13 replies to this topic

[deth]

........I enjoy his books........ I'm reading them in order..... I'm on Scorpius now...



........while I have complained about the double crosses in the past, another annoyance is Bond seems to be too smart about everything
..... he knows something about EVERYTHING almost......

.........he's always committing things to memory, like it's the easiest thing in the world..... and it's a bit annoying...... to have this Bond with the brain of a near genius......


.........just a comment.......

[Mister Asterix]

Yes. But only a little bit. It

[Brix Bond]

No, he's incredibly stupid. How could you not tell the wrong brother had been killed in Never Send Flowers?

[deth]

I mean his ability to memorize is uncanny....... and his general knowledge is nearly perfect....




..........hell, I wouldn't be surprised if he WAS an expert on orchids.....

[Qwerty]

I do find Gardner's Bond to be a tad annoying by the way he just takes in every thing compared to Fleming's Bond. Just little things, none off the top of my head, but the character isn't that bad at all, just a couple little things as I read.

[deth]

no, the character isn't too bad....... just he's TOO smart. Hell, if he put his mind to it... he could easily win a nobel prize in physics, chemistry, economics, literature, and of course, the Nobel peace prize.....



.......seriously, he's just too damn smart. Gardner did get his physical aspect perfect though, imo....

[Methos]

I was always under the impression that John Gardner was intent upon bringing Bond back to some of the 'real-world' espionage roots that Fleming had established. Gardner was known to have had connections with actual intelligence resources in the UK and USA and this was beautifully reflected in his Bond novels. I suspect that Gardner aimed to portray Bond as a reflection of a 'real-world' covert operations officer. As such, he crafted Bond as a 'jack of all trades, master of none'. Bear in mind too, that an intelligence officer is a highly skilled and educated individual. Western intelligence services, both in the UK and USA, recruit only the best and brightest.

It would strike me as self evident that memorization and a keen awareness of one's enviroment are essential elements of what field operatives in the West call 'tradecraft'. In fiction, the most illustrative exposition of this quentessential skill that I can recall is depicted in the film 'Spygame'. During the course of the film an elder CIA officer tutors a younger officer in 'tradecraft'. The younger officer is encouraged to note as many details of his surroundings as possible and recount a detailed description of his surroundings to the veteran. Such techniques are most useful when tracking people, or more often than not, being aware of when your being tracked. For those of you interested in 'real world' clandestine operations, I highly recommend reading 'See No Evil' by Robert Baer (a former CIA operations officer). In the book he details quite a few instances where an awareness of his surroundings was crucial.

Edited by Methos, 17 January 2004 - 09:29 PM.

[deth]

good points Methos.....


...........maybe then........ it may just be the WAY in which Gardner writes it that makes it sound kind of annoying....

[Dr Niles Crane]

Actually now that you come to mention it, Gardner (for me) always made Bond just a bit too - not smart, but perfect - and therefore annoying as a character. Fleming's Bond was a little more vulnerable and human.

To take an example - With Gardner its is 'Bond is captured - ok give him two paragraphs - oh yes there he goes - he has just escaped. You know the obligatory 'James saw his chance and feinted to the left, catching the gun man with a punch to the jaw and escaped out the window.

This is another example of how Gardner writes him 'annoyingly perfect'.

And I think Benson has been getting a bit the same way. I always liked the frailty of Bond in the books - I mean he spent about three books having and recovering from a nervous breakdown.

This is nothing like the superspy we have now who probably would have just shrugged off Tracey's death with a quip. But that is the Bond of the movies - 14 months of torture - just find me a razor and I'll be tickety boo.

But then again Gardner's writing style really annoys me.

[Methos]

Niles, while I enjoyed Gardner's writing very much, you make some very valid points. Though, I seem to recall Gardner complaining that he was under pressure from the publisher to tailor his books more to the film's incarnation of Bond, as opposed to Fleming's literary standard. Regardless of Gardner Bond's flaw, I would take him over Bensons any day!!!

[Dr Niles Crane]

Sigh - we are never going to get Fleming back - but I can never forgive Gardner for Lavender Peacock - ARGGGGGGGGGGGGH!

[deth]

Sigh - we are never going to get Fleming back - but I can never forgive Gardner for Lavender Peacock - ARGGGGGGGGGGGGH!

what about Lavender?

[General Koskov]

That passage in ND,MB about Bond remembering thousands (hundereds?) of 'phone numbers was disturbing. I thought he spent his spare time drinking, not reading the 'phone book.

But all in all, Bond just has too many 'practical' and 'long lasting' gadgets, not brains.

[deth]

That passage in ND,MB about Bond remembering thousands (hundereds?) of 'phone numbers was disturbing. I thought he spent his spare time drinking, not reading the 'phone book.

yes........ that passage was just ridiculous........