11 replies to this topic

[spynovelfan]

(Hitch asked about this on another thread, and courtesy of a very nice chap called Hank Reineke, I can oblige. So thanks very much to Hank for sharing both of these. )

In 1966, two British literary giants reviewed Ian Fleming's posthumously-published collection featuring the short stories OCTOPUSSY and THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS.

Anthony Burgess, the author of A CLOCKWORK ORANGE and a rejected screenplay for THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, wrote a very short review of the collection that was published under the heading 'New Fiction' in The Listener on 14 July 1966. It was only a paragraph long, the last review in a piece that also looked at works by Marguerite Duras, Peter de Polnay and Colin Spencer. Here's the whole review:

'The last of Ian Fleming: two stories which, in their fascinated poring on things - guns, techniques, foodstuffs - remind us that the stuff of the anti-novel needn't necessarily spring from a thought-out aesthetic; it is the mastery of the world as things rather than people that gives Fleming his peculiar literary niche. I admired all the Bond books and I'm sorry there'll be no more. A sad farewell to Fleming and, while I think of it, to my own readers. Here on the novel-page of THE LISTENER, I mean. At least I hope only that.'

The review by poet Philip Larkin - titled 'Bond's Last Case' - appeared in The Spectator on 8 July 1966. I don't have the whole review, but here are the first two paragraphs:

'These two stories, according to the blurb, were written in 1961 and 1962 respectively, and would have formed part of a similar collection to FOR YOUR EYES ONLY if the late Ian Fleming had lived to add others to them. As it is, they presumably represent the last hard-core splutterings of his remarkable talent. I am not surprised that Fleming preferred to write novels. James Bond, unlike Sherlock Holmes, does not fit snugly into the short story length: there is something grandiose and intercontinental about his adventures that requires elbow-room, and such Bond examples of the form as we have tend to be eccentric or muted.

These are no exception. It would be difficult to deduce from them the staggeringly gigantic reputation, amounting almost to folk-myth, that has grown out of the novels. Indeed, it would be difficult nowadays to deduce it from the novels. No sooner were we told that the Bond novels represented a vulgarisation and brutalisation of Western values than the Bond films came along to vulgarise and brutalise - and, in a way, sterilise - the Bond novels. With our minds full of Sean Connery in Technicolor, or whatever it's called now, the study of a retired Secret Service major drinking himself towards his final coronary, and its cover-mate, an assignment for 007 in Berlin to out-snipe a sniper, seems sensitive, civilised, full of shading and nuance.'

[Scrambled Eggs]

No sooner were we told that the Bond novels represented a vulgarisation and brutalisation of Western values than the Bond films came along to vulgarise and brutalise - and, in a way, sterilise - the Bond novels. With our minds full of Sean Connery in Technicolor, or whatever it's called now, the study of a retired Secret Service major drinking himself towards his final coronary, and its cover-mate, an assignment for 007 in Berlin to out-snipe a sniper, seems sensitive, civilised, full of shading and nuance.

You the man Larkin.

Thanks for posting these.

[Hitch]

I see now the advantages of a bespoke service. I feel rather swish. My thanks to both Spynovelfan and Mr Reineke.

I could read reviews like this all day long. How interesting to see Pan's devious copywriter excising the tart phrase, "remind us that the stuff of the anti-novel needn't necessarily spring from a thought-out aesthetic" from the otherwise glowing tribute that rests on the back of my copy of Octopussy. I wonder if the preceding books reviewed in that day's column had provoked Burgess's spleen?

What a back-handed compliment! Apparently, Fleming's last stories are the stuff of the anti-novel, and instinctive at that. It seems plain from interviews that Fleming knew all too well what approach he was taking, having rejected the Tolstoyan route in deciding to write extended daydreams. His books might be fantastical but they were written by a journalist - a pragmatic creature when it comes to putting pen to paper. Bond's tastes, reactions and instincts feature strongly in the stories, but they don't appear on the page by accident.

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting the intention of "anti-novel"? Without the rest of the article to put it in context, it's difficult to decide whether it's pejorative.

Larkin later.

[Revelator]

What a back-handed compliment! Apparently, Fleming's last stories are the stuff of the anti-novel, and instinctive at that.

Well, according to Burgess, the anti-novel is notable for its "fascinated poring on things - guns, techniques, foodstuffs" and usually springs from "a thought-out aesthetic." This sounds a bit to me like le nouveau roman, as formulated by the late Alain Robbe-Grillet. If Burgess is indeed referring to the "new novel" when he refers to the "anti-novel," then he's doing the opposite of giving Fleming a backhanded compliment and is instead implying that Fleming inadvertently pipped the avant-garde. So Fleming was ahead of the curve but didn't know it. Not bad I'd say.
Thanks very much to Spynovelfan for reprinting these passages, which will one day end up in The Ian Fleming Reader--a mythical book now, but perhaps a reality in the years to come.

Edited by Revelator, 06 January 2009 - 10:41 PM.

[dogmanstar]

Burgess also wrote introductions to the Fleming novels published in the States about 10 or so years ago. I know I have a copy (somewhere) of OHMSS with a Burgess intro. Have to see if I can find that.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Fine words from the authors of the first draft of The Spy Who Loved Me and This Be the Verse, respectively.

[Hitch]

As Mark Twain had it, Man is the only animal that blushes. Or needs to.

Why couldn't Burgess write in plain English and use the accepted French term, blast him? Le nouveau roman I get, especially when applied to someone like Joyce. As I understand it, the term "anti-novel" refers to something that eschews or parodies established literary techniques in order to create a new narrative form. Anti, in this context, is not a pejorative prefix assigned to a literary philistine but an acknowledgement that the author is trying to subvert the norm.

My head hurts.

In my weedy defence, at least I acknowledged that, not having the whole review to read, I might be completely wrong - though that didn't stop CBn's perceptive readership from understanding Burgess's intentions. Even so, it's the phrase "needn't necessarily spring from a thought-out aesthetic" that still interests me. If Burgess is praising Fleming for being ahead of his time, all well and good; if he's implying that he was some kind of, and excuse the use of yet more French, idiot savant then I'm not so sure it's a compliment. Perhaps Pan's copywriter thought so too or perhaps it was cut out for fear of confusing Bond fans. Ahem.

My thanks to spynovelfan for gently shunting me away from the Colonel Sun thread. Devious blighters, these novelist chappies.

Larkin much later.

[Loomis]

Fascinating. Thanks for bringing this to our attention, spy.

[Lazenby880]

I'm a bit late, but thanks very much for posting these. Most interesting. Kingsely Amis's reviews of "For Special Services" and the film version of "The Spy who Loved Me" are excellent also. Unfortunately we don't seem to get such erudite literary criticism anymore from today's authors. I agree with Hitch - I could read these all day. I also agree with Larkin - Bond is not a character who lends himself to the short story format. I always feel there is something a little lacking in the short stories, that there is not wide enough scope. "From a View to a Kill" is probably my favourite short story, although I am still left wanting more at the end (so open a Bond novel instead!).

[Hitch]

There we will have to disagree, Laz. I think Fleming's short stories are concentrated doses of the good stuff. In some ways they are stronger than a few of the novels in that they don't feature the sometimes ropey plotting of, say, Goldfinger. I think Octopussy is a near-perfect example of the form and is worthy of inclusion in any short story anthology.

But I digress.

[Lazenby880]

There we will have to disagree, Laz. I think Fleming's short stories are concentrated doses of the good stuff. In some ways they are stronger than a few of the novels in that they don't feature the sometimes ropey plotting of, say, Goldfinger. I think Octopussy is a near-perfect example of the form and is worthy of inclusion in any short story anthology.

But I digress.

Hi Hitch. To be fair some short stories are better than others. I find "Quantum of Solace" dreadfully boring. On the other hand, much of "From a View to a Kill" is great fun and exciting. I just am left with a slightly empty feeling, a feeling of wanting more. Bond's adventures are so larger than life, with such joie de vivre, that I want to read about him paddling around in Jamaica or wandering around Istanbul. Perhaps because what is interesting is often not so much Bond himself but Bond's world, about which Fleming is so adept at bringing to life with such verve. For me that world cannot be explored adequately in the short story format.

That said, I do love the insight in "For Your Eyes Only":

'Bond did not like what he was going to do, and all the way from England he had had to keep reminding himself what sort of men these were. The killing of the Havelocks had been a particularly dreadful killing. Von Hammerstein and his gunmen were particularly dreadful men whom many people around the eorld would probably be very glad to destroy, as this girl proposed to do, out of private revenge. But for Bond it was different. He had no personal motives against them. THis was merely his job - as it was the job of a pest control officer to kill rats. He was the public executioner appointed by M to represent the community. In a way, Bond argued to himself, these men were as much enemies of his country as were the agents of SMERSH or of other enemey Secret Services. They had declared and waged war against British people on British soil and they were currently planning another attack. Bond’s mind hunted around for more arguments to bolster his resolve. They had killed the girl's pony and her dog with two casual sideswipes of the hand as if they had been flies. They...'

This is one of the best insights into Bond's character, belying the notion that he is some kind of unthinking killer.

Edited by Lazenby880, 08 March 2009 - 05:26 PM.

[Peckinpah1976]

To be fair some short stories are better than others. I find "Quantum of Solace" dreadfully boring. On the other hand, much of "From a View to a Kill" is great fun and exciting.

Quantum of Solace is hardly typical though, is it? Putting aside this experimental piece and the two stories that were written for promotional purposes - you're left with a pretty damn good selection IMO and as Hitch says, they're rather better than some of the novels. The main two stories from the final collection are cracking reads - there being enough good material in Octopussy alone to make a damn good non-Bond film IMO.

I often recomend the complete short stories as a good starting point for Fleming newbies.