25 replies to this topic

[Tpatt]

Having read and enjoyed Devil May Care, I was wondering if anyone knows or have heard if and when the next Bond novel is comeing out?

[zencat]

Hey Tpatt. Unfortunately, there is no news whatsoever on when we will see the next Bond novel. But if there's one in the works, my guess is we will at least hear something about it later in the year.

Welcome to CBn.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

I would love to see Bond novels continued to being written by "big name" writers in the future.

I own Devil May Care but haven't gotten around to reading it yet. I hope it's better than some here suggests.

[DamnCoffee]

I started to read Devil May Care the night before last, I read a few pages, thought " it" and went to sleep.

[Major Tallon]

I would love to see Bond novels continued to being written by "big name" writers in the future.

I own Devil May Care but haven't gotten around to reading it yet. I hope it's better than some here suggests.

A major part of the problem with Devil May Care is that expectations were so high. First, there was Faulks' reputation as a fine writer with a background in journalism, who was expected to write classic material with Fleming's dash. Then came the early word of mouth from insiders, who led us to believe that the book was extraordinary.

The first signs of trouble came when excerpts were published in The Times, and they were, frankly, poor. When the promotional campaign is so disappointing, it makes one fear for the overall product. Devil May Care never overcame that initial shock of profound disappointment.

For all that, I don't think the book's as bad as it's frequently portrayed. This isn't a positive review (or really an actual review at all), and I acknowledge that it has major flaws, but there are a good many parts to enjoy.

Would I read it? Sure, but I'd never mistake it for Fleming.

[Quantumofsolace007]

Is Devil may care amazing no not really. Benson and Amis are still tied as my fav continuation novelists.

I'm just annoyed we are seemingly getting nothing in 2009 No Bond Video Game no bond novel.... well at least i have the gardner novels i never read to enjoy.

[zencat]

I own Devil May Care but haven't gotten around to reading it yet. I hope it's better than some here suggests.

It is. I've read it twice and I think it's a fine Bond novel. It's not the best, but it's certainly not the worse. I really don't get the hate that is leveled at this book (aside from the fact that some fans just love to hate). But I do think expectations were ridiculous. I also think many pass judgment without ever having read any of the other continuation novels. Read Death Is Forever or Cold Fall to know how disappointing a Bond novel can be. DMC is a good breezy read with excellent locations and some nice Bondian situations. I enjoyed it.

[Loomis]

I really don't get the hate that is leveled at this book. But I do think expectations were ridiculous.

Not when you consider the utter brilliance of Faulks' earlier work. Based on the man's track record, it was absolutely appropriate to have extremely high expectations of DEVIL MAY CARE.

Okay, it was never likely that DMC would be an honest-to-goodness literary masterpiece like some of Faulks' "serious" novels, but I was, at the very least, seriously expecting IFP's answer to Eon's CASINO ROYALE, i.e. a work of unusually - indeed sometimes astonishingly - high quality, relaunching the series with a real bang.

As for a new Bond novel, while I'm a huge fan of the literary Bond (not just Fleming but also some of the continuations), and while it's certainly possible that a new novel could be good, I don't really care at this point whether we ever get one or not. I don't want more LitBond just for the sake of it, and DMC was such a disappointment that I rather wish they'd call the whole thing a day.

[zencat]

I really don't get the hate that is leveled at this book. But I do think expectations were ridiculous.

Not when you consider the utter brilliance of Faulks' earlier work. Based on the man's track record, it was absolutely appropriate to have extremely high expectations of DEVIL MAY CARE.

It's funny, but in the run up to release, I seemed to be the only one around who had doubts (and now I'm the only one who seems to be okay with the book). Just because he's a great writer did not tell me he would write a great Bond novel. I was also nervous about how he talked about writing it in a few weeks, and I knew from the moment we learned of the "writing of Ian Fleming" credit that this was not going to be a Sebastian Faulks novel. It was an experiment on his part, and he didn't appear to be taking it seriously. It was a lark to him. So I had lowered expectations. I was then surprised that he really did write a Bond novel that, in comparison with the other Bond continuations novels, holds up just fine.

[Loomis]

Just because he's a great writer did not tell me he would write a great Bond novel.

Granted, although his proven brilliance was undeniably a very encouraging sign.

I knew from the moment we learned of the "writing of Ian Fleming" credit that this was not going to be a Sebastian Faulks novel.

Again, granted, but neither is it a convincing imitation of Fleming. If he'd xeroxed Fleming's style (as claimed), I'd have still been disappointed it wasn't a Sebastian Faulks novel, but I'd certainly have accepted it and enjoyed it. As it stands, though, it's neither one thing nor the other. It's neither Faulks nor Fleming. Not really sure what it is, but all I know is that it isn't very good.

he didn't appear to be taking it seriously.

Well, now you're hitting the nail on the head, zen. It's a very halfhearted affair.

I was then surprised that he really did write a Bond novel that, in comparison with the other Bond continuations novels, holds up just fine.

I haven't read nearly as many Bond continuation novels as you have, but I don't think DEVIL MAY CARE holds up very well against most of those I've read. Even the much-maligned Benson has done considerably better, in my opinion.

Still, I know that this isn't a thread to debate the merits of DEVIL MAY CARE, and that we've already had this discussion, so apologies for the threadjacking.

[Major Tallon]

I own Devil May Care but haven't gotten around to reading it yet. I hope it's better than some here suggests.

DMC is a good breezy read with excellent locations and some nice Bondian situations.

I agree with this assessment.

[K1Bond007]

I really don't get the hate that is leveled at this book. But I do think expectations were ridiculous.

Not when you consider the utter brilliance of Faulks' earlier work. Based on the man's track record, it was absolutely appropriate to have extremely high expectations of DEVIL MAY CARE.

It's funny, but in the run up to release, I seemed to be the only one around who had doubts (and now I'm the only one who seems to be okay with the book). Just because he's a great writer did not tell me he would write a great Bond novel. I was also nervous about how he talked about writing it in a few weeks, and I knew from the moment we learned of the "writing of Ian Fleming" credit that this was not going to be a Sebastian Faulks novel. It was an experiment on his part, and he didn't appear to be taking it seriously. It was a lark to him. So I had lowered expectations. I was then surprised that he really did write a Bond novel that, in comparison with the other Bond continuations novels, holds up just fine.

I actually agree with Loomis though. If you've read Faulk's other works then you'd realize what a huge let down Devil May Care really is. Birdsong is a masterpiece and undoubtedly one of the best novels I've ever read. So I sort of had high expectations as far as Bond books go.

I'm fine with Devil May Care. I think it largely depends on how big of a Fleming fan you really are or how much of a break you're willing to give the guy seeing as he follows some real duds by the other continuation authors. I think Loomis' Casino Royale analogy is pretty apt though. I was hoping for something of that caliber. Honestly, Faulks pretty much hit par for Bond cont. novels IMO. Kingsley Amis is another brilliant author - one of the best from the last century and his Bond novel was no better. Strange that way. You get two highly lauded authors like Amis and Faulks and have them write Fleming and they don't do so hot. You bring in a guy like Charlie Higson who as a writer (of books) nobody is really familiar with and he knocks a couple out of the park.

[Tpatt]

Thanks for the info guys... I was really hopeing to see a new novel coming soon but alas. I'll just re-read the ones I have already, maybe start with Casino Royale and go forward. But touching on Devil May Care, i thought it was a pretty good read myself. Not the best by far but good non the less.

[OmarB]

I really hope they bring back the Robert Markham persona and do the books with a rotating line up of authors. Each guy can do 3 or 4 and then on to the next. There's a bunch of good to great writers out there who Bond material is right up their alley and given the chance would knock it out of the park. Check this out: http://www.iamtw.org/

Anything's better than expecting literary genius and getting ham fisted pastiche. I'm looking at you Sebastian.

[MattofSteel]

I really don't get the hate that is leveled at this book. But I do think expectations were ridiculous.

Not when you consider the utter brilliance of Faulks' earlier work. Based on the man's track record, it was absolutely appropriate to have extremely high expectations of DEVIL MAY CARE.

It's funny, but in the run up to release, I seemed to be the only one around who had doubts (and now I'm the only one who seems to be okay with the book). Just because he's a great writer did not tell me he would write a great Bond novel. I was also nervous about how he talked about writing it in a few weeks, and I knew from the moment we learned of the "writing of Ian Fleming" credit that this was not going to be a Sebastian Faulks novel. It was an experiment on his part, and he didn't appear to be taking it seriously. It was a lark to him. So I had lowered expectations. I was then surprised that he really did write a Bond novel that, in comparison with the other Bond continuations novels, holds up just fine.

I read it once last September, and I'd agree it doesn't seem to deserve the hate it gets. At the same time, it's not without fault. I think some people forget that Fleming's novels themselves weren't exactly packed to the gills in a contemporary sense. My vague memory of the YOLT novel is that Bond does little for the entire first half other than play rock-paper-scissors with Tiger.

DMC captured Fleming's spirit, and perhaps imitated his sense of pacing a little too closely for some contemporary tastes. My issues were less with that, and more to do with pointless scenes that did nothing to advance the story. We all get that Fleming liked to write in detail, but in trying to emulate that, Faulks communicates some things in nauseating detail, for great lengths of time. It often kind of plods along and Faulks seems hellbent on creating a very vivid image of scenes, etc., without really having anything happen in them.

His story is well paced and designed, but his plot often isn't (to use those terms like an English major would).

I seem to remember the very end of the novel is Bond and the girl hitching a ride on a fishing boat or something like that (I could be totally wrong), and yet upon reading it seemed to take fooooorever.

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

I started to read Devil May Care the night before last, I read a few pages, thought " it" and went to sleep.

Is it THAT bad?

[Loomis]

Well.... yes. I'd recommend it only to people who've never read a Bond novel. That way, it might strike you as fresh and interesting, and you'll be more easily persuaded that it's Flemingian.

[tdalton]

I started to read Devil May Care the night before last, I read a few pages, thought " it" and went to sleep.

Is it THAT bad?

Yes, it's that bad, and then some. I was so excited for the novel to be released because I thought that it would be the best Bond novel since YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, given the track record of the author and the relative mediocrity of the novels that followed YOLT, but I have yet to finish DEVIL MAY CARE because it's that bad.

[Harmsway]

I'd recommend it only to people who've never read a Bond novel. That way, it might strike you as fresh and interesting, and you'll be more easily persuaded that it's Flemingian.

I wouldn't even do that. Even though people unacquainted with Fleming would probably be entertained, people are better off reading the actual Fleming novels, rather than reading a pale imitation of them.

[OmarB]

He is right though, the only way you could enjoy that is reading it first because after Flem it's pretty sad. I hate piling on, but there are many guys out there, big and small names who could have given us a way better book. Heck, somebody who could commit themselves to a couple books not just one.

[007½]

I agee that there should be more books, but I thought it was quite a good one. It sticks in my mind more than some other Bond books do.

[Harry Fawkes]

I liked DMC a lot. Having said that, I miss John Gardner's Bond novels although he ran out of fresh ideas towards the end. I'm also sure that Faulks could have done much, much better. Mind you, again, it wasn't that bad surely. Perhaps he should try his hand at another.

Harry

[marktmurphy]

I really don't get the hate that is leveled at this book. But I do think expectations were ridiculous.

Not when you consider the utter brilliance of Faulks' earlier work. Based on the man's track record, it was absolutely appropriate to have extremely high expectations of DEVIL MAY CARE.

It wasn't even that that spoiled me for DMC; I was expecting or hoping for something of the quality of a Young Bond novel. And it's nowhere near as good: Higson catches the flavour and sadism of Fleming just perfectly: Faulks was nowhere near, comparatively, and added nothing new to the piece, unlike Higson.

[Loomis]

Higson catches the flavour and sadism of Fleming just perfectly

Which Higson(s) in particular would you recommend?

Also, which other continuation novels do you consider good?

[OmarB]

The Higson books flow together as one story so it's hard to recommend just one. My favorite is Blood Fever but it's the second part of a much larger story. I would start at the beginning.

As for new Bond authors, how about Charles Cumming?

Edited by OmarB, 06 May 2009 - 09:21 PM.

[marktmurphy]

Higson catches the flavour and sadism of Fleming just perfectly

Which Higson(s) in particular would you recommend?

Also, which other continuation novels do you consider good?

Although I haven't yet read Silverfin I honestly found them all to be really good fun with some nicely nasty moments in there. And there's just something about the slightly twisted thinking in there which feels like Fleming. They're proper adventure books for boys but passed through a sort of Fleming filter.

Apart from those I honestly haven't found any continuation novels to be very worthwhile, although something like like Facts of Death is good knockabout frothy fun, and there's stuff to be enjoyed in some Gardners like Nobody Lives Forever. Not sure I can imagine ever rereading them though.