55 replies to this topic

[David Schofield]

Sorry, Loom and others, I can't seen any point in a contrivance of any sort.

James Bond in a novel by Sebastian Faulks'll do fine.

I am, of course, assuming that people know that James Bond was created by Ian Fleming.

[Loomis]

Sorry, Loom and others, I can't seen any point in a contrivance of any sort.

James Bond in a novel by Sebastian Faulks'll do fine.

Oh, I agree totally. It's just that I suspect a "clever" marketing ploy and am trying to fathom the thinking behind it.

[David Schofield]

Sorry, Loom and others, I can't seen any point in a contrivance of any sort.

James Bond in a novel by Sebastian Faulks'll do fine.

Oh, I agree totally. It's just that I suspect a "clever" marketing ploy and am trying to fathom the thinking behind it.

Okay. How about.

"It's a hundred years since Ian Fleming was born, the creator of the immortal James Bond in a series of classic espionage novels.

Now, in honour of Ian Fleming, one of the world's foremost contemporary novelists presents his crafted* tribute to Ian Fleming.

Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming presents James Bond in Devil May Care."

* insert more appropriate word than "crafted" that means copied, etc

[spynovelfan]

But David, you've just thrown 'Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming' into a sentence without it meaning anything, and pretended otherwise there's no contrivance! Your nonsensical sentence doesn't really get around the idea that it looks very much as though there *will* be some sort of contrivance. The phrasing itself is one. It might not be as extreme as I've speculated, but again, look at the form with Westbrook/Weinberg. And look at the subject line of this thread again. It's undeniably an odd thing to see, isn't it? They're up to something.

You seem to be acting as though this was my idea. I'm just trying to guess what their idea is. I'd far rather they steered well clear of any contrivances of this sort. And it could well be that we're overthinking it, and it'll simply be the top of a press release, as it is here, a gentle (though still very strange, to my eye) way of making the point that this is an experiment:

http://www.penguinca...n 007.pdf<br />
I hope so. Because 'Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming' makes me feel a bit uneasy - as does his comment that he doesn't like thrillers. I want a straight-ahead exciting, bizarre, Sixties-set Bond novel that is in Fleming's spirit but doesn't try too desperately hard to be Fleming. Just like you, I expect.

[David Schofield]

But David, you've just thrown 'Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming' into a sentence without it meaning anything, and pretended otherwise there's no contrivance! That doesn't get around the idea that it looks very much as though there will be some sort of contrivance. Might not be, but again, look at the form with Westbrook/Weinberg. Look at the subject line of this thread again. It's odd.

You're acting as though this was my idea! I'm just trying to guess what their idea is. I'd far rather they steered well clear of any contrivances of this sort. And it could well be that we're overthinking it, and it'll simply be the top of a press release, as it is here, a very gentle way of making the point that this is an experiment:

http://www.penguinca...n 007.pdf<br />
I hope so. Because 'Sebastian Faulks writing as Ian Fleming' makes me feel a bit uneasy - as does his comment that he doesn't like thrillers. I want a straight-ahead exciting, bizarre, Sixties-set Bond novel that is in Fleming's spirit but doesn't try too desperately hard to be Fleming. Just like you, I expect.

Sorry, Spy, wasn't trying to imply it was you're idea!

I was trying to put into a brief marketing phrase how is might appear that Faulks was writing as Fleming by suggesting Faulks was imitating Fleming's style as a simple homage to him, rather than the contrivance of the finding of a lost manuscript, etc.

I think we are all uneasy about the phrase IFP or whoever have put out, and we would indeed prefer a simple Bond book, as I've stated above,w which simply features "James Bond in a novel by Sebastian Faulks".

I feel anything else would be an insult to many: Faulks, Bond fans - and above all, Ian Fleming. A novel written as a tribute, however, using Fleming's style (which we'd all propably expect) by a leading contempoary writer, would be the opposite.

[zencat]

BTW, the UK edition is now available for pre-order on Amazon.co.uk. No weirdness with the name there, but the publisher shows as Vintage instead of Penguin or Penguin 007.

[K1Bond007]

You know, at best I think this may show up on an advertisement for the book, but probably has no meaning beyond that. I don't expect to see any crazy wordy covers declaring Faulks writing as Fleming or some TSWLM type of "I found this lost manuscript". They're probably going to advertise the hell out of this book and this is just one way for them to put Sebastian Faulks and Ian Fleming in the same sentence.

[zencat]

The more I think about this, the more I agree with whoever said this is just a bit of pre-publicity intellectual cover for Faulks. Make it clear that he is evoking the style of Fleming and not writing a "Sebastian Faulks" novel. Maybe it's by request of his agent or publisher. But I don't expect any mention of this will be made on the book itself.

[plankattack]

"Sebastian Faulks writing AS Ian Fleming" is nothing more than a very clever marketing ploy on the part of Penguin. Why? To give us all something to debate and stir up interest in all those non-CBn losers out there... It's a stab at controversy in the way that " this Mr Craig chap is surely not Bond" got everyone worked up.

In all seriousness I don't read to much into it, other than the book will be very much written in Fleming's style, both literally in terms of the prose, and in terms of the content. This Bond will drive a Bentley not a Saab like Gardner's Bond, and probably smoke to a fair degree, unlike the movie Bond, who also drives an invisible car and has a double-taking pidgeon as a sidekick.....I do not believe that these latter items were found in any lost manuscripts.

[Loomis]

I think we are all uneasy about the phrase IFP or whoever have put out, and we would indeed prefer a simple Bond book, as I've stated above, which simply features "James Bond in a novel by Sebastian Faulks".

Sure. Heck, as a raging Faulks fan, I'd be more than happy with that. But it doesn't look as though that's what we're going to get. Faulks seems to have tasked himself with writing the book as though possessed by Fleming's ghost. Why shouldn't the publicity for DEVIL MAY CARE, and even the byline, reflect this? Personally, I'd be okay with the "Sebastian Faulks Writing As Ian Fleming" credit, but, still, it remains to be seen whether it'll be used. Time will tell. Definitely not opposed to the idea, though. An insult to Fleming? As we all know, Fleming's had a lot worse over the years; indeed, there's been so much committed in the name of Bond to make Fleming turn in his grave that the corpse has probably tunnelled all the way to Australia by now!

[Skudor]

We're probably just making too much out of a simple heading.

[Double-Oh-Zero]

And, of course, as Faulks himself has said, the book is set in 1967. So IFP then say that even though Fleming snuffed it in 1964, he left a manuscript specifically dated to take place in 1967 Faulks has unearthed ... I think not.

Oops. Now there's a point.

Perhaps they won't actually go down the well-worn Lost Manuscript™ route. No introductory stuff by Faulks about how he was going through his Aunt Edna's belongings or was approached by shadowy figures "working for the British government" who asked him to take care of a package of notebooks. Instead, there may just be an unspoken invitation to the reader to, like, pretend that Fleming had lived until at least 1967 and had written the book that he's now holding. Don't see a problem with that.

Me neither. Of all the theories that suggest Faulks will be writing as/like/in the style of/a "Lost Manuscript ™," this one makes the most sense to me. If this was to be the case, I wouldn't be surprised, given that IFP isn't trying to hide the fact that Faulks is writing it (he is a well-established author, after all, and I doubt they'd be shy about saying that they got him to write a "Bond adventure"); by doing it like this, they'd be able to experiment with a bit of a "what if Fleming hadn't kicked it?" scenario at the same time without too much of a fuss or backlash from fans who feel they've been hassled in some way, while still giving credit to Faulks. Still unsure of how they'd arrange the names on the jacket without it looking like a complete catastrophe, but just me two cents.

Then again, there is the possibility that they'll still market it as a Lost Transcript™ that Fleming had set three years in the future (given that he died three years before this is set), but that's stretching it a bit, I think. (I'm aware that I've probably re-stated a bunch of of points that have already been made in this thread; apologies to those that I've inadvertently plagiarized.)

And slightly off topic, but I wonder which marketing route they would have gone if they hadn't gotten someone as eminent as Faulks?

[plankattack]

And slightly off topic, but I wonder which marketing route they would have gone if they hadn't gotten someone as eminent as Faulks?

But I think that's the point, Zero, they had to get someone with the heft of Faulks. It's the centenary so to celebrate it you need whoever you can get from the A-List, whether it be the literary list, or the "thriller" sub-category (in that case a real name - Le Carre, Forsyth etc).

[OmarB]

Well I think the answer to the question lies in Sebastian's Pastiche. He wrote the James Bond story in that in Fleming's style. This books is just a more serious go at it, a longer more involved piece.

Either way, we'll know when we see the cover. Oh, and how come there are no threads about the cover? No fan made photoshop images of the cover? Really guys, slacking off a bit.

[bond_girl_double07]

If it doesn't become a plot contrivance like TSWLM, I think it just seems like a nice nod to Fleming. The issue is going to be the backlash if the novel or the writing style is awful.. The publishers have given him a big pair of shoes to fill, lets hope he comes through!

[Trident]

If it doesn't become a plot contrivance like TSWLM, I think it just seems like a nice nod to Fleming. The issue is going to be the backlash if the novel or the writing style is awful.. The publishers have given him a big pair of shoes to fill, lets hope he comes through!

Actually that was what stirred me up a bit. It's one thing to write a few hundred pages in a specific style. Difficult but possible and within the abilities of Faulks I should think. And it's another thing to write a stunning, gripping, thrilling, amazing, insert-any-ing stylish and sophisticated pageturner in the Bond-vein. Also difficult but also certainly within Faulks powers.

But doing both at same time is a hellishly precarious task and I tend to view Faulks with distincted awe and wonder for just trying to do it! Still, judging from 'Charlotte Gray', the only book from Faulks I've read so far, I really think he is going to pull the thing.

[bond_girl_double07]

I just feel like Fleming's writing style really stemmed from the era in which he lived and his lifestyle.. I've always felt that growing up at the tail end of the British Empire and finding himself almost out of place in the 50's and early 60's gave his writing such an unusual flair. Add in his WWII experience and his luxurious lifestyle, and his writing is unlike anything else I've ever read. I really have a lot of confidence in Faulks, but I just hope it the whole novel doesn't come off as contrived and kitschy.

[Trident]

I just feel like Fleming's writing style really stemmed from the era in which he lived and his lifestyle.. I've always felt that growing up at the tail end of the British Empire and finding himself almost out of place in the 50's and early 60's gave his writing such an unusual flair. Add in his WWII experience and his luxurious lifestyle, and his writing is unlike anything else I've ever read. ...

Very much what I myself think about Fleming's style. Compared with Greene, Ambler and Deighton he really has managed to capture the (romantic) hero of (basically) the 19th century and let him experience fantastic adventures in the 20th. And managed for the most part to keep his stories from being either too kitschy or too cynical and yet succeeded in describing a distinctive flair of fin-de-empire.

I'm not sure, but I think that was what made Lee Child turn down the opportunity as he felt he wouldn't be able to reproduce a similar feeling. Strange, considering the fact that he himself managed to take the 19th-century-lonesome-gunslinger/cowboy-hero and placed him in modern day Clinton/Bush USA, basically pulling off the same kind of trick, although in a different setting and entirely different attitude.

Faulks of course is aiming for a period piece that knows nothing of any future (say: past '69) problems. No Vietnam-pullout, no Watergate, no Provo-IRA past '69, no Munich Massacre, Lockerbie, 9/11 and so on.

Granted, ignoring all of these seems almost impossible, yet Fleming's own material had a lot of escapism and glorification of the good old days woven into his books. There often seems to be a strong undertone of longing for the golden days of 1920's pre-war empire, europe and even the world. I'm not sure if someone who hasn't experienced these times between the wars himself is able to reproduce this particular brand of Empire-Weltschmerz. But I'm sure that Faulks is able of a profound understanding of Fleming's approach and that is the most one can ask for at the moment. I keep my fingers crossed for him.

Edited by Trident, 24 January 2008 - 08:49 PM.

[YOLT]

My question is that, is Sebastian Faulks wrting Devil May Care "as Ian Fleming" so that the books may turn into films ?

[Mister Asterix]

{topics merged.}

[solace]

I would expect that the "writing as..." is IFP's way of saying - if Ian had been alive this is what he would have written. How they would know this exactly Im not too sure of. The only thing that would make any sense to me would be that the flemings have requested Faulks to write Bond as interpreted by Fleming and to discount any other takes eg movies,Gardner,benson etc. Perhaps to try and write a book as if the Fleming novels had been the only Bond media that existed.

Edited by solace, 28 April 2008 - 03:56 PM.

[zencat]

Here's something interesting. This is not the first time a continuation author has been billed with this "writing as Ian Fleming" byline. The French editions of the Benson books (re-released in 2002) also say "writing as Ian Fleming" (if I have the translation right).

http://www.amazon.fr.../dp/2738659330/

[[dark]]

It's been a while since I've taken French, so I don't know if it's an expression, but that literally translates to "with the character of Ian Fleming" - which may just imply James Bond was created by Fleming. That's what my money's on.

[MkB]

[dark] is true, it means literally "with Ian Fleming's character" (= created by Ian Fleming). I guess it's a clumsy translation of something like "Ian Fleming's James Bond 007 in Zero Minus Ten by Raymond Benson", it doesn't imply that Benson is "writing as Ian Fleming".

[zencat]

Right. Sorry. Thought I made a discovery.

[Pete]

Having just finished DMC, I think the "As Ian Fleming" comes down to the way certain parts are written, E.G the way Bond has his shower, the way the car sounded, the description of MI6's building. These are how Fleming described them and Faulks did the same. He borrowed phrasing from Fleming. By doing this it gave it a Fleming feel,something that was missing from Gardner & Benson.