167 replies to this topic

[Jim]

Milky milky.

[Jim]

Nice fun little interview at the end of the Radio 4 PM programme today with Dunph and others commenting on this. National radio...

[David_M]

Wow, I didn't even know Hopalong Cassidy was still alive.

[glidrose]

Here's a 2007 quote from our own Spynovelfan.

"Sorry, Loomis, but I'm 99 percent sure that William Boyd won't do it. He's just come off writing a spy thriller and he's the sort of writer who likes to move around from one thing to another and not stay too long in one place. And while he is fascinated by Fleming and read Bond as a boy, he's not really a fan anymore."

[007jamesbond]

hey Jim do you plan to create a section for William Boyd so we can talk about what his book will be like? like plot, gun, characters, locations, etc

[glidrose]

SNF also wrote way back when, "I've just interviewed Boyd. Among other things, he said he felt that Daniel Craig (who starred in THE TRENCH, which Boyd wrote and directed, and SWORD OF HONOUR, which he wrote) will rejuvenate the Bond series and that no actor to take the role since Connery has had such presence. [...] I don't think it's going to be Boyd, but I do think he'd have been brilliant, especially if he'd done a period piece. Forgot to mention that he's Scottish, lives in Chelsea and the Dordogne (where he makes his own wine), and is a Commander of the British Empire. Seem to remember he drives an Aston Martin, too. He's about as Bond as a modern British writer could be. RESTLESS is first-class."

Edited by glidrose, 12 April 2012 - 09:08 PM.

[Loomis]

I'll have to read RESTLESS. Been meaning to re-read THE NEW CONFESSIONS for some time now, as well other books by Boyd.

Given that I [A] like Boyd and [B] have championed him as a Bond continuation novelist for years, I ought to be beside myself with joy, but the ominous shadow of DEVIL MAY CARE does appear to loom large over this enterprise.

Of course, Boyd will not be explicitly "writing as Ian Fleming" (not that there's any evidence of such a thing in Faulks' end product), but presumably his 1960s-set Bond adventure is intended to feature Fleming's Bond in a continuation of Fleming's timeline.

I hope that Boyd won't pen his 007 outing (as Faulks and Deaver seemed to) according to a supposed "Fleming formula" that, in reality, Fleming himself was never shackled by. There's been a sense of a lot of box-ticking (with a constant worried eye towards pleasing casual readers who know Bond strictly from the Eon films) that has merely resulted in Bond novels that are derivative and dull: briefing scene with M here, car chase here, torture scene here, obligatory sacrificial lamb here, change of location here in case the reader has grown bored of being in Turkey for the last thirty pages.... I know that the films are also guilty of this sort of slavish adherence to formula, but somehow it seems more heavyhanded in the continuation novels, with their workmanlike prose and their lack of attractive film stars, splendidly-photographed locations, eye-popping stunts and hummable music to make the pill marked "cliché" more pleasant to swallow.

Who knows, though? Perhaps Boyd actually has some ambition for his Bond novel and doesn't want to be simply the latest big name to pen a Bond continuation novel, which is something that almost seems to have become a rite of passage for successful middle-aged novelists. Perhaps he doesn't want to be the second Sebastian Faulks, and is aware of how and why Faulks went wrong with DEVIL MAY CARE. Perhaps Boyd's effort will be something truly special, with more to offer than the joining of the traditional dots. Time will tell.

[AMC Hornet]

Hear, hear.

[TheREAL008]

I'm skeptical, but optimistic all the same. I think IFP has ditched the reboot idea (sadly) in favor to keep James Bond set in the past. However I just want one single author to write the books instead of jumping from one writer to the next.

Oh well, I had high hopes for the reboot lit Bond. Sorry they were dashed all too soon. It did show promise.

[MarkA]

I hope that Boyd won't pen his 007 outing (as Faulks and Deaver seemed to) according to a supposed "Fleming formula" that, in reality, Fleming himself was never shackled by. There's been a sense of a lot of box-ticking (with a constant worried eye towards pleasing casual readers who know Bond strictly from the Eon films) that has merely resulted in Bond novels that are derivative and dull: briefing scene with M here, car chase here, torture scene here, obligatory sacrificial lamb here, change of location here in case the reader has grown bored of being in Turkey for the last thirty pages.... I know that the films are also guilty of this sort of slavish adherence to formula, but somehow it seems more heavyhanded in the continuation novels, with their workmanlike prose and their lack of attractive film stars, splendidly-photographed locations, eye-popping stunts and hummable music to make the pill marked "cliché" more pleasant to swallow.

That is one of the most intelligent assessments of the continuation novels I have read. That is also why I thought Casino Royale in it's second half was so successful because by adapting Fleming's book it steered away from that cliché. The Young Bond's (despite a flawed concept) and The Moneypenny Diaries did the same. But in many cases it is not commercial. In fact even though I admired the concept and bravery I did wonder whom The Moneypenny Diaries were written for! I personally think after many mediocre attempts these Bond continuation novels are written for all the wrong reasons.

Edited by MarkA, 12 April 2012 - 11:32 PM.

[Matt_13]

...The Young Bond novels are fantastic, and are without doubt the best continuation novels ever written.

[Dustin]

Here's a 2007 quote from our own Spynovelfan.

"Sorry, Loomis, but I'm 99 percent sure that William Boyd won't do it. He's just come off writing a spy thriller and he's the sort of writer who likes to move around from one thing to another and not stay too long in one place. And while he is fascinated by Fleming and read Bond as a boy, he's not really a fan anymore."

SNF also wrote way back when, "I've just interviewed Boyd. Among other things, he said he felt that Daniel Craig (who starred in THE TRENCH, which Boyd wrote and directed, and SWORD OF HONOUR, which he wrote) will rejuvenate the Bond series and that no actor to take the role since Connery has had such presence. [...] I don't think it's going to be Boyd, but I do think he'd have been brilliant, especially if he'd done a period piece. Forgot to mention that he's Scottish, lives in Chelsea and the Dordogne (where he makes his own wine), and is a Commander of the British Empire. Seem to remember he drives an Aston Martin, too. He's about as Bond as a modern British writer could be. RESTLESS is first-class."

I suppose Boyd back in the day didn't know himself the topic - espionage and thrillers in general - would keep him so occupied. ORDINARY THUNDERSTORMS must have been in the works already, but there Boyd approaches the field more from a Hitchcock angle - innocent guy accidentally gets into the works of a much larger scheme and has to fight for his life. WAITING FOR SUNRISE once more sets a character firmly into the foreground who gets involved with something much larger - WWI - and more or less drifts into the mechanisms of intelligence and counterintelligence. I have yet to read it but it seems evident Boyd is quite aware of the potential that lies with such a setting, otherwise he'd hardly have used it repeatedly.

I'll have to read RESTLESS. Been meaning to re-read THE NEW CONFESSIONS for some time now, as well other books by Boyd.

Given that I [A] like Boyd and [B] have championed him as a Bond continuation novelist for years, I ought to be beside myself with joy, but the ominous shadow of DEVIL MAY CARE does appear to loom large over this enterprise.

Of course, Boyd will not be explicitly "writing as Ian Fleming" (not that there's any evidence of such a thing in Faulks' end product), but presumably his 1960s-set Bond adventure is intended to feature Fleming's Bond in a continuation of Fleming's timeline.

I hope that Boyd won't pen his 007 outing (as Faulks and Deaver seemed to) according to a supposed "Fleming formula" that, in reality, Fleming himself was never shackled by. There's been a sense of a lot of box-ticking (with a constant worried eye towards pleasing casual readers who know Bond strictly from the Eon films) that has merely resulted in Bond novels that are derivative and dull: briefing scene with M here, car chase here, torture scene here, obligatory sacrificial lamb here, change of location here in case the reader has grown bored of being in Turkey for the last thirty pages.... I know that the films are also guilty of this sort of slavish adherence to formula, but somehow it seems more heavyhanded in the continuation novels, with their workmanlike prose and their lack of attractive film stars, splendidly-photographed locations, eye-popping stunts and hummable music to make the pill marked "cliché" more pleasant to swallow.

Who knows, though? Perhaps Boyd actually has some ambition for his Bond novel and doesn't want to be simply the latest big name to pen a Bond continuation novel, which is something that almost seems to have become a rite of passage for successful middle-aged novelists. Perhaps he doesn't want to be the second Sebastian Faulks, and is aware of how and why Faulks went wrong with DEVIL MAY CARE. Perhaps Boyd's effort will be something truly special, with more to offer than the joining of the traditional dots. Time will tell.

I would hope Boyd tries to pick up one of several interesting threads Fleming's work indicates but doesn't explore deeper. For example, what happened to Bond in Russia during his time at the hands of the KGB? Or what would Bond's real feelings about the repeated brainwashing be? Wouldn't he hate Moloney for bringing back along with his personality also his worst nightmares, that painful feeling of impotence and susequent guilt about the death of his wife? Would he really be glad Moloney restored the familiar old hatred for the KGB and its ways? Might he not suspect Moloney - while he's at it anyway - didn't just erase the stains of the KGB hypnosis but did also - on M's orders, of course! - readjust his potential willingness to risk his life? No, of course the good guys woud never stoop to something so devious, not in Bond's world. But would he be sure about it? Could he ever be?

And one other thing, Bond in Fleming's books didn't get to see M again after the attempt to kill him with the poison gun. M congratulates him on a successful mission, even approves of the knighthood Bond is supposed to receive. But how would the first reunion between Bond and M really play? Both knowing Bond nearly succeeded to kill him, both knowing about the other's unease? M said in TMWTGG:

'... 007 was a good agent once. There's no reason why he shouldn't be a good agent again. Within limits, that is.'

Would there be limits to Bond's continued service? And if so, what would they be? Could age once more come into play? M used to argue Bond has served far too long in the 00-section in YOLT and Bond didn't argue that point, although he suspected a rescue mission for his benefit on the pretext of promotion to the diplomatic section. Could not Bond work in a different section in Boyd's book also?

For once I would hope for a different meal, not the usual PTS/briefing-with-M/first-chase/first-meeting-with-villain/ so on routine. That diet could do with a fresh approach.

[Loomis]

Some excellent ideas, Dustin. And I've always wanted a novel set between the events of YOLT and TMWTGG, dealing with Bond's time in Russia (as well as the efforts by M and co. to investigate his disappearance). As well as taking Bond into dark geographical, political and psychological territory, such a book could also adopt an unconventional approach to structure.

However, I suspect that a bland, McGuffin-driven plot that doesn't stray far from "the usual PTS/briefing-with-M/first-chase/first-meeting-with-villain/ so on routine" is what the Bond Powers That Be have decreed is what the public demands. Today's readers cannot cope with anything more subtle, thought-provoking or experimental than that, it would seem, and will put the book down unless it gives them nothing but the quipping action hero of the films.

Of course, there's nothing necessarily wrong with cookie-cutter Bond novels. They can be enjoyable enough. However, from names like Faulks, Deaver and Boyd one would hope for more than that.

[marktmurphy]

Some excellent ideas, Dustin. And I've always wanted a novel set between the events of YOLT and TMWTGG, dealing with Bond's time in Russia (as well as the efforts by M and co. to investigate his disappearance). As well as taking Bond into dark geographical, political and psychological territory, such a book could also adopt an unconventional approach to structure.

If we had a series running that'd be fine, but these are supposed to have a mass appeal: I'm not sure picking apart 50-year-old continuity like that will appeal to many beyond fans.

[Jim]

Some excellent ideas, Dustin. And I've always wanted a novel set between the events of YOLT and TMWTGG, dealing with Bond's time in Russia (as well as the efforts by M and co. to investigate his disappearance). As well as taking Bond into dark geographical, political and psychological territory, such a book could also adopt an unconventional approach to structure.

If we had a series running that'd be fine, but these are supposed to have a mass appeal: I'm not sure picking apart 50-year-old continuity like that will appeal to many beyond fans.

Quite - interesting comment in that BBC piece that the sales of Carte Blanche (at least initially in hardback, I forget the precise quote) were significantly down on Devil May Care - despite one thinking that the move to Deaver and an ostensible reboot may have been an attempt not to alienate casual readers whilst retaining something of the original - the references to the parents etc (although it appears to have divided Bond fans).

I'm not personally unhappy that they are putting Bond in his original social idiom but I doubt they have done this to please me specifically. However, need to be careful not to fall into the knowing-hindsight dangers of Devil May Care doing the same.

[marktmurphy]

Quite - interesting comment in that BBC piece that the sales of Carte Blanche (at least initially in hardback, I forget the precise quote) were significantly down on Devil May Care - despite one thinking that the move to Deaver and an ostensible reboot may have been an attempt not to alienate casual readers whilst retaining something of the original - the references to the parents etc (although it appears to have divided Bond fans).

Yeah, I think it's no real fault of Carte Blanche or Deaver or the PR campaign: Devil May Care was a bit of a one-off- they promoted it as the first new Bond novel and lots of people wanted to read it. You can't really do that twice.

Bit sad for Faulks perhaps that I imagine Devil May Care is probably his biggest-selling novel; and it's the one he spent the least amount of time on.

[Simon]

I'm not personally unhappy that they are putting Bond in his original social idiom but I doubt they have done this to please me specifically.

Oh Jim, you do yourself an injustice.

[Jim]

I suppose he would say he was patently writing as Ian Fleming i.e. after 14 books (had he lived) couldn't give a bugger and preferred having a nice time and taking the money whilst embracing death (probably not the last bit) and knocking off a few thousand words per day knowing it will sell. It didn't say "writing like" - it was always "writing as".

I'm not personally unhappy that they are putting Bond in his original social idiom but I doubt they have done this to please me specifically.

Oh Jim, you do yourself an injustice.

Humility is the worst form of conceit.

[Loomis]

Some excellent ideas, Dustin. And I've always wanted a novel set between the events of YOLT and TMWTGG, dealing with Bond's time in Russia (as well as the efforts by M and co. to investigate his disappearance). As well as taking Bond into dark geographical, political and psychological territory, such a book could also adopt an unconventional approach to structure.

If we had a series running that'd be fine, but these are supposed to have a mass appeal: I'm not sure picking apart 50-year-old continuity like that will appeal to many beyond fans.

I thought that we did have a series running, albeit one in which it seems that every new Bond novel (excluding Young Bond) is a one-shot affair by a famous name. UNTITLED WILLIAM BOYD JAMES BOND NOVEL is surely a sequel (or, if you prefer, followup) to DEVIL MAY CARE/CARTE BLANCHE (depending on the degree of weight that one gives the "timeline"). Anyone who's kept half an eye on the news will know that Boyd's book is the third 007 novel since 2008.

Not that I'm necessarily calling for a wildly experimental Bond novel - merely something that, y'know, reads as though it's had a bit of imagination and writing talent put into it - the sort of imagination and writing talent that Boyd, Deaver and Faulks have all shown in their other ventures. "Celebrity author writes garden-variety Bond novel" has grown a bit tiresome, after all.

Still, if that's where mass appeal lies, so be it, I suppose.

[Dustin]

As I see it the idea behind CB had been to kick off a new series of Bond action thrillers, one notch or two above pulp, that would re-establish Bond in books. This could indeed have worked, the only major hurdle to take was that Carte Blanche wasn't a very hot thriller to begin with. No, it wasn't abysmal or horrible or unreadable. But it had not a lot going for it either. Please, those who have read it, please take a moment and change the protagonist's name to Jerry Cotton in your minds. Would you have read it then? And enjoyed it? The real problem there is that the competition in that field is quite fierce and the market is awash with special-forces-24-killer-agent types like with nothing else. Vampires perhaps, but they don't count. Vampire agents do, and I'm sure there must be a few of them also.

Against that competition Carte Blanche didn't really excel. Without the name and three digits it would have been a fairly forgettable affair. Hell, it is even with them. I daresay it would have been more witty and quaint if it had been a reboot of Sherlock Holmes, working for the SIS. Would have needed a Boswell, but what the hell.

Anyway, IFP can still go back that route whenever they please, nothing there to keep them. Now I suppose they hope to have another go at the literary thriller with Boyd. It's by no means a guarantee that will work this time, but hope usually is the last thing to die. I doubt Boyd will want to involve himself into a longer series. But I don't see him riding the thing into the ground on purpose either. Sure, money is the driving force here. But Boyd could surely use one or two of the themes that interest him with Bond too, while he's at it. No law saying he couldn't have a bit of fun at the job.

[CasinoKiller]

I think an interesting premise for a new Bond (period piece) novel would be one set in the late 1940's covering Bond's origins in the Secret Service. That's really one period of his life which has been scarcely explored in the Fleming novels. A book which would perhaps begin in the middle of WW2, with Bond carrying out the assassinations of a Japanese cipher clerk and a Norwegian double agent, and then follow Bond's early years as 007, the establishment of his relationship with Moneypenny, Bill Taner, M, Rene Mathis etc.

Trouble is that the Bond franchise, be it literary or cinematic, IS constrained by the need to remain commercially viable, and that necessitates hovering around (if not rigidly adhering too) the 'formula' to some extent. While this is very understandable in the case of big budget films, one would expect the novels to be a 'safer' place for experimentation...

[glidrose]

Don't know if it's already been mentioned, but Boyd was born in Accra, Ghana and was raised in Africa. I suspect I'm probably stretching things a bit by saying he's our first African Bond author. Well, second, really. There was that Jenkins chap and we all know how that turned out.

Several of his novels are set in Africa.

Boyd's been twice nominated for the Booker prize. The only other Bond author to have Booker experience is Kingsley Amis, who was shortlisted twice and won once.

Five of Boyd's novels and one of his short stories have been filmed. He's also written many produced screenplays.

Edited by glidrose, 13 April 2012 - 08:04 PM.

[Syndicate]

I hate to say it, but I don't know who is William Boyd. Hate to say this also never heard of any of his works either. I know a lot of authors that writer spy novles who they are and their work. Even other authors that I have no intrest in that write medical thrillers, fanstay, crime Sci-Fi, and general fiction. I would know who they are and some of their works too.

[Jack Spang]

I gave up on the timelines ages ago. When I read a Bond book I just forget about the previous ones except if it's set in the 60's then I think about the Fleming ones. I just ride with it.

I'm still excited about a new young Bond series and an adult Bond yarn but to a lesser extent than I would have been a few years ago due to DMC and CB. I still feel greater enthusiasm for a new Bond book though than I do a new Bond film.

Edited by Jack Spang, 14 April 2012 - 05:17 AM.

[CasinoKiller]

I gave up on the timelines ages ago. When I read a Bond book I just forget about the previous ones except if it's set in the 60's then I think about the Fleming ones. I just ride with it.

I'm still excited about a new young Bond series and an adult Bond yarn but to a lesser extent than I would have been a few years ago. I still feel greater enthusiasm for a new Bond book though than I do a new Bond film.

I gave up on the timelines ages ago. When I read a Bond book I just forget about the previous ones except if it's set in the 60's then I think about the Fleming ones. I just ride with it.

I'm still excited about a new young Bond series and an adult Bond yarn but to a lesser extent than I would have been a few years ago. I still feel greater enthusiasm for a new Bond book though than I do a new Bond film.

The issue here is not so much the timeline/internal chronology in the strictest sense...rather its to do with setting.

IFP is flip-flopping between the 60's and the present day so often that its evident they really can't make up their mind about the long-term future of the Bond literary franchise.

At least with the previous continuation novels, we had a uniform setting and style through an entire series. John Gardner's books were about an older version of Fleming's Bond set in the 1980's. Raymond Benson's books were set in the post-Cold War world of the 90's with a sort of mix between Fleming's Bond and Brosnan's Bond from the film.

But right now, I don't think we have anything resembling consistency. We have had a period piece, then a modern day reboot, and now ANOTHER period piece...there's no way their going to attract the attention of the casual reader by pretending this is a 'series' now...

[tdalton]

The issue here is not so much the timeline/internal chronology in the strictest sense...rather its to do with setting.

IFP is flip-flopping between the 60's and the present day so often that its evident they really can't make up their mind about the long-term future of the Bond literary franchise.

At least with the previous continuation novels, we had a uniform setting and style through an entire series. John Gardner's books were about an older version of Fleming's Bond set in the 1980's. Raymond Benson's books were set in the post-Cold War world of the 90's with a sort of mix between Fleming's Bond and Brosnan's Bond from the film.

But right now, I don't think we have anything resembling consistency. We have had a period piece, then a modern day reboot, and now ANOTHER period piece...there's no way their going to attract the attention of the casual reader by pretending this is a 'series' now...

I think your post 100% highlights the problem with the current string of Bond novels we've been getting.

I would be fine with the novels if the only thing that they had going for them in terms of continuity was the time period that they are set in. Would I like it if the novels kind of built upon each other in some semblance of a coherent timeline that showed Bond, as a character, progress over the course of the series of novels? Yes, I'd very much like that, but I could very much make do with simply having a series of novels with the loose idea of continuity that would be provided simply by keeping them all set in the same time period.

The current jumping back and forth between time periods (Benson-Present; Faulks-Past; Deaver-Present; Boyd-Past) with each consecutive novel really is quite jarring and it keeps each respective author from really building up the Bond character as the series moves along, as each novel ends up serving as some form of a mini-reboot each time out (or, in the case of Deaver, a total reboot of the series).

While I would have preferred seeing what could have been done with the current reboot, although hopefully by a different author who understood Bond a bit better, I hope now that they stick with the period piece setting for a while and hopefully find someone that can build up the Bond character over the course of several novels.

[Byron]

Some excellent ideas, Dustin. And I've always wanted a novel set between the events of YOLT and TMWTGG, dealing with Bond's time in Russia (as well as the efforts by M and co. to investigate his disappearance). As well as taking Bond into dark geographical, political and psychological territory, such a book could also adopt an unconventional approach to structure.

However, I suspect that a bland, McGuffin-driven plot that doesn't stray far from "the usual PTS/briefing-with-M/first-chase/first-meeting-with-villain/ so on routine" is what the Bond Powers That Be have decreed is what the public demands. Today's readers cannot cope with anything more subtle, thought-provoking or experimental than that, it would seem, and will put the book down unless it gives them nothing but the quipping action hero of the films.

Of course, there's nothing necessarily wrong with cookie-cutter Bond novels. They can be enjoyable enough. However, from names like Faulks, Deaver and Boyd one would hope for more than that.

I think at least a reference to YOLT and the events of Colonel Sun (a few lines or several paragraphs) would be a nice touch acknowledging the real literary Bond fans. However DMC throws a spanner in the works and would best be ignored.

I also recall the time when Loomis quoted from Faulks, and thought we were in for a right royal treat. Then a few days before the official release, several snippets made the rounds, and the writing was so lacking that warning bells sounded immediately.
Add to that a lacklustre CB, flip-flopping on the timeline and a ticker-box approach and one has to wisely lower his expectations.

I think an interesting premise for a new Bond (period piece) novel would be one set in the late 1940's covering Bond's origins in the Secret Service. That's really one period of his life which has been scarcely explored in the Fleming novels. A book which would perhaps begin in the middle of WW2, with Bond carrying out the assassinations of a Japanese cipher clerk and a Norwegian double agent, and then follow Bond's early years as 007, the establishment of his relationship with Moneypenny, Bill Taner, M, Rene Mathis etc.

Trouble is that the Bond franchise, be it literary or cinematic, IS constrained by the need to remain commercially viable, and that necessitates hovering around (if not rigidly adhering too) the 'formula' to some extent. While this is very understandable in the case of big budget films, one would expect the novels to be a 'safer' place for experimentation...

Very good post. A WW2 Bond would be great. I wonder if IFP have ever considered the idea.

[CasinoKiller]

Some excellent ideas, Dustin. And I've always wanted a novel set between the events of YOLT and TMWTGG, dealing with Bond's time in Russia (as well as the efforts by M and co. to investigate his disappearance). As well as taking Bond into dark geographical, political and psychological territory, such a book could also adopt an unconventional approach to structure.

However, I suspect that a bland, McGuffin-driven plot that doesn't stray far from "the usual PTS/briefing-with-M/first-chase/first-meeting-with-villain/ so on routine" is what the Bond Powers That Be have decreed is what the public demands. Today's readers cannot cope with anything more subtle, thought-provoking or experimental than that, it would seem, and will put the book down unless it gives them nothing but the quipping action hero of the films.

Of course, there's nothing necessarily wrong with cookie-cutter Bond novels. They can be enjoyable enough. However, from names like Faulks, Deaver and Boyd one would hope for more than that.

I think at least a reference to YOLT and the events of Colonel Sun (a few lines or several paragraphs) would be a nice touch acknowledging the real literary Bond fans. However DMC throws a spanner in the works and would best be ignored.

I also recall the time when Loomis quoted from Faulks, and thought we were in for a right royal treat. Then a few days before the official release, several snippets made the rounds, and the writing was so lacking that warning bells sounded immediately.
Add to that a lacklustre CB, flip-flopping on the timeline and a ticker-box approach and one has to wisely lower his expectations.

I think an interesting premise for a new Bond (period piece) novel would be one set in the late 1940's covering Bond's origins in the Secret Service. That's really one period of his life which has been scarcely explored in the Fleming novels. A book which would perhaps begin in the middle of WW2, with Bond carrying out the assassinations of a Japanese cipher clerk and a Norwegian double agent, and then follow Bond's early years as 007, the establishment of his relationship with Moneypenny, Bill Taner, M, Rene Mathis etc.

Trouble is that the Bond franchise, be it literary or cinematic, IS constrained by the need to remain commercially viable, and that necessitates hovering around (if not rigidly adhering too) the 'formula' to some extent. While this is very understandable in the case of big budget films, one would expect the novels to be a 'safer' place for experimentation...

Very good post. A WW2 Bond would be great. I wonder if IFP have ever considered the idea.

Some excellent ideas, Dustin. And I've always wanted a novel set between the events of YOLT and TMWTGG, dealing with Bond's time in Russia (as well as the efforts by M and co. to investigate his disappearance). As well as taking Bond into dark geographical, political and psychological territory, such a book could also adopt an unconventional approach to structure.

However, I suspect that a bland, McGuffin-driven plot that doesn't stray far from "the usual PTS/briefing-with-M/first-chase/first-meeting-with-villain/ so on routine" is what the Bond Powers That Be have decreed is what the public demands. Today's readers cannot cope with anything more subtle, thought-provoking or experimental than that, it would seem, and will put the book down unless it gives them nothing but the quipping action hero of the films.

Of course, there's nothing necessarily wrong with cookie-cutter Bond novels. They can be enjoyable enough. However, from names like Faulks, Deaver and Boyd one would hope for more than that.

I think at least a reference to YOLT and the events of Colonel Sun (a few lines or several paragraphs) would be a nice touch acknowledging the real literary Bond fans. However DMC throws a spanner in the works and would best be ignored.

I also recall the time when Loomis quoted from Faulks, and thought we were in for a right royal treat. Then a few days before the official release, several snippets made the rounds, and the writing was so lacking that warning bells sounded immediately.
Add to that a lacklustre CB, flip-flopping on the timeline and a ticker-box approach and one has to wisely lower his expectations.

I think an interesting premise for a new Bond (period piece) novel would be one set in the late 1940's covering Bond's origins in the Secret Service. That's really one period of his life which has been scarcely explored in the Fleming novels. A book which would perhaps begin in the middle of WW2, with Bond carrying out the assassinations of a Japanese cipher clerk and a Norwegian double agent, and then follow Bond's early years as 007, the establishment of his relationship with Moneypenny, Bill Taner, M, Rene Mathis etc.

Trouble is that the Bond franchise, be it literary or cinematic, IS constrained by the need to remain commercially viable, and that necessitates hovering around (if not rigidly adhering too) the 'formula' to some extent. While this is very understandable in the case of big budget films, one would expect the novels to be a 'safer' place for experimentation...

Very good post. A WW2 Bond would be great. I wonder if IFP have ever considered the idea.

Related to my post about a WW2 Bond book; I do hope they make an attempt to clarify Fleming's Bond's timeline, if they ARE planning to set more books in that time frame. Fleming himself made changes to certain dates pertaining to Bond's early life and career in order to keep 007 relatively young.

Whether Bond was born in 1920, or 1924, or someone in between makes a world of difference if you're going to set a book in the late 1960's, since it can mean the difference between a Bond who's slightly past his prime but still believable as an agent, or a Bond who's just way too old to be doing this stuff anymore...

[ACE]

Like Faulks and Deaver, a great choice of novelist. Let's hope the powers that be make a great choice of novel.
Let's hope Angel's Can't Blush is great addition to the series but listen to this interview and Boyd talking about gadgets...
http://www.telegraph...Bond-novel.html

[SteveBolton]

shame they didn't go with a follow up to CB, in would of been interesting. But i'm sure he'll deliver a good Bond novel.