15 replies to this topic

[RossMan]

Who do you think is better at carrying on Fleming's Bond series. This is a tough but I think that I have to go with John Gardner. (Sorry Raymond). I don't know why but I've enjoyed most of Gardner books more than I have Bensons. Gardner is the superior writer, having already had a career at writing spy novels, mysteries by the time he started on Bond. Benson though has a much better understanding of the actual Bond character but for me, his books are a bit too cinematic, with a few exceptions. Gardner's books, though not always very Flemingesque, at least could not be mistaken with the movies, having rather minor, basic gadgets (don't get me started on the Jaguar in Benson's books) and bringing back some familiar fleming elements; SMERSH, SPECTRE. (Granted Benson has done the same with characters). I also thought that Gardner's storylines were a bit more original and interesting, Bond's returning to the navy, introduction of Blofeld's daughter, etc. Of course, Gardner's writing isn't all that Flemingish, but neither is Benson's with the exception of his descriptions.

Yep, I have to go with good ol' Gardner on this one.

[rafterman]

for me there is no comparison, Benson's are more enjoyable and he knows the world of Bond, Gardner's were occasionally good, but take away the name and they just aren't really Bond, plus they're so full of people constantly switching sides, bland villians, dull capers and Bond falling in love in practically every story....I have plenty of gripes with Gardner and admittedly he's probably the better writer, but Benson's are much more Bond to me and with the exception of the Jaguar he's so much more faithful to Fleming's legacy, and I'll say that High Time to Kill is the best non Fleming and even better than some of his...

[mccartney007]

I'm a fan of both Gardner and Benson, but I think Benson's novels, for me anyway, flow much better. I used to take a week or two to read a book, but I've always read Benson's books within a day or two. Fleming had something called the "Fleming Sweep" and I think Benson has something very similiar (the "Benson Flow?"). John Gardner never really developed anything like that but he did have some interesting novels.

My Vote - Master Benson (he makes me call him that, just kidding)

[zencat]

Blofeld's Cat (24 Dec, 2001 02:31 a.m.):

zencat (23 Dec, 2001 05:32 p.m.):
I enjoyed the Gardner books, but I think Raymond's books are far superior. In fact, I'd say HIGH TIME TO KILL is the best post-Fleming Bond book ever. (Sorry Mr. Gardner)

Even better than Colonel Sun?

Well, yes. At least for me. I know most fans put Colonel Sun right next to Fleming, and I do like Colonel Sun, but for whatever reason I like Benson's books better. (Sorry Mr. Amis.)

[Blofeld's Cat]

zencat (24 Dec, 2001 06:22 p.m.):

Blofeld's Cat (24 Dec, 2001 02:31 a.m.):

zencat (23 Dec, 2001 05:32 p.m.):
I enjoyed the Gardner books, but I think Raymond's books are far superior. In fact, I'd say HIGH TIME TO KILL is the best post-Fleming Bond book ever. (Sorry Mr. Gardner)

Even better than Colonel Sun?

Well, yes. At least for me. I know most fans put Colonel Sun right next to Fleming, and I do like Colonel Sun, but for whatever reason I like Benson's books better. (Sorry Mr. Amis.)

Well that does it, then! Zencat, coming from a professional writer that's high praise indeed. Looks like I'm going to read HTTK.

AND, your other recommendation, NDOD.

[RossMan]

mccartney007 (24 Dec, 2001 06:21 p.m.):
I think Benson's novels, for me anyway, flow much better.  I used to take a week or two to read a book, but I've always read Benson's books within a day or two.  Fleming had something called the "Fleming Sweep" and I think Benson has something very similiar (the "Benson Flow?").  John Gardner never really developed anything like that but he did have some interesting novels.

I do have to admit that Benson's books are a little more fast paced than most of Gardner's. Of the Benson books, the only one that I couldn't quickly read right throw was NDOD.

[Icephoenix]

I find it Hard to out a Benson Book down, though with gardner Im not exactly drawn to the book. I love both, they both have their up's and downs. More downs for gardner i think. Gardner usually takes the plot along to slow, making it painfull to turn the page, but he loves to describe things as much as possible. Benson describes things in a different way. He draws you into it. Im for Benson. So Gard ol' boy.

[Glenn]

Personally I prefer Gardner. I find Benson's novels far too much like the films, and I especially disliked Never Dream of Dying (I didn't dare send in my review of it to this site - I'd be roasted!). Gardner's novels were admittedly slower but Bond was more a spy/agent than Benson's film action hero who seems to only repeat the film stunts. The only ones that I have liked of Benson's to date are 0-10 and TFOD. Have to agree with Ross on this one. Sorry, Zencat!

[RossMan]

I knew that I couldn't be the only one here preferring Gardner's books.

One thing that I don't care for in the Gardner books is that sometimes there'll be a little too many briefing scenes. In Scorpius, every other chapter for the first half has Bond talking with M, and in the Man F/ Barbarossa after briefing scenes with M, Bond goes on to talk about the mission with the KGB and Mossad for a long time. I don't mind the double crosses so much, or even the triple crosses, becuase though I knew there coming it still keeps me a bit more interested in the story, not sure who's who. (Death is Forever got a little out of hand...)

I agree with the comment about Benson's books seeming too much like the movies, but he had an exception in Doubleshot. BOnd's the most human, the gadets and action is at a minimum, and it has Bond using his wits, putting clues together to try to figure out what's going on. This was the case somewhat with HTTK. TFOD was my first BOnd book, when I read it I had no idea there was a book and movie Bond. I thought it was just a continuation of the PB movies which is what it feels like.

[White Persian]

It seems to me that Benson is a far better plotter than Benson (who pretty much admitted starting them with no idea where the plot was going), and has a much better feeling for Bond's character, as well as a great knowledge of Bond's past.
Gardner, though, is a better writer. I find much of Benson's prose kinda leaden, and sometimes catch myself rewriting his sentences as I go. He doesn't seem to have a natural instinct for the rhythm of written English, which for me, anyway, is a large part of my enjoyment of reading. This was one of Fleming's strengths, and often compensated for some lacklustre plotting. Perhaps he needs a good editor.

[RossMan]

[quote]White Persian (27 Dec, 2001 10:08 p.m.):
It seems to me that Benson is a far better plotter than Benson (who pretty much admitted starting them with no idea where the plot was going), quote]

I agree with that somewhat. Benson probably started the Union trilogy knowing exactly what would happen during each book and then the next book deals with covering up some loose ends from the Union trilogy with the Japapense terrorist. So that's four years worth of Bond that he had planned and plotted out in advance.

[Mister Asterix]

I'll give Gardner points for being a much superior wordsmith and I did enjoy Gardner's novels. However, it just did not quite feel like the same James Bond that Fleming wrote about. Benson's Bond, for the most part, seems to be that fellow.

I have to put my vote on Ray-Ray.

[zencat]

I enjoyed the Gardner books, but I think Raymond's books are far superior. In fact, I'd say HIGH TIME TO KILL is the best post-Fleming Bond book ever. (Sorry Mr. Gardner)

[Blofeld's Cat]

zencat (23 Dec, 2001 05:32 p.m.):
I enjoyed the Gardner books, but I think Raymond's books are far superior. In fact, I'd say HIGH TIME TO KILL is the best post-Fleming Bond book ever. (Sorry Mr. Gardner)

Even better than Colonel Sun?

[The Admiral]

I've only actually read one Gardner book, and that was the novelisation of Goldeneye - which was good.

Because of that, I can't really compare Bensons books to Gardners books, but I do think that Bensons are a lot better than the Gardner book I read.

[walther]

To date I've read all the Benson novels, and yes that includes TND and TWINE. I'm collecting and reading the Gardner novels as I get them. Personally, I would say that I like Benson better (Sorry Mr. Gardner). I found Benson's novels so addicting that on my trip to France, I was about to read NDOD. I read that in one day. Maybe it was because I was in Cannes when I read it, but I also read HTTK in eight hours on the plane. That how addicting I found Benson's novels. I have read some of the gardner ones, as I am trying to get my hands on the rest of them. Gardner's plot I agree, were original, but to me the character wasn't how Fleming had made it. Now I can't say anything about Colonel Sun yet, I haven't read it. But I think I was pretty lucky to win a UK First Edition HC w/ DJ of CS on Ebay for $30. HAHA! But i you just want my answer, Benson wins.