65 replies to this topic

[Boldman]

Everyone on this board seems to adore Benson. Can't any of you see that he can't write, and that all of his novels are terrible?

The only reason he got to write them in the first place is that he did one book on 007, which I'm told is full of mistakes (although I've never read it, and hopefully never will).

Isn't it time that they passed the shoe on to someone who's literate?

[bridge]

Blue Eyes (05 Aug, 2001 07:46 a.m.):
This thread is turning sour, sorry to say it. I don't want complications in this community at any stage of it's hopefully long life. While I can see that people out there do not like Benson and that there are those out there who do I must say this. Unless this topic receives better and more substantiated posts I'm going to have to close it.

I'm not trying to close down any peoples opinions, mearly stop arguements that could turn sour.

Your intentions are clearly for the good of this message board, Blue Eyes. But like Boldman, I do not perfectly understand your meanings here. What is your standard for posts really? Must it include a fact instead of being pure opinion? I am merely trying to get a definition here, please do not feel offended.

From my point of view, I think that arguments, as long as they are civilized and logical and understandable, are good for message boards, simply because if everybody agrees with everybody else, we only need to post a "yes" to everything, along with a smiley of course.

And of course, feel free to delete my posts if you feel that they are offensive.

[bridge]

[b]Boldman (05 Aug, 2001 09:25 p.m.)That's exactly how I feel.  They should look a bit harder before hiring Benson for more books.

I am very glad to see you agreeing with me on the issues of Ray Benson. And I think someone may need to flip through the Fanfiction.net.

[Blue Eyes]

My reasons for saying I'll close this is because we are going around in circles. While people such as Zencat are posting lengthy posts others are just posting one liners such as "I don't like Benson" which explains nothing but a simple opinion. There is too little content there, that's all I'm asking for, content! Before it does turn sour.

[zencat]

Blue Eyes (07 Aug, 2001 03:05 a.m.):
My reasons for saying I'll close this is because we are going around in circles. While people such as Zencat are posting lengthy posts others are just posting one liners such as "I don't like Benson" which explains nothing but a simple opinion. There is too little content there, that's all I'm asking for, content! Before it does turn sour.

Maybe we can just change the title of the topic. I hate seeing "Is there anyone else who can't stand Benson?" show up everyday. Maybe something like "Does anyone have a negative opinion of Benson" or "The pros and cons of Benson" or something like that?

[Blue Eyes]

A fantastic suggestion Zencat!! So there it is Hopefully it will change the overall tone of the topic.

[Boldman]

I hope not. This topic wasn't started to discuss 'The pros and cons of Benson'. The topic was started to find out who else didn't like his writing. I started it because I hadn't seen a single comment on this board that wasn't sucking up to him.

While people such as Zencat are posting lengthy posts others are just posting one liners such as "I don't like Benson" which explains nothing but a simple opinion

Funnily enough, that was exactly the type of answer I was looking for when I started the topic. It answers the question 'Is there anyone else who can't stand Benson' perfectly.

I expect it was directed at me though.. At the moment I don't have time to write out long posts, so I can only post on the major points.

I understand why you don't want me stating my opinions of Benson, you don't want him to cancel your interview.

[zencat]

Boldman (07 Aug, 2001 08:38 p.m.):
I understand why you don't want me stating my opinions of Benson, you don't want him to cancel your interview.

I think the tone just shifted.

As I said at the beginning of this topic, Boldman, you can find a brotherhood of Benson haters elsewhere. One of the reasons CB.N may seem overly pro Benson to you is because Benson fans have flocked here to get away from people who sign their name as "Benson sucks."

[Boldman]

Maybe I should have left off the sig for that message.

[Boldman]

One of the reasons CB.N may seem overly pro Benson to you is because Benson fans have flocked here to get away from people who sign their name as "Benson sucks."

That's rather childish. You make it sound like Benson lovers are outlaws, chased away from civilisation.

[Blue Eyes]

Actually to tell you the truth Boldman regardless of what you say the interview will go ahead, that's the same for everyone. This site as a whole promotes Benson, as it will any Bond author, and it's users (you and everyone else) are all entitled to an opinion. Feel free to push that opinion. I just don't want holstilities forming on the board, that's all!

[Boldman]

Actually to tell you the truth Boldman regardless of what you say the interview will go ahead, that's the same for everyone.

I know

...and it's users (you and everyone else) are all entitled to an opinion

Which is why I don't understand why you changed the header. I did give you permission to edit my posts as you see fit, but what you did changed the whole message. I was asking who else didn't like him, now I'm asking for what people think his pros and cons are. You see what I'm getting at?

[Blue Eyes]

Simply because a simple "who doesn't like" could easily turn into a big slinging match. Pros and Cons has a much more passive approach.

[RossMan]

My only problem with Benson's books is the influence of the movies with pre-title sequences and a character from TSWLM film even appearing in one of his books. And the scenes with Major Boothroyd are right out of the movies. But his stories are more realistic and that of the literary Bond then the cinematic Bond. I do favor his Bond works over Gardner's, he has a better understanding of the Bond character than Gardner did.

[Blue Eyes]

RossMan (12 Aug, 2001 09:12 p.m.):
My only problem with Benson's books is the influence of the movies with pre-title sequences and a character from TSWLM film even appearing in one of his books.  And the scenes with Major Boothroyd are right out of the movies.

That's interesting. I prefer his Boothroyd character, mainly because I found Llwellyn perfect on screen and a fantastic elements in all the films. So to find an extra place with him is fantastic!

Who is TSWLM character?

[RossMan]

Blue Eyes (12 Aug, 2001 11:37 p.m.):
Who is TSWLM character?

The TSWLM character is Admiral Hargreaves, he appears in The Facts of Death at Sir Mile's dinner party. In the movie, he was briefly seen during Bond's briefing, played by Robert Brown.

[Blue Eyes]

I never noticed that. Trust me

[White Persian]

I find "The Bond Files" a fun read, though admittedly there are goofs in it, though nothing really major. The authors, Andy Lane and Paul simpson, do pick at holes in the plots etc. but it's in an affectionate spirit, much as we do here.
It is useful in that includes the newspaper strips (many of which were new stories- some of them pretty good), and even the dire "James Bond Junior" cartoons, which merit every ounce of scorn the authors pour on them.
As for Benson's "Bedside Companion", it is excellent, though clearly inspired by Amis's "James Bond Dossier", but expanded to include the films and the post Fleming pastiches (though not his own, which came later).
Does anyone else remember "007:The James Bond Report", by O.J.(?) Snelling, which was I think the first book to survey Bond and his world.

[zencat]

White Persian (13 Aug, 2001 11:41 a.m.):
I find "The Bond Files" a fun read, though admittedly there are goofs in it, though nothing really major. The authors, Andy Lane and Paul simpson, do pick at holes in the plots etc. but it's in an affectionate spirit, much as we do here. It is useful in that includes the newspaper strips (many of which were new stories- some of them pretty good), and even the dire "James Bond Junior" cartoons, which merit every ounce of scorn the authors pour on them.

I'm with you. I really value The Bond Files. Yes, it makes mistakes here and there, but it covers EVERYTHING, cartoon strips, computer games, James Bond Jr... It's amazing how many stories James Bond has appeared in. I've been making a list, and NDOD is #136!

[Blue Eyes]

What a fantastic interview on the main page! We had to ask him about the Benson-bashers of course

I'm still looking out for teh Bond Files. I've seen it twice and haven't managed to pick it up yet Damn cashless shmuck that I am! But I have flicked through it and wow, does it cover heaps! I think I'll write one myself, get it published and then hey presto, I'll be a Bond Scholar

[Jacques Nexus]

............

[Jacques Nexus]

White Persian (13 Aug, 2001 11:41 a.m.):
...even the dire "James Bond Junior" cartoons, which merit every ounce of scorn the authors pour on them.
Does anyone else remember "007:The James Bond Report", by O.J.(?) Snelling, which was I think the first book to survey Bond and his world.

Yep...I've got Snelling's book at home and it's quite good...very entertaining...particularly when he talks about Fleming's heroines. His book was published in '63 I think and his thoughts on Bond's future were very interesting; the only bit of that I remember right now is a passage where Snelling discusses what OHMSS would be like with Connery playing a Scottish Baronnet. If I recall, Snelling may have thought Connery wasn't sophisticated enough to play the part !!!

Now...at the risk of being ostracized...I like the James Bond Jnr Series...............

[DIKKO]

Getting back to Benson, while I would agree that his writing still lacks a certain polish I would not question his affection for Bond and his desire to protect the integrity of the characters.
By the end of Gardner’s tenure 007 bore little resemblance to either his book or movie incarnations.

[Blue Eyes]

I'm sorry Boldman but I think you're very wrong. Benson can write, his plots are a lot better and more concise than that of Gardners.

I'm sure his Bedside Companion help get him a contract, but he's an excellent Bond scholar so he knows his stuff. In his novels I've come across only one mistake. And I'd say it's very unfair to says he illiterate, that's extremely harsh and unjustified.

His novels are entertaining and good to follow. And I think a lot of people like him for that reason. There are those like yourself who don't appreciate his work, and that is of course fine. But I'm sure even those who do 'adore' him have their critisicims as well.

[zencat]

Boldman (25 Jul, 2001 10:07 p.m.):
Everyone on this board seems to adore Benson.  Can't any of you see that he can't write, and that all of his novels are terrible? The only reason he got to write them in the first place is that he did one book on 007, which I'm told is full of mistakes (although I've never read it, and hopefully never will). Isn't it time that they passed the shoe on to someone who's literate?

Well, that's your opinion, Boldman. It sure is easy to type, isn't it? But seeing as you asked the question...

NO, I can't see that "Benson can't write and that all his books are terrible." Frankly, I find that an amazing statement. What standard are you holding him to? Fleming? Okay, you're right, Benson isn't as good a writer as Fleming. Very few people are. Gardner? Well, I think Benson's books are better than Gardners and that Benson is an equivalent, if not a better writer of Bond. I know Benson is better plotter than Gardner, and his understanding of the Bond character and Bond formula is something that I don't think can be matched by any Tom Clancy level A-list author -- which is why I feel Benson was and IS the best choice to carry on the literary Bond tradition.

Benson got the job because he wrote a book about Bond? Lot's of people have written books about Bond, did they get the job? Is that really fair to say? Yes, one of the reason's Benson got the job is because his book, THE JAMES BOND BEDSIDE COMPANION, showed an understanding and a grasp of the literary James Bond that was well beyond typical fan speak.

For you to say the BESIDE COMPANION is "full of mistakes" when you admittedly haven't read it is, well, embarrassing for you. The BEDSIDE COMPANION is NOT "full of mistakes." In fact, you being a Bond fan, I would think you would really enjoy it. For you to state "I've never read it and hopefully never will" is bizarre. It's like me saying I haven't seen The Spy Who Loved Me, and hopefully never will!, because I prefer Sean Connery as Bond.

ALL his novels are terrible? ALL of them? You didn't just have a problem with, say, Doubleshot or HTTK? ALL of them? Have you even read them all, or did the same helpful person who told you the Beside Companion was "full of mistakes" give you this information as well?

I don't know you, Boldman, but from your other posts you sound like a decent person and a sharp Bond fan. But I can't help but feel your problem with Benson is more personal than literary.

You might enjoy a web site called 007 Forever. If your thing is to bash Benson, you'll find a brotherhood over there.

John

[Blue Eyes]

I thought you'd get annoyed with the post Zencat. Sadly it didn't seem all that well researched. When I first read Fleming I didn't like it, I was too young to even grasp it. But now I adore his novels.

I take it you're not a 007Forever fan either?

While if Boldman did not like Benson's novels I find that find. But to call him illiterate is just play unfair.

[zencat]

Blue Eyes (26 Jul, 2001 02:21 a.m.):
I take it you're not a 007Forever fan either?

I don't care for the forums over at 007Forever, but the site itself is pretty nice. Some very good articles.

[Blue Eyes]

Yes, their forums are damn confusing.

[Boldman]

Very defensive about RB over here.

My thing is not to bash Benson. I admit calling him illiterate was slightly harsh, but I feel he deserves it.

I said that the only reason why he got to write is because he wrote one book. Back when he wrote this, it was only the third (I think) book to be written on 007. Today there are hundreds of them. Not everyone one of those authors can get Bond contracts.

I said I never want to read Bensons bedside companion. I stick with this. I can't stand Bensons novels, and I see no reason why I'd enjoy his non-fiction work.

At the moment, I have no plans to ever read another Benson novel. I admit that I only ever read three before giving up on him. All three were (imo) terrible. Luckily for me I didn't waste my money on them, and they were lent to me by a friend.

As for my dislike of his novels as personal, that's ridiculous. I've never met him, and know very little about him.

[zencat]

Well, if you've read three books (and I'm assuming you mean his originals and not the novelizations) then I guess you gave it a fair shot and are just not a Benson fan. I do hope one of the three was HIGH TIME TO KILL, because that's the book in which I think RB really hit his stride and the one I recommend people start with.

But I still think you'd like THE BESIDE COMPANION, just as a Bond reference source. You can just pretend RB didn't write it. Black out his name with a sharpie.

How do you feel about the Gardner novels? If you haven't read them, you'll find some pretty informative posts in the Gardner forum.