22 replies to this topic

[CasinoKiller]

The Spy who Loved Me was the one Bond novel I'd never read so far-I'd always avoided it given all that I'd heard about it (Bond showing up only in the last third of the book, and most of the book being about the female protagonists' sordid affairs...); but for the sake of completion, I read the book recently and I must say I've formed a RADICALLY revised opinion of it now!

TSWLM is unique in that it is, among all the Fleming Bond books (indeed among ALL Bond stories ever!), the closest to 'realism'...and I don't mean 'realism' in the sense that gritty espionage stories like Casino Royale or From Russia with Love are 'realistic'; but rather, realism in the sense of illustrating the real world inhabited by ordinary people far removed from the secret battlefield of espionage and assassination. Reading the protagonist Vivienne Michel's account of her life, you can get so absorbed in her dramas, that you literally forget you're reading a Bond novel!

Bond's insertion into the story is also interesting...unlike the other books, where we follow 007's perspective through his mission, and thus all the cloak-and-dagger gimmicks, and the violence and death is all quiet sundry; here we perceive Bond from the point-of-view of an ordinary person-one who's path just happens to briefly and violently intersect with the world of spies and gangsters. To Vivienne, and by extension the reader, James Bond comes across as a man of mystery belonging to an alien world light-years away from the Dreary Pines Motel, albeit one who, by virtue of who and what he is, is in the position to be a savior!

In a sense, the book is virtually a deconstruction of Bond; explicitly presenting the two conflicting interpretations of him. On one hand, Bond is like a knight who slays the dragon and rescues the damsel in distress. On the other hand, he, and the villains he kills, are another species entirely...a species of hardened cold blooded killers...and that they do not belong to the 'normal' world. The whole dynamic between Bond and his 'Bond girls' is explored as well-Vivienne even goes on to say that no woman shall ever possess Bond, but she, by virtue of having her life saved by him, will always feel she owns a part of him now.

It may not have the thrills of On Her Majesties Secret Service or You Only Live Twice, not the suspenseful espionage of From Russia with Love or The Property of a Lady, but The Spy who Loved Me is the perfect glimpse of James Bond's world from the 'wrong end of the telescope' as Fleming himself once put it!

[blueman]

Excellent points! Always liked TSWLM, it's such a unique creation and damned if Fleming doesn't pull it off in the end.

Glad you started this thread.

[Dustin]

A splendid work about a splendid book. Top job, CasinoKiller!

[glidrose]

I've always believed it's one of Fleming's best.

BTW, those of us who enjoy this book owe a round of thanks to former Glidrose chairman Peter Janson-Smith. As you may recall Fleming asked that the book be withdrawn and that there be no paperback edition. After Fleming's death, Janson-Smith fought the objections of other Glidrose directors to get the book back into print.

[Revelator]

I'm glad to hear someone else standing up for this criminally marginalized book, which reveals Fleming at his most experimental and gutsiest. How many other blockbuster authors would dare tamper with a proven formula so drastically? If Fleming was stung by TSWLM's reception, it was probably because much of the book was autobiographical and inspired by painful memories. As I wrote elsewhere on this board, Fleming drew upon his own early sexual experience for the cinema scene, but--in an startlingly sympathetic reversal--portrayed it from his partner's point of view, with the male character self-critically cast as a caddish young Fleming. In this book he not only views Bond "from the wrong end of the telescope"--he views himself.

The Spy Who Loved Me is the most feminist of all the Bond novels--if there is such a thing!--and is also the most bleak and pessmistic in its sexual politics. I call it the most feminist because it is a devastating catalog of male vanity, hypocrisy, and callousness, related directly to us by the only three dimensional female character Fleming created. It is sexually bleak because it suggests the only decent man for Vivienne is an eternally unavailable one, a figure of fantasy who slips into the lives of ordinary people rarely and fleetingly. And all other men--all sexually available men--regardless of nationality and class, are in comparison no good.

Fleming's own conflicted feelings about Bond are on full display in STWLM. Having originally intended Bond to be a cold, blunt instrument, Fleming inadvertently found himself fleshing Bond out to near-human extremes. That Fleming was disturbed and divided by this is evident in the words of the kind police captain who warns Vivienne that Bond is little different from the criminals he fights. That is the Bond of Casino Royale, Fleming's intended Bond. But this is immediately undermined by Vivienne's knowledge that Bond is the only man who treated her with true affection and understanding. That is the chivalrous, humanized 007, the romantic character Bond grew into. The other men Fleming portrays in TSWLM correspond to the flawed men one meets in real life, but in real life James Bond, the ideal man, must remain an unattainable fantasy to the woman who appreciates him most.

Edited by Revelator, 09 April 2012 - 08:40 PM.

[CasinoKiller]

I'm glad to hear someone else standing up for this criminally marginalized book, which reveals Fleming at his most experimental and gutsiest. How many other blockbuster authors would dare tamper with a proven formula so drastically? If Fleming was stung by TSWLM's reception, it was probably because much of the book was autobiographical and inspired by painful memories. As I wrote elsewhere on this board, Fleming drew upon his own early sexual experience for the cinema scene, but--in an startlingly sympathetic reversal--portrayed it from his partner's point of view, with the male character self-critically cast as a caddish young Fleming. In this book he not only views Bond "from the wrong end of the telescope"--he views himself.

The Spy Who Loved Me is the most feminist of all the Bond novels--if there is such a thing!--and is also the most bleak and pessmistic in its sexual politics. I call it the most feminist because it is a devastating catalog of male vanity, hypocrisy, and callousness, related directly to us by the only three dimensional female character Fleming created. It is sexually bleak because it suggests the only decent man for Vivienne is an eternally unavailable one, a figure of fantasy who slips into the lives of ordinary people rarely and fleetingly. And all other men--all sexually available men--regardless of nationality and class, are in comparison no good.

Fleming's own conflicted feelings about Bond are on full display in STWLM. Having originally intended Bond to be a cold, blunt instrument, Fleming inadvertently found himself fleshing Bond out to near-human extremes. That Fleming was disturbed and divided by this is evident in the words of the kind police captain who warns Vivienne that Bond is little different from the criminals he fights. That is the Bond of Casino Royale, Fleming's intended Bond. But this is immediately undermined by Vivienne's knowledge that Bond is the only man who treated her with true affection and understanding. That is the chivalrous, humanized 007, the romantic character Bond grew into. The other men Fleming portrays in TSWLM correspond to the flawed men one meets in real life, but in real life James Bond, the ideal man, must remain an unattainable fantasy to the woman who appreciates him most.

I'm glad to hear someone else standing up for this criminally marginalized book, which reveals Fleming at his most experimental and gutsiest. How many other blockbuster authors would dare tamper with a proven formula so drastically? If Fleming was stung by TSWLM's reception, it was probably because much of the book was autobiographical and inspired by painful memories. As I wrote elsewhere on this board, Fleming drew upon his own early sexual experience for the cinema scene, but--in an startlingly sympathetic reversal--portrayed it from his partner's point of view, with the male character self-critically cast as a caddish young Fleming. In this book he not only views Bond "from the wrong end of the telescope"--he views himself.

The Spy Who Loved Me is the most feminist of all the Bond novels--if there is such a thing!--and is also the most bleak and pessmistic in its sexual politics. I call it the most feminist because it is a devastating catalog of male vanity, hypocrisy, and callousness, related directly to us by the only three dimensional female character Fleming created. It is sexually bleak because it suggests the only decent man for Vivienne is an eternally unavailable one, a figure of fantasy who slips into the lives of ordinary people rarely and fleetingly. And all other men--all sexually available men--regardless of nationality and class, are in comparison no good.

Fleming's own conflicted feelings about Bond are on full display in STWLM. Having originally intended Bond to be a cold, blunt instrument, Fleming inadvertently found himself fleshing Bond out to near-human extremes. That Fleming was disturbed and divided by this is evident in the words of the kind police captain who warns Vivienne that Bond is little different from the criminals he fights. That is the Bond of Casino Royale, Fleming's intended Bond. But this is immediately undermined by Vivienne's knowledge that Bond is the only man who treated her with true affection and understanding. That is the chivalrous, humanized 007, the romantic character Bond grew into. The other men Fleming portrays in TSWLM correspond to the flawed men one meets in real life, but in real life James Bond, the ideal man, must remain an unattainable fantasy to the woman who appreciates him most.

Very good points!

And I agree with you about the contradictory portrayal of Bond-on the one hand, Bond is portrayed as the ultimate man of violence; a man who lies in wait for an assassin and then guns him down...but on the other hand, Bond refuses to shoot Slugsy and Horror because he apparently cannot kill in cold blood.

[Dustin]

The key scene to me is the moment Vivienne answers the door to find yet another gangster waiting there, on top of the couple already scaring her to death. The same remorseless deadly cruelty she's just witnessed. Only when Bond smiles she gets her hope up.

[Major Tallon]

The key scene to me is the moment Vivienne answers the door to find yet another gangster waiting there, on top of the couple already scaring he to death. The same remorseless deadly cruelty she's just witnessed. Only when Bond smiles she gets her hope up.

Yes, indeed. I love that scene.

[blueman]

That's an interesting setup, Bond on his own and presented almost as a mirror to the men he battles, really extrordinary. I think that's one reason I like QOS so much, Bond spends so much of that film on his own and simply taking care of business better than anyone else, plus the sexless relationship with Camille comes across as eerily similar to what Bond and Vivienne experience, at least in feeling. But like the Bond in TSWLM, not a popular interpretation with most folks who've come to expect the same old same old from Bond. Random thought sans coffee.

[glidrose]

Couldn't resist slipping in extraneous and pointless apologia for QoS, could you? The novel TSWLM and the film QoS are like chalk and cheese. I'll leave you to your chalk sandwich.

[Jim]

Too aggressive. Back to the topic please.

[glidrose]

Yes, thank you Jim, he said between gritted teeth. By all means let's get back to the topic which is Fleming's TSWLM.

[blueman]

???

Seems a reasonable place to go, TSWLM is a unique novel in the canon, for its perspective on Bond. FWIW, Moore's badass moments with Adams in TMWTGG strike a similar cord. Also FWIW, minor henchmen in the films tend to come across as stooges more often than not, certainly not the cold-blooded killer Bond is, always lessens Bond IMO, not very thrilling when he's offing dupes. The Grants are too rare, hope we get some actual threats ala Sluggsy and Horror (silly names, but scary characters) in SF. Bond comes across more of a killer when there's somebody worth killing, something the producers tend to forget.

[CasinoKiller]

True. Then again, I don't think Bond necessarily needs to kill someone who is a physical threat in order to come across as a killer. To my mind, some of the greatest 'Bond kills' are the one's where Bond coldly kills someone who has been developed as an individual to some extent in the story...someone who is a fully formed character, and not just a random thug holding a gun or a knife. And somehow, I feel the killings have a greater impact in a more 'civilized' setting.

Okay, here's the perfect example to prove what I mean-Bond's killing of Dryden in the PTS of Casino Royale. Dryden may appear for a few minutes, but he has been developed as a character (albeit a minor one). We know he's an MI6 section chief who knows M, we know he's a traitor, we know that he knows Bond from before...in order words, he's a PERSON and not some random expendable mook who exists to be killed in a video-game-like killing spree! And they are sitting in Dryden's office...having quiet a civilized conversation, when all of a sudden Bond whips out his gun and fires a single silenced shot, killing Dryden.

And the moment he does so, we have the feeling that Bond has done something 'concrete'. He's killed an actual person; not just a random mook, or some henchman or some murderous thug, but someone whom he just had a conversation with, who's been developed as a character in our eyes, with his own motivations and reactions. That too, not in a battlefield, or in the midst of some chase sequence, but in an office-a very civilized setting.

I think the impact of Bond's action is somehow heightened by these factors-namely, the fact that he's ended the life of a PERSON (as opposed to a cardboard cut-out created to be mowed down by gunfire), in a very ordinary and civilized setting. It highlights the fact that Bond is an assassin...not a soldier or an action hero.

[blueman]

Yep, get what you're saying about being an assassin. I'm more thinking of those nameless hordes, from about TB through DAD, that like you said Bond more often than not simply mows down cuz they're coming at him en masse. Just gets old, also not very "thrilling." Give me mano-a-mano tough-guy battles any day (Connery did have his share, Laz too, and Craig now... I want to say Dalton cuz he got tough, but never really had a decent foe to grapple with IMO).

TSWLM, coming on the heels of the film project-based TB, is a nice change up in that regard, there's a much more human focus in Vivienne's tale, compared to NATO trying to stop its missing bombs from exploding. Some (probably most) may not care for the expanded short story-type treatment, I love it, keeps a nice tight angle on the people involved.

There's also some striking examples from films of that time (1962) of female characters breaking out from prescribed roles and perspectives (not sure Vivienne really is such a different creature, but her 1st person "feel" of things given to the reader is pleasantly upsetting, lol). Anna Karina in "My Life To Live" springs to mind, a similar-feel woman living her life as she chooses. Lots happening then re women and their "place" in western society (imagine how different Honey Rider might be presented on screen now than she was in 1962!).

[Revelator]

Seems a reasonable place to go, TSWLM is a unique novel in the canon, for its perspective on Bond. FWIW, Moore's badass moments with Adams in TMWTGG strike a similar cord.

I think Moore slapping Adams was probably his lowest moment as Bond. That sort of scene has very little to do with Fleming. It is quite revealing that while in the movies Bond slaps at least four women out of anger or to intimidate them, Fleming's Bond never does. In the book of TMWTGG he slaps Tiffy because she's being hysterical, and that's it. Moore slapping Adams is really a callback to Connery slapping Tanya and Tiffany Case, not to anything in Fleming. When it comes to violence against women, Fleming's Bond has a near-spotless track record, and a more progressive one than his movie counterparts.

Edited by Revelator, 12 April 2012 - 07:34 AM.

[blueman]

Well, he shoots the cello playing assassin in LTK. And isn't shy about fighting for his life against Klebb. Context seems to be the thing (though agree in general, Fleming's Bond feels more rooted in the chivalrous world of, say, Dornford Yates than a contemporary like Spillane, okay, Yates with a lot of nooky thrown in).

[Dustin]

Seems a reasonable place to go, TSWLM is a unique novel in the canon, for its perspective on Bond. FWIW, Moore's badass moments with Adams in TMWTGG strike a similar cord.

I think Moore slapping Adams was probably his lowest moment as Bond. That sort of scene has very little to do with Fleming. It is quite revealing that while in the movies Bond slaps at least four women out of anger or to intimidate them, Fleming's Bond never does. In the book of TMWTGG he slaps Tiffy because she's being hysterical, and that's it. Moore slapping Adams is really a callback to Connery slapping Tanya and Tiffany Case, not to anything in Fleming. When it comes to violence against women, Fleming's Bond has a near-spotless track record, and a more progressive one than his movie counterparts.

Book Bond's progressive, overall quite caring and considerate behaviour towards women is probably considered 'liberal' and cissy-ish today. For some reason our times seem to have become so brutalised and dehumanised that I wouldn't be surprised to hear demands for Bond slapping the odd woman again. Book Bond wasn't the best role model for a man of his time, but he considered himself a much more selfish bastard than he was in actual situations when in a hard spot with a woman and a confident man was needed.

[Revelator]

Well, he shoots the cello playing assassin in LTK. And isn't shy about fighting for his life against Klebb.

Well, Klebb is an ugly woman, so Bond would have no problem hitting her. (I kid, I kid, to quote Triumph the Talking Dog.) It's also notable that Bond wounds Trigger when he had orders to kill her, and thus lands himself in trouble with the higher-ups. Bond, who cannot bear killing a lovely woman in cold blood, justifies himself by saying Trigger will be punished by her own people, but even that makes him feel sorry for her. (In the excellent comic strip adaptation of TLD, M acknowledges Bond's point after gently chiding him, but keeps concealed from a 007 a Russian newspaper that state Trigger was killed in an "accident".) IIRC, Lycett's biography says that Fleming disliked Spillane's books, which is not surprising. Spillane is sadistic, whereas Fleming is masochistic.

Edited by Revelator, 12 April 2012 - 06:48 PM.

[Major Tallon]

There is, I think, a tendency among some fans to regard the literary Bond as a brutal, joyless man, but I don't think that viewpoint finds confirmation in the stories. I've pointed out elsewhere that Bond threatens to kill Solitaire if she betrays him, but both Bond's introspective thoughts about her and his actions toward her are romantic, even chivalrous. You'd never find Fleming's Bond threatening to break a woman's arm if she didn't provide him with information.

[Trevelyan 006]

You'd never find Fleming's Bond threatening to break a woman's arm if she didn't provide him with information.

Good Point.

Returning to the topic, I'd also have to say TSWLM was one of the better Bond novels, merely because it was so different from the others.
It's a novel that stands out for simply starting off introducing and getting acquainted with a fresh character. The fact that Fleming produces a whole background story for Vivienne, sets up the conflict, then introduces Bond into the equation, makes for a splendid read.

[The Shark]

I've pointed out elsewhere that Bond threatens to kill Solitaire if she betrays him, but both Bond's introspective thoughts about her and his actions toward her are romantic, even chivalrous.

This is one of the great insights of literature - the internal monologue. It's much harder for film to convey the innermost soul of a character, hence the necessity of a musical score in much film. I've always said the one consistent element in the spirit of Fleming was John Barry's underscore. Without having read the novels, solely through an understanding of human psychology and sheer intuition, he provided the films with the literary Bond's chivalrous, nostalgic and even at times sentimental nature. That was both John Barry, James Bond (and by way, Ian Fleming).

“Like all harsh, cold men, he was easily tipped over into sentiment." - CASINO ROYALE.

[Revelator]

Whenever I reread Bond and Vivienne's first meeting it's certainly Barry that I hear in the background of my mind. Barry was also a master of leitmotif, something most non-Barry scores have ignored to their detriment.