44 replies to this topic

[doublenoughtspy]

In researching an article, I came across a rather curious fact.

In these five books:

For Bond Lovers Only by Sheldon Lane, James Bond: A Celebration by Peter Haining, Ian Fleming by Andrew Lycett, License to Thrill by James Chapman, and James Bond: The Man and His World by Henry Chancellor

All make reference to an Ian Fleming interview that was first published in the December 1964 issue of Playboy.

Yet none of them site the source.

For Bond Lovers Only just grabs a bunch of interviews, including the Playboy, and makes it seem like one massive interview - not citing where or when any of them happened.

James Bond: A Celebration falsely attributes the quotes to a New Yorker interview from 1962.

License to Thrill merely quotes For Bond Lovers Only.

Lycett and Chancellor try to go the highbrow route and say "As Fleming told American journalist Ken Purdy..."

Now I don't expect any author to say "As Fleming told the titty magazine Playboy...", but still, I find it very weird that 5 British authors wouldn't acknowledge the true source of the interview.

[Turn]

That is interesting. It's not like the interview was in Hustler or something. Playboy was and is considered respectable as far as those types of publications go, with some of the most famous writers of the last 60 years contributing articles.

And Playboy and Bond have a long history together, so it's not like that was a one-off secret or anything.

[bill007]

Quite an odd job, indeed. Especially considering the fact that both were born of the same era, early 1950's. And as Turn said, they've been partners ever since they were toddlers. Certainly room for Hef's legal team to take issue upon.

[Jim]

It does have a bit of an image although given things like FHM and Maxim, it is probably very mild or at least on a par with those - however, whilst those are on sale in supermarkets, Playboy isn't.

Interesting observation; it may have a bit of a grubby reputation in the UK; not sure why. Maybe the UK version is more graphic? Or maybe it's just snobbery (God forbid). On that further, it might not be "fear" per se but that it's not considered a credible publication for articles of merit.

I hasten to add - I don't know.

I'll ask my sons. At eleven, they seem to be the target age.

I only read Country Life and The Economist now. Honest.

[Blofeld's Cat]

One reads Playboy!!??

[Roebuck]

One reads Playboy!!??

Perhaps it's my age, but I skip the pictorials now. First thing I do with a new issue is skim through for the jokes/cartoons. Next comes the articles (good interviews with Seth MacFarlane and this month, plus an interesting piece on the influence of the Federal Communications Commission. What other magazine will give you that mix?). Short Fiction is always worth a read.

Maybe the image problem in the UK persists because most outlets that stock Playboy display it amongst considerably more graphic top shelf material, rather than with the mans lifestyle magazines (which it more properly is). Could be a legal thing, but they could probably get round it by simply bagging Playboy.

[Blofeld's Cat]

Maybe the image problem in the UK persists because most outlets that stock Playboy display it amongst considerably more graphic top shelf material, rather than with the mans lifestyle magazines (which it more properly is).

Yes, I notice that Borders shelves Playboy in the Male Lifestyle section these days. Probably an indicator of the mag being more informative than salacious these days.

[zencat]

One reads Playboy!!??

Perhaps it's my age, but I skip the pictorials now. First thing I do with a new issue is skim through for the jokes/cartoons.

Ah, then you can tell me, are these new jokes and cartoons, or recycled? I ask because I just can't believe in 2007 someone is writing a joke about balancing a martini while on a waterbed.

But don't get me wrong. I love Hef and the whole Playboy thing. I'm a big fan of The Girls Next Door show because it reminds me of my own life...expect for the mansion, money, and girls.

But, yeah, odd these books don't credit Playboy. Nice work, doublenoughtspy.

[Jim]

Feeble wank mag.

[Roebuck]

Ah, then you can tell me, are these new jokes and cartoons, or recycled? I ask because I just can't believe in 2007 someone is writing a joke about balancing a martini while on a waterbed.

The 'Party Jokes' are readers submissions (remember that 'Friends' episode?).

BTW - What's the punchline to the waterbed gag?

[spynovelfan]

How strange! Even odder, my edition of Lycett does have a reference for Playboy in the index, but there's no mention of it on that page! Suppose it's a typo and it is in there somewhere, but I can't be bothered skim-reading every page to find it. I have the third impression Phoenix paperback, incidentally.

I haven't read Chancellor's book yet - it's on order! - but does he quote the same stuff that Lycett does? In which case, he's just used Lycett so that's why he doesn't know it's from Playboy.

Is there any original material in FOR BOND LOVERS ONLY or is it a cash-in? Ie do they have solid sources elsewhere?

I suspect it's just cock-ups rather than anything else. As has been said, Bond and Playboy are pretty inextricably linked, and the magazine even makes an appearance in OHMSS. I don't really think that distaste would come into it for Brits, but who knows?

Nice find.

[doublenoughtspy]

How strange! Even odder, my edition of Lycett does have a reference for Playboy in the index, but there's no mention of it on that page! Suppose it's a type and it is in there somewhere, but I can't be bothered skim-reading every page to find it. I have the third impression Phoenix paperback, incidentally.

It's that way in the hardback first edition as well - a reference to a page where Playboy is not mentioned.

I haven't read Chancellor's book yet - it's on order! - but does he quote the same stuff that Lycett does? In which case, he's just used Lycett so that's why he doesn't know it's from Playboy.

Different quotes. Lycett uses just 1, Chancellor quotes from it twice.

Is there any original material in FOR BOND LOVERS ONLY or is it a cash-in? Ie do they have solid sources elsewhere?

Cash-in. Hardly anything is sourced.

I suspect it's just cock-ups rather than anything else. As has been said, Bond and Playboy are pretty inextricably linked, and the magazine even makes an appearance in OHMSS. I don't really think that distaste would come into it for Brits, but who knows?

I'm not surprised by the cash-in, Haining could have been an honest mistake, Chapman is just quoting the cash-in - but I find it odd about Lycett and Chancellor.

The other tidbit that I forgot to mention - you actually have to do a little digging to know that Purdy did the interview. It's not mentioned in the article - Playboy altered his opening paragraph about Fleming's office environment so he wanted his name taken off the interview.

Nice find.

Thanks.

It's as much a tribute to the sad fact that there are so few Fleming interviews that I can immediately recognize which one it came from more than great detective work on my part.

I have however, recently come across a printed 1962 interview that has not been referenced in any of the biographies, cash-ins, fan mags or anything else - it wasn't even in the IFP's archives either.

I've gotten a message off to the interviewer to see if he has the tapes too

[spynovelfan]

Different quotes. Lycett uses just 1, Chancellor quotes from it twice.

That is strange. Just to make sure we're on the same page, you're counting Lycett's 1925 quote as part of the other one, presumably?

I'm not surprised by the cash-in, Haining could have been an honest mistake, Chapman is just quoting the cash-in - but I find it odd about Lycett and Chancellor.

The other tidbit that I forgot to mention - you actually have to do a little digging to know that Purdy did the interview. It's not mentioned in the article - Playboy altered his opening paragraph about Fleming's office environment so he wanted his name taken off the interview.

According to bondian.com, Playboy Interview, Volume II Edited by G. Barry Golson (1983) lists Purdy as the conductor of the interview, so Lycett may have gotten his name from there. Why not name the magazine, though? Purdy was best known as a motoring journalist, and edited at Parade, Argosy and True, all Playboy competitors, so perhaps he asked Lycett to credit him or something? It is strange. Especially strange if Chancellor was not just going from Lycett, which is the obvious answer.

Another thought: some other source quoted Purdy's article before it was published in Playboy - there were at least four months, and probably more. Purdy may still have been shopping it around or something? It's definitely not in Pearson, is it?

There must be some logical explanation.

[doublenoughtspy]

That is strange. Just to make sure we're on the same page, you're counting Lycett's 1925 quote as part of the other one, presumably?

Nope - Lycett uses the 1925 quote, Chancellor uses 2 others related to Bond.

According to bondian.com, Playboy Interview, Volume II Edited by G. Barry Golson (1983) lists Purdy as the conductor of the interview, so Lycett may have gotten his name from there. Why not name the magazine, though? Purdy was best known as a motoring journalist, and edited at Parade, Argosy and True, all Playboy competitors, so perhaps he asked Lycett to credit him or something? It is strange. Especially strange if Chancellor was not just going from Lycett, which is the obvious answer.

Another thought: some other source quoted Purdy's article before it was published in Playboy - there were at least four months, and probably more. Purdy may still have been shopping it around or something? It's definitely not in Pearson, is it?

There must be some logical explanation.

I assume that they might have quoted from one of the collected Playboy interviews (including the electronic edition).

I'd be pretty surprised if Purdy shopped it around, though it appears he was pretty sensitive about any edits to his work which you would think a freelancer would be used to.

I'm fairly certain that the interview was done at the behest of, and 1st appeared in Playboy. Fleming's relationship with the magazine was solid and important.

It's also worth nothing that out of the over 300 magazines & newspapers that covered Thunderball - Connery only granted an interview to Playboy.

And no, it's not in Pearson.

[spynovelfan]

I'm fairly certain that the interview was done at the behest of, and 1st appeared in Playboy. Fleming's relationship with the magazine was solid and important.

True. But then why wait four months after his death to run the interview? I know they have a very long lead-in - a year last time I pitched to them! - but I think for this they'd have held everything. Still, I think Purdy was a contributing editor then, so it's odd. Perhaps IFP have a beef with Playboy and never want them mentioned? Or is the magazine mentioned in American books thathave comeout since Lycett's?

EDIT: Still makes no sense, because IFP published Benson in Playboy!

[Skudor]

Isn't it just due to the authors' egos - not wanting to be quoting Playboy? Seems the most rational explanation to me. They don't fancy putting in writing that they might have read an issue of Playboy (shock horror!!!).

[spynovelfan]

Seems a bit odd for James Bond critics, though - there's been loads of Bond-related stuff in Playboy! Playboy was very highly esteemed for its articles and fiction in the 60s - really!

[Skudor]

It is odd but I can't really see any other explanation. Seems a bit too consistent to be just a fluke.

[RazorBlade]

It is odd but I can't really see any other explanation. Seems a bit too consistent to be just a fluke.

Right.

Let's not forget the shot of a Playboy mag in OHMSS. Laz even took the centerfold with him. Go Laz.

Yes, I'm a newly minted Laz fan. And not just for taking the centerfold.

Feeble wank mag.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Skudor]

It is odd but I can't really see any other explanation. Seems a bit too consistent to be just a fluke.

Right.

Let's not forget the shot of a Playboy mag in OHMSS. Laz even took the centerfold with him. Go Laz.

Yes, I'm a newly minted Laz fan. And not just for taking the centerfold.

I'm not referring to the producers or IFP but rather the authors.

[spynovelfan]

Isn't it just due to the authors' egos - not wanting to be quoting Playboy? Seems the most rational explanation to me. They don't fancy putting in writing that they might have read an issue of Playboy (shock horror!!!).

I think what it *might* be is that all the authors other than Lycett and Chancellor were lazy/cocked up, as discussed, but with those two, they felt that their point sounded more convincing without the word Playboy, which might distract a bit because the reader might question the validity of the interview (or something). But it's pretty strange. Playboy is very well respected.

[Skudor]

Isn't it just due to the authors' egos - not wanting to be quoting Playboy? Seems the most rational explanation to me. They don't fancy putting in writing that they might have read an issue of Playboy (shock horror!!!).

I think what it *might* be is that all the authors other than Lycett and Chancellor were lazy/cocked up, as discussed, but with those two, they felt that their point sounded more convincing without the word Playboy, which might distract a bit because the reader might question the validity of the interview (or something). But it's pretty strange. Playboy is very well respected.

I'll buy that. Sounds plausible.

[Strangways]

Just shoddy journalism - and the publisher's fact checkers should be ashamed of not getting original sources. IFP certainly could not have a problem with Playboy, not after all the articles, interviews, and stories they have published over the years.

There just aren't enough "original thought" text sources about James Bond. For years, John Brosnan's book was THE tome - Steve Rubin quotes from it liberally, then Benson quotes from Rubin, and so on. It's like everyone who took Benson's college course on Bond wants to publish their final exam essay.

And how many times have you seen the Great James Bond Grid (giant Excel spread of villians, plots, lines, girls, etc)? I think Benson started that in "Bedside" (for both the books and the films) but you see it everywhere, even in Playboy in lieu of an article (Aug 89).

But one more thing to add to your list of Playboy aversion: with all the connections to Playboy (stories, pictorials, OHMSS visual, DAF Playboy Key Club Member, etc) why doesn't Rubin even mention "Playboy" in the James Bond Encyclopedia?

[doublenoughtspy]

Actually Amis started the grid, in The James Bond Dossier in 1965.

But you are absolutely right, there isn't a lot of original thought out there regarding James Bond criticism and study.

Brosnan, Rubin, and Benson all created landmark works though and they had many hurdles (uncoperative Eon & IFP at first for Benson, etc. etc.)

I'm also impressed with how much they accomplished without the luxury people take for granted today - the internet.

But back to the original topic - I think there are two indicators that prove they were trying to hide the Playboy connection - 1) They mention other publications by name rather than the interviewer (New Yorker in Lycett, New York Herald Tribune in Chancellor) and 2) In Chancellor, there is a photograph of 3 of the Playboy serializations clipped out and the caption says "Major magazines and newspapers serialized Fleming..."

Lame.

[spynovelfan]

In Chancellor, there is a photograph of 3 of the Playboy serializations clipped out and the caption says "Major magazines and newspapers serialized Fleming..."

That's pretty strange, because they must have gotten permission from Playboy for the photos, which means it was definitely their decision not to name the magazine. But why? Would mentioning it mean that Chancellor's book was no longer seen as child-friendly or something? Parents might complain that their 14-year-old was introduced to Playboy after reading about it in his Christmas present, courtesy of those filth-peddlers Ian Fleming Publications? How bizarre.

[zencat]

Ah, then you can tell me, are these new jokes and cartoons, or recycled? I ask because I just can't believe in 2007 someone is writing a joke about balancing a martini while on a waterbed.

The 'Party Jokes' are readers submissions (remember that 'Friends' episode?).

BTW - What's the punchline to the waterbed gag?

LOL. That wasn't real. I just made that up as an example. But it might be fun to come up with a punchline. Hmmm...

[doublenoughtspy]

I'm starting to look for people on the grassy knoll now.

2 more books quote from it but don't acknolwedge the source:

The Cool Crazy Committed World of the 60s by Pierre Burton (he interviews Ann Fleming, and he quotes from the Playboy interview but calls it "the last interview he did")

The Man with The Golden Pen by Elanor and Dennis Pelrine quotes from it but neglects to mention the source, and referes to Ken Purdy as "Fleming's biographer".

Sure. Biographer from a p

[TheSaint]

I like the bit from Playbill section. Shame there wasn't a mention in later issues about "Hey writers, if you are going to quote from us, please give credit where it's due." Hell, in college I wrote a report about Jackie Gleason where I quoted from his Playboy interview, and I gave credit. My report wasn't instantly rejected because I listed Playboy as a source.

[K1Bond007]

Sourcing information in some of these books is a concern of mine. Some are just lazy and regurgitating other previous books, mainly Lycett, Pearson, sometimes Benson, and maybe a few others here and there. I hate it when they hit a controversial part too and they state something outright yet they show no proof. An example being Chancellor stating that The Man with the Golden Gun was edited by Kingsley Amis. Where is the proof? It's just a small snippet and it's a throwaway in the book. He doesn't even expound on it and for a book that is all about the literary angle and Ian Fleming, this is rather sad.

[dee-bee-five]

In researching an article, I came across a rather curious fact.

In these five books:

For Bond Lovers Only by Sheldon Lane, James Bond: A Celebration by Peter Haining, Ian Fleming by Andrew Lycett, License to Thrill by James Chapman, and James Bond: The Man and His World by Henry Chancellor

All make reference to an Ian Fleming interview that was first published in the December 1964 issue of Playboy.

Yet none of them site the source.

For Bond Lovers Only just grabs a bunch of interviews, including the Playboy, and makes it seem like one massive interview - not citing where or when any of them happened.

James Bond: A Celebration falsely attributes the quotes to a New Yorker interview from 1962.

License to Thrill merely quotes For Bond Lovers Only.

Lycett and Chancellor try to go the highbrow route and say "As Fleming told American journalist Ken Purdy..."

Now I don't expect any author to say "As Fleming told the titty magazine Playboy...", but still, I find it very weird that 5 British authors wouldn't acknowledge the true source of the interview.

Perhaps it was just good taste...?