167 replies to this topic

[AMC Hornet]

Let's hope Angel's Can't Blush is great addition to the series

Where does that come from?

[Marketto007]

The Telegraph - William Boyd talks about Bond



xxx

[tdalton]

I'm at least encouraged to hear what sounds to be genuine enthusiasm coming from Boyd regarding the project, which is something we haven't had in much abudance from the continuation authors of the recent years.

I'm also encouraged by the idea that the publishers are allowing Boyd to write "his" novel rather than having to mimic Ian Fleming, which largely contributed to the disappointment surrounding DMC.

[Loomis]

The Telegraph - William Boyd talks about Bond

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-d6P6fV4qg

xxx

Well, I think there will definitely be ladies, and that's part of the appeal of writing a Bond novel: you know there are certain things that have to occur, that there have to be at least two love affairs with very interesting, possibly deadly, women, also those relationships with M, his boss, Moneypenny, Q Section that make his various gadgets. You would be a fool not to include these in your novel, because they're what make the world of Bond so beguiling, but you can give them your own spin, you know, what particular gadget would Q Section come up with in my novel, You'll have to wait and see.

It would seem that Boyd's idea of Bond comes more from the films than from the Fleming novels. The "at least two love affairs with very interesting, possibly deadly, women" aspect is very much a hallmark of the films, not the novels. Q and his gadgets also have a higher profile in the Eon series than in the Fleming canon.

[Peaceful]

Thanks for pointing this out Loomis, I makes me think we're gonna get another DMC *sigh*
If only someone could have a word in Mr Boyd's ear about it !

[Jack Spang]

Thanks for pointing this out Loomis, I makes me think we're gonna get another DMC *sigh*
If only someone could have a word in Mr Boyd's ear about it !

I didn't find DMC reminiscent of the films. The Benson novels were horribly like the films though.

"It would seem that Boyd's idea of Bond comes more from the films than from the Fleming novels. The "at least two love affairs with very interesting, possibly deadly, women" aspect is very much a hallmark of the films, not the novels. Q and his gadgets also have a higher profile in the Eon series than in the Fleming canon."

I thought of this too when I listened to the interview. It is a slight worry. I hope he picks up the Fleming books and re-reads them like I'm doing at the moment for about the 7th time. LOL

Edited by Jack Spang, 15 April 2012 - 04:01 AM.

[tdalton]

While it does seem as though he's talking about the project more in terms of the style of the film series than Fleming's work, given that the project is set in the 1960s, I would be completely satisfied if Boyd delivered a well written and exciting novel that is reminiscent of EON's Dr. No, From Russia With Love, or Thunderball rather than something along the lines of Devil May Care or Carte Blanche.

[Jack Spang]

Yes, that would certainly be better than CB or DMC. A book reminscent of the literary FRWL or Dr No would be the icing on the cake! That's too much to hope for though.

[Dustin]

Gadgets...

Two love affairs...

Deadly women...


Argh!

[CasinoKiller]

That apart, I felt he sort of had the right approach. He addressed the necessity of adhering to the formula to some degree, but he's also promised to add his own twist to it.

[Dustin]

There was a nifty piece on Boyd in this Saturday's Independent, written by John Walsh. Thanks to Simon Gardner for alerting me to this!

William Boyd: Our man in 007 land


With an invitation to pen the next James Bond novel, this most accomplished of storytellers is poised to win a whole new set of admirers

When it was announced on Wednesday that William Boyd had accepted an invitation by the Ian Fleming estate to write a new James Bond novel, fans of his recent books won't have been much surprised. From Restless in 2006 to the recent Waiting for Sunrise, by way of Ordinary Thunderstorms (2009), Boyd has ploughed a furrow that's perplexed admirers of his earlier "literary" works such as his Whitbread-winning debut, A Good Man in Africa and the Booker-shortlisted An Ice-Cream War.

Boyd's late-middle-period books are thrillers with classic ingredients: spies, femmes fatales, men on the run, men going underground, daring escapes, untrustworthy foreigners, assumed identities and a casual sadism that would have impressed Ian Fleming. In Ordinary Thunderstorms, our hero is pursued by an ex-SAS psychopath called Jonjo Case who likes to flay the skin from his victim's hands and fingers. The protagonist in Waiting for Sunrise, a dim but likeable actor called Lysander discovers an aptitude for torture by forcing Brillo pads into a man's mouth and applying electrodes, plugged into the mains.

To the full article here:

[Morgan]

Don't know how anyone else feels but personally I think the decsion by Ian Fleming Publications to hire a new author (William Boyd) that puts Bond back in the 60's after Jeffery Deaver's great character reboot is a step in the wrong direction. Trying to recapture classic Fleming has been done enough already, so let's keep the momentum started by Deaver going by keeping Bond current.

[Jeao007]

Wrong place to post this, sir.

Edited by Jeao007, 16 April 2012 - 08:57 PM.

[Dustin]

Perhaps one has to approach this from another angle.

Reading James Bond has become an uncommon concept, the very idea of which today is buried under an enormous amount of iconic images and elements known for the better part of 50 years of cinema history. Elements which by now have become so irrevocably intertwined with Bond it's nearly impossible to divide them from the original incarnation of the character. If we ask any number of Bond fans - both varieties, casual and enthusiastic - what they expect from a Bond novel I feel sure we'd get from 90 per cent answers like: vodka martini, Aston Martin, dinner jacket (often called tux; same idea), femmes fatale, hollow volcanoes, submarine cars, gadgets and so on. None of which are an integral part of the Fleming books, albeit some may appear in a milder, less outlandish form. If we ask the same number of ordinary readers the answers will be much the same. People in their majority probably expect a Bond book to be a written Bond film today.

That is why the more recent continuations always have an eye on cinema Bond too (despite Faulks's unoriginal and tedious use of reminiscences and names from earlier events Fleming had used in his time). They do not trust their characters and plots to carry an entire book and fill in the blanks with what they consider their version of the iconic images everybody knows already.

And that is also the reason why I suppose a novel dealing with specific gaps Fleming left for those coming after him is not likely to happen. A new Bond novel will inevitably meet with customer expectations along the lines of Aston Martin and vodka martini. You can exchange a few of the brands, turn the Aston to a Bentley to throw a bone to the die-hard Fleming buffs. But in the end the mixture will have to be closer to the recipe of Eon than to Fleming.

Now, what reaction would a book starting out in Vladivostok and ending at the KGB headquarters Moscow get? A book where Bond doesn't even know who he is? Where he's just left a Japanese fisherman island and a pregnant girl? Or a book where Bond is no longer 007; or one where he's uncomfortable around M and vice versa?

People would just not accept the idea. The very least would have to be a clumsy and pedestrian foreword, explainig the whys and why-nots and circumstances of the setting and background because most readers will likely not be familiar with the original Flemings. Even with that readers are bound to be disappointed if the Aston Martin/femme fatale/vodka martini ratio isn't met.

Fleming himself was fascinated by such masters of the crime series as Rex Stout and Georges Simenon. What intrigued him was not just the quality but also the frequency of the output and how they managed to keep their characters in the air so long and their readers coming back for more. Part of the answer was, they didn't develop their characters a lot, not even over decades. Nero Wolfe, Archie Goodwin and Jules Maigret kept pretty much the same characters in the first of their books as they did in the last. Changes were kept to a minimum or had no lasting effect. So readers could pick up whatever book in the series and were seldom going to meet with circumstances they didn't understand because they had missed something. Does that sound familiar?

Try starting a current crime series with book five or ten or whatever. Chances are a lot of the situation and relations between characters remain mysterious, perhaps downright indecipherable without knowledge of earlier entries. Fleming avoided that kind of confusion by always coming back to square one. The only book requiring some idea of the previous one was YOLT. The most baffling start of TMWTGG comes without warning in YOLT and is explained by events that happened entirely off stage. The general idea always remained to keep the spiel going and the readers for the most part on familiar ground. While his best and most outstanding works are the books where Fleming just threw the recipe out of the window, the general disposition of his character remained remarkably unscathed by even the worst nightmares he went through. Even close to breakdown, even as a burnt-out case, Bond never really loses the ability to resurrect.

Chances are every continuation will follow this general pattern from now on.

Edited by Dustin, 11 June 2012 - 08:23 PM.

[glidrose]

Dustin makes some interesting points.

First off, had a continuation author written TSWLM, YOLT or the short stories QoS or Octopussy, readers would say this isn't Bond. The originator - in this case Fleming - can get away with just about anything in the name of Bond.

If you still don't believe me, consider those complaints that Moore-Bond wearing a clown outfit in Octopussy is nothing like Fleming. As we now know, Fleming's notebook of ideas did have a story in mind where Bond would get into a fight with a KGB agent while both wore clown outfits at a dinner party. Imagine the response if a continuation novelist attempted such a scene.

Also, the world has changed so much since Fleming's day that it's impossible to write a post-Fleming era Bond novel and be true to Fleming's world. I suspect that if Fleming were brought back from the dead and proceeded to write more Bond novels, people would say his new works aren't as good as his original stories.

I don't think it's even possible to write book Bond any more without dragging film Bond into the mix. As Dustin says we've got 50 years of iconic images to contend with.

Ultimately, people don't go into the continuation novels expecting to read the Fleming novel Fleming never wrote. They go into these things expecting to read a James Bond novel. And like it or not, the film franchise has iconized this Bond chap more than Fleming ever did. I would argue that the film franchise has also explored the Bond mythos more deeply than Fleming ever did. In short, film Bond has transcended book Bond.

[Jack Spang]

Dustin makes some interesting points.

First off, had a continuation author written TSWLM, YOLT or the short stories QoS or Octopussy, readers would say this isn't Bond. The originator - in this case Fleming - can get away with just about anything in the name of Bond.

If you still don't believe me, consider those complaints that Moore-Bond wearing a clown outfit in Octopussy is nothing like Fleming. As we now know, Fleming's notebook of ideas did have a story in mind where Bond would get into a fight with a KGB agent while both wore clown outfits at a dinner party. Imagine the response if a continuation novelist attempted such a scene.

Also, the world has changed so much since Fleming's day that it's impossible to write a post-Fleming era Bond novel and be true to Fleming's world. I suspect that if Fleming were brought back from the dead and proceeded to write more Bond novels, people would say his new works aren't as good as his original stories.

I don't think it's even possible to write book Bond any more without dragging film Bond into the mix. As Dustin says we've got 50 years of iconic images to contend with.

Ultimately, people don't go into the continuation novels expecting to read the Fleming novel Fleming never wrote. They go into these things expecting to read a James Bond novel. And like it or not, the film franchise has iconized this Bond chap more than Fleming ever did. I would argue that the film franchise has also explored the Bond mythos more deeply than Fleming ever did. In short, film Bond has transcended book Bond.

If this is what has happened then I can no longer really look forward to these novels.

I don't mind a Bond without the chauvenism, xenophobia and excess smoking because I don't believe these are major aspects of his character but there are other facets to the literary Bond's personality that can remain intact today.

Edited by Jack Spang, 17 April 2012 - 09:35 AM.

[Dustin]

First off, had a continuation author written TSWLM, YOLT or the short stories QoS or Octopussy, readers would say this isn't Bond. The originator - in this case Fleming - can get away with just about anything in the name of Bond.

If you still don't believe me, consider those complaints that Moore-Bond wearing a clown outfit in Octopussy is nothing like Fleming. As we now know, Fleming's notebook of ideas did have a story in mind where Bond would get into a fight with a KGB agent while both wore clown outfits at a dinner party. Imagine the response if a continuation novelist attempted such a scene.

Also, the world has changed so much since Fleming's day that it's impossible to write a post-Fleming era Bond novel and be true to Fleming's world. I suspect that if Fleming were brought back from the dead and proceeded to write more Bond novels, people would say his new works aren't as good as his original stories.

I don't think it's even possible to write book Bond any more without dragging film Bond into the mix. As Dustin says we've got 50 years of iconic images to contend with.

You might even argue Bond himself was one of the driving forces behind the way in which our world has changed, for better or worse. After all Bond is doubtlessly by now also a popular figure of history, despite his fictional nature. In effect the continuation in modern day calls either for a Bond character completely unaware of (and unbothered by) the change he himself helped instigate; a kind of literary feedback loop. Or Bond acknowledges the passage of time - maybe even comments on it - but denies his own role in the greater scheme of things and has to find new ways to distinguish himself from the mainstream. Both options seem to lack attraction to me and I can understand why the pressure is on to avoid such complications by the current fad to either keep to 60s period or aim for reboot.

Ultimately, people don't go into the continuation novels expecting to read the Fleming novel Fleming never wrote. They go into these things expecting to read a James Bond novel. And like it or not, the film franchise has iconized this Bond chap more than Fleming ever did. I would argue that the film franchise has also explored the Bond mythos more deeply than Fleming ever did. In short, film Bond has transcended book Bond.

My thoughts exactly.

If this is what has happened then I can no longer really look forward to these novels.

I don't mind a Bond without the chauvenism, xenophobia and excess smoking because I don't believe these are major aspects of his character but there are other facets to the literary Bond's personality that can remain intact today.

Well, I would say it depends. Christopher Wood has shown already you can write a film tie-in as if it was literature (thus following in the tracks of Fleming himself - whom Wood didn't like a lot - who tried to write thrillers as if they were literature). I suppose the two novelisations by Wood would sell well above average and meet with positive reviews by ecstatic readers, were they to be published as original Bond continuations today.

They cover exactly the middle grounds between dreary, beefed-up versions of the 19th incarnation of shooting scripts, which often used to be sold as film tie-in until a few years ago, and that less screen-time oriented, less action-y material that Fleming wrote. If the Woods weren't tie-ins to old films they would be probably the template of what an ordinary reader today would expect when picking up a book with 'James Bond 007' on the cover.

[Peckinpah1976]

They cover exactly the middle grounds between dreary, beefed-up versions of the 19th incarnation of shooting scripts, which often used to be sold as film tie-in until a few years ago, and that less screen-time oriented, less action-y material that Fleming wrote.

Oddly enough, that's exactly how I feel about the Wood books but I think they're rather overrated by folks around here; yes they're well above-average as film novelizations go but they are still just that at the end of the day.

As for Boyd; I don't think it's a question of period vs modern when it comes to the weaknesses of his immediate predecessors - they simply didn't write very good books IMO (which should be of no surprise when it comes to Deaver, who's talentless hackery is only a few notches above someone like James Patterson and Faulks clearly thought it was beneath him and wasn't at all interested until IFP told him he could do it as a pastiche and knock it out in six weeks...). I suppose finding a good writer who's actually willing to take the character on is hard enough, so when you do find one it's only natural that you'll let them play to their strengths and Boyd writes period thrillers, so...

Edited by Peckinpah1976, 20 April 2012 - 06:39 AM.

[[dark]]

I picked up Boyd's Ordinary Thunderstorms from the library this week. Looking forward to giving it a read.

[Dustin]

They cover exactly the middle grounds between dreary, beefed-up versions of the 19th incarnation of shooting scripts, which often used to be sold as film tie-in until a few years ago, and that less screen-time oriented, less action-y material that Fleming wrote.

Oddly enough, that's exactly how I feel about the Wood books but I think they're rather overrated by folks around here; yes they're well above-average as film novelizations go but they are still just that at the end of the day.

That is of course true. I suppose the appeal of the Wood books -at least for me - partially lies therein that these books succeed in the "what if Fleming had written a novelisation?" department. Not just does the language hit the tone for the most part - and without that painfully unnerving sound of mimicking; - Wood is also providing some of the overall spirit that you'd expect from Fleming.

It's small things like the KGB/SMERSH scheme that's supposed to see Bond and a dead girl among the debris of a drug party. Or Bond retrieving his gun from an Olivetti travel typewriter. Or the MR PTS chapter that delves into the horrors of Bond tumbling towards the surface minus parachute. And mentions a chance encounter with members from the Red Devils that provided him with invaluable information about the physics of sky diving and the necessary manoeuvres to reach the other man.

Just the odd detail to save the books from the outlandishness that their counterparts on the screen depict. When you think of it these situations are really the same as Inspector Closeau in a Pink Panther film being attacked by his Asian servant in multiple deadly ways; it's all just part of the ride and Bond rolls with the punches. But the meat Wood puts on the bones makes the crucial difference, one can - for the time it takes to read the page at least - really imagine Fleming might have come up with similar stuff. As continuations go this is already a major feat.

As for Boyd; I don't think it's a question of period vs modern when it comes to the weaknesses of his immediate predecessors - they simply didn't write very good books IMO (which should be of no surprise when it comes to Deaver, who's talentless hackery is only a few notches above someone like James Patterson and Faulks clearly thought it was beneath him and wasn't at all interested until IFP told him he could do it as a pastiche and knock it out in six weeks...). I suppose finding a good writer who's actually willing to take the character on is hard enough, so when you do find one it's only natural that you'll let them play to their strengths and Boyd writes period thrillers, so...

Also possible IFP just go out asking people they think would be interested (and interesting) and leave the rest to them. Within limits, of course. Boyd doing a period book is not surprising, given his impressive mastery of the subject. Also I don't see him go with the premise Deaver employed for his reboot. But all that isn't to say they may not switch back and forth between the two (or three or however many) timelines. What could keep them from? Fans of Deaver and his ODG ultra-secret secret service could see a return of that stage and those protagonists to the 007-Theatre of Thrills.

[Harmsway]

I'm not really looking forward to Boyd's new novel, having suffered the back-to-back blows of DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE, but there's a chance he'll come up with something readable, even if it does have the whiff of the cinematic James Bond about it. The problem with DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE, more than anything, is that they're boring.

Benson's novels were as devoted to the cinematic Bond as all get-out--they read like novelized movie scripts--but their problem was more with the prose than anything else. Look past the inadequate prose and there's a lot of clever, colorful situations throughout those novels (stuff the likes of which I wish EON had been so bold to give us during those same years). If all Boyd gives us is a Benson novel with far more elegant prose, I'll be more satisfied than I am with DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE.

[DamnCoffee]

I see your point. I haven't gotten round to reading Devil May Care yet, but I have read Carte Blanche, and I was one of the people that highly enjoyed it. So I'm looking forward to seeing what Boyd brings to the table. I've just recently been introduced to the Bond novels, so I'm so much more enthusiastic about them, as I was last year.

[glidrose]

Interesting coincidence... Boyd and IFP have the same agent.

Geller also represents John le Carré, Daniel Silva, David Wolstencroft, among others (Nelson Mandala! Sacha Baron Cohen!)


Article Link

Jonny Geller is the literary agent for the Ian Fleming estate – and also, as it happens, William Boyd’s literary agent. He says it’s not just the previous books that present a challenge for Boyd – but rather, the global phenomenon that is Bond.

“The fascinating thing about the James Bond/Ian Fleming world,” says Geller, “is that there’s a large number of people who are kind of experts. You can find them on the Internet, on blog sites – they know a huge amount about each of the books and the story of Ian Fleming himself, so they’re quite an exacting audience.”

Still, both Boyd and his literary agent stress that this will be Boyd’s book, and that he’ll take it just as seriously as all his other novels.

Boyd says that his novel will go back to classic Bond – it’ll be set in 1969, five years after Ian Fleming died. He says he’ll have to imagine what Fleming might have been writing about then, had he been alive.

“I was alive in 1969, so it’s a curious combination of my own personal memories of that period, and taking on the whole kind of cold war geopolitical setup, and having tremendous fun.”

[Dustin]

Interesting find. Geller (and thus Boyd,too?) apparently is aware of places like this. Reads almost like a white flag, doesn't it?

[glidrose]

Ours is not the only Bond Boyd!

[Yellow Pinky]

I'm not really looking forward to Boyd's new novel, having suffered the back-to-back blows of DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE, but there's a chance he'll come up with something readable, even if it does have the whiff of the cinematic James Bond about it. The problem with DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE, more than anything, is that they're boring.

Benson's novels were as devoted to the cinematic Bond as all get-out--they read like novelized movie scripts--but their problem was more with the prose than anything else. Look past the inadequate prose and there's a lot of clever, colorful situations throughout those novels (stuff the likes of which I wish EON had been so bold to give us during those same years). If all Boyd gives us is a Benson novel with far more elegant prose, I'll be more satisfied than I am with DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE.

I was all set to add to this thread when I read what Harmsway wrote and realized I would have only made the identical observations in different words. I found both DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE painfully boring and was not surprised by a single beat in either of them. I was honestly shocked to have this opinion after all the early praise for CARTE BLANCH. Benson's attempts were often interesting in concept but so encumbered with clumsy and cliched prose on every page they were almost unreadable.

[zencat]

Some news details from the man himself:

http://www.thebookbo...ails-about.html

[Dustin]

May I say, this is splendid news? I'm very relieved to read this!

[5thstreet]

Yes, this is great news!

[Odd Jobbies]

Sounds very promising.