52 replies to this topic

[Emma]

Hmmm I really couldn't get into either book. My mind is brainwashed by the John Pearson bio, and his portrayal of 'young Bond'. His Bond seemed to be more cool. Higson's Bond does come across like a slightly less dweebish version of Harry Potter.

[Willowhugger]

I think that the Young Bond books are extraordinarily well written books that would have done well to have been written about Indiana Jones.

It's strange but I can't get over the disconnect in concept honestly. I would have actually preferred the books to be a serious work about James Bond's illegitimate son in the cartoon (yes, I know he's supposed to be his nephew---I knew better when I was 11)

It's simply too out there.

[moorebond82]

Well i haven't read them but theyoung bond idea sounds ok to me so why mot explore it?

Edited by moorebond82, 10 December 2006 - 07:44 PM.

[deth]

I just finished reading Silverfin, and have started on Blood Fever....

while I found Silverfin to have an engaging plotline (particularly loved the first half of the book), and was much better than I expected, it still seemed a bit odd having a young Bond have such monumental events happening to him early in life. Let's face it: What Bond goes through in Silverfin is equivalent to almost any Fleming Bond adventure.


hoping Bloof Fever will be a bit more down to earth.

[K1Bond007]

I just finished reading Silverfin, and have started on Blood Fever....

while I found Silverfin to have an engaging plotline (particularly loved the first half of the book), and was much better than I expected, it still seemed a bit odd having a young Bond have such monumental events happening to him early in life. Let's face it: What Bond goes through in Silverfin is equivalent to almost any Fleming Bond adventure.


hoping Bloof Fever will be a bit more down to earth.

Blood Fever is more (IMHO) like a Dr. No / Live and Let Die. That's how I view it. SilverFin was kind of... fantastical. I don't know why I think that. The serum, the eels, the castle. It's all just a little more grand than it should be.

Blood Fever is definitely the better of the two.

[zencat]

I just finished reading Silverfin, and have started on Blood Fever....

while I found Silverfin to have an engaging plotline (particularly loved the first half of the book), and was much better than I expected, it still seemed a bit odd having a young Bond have such monumental events happening to him early in life. Let's face it: What Bond goes through in Silverfin is equivalent to almost any Fleming Bond adventure.


hoping Bloof Fever will be a bit more down to earth.

I think the key to really enjoying the Young Bond series is not to read them, or require them to be, realistic backstory to the Fleming character and books. While the series does nothing to contradict the Fleming character or timeline, they are very much "Bondian" adventures in their own right, and thus will be, as you say, as big as anything in Fleming. I read these more as James Bond novels featuring a Young Bond than books about the childhood of James Bond....if that makes sense.

[Santa]

Perfect sense.

[Loomis]

...it still seemed a bit odd having a young Bond have such monumental events happening to him early in life. Let's face it: What Bond goes through in Silverfin is equivalent to almost any Fleming Bond adventure.

While taking the zenmeister's points, I agree. If you "believe" the Higson books, James Bond didn't become a globetrotting spy only when he joined the British secret service - he was one ever since boyhood! Which seems a bit strange and a bit too much. Also, I'm under the impression that the adventures he has in the Higsons are more fantastical than anything in the Flemings.

What's more, I'd have much preferred, as zen puts it, "books about the childhood of James Bond", giving "realistic backstory to the Fleming character and books", although I do appreciate that such an approach would by necessity result in books so low-key and so generally unexciting for all but the most passionately purist of Fleming fanatics that it's hard to imagine even one of them selling, let alone a whole series (and, needless to say, their readership among children would be zero).

Still, while I agree that "the series does nothing to contradict the Fleming character or timeline", I wish that it carried far more echoes of Fleming's voice. The Higsons are fun, and I'm glad they exist, but, as prequels, they chime with the hallowed originals every bit as uncomfortably as STAR WARS episodes I - III.

[Santa]

Ahhh. More perfect sense. I agree with both of you.

[deth]

I kinda agree with Zen and Loomis...... if that's possible.

I just finished Blood Fever and agree with everyone here who says that it's the best of the two. It seemed like James was more thrown into what happened compared to Silverfin where he went out to do the stuff of his own accord.

I suppose I was trying to read them as "prequels" in a way... and it just doesn't work. So when I read YB 3 (whenever it comes out in the US and Canada), I'll just read it as it's own seperate thing... as hard as it may be to seperate the two generations of Bond characters.

I personally would have read a fairly low-key background to Fleming's character... and think it could actually have been made to be interesting (even to children). After all, there are plenty of stories for younger readers that don't need globetrotting and high-octane action, and are quite successful. However, this is the way it is, it's what we've got, and it's fun to read (mainly to try and pick up the subtle suggestions of the adult Bond that Higson expertly sprinkles in here and there).

I hope Higson makes Bond a bit older soon though... no more term to term adventures....

I'd love to see the final book going up to the end of his schooling and the start of the navy.

btw, I must say that I absolutely LOVED the last sequence in Blood Fever. The last line was PURE Bond to me... I gotta admit I almost got up and cheered after reading that last line.... it perfectly combined the future "smoot ladies man Bond" and the naive young Bond. Loved it.

[zencat]

I hope Higson makes Bond a bit older soon though... no more term to term adventures....

I'd love to see the final book going up to the end of his schooling and the start of the navy.

Sorry to say you're not going to get your wish, deth. Higgy's already told us Book 5 will be about Bond's expulsion from Eton (and the "incident with the maid"). But I would love to see a second set of Young Bond novels -- YOUNG BOND II -- which would see James through Fettes and into the service.

[deth]

I hope Higson makes Bond a bit older soon though... no more term to term adventures....

I'd love to see the final book going up to the end of his schooling and the start of the navy.

Sorry to say you're not going to get your wish, deth. Higgy's already told us Book 5 will be about Bond's expulsion from Eton (and the "incident with the maid"). But I would love to see a second set of Young Bond novels -- YOUNG BOND II -- which would see James through Fettes and into the service.

that's unfortunate... but again, I guess since this isn't really a strict "prequel" to the Bond we know, then it doesn't matter how many adventures he gets into each year....

I young bond 2 would be nice.... I'd love to read about that. However, it feels like a part of Bond's life that would be better served coming from the pen of Fleming... don't know why... it's something that needs to feel really "authentic". Probably just me tho.

[pedroarmendariz]

even though the idea of a set of prequels for the literary bond falls into the same category of prequels that is affecting hollywood right now, it's a great opportunity to finally answer a few questions about bond's past that fleming never answered and no successor tried to get near to. sure ifp is trying to cash in on the young audience reading books, but charlie higson has written great adventures for bond to have and though they don't compare to the sexually charged older books, they do prepare you for 2008 when we'll hopefully get a new adult bond book after a long wait. if you've read the older bond books, give the young bond series a try before you reject it because they're a nice treat during this long drought.

[Four Aces]

After my initial pooh-pooh-ing of the young Bond concept, I am now reversing myself. These will definitely be on my '07 reading list. Thanks CBn.

4A

[SilencedPPK]

to be honest, I just haven't had the time to get into the young bond series!

[HildebrandRarity]

I simply cannot relate to a child who can't have sex for the sake of pleasure with a delicious woman, drive a fast car above the speed limit and not think anything of it, drink champagne or vodka or a fine Bordeaux whenever the mood strikes, engage in utilizing the latest technology or book a vacation to The Bahamas using your Visa card and have the ability to pay for it all when the bill comes due (not the sex of course...it should be free.)

I have not read a Young Bond book but then neither have I read Harry Potter or Sherlock Holmes and Higson is basically writing something stuck in time between those two eras.

I hope i'm not going to be chastised for the above.

Higson is writing about a child in the 1930s...Um, no thanks.

:-)

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 05 January 2007 - 12:19 AM.

[HildebrandRarity]

it's a great opportunity to finally answer a few questions about bond's past that fleming never answered .

Who's to say Fleming would have had what Higson has in mind?

Perhaps he could not have cared less about Bond's past? Perhaps some of us dont care either?

?

I mean he was a man of the world who utilized James Bond to live out a fantasy that he physically could no longer engage in as 35 year old...because he was no longer 35.

I doubt he would have cared for a James Bond as a teenager. Fleming was trying to be 1 minute ahead of his time.

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is as far as he got when it came to children and children's fairy tales.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 05 January 2007 - 12:22 AM.

[Four Aces]

I simply cannot relate to a child who can't have sex for the sake of pleasure with a delicious woman, drive a fast car above the speed limit and not think anything of it, drink champagne or vodka or a fine Bordeaux whenever the mood strikes, engage in utilizing the latest technology or book a vacation to The Bahamas using your Visa card and have the ability to pay for it all when the bill comes due (not the sex of course...it should be free.)

I have not read a Young Bond book but then neither have I read Harry Potter or Sherlock Holmes and Higson is basically writing something stuck in time between those two eras.

I hope i'm not going to be chastised for the above.

Higson is writing about a child in the 1930s...Um, no thanks.

:-)

No chastising at all, but consider some of the following...

Who is to say that adventure is not to be had by children? We can go back further than 1930...

Admiral David Farragut was eight years old when he joined the US Navy. He was eleven years old when he fought in The War of 1812.

Four Aces was 15 years old when he first took hostile gunfire in the country of Guatemala, and he carried a CETME G-3 at the time.

That's pretty interesting stuff for any youth to read about, and the presentation of such sets up an inquisitive mind for the young reader, which hopefully will lead to a later understanding of the complexities of the world. Such I hope is the case with Higson's series.

Cheers,

4A

[K1Bond007]

I simply cannot relate to a child who can't have sex for the sake of pleasure with a delicious woman, drive a fast car above the speed limit and not think anything of it, drink champagne or vodka or a fine Bordeaux whenever the mood strikes, engage in utilizing the latest technology or book a vacation to The Bahamas using your Visa card and have the ability to pay for it all when the bill comes due (not the sex of course...it should be free.)

I have not read a Young Bond book but then neither have I read Harry Potter or Sherlock Holmes and Higson is basically writing something stuck in time between those two eras.

I hope i'm not going to be chastised for the above.

Higson is writing about a child in the 1930s...Um, no thanks.

:-)

You're clearly judging a book by it's cover without really knowing anything about the subject matter. Obviously you've made up your mind so I won't bother trying to correct you.

Frankly it also doesn't matter what Ian Fleming would have wanted or would have done. I'm a Fleming purist, but ... he's dead. Possibilities. He may have deemed The Man with the Golden Gun to be poorly written and never allowed for it be published - he may have rewritten it and it may have been deemed his best. He may have committed suicide after seeing the lighthearted approach to the character that Roger Moore took in the 70s and early 80s. Hey it's a possibility. I think he would have been severely upset with a number of the films, but none of this matters. He's passed on. The point is, some of you guys are so quick to allow EON Productions to make up new stories, or Amis, Gardner, and Benson, but for whatever reason a prequel series, that is faithful to Fleming's material (and better written IMHO than the preceding authors save for obviously Fleming himself), is somehow wrong. I find that to be ridiculous. There were a million ways a series like this could have gone wrong and yet I believe Higson pulled it off. I think, for the most part, Fleming would have liked it, but we'll never know.

[Bon-san]

I simply cannot relate to a child who can't have sex for the sake of pleasure with a delicious woman, drive a fast car above the speed limit and not think anything of it, drink champagne or vodka or a fine Bordeaux whenever the mood strikes, engage in utilizing the latest technology or book a vacation to The Bahamas using your Visa card and have the ability to pay for it all when the bill comes due (not the sex of course...it should be free.)

I have not read a Young Bond book but then neither have I read Harry Potter or Sherlock Holmes and Higson is basically writing something stuck in time between those two eras.

I hope i'm not going to be chastised for the above.

Higson is writing about a child in the 1930s...Um, no thanks.

:-)

You're clearly judging a book by it's cover without really knowing anything about the subject matter. Obviously you've made up your mind so I won't bother trying to correct you.

Frankly it also doesn't matter what Ian Fleming would have wanted or would have done. I'm a Fleming purist, but ... he's dead. Possibilities. He may have deemed The Man with the Golden Gun to be poorly written and never allowed for it be published - he may have rewritten it and it may have been deemed his best. He may have committed suicide after seeing the lighthearted approach to the character that Roger Moore took in the 70s and early 80s. Hey it's a possibility. I think he would have been severely upset with a number of the films, but none of this matters. He's passed on. The point is, some of you guys are so quick to allow EON Productions to make up new stories, or Amis, Gardner, and Benson, but for whatever reason a prequel series, that is faithful to Fleming's material (and better written IMHO than the preceding authors save for obviously Fleming himself), is somehow wrong. I find that to be ridiculous. There were a million ways a series like this could have gone wrong and yet I believe Higson pulled it off. I think, for the most part, Fleming would have liked it, but we'll never know.

Not to mention, you seem to be contravening your own previously issued proclamations of the need for attitudinal tolerance, as put forth in your many, many, many impassioned pleas for everyone to accept that Daniel Craig and Casino Royale are excellent. Weren't naysayers considered somewhat heretical in that instance?

Many of us were sceptical about the Young Bond books. And many of us hold them in high esteem now. You'll never know if they're any good or not if you simply boycott. Is this a case of YBINB.com* ?


* YoungBondIsNotBond.com

[HildebrandRarity]

...you seem to be contravening your own previously issued proclamations of the need for attitudinal tolerance, as put forth in your many, many, many impassioned pleas for everyone to accept that Daniel Craig and Casino Royale are excellent.


You'll never know if they're any good or not if you simply boycott. Is this a case of YBINB.com* ?


* YoungBondIsNotBond.com

One second, I NEVER proclaimed that everyone should accept DC and CR are excellent.

My beef was with those who thought Daniel Craig was all wrong for James Bond before the movie was released and I laid down bets in favour of it's box office success which no one took up.

In this case I'm not boycotting anything per se...Ever since I was a child, James Bond was someone (even a concept) to aspire to. He remains so even now a few decades later.

I'm afraid reading about a teenager's exploits 70 years ago has little aspirational value for me. I'm not just going to read something I ordinarily would not simply because it has "James Bond" written on it.

The only 2 books I have purchased this past year are "Filming Casino Royale" and "The Art Of Bond" and prior to that it was "The Man With The Red Tattoo" which was about a fully formed OO operative in the here and now.

I am not reading Rowling or Conan Doyle and i'm not terribly interested in reading Higson. I'd rather spend my money on the UE dvds which i've mostly bought.

It has nothing to do with "Boycott". Now, if I was a boy, i'd probably ask mummy to buy me a copy but that isn't the case right now.

;-)

I don't mean to offend but this thread asks a question and i'm merely answering...unfortunately the answer is not the one every one else is looking for. Let's just say i'm more attracted to the "OO7" part of "James Bond" than anything else and Higson is not giving me that.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 06 January 2007 - 03:23 AM.

[sharpshooter]

A thought had past my mind - and had plagued my mind since last night.

Can we now say that these Young Bond books are the written lore of every actor that has played James Bond's childhood - just updated for their time period?

[K1Bond007]

A thought had past my mind - and had plagued my mind since last night.

Can we now say that these Young Bond books are the written lore of every actor that has played James Bond's childhood - just updated for their time period?

Only if you believe Fleming's books are the "written lore of every actor that has played James Bond." I think there are those that played so far away from Fleming, such as Roger Moore, that they had to have had a different childhood. Take for instance in Casino Royale when Vesper is sizing up Bond. Could she have said that same line with Roger Moore sitting across from her? The books are rather faithful to Fleming so if you believe Fleming then Higson isn't that far away.

You gotta really treat each author's contributions as their own continuum. The only ones that I would ever possibly bundle in with Fleming's is Amis and Higson. IMHO.