91 replies to this topic

[spynovelfan]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?

No. I have all the Flemings, and several continuations. And... I didn't think DMC was very original!

2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?

No. I have several Gardners, a couple of Bensons, Amis, one of Wood's. Someone very kindly gave me both Pearson's book and Higson's first. I want to read all the continuations, but haven't found the time yet.

3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?

No. I've read Amis', Pearson's, one Higson, one Benson (High Time To Kill), and I think four Gardners over the years.

4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?

I can't answer that question, as I've only read one of Benson's. I preferred the one Benson I've read to DMC in some ways, though.

5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?

Same answer as 4, but I've read a few more of Gardner's.

6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?

Not in my view.

7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

Not in my view.

[Kronsteen]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?

No

2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?

No

3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?

No

4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?

Not read them all. It's better than Red Tattoo, but not better than the
Union trilogy.

5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?

Not read the the two last, but I'd say they're equal. I really like some of
Gardners (WLD, TMFB, NSF), but the other ones are equal to DMC or worse.

6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?

No.

7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

Haven't read (unfortunately).

[Craig Arthur]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?

No.

2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?

No. I have purchased everything upon publication. Everything except Doubleshot, Never Dream of Dying, and The Man With the Red Tatoo - which I have been unable to get hold of. Same thing, with the second Moneypenny Diaries effort. But I am not that interested in The Moneypenny Diraries.

3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?

I have read everything except the volumes listed above.

4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?

No. Raymond has a better understanding of the character and more sincerity and puts more effort into his work.
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?

Better than the last four or five Gardners but not "Licence Renewed".

6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?

No. Neither Faulks nor Amis are thriller writers but Amis put more effort into Colonel Sun, had more passion for Bond and, like Benson better knowledge of the character.

7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

About the same.

[neversaynever]

[quote name='ACE' post='878082' date='9 June 2008 - 14:28']I'm curious to hear from people about their experience with James Bond continuation novels*

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?[/quote]

No.

[quote name='ACE' post='878082' date='9 June 2008 - 14:28']2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?[/quote]

No. I have several Bensons and Gardners.

[quote name='ACE' post='878082' date='9 June 2008 - 14:28']3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?[/quote]

No. See above.

[quote name='ACE' post='878082' date='9 June 2008 - 14:28']4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?[/quote]

Yes and no: it's better than some, not as good as others.

[quote name='ACE' post='878082' date='9 June 2008 - 14:28']5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?[/quote]

It's been so long since I read the Gardner books I couldn't honestly say.

[quote name='ACE' post='878082' date='9 June 2008 - 14:28']6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?[/quote]

I have not read Colonel Sun.

[quote name='ACE' date='9 June 2008 - 14:28' post='878082']7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

I have not read it, so I can't say.

[TheSaint]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought? No.
2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought? No.
3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read? No.
4) Is DMC better than the Benson books? I've only read the Bensons once so, off the top of my head, yes for now.
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books? No.
6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun? No.
7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography? Another book I've only read once so, hard to say.

[Double-Oh Agent]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?

No. I have all the Bond novels (Fleming, Amis, Pearson, Wood, Gardner, Benson, Higson, and Weinberg as well as Faulks) except Hurricane Gold which hasn't come out in America yet.

2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?

See above.

3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?

No. I've read them all except Hurricane Gold.

4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?

No. I rather like the Benson books.

5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?

The first half of Gardner's books (through Win, Lose Or Die) and Death Is Forever, no. The latter half of Gardner's books, (excluding DIF) yes.

6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?

Tough call as Colonel Sun isn't one of my favorites but I'd say no.

7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorized Biography Of 007?

Another tough call as they're two totally different books, but I'll say yes although I really do like Pearson's novel.

[Hitch]

Does anyone else have sore ribs from ACE's PM prodding? Sorry about my brief answers but am a bit pushed for time.

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?

No

2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?

No

3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?

No

4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?

I haven't read any Benson.

5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?

All I've read of Gardner is half of Licence Renewed so a comparion would be unfair.

6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?

No

7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

No

[Trident]

Hi, ACE! Sorry for taking so long.

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?
2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?
3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?

No to all three questions. My first Fleming was 'Moonraker' back in 1977. My first continuation was Gardner's 'Licence Renewed' after which I accidentially stumbled upon 'Colonel Sun'. Later I purchased and immediately read all the Gardners and Bensons as soon as I they were published.






4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?
6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?
7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?


Cannot really judge. I have to confess that 'Devil May Care' was the first Bond novel that I haven't been able to finish yet. My impression based upon roughly 120 pages is as follows:

On Benson

DMC seems to be better written at some points as far as the command of the English language is concerned. At other points it seems to be much worse written and I simply cannot understand why ever certain phrases found their way into the final text that was published. One minor example:

'In the boutiques of the King's Road, Chelsea, near his flat, Bond had seen the new fashion for military uniforms among the young, who sported coats and tunics with coloured braid.'

Why is the location given three times? Wouldn't have 'King's Road boutiques' or 'Chelsea boutiques' or 'some boutiques near his flat' have been enough? Perhaps it's because I'm no native speaker, but to me this sentence comes across as terribly awkward.

In terms of characterization Benson seems to have the edge over DMC. He shows a deeper understanding of Bond and generally took his task much more serious, even if his language and plotting couldn't keep up with this.


On Gardner

DMC to me seems far below Gardner's first three when I felt Gardner was still trying to come up with original, or at least memorable, plots. Compared to Gardner's endless-hotel-room-briefings/double-tripple-quadruple-crossing/save-the-President's--Period DMC may come close to having the edge over most of Gardner's later books.


On Gardner and Benson

I have to mention here that I was a huge fan of Gardner's first books when I myself was a youth. Over the years it seems they all have lost some of their attraction (with the last 10 or so not having held much for me to start from). When Benson took over 11 years ago (yes, it's really that long ago) I welcomed him very much because he seemed to have a far better basic understanding of Bond than Gardner had shown towards the end. Unfortunately, I have to say that my general liking for Benson was for the most part induced by the terrible low Gardner's work has arrived at with his last books. I've read all Gardners and Bensons at least twice. But nowadays I don't feel compelled to reread them again. Only few scenes in them seem truly memorable IMHO, the thrilling factor isn't as pronounced as to justify another go and their language for the most part isn't that ejoyable. Still, I've read all of them, some with definite enjoyment. Which is more than I can say about DMC.

On Amis
While 'Colonel Sun' does have its definite lacks and problems, I feel it was written with far more verve, dedication and general love for the story and its main character James Bond than was the case with DMC.

On Pearson

As 'The Authorised Biography' tells the story of the real Bond, I don't consider it a continuation in the traditional sense. But it was certainly much more fun reading than DMC.

On all continuation authors (including Wood, Higson, Westbrook)
Regardless of the outcome the respective authors achived with their works, I always felt they've put a terrible amount of dedication, passion, love or, from the point when their capital of the above mentioned was spent (e.g. Gardner), at the very least effort into their books.

Sorry, but I don't feel any of this in DMC, much as I would like to. To me it seems a sloppy, rushed, uninspired work that would never have seen print without the names involved. Some may call it workmanlike, but I fear that judgment doesn't do justice to all workmen. If I were a publisher, this book would have had to undergo severe changes before I'd dare throwing it on the market.

[David Schofield]

No to all the questions.

I have read every continuation novel, except R.D. Mascott's effort which some ludicrously ( ) consider a legitimate continuation p(probably the sort of person who would exclude novelisations from this list - Wood's Spy and possibly Licence to Kill are in a far higher class than DMC.)

I am extremely disappointed in DMC, given Faulks apparent pedigree. Would I read another Faulks book? No. Would I want Faulks to write aniother Bond? On this evidence, no. Is DMC slack, lazy and badly written and does it reflect badly on Faulks and IFP? Yes. Have Faulks and IFP achieved what they wanted - and do they care what I think? Of course not.

Do I wish Faulks hadn't had DMC published? No. It was worthwhile seeing how he (or anyone else might) fair. Evidence is clear that Gardner really should have gone after his fifth novel, and Zero Minus 10 that Benson wasn't up to the job, but their initial efforts were worth seeing in order to be able to judge.

Then again, I for one can easily ignore DMC, just as I can the other continuations I do not like. Most of them contribute little that would be missed from the Bond canon had they not existed. Only Amis, Wood's Spy and the first two Gardners are worth standing next to the Fleming's, IMHO.

**Higson is well written but I can't 100% convince myslef he's writing about Ian Fleming's Bond and Pearson is superbly written but I stand with Trident in opinion of that, a position that is also relective of my views on the Moneypenny Diaries.

[tdalton]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?
-No

2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?
-No

3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?
-No

4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?
-No (I would certainly rank Zero Minus Ten and Never Dream of Dying ahead of Devil May Care and would also say that The Facts of Death and The Man With the Red Tattoo are on par with Devil May Care)

5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?
-No (The majority of Gardner's books are better than Devil May Care, especially For Special Services and Icebreaker).

6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?
-I don't know. I've never read Colonel Sun

7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?
-I don't know. I've never read James Bond: The Authorised Biography

[Trempo]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?
2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?
3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?
4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?
6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?
7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

*including Young Bond, Moneypenny Diaries, Benson, Gardner, Pearson, Amis etc but excluding novelizations

1) No
2) No
3) No
4)+5) No. I don't know how to describe it, but I think James Bond is more present in the Benson and Gardner books. He isn't just floating through the story. But it is difficult to judge one book against 6 or 14.
6) No. But Colonel Sun has a special meaning to me, because it was the first I ever read.
7) No

[Von Hammerstein]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought? No. I read all the Flemings and Amis's Colonel Sun as a youngster.
2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought? No
3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read? No I read some of the Gardners and all of Bensons
4) Is DMC better than the Benson books? No
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books? Some
6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun? No
7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography? Yes

Faulkes DMC is an adequate continuation, but Benson's Zero Minus Ten, Gardner's License Renewed and Icebreaker, and of course Colonel Sun were much better.

[Mark_Hazard]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?

No

2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?

No

3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?
4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?
6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?
7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

Sorry Ace, but unfortunately I can't answer these questions as I have not yet read the book, I'm about two book cases behind in my reading (that's cases, not shelves), I still have at least the last two Bensons to read.

I did start to read the piece in the Times the other week and gave up in disgust, two errors in a matter of a few paragraphs, the one I remember was May calling 007 "Mr Bond." How could he have got that wrong, it doesn't fill me with much enthusiasm, however, by the time I get around to reading it I'll have forgotten that error, until I read it again, but then I'll persevere.

[Sbott]

I'm curious to hear from people about their experience with James Bond continuation novels*

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?
2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?
3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?
4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?
6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?
7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

*including Young Bond, Moneypenny Diaries, Benson, Gardner, Pearson, Amis etc but excluding novelizations

1 - No
2 - No
3 - No
4 - No
5 - No
6 - No
7 - No

DMC was really disappointing I felt that Faulks was too lazy and obvious in his writing a real shame.

[dodge]

True confession time: I've read only the Fleming novels and have not read a single continuation novel to date. This may change, but I picked up the Faulks book and felt no compelling need to read more than a page or two, let alone to buy it. Fleming's books and the film franchise are two different entities to me, which co-exist in perfect ease. Continuation novels pay other writers' rent, imo, and don't interest me. As I say, this may change.

[Harmsway]

True confession time: I've read only the Fleming novels and have not read a single continuation novel to date. This may change, but I picked up the Faulks book and felt no compelling need to read more than a page or two, let alone to buy it. Fleming's books and the film franchise are two different entities to me, which co-exist in perfect ease. Continuation novels pay other writers' rent, imo, and don't interest me. As I say, this may change.

That's fair. But you should, at least, try and pick up COLONEL SUN.

[spynovelfan]

True confession time: I've read only the Fleming novels and have not read a single continuation novel to date. This may change, but I picked up the Faulks book and felt no compelling need to read more than a page or two, let alone to buy it. Fleming's books and the film franchise are two different entities to me, which co-exist in perfect ease. Continuation novels pay other writers' rent, imo, and don't interest me. As I say, this may change.

That's fair. But you should, at least, try and pick up COLONEL SUN.

And once you've put it down again because you couldn't get past the middle third of it, speed-read to the ending and then pick up John Pearson's JAMES BOND: THE AUTHORISED BIOGRAPHY instead.

[zencat]

Yes, what spynovelfan said.

[Donovan Mayne-Nicholls]

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought?
2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought?
3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read?
4) Is DMC better than the Benson books?
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books?
6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun?
7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography?

1)No
2)No
3)No
4) I hate Benson's books they are so badly written. I am amazed they got published. So Yes
5) Didn't much like Gardner's either. I tend to think maybe written Bond should be in period. Bond driving a Saab, so eighties and so naff.
6) Doesn't come close. In fact I re-read Colonel Sun recently and I was amazed at how good it was. Though not quite Fleming it has one of the best openings and a stunning torture sequence. A pity he didn't write more. By the way Zencat there I go again. The total opposite of you. Boy if we ever met, that would be fun.
7) No, another real gem. In fact I think I was spoilt by those early continuation novels. Then along came Gardner and Benson to ruin it. Mind you also prefer Charlie Higson and Samantha Weinberg. See back in period.

I am amazed it's taken this long to find someone who also thinks Benson books should have been left in the can. Peter Janson Smith said that Jenkins' book hadn't been published because it wasn't well written. I doubt, though, it was anywhere this bad. People in those days had a sense of prose and style. Nowadays, it seems everybody believes they can write books and publishera are more interested in selling to fans based on hype than to readers. To enjoy Benson at any level one has to come to the book via the movies and still have extremely low demands. His prose is bad to the point of having felt embarrassed atreading it WHILE reading it.

[zencat]

Well, I'm going to drive you guys nuts now, but I think DMC is going to actually boost an appreciation of Benson. DMC has shown that it's no small trick concocting a new James Bond story, even if your name is Sebastian Faulks. Setting aside style comparisons, I think many of Benson's books are superior in overall conception, particularly HTTK, which I think is a brilliant mix of traditional Bond adventure and original mountaineering thriller. It's possible HTTK might be the best conceived Bond continuation of them all.

[Harmsway]

And once you've put it down again because you couldn't get past the middle third of it, speed-read to the ending and then pick up John Pearson's JAMES BOND: THE AUTHORISED BIOGRAPHY instead.

Also good. But not quite as good as COLONEL SUN, because of how silly it gets as it goes on. COLONEL SUN isn't perfect, but it is better than at least half of the Fleming Bond novels.

[spynovelfan]

Well, I'm going to drive you guys nuts now, but I think DMC is going to actually boost an appreciation of Benson. DMC has shown that it's no small trick concocting a new James Bond story, even if your name is Sebastian Faulks. Setting aside style comparisons, I think many of Benson's books are superior in overall conception, particularly HTTK, which I think is a brilliant mix of traditional Bond adventure and original mountaineering thriller. It's possible HTTK might be the best conceived Bond continuation of them all.

Not nuts at all. I've only read one Benson novel, and it was HTTK. I got sent it at my previous job at a magazine in Brussels, because part of it is set there, and having read some Gardners in my teens and being (at that point) enough of a Bond fan to tell you that it was George Lazenby who got married and wore the kilt, I read it, interviewed him by email about it, and we published the article. I thought the book was very poorly written, but had quite a decent plot and some interesting ideas.

That was then. I came to DEVIL MAY CARE with very high expectations: I'd read some of Faulks' work, and was impressed, and I loved the fact that they'd managed to net him and were going back to the Sixties. But reading it, apart from the disappointment that it was such a poorly paced, poorly plotted, very obvious Fleming 'tribute' novel - precisely the sort of trap a Literary Writer was always in danger of falling into - I found myself rethinking my opinion of several other Bond novels, notably COLONEL SUN and HIGH TIME TO KILL. And while both have their flaws, I realised that they had done something I hadn't given them credit for, which was to pull off the trick of concocting a James Bond story. I'd sort of taken it as a given that that was relatively easy to manage - just read Fleming, do a bit of research, come up with a location, attach a girl and a villain and so on - but Faulks got it so wrong I suddenly saw how hard it must be to do it and not fall flat on your face in the same way. There are all sorts of mistakes Faulks makes that no other continuation writer has even gone near to making. COLONEL SUN drags terribly and there's a massive (for me) plot problem in that Bond's father figure, M, is kidnapped and rather than being frantic about it, both personally and from the perspective of national security (the Red Chinese are torturing the head of MI6 - imagine what they could find out!), Bond very slowly gets into gear. A great plot idea, hugely wasted. But... Amis struck out on his own. He took the spirit of the books and went for something new, rather than simply replicating and referencing Fleming. Similarly, HIGH TIME TO KILL is rather a generic adventure in some ways - Bond meets THE EIGER SANCTION - but it makes no bones about that: it does what it says on the tin, pretty much. Still flawed... but yes, I think I have changed my view. And I certainly never imagined I would feel this way after reading a Sixties-set Bond novel by Sebastian Faulks.

[zencat]

I very pleased to hear that, especially from someone whose opinion I respect as much as yours, spynovelfan.

It's a strange phenomena, but in the days after reading DMC (which I throughly enjoyed), I find myself yearning to re-read HTTK or TMWTRT.

[spynovelfan]

I actually have DOUBLESHOT on my shelf, waiting to be read! It's weird. I am not expecting it to be anything other than a straightforward Bond adventure - but that will do me now. I want to be put in the hands of someone who can do that, and who is not going to get Bond wrong. I know you liked DMC, but I think even your spirited enthusiasm has something peeking between the lines, when barely a week after its release you're clamouring for Higson to take over.

[ACE]

...I think DMC is going to actually boost an appreciation of Benson. DMC has shown that it's no small trick concocting a new James Bond story, even if your name is Sebastian Faulks. Setting aside style comparisons, I think many of Benson's books are superior in overall conception, particularly HTTK, which I think is a brilliant mix of traditional Bond adventure and original mountaineering thriller...

I absolutely agree with this!

I came to DEVIL MAY CARE with very high expectations: I'd read some of Faulks' work, and was impressed, and I loved the fact that they'd managed to net him and were going back to the Sixties. ...I found myself rethinking my opinion of several other Bond novels, notably COLONEL SUN and HIGH TIME TO KILL. And while both have their flaws, I realised that they had done something I hadn't given them credit for, which was to pull off the trick of concocting a James Bond story. I'd sort of taken it as a given that that was relatively easy to manage - just read Fleming, do a bit of research, come up with a location, attach a girl and a villain and so on...

I absolutely agree with this too.

I have read all the official, original continuation novels (and The Adventures of James Bond 3 1/2, Moneypenny Diaries, Young Bond and all the novelizations). I think DMC is a terrific, breezy, jaunty read. It is Bond and it is fun. In places, Faulks has achieved Fleming's high-insider's tone and soi disant literary swagger. There is huge imagination and originality in the powerful set pieces, interesting and unique characterisations. I love the post-colonial subtext and themes to the book, brought out by the clever period-yet-contemporaneously-resonant locations. Ironically, its flaws stem from the same source: Ian Fleming. DMC cleaves to Fleming tropes and structure too closely in some respects yet is irritatingly careless on getting the Fleming details and biblio-continuity right in other areas. This is all the more surprising considering the conscientious and wonderful crafting of Charlie Higson's Young Bond and Samantha Weinberg's Moneypenny Diaries. Fleming made it look easy and it seems Faulks took "How To Write A Thriller" literally.

Benson's writing is not in a vastly different world from Faulks' DMC. All those people who carp on about Benson not being a good writer, really need to take another look. Have any of them read Dan Brown, Jeffrey Archer, Tom Clancy? Benson is WAY better than them. Yes, the odd Americanism slips in and the writing style is clumsy in places. However, Benson (IMO) writes true to Ian Fleming's Bond. Benson's huge strength is his impeccable plotting, characterization, originality born of enthusiasm and passion. I prefer Faulks and Gardner's (and Christopher Wood's) writing to Benson but I prefer Benson's stories anyday (no mean feat considering the former were professional writers prior to Bond). The Union Trilogy (High Time To Kill, Doubleshot and Never Dream Of Dying) is a fine chunk of litBond.

I think DMC is on par with Bond by Benson and Gardner. The latter two never really benefitted from the huge promotional spend and renewed interest in Fleming (strong from Casino Royale slipstream).

My favourite continuation novels remain Kingsly Amis writing as Robert Markham writing as Ian Fleming's Colonel Sun (spynovelfan, love your take on Bond's mental state pursuant to M's kidnap - disagree about the purported middle drag: your main course is always heftier than the starter and dessert!) and John Pearson's superb James Bond: The Authorised Biography.

It is wonderful that Sebastian Faulks deigned to write a James Bond novel.
It is wonderful that the book has sold so well.
It is wonderful that there will, almost certainly, be more adult Bond novels (and for us litBond fans, that is important)
It is wonderful that the literary Bond is riding high in Fleming's centenary year and many a DMC reader will pick up a Fleming original and discover litBond.

The truth is Fleming made it look easy and was self-deprecating about the enormous effort that went into crafting the original novels and short stories. The undervalued and underrated skill of Fleming's writing is only now being noted. Those novels have matured like fine wine: thrillers designed to be read as literature and to be appreciated like Ch

[tdalton]

...I think DMC is going to actually boost an appreciation of Benson. DMC has shown that it's no small trick concocting a new James Bond story, even if your name is Sebastian Faulks. Setting aside style comparisons, I think many of Benson's books are superior in overall conception, particularly HTTK, which I think is a brilliant mix of traditional Bond adventure and original mountaineering thriller...

I absolutely agree with this!

I agree as well. I'm actually leaning towards putting DMC down for a while and moving onto the centenary collection of fanfiction stories that was published on this site instead, as DMC just doesn't have enough to hold my attention for the extended period of time that it's taken me to get as far into as I have, and I might even go ahead and try to develop the storyline that should have been the focus of DMC into my own fanfiction project (this being Bond going after those who brainwashed him in between YOLT and TMWTGG) before picking up DMC and trying to finish it.

I always enjoyed Benson's novels for what they were anyway, which was good, solid Bond stories that were, more often than not, very imaginative and different from what we had seen before. Sure, they may not have been the best written novels of all of the Bond novels (although I don't think that they're poorly written either), but the ideas that Benson comes up with makes up for those shortcomings. Doubleshot was a great continuation novel and, if done correctly, could prove to be a very interesting concept for a future film. Also, Never Dream of Dying was quite good, and I love the risks that Benson took with certain characters in that novel, which he certainly didn't have to do in order to craft a good Bond story, but I like the fact that he went ahead and did it anyway.

Actually, I wouldn't have minded if the publishers had returned to Benson to pen the centenary novel. He is clearly a man who loves the Bond character and he was great at coming up with great ideas for his stories, which would have been enough for me.

[MHazard]

I think rather than having Faulks do the centennary novel (which I have criticized mightily) a better approach would have been to have a number of writers do a short story collection with each of their takes on Bond. So, you could have had a story by Benson, a story by Faulks, and stories by other thriller or literary writers if interested. Perhaps someone like Alan Furst. Comparing different authors take on Bond would have been interesting. A number of years ago something like this was done for Raymond Chandler with Robert Parker and others writing a very interesting collection.

Instead we are left with a novel that for the most part is (in my opinion) a collossal bore. I think most continuation authors have one good book in them (License Renewed, Zero Minus Ten, Col. Sun). I don't think Faulks had even that in him.

[Skudor]

I think rather than having Faulks do the centennary novel (which I have criticized mightily) a better approach would have been to have a number of writers do a short story collection with each of their takes on Bond. So, you could have had a story by Benson, a story by Faulks, and stories by other thriller or literary writers if interested. Perhaps someone like Alan Furst. Comparing different authors take on Bond would have been interesting. A number of years ago something like this was done for Raymond Chandler with Robert Parker and others writing a very interesting collection.

Instead we are left with a novel that for the most part is (in my opinion) a collossal bore. I think most continuation authors have one good book in them (License Renewed, Zero Minus Ten, Col. Sun). I don't think Faulks had even that in him.

I think a short story collection like you describe would have been much better. Far more interesting.

[ImTheMoneypenny]

I think rather than having Faulks do the centennary novel (which I have criticized mightily) a better approach would have been to have a number of writers do a short story collection with each of their takes on Bond. So, you could have had a story by Benson, a story by Faulks, and stories by other thriller or literary writers if interested. Perhaps someone like Alan Furst. Comparing different authors take on Bond would have been interesting. A number of years ago something like this was done for Raymond Chandler with Robert Parker and others writing a very interesting collection.

Instead we are left with a novel that for the most part is (in my opinion) a collossal bore. I think most continuation authors have one good book in them (License Renewed, Zero Minus Ten, Col. Sun). I don't think Faulks had even that in him.

I agree a short story collection would have been a far better idea. Sort of like Doctor Who Short Trips book where you have different Doctors and different authors a little bit of every flavour for every taste.

[Flemingsan]

I'm curious to hear from people about their experience with James Bond continuation novels*

1) Is this the first original James Bond novel you have bought? NO
2) Is this the first original James Bond continuation novel you have bought? NO
3) Is this the only continuation Bond novel you have read? NO
4) Is DMC better than the Benson books? ***GULP*** YES ***GULP*** BUT THAT`S A VERY EASY THING TO DO! BENSON IS NOT A WRITER (OR AM I JUST DUMB?)
5) Is DMC better than the Gardner books? SURELY NOT BETTER THAN LICENCE REVOKED, BUT STILL DMC & GARDNER ARE PURE ****
6) Is DMC better than Colonel Sun? NO. DMC IS PURE **** COLONEL SUN IS NOT FLEMING & NOT THAT BAD
7) Is DMC better than James Bond: The Authorised Biography? JB AUT BIOG IS ALSO **** BUT AT LEAST NOT TOO DUMB

FLEMING WAS AND IS THE ONLY BOND WRITER - FORGET THE REST (though small wink & thanks at Amis for JB Dossier and Colonel Sun)

*including Young Bond, Moneypenny Diaries, Benson, Gardner, Pearson, Amis etc but excluding novelizations