20 replies to this topic

[DaveBond21]

As surmised by Vesper. She guesses that he didn't "come from money". However, his parents died in a climbing accent in the French Alps, and this suggests some kind of money as this is not the activity of your average poor family. Surely they would have left him some money in their will.

I am not a reader of the James Bond novels so I am genuinely asking - did James Bond grow up poor, and later acquire his expensive tastes or has he always had quality food and accessories?

Thanks in advance for any replies.


______________________

[Major Tallon]

I wouldn't say he was poor. His obituary in YOLT, and references in the other books, tell us that his father was a foreign representative of the Vickers armaments firm, and he grew up mostly abroad, with time spent in Switzerland, among other places. His father had entered him for Eton at birth, and, following expulsion, he completed his education at Fettes, his father's old school. Unlike his cinematic counterpart, he did not attend university, but embarked on a career in the forces and the Secret Service. He acquired his Bentley before the war (at least by one account), and Moonraker tells us that he had a modest annual income of his own. So, while he wasn't wealthy, he was able to live fairly well and seems to have been satisfied with his economic and social position.

[Dustin]

As already evidenced by Major Tallon Bond surely cannot be said to have a poor background. For somebody to have a car even before the war (and let's forget about the brand), a public school education, living for streches abroad, all that's telling enough really. But I never took Vesper's shot in the dark for anything else than guesswork.
If memory serves Bond smiles amused there, not bothering to clear this error.

That said there is an interesting backstory to Fleming's family that could be attributed to Bond's background too if we apply the frequent theory that Bond's world is the idealised version of Fleming's. Fleming came from money, but it wasn't 'old' money; an unforgivable stain in the eyes of that society and perhaps most disturbing the members of that class - the winners of industrialisation - themselves.

Fleming's grandfather was the one person in the family that had earned the riches almost singlehandedly, had himself been the son of a shopkeeper and earned his money with ordinary work until he devised a way to collect large sums of money from many different lenders, thus starting his own private bank and a career as venture capital financier. Before that the family indeed had not been rich.

By a turn of fate the grandchildren of Robert Fleming became dependent on the allowance they got from their widowed mother. Ian Fleming and his brothers thus could not command their own share of the considerable Fleming trust. Fleming never had to endure real hunger or poverty. But in his own perception he considered himself indeed a poor fellow living below the standards that should have rightfully made up his background. For the best part of his life Fleming had money worries and the making of money was a considerable motif behind many decisions he made. Fleming surely didn't consider himself rich and he felt a lifelong inferiority complex for not making his own fortune.

[Captain Tightpants]

As surmised by Vesper. She guesses that he didn't "come from money". However, his parents died in a climbing accent in the French Alps, and this suggests some kind of money as this is not the activity of your average poor family. Surely they would have left him some money in their will.

I always read it as meaning that while Bond's parents had enough money to live comfortably, they didn't necessarily have enough to send Bond away to a prestigous boarding school; if his parents had lived, he likely would have gone to a good school, but not a "name" school. We have that down here in Australia - a few highly-competitive selective schools where admission virtually guarantees you whatever future you want because of the school's reputation. It's implied that the family Bond lived with after his parents' death did have the money to send him to a "name" school, but, as Vesper said, his friends never let him forget it. He wasn't born into money, so he wasn't of the same class as they were.

[Mr_Wint]

Or you could say that Vesper cannot read other people as well as Bond can...

Anyway, Craig's version of Bond is a little bit schizophrenic in some aspects and we see an example of that here. It is as if the filmmakers cannot really agree with themselves, so they go for a sort of subtle middle-ground approach. Let's not say that he is poor, but let us imply it by having someone "guessing" that he is poor. He has a tuxedo… but it is not “really” tailor-made… or is it? etc. etc.

[doublenoughtspy]

Are you asking about the literary character or the film character?

As Major Tallon lays out - the literary character was far from poor. He did not come from old money, but his family was working their way up.

Fleming's Bond does not seem to be particullary interested in acquiring wealth for wealth's sake. Which would lead me to believe he didn't grow up poor.

[OmarB]

Are you asking about the literary character or the film character?

As Major Tallon lays out - the literary character was far from poor. He did not come from old money, but his family was working their way up.

Fleming's Bond does not seem to be particullary interested in acquiring wealth for wealth's sake. Which would lead me to believe he didn't grow up poor.

I was just about to ask that. From the Fleming novels themselves, but moreso from the Higson books we see that he comes from a family that is pretty comfortable. Heck, vacationing in Corsica at your uncles mansion, the Bentley, etc.

[AMC Hornet]

It's implied that the family Bond lived with after his parents' death did have the money to send him to a "name" school, but, as Vesper said, his friends never let him forget it. He wasn't born into money, so he wasn't of the same class as they were.

Perzackly. The reason the idea of Bond growing up 'poor' keeps cropping up is because Vesper surmises that Bond "didn't come from money" and that he attended "Oxford or wherever...by the grace of someone else's charity" - presumably that of dear Aunt Charmian and/or whatever trust was left him by his late parents.

This chip on his shoulder is meant to explain the casual way he wears expensive clothes, regards women as disposable playthings, etc. It's cinematic shorthand, coming from a character who really knows nothing about him. It's insightful, sure, but it's not gospel - it's really only there to intrigue those in the audience who've never read Fleming and may have always wondered at Bond's background, which has never been explored deeply before. It may even have been intended to either satisfy or tease the literary purists (like the 'stirred, not shaken line in YOLT).

Either way, I say enough of exploring Bond's psyche, let's get back to our self-indulgent blunt instrument with expensive tastes. I hope 007 gets to enjoy himself a little in SKYFALL - it's what I like about the movies. After all, if he isn't enjoying himself, how can we in the audience enjoy watching him? (I'm thinking LTK and QoS here)

[Captain Tightpants]

Or you could say that Vesper cannot read other people as well as Bond can...

You're assuming that Craig's Bond retains Fleming's original backstory there.

Dustin's point about Bond coming from "new money" means that Bond could have come from a wealthy family and Vesper can still be right about it. People who come from "old money" tend to treat it as something of a status symbol. The older your family is, the more pull you have. If Bond's father or grandfather had been the one to make the family fortune, then the charity Vesper refers to would have come from the school administration, who admitted Bond despite his coming from "new money". The school probably would not have cared about it, but his schholfriends would have.

[Guy Haines]

Eton, followed by Fettes, and depending on whether it is the book Bond, military service, or the cinema Bond, Cambridge. Bond's background is hardly "poor" by many definitions. Upper middle class, I'd say.

Whether his family's background is "old money" or "new money" - now that's a different matter. And in the UK that still matters, even now.

One other thing - in one of the novels, Moonraker (I think), Bond is described at one point as not looking very "English", for an Englishman. Of course. His ancestry is part Scot part Swiss.

Bond's resemblance to his counterpart, the un-named agent from up North with a lower class background in the first Len Deighton spy novels - "Harry Palmer" in the films of them - is slight indeed. But Fleming didn't quite make Bond the typical upper class Englishman either. There's a slight touch of the "outsider" about him.

[Peckinpah1976]

I think the comment about Bond "not coming from money" has more to do with pedigree than actual physical wealth; there's a big difference between leading a comfortable upper-middle class existance and having lineage - the current movie version of Bond seems to have come from the former but doesn't have the latter and his contemporaries never let him forget this. Interestingly the reverse can also be true; Winston Churchill for instance, came from a well established family but seldom had two shillings to rub together (by the standards of his class).

It's also interesting to note how frugal and unostentatious the literary Bond is; he has a few long-cherished 'status symbols' (his car, flat etc) but seldom spends any money, doesn't show-off what he has and his indulgences in food and wine are nearly always at the expense of others and are viewed as rare treats. This is all a very long way from most cinematic Bond, especially the Brosnan version.

[Mr. Blofeld]

One other thing - in one of the novels, Moonraker (I think), Bond is described at one point as not looking very "English", for an Englishman. Of course. His ancestry is part Scot part Swiss. Fleming didn't quite make Bond the typical upper class Englishman either. There's a slight touch of the "outsider" about him.

That ancestry, I think, was not yet established by the time Fleming wrote Moonraker (or whenever), but since we're drawing from Fleming's own biography for some small measure of knowledge, it may be that Fleming himself was drawing on his own lineage -- Scots-Irish-Flemish, if I recall correctly.

He had a "touch of the outsider", himself, and his own looks certainly weren't the conventional type -- in his younger years, he had something of a rough-hewn beauty, sort of like Daniel Craig. Appropriate, no? :-)

[Major Tallon]

I think the comment about Bond "not coming from money" has more to do with pedigree than actual physical wealth; there's a big difference between leading a comfortable upper-middle class existance and having lineage - the current movie version of Bond seems to have come from the former but doesn't have the latter and his contemporaries never let him forget this. Interestingly the reverse can also be true; Winston Churchill for instance, came from a well established family but seldom had two shillings to rub together (by the standards of his class).

It's also interesting to note how frugal and unostentatious the literary Bond is; he has a few long-cherished 'status symbols' (his car, flat etc) but seldom spends any money, doesn't show-off what he has and his indulgences in food and wine are nearly always at the expense of others and are viewed as rare treats. This is all a very long way from most cinematic Bond, especially the Brosnan version.

The literary Bond's attitude toward money is interesting. When he takes on Drax at a high-stakes game of bridge, he suddenly realizes that losing four rubbers will cost nearly twice his annual income, forcing him to borrow from M (Moonraker, chapter 5). Moreover, when he loses a hundred pounds in a game with friends, that's "important money" (Thunderball, chapter 1). On the other hand, when he wins £15,000 from Drax, he plans to purchase a Rolls-Bentley convertible, buy three diamond clips, make some fairly commonplace purchases (clothes, golf clubs, a new paint job for his flat, and champagne), then invest the remainder (apparently somewhat shy of £10,000) in gold shares (Moonraker, chapter 8). The car and the jewelry fall into the realm of conspicuous consumption, but Bond's spending of this "found money" otherwise doesn't represent particularly lavish expenditure.

Even more intersting, when he's paid $10,000 for exposing Goldfinger's cheating at cards, he gives the money to Jill Masterton (Goldfinger, chapter 5), an act disclosing a rather startling lack of self-indulgence.

Thus, Bond feels insecure about losing large amounts at cards, but in other respects he's not particularly concerned with money, and I find no indication that he's ever had serious long-term financial worries. He's willing to make a few extravagant purchases, but wouldn't really care if the money to make them hadn't turned up, and isn't concerned about building up a large cash reserve. His attitude about money seems rather matter-of-fact. As long as he's not in debt and can provide for his basic wants, he's content.

[AMC Hornet]

He's willing to make a few extravagant purchases, but wouldn't really care if the money to make them hadn't turned up, and isn't concerned about building up a large cash reserve. His attitude about money seems rather matter-of-fact. As long as he's not in debt and can provide for his basic wants, he's content.

This attitude is explained in one of the books - I can't remember which at the moment - wherein Bond reflected that his objective was to have as little money in his account as possible when he died ("which, in his more melancholy moments, he expected he would before the mandatory retirement age of 45").

The last part I believe is a fairly accurate quote. Can anyone remember which novel it's from?

[Clements]

There's another detail from Moonraker (chapter 1) that I don't think has been mentioned yet:

"He earned £1500 a year, the salary of a Principal Officer in the Civil Service and he had a thousand a year free of tax of his own. When he was on a job he could spend as much as he liked, so for the other months of the year he could live very well on his £2000 net."

Fleming never tells us where that extra "thousand a year free of tax of his own" comes from - possibly an inheritance from his parents, or from Aunt Charmian, investments made from his gambling profits, ...

[Clements]

This attitude is explained in one of the books - I can't remember which at the moment - wherein Bond reflected that his objective was to have as little money in his account as possible when he died ("which, in his more melancholy moments, he expected he would before the mandatory retirement age of 45").

The last part I believe is a fairly accurate quote. Can anyone remember which novel it's from?

It's from Moonraker, chapter 1, just a couple of paragraphs after the bit I quoted above. You were pretty accurate. Here is the actual quote:

"On these things he spent all his money and it was his ambition to have as little as possible in his banking account when he was killed, as, when he was depressed, he knew he would be, before the statutory age of forty-five."

[AMC Hornet]

Quick-drawClements.

I may have to pass my trivia-king crown to you.

[Clements]

Quick-drawClements.

I may have to pass my trivia-king crown to you.

I carry my iPad in a Burns Martin holster.

[Captain Tightpants]

One other thing - in one of the novels, Moonraker (I think), Bond is described at one point as not looking very "English", for an Englishman. Of course. His ancestry is part Scot part Swiss.

But this isn't about the novels. DaveBond21 was asking about Bond's background in the Craig films.

[AMC Hornet]

One other thing - in one of the novels, Moonraker (I think), Bond is described at one point as not looking very "English", for an Englishman. Of course. His ancestry is part Scot part Swiss.

But this isn't about the novels. DaveBond21 was asking about Bond's background in the Craig films.

Plus, don't we all know by now that the only reason 007 was revealed as half-Scottish in OHMSS was because Fleming had come around to liking Sean Connery while Dr. No was being filmed? Had Richard Burton played Bond instead, Fleming might have suddenly made him Welsh. (Cue Alan Partridge: "M'namesh Bond, Jonesh Bond, double-0 Ssscheven").

[doublenoughtspy]

Plus, don't we all know by now that the only reason 007 was revealed as half-Scottish in OHMSS was because Fleming had come around to liking Sean Connery while Dr. No was being filmed?

The extensive research I did for my book proved that theory to be a fallacy. Fleming wanted Bond to be Scottish years before Dr No began filming...

Zencat mentions it in his review: http://www.amazon.co...3&nodeID=266239