167 replies to this topic

[solace]

Don't know if anybody's posted this as it's from June, but Boyd says,

“He is a middle-aged man, a middle-aged spy, and that’s one of the things that interests me. The as-yet-untitled novel is set in 1969, with Bond aged 45. I’m a realistic novelist and what interests me about Bond is the human being. There will be no mountains filled with atom bombs or global plagues, no gadgets, no superpowers or preposterous enemies - there will be an entirely believable psychopath, not a preposterous psychopath. And similarly with love affairs - in my novel they will be entirely believable.”

http://www.telegraph...iddle-aged.html

Loving this.


Skyfall for me was the best fim in the series for lots of reasons but mostly because so much of Bond is revealed to us. A book doing the same would be fantastic.

[Peckinpah1976]

The quotes are definitely encouraging, but so were the ones leading up to DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE. After being let down by those two lackluster efforts, I'm not getting my hopes up this time around.

Personally I was suspicious of Devil May Care the minute Faulks opened his mouth about it; his motives for accepting the job and contempt for the character were blatantly obvious and Deaver is a bad writer period, so no surprises there.

I've always favoured Alan Furst as a Bond novelist and he and Boyd are kindred spirits both in the quality of their writing and their chosen periods and subject matters - it's a good omen IMO.

Edited by Peckinpah1976, 26 November 2012 - 01:14 PM.

[tdalton]

The quotes are definitely encouraging, but so were the ones leading up to DEVIL MAY CARE and CARTE BLANCHE. After being let down by those two lackluster efforts, I'm not getting my hopes up this time around.

Personally I was suspicious of Devil May Care the minute Faulks opened his mouth about it; his motives for accepting the job and contempt for the character were blatantly obvious and Deaver is a bad writer period, so no surprises there.

I've always favoured Alan Furst as a Bond novelist and he and Boyd are kindred spirits both in the quality of their writing and their chosen periods and subject matters - it's a good omen IMO.

I'm not at all familiar with Boyd's work, just as I wasn't with Faulks and Deaver, so I can't really get an idea as to how a Boyd-Bond novel might turn out. Hopefully he does a great job and washes away the bad taste of the past two novels. The only thing I do know is that we've heard similar things before, so after being disappointed in the finished product the last two times out, it's very difficult to get one's hopes up a third time.

He does seem much more invested in the project than Faulks ever appeared to be, I'll definitely give him that. Hopefully in the end that yields a much better novel than either Devil May Care or Carte Blanche, although that's certainly not a lofty goal.

[PPK_19]

Hmm. Isn't Bond meant to be in his late thirties? Not that it matters having a 45 year old Bond, but i'm beginning to sense a trend towards an older 007 these days.

Take Skyfall. An older agent being told "Its a young man's game" , Daniel Craig visibly older...am i right in thinking that the next set of films will be another 'reboot' with Bond being much younger/cast as a younger man?

I just hope Boyd's Bond novel won't continue with Bond being more world weary than he already is. But i trust Boyd knows what he is doing. A 'believable psychopath' sounds promising as a villain, akin to Silva.

[FOX MULDER]

I'm surprised they're going with another "literary" writer. Fleming wasn't a literary writer - by his own admission - and Bond wasn't created in the rich, deep, layered fashion characters in literary fiction are. Bond was, after all, intended to be a 'dull instrument', a vehicle of pure escapism.

The genius of Fleming was his ability to make the preposterous plausible. That's the one thing that makes him exceptional in the genre (and his wonderful talent in naming characters).

My worry with Boyd is that we're going to get a completely plausible (definitely not preposterous), believable, engrossing, Ambler-esqe spy yarn. And there's nothing wrong with that - except, perhaps, it probably won't be Bond.

[tdalton]

Well, they went with the non "literary" writer the last time around with Deaver and that didn't yield particularly strong results either. It's about finding the right author who is willing to take the right approach to the novel rather than finding someone who fits into one category or the other.

[Yellow Pinky]

Well, they went with the non "literary" writer the last time around with Deaver and that didn't yield particularly strong results either. It's about finding the right author who is willing to take the right approach to the novel rather than finding someone who fits into one category or the other.

I couldn't agree more. I can't begin to say how disappointed I was with Carte Blanche, especially after the mess that was Devil May Care. I thought that with Deaver they at least had someone who understood how to write a decent straightforward thriller, but I was wrong on that count.

[zencat]

Maybe something a little new here:

http://www.thebookbo...-that-goes.html

[Matt_13]

So long as it's better than DMC. Still disappointed Deaver's Bond got dropped. Oh well. Can't wait to see a preview.

[tdalton]

Great, Boyd is already talking about having had to use a checklist given to him by the publishers. Why can't they just let these people write what they want? You don't become an award-winning author by being bad at the craft.

With that said, the concept of an ordinary mission going horribly wrong is intriguing.

[zencat]

Great, Boyd is already talking about having had to use a checklist given to him by the publishers. Why can't they just let these people write what they want? You don't become an award-winning author by being bad at the craft.

A checklist given to him by the publishers? He doesn't say that. He seems to be saying just the opposite.

Boyd: "You have total freedom. There's no point in asking somebody like me or [Devil May Care author] Sebastian Faulks to write a Bond novel if you then say "You have to do this." There are certain boxes you have to tick, but within those relatively few parameters you're free to invent your own story."

Funnily, someone just posted a comment on my site saying they are concerned because he has freedom to do what he likes.

Fandom -- we always find a way to complain about what we like.

[tdalton]

The "certain boxes you have to tick" quote, to me, directly indicates that there are certain things that he's been told that he must include. Whether that's because he thinks he has to include them or he's actually been told he has to, that indicates that there is some form of a checklist.

[glidrose]

The "certain boxes you have to tick" quote, to me, directly indicates that there are certain things that he's been told that he must include. Whether that's because he thinks he has to include them or he's actually been told he has to, that indicates that there is some form of a checklist.

Er, yes: Bond, an assignment that involves espionage and some action. A love interest. A villain. A climax of sorts.

Just so he doesn't turn in a book about Bond visiting pubs in Brighton on his off-time, then picking up a hitchhiker and discovering counter-culture up close, culminating in the scene where he reunites mother and daughter.

Or have Bond turn out to be a closet homosexual who's spying for the Soviet Union.

Or have Bond be a minor player in the story.

Or write a novel where Bond is getting a divorce and is trying to rescue his daughter from drugs and is behind on child support payments.

Or write a book about Bond recovering from prostate removal surgery, set in an old folks home.

Or make Bond the villain.

Have I left anything out?

[The Shark]

Or have Bond be a minor player in the story.

Does Fleming's SPY qualify?

[Dustin]

Or have Bond be a minor player in the story.

Does Fleming's SPY qualify?

Or his QOS short story or TPOAL or the first third of FRWL...

The continuations are much less openminded about their themes and their genre; straight (Bond-) thrillers are clearly the staple diet.

[glidrose]

 

 

Or have Bond be a minor player in the story.

Does Fleming's SPY qualify?

 

Or his QOS short story or TPOAL or the first third of FRWL...

The continuations are much less openminded about their themes and their genre; straight (Bond-) thrillers are clearly the staple diet.

 

 

Spot on, Dustin. The continuation authors lack the freedom Fleming had.

 

And if anyone quotes "Spy" in this context, try to remember that book's chilly reception.

[Peckinpah1976]

 

Well, they went with the non "literary" writer the last time around with Deaver and that didn't yield particularly strong results either. It's about finding the right author who is willing to take the right approach to the novel rather than finding someone who fits into one category or the other.

I couldn't agree more. I can't begin to say how disappointed I was with Carte Blanche, especially after the mess that was Devil May Care. I thought that with Deaver they at least had someone who understood how to write a decent straightforward thriller, but I was wrong on that count.

 

The trouble is that Deaver doesn't know how to write a decent straightforward thriller; he overloads his narratives with 'authentic' detail at the expense of character and plot and that's before you get to considering the quality of his prose and dialogue.

 

I think 'literary' writers are the only real way to go now, as there's nobody in the commercial mainstream who writes like Fleming any more - IFP were on the right track with Faulks but didn't foresee the contempt he had for what was being asked of him. For that reason Boyd or Alan Furst (who I mentioned earlier) would be much better choices than hacks like Deaver and Lee Child IMO.

 

I think it says much about the state of modern thrillers that the only person of late to successfully replicate the success of what Fleming did, did so as part of a children's series.      

[Dustin]

The trouble is that Deaver doesn't know how to write a decent straightforward thriller; he overloads his narratives with 'authentic' detail at the expense of character and plot and that's before you get to considering the quality of his prose and dialogue.

Well, thriller today is more of a spectrum than a clearly defined genre, with numerous subcategories, one of which - the scientific/procedural police mystery - Deaver represents quite successfully. The question is whether the expertise in that field is enough recommendation for a Bond thriller, by now its own particular genre.

I think 'literary' writers are the only real way to go now, as there's nobody in the commercial mainstream who writes like Fleming any more - IFP were on the right track with Faulks but didn't foresee the contempt he had for what was being asked of him. For that reason Boyd or Alan Furst (who I mentioned earlier) would be much better choices than hacks like Deaver and Lee Child IMO.

I think it says much about the state of modern thrillers that the only person of late to successfully replicate the success of what Fleming did, did so as part of a children's series.

Perhaps it's also telling with regard to what we as fans would want from a Bond novel. A sense of wonder and adventure, mixed perhaps with the odd fantastic or bizarre element, might be what nowadays is kept for the most part from adult literature or is firmly restricted to the horror or fantasy genres. Fleming in his day had no such limitations put upon his work.

[seawolfnyy]

I think the problem with the novels post-Fleming are all that they try to emulate the films. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing (Benson's works notwithstanding), they are not the novels we are used to. Fleming's works were the product of their time. Yes, they've aged well, but his type of writing wouldn't excite the general public today and probably would not have launched a film franchise the way it did in 1962. I think for a continuation novel like this to endure, we and especially the author, need to let go of that idea and read what is given to us. Having said that, DMC and CB were both absolute messes, but I think with more polish and a better writer Carte Blanche could've been better. Devil May Care had a writer who, as many here have stated, didn't care and was not interested in what he was writing. Hopefully Boyd can change this and give us a novel that is polished and can stand on its own.

[quantumofsolace]

http://www.telegraph...lliam-Boyd.html

 

http://www.dailymail...lliam-Boyd.html

 

http://www.thebookse...et-sixties.html

 

http://www.independe...69-8406221.html

Edited by quantumofsolace, 12 December 2012 - 11:54 PM.

[FOX MULDER]

 

'I’m a realistic novelist and what interests me about Bond is the human being. 

'There will be no mountains filled with atom bombs or global plagues, no gadgets, no superpowers or preposterous enemies - there will be an entirely believable psychopath, not a preposterous psychopath.

'And similarly with love affairs - in my novel they will be entirely believable.”

 

A psychopath? I hope not. Mental illness never works well for villains, in my opinion. I prefer villainous characters who can differentiate between right and wrong, and make a conscious choice. They're much more interesting. I mean, Michael Myers from Halloween is a psychopath and, although I loved the movie, he's about as one-dimensional as you can get. 

[Walecs]

I have a good feeling about this.

[Sherlock]

I'll remain on the fence. The reason being that none of the continuation authors can seem to get it right. Not that they're bad writers, but they're all trying to write in a vein of something that simply cannot be accomplished. Meaning - writing as Ian Fleming. It's not the fault of Amis, Gardner, Benson, Faulks, or Deaver. It's just the way it is - they're not Fleming and shouldn't be given boxes to check off.

[ggl]

I'll remain on the fence. The reason being that none of the continuation authors can seem to get it right. Not that they're bad writers, but they're all trying to write in a vein of something that simply cannot be accomplished. Meaning - writing as Ian Fleming. It's not the fault of Amis, Gardner, Benson, Faulks, or Deaver. It's just the way it is - they're not Fleming and shouldn't be given boxes to check off.

Remember Lazenby trying to be like Connery?

 

Lesson 1: Nobody is Connery, but Connery.

 

Lesson 2: Nobody is Fleming, but Fleming...

[quantumofsolace]

William Boyd: The man who knows the real 007

http://www.independe...07-8420442.html

[clinkeroo]

A nice article; we learn a bit about the man, and about how he is approaching Bond, without selling the farm. Living in a townhouse in Chelsea; I wonder if that is a convenient coincidence, or if he is that set on method writing. Fascinating guy. I've only read Good Man in Africa, but now I'm going to dive a little deeper.

[Major Tallon]

Add me to the list of those who are strongly anticipating this book.  Every Bond continuation novelist will inevitably be compared to Fleming, and Fleming's style is virtually inimitable.  Still, for some reason I can't put my finger on, I'm getting a very positive vibe about this one.

[tdalton]

The article posted above does give off a sense that there could be a bit more reason for optimism than we've had in a while.  I'm still not getting my hopes up for this novel, but at the same time I at least get the feeling that it will be able to surpass Devil May Care and Carte Blanche, however easy a bar that is to hurdle.  Still, I'm rooting for this novel to succeed.  It would be nice to have a decent Bond novel for the first time in a long time.

[Dustin]

Having read a number of Boyd's previous books I am in fact guardedly optimistic about this one. I've championed Boyd for some time as a possible candidate for Bond, now I'm getting my wish. Also note how much time there still is until Boyd's book will be published; nothing here points to a rushed job. 'Project X' - as Carte Blanche was known then - was announced in May 2010 for a release in May 2011. Devil May Care was announced in July 2007 for a May 2008 release. Boyd seems to get roughly six months more of time for his work, and on top he doesn't try to emulate Fleming's writing regimen as Faulks supposedly aimed for.    

[Sherlock]

Time will tell, eventually.