18 replies to this topic

[freemo]

Hi,

Have written a short piece on how both John Gardner and Raymond Benson used the very first appearance Bond in their respective debut efforts to set the tone for what they'd be attempting to do with the character and the series throughout their tenures.

You can read it here:

http://writingsonjam....wordpress.com/

Will also be occasionally updating with other pieces.

Hope you enjoy.

Thanks,

Luke

[Dustin]

Two splendid reads there, thanks a lot for sharing these here, Freemo.

Your first article picks up in something I've long since wanted to point out myself (but always forgot about it afterwards). In NSNA Bond indeed seems to have joined the ranks of Deighton's version of the Secret Service instead of his own natural habitat. The offices look drab and at least partially decayed and the staff seems to match this atmosphere. Everything's a bit past its prime and slightly scurile, far from the usual air of understated elegance that M's domain previously exuded and that you might as well expect in No. 10.

The Gardner/Benson comparison nails it perfectly fine in my view. Into the future while distancing itself from the films vs. back to the roots with the means and toolbox of the cinematic operation manual.

Very good work indeed.

[zencat]

Great work, Luke.

[freemo]

Thanks for the feedback, guys.

Been enjoying other people's Bond work on here for so long, thought it was about time I contributed some stuff of my own.

[Major Tallon]

Both interesting articles, Freemo. With reference to your NSNA article, it seemed to me that Shrublands was also a shabbier version of the facility portrayed in Thunderball, reinforcing your point that perhaps it wasn't just the Secret Service that was shown to be in decline, but Britain itself.

[glidrose]

Cedar Leiter, not Cedar Lieter.

... "i" before "e" but not after "c" or in this case "l".

[freemo]

Cedar Leiter, not Cedar Lieter.

... "i" before "e" but not after "c" or in this case "l".

Ha. Had a could of goes and a good think at that, and still didn't get it right! Will fix when I get the chance. Thanks.

[Major Tallon]

Glad to see Gardner vs. Benson as a main page article. Once again, Freemo, nice job!

[Dustin]

Terrific article!

Perhaps interesting to note: I've often heard LR being called a typical/standard Bond adventure, with many people - myself included - feeling it was somehow 'like the films' of that time. But on closer inspection it seems the films took a turn in that LR direction only afterwards. The book to me feels like a typical John Glen Bond of the FYEO to TLD period. The films at that time shared a lot of the atmosphere (and some elements) with Gardner's books. Bond becoming a walking listening device (with Q-assistance) is a theme in LR and OP/AVTAK, with the latter picking up also the Ascot/horse angle and the villain residing in a lordly estate. Bond investigating a killer/terrorist with a Spanish name is a theme in LR and FYEO. And of course Bond fighting the henchman in-flight on a Starlifter/Hercules is a highlight of both LR and TLD. One might say Gardner's first entry inspired in one way or another the better part of a decade of EON's output.

[Simg]

It should be noted that JG did not watch any Bond movies after he started his continuation novels simply because he did not want to be influenced by the 'Movie Bond'.
This was something that had been discussed in early talks with Glidrose who were very strict on the does and don'ts of what my late Father could do.
Any references or likeness to the James Bond of the siver screen were, simply put, 'not allowed'.

SRJG

[Simon]

Pity that edict was not carried forth into the Benson era whose, 'for every man' book Bond was what Brosnan's Bond was to film.

(Although I don't blame Brosnan for this - he was rather hamstrung by scripts that had equal portions of comedy, emotion, brutality, etc moments dedicated to the various demographics)

[Dustin]

It should be noted that JG did not watch any Bond movies after he started his continuation novels simply because he did not want to be influenced by the 'Movie Bond'.
This was something that had been discussed in early talks with Glidrose who were very strict on the does and don'ts of what my late Father could do.
Any references or likeness to the James Bond of the siver screen were, simply put, 'not allowed'.

SRJG

This is truly ridiculous, considering what amount of 'inspiration' went the other way of the pipeline. And as Simon points out, with Raymond Benson all stops were pulled to establish a connection between his books and the films people saw in theatres.

It's also a bit strange given the fact the film tie-ins were written by the continuation-author-of-the-watch beginning with John Gardner. On the one hand the films weren't to be touched, on the other he had to do just that later.

[Simon]

I am not saying that Benson was encouraged to liken the books to the film (because I just don't know) so much as either it was allowed, or it was just not discouraged in the same way as alluded to above with Gardner.

[Dustin]

I think it's pretty evident giving the Bensons a 'cinema vibe' was a main goal of his run. Moreover I think that was what most people also wanted at the time, getting the books closer to the once again regular output of EON and the publicity it provided. TFOD to me is coming particularly close with its Jaguar with micro-drone, self-sealing coachwork and numerous other gadgets. It contains action scenes you would hardly have expected in BookBond, and would seem more at home in DAD.

[Vodka Martino]

Great article, Luke! Geez, I haven't been here in some time. Not since about three months after "QoS" was released. Nice work on the CBn website, folks!

I greatly preferred John Gardner's Bond novels to Benson's. I think Gardner had a tough job on his hands resurrecting a literary character that hadn't appeared in print for fifteen years, and one that most people related to through Roger Moore's portrayals on-screen.

Luke, a well-written and thought-out piece that you've done here, mate. Very insightful. Benson's plots always struck me as too 'filmable' and too laden with FilmBond sensibilities.

And @ Simg, your dad was a great thriller writer. I read "The Liquidator" shortly before buying "Licence Renewed" in '81 and thought to myself that Bond was in good hands. "Icebreaker" was a particular standout, and there was a certain passage in "Cold" (Chapter- Water Carnival) ,where Bond crashes a helicopter into a lake and has brief reminiscences about his life and career as the chopper is sinking, that brought tears to my eyes when I read it.
He did sterling work, sir.

[glidrose]

It should be noted that JG did not watch any Bond movies after he started his continuation novels simply because he did not want to be influenced by the 'Movie Bond'.

Well he did admit that he did see NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN.

[Dustin]

This was something that had been discussed in early talks with Glidrose who were very strict on the does and don'ts of what my late Father could do.
Any references or likeness to the James Bond of the siver screen were, simply put, 'not allowed'.

SRJG

This keeps bugging me. We've heard the Wood tie-ins were forced on Glidrose and that they weren't happy with both of them (as well as the Pearson book, but that just as an aside). There was Michael G Wilson's remark about the continuations not being stuff for the Bond films any more, which must have been made in the early 1980s. Has there been some fallout between the two, Glidrose and EON? And was this quarrel settled later? I seem to remember favourable comments about Faulks's book from EON's side (despite never going so far as to suggest an actual chance of the book being picked up by them).

[glidrose]

This was something that had been discussed in early talks with Glidrose who were very strict on the does and don'ts of what my late Father could do.
Any references or likeness to the James Bond of the siver screen were, simply put, 'not allowed'.

SRJG

This keeps bugging me. We've heard the Wood tie-ins were forced on Glidrose and that they weren't happy with both of them (as well as the Pearson book, but that just as an aside). There was Michael G Wilson's remark about the continuations not being stuff for the Bond films any more, which must have been made in the early 1980s. Has there been some fallout between the two, Glidrose and EON? And was this quarrel settled later? I seem to remember favourable comments about Faulks's book from EON's side (despite never going so far as to suggest an actual chance of the book being picked up by them).

http://debrief.comma...corporate-info/

Whoops. You're already familiar with that thread. Sorry Dustin.

Edited by glidrose, 17 August 2012 - 12:31 AM.

[freemo]

Some thoughts and stuff on that chapter of Live and Let Die:

James Bond Goes to Harlem

Enjoy.