2121 replies to this topic

[Dustin]

Today's Sunday Times interview with Deaver and book preview reveals, amongst other minor things:

Spoiler

Bond's comely office assistant is called Ophelia Maidenstone. What, no 22 year old Goodnight? What have we been arguing over for a year, then?

Bond wears a Rolex.

Listens to Radio 4 over scrambled eggs.

And - get this - is a huge fan of TOP GEAR!!!! (I kid you not)

Oh, and Deaver thinks, as a way of suggesting lit. Bond is not the bed-hopping rogue of the films, in the original books Bond was married TWICE?

Was he? Don't remember the second 'un.

Spoiler

I rather think beeb four could be a fitting garnish for the eggs. TOP GEAR though seems a bit odd. And of course he's spot on with two marriages - a first and a last time. Or it's a rare reference to Harriet Horner from Scorpius, whom Bond married mainly for reasons of distraction.

[007jamesbond]

so apparately Mary Goodnight is not the secretary for Bond anymore? oh wow.......why the change? I guess we will never know

[Righty007]

Amazon.co.uk Ranking in Books: 104

It's now #23!

[Captain Tightpants]

so apparately Mary Goodnight is not the secretary for Bond anymore? oh wow.......why the change? I guess we will never know

Why change? Maybe because Deaver wanted to create soemthing true to Fleming without being a pastiche.

[David Schofield]

so apparately Mary Goodnight is not the secretary for Bond anymore? oh wow.......why the change? I guess we will never know

Why change? Maybe because Deaver wanted to create soemthing true to Fleming without being a pastiche.

The fewer Fleming characters Deaver resurrects the better.

I think many of us were deeply concerned when the checklist of Fleming names - Messervy, Moneypenny, Leiter and Goodnight - was trotted out 12 months ago.

Deaver deciding to go with his own people certainly indicates an independent freshness I for one prefer.

Nice name for the "office assistant", too. Though I miss the fact John Gardner only name checked once Bond's new secretary in SEAFIRE: Chastity Vain. The potential for Bond and Chastity could have been immense.

[Dustin]

so apparately Mary Goodnight is not the secretary for Bond anymore? oh wow.......why the change? I guess we will never know

Why change? Maybe because Deaver wanted to create soemthing true to Fleming without being a pastiche.

The fewer Fleming characters Deaver resurrects the better.

I think many of us were deeply concerned when the checklist of Fleming names - Messervy, Moneypenny, Leiter and Goodnight - was trotted out 12 months ago.

Deaver deciding to go with his own people certainly indicates an independent freshness I for one prefer.

Nice name for the "office assistant", too. Though I miss the fact John Gardner only name checked once Bond's new secretary in SEAFIRE: Chastity Vain. The potential for Bond and Chastity could have been immense.

I have to admit I have changed my mind about the reappearence of former Fleming characters. During Gardner years I often wished for closer ties to the past, but all we've got was Leiter, and both times he didn't strike me as the original. Benson then gave me what I wanted at the time. Only, I had decided in the meantime that I no longer needed or wanted all the old names, at least not in such quantities. Needless to say, they often did not fit my idea of their roles in Bond's world, so I was often disappointed. Today I'd prefer the continuations to use former Fleming characters only sparingly, if at all.

As for the office/personal assistant, I really think there is no need for such characters any more on Bond's level. He's not a top level executive preparing all kinds of papers and presentations for the Service. What typing he has to do he can do on his own. What research he needs for his assignments he will probably do with the analysts. A secretary (for Bond or the 00 section) is indeed completely superflous today and would only expand the number of people with access to sensitive material.

[David Schofield]

As for the office/personal assistant, I really think there is no need for such characters any more on Bond's level. He's not a top level executive preparing all kinds of papers and presentations for the Service. What typing he has to do he can do on his own. What research he needs for his assignments he will probably do with the analysts. A secretary (for Bond or the 00 section) is indeed completely superflous today and would only expand the number of people with access to sensitive material.

That might turn out to be true, that due to modernisation that Bond has morphed from a medium grade civil servant (Kingsley Amis TM) to a go-to Rambo commando.

Personally, I would hope that Deaver's character - even on 2011 - has retained some of the bored-Bond pen-pushing characteristicts, and therefore I am happy enough with the assistant stuff. But we shall see.

[Dustin]

No, I really meant that in the sense that Bond's office life today, even if it was similar to Fleming's descriptions, would hardly entail the need for a secretary. Whatever Bond does when he doesn't sharpen his knives and polishes his guns, it would hardly give him an excuse for having a secretary any more. There is literally nothing a Ponsonby or a Goodnight could do for him (office-wise) he couldn't be expected to do himself. Of course, it could always be this Bond is settled several ranks above the original, perhaps as section head or special commissioner for statistic intelligence or some such, all that mainly being a cover for Bond's real purpose. Would even work up to a point. An exposed character on deputy director level would lose most of his anonymity. But foreign intelligence and security services would hardly suspect him of being one third of the SIS's death squad.

[marktmurphy]

Yeah I think the only one worth bringing back from the original line-up is Bill Tanner, really. As the only bloke in the UK Bond is friendly with that makes him a little unique. You cold replace all of the others quite happily (including M) and they'd still do the same things. Never been very interested in Leiter; feels like he often gets in the way of Bond being a lone wolf, somehow.

[Solex Agitator]

I received an email this morning from Amazon UK alerting me that Carte Blanche had been shipped!

[Loomis]

Cool. I wonder whether you'll get it tomorrow. As for me, I cancelled my order from Amazon UK today. I've had CARTE BLANCHE on order from them since March, but when I checked the status of my order today I was informed that it might not reach me till next Wednesday.

So I'll be buying it from a bookshop on Thursday morning.

ETA: Wait, you're in Augusta, GA, and Amazon UK have already shipped your order, yet they haven't done so for muggins here in Britain?

[terminus]

I received an email this morning from Amazon UK alerting me that Carte Blanche had been shipped!

Whah?

Cool. I wonder whether you'll get it tomorrow. As for me, I cancelled my order from Amazon UK today. I've had CARTE BLANCHE on order from them since March, but when I checked the status of my order today I was informed that it might not reach me till next Wednesday.

So I'll be buying it from a bookshop on Thursday morning.

ETA: Wait, you're in Augusta, GA, and Amazon UK have already shipped your order, yet they haven't done so for muggins here in Britain?

Just checking mine now in case that's happening - the ex's new fella lives near Manc CC so may be able to get him to pick it up on the day on his way home (he's the one preordered me it as a gift for doing him a favour). I know he said earlier they hadn't taken the cash from his account yet.

Just checked and that IS what's happening. Will get the ex to cancel the order ; he's not recieved an e-mail cos he's been forwarding me all pertinent e-mails.

[Captain Tightpants]

Whah?

Today is the 25th. They're obviously making sure it's shipped out in time for the launch on the 26th.

[Santa]

Well it'll take bloody ages to get to Spain, but I haven't had any emails from them this morning. I won't be cancelling because it's not going to be in the shops here so I'll just wait.

[David Schofield]

Broker down and read the excerpts at Deaver's website last night:

http://www.jefferyde...pt/excerpt.html

Promising, in a modern action thriller kind of way.

But the insertion of Bond's age, height, weight and appearance is unbelievably cack-handedly forced.

[Captain Tightpants]

It's been mentioned. Some people suspect it wasn't Deaver's preferred way of doing things.

[David Schofield]

Possibly IFP were determined to get the standard Fleming description in so there was no confusion with the Craig look. And to get it in at the earliest opportunity, too.

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

Very clumsy on both counts.

[marktmurphy]

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

? Bond's always in his thirties.

[David Schofield]

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

? Bond's always in his thirties.

Quite.

Even when those nutcases like me want to see him age through the Fleming's into his 40s. And even when he's played in most of the movies by actors who are clearly over 40 and certainly look it.

He's always in his 30s.

Which is why this heavy handed early statement of that is so clunkingly bad. And quite unncessary.

[quantumofsolace]

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

? Bond's always in his thirties.

Quite.

Even when those nutcases like me want to see him age through the Fleming's into his 40s. And even when he's played in most of the movies by actors who are clearly over 40 and certainly look it.

He's always in his 30s.

Which is why this heavy handed early statement of that is so clunkingly bad. And quite unncessary.

Isn't it necessary for those that have not read a Bond novel before?

[David Schofield]

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

? Bond's always in his thirties.

Quite.

Even when those nutcases like me want to see him age through the Fleming's into his 40s. And even when he's played in most of the movies by actors who are clearly over 40 and certainly look it.

He's always in his 30s.

Which is why this heavy handed early statement of that is so clunkingly bad. And quite unncessary.

Isn't it necessary for those that have not read a Bond novel before?

I guess if you've nver come across James Bond or his image, sure.

But are there such people?

Deaver isn't writing here about a brand new character he has just created.

[Vauxhall]

Just seen this tweet from ITV's Julie Etchingham, presumably referring to the CARTE BLANCHE book launch...

At st pancras to record Tonight prog links and there is a book launch on involving marines abseiling from the roof #givemestrength
http://twitter.com/#!/julieetchitv/status/73352409723846657

[quantumofsolace]

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

? Bond's always in his thirties.

Quite.

Even when those nutcases like me want to see him age through the Fleming's into his 40s. And even when he's played in most of the movies by actors who are clearly over 40 and certainly look it.

He's always in his 30s.

Which is why this heavy handed early statement of that is so clunkingly bad. And quite unncessary.

Isn't it necessary for those that have not read a Bond novel before?

I guess if you've nver come across James Bond or his image, sure.

But are there such people?

Deaver isn't writing here about a brand new character he has just created.

But you said yourself that he's usually played by an actor in his 40's. Therefore surely it is necessary as most people know of Bond as the film character.

[David Schofield]

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

? Bond's always in his thirties.

Quite.

Even when those nutcases like me want to see him age through the Fleming's into his 40s. And even when he's played in most of the movies by actors who are clearly over 40 and certainly look it.

He's always in his 30s.

Which is why this heavy handed early statement of that is so clunkingly bad. And quite unncessary.

Isn't it necessary for those that have not read a Bond novel before?

I guess if you've nver come across James Bond or his image, sure.

But are there such people?

Deaver isn't writing here about a brand new character he has just created.

But you said yourself that he's usually played by an actor in his 40's. Therefore surely it is necessary as most people know of Bond as the film character.

The point I was making about the actors being in their 40s was that they are still playing Bond as if he were a 38 year old action man.

It does not need stating that Bond is in his 30s because, even if he doesn't always look like he is in the movies, we are expected to believe he is unageing.

This early statement of intent by Deaver of so uneccessary, heavy handed and ludicrously out of place, IMO.

[Loomis]

But the insertion of Bond's age, height, weight and appearance is unbelievably cack-handedly forced.

Couldn't agree more. This box-ticking description of Bond comes thudding into an otherwise lively and promising piece of text like a brick.

No one's going to be reading CARTE BLANCHE and thinking "Good job I've been given an early description of Bond, otherwise I might have read on thinking he might be five foot fall with thinning ginger hair and a goatee, and a three-inch scar across his forehead, which for all I know may be how Flemming described him in those novels from the 1940s or whenever."

Still, I'll be charitable and assume that it was IFP's doing and not Deaver's.

[marktmurphy]

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

? Bond's always in his thirties.

Quite.

Even when those nutcases like me want to see him age through the Fleming's into his 40s. And even when he's played in most of the movies by actors who are clearly over 40 and certainly look it.

He's always in his 30s.

Which is why this heavy handed early statement of that is so clunkingly bad. And quite unncessary.

I don't follow you at all, I'm afraid. There's something wrong with briefly pointing out a character's rough age?

I would have thought that the character's familiarity to everyone would actually make something like 'he's in his thirties' quite a handy statement to plonk in the ground; especially in this age of the ageing action man (Rambo, Indiana Jones) and the reboot. Because this is, of course, a reboot. And then it's not as if we've just had a series of books about James Bond as a boy or anything...

The launch sounded fun:

In a scene which could have been lifted from a James Bond novel, Jeffery Deaver pulled up at Europe’s longest bar – The Champagne Bar at St Pancras International – in a special Carte Blanche red Bentley Continental GT flanked by a Bond girl clad in black leathers.

However, the fist copy of the book did not arrive by way of the four-wheel drive grand tourer, but was delivered by air. In a dramatic twist to the launch, four members of the Royal Marines Display Team descended from the iconic roof of St Pancras International onto the concourse below, bearing copies of the novel. The books were handed over to Deaver in front of members of Ian Fleming’s family and invited guests. The plot of the book remains, until midnight tonight, a closely guarded secret, so it was put under lock and key in an undisclosed location.

http://www.autoevolu...unch-35719.html



Interesting little nugget:

The day’s Bond girl, who arrived on a BSA 1966 Spitfire motorbike, is inspired by one of Bond’s love interests in the book, whose passion for speed and fast engines rivals that of our hero. It is in our honest and humble opinion that there is no higher a caliber of female protagonist in and heroine than a Bond Girl.

[David Schofield]

But I detect Deaver's hand all over the Bond was "in his thirtes": this is MY Bond, this is what you're getting whether you like it or not. And we're getting this clear from the start.

? Bond's always in his thirties.

Quite.

Even when those nutcases like me want to see him age through the Fleming's into his 40s. And even when he's played in most of the movies by actors who are clearly over 40 and certainly look it.

He's always in his 30s.

Which is why this heavy handed early statement of that is so clunkingly bad. And quite unncessary.

I don't follow you at all, I'm afraid. There's something wrong with briefly pointing out a character's rough age?

I would have thought that the character's familiarity to everyone would actually make something like 'he's in his thirties' quite a handy statement to plonk in the ground; especially in this age of the ageing action man (Rambo, Indiana Jones) and the reboot. Because this is, of course, a reboot. And then it's not as if we've just had a series of books about James Bond as a boy or anything...

There are far subtler ways of doing this than in the opeing bars of the book while Bond is observing - from what I've read - a potential action scence.

The best way would have been to have Bond observed later on by a third party and his appearance and age noted by them then.

Okay, this is the way Fleming used to do it, so maybe Jeff's gone down his own street. Not for the bettter, again IMO only.

[marktmurphy]

Pfft. It's either that he pointed it out at all or the manner he did it that annoyed you; seems to change between posts. Seems such a tiny issue I have no idea why anyone would bang on about it.

Anyway; look up there! A girl in leather! A big red car! Much more interesting.

[Loomis]

The plot of the book remains, until midnight tonight, a closely guarded secret, so it was put under lock and key in an undisclosed location.

I wonder how it can be so closely guarded at this stage? Surely there must be thousands of copies of CARTE BLANCHE in the stockrooms of bookshops all across the land by now?

[zencat]

Today's launch event details.

http://www.thebookbo...roof-at-st.html