80 replies to this topic

[Jeff007]

I was waiting for your comments, Major Tallon. Brilliant, as per usual, with very insightful examples.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Very good, Major! I must start pouring through my Fleming set over the holidays, again; I've been so busy these few months that I hadn't the time to sink into the mood and mindset a Bond novel requires -- as though you're sitting on the proverbial train beside Fleming's own imagined preferred reader.

Revelator, where do the posthumous short stories fit into your thesis? I know they were published after TMWTGG, but they were written intermittently between For Your Eyes Only and On Her Majesty's Secret Service -- how do they interconnect with the other examples mentioned? I'm curious to know...

[Mr. Blofeld]

As an addendum, does this sound like Fleming's conception of Bond, to you?

"...Bond is not [...] a man who enjoys killing. [He isn't] a Sam Peckinpah character, getting obvious enjoyment out of killing, but when the time comes to squeeze the trigger, Bond does it quicker and with greater accuracy.

He enjoys the good things in life, a good attractive woman, and he will combine business with pleasure. He is not averse to taking a lady to bed, and then giving her a sharp clip around the ear to find out why she went to bed with him - was it the enormous size of his Hampton or for information?"

[Revelator]

Wonderful comments Major!

As I read Revelator's quotation of the Alan Moore/ Scott Lynch assessment of Bond's attitude toward women, I had to ask myself if they've ever seriously read an Ian Fleming novel.

The only thing worse than a non-reading is a shallow reading, and that's the problem with the Moore/Lynch standpoint. And because Moore is such an influential author, lots of people will read the Bond books with preconceived notions of Bond's misogyny. The idea of carefully reading the books doesn't occur to them because they think Fleming is a trashy, sloppy author full of bad attitudes.

In Chapters 10 and 11 of LALD, Bond treats Solitaire with consideration and genuinely takes pleasure in her company... I see in Bond's attitude something a great deal more than that. I see a concern for Solitaire as a person in need of protection, a companion on a perilous journey, as someone to "discover" in a romantic, not just a sexual, sense.

Very good points. I think what has been obscured by the films is how courtly and near-chivalrous Bond's literary romances now seem. He's far from being some sort of sexual predator or careless playboy, as one might expect from watching Sean Connery's shark-like performance (as the Major points out with his FRWL example) or Roger Moore at his most caddish or frivolous. In a future post I hope to categorize the major female protagonists in the books and the various relationships they have with Bond.

In Moonraker, Bond's intial thoughts about Gala Brand are equivocal...He's attracted to her, but he sums her up at once as well chosen for her assignment. "Thank heavens, he thought. A professional." ... I dispute any suggestion that Bond is looking for utter submissiveness, sexual or otherwise.

Exactly. And the passage is also evidence of Bond's personal growth--the Bond of Casino Royale might have been more reluctant to class Gala as a professional. Most critics simply haven't taken into consideration that Bond is a fluid character who changes and grows over the course of the novels.

Revelator, where do the posthumous short stories fit into your thesis? I know they were published after TMWTGG, but they were written intermittently between For Your Eyes Only and On Her Majesty's Secret Service -- how do they interconnect with the other examples mentioned? I'm curious to know...

Do you mean "TLD" and "Octopussy"? In terms of female characters and relationships there's not much to work with in the latter, since Bond is a minor character. His actions in TLD however point toward the chivalric side of his character and his compassion (whereas Scott Lynch's Bond would have presumably shot her in the crotch). Some of the stories I didn't discuss in FYEO also shed light on Bond's character. In QoS for one example, Bond's sympathy for the home-wrecking wife (in contrast to the greater cruelty of her husband) is evident, though some would have expected otherwise.

As an addendum, does this sound like Fleming's conception of Bond, to you?

"...Bond is not [...] a man who enjoys killing. [He isn't] a Sam Peckinpah character, getting obvious enjoyment out of killing, but when the time comes to squeeze the trigger, Bond does it quicker and with greater accuracy.
He enjoys the good things in life, a good attractive woman, and he will combine business with pleasure. He is not averse to taking a lady to bed, and then giving her a sharp clip around the ear to find out why she went to bed with him - was it the enormous size of his Hampton or for information?"

Yes and no. That's a quote by Roger Moore, isn't it? I don't think many Sam Peckinpah characters enjoy killing that much--it's just that Peckinpah's world is a kill-or-be-killed place. Bond doesn't take pleasure in killing, but, like a Peckinpah character, he would easily kill out of revenge (as he tells Mathis, he'd gladly kill LeChiffre after what LeChiffre did to him.) And throughout the books Bond grows progressively more squeamish about cold-blooded killing (which is bit inconvenient, since he's a government assassin!).
But I don't think the bit about taking a lady to bed and then clipping her for information is really Flemingian, for the simple reason that it never happens in the books. In Fleming's world good-looking women are never evil. The movies on the other hand go for a sort of madonna/whore complex, with a bad but sexy bad Bond girl versus a good but less raunchy one. The movie version of Domino for example had most of her fire and "to-hell-with-you" spunk transferred to Fiona Volpe, thus becoming a more innocent and less sexy character. But Fleming never created any evil Bond girls.*
If the heroine is temporarily with the villain, she's usually won over by Bond. In the case of, say, Pussy Galore, Bond's power becomes a ridiculous male fantasy, but it at least means that Fleming's female characters don't simply fit on a Madonna/whore continuum. The only truly evil woman in the Bond books is Rosa Klebb, and she's of course old and ugly.

* Though I should point out Fleming apparently created Fatima Blush for one of the early Thunderball screenplays. I don't remember if the character stayed evil or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if she joined Bond's side.

Edited by Revelator, 21 December 2010 - 09:00 PM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Revelator, where do the posthumous short stories fit into your thesis? I know they were published after TMWTGG, but they were written intermittently between For Your Eyes Only and On Her Majesty's Secret Service -- how do they interconnect with the other examples mentioned? I'm curious to know...

Do you mean "TLD" and "Octopussy"? In terms of female characters and relationships there's not much to work with in the latter, since Bond is a minor character. His actions in TLD however point toward the chivalric side of his character and his compassion (whereas Scott Lynch's Bond would have presumably shot her in the crotch). Some of the stories I didn't discuss in FYEO also shed light on Bond's character. In QoS for one example, Bond's sympathy for the home-wrecking wife (in contrast to the greater cruelty of her husband) is evident, though some would have expected otherwise.

What about Mary Ann Russell, from "From a View to a Kill"? Surely, you can't say Fleming doesn't make her out to be a professional at her job; in fact, right before Russell introduces herself to Bond, Bond realizes she's exactly what he'd wanted for the night -- and then she turns out to be working for the old firm! It's a genuine bit of comedy, and subtle, not smutty; despite the fact that most of the comedy results from the internal monologue, the Moore films, for certain, could have learned from this charming bit of interplay.

As an addendum, does this sound like Fleming's conception of Bond, to you?

"...Bond is not [...] a man who enjoys killing. [He isn't] a Sam Peckinpah character, getting obvious enjoyment out of killing, but when the time comes to squeeze the trigger, Bond does it quicker and with greater accuracy.
He enjoys the good things in life, a good attractive woman, and he will combine business with pleasure. He is not averse to taking a lady to bed, and then giving her a sharp clip around the ear to find out why she went to bed with him - was it the enormous size of his Hampton or for information?"

Yes and no. That's a quote by Roger Moore, isn't it? I don't think many Sam Peckinpah characters enjoy killing that much--it's just that Peckinpah's world is a kill-or-be-killed place. Bond doesn't take pleasure in killing, but, like a Peckinpah character, he would easily kill out of revenge (as he tells Mathis, he'd gladly kill Le Chiffre after what Le Chiffre did to him.) And throughout the books Bond grows progressively more squeamish about cold-blooded killing (which is bit inconvenient, since he's a government assassin!).

I would have to agree with you, there; Peckinpah made films about bloody worlds and the men and women who lived in them; the Old West, the New West, World War II, the occasional spy or action feature -- Peckinpah wasn't obsessed with violence, but the audience's reaction to it.

Even Straw Dogs was something of a reversal of expectations, where Dustin Hoffman is something of a villain to the picture; it's taken a while, for critics and commentators alike, to understand Peckinpah's oeuvre, but that distance wasn't available when Roger Moore made that comment -- hence, he sides with the general view of Peckinpah at the time, and why he's on record as being so squeamish concerning the violence towards the end of A View to a Kill (despite that movie being terrible in so many other ways; Moore was certainly accustomed to those, but not to violence of that extent).

But I don't think the bit about taking a lady to bed and then clipping her for information is really Flemingian, for the simple reason that it never happens in the books. In Fleming's world, good-looking women are never evil; the movies, on the other hand, go for a sort of madonna/whore complex, with a bad, but sexy, bad Bond girl versus a good, but less raunchy, one.

There's one exception to that; Die Another Day, where the explicitely raunchy Jinx ("Yo momma", "got the thrust of it", "Read this, bitch!") is the good Bond girl who gets to bed Bond in the end, while the more uptight, double-crossing Miranda Frost gets a dagger in her chest for her troubles.

Granted, I have heard that it was originally the reverse, and that Frost was to be Gala Brand, but it was changed due to Halle Berry's Oscar win... but that's only hearsay; we can only view the finished product and compare it to what came before.

The movie version of Domino for example had most of her fire and "to-hell-with-you" spunk transferred to Fiona Volpe, thus becoming a more innocent and less sexy character. But Fleming never created any evil Bond girls (though I should point out Fleming apparently created Fatima Blush for one of the early Thunderball screenplays; I don't remember if the character stayed evil or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if she joined Bond's side).

She did, indeed; she ended up betraying Largo out of lust (similar, bizarrely enough, to May Day turning good out of nowhere in AVTAK), and Blush actually ended up detonating the nuclear bomb hidden on Largo's plane (in that script) out of anger and blowing up the aircraft, with them both on it. I don't recall who said it was too downbeat, but it ended up being changed so that the Kutze figure (not that name in that draft) detonated the bomb; this was eventually changed to Kutze ratting out on SPECTRE in the novel, and finally to Kutze freeing Domino from her captivity onboard the Disco Volante, alerting Bond and Domino to the Volante's imminent crash -- and, then, mysteriously disappearing (I guess he wasn't able to learn how to swim).

To come back to Domino, however, the film made her less fiery, true, but it also removed a moment of casual racism, concerning the black hansom driver on Nassau High Street, when Bond first meets Domino; certainly, it might have been acceptable to a Fleming and a Bond accustomed to people of other races in lower-paying positions (just look at Bond's suspicions about the allergy clinic in On Her Majesty's Secret Service being a SPECTRE front -- due to its multiculturalism!), but had it played out onscreen, to a worldwide audience and with a Bond the producers had attempted to make safe by giving him a black sidekick, Pinder, for the film... well, I don't think too many audience members would have had much sympathy for Domino by the time Largo took out his ice cubes and cigarettes.

If the heroine is temporarily with the villain, she's usually won over by Bond. In the case of, say, Pussy Galore, Bond's power becomes a ridiculous male fantasy, but it at least means that Fleming's female characters don't simply fit on a Madonna/whore continuum. The only truly evil woman in the Bond books is Rosa Klebb, and she's of course old and ugly.

She's also a lesbian, like Pussy Galore, which means... what? That lesbianism is evil, but curable in the young? A bit confusing, methinks...

[Revelator]

What about Mary Ann Russell, from "From a View to a Kill"? Surely, you can't say Fleming doesn't make her out to be a professional at her job; in fact, right before Russell introduces herself to Bond, Bond realizes she's exactly what he'd wanted for the night...

Good point. She also saves Bond's bacon at the end. There's a good article waiting to be written on all the times Bond gets rescued by the Bond girl, and how he's so often a dude in distress.

distance wasn't available when Roger Moore made that comment -- hence, he sides with the general view of Peckinpah at the time, and why he's on record as being so squeamish concerning the violence towards the end of A View to a Kill

And of course Moore was even reluctant about less bloody violent acts, like kicking Locque's car over that cliff in FYEO, though he was often at his best when forced to play outside his comfort range. In such scenes you do feel that Bond enjoys killing those who have crossed him and deserve it; you feel it in the cold relish he says "what a helpful chap" with while gazing down at Sandor's broken body in TSWLM.

There's one exception to that; Die Another Day...

That's a good point, in being an exception that proves the rule.

She did, indeed; she ended up betraying Largo out of lust (similar, bizarrely enough, to May Day turning good out of nowhere in AVTAK)

Though Fatima had the excuse of Bond's sex-God vibe, whereas May Day's change of heart can hardly be chalked down to having sex with a geriatric Roger Moore.

To come back to Domino, however, the film made her less fiery, true, but it also removed a moment of casual racism

Yes, though even the book could have lost that bit without much damage. The scene with Bond, Leiter and the bartender who moves with the "slow dignity of colored help" is similarly regrettable.

She's also a lesbian, like Pussy Galore, which means... what? That lesbianism is evil, but curable in the young? A bit confusing, methinks...

Fleming says that to Klebb sex is "an itch" and calls her a "neuter," so I think Klebb's lesbianism in this case is mostly perfunctory--she mistakenly thinks it's a way to get onto Tatiana's good side. But Klebb herself doesn't really care very much about sex. In Pussy's case, her lesbianism is not the result of an actual same-sex sexual orientation but simply arises from never having met a real man, her previous heterosexual experience having been traumatic. Tilly meanwhile, is supposedly lesbian because she's been sexually confused due to changing gender roles and sex equality and so forth. None of these characters is a lesbian because of a biologically determined predilection, unlike the majority of real people who identify as being lesbians. So I don't think Fleming took lesbianism seriously at all, and could barely bring himself to believe in it. His attitude toward male homosexuality is less frivolous but more negative.

Edited by Revelator, 22 December 2010 - 08:47 PM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Good point. She also saves Bond's bacon at the end. There's a good article waiting to be written on all the times Bond gets rescued by the Bond girl, and how he's so often a dude in distress.

If that's so, then you should write it.

And of course Moore was even reluctant about less bloody violent acts, like kicking Locque's car over that cliff in FYEO, though he was often at his best when forced to play outside his comfort range. In such scenes you do feel that Bond enjoys killing those who have crossed him and deserve it; you feel it in the cold relish he says "what a helpful chap" with while gazing down at Sandor's broken body in TSWLM.

That's the strange thing; he never uttered a peep against the Sandor scene, but rails against doing the Locque scene -- even though they're essentially the same, being brutal killings? Bit of a double standard, no?

That's a good point, in being an exception that proves the rule.

True... but would you say it's a successful exception? Considering how critically reviled DAD was, it's intriguing to see how that unconscious reversal might have played into things...

Though Fatima had the excuse of Bond's sex-God vibe, whereas May Day's change of heart can hardly be chalked down to having sex with a geriatric Roger Moore.

I suppose -- would you say Fleming often used that "sex-God vibe", or that it ended up being a one-time event with Goldfinger?

Yes, though even the book could have lost that bit without much damage. The scene with Bond, Leiter and the bartender who moves with the "slow dignity of colored help" is similarly regrettable.

Regrettable because it exposes the racism of the time, or because it exposes Fleming's unconscious racism?

Fleming says that to Klebb sex is "an itch" and calls her a "neuter," so I think Klebb's lesbianism in this case is mostly perfunctory--she mistakenly thinks it's a way to get onto Tatiana's good side. But Klebb herself doesn't really care very much about sex. In Pussy's case, her lesbianism is not the result of an actual same-sex sexual orientation but simply arises from never having met a real man, her previous heterosexual experience having been traumatic. Tilly meanwhile, is supposedly lesbian because she's been sexually confused due to changing gender roles and sex equality and so forth. None of these characters is a lesbian because of a biologically determined predilection, unlike the majority of real people who identify as being lesbians. So I don't think Fleming took lesbianism seriously at all, and could barely bring himself to believe in it. His attitude toward male homosexuality is less frivolous but more negative.

Again, is that just from the culture, or from Fleming himself? There is the whole convoluted tale about where exactly Fleming got the name of his house from, after all...

[Mr. Blofeld]

Erm, Revelator? You there...?

[Revelator]

If that's so, then you should write it.

Someday...I wish there were more people focusing on such issues though. When Fleming's work gets labelled as misogynist that tends to close down any real/detailed discussion of gender instead of opening it up. Things would be diferent if Fleming was studied more often by academics, but that hasn't really taken off yet. Feminist academic critics would find something like TSWLM incredibly rich fodder for discussion.

True... but would you say it's a successful exception? Considering how critically reviled DAD was, it's intriguing to see how that unconscious reversal might have played into things...

I thought the worst thing about DAD was the CGI, so it's probably a successful exception. But the entire idea of having two girls, with one being evil and the other good, is still a creation of the movies, and a concept Fleming had absolutely no interest in. For him a woman cannot be evil unless she's ugly and middle-aged.

I suppose -- would you say Fleming often used that "sex-God vibe", or that it ended up being a one-time event with Goldfinger?

It's what makes Solitaire want to run away with Bond, and is at work throughout the series. The only women who don't desire BOnd are folks like Tilly, who Bond describes as sexually adrift.

Regrettable because it exposes the racism of the time, or because it exposes Fleming's unconscious racism?

Both, but slightly more for the latter.

Again, is that just from the culture, or from Fleming himself?

Bond's attitude that lesbians pose a sexual challenge to men--i.e., that a Lesbian is someone who hasn't met a good man yet--is something you'd expect to find expressed on Mad Men. So essentially cultural, though Fleming's view on the connection between women's equality and sexual ambiguity sounds like one of his more outrageous personal views, though a modern cultural studies professor might agree with the idea, but with the proviso that "male and female qualities" are more culturally determined than essentially determined.

Edited by Revelator, 29 December 2010 - 03:48 AM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Someday...I wish there were more people focusing on such issues though. When Fleming's work gets labelled as misogynist that tends to close down any real/detailed discussion of gender instead of opening it up. Things would be diferent if Fleming was studied more often by academics, but that hasn't really taken off yet. Feminist academic critics would find something like TSWLM incredibly rich fodder for discussion.

I suppose, but in what way? Would it be detrimental to the novel, or improve its reputation? I think it's an underrated classic, myself, but it probably wouldn't be the best way to introduce feminist critics to the James Bond novels...

I thought the worst thing about DAD was the CGI, so it's probably a successful exception. But the entire idea of having two girls, with one being evil and the other good, is still a creation of the movies, and a concept Fleming had absolutely no interest in. For him a woman cannot be evil unless she's ugly and middle-aged.

Do you suppose that's limited, or does it show that a sexual woman is automatically open to goodness, as opposed to being more attracted to evil? It'd be interesting to juxtapose the two images of women, from the books and the films, and see which is a better portrayal of the independent woman -- especially in the light of the Craig movies.

It's what makes Solitaire want to run away with Bond, and is at work throughout the series. The only women who don't desire Bond are folks like Tilly, who Bond describes as sexually adrift.

Is it also what makes Scaramanga want to hire Bond, do you think? If nothing else, it's an implicit motivator for a good number of the Bond novels...

Both, but slightly more for the latter.

I often wish Fleming didn't have his imperfections, but they are what make up a person; you can't have the good without the bad, or the rough without the smooth.

Bond's attitude that lesbians pose a sexual challenge to men--i.e., that a Lesbian is someone who hasn't met a good man yet--is something you'd expect to find expressed on Mad Men. So essentially cultural, though Fleming's view on the connection between women's equality and sexual ambiguity sounds like one of his more outrageous personal views, though a modern cultural studies professor might agree with the idea, but with the proviso that "male and female qualities" are more culturally determined than essentially determined.

The irony of Fleming's views is that EON, despite their filmic Bond occasionally enacting violence against women, was perfectly willing to hire a lesbian, Ilsa Steppat, for one of their films (I've heard rumours of Peter Hunt's orientation, but don't wish to discuss them, here) -- Fleming, despite being very friendly with noted gay men in his private life, probably would have never consented to hiring a woman he felt was "adrift".

[Anticitizen]

(just look at Bond's suspicions about the allergy clinic in On Her Majesty's Secret Service being a SPECTRE front -- due to its multiculturalism!)

To be fair, that was based on his prior knowledge of SPECTRE being comprised of three-man cell groups of operatives recruited from intelligence agencies across Europe. Though, any British operatives are absent, of course - and it's amusing that Bond reckoned that the French operatives would surely be manning the kitchen of Piz Gloria.

It would've been interesting to have a British group in SPECTRE, which Bond would inflict harm upon with special hostility due to its traitorous nature.

[Mr. Blofeld]

To be fair, that was based on his prior knowledge of SPECTRE being comprised of three-man cell groups of operatives recruited from intelligence agencies across Europe. Though, any British operatives are absent, of course - and it's amusing that Bond reckoned that the French operatives would surely be manning the kitchen of Piz Gloria.

Still, it's a little racıalıstic...

[Major Tallon]

To be fair, that was based on his prior knowledge of SPECTRE being comprised of three-man cell groups of operatives recruited from intelligence agencies across Europe. Though, any British operatives are absent, of course - and it's amusing that Bond reckoned that the French operatives would surely be manning the kitchen of Piz Gloria.

Still, it's a little racıalıstic...

I'm afraid I can't agree that there was anything racial in Bond's investigation of SPECTRE in OHMSS. By the time the novel begins, Bond has learned that Blofeld traditionally organizes his men in three-man cells, with each cell representing a different national group, and all he was doing in OHMSS was pondering whether the alleged "Comte de Bleuville" was sticking to that pattern.

Thunderball tells us that all of the cells were composed of European men. Though of differing nationalities, there weren't any ethnic minorities among them, nor any cultural minorities either, unless one counts the one cell composed of highland Turks. By the time of OHMSS, Bond's post-Thunderball investigations had disclosed that Blofeld used this structure, but it wasn't this fact that caused Bond's attentions to focus on on the putative count. It was the fact that Blofeld, in the course of seeking the title, had done so using his real name (a fact that the film would subsequently alter) that drew Bond's attention to him and his clinic. Bond would have been negligent, indeed hopelessly incompetent, if his later investigations at Piz Gloria had steered clear of noticing a similar personnel structure to the one SPECTRE traditionally used, just because he would have to take note of the staff's nationalities in order to do so.

Thus, when Bond encountered a likely Corsican, he suspected a link to Blofeld because Draco had told him that one of his own men had defected to Blofeld. Bond simply took note of an investigative fact, with no ant-Corsican bias suggested. When the "Angels of Death" described Piz Gloria's staff structure, it caused Bond to wonder if SPECTRE's old cell structure had been reconstituted. It wasn't Bond's view that anyone employing groups of Bulgars, Germans, Russians, etc. must be a villain, but instead he wondered if the "count" was following a pattern of behavior similar to Blofeld's, thus establishing a "modus operandi", a legitimate investigative inquiry.

As to this charge of racialsim (or anti-cultural bias), my conclusion is that Commander Bond is not guilty.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Damn... you've shut me up. Will have to take another look at OHMSS soon; it seems to have been too long since I last read it.

[Revelator]

I suppose, but in what way? Would it be detrimental to the novel, or improve its reputation? I think it's an underrated classic, myself, but it probably wouldn't be the best way to introduce feminist critics to the James Bond novels...

TSWLM would probably be the most interesting novel for critics interested in gender relations and the treatment of feminism in Fleming, since Fleming is writing directly from a woman's perspective. I'd think that be fascinating to anyone interested in the topic. It could only help the novel's reputation, since it's currently quite low (and wasn't helped by Simon Winder's continual rubbishing of it).

Do you suppose that's limited, or does it show that a sexual woman is automatically open to goodness, as opposed to being more attracted to evil?

Both really, and in any case it's a nice break from the madonna/whore cliche that the Bond films have endlessly played on, like way too many other movies.

Is it also what makes Scaramanga want to hire Bond, do you think?

If you're Kingsley Amis than the answer is a definite yes. I think it's more laziness on Fleming's part.

I often wish Fleming didn't have his imperfections, but they are what make up a person; you can't have the good without the bad, or the rough without the smooth.

I wish his editors had been a little more sensitive, since many of the more offensive passages in the books could be removed with no damage at all.

The irony of Fleming's views is that EON, despite their filmic Bond occasionally enacting violence against women, was perfectly willing to hire a lesbian, Ilsa Steppat, for one of their films (I've heard rumours of Peter Hunt's orientation, but don't wish to discuss them, here) -- Fleming, despite being very friendly with noted gay men in his private life, probably would have never consented to hiring a woman he felt was "adrift".

I think he wouldn't have cared as long as she was good looking! And EON probably would not have hired a lesbian actress to play anything besides an ugly villainess--I doubt they'd have knowingly cast a lesbian as a Bond girl. I thought Peter Hunt's orientation was openly known at this point--his Guardian obituary mentions his leaving behind a male companion. And since he's deceased we don't have to worry about outing him against his will. I think there's a wonderful irony in the best Bond director and editor, the man who helped make the series what it was, being gay. Proof that Bond's appeal transcended sexual orientation, along with Fleming's less admirable attitudes.

Edited by Revelator, 31 December 2010 - 05:15 AM.

[Mr. Blofeld]

TSWLM would probably be the most interesting novel for critics interested in gender relations and the treatment of feminism in Fleming, since Fleming is writing directly from a woman's perspective. I'd think that be fascinating to anyone interested in the topic. It could only help the novel's reputation, since it's currently quite low (and wasn't helped by Simon Winder's continual rubbishing of it).

I'm almost positive, however, that were I to invite a feminist college professor to read it, she would decline once I told her who wrote the novel and what series it was a part of -- a bit stereotypical, but that's the reputation Fleming seems to have garnered.

Both really, and in any case it's a nice break from the madonna/whore cliche that the Bond films have endlessly played on, like way too many other movies.

If nothing else, it poses a convenient dichotomy between the heroes and their heroine (singular because, in Bond, it's seemingly always been singular) and the villains and their villainess...

If you're Kingsley Amis than the answer is a definite yes. I think it's more laziness on Fleming's part.

Laziness? Perhaps more weariness; that same sense of spiritual and inspirational exhaustion that so often accompanies the winding-down of life. Fleming had gotten that sort of ennui while working on Goldfinger, but this probably hit him much harder, especially after he had seemingly exhausted himself from his last three novels and the Thunderball court case.

I wish his editors had been a little more sensitive, since many of the more offensive passages in the books could be removed with no damage at all.

More likely than not, they shared the same prejudices; Jonathan Cape and company were certainly all part of the same social strata that Fleming belonged to -- that's why they defended his plagiarism with regards to Thunderball.

I think he wouldn't have cared as long as she was good looking! And EON probably would not have hired a lesbian actress to play anything besides an ugly villainess--I doubt they'd have knowingly cast a lesbian as a Bond girl. I thought Peter Hunt's orientation was openly known at this point--his Guardian obituary mentions his leaving behind a male companion. And since he's deceased we don't have to worry about outing him against his will. I think there's a wonderful irony in the best Bond director and editor, the man who helped make the series what it was, being gay. Proof that Bond's appeal transcended sexual orientation, along with Fleming's less admirable attitudes.

I was reading Charles Helfenstein's The Making of On Her Majesty's Secret Service; apparently, Peter Hunt kept one of the limited editions signed by Fleming with him during filming at Piz Gloria -- the man was a devoted fan, if nothing else.

[Revelator]

I'm almost positive, however, that were I to invite a feminist college professor to read it, she would decline once I told her who wrote the novel and what series it was a part of -- a bit stereotypical, but that's the reputation Fleming seems to have garnered.

That's a definite hurdle, and the movies haven't helped either.

Laziness? Perhaps more weariness

The disruption of Fleming's writing schedule due to illness, which halved his daily writing time, is probably the chief culprit, though his boredom with Bond was also at its maximum.

More likely than not, they shared the same prejudices; Jonathan Cape and company were certainly all part of the same social strata that Fleming belonged to -- that's why they defended his plagiarism with regards to Thunderball.

Most publishers tend to stick by their successful clients in such situations, but it's true that Cape and Company must have had their own clubland prejudices. I was not taken with the Battle For Bond book, which was amateurishly edited, badly structured, and deeply biased in Jack Whittingham's favor (as one would expect from a book that includes flagrantly irrelevant pictures from his daughter's singing career). That Fleming used Whittingham's story elements (thinking the script was legally his to draw from) is beyond doubt, but the more interesting story is about how he took elements from a dodgy-sounding script and transformed them to make a good novel, not how an otherwise forgotten journeyman screenwriter supposedly invented the screen version of Bond.

I was reading Charles Helfenstein's The Making of On Her Majesty's Secret Service; apparently, Peter Hunt kept one of the limited editions signed by Fleming with him during filming at Piz Gloria -- the man was a devoted fan, if nothing else.

More so than pretty much any other Bond director I'm willing to say. Helfenstein's book was truly excellent, and the script sections were fascinating. Simon Raven was another great Fleming fan and supporter, and the movie truly feels like a labor of love.

[Major Tallon]

That Fleming used Whittingham's story elements (thinking the script was legally his to draw from) is beyond doubt, but the more interesting story is about how he took elements from a dodgy-sounding script and transformed them to make a good novel, not how an otherwise forgotten journeyman screenwriter supposedly invented the screen version of Bond.

I completely agree. The manuscript of Thunderball is not included in the Lilly Library's collection of Fleming manuscripts, most likely because it was needed for use in the litigation over the story. Whatever the reason, the manuscripts typically show extensive editing in Fleming's own hand, and this manuscript would have provided additional insight into how the novel was created and the extent to which it was Fleming's own brainchild, rather than an adaptation of others' ideas.

On another topic, I also agree about Helfenstein's book. Just terrific!

Edited by Major Tallon, 02 January 2011 - 10:27 PM.

[Harry Fawkes]

A wonderful thread and one I intend returning to. What a lucky stumble. Thank you.

[MkB]

A wonderful thread and one I intend returning to. What a lucky stumble. Thank you.

WOW! Harry! That new sig... Where can I buy the poster version?!?

[Harry Fawkes]

A wonderful thread and one I intend returning to. What a lucky stumble. Thank you.

WOW! Harry! That new sig... Where can I buy the poster version?!?

I thought I'd try and portray myself a little bit more seriously this year with the addition of this photo as my signiture