36 replies to this topic

[CasinoKiller]

Its the 60th anniversary novel after all, so it makes sense for things to come full circle.

I think its entirely possible Boyd intends his novel to be a conclusion to the story of Ian Fleming's original literary 007. He's already stated that he's writing an older middle-aged Bond. Then there's also the fact that Bond will be 45 in this book. 45 is the age at which, according to the Moonraker novel, Bond would face mandatory retirement from the 00 Section.

So could this be the story of Bond's last mission? Will we learn the ultimate fate of the original 007? Does he retire to a desk job, and possibly settle down with a woman...or does he die in the line of duty, as he long expected he would?

[AMC Hornet]

Read Kate Westbrook's Final Fling.

I don't think anyone will - or at least should - ever slay the golden goo7e in any of his incarnations - Fleming himsel tried it twice, but it never seemed to take. After all, there's no future in it.

Respecting Bond's age, and seeing him granted an extension past 45 opens the door for future continuations.. Anyway, it's too early to speculate about what Boyd intends or doesn't intend to do.

[Dustin]

I cannot see Boyd killing Bond in this. I suppose you can do a lot today when you get the gig from IFP. But a few things will be strictly verboten:

• Bond coming out of the closet
• Bond defecting
• Bond being killed or losing - on a permanent basis - parts of his anatomy or eyesight or hearing or sanity (though that would not bother some, who perhaps might not even notice anything's missing)

That said I strongly suspect Boyd's book could be meant as a kind of closing, even though it's probably neither a permanent one, nor will it mean anything for the next continuation. Think THE LONELY SILVER RAIN, probably without the offspring angle. Boyd most likely will leave the door open for anybody coming after him.

Edited by Dustin, 19 August 2012 - 06:59 PM.

[tdalton]

I think it would be very interesting to see a Bond novel (or film, for that matter) that explores the concept of Bond's final mission, or otherwise giving Bond's arc, loose as it may be, some kind of a conclusion. I doubt that Boyd's novel will explore that concept, but it would be something that I'd be interested to see at some point down the line.

[Dustin]

I think it would be very interesting to see a Bond novel (or film, for that matter) that explores the concept of Bond's final mission, or otherwise giving Bond's arc, loose as it may be, some kind of a conclusion. I doubt that Boyd's novel will explore that concept, but it would be something that I'd be interested to see at some point down the line.

That's Rooster Cogburn terrain. I suppose it's not impossible, it just leaves very little room for further development. Basically it means an old or burnt-out case, confronted with a near impossible task and succeeding against all odds, probably by setting his own - practically spent - life on the line. It is intriguing. But I doubt it is ever touched in anything 'official', beyond fanfic perhaps.

[Odd Jobbies]

Good thread!

Well, it can't do any more to end the series than Deaver's Carte Blanche. It's never taken me soooo long to get through a novel, so tedious is the unnecessary detail of every action or thought on Bond's part. Sadly Carte Blanche present a dull soldier who works by the numbers.

Sure, it's picked up and become a little more interesting just before the end, but that's far to late the hero for this monstrous plodder.

I look forward to Boyd's effort - hopefully we'll have some adventure and some drama, rather than a procedural essay: CSI:007.... dear oh dear.

They certainly won't allow him to die, of commit any of the cardinal sins that Dustin has drawn up, rest assured.

[MattofSteel]

I tried it once in a fan-fictiony way for cinematic Bond. Would have been a 5th Brosnan-type movie. Was an interesting challenge.

[AMC Hornet]

I think it would be very interesting to see a Bond novel (or film, for that matter) that explores the concept of Bond's final mission, or otherwise giving Bond's arc, loose as it may be, some kind of a conclusion. I doubt that Boyd's novel will explore that concept, but it would be something that I'd be interested to see at some point down the line.

That's what was supposed to be happening with NSNA, but it turned out to be more of a a swan song for Connery than for Bond.

Faulkes' Devil May Care was also supposed to have us worried that the investigation of Gorner might be Bond's last kick at the cat (before or after Colonel Sun? - hard to tell) so I'd prefer not to see that territory covered again.

So Bond will be 45 - so was Roger Moore when he started playing Bond. I'll be content to suspend disbelief and just enjoy the story when it appears.

[Double Naught spy]

I'm probably the minority on this one - but kill of or retire (the literary) 007! Maybe not with Boyd's upcoming novel, but it should happen sooner than later. For all of you who have just stood up in horror (and dropped your white cat off your lap in the process - LOL!), please hear me out. Like you, I am a mega-Bond fan. Having said that, I do believe that it's time that (the literary) Bond die, or at least fade away into a peaceful retirement. At least, I thnk he should "offf-camera" so to speak.

I don't say this in an attempt to be sensational... quite then contrary. The notion that a literary character based so closely in reality can be (what? 80+ years old in 2012) alive and kicking after so many years diminishes his (literary) legacy. At the risk of contradicting myself, I loved the Gardner and Benson novels, primarily for the Herculean efforts those authors attempted in achieving the edict-from-on-high that they bring our hero into the modern age.. However, Mr. Foulkes has the right idea in putting 007 in the late 1960's. The more the literary Bond is pushed into the 21st century, the more he devolved into an un-aging Super-Man. I firmly say, "He deserves better."

Take a moment to look at Arthur Conan Doyle's treatment of Sherlock Holmes. During Doyle's stories, (like Fleming, he too wanted to "kill off" his character - I can only conclude that creating a sucessful charater must eventually fall under the "be careful of what you wish for"), he wrote about his sleuth losing his edge and finally retiring. Considering that this fate is destined to all of US - why deny the literary James Bond those same peaceful final days? If you read carefully Fleming's novels, it's clear that James Bond didn't necessarily want to go out in a "blaze of glory" (i.e. he didn't have a 'death-wish' and actuallly mused about retirement.) Not to be snarky, but I didn't hear any complaints when the Moneypenny Diaries basically put our hero out to the proverable "pasture." Let's face it - you could had no problem wrapping your mind around the fact that "he" was 007 (trying to be vague here so I don't spoil things for folks who have yet to read the Moneypenny trilogy.)

Again, I'm not some 007-hater. Much to the contrary - I want a 007 novel to read every year (which I can't say has been the case for the last decade! Right?) I'm not calling on the future 007 writers to pen a novel where our hero dies a heroic death, or even one where he retires into obscurtity. I just think that (put in the right author's hands), there is a vertible gold mind of "Untold Cold War" stories that could be created for 007 within the gaps of Fleming's novels (except of course between From Russia With Love / Doctor No and You Only Live Twice / The Man With the Golden Gun) that there is really no need in 2012 for a capable author to not be able to "fill-in-the-blanks" to Bond's adventures while at MI6.

[Simon]

Bearing in mind the complete lack of continuity in both literary and film world, even if Bond is killed in this book (never going to happen), he will still pop up in future novels.

I am afraid at this stage, it is a pointless question and trying to resolve continuity at this stage probably says more about you/one trying assign order to a world where none can be assigned.

[Odd Jobbies]

I am afraid at this stage, it is a pointless question and trying to resolve continuity at this stage probably says more about you/one trying assign order to a world where none can be assigned.

Harsh! Have you some Rorschach inkblots you can show us too

[CasinoKiller]

Bearing in mind the complete lack of continuity in both literary and film world, even if Bond is killed in this book (never going to happen), he will still pop up in future novels.

I am afraid at this stage, it is a pointless question and trying to resolve continuity at this stage probably says more about you/one trying assign order to a world where none can be assigned.

Which is kinda the point. There are so many (loose) continuities for Bond, that I feel they can safely 'retire' the original Fleming version of the character; James Bond, as a pop culture figure, is ageless. He will be constantly reinvented and reinterpreted. But I'm talking about James Bond, the original character created by Ian Fleming in 1952 and who starred in 12 novels and 9 short stories.

Fleming's Bond novels WERE largely episodic, and yet, unlike the films there was a kind of character arc for Bond through the course of the series, especially towards the end. Bond starts out as the perfect machine, Her Majesties loyal soldier...but as time went by, he started to become a bit of a tortured soul inside as he often contemplated the nature of his work, as seen in the first pages of Goldfinger. Then of course, there was the whole tragedy with Tracy in OHMSS, Bond's subsequent spiritual 'death' of sorts due to amnesia in YOLT, his captivity by the Soviets, his being brainwashed to kill M and his 'reconstruction' by the SIS psychiatrists. Basically, by the end of Fleming's series, Bond was pretty much a broken man, albeit one who still had fight in him. So I would be interested to see Boyd possibly bringing his story to some kind of a conclusion...

[Simon]

So I would be interested to see Boyd possibly bringing his story to some kind of a conclusion...

Ok - but so long as you accept it will be a temporary conclusion until the next time an author tires of a contemporary c2000 story and again goes back to the '50s. I am wondering whether the term existentialism applies. Maybe someone better informed could complete or correct this thought.

Sorry Oddjob, I had to look up the inkblots reference... but consider me now thus informed. Interesting.

[CasinoKiller]

So I would be interested to see Boyd possibly bringing his story to some kind of a conclusion...

Ok - but so long as you accept it will be a temporary conclusion until the next time an author tires of a contemporary c2000 story and again goes back to the '50s. I am wondering whether the term existentialism applies. Maybe someone better informed could complete or correct this thought.

Sorry Oddjob, I had to look up the inkblots reference... but consider me now thus informed. Interesting.

So I would be interested to see Boyd possibly bringing his story to some kind of a conclusion...

Ok - but so long as you accept it will be a temporary conclusion until the next time an author tires of a contemporary c2000 story and again goes back to the '50s. I am wondering whether the term existentialism applies. Maybe someone better informed could complete or correct this thought.

Sorry Oddjob, I had to look up the inkblots reference... but consider me now thus informed. Interesting.

If ever an author got to write a story which ended Fleming's Bond and rendered him inaccessible to future writers...I think the 60th anniversary novel would be the best bet!

But yeah, a future novelist COULD theoretically ignore Boyd's novel...the same way Boyd is likely ignoring Faulks, and Faulks in turn ignored Kingsley Amis.

[Dustin]

As far as the question of ignoring previous works by other continuation authors is concerned, it seems all of them were free to do as they pleased. The most curious example would be Benson's THE FACTS OF DEATH that especially referenced Gardner's hallmark adventure FOR SPECIAL SERVICES, but conspicuously left out Cedar Leiter. And strangely enough it works.

[MajorB]

Someone could certainly write a Death of Bond novel, but given that we no longer have anything resembling a continuing saga in the new books, it would just be yet another one-off endeavor. Someone else would then come along and write a book completely ignoring the death. Which would make the novel more of an arbitrary "what-if" exercise (there are counltess ways he could die) than anything that feels final. The only reason to kill the "original" Bond would be to create a "new" one in a new continuity, sort of like what Deaver attempted. But I can't see IFP wanting to close the door to other stories about the "original" 007.

[AMC Hornet]

Jim Hatfield's greatly over-rated (by those who haven't read it) fanfic The Killing Zone did just that. Bond is garotted to death and nearly decapitated with fine piano wire. I'm not sure which source Hatfield lifted that sequence from (this story was cobbled together from other works in much the same way as was Assassin of Secrets), but the funeral at sea finale was copied word-for word from the novelization of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Anything similar that anyone else were to write would be greeted with just as much disbelief, rejection and contempt.

So, does anybody really believe that an official 'death of 007' novel would be a good idea?

Put me down in the 'no' column.

[Jeff007]

When Fleming was asked by the CBC at Goldeneye if "Is possible that we'll read a James Bond novel in which the hero is killed at the end?", his response was. "I couldn't possibly afford it."

I'm sure it's the same with the IFP.

[Simon]

All of which, coincidentally, should bring to an end this thread.

[CasinoKiller]

When Fleming was asked by the CBC at Goldeneye if "Is possible that we'll read a James Bond novel in which the hero is killed at the end?", his response was. "I couldn't possibly afford it."

I'm sure it's the same with the IFP.

Well, it wouldn't be a 'permanent' death in any sense...given the way 007 continuity works.

[OmarB]

Its the 60th anniversary novel after all, so it makes sense for things to come full circle.

I think its entirely possible Boyd intends his novel to be a conclusion to the story of Ian Fleming's original literary 007. He's already stated that he's writing an older middle-aged Bond. Then there's also the fact that Bond will be 45 in this book. 45 is the age at which, according to the Moonraker novel, Bond would face mandatory retirement from the 00 Section.

So could this be the story of Bond's last mission? Will we learn the ultimate fate of the original 007? Does he retire to a desk job, and possibly settle down with a woman...or does he die in the line of duty, as he long expected he would?

No, in Gardner's books he is older, the 00 section has been dissolved (so the mandatory retirement does not count) and he's the only active agent at that time. I can see Boyd's book bridging the TMWTGG/Col Sun/DMC/License Renewed years. Not that he intetionally plans to, but any post Ian, pre 80's set Bond novel is gonna fall into that slot.

[CasinoKiller]

Its the 60th anniversary novel after all, so it makes sense for things to come full circle.

I think its entirely possible Boyd intends his novel to be a conclusion to the story of Ian Fleming's original literary 007. He's already stated that he's writing an older middle-aged Bond. Then there's also the fact that Bond will be 45 in this book. 45 is the age at which, according to the Moonraker novel, Bond would face mandatory retirement from the 00 Section.

So could this be the story of Bond's last mission? Will we learn the ultimate fate of the original 007? Does he retire to a desk job, and possibly settle down with a woman...or does he die in the line of duty, as he long expected he would?

No, in Gardner's books he is older, the 00 section has been dissolved (so the mandatory retirement does not count) and he's the only active agent at that time. I can see Boyd's book bridging the TMWTGG/Col Sun/DMC/License Renewed years. Not that he intetionally plans to, but any post Ian, pre 80's set Bond novel is gonna fall into that slot.

Again...different continuities. Gardener's Bond is a different continuity from Fleming's Bond (even though they share a common backstory). For instance, there's no way Gardner's Bond fought in WW2 (that would have put him in his sixties during the time of the Gardener novels).

It's entirely possible the mandatory retirement rule would apply in a continuity that is directly informed by Fleming's timeline.

[Dustin]

Freemo has written a fine article that also touches this continuity argument. There is also a thread on it here. Actually Gardner's Bond did claim to have fought in WWII when he was using the Penbrunner cover in FSS, complete with grey hair and moustache and topped with heavy glasses. That said I always got the impression his Bond is 'beyond' the 45 years limit, even in books that would call for a younger incarnation. I highly doubt the RN sends senior officers older than 35 years on Harrier jet-fighter courses, no matter how supposedly fit they are. But in most other books of Gardner I felt Bond was about late-forties to early-fifties. It just seems to fit in with things like Bond becoming head of a major new department of working with the daughter of a friend who always seemed to be the same age as Bond.

Edited by Dustin, 30 August 2012 - 07:07 PM.

[OmarB]

Its the 60th anniversary novel after all, so it makes sense for things to come full circle.

I think its entirely possible Boyd intends his novel to be a conclusion to the story of Ian Fleming's original literary 007. He's already stated that he's writing an older middle-aged Bond. Then there's also the fact that Bond will be 45 in this book. 45 is the age at which, according to the Moonraker novel, Bond would face mandatory retirement from the 00 Section.

So could this be the story of Bond's last mission? Will we learn the ultimate fate of the original 007? Does he retire to a desk job, and possibly settle down with a woman...or does he die in the line of duty, as he long expected he would?

No, in Gardner's books he is older, the 00 section has been dissolved (so the mandatory retirement does not count) and he's the only active agent at that time. I can see Boyd's book bridging the TMWTGG/Col Sun/DMC/License Renewed years. Not that he intetionally plans to, but any post Ian, pre 80's set Bond novel is gonna fall into that slot.

Again...different continuities. Gardener's Bond is a different continuity from Fleming's Bond (even though they share a common backstory). For instance, there's no way Gardner's Bond fought in WW2 (that would have put him in his sixties during the time of the Gardener novels).

It's entirely possible the mandatory retirement rule would apply in a continuity that is directly informed by Fleming's timeline.

If you wanna go that route and say it's a different continuity then that's great. Gardner himself though talked about his Bond being Ian's Bond, only frozen in time. It's the same guy from the novels in the 50's, only in the 80's. I gotta go dig for the quote but I remember JG saying something to the effect of his Bond being Ian's man only imagine him going to sleep for like 20 years and waking up in the 80's.

But as a DC comics fan I'm a huge fan of continuity, alternate continuities, etc.

[seawolfnyy]

I believe Gardner re-imagined Fleming's stories as taking place in the 70s vs the 50s/60s. Same with Benson. He re-imagined those stories as being in the 80s/90s. I kind of felt that with the continuation novels, especially since for the most part each successive author ignores all the previous, that each author presented a different what if scenario and Boyd's novel will be the same.

[OmarB]

I'm of a mind with continuity where if it serves the story then throw it in, if not just continue ... barring you don't have the character act out of character. In and any number of other the comics some versions have John Kent dead, some have him alive, iin some he's the last son of Krypton, in others there's Supergirl and any number of Kryptonians (New Krypton storyline). I could go on, but as long as at his core he's still Superman then I'm cool with it. Same applies to Bond. As long as within a specific author's run he doesn't go crazy and contradict himself from one release to the next.

[TheREAL008]

It'll never happen.

[KM16]

I wouldn't mind it being an open-ended ending (Bond ending up with a Bond girl, saying he's leaving the service, anything such as that nature) but a true ending I just don't see as a real-world possibility. Unless they go back to Deaver's modern Bond and take this just as a one-off but with Young Bond, then Devil May Care, then Carte Blanche, who the hell knows what IFP will do next at this point, they've really been just bouncing around every possibility as of late.

[CasinoKiller]

Freemo has written a fine article that also touches this continuity argument. There is also a thread on it here. Actually Gardner's Bond did claim to have fought in WWII when he was using the Penbrunner cover in FSS, complete with grey hair and moustache and topped with heavy glasses. That said I always got the impression his Bond is 'beyond' the 45 years limit, even in books that would call for a younger incarnation. I highly doubt the RN sends senior officers older than 35 years on Harrier jet-fighter courses, no matter how supposedly fit they are. But in most other books of Gardner I felt Bond was about late-forties to early-fifties. It just seems to fit in with things like Bond becoming head of a major new department of working with the daughter of a friend who always seemed to be the same age as Bond.

Freemo has written a fine article that also touches this continuity argument. There is also a thread on it here. Actually Gardner's Bond did claim to have fought in WWII when he was using the Penbrunner cover in FSS, complete with grey hair and moustache and topped with heavy glasses. That said I always got the impression his Bond is 'beyond' the 45 years limit, even in books that would call for a younger incarnation. I highly doubt the RN sends senior officers older than 35 years on Harrier jet-fighter courses, no matter how supposedly fit they are. But in most other books of Gardner I felt Bond was about late-forties to early-fifties. It just seems to fit in with things like Bond becoming head of a major new department of working with the daughter of a friend who always seemed to be the same age as Bond.

That was a really interesting article. It seems to me, reading this, that Gardner tried to stay within the continuity of Fleming's Bond (sliding timescale aside) but changed the character and his world quiet a bit (albeit more of 'progress' than 'reinvention'); whereas Benson tried to create a blend between Fleming's Bond and Film Bond in a more 'amalgamated' continuity.

Either way, it seems to me that they were both creating alternate continuities to explore their respective takes on Bond (though both were derivative of the original version). Whereas Faulks, and now Boyd, are trying to add to the Fleming canon itself (though whether or not their works can ever truly be considered 'canonical' is doubtful...)

[TheREAL008]

Perhaps Boys will tie up the loose ends? For instance: connecting Colonel Sun along with Devil May Care? I STILL cannot bring myself to read DMC but perhaps it's possible?

 

Being 45 isn't old at all; however I think it would be mildly interesting to have Bond beginning to sense that perhaps this mission could be his last as a member of the double O section? Maybe since the job goes 'horribly wrong' James decides that enough is enough and towards the end he retires or moves onto another division...perhaps section head?