2121 replies to this topic

[David Schofield]

Now, if only Raymond Chandler were around to pen a Bond novel....

A tragic missed opportunity. Alas, when Fleming met Chandler the latter was already so far gone into his own depression and grief that his writing had suffered and I doubt he would have been able of any longer effort any more. If Chandler had written a Bond in his prime, well...

Absolutely.

And consider just how much easier it would have been for an Amercan - Chandler - to write an James Bond novel about a quintissential Englishman than it would Fleming to write a Philip Marlowe novel....

[Trident]

Now, if only Raymond Chandler were around to pen a Bond novel....

A tragic missed opportunity. Alas, when Fleming met Chandler the latter was already so far gone into his own depression and grief that his writing had suffered and I doubt he would have been able of any longer effort any more. If Chandler had written a Bond in his prime, well...

Absolutely.

And consider just how much easier it would have been for an Amercan - Chandler - to write an James Bond novel about a quintissential Englishman than it would Fleming to write a Philip Marlowe novel....

Well said. But Chandler would have had the advantage of being brought up partially in England and attending Dulwich. Not sure, did he even ever consider himself as completely American? His prose seems to suggest he liked a not-quite-one-of-the-team posture, an in-between observer that did not fit in easily. And of course he seriously worked on his career in the Foreign Office until the bureaucratic servility and Mandarin culture of that place drove him out of it.

[David Schofield]

Well said. But Chandler would have had the advantage of being brought up partially in England and attending Dulwich. Not sure, did he even ever consider himself as completely American? His prose seems to suggest he liked a not-quite-one-of-the-team posture, an in-between observer that did not fit in easily.

I think your pretty much spot on. Chandler used his Dulwich College "Britishness" to set himself apart in Hollywood.

It is also a view in the Chandler community that Marlowe's view of himself as a Knight battling the seemier side of life suggests that Chandler MAY have seen Marlowe as possessing many English gentlemanly virtues....

But I think the point is, nationality really should be unimportant if the writer has a certain level of skill and understanding. Fleming and Chandler did.

Deaver has to convince us that he is not an airport doorstop pulp writer who is merely trying to wing it with Bond.

We ALL hope there is more to him.

[Single-O-Seven]

Well said. But Chandler would have had the advantage of being brought up partially in England and attending Dulwich. Not sure, did he even ever consider himself as completely American? His prose seems to suggest he liked a not-quite-one-of-the-team posture, an in-between observer that did not fit in easily.

I think your pretty much spot on. Chandler used his Dulwich College "Britishness" to set himself apart in Hollywood.

It is also a view in the Chandler community that Marlowe's view of himself as a Knight battling the seemier side of life suggests that Chandler MAY have seen Marlowe as possessing many English gentlemanly virtues....

But I think the point is, nationality really should be unimportant if the writer has a certain level of skill and understanding. Fleming and Chandler did.

Deaver has to convince us that he is not an airport doorstop pulp writer who is merely trying to wing it with Bond.

We ALL hope there is more to him.

You mean like Fleming? At least that's how many viewed Fleming back in the day, including Ian himself.

[David Schofield]

Deaver has to convince us that he is not an airport doorstop pulp writer who is merely trying to wing it with Bond.

We ALL hope there is more to him.



You mean like Fleming? At least that's how many viewed Fleming back in the day, including Ian himself.

I know Fleming publicly undersold himself, sure. Contemporaniously, you might be right about public perceptions, also.

I suspect, however, it would have been noted in the 50s that Fleming had created an orginal in James Bond. I'm unaware of similar praise for Deaver's creations.

Perhaps Jeff might also be worthy in the future of the similar kind of reappraisal Fleming has received now that prejudices against Fleming's type of novel has altered.

Suppose the modern reader can simply buy a Deaver and buy FRWL and compare them.

But this is neither here nor there. We are all waiting to see what Deaver can do with Bond, and hoping optimistically for the best.

[Single-O-Seven]

Deaver has to convince us that he is not an airport doorstop pulp writer who is merely trying to wing it with Bond.

We ALL hope there is more to him.



You mean like Fleming? At least that's how many viewed Fleming back in the day, including Ian himself.

I know Fleming public undersold himself, sure. Contemporaniously you might be right publicly, also.

I suspect, however, it would have been noted in the 50s that Fleming had created an orginal in James Bond. I'm unaware of similar praise for Deaver's creations.

Perhaps Jeff might also be worthy in the future of the similar kind of reappraisal Fleming has received now that prejudices against Fleming's type of novel has altered.

Suppose the modern reader can simply buy a Deaver and buy FRWL and compare them.

But this is neither here nor there. We are all waiting to see what Deaver can do with Bond, and hoping optimistically for the best.

You're right on that point. To get too worked up and worry that Deaver might screw it up is not the right frame on mind. Better to hope for the best and stay excited - that's what I'm doing! I've always been excited about and enjoyed every continuation novel, simply because I love being enveloped in the world of Bond. If Deaver can give me that I'll go away satisfied at the least.

[Trident]

Two points:

Firstly, I think what we have to understand is that the modern publishing market has decidedly evolved from the days of Fleming. Today, you'll hardly find a book published that isn't in some way conceived to a specific purpose and a specific target audience. Yes, indeed this gives often the impression of 'streamlined' writing, publishing, selling, reading, so on. But the basic purpose of the writer is to be read and the basic purpose of the editor and the publishing house to sell as many copies as possible. All in all there is nothing wrong with that IMO. I'd even argue if Fleming had had the tools of modern market analysis at his disposal, he'd most likely have used them himself. Perhaps not to the extent as to write completely generic, but he surely might have taken some suggestions and ideas from that well too.

Secondly, I would like to point out that Deaver, while successful in an 'ordinary' genre, indeed is far from a play-it-safe writer. The genre he chose is a fiercely hard one with literally hundreds (if not thousands) of contenders on the American and European markets. Working that part of the turf is a brutally hard task and doing so successfully for over twenty years doesn't exactly point to someone who's a one-trick-pony. And, as far as originality is an item here, one would have to concede that Fleming himself also had a few lighthouses to get his own bearing from and manoeuvre his ship to the right coordinates at the right time. We mustn't underestimate the specific climate Fleming wrote in and the influence of the film series on Bond's success.

As originality goes Deaver surely set out from a point that saw many mystery and thriller writers before him. But mind you, Deaver set out from there with a male hero nearly completely immobilised and handicapped. In a market where a considerable part of the readers is used to physically attractive, healthy and potent male heroes who solve their mysteries, catch the baddies, kill them and have outrageously good sex with one or several equally attractive females in the bargain, going with a paralyzed and bed-ridden character is nothing less but daring. I certainly never would have tried to pull such a stunt. Deaver may not have invented the handicapped detective, but he sure as hell opened a new league in the thriller game for him.

[godwulf]

Even if he is capable, I doubt Deaver will write a passage like this, mainly out of fear of it sounding even remotely racist/prejudiced.

Despite this, for better or worse, i think the 50's/60's era Fleming/Bond mentality regarding other cultures/races is alive and well even today, not just in Britain but other European countries, especially in areas outside of big metro centres like London. Big metro areas are being increasingly homogenised.

Naturally we are all patriotic and protective of our culture and way of life to some extent. This is part of the charm with Fleming's Bond - he is free to voice his opinions without fear of the PC police however he is never an outright racist.

Will Deaver try this today? I sincerely doubt it.

A more important question, in this discussion, I think, is, if Deaver doesn't include passages showing Bond's private, less than complimentary thoughts about other cultures, (1) will anyone be likely to notice, and (2) will it adversely affect anyone's enjoyment of the book?

[zencat]

You're right on that point. To get too worked up and worry that Deaver might screw it up is not the right frame on mind. Better to hope for the best and stay excited - that's what I'm doing! I've always been excited about and enjoyed every continuation novel, simply because I love being enveloped in the world of Bond. If Deaver can give me that I'll go away satisfied at the least.

Me too. Not asking Deaver to be Fleming. Not expecting Deaver to be Fleming. I don't need Deaver to be Fleming. I just want him to write the best Bond novel he can. I think he's a good choice and I'm pleased to see how seriously he's taking the job. And even if he doesn't deliver the best James Bond novel of all time, that's fine too. The world won't end (and it will still be better than most of the recent films).

[Harry Fawkes]

You're right on that point. To get too worked up and worry that Deaver might screw it up is not the right frame on mind. Better to hope for the best and stay excited - that's what I'm doing! I've always been excited about and enjoyed every continuation novel, simply because I love being enveloped in the world of Bond. If Deaver can give me that I'll go away satisfied at the least.

Me too. Not asking Deaver to be Fleming. Not expecting Deaver to be Fleming. I don't need Deaver to be Fleming. I just want him to write the best Bond novel he can. I think he's a good choice and I'm pleased to see how seriously he's taking the job. And even if he doesn't deliver the best James Bond novel of all time, that's fine too. The world won't end (and it will still be better than most of the recent films).

The most important aspect in the whole issue is that at least we'll have another Bond adventure. The world has become a better place because of it

As for Trident and David Schofield and the other contributors: A very well done for making this thread one of the most interesting on CBn. Your arguments were indeed food for thought.

Harry Fawkes

[Santa]

As originality goes Deaver surely set out from a point that saw many mystery and thriller writers before him. But mind you, Deaver set out from there with a male hero nearly completely immobilised and handicapped. In a market where a considerable part of the readers is used to physically attractive, healthy and potent male heroes who solve their mysteries, catch the baddies, kill them and have outrageously good sex with one or several equally attractive females in the bargain, going with a paralyzed and bed-ridden character is nothing less but daring. I certainly never would have tried to pull such a stunt. Deaver may not have invented the handicapped detective, but he sure as hell opened a new league in the thriller game for him.

Really? I think it's a gimmick.

[terminus]

All of the great detectives have had some sort of gimmick - whether it be Miss Marple being a pensioner or Hercule Poirot being a rotund Belgian, Sherlock Holmes having his opium habit and cerebral solutions etc etc

[Harry Fawkes]

Would sex be Bond's I wonder?

[Trident]

As originality goes Deaver surely set out from a point that saw many mystery and thriller writers before him. But mind you, Deaver set out from there with a male hero nearly completely immobilised and handicapped. In a market where a considerable part of the readers is used to physically attractive, healthy and potent male heroes who solve their mysteries, catch the baddies, kill them and have outrageously good sex with one or several equally attractive females in the bargain, going with a paralyzed and bed-ridden character is nothing less but daring. I certainly never would have tried to pull such a stunt. Deaver may not have invented the handicapped detective, but he sure as hell opened a new league in the thriller game for him.

Really? I think it's a gimmick.

Oh, you're welcome to write a few successful novels with that sort of gimmick. I'm just afraid you'll have a hard time finding a publisher willing to go the risk, even if you happened to be Hemingway himself.

That sort of constellation just doesn't lend itself easily to selling books. Of course it's a device that's designed to give the ordinary thriller personnel a kind of twist, open up the cast and spread the plot over a team instead of a single individual. But that's not the point. The point is that it's indeed hard to think of a basic situation that's less promising in the first place. The trick here lies in getting readers over that obstacle and using its potential for your plot at the same time.

I understand that Deaver didn't succeed with you, but he apparently succeeded with the majority of his readers.

[Santa]

Oh, you're welcome to write a few successful novels with that sort of gimmick.

Point taken

I understand that Deaver didn't succeed with you, but he apparently succeeded with the majority of his readers.

Indeed. I'm just not sure popularity = quality. Britney Spears - very successful. Justin Bieber - very successful. Not sure I could call either of them 'good'.

[Loomis]

Even if he is capable, I doubt Deaver will write a passage like this, mainly out of fear of it sounding even remotely racist/prejudiced.

Despite this, for better or worse, i think the 50's/60's era Fleming/Bond mentality regarding other cultures/races is alive and well even today, not just in Britain but other European countries, especially in areas outside of big metro centres like London. Big metro areas are being increasingly homogenised.

Naturally we are all patriotic and protective of our culture and way of life to some extent. This is part of the charm with Fleming's Bond - he is free to voice his opinions without fear of the PC police however he is never an outright racist.

Will Deaver try this today? I sincerely doubt it.

A more important question, in this discussion, I think, is, if Deaver doesn't include passages showing Bond's private, less than complimentary thoughts about other cultures, (1) will anyone be likely to notice, and (2) will it adversely affect anyone's enjoyment of the book?

James Bond does not need to disparage other cultures to be James Bond, but it's worth remembering that Fleming's 007 is often a somewhat unpleasant individual, or at any rate not just a bland, generic action hero. A few flaws in Bond's makeup bring flavour and realism to the character.

I don't want "the PC police" to turn him into James Bland (thank you, I'll be here all week). Neither do I think IFP should assume that no one finds foreign countries or cultures exotic or interesting any more and that people are going to pick up PROJECT X solely in the hope of reading masses of Bourne-esque action scenes.

One of the problems with the Bensons that was pointed out years ago by, I think, Jim was that it seemed as though IFP were trying to deliver an Eon Bond movie in book form. But I firmly believe that the novels ought to tickle parts that the films can't reach. A Bond novel shouldn't just be some kind of movie substitute - it ought to be its own thing, and a literary work. Which involves, I would have thought, an emphasis on Bond's inner life and foibles.

[Trident]

I understand that Deaver didn't succeed with you, but he apparently succeeded with the majority of his readers.

Indeed. I'm just not sure popularity = quality. Britney Spears - very successful. Justin Bieber - very successful. Not sure I could call either of them 'good'.

Granted. But 'good' of course is a highly subjective criterium that doesn't exactly feature as such in publishing. Here 'good' generally is measured in sold copies and satisfied readers. And we should in all honesty concede that those were also the sole criteria Fleming pursued with his work. Entertainment fiction has of course evolved into a far more 'professional' business, but the basic concept still holds true. You buy a few hours of (relatively speaking) harmless reading fun and that's that.

Sometimes you get a little more in the bargain and sometimes the 'fun' isn't all that entertaining. But there's a fierce competition going on and no one can force you to ever again pick up something that didn't do it for you. So by natural selection you get a pretty good average standard that at the very least manages to entertain a majority.

If some of that still fails to entertain you, that merely means it's not your cup of tea. Ok, takes all kinds and you surely aren't alone.

[DAN LIGHTER]

Something that threw me when reading "The Facts of Death" by Benson was when Bond said in it his is not an Englishman. I mean that reeally did me in, and confused me. I hope Deaver doesn't try it.

[Trident]

One of the problems with the Bensons that was pointed out years ago by, I think, Jim was that it seemed as though IFP were trying to deliver an Eon Bond movie in book form. But I firmly believe that the novels ought to tickle parts that the films can't reach. A Bond novel shouldn't just be some kind of movie substitute - it ought to be its own thing, and a literary work. Which involves, I would have thought, an emphasis on Bond's inner life and foibles.

Wholeheartedly agree!

[whiteskwirl]

'Good' definitely is subjective, but Deaver's popularity will likely bring in new readers, some of whom won't only read Project X, but will also go on to read Fleming, and Amis and Gardner and Benson as well. That's good news if this is going to be a series rather than a one-off novel.

[terminus]

Something that threw me when reading "The Facts of Death" by Benson was when Bond said in it his is not an Englishman. I mean that reeally did me in, and confused me. I hope Deaver doesn't try it.

But, theoretically, Bond ISN'T an Englishman. He's British, but he's not English - given his mothers from Switzerland and his father's Scottish.

[godwulf]

He's British, but he's not English...

Many Americans - and I don't exempt myself - do sometimes make the mistake of using those terms interchangeably, or of using the wrong one.

[DAN LIGHTER]

Something that threw me when reading "The Facts of Death" by Benson was when Bond said in it his is not an Englishman. I mean that really did me in, and confused me. I hope Deaver doesn't try it.

But, theoretically, Bond ISN'T an Englishman. He's British, but he's not English - given his mothers from Switzerland and his father's Scottish.

But having a Scottish Father and Swiss Mother doesn't make you Swiss/Scots surly? Yes you could say your half this and half that, but your identity is either where you were born or where you were brought up. Although it's down to the individual, so we will have to ask Bond. If he says Scottish, I wont think twice about giving him a Chinese burn.

[Trident]

Something that threw me when reading "The Facts of Death" by Benson was when Bond said in it his is not an Englishman. I mean that really did me in, and confused me. I hope Deaver doesn't try it.

But, theoretically, Bond ISN'T an Englishman. He's British, but he's not English - given his mothers from Switzerland and his father's Scottish.

But having a Scottish Father and Swiss Mother doesn't make you Swiss/Scots surly? Yes you could say your half this and half that, but your identity is either where you were born or where you were brought up. Although it's down to the individual, so we will have to ask Bond. If he says Scottish, I wont think twice about giving him a Chinese burn.

Well, in all honesty Fleming never really indicated Bond would be anything other than an Englishman pre-OHMSS. The entire canon up to that lacks any personal references to Scottland (or Swizzerland for that matter). One might chalk that up to Bond not having lived with his parents long enough to assimilate any 'Scottishness', but his aunt Charmian would have been probably as Scottish as his father had been, wouldn't she?

No, the fact remains that Fleming just made the background up as EON and Connery came along and he, in spite of his initial doubts, was impressed by Connery's depiction. On the other hand, the Scottish father is mentioned persistently in the next book, while Fleming's announcement, to clear the English/Scottish things up once and for all apparently is a solitary remark of him, perhaps not in the best of moods and/or given without earnest intention to do so.

It's a Scottish mystery, but as the canon stands today Bond is indeed half-Scottish, half-Swiss. And all British.

[DAN LIGHTER]

Something that threw me when reading "The Facts of Death" by Benson was when Bond said in it his is not an Englishman. I mean that really did me in, and confused me. I hope Deaver doesn't try it.

But, theoretically, Bond ISN'T an Englishman. He's British, but he's not English - given his mothers from Switzerland and his father's Scottish.

But having a Scottish Father and Swiss Mother doesn't make you Swiss/Scots surly? Yes you could say your half this and half that, but your identity is either where you were born or where you were brought up. Although it's down to the individual, so we will have to ask Bond. If he says Scottish, I wont think twice about giving him a Chinese burn.

Well, in all honesty Fleming never really indicated Bond would be anything other than an Englishman pre-OHMSS. The entire canon up to that lacks any personal references to Scotland (or Switzerland for that matter). One might chalk that up to Bond not having lived with his parents long enough to assimilate any 'Scottishness', but his aunt Charmian would have been probably as Scottish as his father had been, wouldn't she?

No, the fact remains that Fleming just made the background up as EON and Connery came along and he, in spite of his initial doubts, was impressed by Connery's depiction. On the other hand, the Scottish father is mentioned persistently in the next book, while Fleming's announcement, to clear the English/Scottish things up once and for all apparently is a solitary remark of him, perhaps not in the best of moods and/or given without earnest intention to do so.

It's a Scottish mystery, but as the canon stands today Bond is indeed half-Scottish, half-Swiss. And all British.

Thanks Trident. To add to my confusion, I just had a quick browse at my quick reference guide "You Know My Name" by Cristopher DeRose and in it he said that Bond grew up in Pett Bottom (with his Aunt) which I believe is in Kent. (He also states that Bond's Father is English )

Anyway, this could be discussed here in case we are going off topic? http://debrief.comma...showtopic=55503

This is all getting to much for me, I am going to have a hot then cold shower, slap on some Floris No89 and jump of a curb.

[Gri007]

I personnaly think there taking the reboot to far. Casino Royale was fantastic and Craig did a awsome job, but is it necessary to have reboot novel. As offical this is, it will be unnoficial to me. Will this be Flemings Bond???? Like the upcoming Goldeneye this just doesnt appeal to me.

[zencat]

Well, in all honesty Fleming never really indicated Bond would be anything other than an Englishman pre-OHMSS. The entire canon up to that lacks any personal references to Scotland (or Switzerland for that matter). One might chalk that up to Bond not having lived with his parents long enough to assimilate any 'Scottishness', but his aunt Charmian would have been probably as Scottish as his father had been, wouldn't she?

No, the fact remains that Fleming just made the background up as EON and Connery came along and he, in spite of his initial doubts, was impressed by Connery's depiction.

Actually, doublenoughtspy debunks this this long held belief in his book The Making of On Her Majesty's Secret Service. He discovered correspondence that shows Fleming planned to give Bond a Scottish background (like his own) in 1960, two years before Dr. No. This was in correspondence between Fleming and the researcher who helped him create Bond's background for OHMSS (and who came up with "the world is not enough" motto).

[David Schofield]

Well, in all honesty Fleming never really indicated Bond would be anything other than an Englishman pre-OHMSS. The entire canon up to that lacks any personal references to Scotland (or Switzerland for that matter). One might chalk that up to Bond not having lived with his parents long enough to assimilate any 'Scottishness', but his aunt Charmian would have been probably as Scottish as his father had been, wouldn't she?

No, the fact remains that Fleming just made the background up as EON and Connery came along and he, in spite of his initial doubts, was impressed by Connery's depiction.

Actually, doublenoughtspy debunks this this long held belief in his book The Making of On Her Majesty's Secret Service. He discovered correspondence that shows Fleming planned to give Bond a Scottish background (like his own) in 1960, two years before Dr. No. This was in correspondence between Fleming and the researcher who helped him create Bond's background for OHMSS (and who came up with "the world is not enough" motto).

As you might know, Zen, I am a huge fan of Charles book, but even Charles does not make it the factual statement you make here. Charles uses the word "considered".

Doublesnoughspy gives evidence of 1960 correspondence in which Fleming asked an historian to look into a Scottish Bond family line which he cannot find, though he conceeds that does not preclude there being one.

Charles further provides evidence of a quote from Fleming on Connery's casting in which he approves of everything about Connery EXCEPT his strong Scottish accent.

However, neither of these insights change the facts: in the novel he wrote imediately after the Scottish-heritage research - The Spy Who Loved Me - Fleming makes no reference to any Scots background, and that James Bond only came to enjoy a Scottish heritage AFTER he had see Sean Connery in Dr No, during which it is perfectly possible Fleming overcame his reservations about Sean's accent (which was toned down from his then-brogue anyway).

It is all speculation, one way or the other. However, I think there still isn't enough evidence to suggest that the Scottish-driver was anything other than Sean Connery...

[zencat]

Well, in all honesty Fleming never really indicated Bond would be anything other than an Englishman pre-OHMSS. The entire canon up to that lacks any personal references to Scotland (or Switzerland for that matter). One might chalk that up to Bond not having lived with his parents long enough to assimilate any 'Scottishness', but his aunt Charmian would have been probably as Scottish as his father had been, wouldn't she?

No, the fact remains that Fleming just made the background up as EON and Connery came along and he, in spite of his initial doubts, was impressed by Connery's depiction.

Actually, doublenoughtspy debunks this this long held belief in his book The Making of On Her Majesty's Secret Service. He discovered correspondence that shows Fleming planned to give Bond a Scottish background (like his own) in 1960, two years before Dr. No. This was in correspondence between Fleming and the researcher who helped him create Bond's background for OHMSS (and who came up with "the world is not enough" motto).

As you might know, Zen, I am a huge fan of Charles book, but even Charles does not make it the factual statement you make here. Charles uses the word "considered".

Doublesnoughspy gives evidence of 1960 correspondence in which Fleming asked an historian to look into a Scottish Bond family line which he cannot find, though he conceeds that does not preclude there being one.

Charles further provides evidence of a quote from Fleming on Connery's casting in which he approves of everything about Connery EXCEPT his strong Scottish accent.

However, neither of these insights change the facts: in the novel he wrote imediately after the Scottish-heritage research - The Spy Who Loved Me - Fleming makes no reference to any Scots background, and that James Bond only came to enjoy a Scottish heritage AFTER he had see Sean Connery in Dr No, during which it is perfectly possible Fleming overcame his reservations about Sean's accent (which was toned down from his then-brogue anyway).

It is all speculation, one way or the other. However, I think there still isn't enough evidence to suggest that the Scottish-driver was anything other than Sean Connery...

Oh, okay. Good points. I was just relating what I remember reading. Maybe Charles can chime in on this?

[Trident]

Well, in all honesty Fleming never really indicated Bond would be anything other than an Englishman pre-OHMSS. The entire canon up to that lacks any personal references to Scotland (or Switzerland for that matter). One might chalk that up to Bond not having lived with his parents long enough to assimilate any 'Scottishness', but his aunt Charmian would have been probably as Scottish as his father had been, wouldn't she?

No, the fact remains that Fleming just made the background up as EON and Connery came along and he, in spite of his initial doubts, was impressed by Connery's depiction.

Actually, doublenoughtspy debunks this this long held belief in his book The Making of On Her Majesty's Secret Service. He discovered correspondence that shows Fleming planned to give Bond a Scottish background (like his own) in 1960, two years before Dr. No. This was in correspondence between Fleming and the researcher who helped him create Bond's background for OHMSS (and who came up with "the world is not enough" motto).

You're right! How extraordinarily remarkable! Have to confess, I started 'The Making of On Her Majesty's Secret Service' with the 'Scripts & False Starts' chapter. I only just read 'The Novel' now (stupidly assuming I already knew enough about the background of that book).

Still, not ever a hint at Scottland before OHMSS. Obviously Fleming intended to tally Bond's background with his own, but he seems to have got the idea somewhere along the road to the 1960 research, not from the '53 outset.

Nonetheless, another splendid finding of doublenoughtspy's definite work on the core of the Bond canon, both of films and books. Go, no, run to your local bookshop and get it!