2121 replies to this topic

[Doctor Shatterhand]

Great stuff from Dr Shatterhand there; good facts.

Can you clarify, though:

What is "Pakistanian"? - is this a forgotten missile target from Dubya's Foreign Policy.

"Maidservant" - presumably some nubile, scantily-glad exotic woman, the type that perhaps might have wafted cool air over a pharoah, fed Cleopatra, or entertained Hussein in his tent in the "Spy Who Loved Me".

I assume these are consequences of two nations seperated by a common language?

Admittedly I made a mistake in the spelling when I meant to spell Pakistani. My apologies since I was up late at my office trying to finish the edit, upload it to YouTube and drive an hour back to my home.

Deaver told an entire room of approximately 50 people, before I even had my camera out, the bullet points that are written in the left hand side of my video. I personally asked him during the Q & A about May, which he said that a new character of an Indian or Pakistani background would replace her. No name was given, but Deaver only has an outline written which means that anything could still change before the final edit. Deaver did not say anything to me privately that he did not say to the audience before.

[Doctor Shatterhand]

If they are rebooting the series to allow Bond to be more of an anti-terrorism expert and making MI6 a more ruthless organization, again, there is no real need to do so--just put something in the book mentioning the fact that Bond has had a little more different training as part of his job--

Deaver also said about MI-6 that the organization was considered part of Fleming fiction until it was revealed to have actually existed in the 1990s. Personally I always thought MI-6 existed period, but did not know that it only recently came out of the shadows.

But Deaver went on to say that MI-6, unlike the CIA, did not set up assassination targets. Therefore the MI-6 of Project X will be more shadowy and thus will disavow any agent who is caught by the enemy.

[Trident]

Great stuff from Dr Shatterhand there; good facts.

Can you clarify, though:

What is "Pakistanian"? - is this a forgotten missile target from Dubya's Foreign Policy.

"Maidservant" - presumably some nubile, scantily-glad exotic woman, the type that perhaps might have wafted cool air over a pharoah, fed Cleopatra, or entertained Hussein in his tent in the "Spy Who Loved Me".

I assume these are consequences of two nations seperated by a common language?

Admittedly I made a mistake in the spelling when I meant to spell Pakistani. My apologies since I was up late at my office trying to finish the edit, upload it to YouTube and drive an hour back to my home.

Aw, c'mmon. Let's not pick and overrate these very, very minor details regarding American vs. British English. I think we still all understand what's meant (we do, don't we?) and I trust the final product will be edited to suit our exacting linguistic demands. Look how many fans grant Fleming more than the necessary number of 'Ms'. I daresay most won't much bother about 'maid' and the respective connotations of this and other terms.

Doctor Shatterhand, you did a splendid job in providing us with this wealth of information about a most sensitive operation! Thanks a lot for going to these lengths! And thanks to your source for confiding these glimpses of X to us!

[David Schofield]

I always thought Bond wasn't especially rich anyway, so how can he afford a maid, a Bentley, custom cigarettes, and expensive shirts?

Pretty much every character in Fleming's books lived outside their means with the exception of the villains who were almost always the richest guys around. Can't remember the precise books, but for example, M is said to make something like 6-7K pounds a year, but to gain entry to Blades you need to be able to easily clear 100K.

This wouldn't apply to Bond though who actually seems to have come from money (not unlike IF himself).

Refer his private income reference in Moonraker which DOUBLES his net annual income. Not a bad position to be in.

And if my reading of Charlie is correct, it is stated Bond grew up in a home in Chelsea; this would suggest to me that this is the same property as the Wellington Square flat, perhaps owned by the Bonds for generations or on a perpetual lease. Therefore, Bond would seem to own/have unfettered access to a very desirable and VALUABLE piece of London real estate.

And, of course, Eton and Fettes fees aren't cheap.

And we know how he bags his Bentley's, don't we?

[terminus]

Been reading some of the Chris Ryan books recently and the one I'm currently midway through, Ultimate Weapon, features a character called Jed who is in several ways, remarkably Bond-like. I'm thinking his background would be an excellent way for Deaver to imagine his reenvisioning of Bond.

The character is somewhere in his mid to late twenties, he attended Uni shortly before the events of September 11, 2001 (in the book he does a degree related to science, but I see no harm in changing this to being the languages course we speculated in an earlier post) before being recruited into the Army - and later the SAS whereupon he goes on several succesfull missions.

Heck, there's a suggestion in Spooks that Lucas North was a successfull Senior Agent in MI5 pre-2001 at the age of 29 and Adam Carter was a succesfull operative in the Middle East for MI6 c. 2001 at the same age range.

A later-twenties Bond isn't much of a stretch for the character.

[marktmurphy]

Frankly, I never loved the character of May. It always seemed soooo old fashioned and even made Bond seem a little precious. He needs someone to cook for him, etc. Maybe it was de rigor for a bachelor in the 1950s, but notice there's no May in Dr. No or LALD (films). I could live without the character entirely.

Thank heavens: when I suggested the same in a thread about some people wanting May in the Craig Bond films (?!) I got bashed quite heavily! Does James Bond, superspy who can jump out of a plane without a parachute and save the world really need a lady to come round and cooks his eggs and do his sheets for him? Makes him seem a bit pathetic. He was in the military: he should have learnt how to make a bed!
Maybe he's got a cleaner: that's not so ridiculous, but a maid is just a bit too much. And having a cleaner isn't really a detail worth mentioning in a novel about a superspy. Might as well talk about his washing machine as well.

[David Schofield]

Frankly, I never loved the character of May. It always seemed soooo old fashioned and even made Bond seem a little precious. He needs someone to cook for him, etc. Maybe it was de rigor for a bachelor in the 1950s, but notice there's no May in Dr. No or LALD (films). I could live without the character entirely.

Thank heavens: when I suggested the same in a thread about some people wanting May in the Craig Bond films (?!) I got bashed quite heavily! Does James Bond, superspy who can jump out of a plane without a parachute and save the world really need a lady to come round and cooks his eggs and do his sheets for him? Makes him seem a bit pathetic. He was in the military: he should have learnt how to make a bed!
Maybe he's got a cleaner: that's not so ridiculous, but a maid is just a bit too much. And having a cleaner isn't really a detail worth mentioning in a novel about a superspy. Might as well talk about his washing machine as well.

Yeah, but unlike an Indo-Pak "maidservant" a washine machine would be unlikely to be working undercover for Al Queda and be the driver for the plot, would it?

[Brisco]

But IF that was/is his intention why did he very EXPLICITLY say to Dr Shatterhand his Bond was born in the aerly 80s??? This is beyond being VERRRY clumsy if he didn't mean it; does he think we're not able to calculated when Bond MIGHT have been born??? As I said earlier, with Fleming, he left it up to the readers.

He didn't say it explicitly at all in that video. He only said that HE "envisioned" this Bond being born in the early 1980s. Sounds to me like a writer just explaining where he's coming from in his head. Nothing explicit about plans to state Bond's actual birthdate or make it part of the narrative. I think he just meant that he sees 007 as being in his early 30s. Possibly to indicate, as you suggested, that these adventures take place prior to those we know and love? I'm not too worried!

[terminus]

I'm not getting the insistence on slotting the new novel into the old narrative, surely this is a reboot and reimagining of the Bond canon, Bond 2.0, as Casino Royale/Quantum of Solace were to Doctor No thru to Die Another Day?

Surely the presence of Mary Goodnight as Bonds secretary and not Loelia Ponsonbury's indicates this isn't supposed to be the same continuity?

Edited by terminus, 07 June 2010 - 08:40 PM.

[Jack Spang]

I always thought Bond wasn't especially rich anyway, so how can he afford a maid, a Bentley, custom cigarettes, and expensive shirts?

Pretty much every character in Fleming's books lived outside their means with the exception of the villains who were almost always the richest guys around. Can't remember the precise books, but for example, M is said to make something like 6-7K pounds a year, but to gain entry to Blades you need to be able to easily clear 100K.

This wouldn't apply to Bond though who actually seems to have come from money (not unlike IF himself).

Refer his private income reference in Moonraker which DOUBLES his net annual income. Not a bad position to be in.

And if my reading of Charlie is correct, it is stated Bond grew up in a home in Chelsea; this would suggest to me that this is the same property as the Wellington Square flat, perhaps owned by the Bonds for generations or on a perpetual lease. Therefore, Bond would seem to own/have unfettered access to a very desirable and VALUABLE piece of London real estate.

And, of course, Eton and Fettes fees aren't cheap.

And we know how he bags his Bentley's, don't we?

I checked out Wellington Square last year. Very, very nice flats! Would hate to think how much they cost. Didn't run into Bond though.

[Doctor Shatterhand]

Surely the presence of Mary Goodnight as Bonds secretary and not Loelia Ponsonbury's indicates this isn't supposed to be the same continuity?

Goodnight became Bond's secretary in OHMSS and had a larger role in TMWTGG. She came after Loelia left MI-6 to get married, so I have no problem with her being his secretary, plus her name is so much more memorable than Ponsonbury.

[terminus]

Yes. I know that. I'm not stupid. Perhaps I didn't state what I meant clearly enough.

What I meant was that people are trying to place Project X in a time before Casino Royale. However, if Mary Goodnight arrives in OHMSS after Loelia Ponsonbury departs then it would suggest that Project X with its twenty-one year old Goodnight and thirty-ish year old Bond, cannot be in the same continuity as the Fleming novels.

[Jack Spang]

I’m glad M will be a man again but it sounds like it won’t be Sir Miles which will be a shame. If Moneypenny and Goodonight are there why not have Sir Miles? I wonder if Tanner and Boothroyd will be present. Maybe they will be brought in by another author in the second book.

[Matt_13]

I wonder if Deaver checked out that incredible dossier of Bond on the Casino Royale website. The amount of work put into that thing is extraordinary, and after checking it out again today some of that stuff could fit in just fine in Deaver's new world. For anyone who hasn't listened to it yet, it really is something else.

[Brisco]

I wonder if Deaver checked out that incredible dossier of Bond on the Casino Royale website. The amount of work put into that thing is extraordinary, and after checking it out again today some of that stuff could fit in just fine in Deaver's new world. For anyone who hasn't listened to it yet, it really is something else.

You're right! I haven't heard that since the movie came out, but I was thinking about it just the other day. I really wish those dossiers had been included on at least one version of the DVD! They weren't were they? I don't think that the film and book Bond need to be the same, but someone definitely DID put a lot of work into that, and it should be preserved somewhere more permanent for posterity.

[MajorB]

It's because of this that they looked to rebooting it anyway. Clearly people still want Bond novels, but if you want to publish a current Bond novel, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I liked Benson, but his books were a jumbled mess continuity wise.
(snip)

Some of this reflects was Glidrose (now Ian Fleming Publications) wanted. When Benson took over, one of the conditions was that the stories be set in the "present day." Authors of any long-running series in any medium face the same problem at one time or another.

To use 2 examples in other media: the U.S. television show Gunsmoke, which ran 20 years, had an odd continuity. It was more or less always 1873 (although even there you can find some deviation) but the characters clearly got older. In the 13th season, Doc says Matt Dillon has been U.S. marshal for 13 years. In the 17th season, Kitty says she first met Matt 17 years earlier, etc., etc.


The Dick Tracy comic strip, which began 79 years ago, is even stranger. In 1981, the strip's 50th anniversary, Max Allan Collins established that, more or less, that Tracy had been a cop for 25 years and that Tracy himself was now 50 years old, meaning that every two years of "real time" accounted for one year of continuity time. Yet, just two years later, Collins brought back Pruneface, who had been a Nazi and we were told that was still the case. So, in effect, Collins tossed off his own continuity explanation because he felt he had a better story to tell.

Rex Stout, whose Nero Wolfe mysteries were, as we know, admired by Fleming and shouted out in OHMSS, pulled off the ultimate trick in this area, IMO. In his an even better one. In his 1938 novel Too Many Cooks, there is an African-American college student named Paul Whipple. In Stout's 1964 novel A Right to Die, Whipple returns. But while Whipple has aged appropriately for the time span involved--he is now middle-aged and has a son in his 20s--neither Nero Wolfe nor any of the other "regular" characters in the book seem to have aged a day. And I don't remember exactly how far I was into the book before this fact hit home--but it definitely took its time dawning. Now that's a truly effective presentation of ageless characters!

As for the reboot, I'll be happy as long as Bond is still recognizably Bond. If he's changed so much that he's just some guy I don't know who happens to be called James Bond, that won't be terribly interesting to me.

[Jack Spang]

I wonder if Deaver checked out that incredible dossier of Bond on the Casino Royale website. The amount of work put into that thing is extraordinary, and after checking it out again today some of that stuff could fit in just fine in Deaver's new world. For anyone who hasn't listened to it yet, it really is something else.

Some of that should have been included in the actual films- CR and QOS! Seems like a bit of a waste.

[FlemingBond]

As far as living beyond their means, Bond seemed to make most of his money from gambling.

A reboot? surely you must be joking.

[terminus]

Rex Stout, whose Nero Wolfe mysteries were, as we know, admired by Fleming and shouted out in OHMSS, pulled off the ultimate trick in this area, IMO. In his an even better one. In his 1938 novel Too Many Cooks, there is an African-American college student named Paul Whipple. In Stout's 1964 novel A Right to Die, Whipple returns. But while Whipple has aged appropriately for the time span involved--he is now middle-aged and has a son in his 20s--neither Nero Wolfe nor any of the other "regular" characters in the book seem to have aged a day. And I don't remember exactly how far I was into the book before this fact hit home--but it definitely took its time dawning. Now that's a truly effective presentation of ageless characters!

Miss Marple did much the same thing. Murder at the Vicarage was published in 1930 and featured the wife of the vicar being pregnant (or shortly after giving birth, my memory fails me on the specifics, it's been several years since reading the book) and in the later The Mirror Crack'd in 1962, the vicars son is grown up and either engaged or an eligible bachelor - though Miss Marple hasn't appeared to age a day.

Poirot suffers from the same thing - referring to real world events having taken place (noticeably The Mysterious Affair At Styles refers to the Great War) and yet Poirot never seeming to age (Hastings, his sometime sidekick, meets his wife in 'Murder on the Links' in 1923 and has four grown-up children by the forties written but seventies published 'Curtain').

[MajorB]

Rex Stout, whose Nero Wolfe mysteries were, as we know, admired by Fleming and shouted out in OHMSS, pulled off the ultimate trick in this area, IMO. In his an even better one. In his 1938 novel Too Many Cooks, there is an African-American college student named Paul Whipple. In Stout's 1964 novel A Right to Die, Whipple returns. But while Whipple has aged appropriately for the time span involved--he is now middle-aged and has a son in his 20s--neither Nero Wolfe nor any of the other "regular" characters in the book seem to have aged a day. And I don't remember exactly how far I was into the book before this fact hit home--but it definitely took its time dawning. Now that's a truly effective presentation of ageless characters!

Miss Marple did much the same thing. Murder at the Vicarage was published in 1930 and featured the wife of the vicar being pregnant (or shortly after giving birth, my memory fails me on the specifics, it's been several years since reading the book) and in the later The Mirror Crack'd in 1962, the vicars son is grown up and either engaged or an eligible bachelor - though Miss Marple hasn't appeared to age a day.

Poirot suffers from the same thing - referring to real world events having taken place (noticeably The Mysterious Affair At Styles refers to the Great War) and yet Poirot never seeming to age (Hastings, his sometime sidekick, meets his wife in 'Murder on the Links' in 1923 and has four grown-up children by the forties written but seventies published 'Curtain').

I hadn't known that about Christie. Very interesting! Although at least by the time he died in Curtain, Poirot was presented as elderly, wasn't he? I read the book ages ago, but I seem to remember that.

[terminus]

Yes, there's an increase in age, but not enough to account for the time that has actually passed - and a lot of it is infirmity too.

That said, Poirot might actually age in real-time had Curtain been published when it was written and not kept in a safe for thirty years which is what throws the dates out in Poirot, to be honest.

[OmarB]

If we wanna get into that age thing then both Superman and Batman have been 32 forever ... except when stories are told out of continuity like The Dark Knight Returns, Kingdom Come, etc. It's fiction, we gotta give these people leeway to tell their story.

[terminus]

I don't know, Batman has, at least, shown some time passing with various events - most noticeably the aging of Dick Grayson from teenager to mid/late twenties policeman.

[OmarB]

The supporting characters may have aged around him, but he's still pretty much 32. It was even mentioned last year in one of Bruce's visit to Metropolis, in an article by Lois Lane he was described at the 32 year old Prince of Gotham.

[marktmurphy]

32? I always thought he was supposed to be older than that.

[OmarB]

Nah, DC kept it at 32 to match Superman since he was the first.

[Matt_13]

I'm 100 pages into GARDEN OF BEASTS and all I can say is I really can't wait until next year. Deaver's style is exactly what I look for in a thriller, and he has managed to throw twists in early and often. Great read and highly recommended.

[Bill]

Re: Superman and Batman

Both these characters have remained roughly the same age since 1938 and 1939, respectively, with stories being told about their pasts and futures wherein they have, by necessity, regressed or increased, in age.

However, by the establishment of several parallel universes, DC Comics has allowed for this. While this does not necessarily account for the fact that the characters still age at a very slow pace given the fact that, as far as I can tell, Batman and Superman have remained at a more or less constant continuity since the late 80s without aging all that much (although Batman now has an actual son, born in 1988, and is now about 11 or 12). Still, the fact is that a single story, which in real life, would only encompass a few weeks at best, can last a year or more, given the more or less monthly publishing schedule.

I have mentioned before, that, given the simple presence of Superman, DC Comics exist in a world of science fiction. Thus, parallel Earths and everything else can exist without batting an eye.

Bond does not enjoy such a luxury. Despite the fact that technology exists in the films which may not in real life, which may then indeed set them "one minute in the future" which is often quoted to Michael Wilson (out of curiosity, when did he actually utter that phrase?) the Bond films are rooted in reality. The books even more so.

Thus, although I would want nothing more then an all emcompassing official line on the films (but that may exist if one takes the line from the DK Guide, officially endorsed by EON to the films which acknowledge Bond as a real person, with different actors taking on the exploits of one single "real" man) outside of that DK book, and for that matter, an official line regarding the books, which would reconcile the different takes on Bond's world. For the books, that was not much of a problem, given that every author, aside from John Pearson, Samantha Weinberg and now Jeffrey Deaver, have written or are writing, Bond adventures which all fit into one large continuity. The fact that the Bond of those books would probably be in his 90s is simply and correctly ignored. (For the record, I do acknowledge that Bond's nephew, from the 1960s book and 1990s TV series would have a problem existing, given Fleming's and especially Higson's establishment that Bond had no siblings--but as far as I know, there is no record of Andrew Bond not fathering an illegitmate offspring.)

Now, as I mentioned before, Bond actually existing in "real life" as put forth by Pearson and Weinberg would exist in a separate continuity.

Now Project X is giving us a third continuity. Do I think this necessary? Absolutely not. I argued earlier that continuing Bond, chronogically, from where Raymond Benson left him is indeed possible. I am sure that Mr. Deaver is capable of doing so without even thinking about it. However, and I acknowledge that this may be premature, a decision has been made from the IFP to give Bond a new continuity. For all we know, that may indeed change. The fact is that all of us on this forum are pretty much guaranteed to at least read the first book in Project X, and the majority will be purchasing the book. In terms of book sales, that will have very little effect.

The fact is that the general public, who probably have never heard of May, and for that mater, have no idea who Bill Tanner is, have to buy the book, and have enough interest to buy the next book, and so on. Thus, the real challenge for Mr. Deaver is to make the general public believe they are reading about James Bond.

Going back to the DC discussion, the fact is that despite the parallel universes, very, very little has changed with regard to the core characters and situations of the lives of Batman and Superman. Other characters in DC Comics may enjoy more widespread changes, but as they are not as well known by the general public, that is either here nor there. The core characters of the supporting cast have changed very little. I would argue that Commissioner Gordon is Batman's M, and despite being retired for a couple of years, he is back in full force. The other characters remain--Dick Grayson, Tim Drake, Alfred, Barbara Gordon, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olsen, Perry White, Lana Lang--and although there has been some tinkering with their histories (especially with regard to Ma and Pa Kent, dead until 1986, and then fully alive, with Pa Kent now dead again) the fact is that they are essentially the same characters. Maybe a bit more mature given the maturation of the average comic book reader, but essentially the same characters.

Bond does not enjoy such a rich supporting cast. Here's hoping that Mr. Deaver will be as successful as the average DC Comics writer in making us believe that we are still reading the adventures of our favorite hero. Anything less would be criminal!

Bill

[whiteskwirl]

I'm 100 pages into GARDEN OF BEASTS and all I can say is I really can't wait until next year. Deaver's style is exactly what I look for in a thriller, and he has managed to throw twists in early and often. Great read and highly recommended.

Great! We've got a discussion thread going already for discussing. I would love to hear your thoughts on it when you're finished.

http://debrief.comma...showtopic=58239

[Double-Oh Agent]

Here are my thoughts on what has been leaked to us fans so far (thanks Dr. Shatterhand!) :

* Present day
Great! I'm one of those that prefer new Bond adventures taking place in the here and now.

* Bond no longer smokes
No problem with it whatsoever. Bond hasn't smoked in the novels (or films) for years, and if he wants to succeed and survive in his line of work, he'll need to stay in the best of health in shape which would mean his refraining from smoking.

* He will be born in the early 80s
Now this is where I start getting a little antsy. Being a fairly strict pro-continuity person who believes Bond ages extremely slowly, I would much prefer this being a continuation from Raymond Benson's tenure. However, strangely enough, I'm not as much against the reboot idea as I would have originally thought. Maybe the Casino Royale reboot or IFP's comment that they are still open to period Bond novels have dulled my hackles. Regardless, at the moment, I'm willing to take a wait and see attitude. With that in mind I would want Bond no less than 30 years old (which would make him born in 1980 or 1981).

* Moneypenny will be in mid-thirties
I think that's a little old. I prefer her to be roughly Bond's age, and since I think the reboot Bond should be about 30, I think she should be no more than a couple of years older than him.

* M will return to being a man
I totally approve. It's time for a man to be back in charge. Were it not a reboot, it should be an entirely new M. However, since it is a reboot, M MUST be Miles Messervy.

* May, Bond's Scottish housekeeper will be replaced by an as-yet unnamed Indian or Pakistani maidservant
If there had to be one Bond character that does not return, May is the correct one to omit. Don't really mind her absence and am interested in seeing who this new maid is. And on a side note, although I am not British, I don't quite understand all the hullabaloo some are having about this Indian/Pakastani maid revelation. While those nationalities may or may not be as prevalent in Britain as Jeffery Deaver said, I'm sure one can find some examples.

* Project X is a series of 007 novels by various authors
Terrific! Keep literary Bond going! While I might prefer one continuation author doing multiple novels this is still good news.

* 21 year old Mary Goodnight is Bond's secretary
Two things. One, 21 is too young. Her being 25 years old would be much better. Two, for some reason, I would prefer Loelia Ponsonby as Bond's secretary. Yes, Mary Goodnight has the much better name and yes she was his secretary in the later novels, but I see her mostly as a Bond girl courtesy of her stint in The Man With The Golden Gun. Loelia Ponsonby, on the other hand, was Bond's first secretary and she just seemed to have a little more presence in her office scenes than Mary to me. So overall, I'm a little disappointed with this revelation.

* 00 section is a 'shadowy' assassin portion of MI-6. Agents would be disavowed if they became compromised
Good idea. Totally approve. This should be interesting. I'm greatly looking forward to reading about it.

* The re-boot will have Bond fighting post-9/11 terrorism
Makes complete sense. Ian Fleming's Bond fought during the Cold War, now we're fighting terrorism. Bond should too. Now he doesn't have to fight terrorists all the time, there's got to be room for other threats too, but it does make sense that the bulk of his stories deal with terrorism.

* Has thousands of pages of research completed
Wow!

* Outline is complete
Great! Can't wait to read the final result. If this is anywhere near as good as Deaver's The Bone Collector, we'll be in for a real treat.






On a side note, when Charlie Higson leaked that Project X could be one of two things (obviously now a rebooted Bond in the present day) and Corinne Turner mentioned that IFP was still interested in both present and period Bond stories, could "Project Y" be a period Bond novel circa post-Devil May Care by an as yet unnamed author? And could Project Y novels be released in alternate years with Project X stories?