70 replies to this topic

[Double-0 Six]

There seems to have been a mixed (though generally positive) reaction to Never Dream of Dying and The Man With the Red Tattoo, so I was just curious about what you'd all like to see in Benson's next Bond novel that wasn't in the previous couple.

I can only think of a few things :
I'd like the books to focus much more on Bond rather than secondary characters. I include characters from previous novels and films in this, it's nice to see Tanaka again but not at the expense of letting Bond have his own adventure and relying on his own wits.

I'd like information to be given as its necessary and not in two or three long paragraphs or extensive "information dump" dialogue that makes for very dry reading.

Finally (for now), I'd like to see Bond involved in a really deep mystery where the true villians aren't really known until the very end (a good twist).

Anybody else have any ideas?

[zencat]

Originally posted by Double-0 Six
Finally (for now), I'd like to see Bond involved in a really deep mystery where the true villians aren't really known until the very end (a good twist).

Sounds a little too Gardneresque to me. I don't really like "twists" in my Bond adventures.

As far as 2003 goes... I just want a book, period.

[Blue Eyes]

I agree with that sentiment exactly Zencat, I just want a book next year!

As for twists. I do enjoy them, as long as their not sudden (and completely out of the blue) like some of Gardners!

[PaulZ108]

I'm almost afraid to say this, but I don't really care what we get next year in a Bond novel (as long as we get one) as I've not read this year's and half of the pre-Benson novels.

[RossMan]

I love twists and turns in a Bond novel, especially when I don't see'em coming, it keeps me interested in the story. I'd like to see Bond visiting either the Middle East or South America.

[zencat]

Okay, Africa. That's what I want. Kind of in the spirit of HTTK, I want a "James Bond goes on safari" book.

[Jim]

Without wishing to appear that I do this in my sleep, I'd be quite happy for no book next year if it means that Mr Benson returns in 2004 having invested time not only in what he's writing but how he's writing it.

[Blue Eyes]

Jim, do you think it's important to have a novel out on 2003, The 50th annivesary of Fleming's first Bond novel?

[Jim]

No.

Given Mr Benson's fondness for including in-references, the prospect of the production of a Bond novel because it is the 50th anniversary doesn't thrill me. We can only await further jumping about out a dead man's talent. For what it's worth, my view is that it would be better to release a Bond novel when it's properly written.

However, the 50th anniversary and another book are both inevitable so I might as well sit in the dark and shut up.

If Mr Benson churns out a Bond novel in the 50th anniversary year without any references to Fleming incidents or characters (save the requisite SIS folk) then I will wear my wife's wedding dress all year and sing rather than talk at all times.

But that ain't gonna happen.

[zencat]

Originally posted by Jim
If Mr Benson churns out a Bond novel in the 50th anniversary year without any references to Fleming incidents or characters (save the requisite SIS folk) then I will wear my wife's wedding dress all year and sing rather than talk at all times.  

But that ain't gonna happen.

Wait? Why is it so bad to mention Fleming characters and incidents again? I really don't get this.

[Jim]

Originally posted by zencat

Wait? Why is it so bad to mention Fleming characters and incidents again? I really don't get this.

It's dangerously uncommercial. This may appeal to the fan readership, who know what the characters are and what they did (although it may be a presumption too far that every Bond fan has read, or has any interest in, the Fleming books). However, the casual reader can't unlock the past history and, given that the books are becoming dependent upon the reader's knowledge of previous events, might not be tempted to. In short, too many in-references and in-jokes only ever amuse those in the know. Those few are few. Fleming's Bond books, the last three being exceptional (within every meaning of the word) try to be self-contained adventures, for the most part. What, however, is the impact of Never Dream of Dying if one hasn't read other books? It's uncreative and parasitic.

Secondly, it shows a marked lack of faith in one's own original characters. It would be better to invest time and care developing new and intruiging people rather than a shorthand use of folks who already come with their backstory developed.

Thirdly, it's chronologically suspect. But then only a fan would say that. I bathe in my own hypocrisy and let a tide of inconsistence wash me clean.

[zencat]

Originally posted by Jim

It's dangerously uncommercial. This may appeal to the fan readership, who know what the characters are and what they did (although it may be a presumption too far that every Bond fan has read, or has any interest in, the Fleming books). However, the casual reader can't unlock the past history and, given that the books are becoming dependent upon the reader's knowledge of previous events, might not be tempted to. In short, too many in-references and in-jokes only ever amuse those in the know. Those few are few. Fleming's Bond books, the last three being exceptional (within every meaning of the word) try to be self-contained adventures, for the most part. What, however, is the impact of Never Dream of Dying if one hasn't read other books? It's uncreative and parasitic.

Good point. Yet when I -- a Bond fan -- read NDOD, I had no idea Rene Mathis had appeared in a Fleming Bond book (and I'm still not sure which book he appeared -- FRWL?). I just accepted that he was an original character (whom Bond had known in the past) and I thought the character was great. I suspect you could read Red Tattoo and accept Tiger in the same way. I'd say the opening of HTTK works very well even if you don't make the association to Quantum of Solace. But I do see your point -- too many in references move the books towards fan fiction and this is a real danger. But so far, I think Benson had pulled it off.

Originally posted by Jim B]
Secondly, it shows a marked lack of faith in one's own original characters. It would be better to invest time and care developing new and intruiging people rather than a shorthand use of folks who already come with their backstory developed. [/B]

Another good point. I think Benson should have more faith in his own original characters because when he sets his heart and mind to it he can really creat great ones. I thinking of Roland Marquis and Hope Kendell from HTTK...Margareta Piel from Doubleshot...Tylyn Mignonne from NDOD...all terrific Benson originals and far more memorable than ANY character Gardner created, in my opinion.

Originally posted by Jim B]
Thirdly, it's chronologically suspect. But then only a fan would say that. I bathe in my own hypocrisy and let a tide of inconsistence wash me clean. [/B]

True. But who really gives a ****. You should talk to a Star Wars fan (or author) about chronological inconsistencies between the books (and films). And I do think RB knows his Bond well enough to avoid inconsistencies, at least when it comes to Fleming.

[IrishCrown]

I'd like to see Bond go where he has never gone before....to Kansas.

[RossMan]

Originally posted by IrishCrown
I'd like to see Bond go where he has never gone before....to Kansas.

Not too long back there was a post about Benson's new novel taking Bond to Kansas, with a Native American girl, and a televanglist as a villain. I liked the idea and so was quite irritated that turned out to be false, made up.:mad: Just goes to show some people have too much time on their hands.

[Blofeld's Cat]

If Benson ever sends Bond to Kansas, I can't help but think that Blofeld's derogatory comment in Diamonds Are Forever would rear its ugly head.

[IrishCrown]

I really like the idea. You could have him up in Kansas City on the riverboats gambling or bring him down to Wichita. There is an Air Force base here, and Wichita is the aircraft capital of the world. It's not really all that far-fetched.

[Mister Asterix]

Originally posted by IrishCrown
I really like the idea.  You could have him up in Kansas City on the riverboats gambling or bring him down to Wichita.  There is an Air Force base here, and Wichita is the aircraft capital of the world.  It's not really all that far-fetched.

And as falls Wichita so falls Wichita Falls.*

*(Sorry, couldn't help myself that's the title of one of my fave Pat Matheny albums.)

[1q2w3e4r]

Fleming's missing manuscript; "The Undertakers Wind". That's what I really want next year for Xmas Santa, i'll be good and nice to little kids and old folk if you can swing it.

I seriously wish there was some manuscript he'd never finished (not TMWTGG, or his novel "from the beyond") ahh well... One can hope

[rafterman]

I want a book period and no twists please, I liked some of Gardner's book right up to the unbelievable twist and then hated them...

[1q2w3e4r]

yeah i had that problem... I think thats why he missed the mark so much. He missed the point that the success in Fleming's novels wasn't "tricky and confusing plots" but well constructed narrative and knowing exactly why a character was doing something at any given time. Someone should have coined him onto Fleming's article "How to write a thriller"

Bad thing about Gardner's novels was that after the first 2, the "twist" wasn't a twist per se, but, inevitably and duly expected.

[Jim]

Originally posted by zencat



True. But who really gives a ****. You should talk to a Star Wars fan (or author) about chronological inconsistencies between the books (and films). And I do think RB knows his Bond well enough to avoid inconsistencies, at least when it comes to Fleming.

As a separate issue to whether he should be doing it at all, I tend to agree that when Mr Benson does include his references, he does tend to pay some sort of attention to the "chronology" of all this nonsense.

But I think he comes a bit of a cropper with Tanaka in TMWTRT; Fleming's Tanaka was a WWII kamikaze pilot (an unsuccessful one, it would appear) who had spied for Japan in England before the war whilst at Oxford (I think) and TMWTRT is explicitly set after September 11 2001. At a rough calculation, he'd be about 80 odd. There's the odd mention here and there of age, but not that sort of age.

[14 20 02]

Jack Wade.

Joke. (actually i found Wade quite funny. Why doesn't he come back?)

A good twist in the story.

[1q2w3e4r]

Fair go. Bond was born in 1924. You can't blame Benson for Bond first appearing in the 50s. And it would seem kind of strange to me if Bond went to Paris without seeing Mathis, the US without Felix and I guess Japan without Tiger though thats only if it involved the Japanese SS

[WillieGarvin]

Frankly,I've no objection
to Benson using some of
Ian Fleming's supporting
characters as long as he
produces a good story.I
don't care for most of
Benson's novels because
they read less like books
and more like treatments
for movies.

And as for the ages of the
various Fleming characters
in the Benson Bond
novels?Well,yes,You Only
Live Twice's WWII veteran
Tiger Tanaka would be in
his mid to late eighties,
if he aged at a normal
rate reflecting the
passage of time in the
"real world"--but so would
James Bond(himself a
veteran of WWII--he joined
the Navy at age 17 in 1941
and was posted to the
RNVR).One of the many
advantages of fictional
characters is their abilty
to age as the author who
writes them chooses.

[marktmurphy]

The problem with Benson's use of Tanaka is that he brings him in to show off the fact that he has read YOLT and gets rid of him with a heart attack for seemingly one reason: Not for the plot, but just so he can use the term 'iron crab' when describing Tanaka's coronary. Just another of his heavy-handed 'kisses to the past'. Which is presumably why Bond goes around saying 'So that's the score' to everyone and everything. And since when would an Englishman be suprised to hear a road crossing making a chirruping noise to tell blind people to cross?- they do that here you know Mr. Benson.
Anyone who wants a laugh should read his interview with Kingsley Amis where they slag off Gardner- it includes Benson critising 'much of the detail seems to have been put in for the sake of putting in detail- know what I mean?'. How ironic.
Admittedly thats not up to his -tightenly embarrassing 'your reading of the line "shaken, not stirred" was so fresh' to Timothy Dalton....

[1q2w3e4r]

I agree the use of characters just to kill them off, or using them in a way that they weren't origionally written doesnt appeal to me, and quite frankly pisses me off to no end. i.e. Draco. Just glad darko got his in FRWL.

[marktmurphy]

No, I hate it because it takes the reader outside the idea that Bond is a man on his own with no history. It makes him a man dependant upon his friends (not a one does he have any reason for getting on with- why are him and Felix such pals?). Since when did you go back to a city or country you've been before and meet everyone that you met there last time?
A friend of mine called Benson's book 'The Man With The Colourful Noun' which sums it up perfectly for me- taking whats already gone before whilst carefully sieving out any flavour, orginality or talent. Bland, badly thought out and badly written.
Incidentally- here's a quote from from the bike chase from the TND novelisation by Benson: "The BMW made it all the way across the river by jumping from boat to boat, then onto shore." And that's it. No description or excitement generated: just a stage direction typed up. How bad a writer do you have to be to commit this page- even if you are under pressure?

[zencat]

You guys should all take a shot at writing a novel, and going through the editing process, before judging Benson so harshly.

[Jim]

Originally posted by marktmurphy

Anyone who wants a laugh should read his interview with Kingsley Amis where they slag off Gardner- it includes Benson critising 'much of the detail seems to have been put in for the sake of putting in detail- know what I mean?'. How ironic.
Admittedly thats not up to his -tightenly embarrassing 'your reading of the line "shaken, not stirred" was so fresh' to Timothy Dalton....

Mr Benson can be a little mean spirited when it comes to authors. One would think he had a professional interest, despite the evidence to the contrary.

And the Licence to Kill interview...I am bereft of ribs. My sides have split. Raymond 4 Timothy xxx xxx swalk.

[Adolph Gettler]

I'd like Bond to go back to Royale, for part of the novel at least.