27 replies to this topic

[Golden Gun-E]

I apologize ahead of time if this topic has already been stated in another thread but I couldn't find anything on it.

When first opening the book being very excited and anxious to read the "new" Bond novel I was consequently very let down. I did not really appreciate the beginning parts of the book for a few reasons but the one reason I would like to concentrate on is the fact that I do not speak french. I felt as though while reading the first chapters that Mr. Faulks probably has an interest with France, the french culture or what have you and wrote more about those two things than Bond himself. I feel he did a very poor job setting the mood for the story and concentrated too much on things like the specific name, adress, and location of lets say the French restaurante Bond was eating lunch at instead of giving the reader insight into what Bond was dealing with and going through internally.

Did anyone else happen to feel this way? Or if you think I'm completely off please explain why. Thanks!

Disclaimer: I did find a lot of interesting things and parts of the book I liked. I personally had mixed feelings about it some good and some bad but please concentrate on this specific aspect of the novel.

[Jim]

I apologize ahead of time if this topic has already been stated in another thread but I couldn't find anything on it.

When first opening the book being very excited and anxious to read the "new" Bond novel I was consequently very let down. I did not really appreciate the beginning parts of the book for a few reasons but the one reason I would like to concentrate on is the fact that I do not speak french. I felt as though while reading the first chapters that Mr. Faulks probably has an interest with France, the french culture or what have you and wrote more about those two things than Bond himself. I feel he did a very poor job setting the mood for the story and concentrated too much on things like the specific name, adress, and location of lets say the French restaurante Bond was eating lunch at instead of giving the reader insight into what Bond was dealing with and going through internally.

Did anyone else happen to feel this way? Or if you think I'm completely off please explain why. Thanks!

Disclaimer: I did find a lot of interesting things and parts of the book I liked. I personally had mixed feelings about it some good and some bad but please concentrate on this specific aspect of the novel.

Yes, quite a lot of his other stuff is set in France. Not all of them, but many. The location's not a surprise to those of us who have read his other stuff. I would agree that it was an amiable amble rather than anything terribly vital.

[Harry Fawkes]

Although I don't understand a word of French (Ignorant B******) I did not find it out of place in the book or at all confusing.

[MkB]

Well, I wasn't under the impression that the few French words interspersed in the text could be a problem... Did you feel thta the foreign words were the problem, or rather setting the action (or non-action) in a foreign culture / lanscape, Golden Gun-E?
I must say that, in itself, it didn't bothered me (Fleming too paid great attention to the restaurants where Bond had dinner), but Faulks execution was a bit too cliché, compared with Fleming.

[Johnboy007]

Fleming only "dropped" the French in small bits whereas it seemed Faulks gave entire sentences or conversations. I don't seem to remember anything surrounding it either to give it some context to figure out. "This isn't the Berlitz School of Languages..."

The least he could have done is put it in German, some simple Spanish, or even in Latin and I wouldn't complain.

[Golden Gun-E]

Well, I wasn't under the impression that the few French words interspersed in the text could be a problem... Did you feel thta the foreign words were the problem, or rather setting the action (or non-action) in a foreign culture / lanscape, Golden Gun-E?
I must say that, in itself, it didn't bothered me (Fleming too paid great attention to the restaurants where Bond had dinner), but Faulks execution was a bit too cliché, compared with Fleming.

To start off, I counted 26 french words (all in italics I believe) in the first 2 chapters of the book. I would completely agree with you MkB if Faulks did in fact intersperse a few french words in the text but it seemed quite the opposite to me.

Now to respond to your question. One of my favorite parts of the book was that Faulks set the action in a foreign landscape and you were able to see the culture (such as when Darius and Bond go to the 'Paradise Club'). My biggest problem was specifically in the first 2-3 chapters when Faulks uses french words because he didn't always give context clues. Sometimes he did a fine job and used a word somewhere and you could assume what it meant if you don't speak french.
Example, page 7: "Here were the yellow and scarlet awnings of Indo-Chinese restaurants, the single lights of second-hand furniture shops or the occasional red bulb of an hotel de passe with a plump and bare-legged poule standing beneath an umbrella on the corner."

Other times, it was harder to decipher such as a short conversation on page 3.

I guess it is in ones own opinion as to whether or not the more frequent than usual french words bothered you or not. In my case, it did slightly bother me and I was wondering if anyone else felt it distracted them from the storyline. I am pleased at the response to this thread, please keep the discussion going.

[Dr. Noah]

http://translation2.paralink.com/

It's REALLY not that big of a deal...

[Johnboy007]

True, but one shouldn't have to put a book down, hop online, and pull up a translator while reading. Dropping words here or there isn't a problem and does add some to the atmosphere, but when it's done repeatedly it just irritates me and comes across as smug.

[Dr. Noah]

True, but one shouldn't have to put a book down, hop online, and pull up a translator while reading. Dropping words here or there isn't a problem and does add some to the atmosphere, but when it's done repeatedly it just irritates me and comes across as smug.

Well, maybe he should keep the English words really small and simple, too, so everybody at every reading level will never put down the book. God forbid the readers have to consult a dictionary and learn something new. Just write what they know already, or explain every phrase -- or be deemed "smug." Frankly, having to read countless translations to words you already know slows down the narrative, too -- but let elitists who actually can figure out the meaning of incomprehensible French phrases like, oh, hotel de passe (!!!) waste their time reading the literal translations 35 times in the first chapter, and really bog the story down.

How do they get any authors to write Bond books? What a thankless freaking task. Half the fanboys are upset the writer uses "can" instead of "may," the other half are upset that they have to look up words they don't understand; Then half are mad if the writer changes anything from what they're used to, while the other half are upset if he isn't adding anything new.

Raymond Benson must be surfing these forums, laughing his off. "Maybe my Bonds were never bestsellers, and maybe I didn't write 'Birdsong' or 'Charlotte Gray,' but at least I don't have to put up with this crap anymore..."

[Johnboy007]

But I haven't based my entire opinion of the book on "fanboyish" problems and never got caught up in the "writing as Ian Fleming" ploy. I don't like the book because Sebastian Faulks could not or would not do anything interesting in this book. The plot is boring, the villain is weak, the other characters are flat, and the style is nonexistent.

maybe I didn't write 'Birdsong' or 'Charlotte Gray,'

Precisely. Shouldn't the person behind those great books be able to add something more stylish and innovative than tacky bits of French? At the very least he could have done it with Farsi. That would have been way more interesting and fun, but it's virtually absent beyond "Allahu Akbar." I can get that in any 24 episode and in every Al-Qaeda training video.

[Dr. Noah]

I liked the book. Please forgive me. Maybe next time Faulks can live up to your high literary standards... and not use too many hard French words.

[zencat]

I liked the book as well but, man, it cannot catch a break in fandom. We just has a dozen posts in another about Faulks using the word "can" instead of "may." For whatever reason, this book is shaping up to be the DAD of the literary side. Who would have imagined this.

[Loomis]

I know. "Faulks + Bond = almost certainly one of the very best 007 novels ever" was what I thought. Until I read it.

Those who wish to flame may flame away, but, honestly, I think it's a very poor book. I'm a Faulks fan and a DIE ANOTHER DAY fan, and I both wanted and genuinely expected to really love DEVIL MAY CARE.

You could say that it's a case of a fanboy unable to cope with the inevitable disappointment of ridiculously high expectations, but, seriously, I think this novel doesn't merely fail in being the masterpiece that I'd built it up to be - I think it's just flat-out bad.

Surely we should all be allowed to call DMC as we see it, good, bad or whatever. I doubt that anyone here deliberately set out to hate it - we're all Bond fans, after all, no?

Personally, I'm not cackling with evil delight as I diss DMC in what I delude myself is a clever way - I'm just sad that the book didn't do it for me.

[Dr. Noah]

I liked the book as well but, man, it cannot catch a break in fandom.

Amis couldn't, either. The reality is the DMC's gotten pretty good reviews, which is more than Amis or Fleming got (and the fact it got reviewed at all puts it over Gardner and Benson), and the sales have been outstanding -- especially for book number 30-whatever in the canon.

The fanboy stuff is par for the course -- it's just annoying when you stop in periodically for news and you have to scan past all this myopia.

Look at the thread for the new QOS teaser. The same whining -- by the same guys. "M's relationship with Bond is still the same." No kidding? It takes place five minutes after the last film ended! Do they think Bond and M had a long, soul-searching talk in between? We need reminding of the past story and their relationship, but the fanboys have had the same M-Bond conversation running on a loop in their brains since November of 2006 -- nearly two years! They need a change -- desperately!

The truth is the fanboys aren't what make or break the project. They buy it anyway. What IFP have to be thrilled about is the audience for Bond books has opened up again. That's what determines the true success of the project.

[Hitch]

I'm sorry if my silly "can" or "may" post was perceived as adding to the can/may diversion. I was simply trying to leaven what I thought was a fairly nerdy and irrelevant strand of an interesting thread. Carry on.

[Dr. Noah]

I'm sorry if my silly "can" or "may" post was perceived as adding to the can/may diversion. I was simply trying to leaven what I thought was a fairly nerdy and irrelevant strand of an interesting thread. Carry on.

Nah. We're talking about the guys crying that it's a complete failure when it's obviously far from it.

Sort of 'CraigIsNotBond.com' for the literary set.

Besides, your post led to one of the best retorts ever: "So you think it should be titled 'Devil CAN Care'???"

[MkB]

Besides, your post led to one of the best retorts ever: "So you think it should be titled 'Devil CAN Care'???"

Hey! This was my line!

[zencat]

I'm sorry if my silly "can" or "may" post was perceived as adding to the can/may diversion. I was simply trying to leaven what I thought was a fairly nerdy and irrelevant strand of an interesting thread. Carry on.

Nah, I was just pulling that out an example, Hitch. No worries.

[Dr. Noah]

Hey! This was my line!

Genius! I laughed for a day.

[Hitch]

Thanks for the reassurances.

*CBn group hug*

I must point out that the funniest comment I've seen about DMC (an enjoyable read for a number of reasons) was a suggestion for an alternative title. Ready?

Monkeypaw

[Jim]

“In hard covers my books are written for and appeal principally to an “A” readership, but they have all been reprinted in paperbacks, both in England and in America and it appears that the “B” and “C” classes find them equally readable, although one might have thought that the sophistication of the background and detail would be outside their experience and in part incomprehensible.”

Ian Fleming, letter to CBS, 1957

Not saying anyone's A or B or C, but the French bits in Devil May Care do seem to be along these lines... writing as Ian Fleming. Hmm.

Things can be overexplained. A sense of out-of-reach mystery isn't a bad thing.

[MkB]

Thanks for the quotation, Jim. How snobbish of Fleming, though, to classify his readership in A, B and C classes after the degree of hardness of the book covers they bought!
I must say I don't know much about the man, having just read his Bond books, but I definitely should try to learn more, he looked like a funny chap!

[Johnboy007]

This discussion has crossed the line into pointlessness.

Loomis says it best: "I'm not cackling with evil delight as I diss DMC in what I delude myself is a clever way - I'm just sad that the book didn't do it for me." My opinion of this book doesn't hinge on such meaningless points as the amount of French spoken and Faulks' usage of may/can. It's an incredibly minute source of irritation that ultimately has no effect on my opinion of the book. In the same vein, I don't find the inclusion of German in Moonraker or German and Latin in On Her Majesty's Secret Service adding anything to my enjoyment of them.

I really wish I found this book more enjoyable, but it did not turn out that way. I approached it with reasonable expectations that weren't met. Devil May Care is not the worst James Bond book and I have never said that it is. I'm happy for those who enjoyed it and I hold no grudge.

That said, Dr. Noah's condescension and gall in this thread is unbearable. After your previous experience on the moderated list you ought to know better by now.

[Dr. Noah]

That's priceless -- the guy calling Sebastian Faulks' writing "tacky" and "smug" but is "happy for those who enjoyed it" is worried about condescension.

From now on I'll post the insults in French, so you can't understand it.

[Golden Gun-E]

In response to Dr. Noah:
I can see where you are coming from by saying how annoying it is to come on the forums and read people nagging about the tiniest things but this isn't the movie section, it's the literature section. I posted this not to nag about the book but to critique it which is (correct me if I'm wrong) allowed in a discussion forum about an author? Please do not take me wondering something about the book as being a "fanboy" who is just making another "Craigisnotbond.com" type thread. On the contrary, I felt that I was looking into a literary aspect of the book that bothered me and, as I assumed, some of you felt a similar way and some of you didn't. That's absolutely fine.

I have no problem breaking out an English dictionary and will definately admit that I do not know the definition of every word but I am curious as to where your hostility comes from? Is it because my "elitist" inquistion bothers you? Or maybe the fact that I actually analyze a book that I read instead of posting something inane?

Yes, breaking out a french-english dictionary 35 times in the first two chapters of a book would bog down the story.

I don't think it would be considered "high literary standards" to wonder if the book would have been better written a slightly different way.


Then again, I clearly can not have an opinion on this matter because if I do, the person who makes these "high literary standards",Dr. Noah, will flame my thread and tell us all about how he doesn't like his time to be wasted. What's more of a waste of time Dr. Noah, letting this discussion continue on or spending your precious time making 7 posts about how this thread is in fact wasting your time? We wouldn't want people to think that maybe you are being analytic because people could confuse that as an "elitist" or "fanboy" as we have clearly seen......

Sorry to everyone else who actually made positive contributions to this thread and thanks to Jim for that great quote!

Edited by Golden Gun-E, 30 June 2008 - 10:40 PM.

[MkB]

“In hard covers my books are written for and appeal principally to an “A” readership, but they have all been reprinted in paperbacks, both in England and in America and it appears that the “B” and “C” classes find them equally readable, although one might have thought that the sophistication of the background and detail would be outside their experience and in part incomprehensible.”

Ian Fleming, letter to CBS, 1957

Not saying anyone's A or B or C, but the French bits in Devil May Care do seem to be along these lines... writing as Ian Fleming. Hmm.

Things can be overexplained. A sense of out-of-reach mystery isn't a bad thing.

That's for sure! But, thinking about it again... I seem to remember that, in A Fool's Alphabet, Faulks uses foreign words and phrases almost exclusively in the chapters set in France (hence, French words). I should check in the other chapters, but anyway I'm sure there are plenty of French words and phrases in the French chapters. It looks like Faulks has a soft spot for this country and/or language.
So, maybe this French words dropping is "writing as Ian Fleming", but it's also quite "writing as Sebastian Faulks"

[Golden Gun-E]

It looks like Faulks has a soft spot for this country and/or language.
So, maybe this French words dropping is "writing as Ian Fleming", but it's also quite "writing as Sebastian Faulks"

Excellent points MkB. I haven't read any of Faulks other works but after reading the first chapters I suspected he may have had the "soft spot" that you mention for France...

[Dr. Noah]

In response to Dr. Noah:
I can see where you are coming from by saying how annoying it is to come on the forums and read people nagging about the tiniest things but this isn't the movie section, it's the literature section.

Ah. That makes all the difference.