14 replies to this topic

[General Koskov]

On page 186 of the Coronet paperback edition of GoldenEye, Bond mentions to Natalya (while in bed at their beach house) that there was a woman he was with, who may never walk again, while 'dealing with a very bad man.'

As I can tell (though it's not clear and conflicts with the film being set in Cuba) Bond and Natalya's beach-house is in Puerto Rico.

So, first off: when the hell has Bond been to Puerto Rico? And even if I'm getting the location wrong (and they're in Jamaica, or the Bahamas), the question still stands: to whom does he refer?

Of course, I am basing this question on the assumtion that Gardner is referencing a previous Bond novel...have I missed one? If not, it's a very strange bit of dialogue.

[Johnboy007]

Bond travelled to Puerto Rico in Seafire. One of his later novels. The girl is the late Fredericka (Flicka) von Gruesse. The evil man is Sir Max Tarn.

[brendan007]

'May never walk again'
If he's talking about Flika thats a damn stupid line, she died. Either Gardner's a twit or Bond is incredibly optimistic (or he's talking about someone else)

[clinkeroo]

Bond travelled to Puerto Rico in Seafire.  One of his later novels. The girl is the late Fredericka (Flicka) von Gruesse.  The evil man is Sir Max Tarn.

SeaFire, the book in which Flicka is injured was published in 1994, GoldenEye was published in 1995, and Cold was published in 1996. Chances are, Gardner was slipping the events of GoldenEye into the time frame between the two novels when Flicka is spending a year slowly slipping away and Bond spends most of his time at her bedside. It's quite a stretch, but then any marriage between the modern films and the books is a stretch.

[brendan007]

Ahh that makes sense. Thanks.

[General Koskov]

Ah, crap! I'm an idiot. I ran through all the novels in my mind, but I guess I forgot that Goldeneye falls inbetween Seafire and Cold.

So did Gardner actually write Goldeneye before he decided to kill Flicka in Cold? And what kind of fiance leaves his love in a coma in London (or wherever) to go driving around Monte Carlo? What was M. thinking: that it is sensible to evaluate an agent while his girlfriend is dying? Good grief!

[zencat]

This is a fascinating find, General Koskov. Who could this be?

[booyeah_]

[quote name='clinkeroo' date='14 February 2004 - 02:02'] [quote name='johnboy007' date='13 February 2004 - 20:37']Bond travelled to Puerto Rico in Seafire.

[brendan007]

Hang on, Goldeneye has to occur after Cold. At the end of Cold Bond is getting ready to meet the new female M. In Goldeneye Bond and M have been working together for a little while.
It seems Gardner is just a twit then, or he is talking about someone else.

[clinkeroo]

It seems Gardner is just a twit then, or he is talking about someone else.

Good point.

I honestly just think Gardner had stopped giving a by this point, and was probably just careless about the timeline. Or, maybe, he had the same guidelines from Glidrose regarding the film tie-ins that Benson was given with the previous media. That is, take what you want, leave what you don't.

Personally, I didn't like it when Gardner and Benson tried so hard to merge the film adaptations with what was going on with the literary Bond in their storylines. It was always apples and oranges, and obviously the prime example is the laughable sequence from the LTK tie-in where Felix has his prosthetic limbs being torn off in yet another shark attack. Pure and utter poop, and Gardner knew it.

I would much prefer stand alones, such as Christopher Wood's work. Although the idea of P&W writing a Bond novel does make my blood run cold.

Edited by clinkeroo, 15 February 2004 - 07:34 AM.

[clinkeroo]

Way off topic but cool sig Clinkeroo!

Thanks, Booyeah. A friend of mine who is a truly gifted graphic artist designed it for me.

[Matt Helm]

I always took it as Flicka even though the last chapter of Cold does indicate that Goldeneye would have to come after Cold. As Clinkeroo states, Gardner tried to tie the novelizations in with his series (maybe to attract new fans to his original work) as best he could without changing the EON storyline.

My feeling is that in the movie Goldeneye, Bond is obviously very intense on the beach. MGM was probably just trying to establish a deeper character with Brosnan's first outing by inserting intense drama and exploring Pierce's acting ability. Gardner on the other hand, was burdened with explaining that emotion in literary prose. Rather than spend time in generalizations about Bond's feelings, he took advantage and reached into his own stories for a motive.

Clinkeroo, I find it odd that you consider Wood's work "stand alones". I would say it was quite the opposite. More than any of the others, Wood changed the movie screenplay into a novel in Fleming's world. JB,TSWLM varies greatly from the movie and to me is the continuation novel between CS and LR. I find JBAMR almost as silly as the movie so I try to forget it is out there.

[clinkeroo]

Clinkeroo, I find it odd that you consider Wood's work "stand alones". I would say it was quite the opposite. More than any of the others, Wood changed the movie screenplay into a novel in Fleming's world. JB,TSWLM varies greatly from the movie and to me is the continuation novel between CS and LR. I find JBAMR almost as silly as the movie so I try to forget it is out there.

Yeah, I didn't state myself very well. By "stand alone" I meant that they didn't exist within the continuation novels, but they certainly do harken back to Fleming. Lord knows what Gardner would have made of a submarine Lotus or laser fights in space if he'd written them.

Wood didn't have the burden of attempting to write continuation novels as well as the tie-ins, so these books were able to play more loosely with reality. I like them as well, but I don't think of them as part of the canon.

I believe that Wood's writing style was very clean (unlike Benson) and that he took the effort to recreate Fleming's style (unlike Gardner). Maybe the screen writing gave him more of a chameleon like ability to write from different viewpoints and guises.

Certainly, TSWLM is much more realistic that MR, but neither would really cut it in the world of thriller writing where the suspension of disbelief becomes so important.

[General Koskov]

Wood's Spy was certainly the creme de la creme of novel adaptations, but his Moonraker was, purely because it followed the film so closely, boring. Still well written, though.

[Brix Bond]

I really cannot stand reading any of Gardner's books. I just dislike his writing style. He writes the character far too simplisticly and the polar opposite to Fleming. Gardner's Bond always comes across as stupid and flat and I find that offensive.

Fleming will always be the king as far as James Bond is concerned. It was his character afterall and his writing style is part of James Bond, so Gardner has already scuppered himself. I cringed at the end of Seafire, I really did. Who is Flicka compared with Tracy? Also the name 'Flicka' is appalling, a cheap copy of Pussy Galore. Although in saying that, my mother who reads the Gardner novels, never got the connotations behind Flicka's name.

Anyway, I have had a small rant and must now leave my tangent to sit in a bath with Thunderball as I really want to get onto OHMSS.