15 replies to this topic

[marktmurphy]

- Higson is a professional writer successful in many circles (including thrillers Higson novels and reviews) and very famous for his TV work in the UK. His appointment brings the publicity and proffessionalism so many Bond fans were demanding the series got. So stop moaning.
- Simply because a book stars a 13 year old and is aimed at teenagers does not neccessarily mean it will be an Enid Blyton. 'His Dark Materials' features a 12 year old hero who is forced to murder and suffers terrible injuries and is easily as strong a character as Bond.
- The 30's setting is encouraging; it may actually feel Bond-y- or at least a good adventure.
- The plotline seems Bond-y; unlike the Young Indiana Jones series which seemed to forget what the things which made Indy stories Indy stories were.

[Mister Asterix]

Good points, mtm. All the the idea of a 13-year-old James Bond written for children is not what I wanted to see from the IFP it does not mean that Higson may not do a bang up job of it.

And while we all poo-poo Harry Potter, it has set a trend to write books for literate 9- to 12-year-olds in a style that can be enjoyed by adults.

[marktmurphy]

As long as he treats the readers intelligently (like the Antony Horowitz or Philip Pullman - aiming a bit high with that last one) it can easily satisfy adults.
Keeping the Bond elements shouldn't be too tricky either- his essential character wouldn't have to change much (bit less world weary, natch) from the sullen loner we all love- especially at the hands of sadistic 30's house masters. I'm sure he'll find some way to shoehorn some gadgets in, and the bonus of being set in the 30's is that he won't be tempted to go silly with them as the film makers have. Clever (and I mean clever) mechanical gadgets could easily please.
As long as he is the young Bond Fleming describes and that the plots are suitably dark (see Potter or Dark Materials for this) I think this could be very interesting.
Or rubbish.

We'll just have to see.

[White Tuxedo]

My problem is this:

They are putting James Bond in adventures at the age of 13. In my opinion he should have a mostly normal (and not fully explained) upbringing. It was the war and entering the civil service that changed him. He was trained by them and became fiercely loyal. That loyalty and his job keeps him going.

Now with Harry Bond they have a different character. He has not yet entered into the world that will control him later in life. To put this in the hands of anyone but Ian Fleming (who -and I know I can't speak for the dead, but let us use common sense- would have thought his stupid) is really playing with fire. This is dangerous stuff to get into becasue younger fans (I mean the fanboys who take every non-Fleming book as Canon) are going to run with it.

It will also lessen to impact (in a way) of the Fleming books. The ambiguity of the character (esspecially in the early novels) is a major plus IMHO. We get to know thise guy more and more over the course of the novels, even though I still think it's more entertainment than any kind of human character study.

But now we The Hardy Bond. Little Harry Bond escapes from his school and there is something mentioned about a castle with disturbing scientific experiments. Give me a break. :roll:

IFP should be officially ashamed of themselves.

[marktmurphy]

Harm fleming? Don't be silly: this won't effect anything if it's good or bad. The Young Indy stories didn't effect my enjoyment of the movies in any way because they were so clearly nothing to do with it and neither will this. It's just a bit of fun, not the end of history.

[White Tuxedo]

Oh, I know that. It's just that this series can alter the view of Bond from many fans. I don't take it all too seriously, even though a night sleeping on the issue has not changed my opinion an inch.

Still, I'll get them and read them to see what he makes of it.

Edited by White Tuxedo, 07 April 2004 - 01:57 AM.

[[dark]]

My problem is this:

They are putting James Bond in adventures at the age of 13.  In my opinion he should have a mostly normal (and not fully explained) upbringing.  It was the war and entering the civil service that changed him.  He was trained by them and became fiercely loyal.  That loyalty and his job keeps him going.

It will also lessen to impact (in a way) of the Fleming books.  The ambiguity of the character (esspecially in the early novels) is a major plus IMHO.  We get to know thise guy more and more over the course of the novels, even though I still think it's more entertainment than any kind of human character study.

But now we The Hardy Bond.  Little Harry Bond escapes from his school and there is something mentioned about a castle with disturbing scientific experiments.  Give me a break. :roll:

IFP should be officially ashamed of themselves.

Thanks, White Tuxedo.

You managed to successfully summarise why I think this is a horrible idea, particularly in that first paragraph.

Bond should have a normal upbringing. Does the Bond of Casino Royale or Live And Let Die, or, heck, even Die Another Day sound like a man who, as a boy, snuck out of his room at night to investigate "disturbing" experiments in castles performed by mad scientists or some such nonsense?

I didn't think so.

Edited by [dark], 08 April 2004 - 12:13 PM.

[J J]

[quote name='[dark]' date='8 April 2004 - 12:12'] [quote name='White Tuxedo' date='7 April 2004 - 07:05'] My problem is this:

They are putting James Bond in adventures at the age of 13.

[DLibrasnow]

One has to ask though - would we prefer nothing to come out of Glidrose as was the case from 1967 to 1981?!

[Qwerty]

No, this is tons better than no novel, but for what it is delivering, I just wish we had more Bond novels coming that we are accustomed to, but I am more than willing to try this out, and I truly wish that it is very enjoyable if this will be our Bond reading for the next few years or so.

[DLibrasnow]

Well I just remember the dark 14 years or so when the only new Bond books were the Chris Wood novelizations.

[Qwerty]

Yes, although I wasn't alive for that. Change is needed sometimes, but I do not believe anyone really expected a change as great as this. I had finally caught up with reading all the Bond novels in early 2003 and had looked forward to some more ones, but these might, that is might be fine too.

[Atticus17F]

,8 April 2004 - 12:12]Bond should have a normal upbringing.  Does the Bond of Casino Royale or Live And Let Die, or, heck, even Die Another Day sound like a man who, as a boy, snuck out of his room at night to investigate "disturbing" experiments in castles performed by mad scientists or some such nonsense?

I didn't think so.

You Only Live Twice by Ian Fleming. James Bond encounters disturbing goings-on involving a madman in a castle. I think Licence Renewed had the same thing. And when you put it like that, it sounds exactly the type of thing one should find in a children's novel, doesn't it?

Another way of looking at it, though; does the Bond of Casino Royale sound like a man who'd swim into a harbour with a small stuffed seagull on his head?

[Xenobia]

Mark T does make some good points, particularly in harkening back to Higson's other work.

I too, do not believe he won't write a good book, I am just not sure if Bond is the place to do it.

I also think we need to divorce in our minds the Bond from the films from the Bond in the books. The two Bonds have not been (if they ever were) the same man for a very long time. It's possible the Bond of Higson will be the Bond of Fleming.

That being said, the Bond of Fleming that I have seen doesn't strike me as being the type who ran out in his teen years and investigated weird happenings.

Who knows.

-- Xenobia

[Atticus17F]

Mark T does make some good points, particularly in harkening back to Higson's other work. 

I too, do not believe he won't write a good book, I am just not sure if Bond is the place to do it.

I also think we need to divorce in our minds the Bond from the films from the Bond in the books.  The two Bonds have not been (if they ever were) the same man for a very long time.  It's possible the Bond of Higson will be the Bond of Fleming. 

That being said, the Bond of Fleming that I have seen doesn't strike me as being the type who ran out in his teen years and investigated weird happenings.

That's precisely it, Xen. Take Fleming out of the way for a second and no two incarnations of his character are alike. There is no "film Bond", no "continuation novel Bond" and no "cartoon/comic strip Bond". There is "Fleming's Bond" - a consistent, recognisable character - and then there's the stream of inconsistent mess which came after it.

A couple of children's books added to the mix won't make a blind bit of difference to me and, with apologies to all incensed by the Higson project, I still fail to understand how it could affect anything - or anyone - else.

[Loomis]

Well, now that the "SilverFin" dust has settled....

- Higson is a professional writer successful in many circles (including thrillers Higson novels and reviews) and very famous for his TV work in the UK. His appointment brings the publicity and proffessionalism so many Bond fans were demanding the series got. So stop moaning.
- Simply because a book stars a 13 year old and is aimed at teenagers does not neccessarily mean it will be an Enid Blyton. 'His Dark Materials' features a 12 year old hero who is forced to murder and suffers terrible injuries and is easily as strong a character as Bond.
- The 30's setting is encouraging; it may actually feel Bond-y- or at least a good adventure.
- The plotline seems Bond-y; unlike the Young Indiana Jones series which seemed to forget what the things which made Indy stories Indy stories were.

Yep, I think you were right all along, MTM. Higson did a very good job, and while I think "SilverFin" reads more like a prequel to the Gardners than a prequel to the Flemings, and while the '30s setting is at times a little.... unconvincing, the book is enjoyable and a refreshing change from "just another heavily Eon-ised potboiler from IFP about the grown-up Bond going on another *yawn* mission to save the world". I'm looking forward to Higson's second one. I've a feeling his series is going to get better and better.