and checked my TND novelization.

The passage is from CH 4 of the book:

"Bond once had a bad habit of telling people he had been to Cambridge. He remembered trying to impress Miss Moneypenny by telling her that he took a first in Oriental languages there. It wasn't true."

This passage occurs after Benson summarizes Bond's educational background as laid out by Fleming, where he explicitly states that Bond did not have "proper schooling" after Fettes. It also puts the book right into both film and literary continuity--and explains why Bond cannot read the keyboard at Wai Lin's HQ later in the book/film, despite the boast to Moneypenny in the film You Only Live Twice--all this in three sentences. Not bad! (Yes, this still does not explain 007 seemingly attending Cambridge with Hosain from the film The Spy Who Loved Me, but it's a start!)


Surely that's only a movie reference? The sentence clearly contradicts Fleming's YOLT where Bond had no working knowledge of the Japanese language. That is one of the problems with using the movies as an authoritive history of Bond's life, they don't always expressly follow the novels.
If Benson was being true to the literary 007 he wouldn't have mentioned the Moneypenny & Cambridge incident at all. TND is more to do with the FILMS than it is to do with the NOVELS, ans as such this sentence is fine.
As I said, in Benson's tie ins he rather ignores the literary 007.

Regards TFOD, I don't think even FSS is mentioned, just some vague reference to past adventures, particularly the incident where Felix loses his leg. Unless it occurs elsewhere from chapter 6. Did you have any luck tracing those other ex-girlfriends down, Bill? I really don't remember them being mentioned at all.

#23 David Schofield

David Schofield

    Commander

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3026 posts

Posted 01 June 2011 - 11:38 AM

Of course, Chris Wood put Bond's Stromberg adventure back in the lit.Bond world by obliterating the Hossein-Cambridge stuff.

Then again, he also obliterates Roger Moore's James Bond from the story :tup: whereas I always felt Benson was deliberately writing about Pierce Brosnan's James Bond even in his orignal, non-novelisations. I could never honestly accept that Benson hadn't been actively, and willingly, encouraged to make his Bond the current movie Bond. His books have always seemed to me to be the James Bond adventures of Pierce Brosnan EON never got round to filming.

As has been pointed out, he does tip his hat to being a continuation of the Gardner series as previous posts have referenced. Hey, perhaps he was influenced to make his James Bond Pierce because Gardener's last CHRONOLOGICAL novelisation had been of Brosnan's Goldeneye. ;)

#24 Bill

Bill

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 257 posts
  • Location:Levittown, New York

Posted 01 June 2011 - 02:48 PM

chrisno1:

Yes, that is a movie reference in the sense that only the films mention Cambridge. However, it also reconciles the film Bond with the literary Bond in addressing the Cambridge issue at all--I did not transcribe the paragraphs preceding that passage, but as I said it is a description of Bond's early days, mostly lifted from Bond's obituary in the YOLT novel.

And David, good point on the Wood novelization (both of his books are excellent, by the way). As for the novelizations themselves, the seven to date can, for the most part, be seen to be part of the literary canon. TSWLM is very Fleming like, if I remember correctly, even going back to describing the KGB/Smersh leadership as mentioned in Fleming's FRWL. Moonraker is a little more problematic, as the Drax as described in that book is the same as in Fleming's--so it is an amazing coincidence that Bond encounters two men who look exactly the same and have the same background--but for his part, Wood makes both of his novels very Flemingesque. The same problem applies to the Licence To Kill novelization, wherein Bond apparently has met two Milton Krests in his life! However, Gardner does fit the rest of the book into literary continuity without a problem, even having Leiter attacked by a shark for a second time, with the scene with the note "He disagreed with something that ate him" appearing as a flashback to the LALD novel rather then in the present in LTK. If I remember correctly, Gardner even has Bond use a different gun then the PPK, as Bond did not use that gun in his books. The Benson novelizations do not feature any conflict with Fleming, aside from the Cambridge reconciliation.

Now I do not think that the novelizations were ever meant to fit seamlessly into the literary continuity. I just find it cool that Wood, Gardner and Benson did their best to do so. I think Raymond Benson is on record somewhere as stating that the novelizations are not really meant to be part of his book series. Still, when it r comes right down to it, the discrepancies are relatively minor, and I have no problem seeing them as part of the book series despite them.

And chrisno1, the ex-girlfriends are mentioned in, I believe, Never Dream of Dying. I remembered where the TND passage was, so I had no problem last night in citing that, but I was too tired to go through all of NDOD. I will try to do so tonight (and as I said I am 99.9 % certain that the passage appears--so if I don't find it, forgive me!)

#25 David Schofield

David Schofield

    Commander

  • Discharged
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3026 posts

Posted 01 June 2011 - 02:59 PM

Bill

Never had much of a problem with what Gardner did with LTK to fit it into his/Fleming's continuity. We have all met people with the same name, as in the case with Krest, and the character of the LTK deviant is so different than Fleming's Hemingwayesque tough guy. I guess Bond might have raised an eyebrow at the coincidence and that of the name of his boat, but no matter to me, anyhow.

Of course, Wood is on to a much stickier wicket with Drax and the name of his project, Moonraker. Can't see how Wood could have renamed Drax or his project without defeating the object of the novelisation - to promote the movie of the same name. That said, Wood's SPY is clearly not about a James Bond film starring the Roger Moore James Bond character... ;)

#26 CasinoKiller

CasinoKiller

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 145 posts

Posted 02 June 2011 - 04:44 PM

So the general impression I seem to be getting here is that Bond is a few years older than Fleming's Bond (at the end of that series), at the start of Gardner's series, and he's a good 15 years older by the end of the Gardner series...by that logic, the Fleming novel events happened in the early 1960's up till the mid 1970's (roughly a decade after they 'originally' happened), with Gardner's series beginning a few years later in the early 1980's.

Which seems to fit in well (somewhat) with what we know about Bond's age in the novels. Most people believe Bond was born in 1924 (the latest year Fleming implied in his canon), which would put him in his late 20's at the start of the series (in Casino Royale) and in his late thirties (or maybe around 40 even) at the end of the series (in The Man with the Golden Gun). Shift the timeline forward by a decade, and Bond is born in 1934 (or maybe a few years later in the 1930's)...which would put him in his mid to late 40's at the start of the Gardner series, and possibly in his late 50's at the end of the Gardner series.

With Benson, I feel the best explanation is to go with the way Brosnan's Bond was implied to be portrayed in the movies...he's in his early 40's, still in his prime (albeit at the back end of it), but older and more mature than he used to be, a veteran agent and 'relic' of the Cold War.

#27 ACE

ACE

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4543 posts

Posted 27 June 2011 - 03:43 PM

There's a beautiful homage to Fleming when Gardner mentions Bond has started collecting first editions of books as an investment (Fleming did so)

Sorry, Donovan Mayne-Nicholls, I've missed this interpretation. In which chapter of which novel was this?

Interesting debate here. Just my tuppence worth, I think the Bond in Casino Royale is the same chap, "by literary sleight of hand" (Mr Gardner's expression), as in The Man With The Red Tattoo. There is a convoluted and not always accurate throughline from Fleming through Higson, Faulks, Amis, Pearson, Weinberg, Gardner and Benson.

The Bond of ALL the film tie-in novelizations is expressly outside the literary continuity, despite Gardner's determined attempts in Licence To Kill 1989 (to at least keep continuity in his own series). I suggest this is true of all the comic iterations of the character too (although some, like Mike Grell's Permission To Die, try to marry worlds).

I agree with many here that there is a loose, squint-as-you-look-at-it-continuity applying to all the official Bond novels and short stories until Carte Blanche.

Re: continuation author continuity.
Whilst Pearson's 007 Biography 1973 references Amis/Markham's Colonel Sun 1968, Gardner gives M new staff, the Davisons, in Win Lose Or Die 1989. Implicit in this is the acknowledgment of the death of the Hammonds in Colonel Sun. Benson has M retain the Davisons in The Facts of Death 1998. Benson also uses Stuart Thomas, the Greek section chief from Colonel Sun, in The Facts of Death, thus threading continuities neatly.

As Professor Pi has mentioned, in the first Benson short story, Blast From The Past 1997, he name checks Irma Bunt (OHMSS 1963) and his child from Kissy Suzuki (You Only Live Twice, 1964). However, he also mentions Bunt's alleged sighting in Australia and the name of his son with Kissy, James. Both these keep continuity with John Pearson's biography of 007 published in 1973 (itself, brilliant connecting tissue between the Fleming novels and even Colonel Sun). Another example of Benson tying up continuities deftly.

Also, as Dustin mentions, The Facts of Death 1998 has Bond recalling a mission in Texas, a glancing reference to Gardner's For Special Services 1982. Interestingly, reference to Leiter's daughter, Cedar, with whom Bond shared the Gardner mission and with whom, as far as we are told, Bond did NOT share a bed, is conspicuous by its absence in Benson's tale. Bond also references his Gardner years when it's revealed the wheelchair-bound Leiter uses an ASP 9mm, 007 says "the weapon I was using for a while..." Benson even mentions Leiter's time at the DEA (only from Licence To Kill 1989 film and novelisation) and also Admiral Hargreaves which threads in filmic continuity. Benson does it well, again.

I believe the Benson books refer to Predator and James Boldman, the code and covernames John Gardner bestowed upon Bond in his series. Benson also has Bond smoke handmade cigarettes from H. Simmons of the Burlington Arcade, Gardner's replacement for Morelands after they ceased trading.

I've never been convinced of a seamless in continuity in Bond (Why do all the people who bleat about Judi Dench's M in Casino Royale accept the even more ridiculous Bond meeting Blofeld for the first time in OHMSS without a peep?). It's fairly obvious that even Fleming retro-fitted some character details when he realised the character was more successful and enduring than he dreamt of. But I guess we all look at and find connections in Bond in our own way.

Vive la debate!