›

Is Modern literary Bond dead, and if so Why?

Risico007Risico007
in Literary 007 Posts: 9,846
I feel this needs to be discussed

From Casino Royale - The Man with the red tattoo (the last benson bond novel) the literary James bond lived in what was at the release of the books the present. Then since 2008 we have had 4 adult bond Novels (including this falls Trigger Mortis) and only one ( Jeffery Deaver's Carte Blanche) was set in the present the other three were set in the 50's/60's and I have to ask why? Fleming never intended his character to be a period piece indeed OHMSS discuss Ursala Andress (who was in Dr. No a year earlier I believe) So I have to ask does Modern Bond just simply not work are authors afraid to use him in the modern context?

In other words is Modern Literary Bond Dead?

If so Why?

If Not who could possibly bring him back. I thought Deaver had some great ideas (the 00 branch being a shadowy branch of mi6 created after 9/11 etc) but I felt his execution was garbage (Although I think next summer I might reread Carte Blanche to see how I truly feel.)

My thoughts Brad Meltzer could be the man to bring it back. the man can write a great thriller he has a great prowess for descriptions and action and is a Bond fan..

well enough of my ramblings what do you guys think?
«1

Comments

  • PerdoggPerdogg
    Posts: 686
    Yes.

    1. No writer can match Ian Fleming. Except a couple who will never write a bond Novel.

    2. The movies have pretty much destroyed the novels. People do not really read anymore, I wonder how many people actually know Bond originated from novels. People do not have the patience to read through words after seeing Bond on a bobcat in the movie.

    3. Bond doesn't fit in the modern world as PC police and modern Homintern have defined it.

    Personally, I do not want to read about Bond turning on a mobile and using an iPhone app.




  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Regard an author, I really don't know. The Fleming prose is unique.

    Regard the content, it's entirely possible. You have to adjust the character, though. He'd be a man that understood technology and was capable, but shunned it on a personal level. It's not difficult, he's an isolated sort of fellow so wouldn't be obliged to engage in trend following. It would also add to his slightly combative streak and reluctance to play by the rules. In this case societal ones. Many of his character attributes can remain the same. He can smoke, drink to excess and sleep around.

    I don't really ascribe to Perdogg's pessimistic scenario. Enough people read and no one can stop you writing a novel. The only sticking point is topping Fleming. If you accept this is near, if not completely impossible, then an author may have a shot at something interesting and enjoyable.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,797
    Like Ian Malcolm said, anything at all can & does happen. Just look at Christopher Wood's version of TSWLM novelization. It's far from impossible however unlikely.
  • TriggerMortisTriggerMortis
    Posts: 158
    The hypothesis that 'modern' literary Bond is dead doesn't have to be correct albeit staying in Fleming's era allows for more possibilities and allows 007 to be more faithfully portrayed.
    In my opinion, we simply need a great 007 book and it can be done in a multiplicity of different ways.
    Gardner successfull rebooted for the '80s showed that Bond can be updated as his first five outings met with considerable commercial and critical success. Albeit, even back then, the character and the era didn't sit comfortably together.
    In another way, in the form of 'Young Bond', literary Bond has enjoyed recent sustainable success. Few who have read them have anything but praise and they fleshed out the formative years of Fleming's creation perfectly whilst having given us great, new adventures. I speak of the Higson books.
    When it comes to the quality continuation of iconic characters, Horowitz's success with Holmes and Hannah's recent hit with Poirot are concrete examples of what can happen when enthused, quality authors take up their pens. They both elected to keep their hero's in period settings and fans were delighted because the books were great.
    What is probably unique about Bond is the screen phenomena that has long had little, if anything, to do with Fleming's creation. It is this that makes a modern literary Bond extremely difficult.
    If you adapt screen Bond to the page you would have no differential advantage over current, modern literary espionage offers. Indeed you probably have disadvantages.
    If you tried to update Fleming's Bond, as Deaver disastrously tried, you are left with a cardboard cut out of the original.
    Horowitz has taken absolutely the correct route and in September we will be presented with something marvellous - I've staked my name on it.
    With regard to Perdogg's assertion that "people don't really read anymore" if correct, JK Rowling would have to return a lot of money!
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    I think the last continuation Bond novels are period pieces to get closer to the literary source and distantiate themselves from the movies. I'm not a big fan of continuations but otherwise that's the smart way to do it I think.
  • TriggerMortisTriggerMortis
    Posts: 158
    If 'House of Siilk' is anything to go by, I think you will find that Horowitz will address his Bond mission in a seamless fashion. If you hadn't known differently, you would have thought that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle had written his Holmes adventure.
    As well as being a great story teller, Horowitz is a real chameleon, he has a capacity to inhabit different styles because he doesn't let his ego get in the way.
    If we look at the recent past, Deaver was just the wrong choice. He is an American pulp writer who proved incapable of delivering anythingthing remotely qualitative.
    Boyd and Faulks should have worked but their huge egos prohibited them fully embracing the project.
    Trigger Mortis will be huge!
    .
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    I might be tempted to buy and read Trigger Mortis, although Carte Blanche is gathering dust on my bookshelf. But this is off topic. I do think if one wants to go back to Fleming's roots and avoid as much as possible the cinematic Bond, then he has to make the Bond novel retro. There is however a gigantic problem with it: Ian Fleming was contemporary to Bond. Whoever writes a Bond novel set in the 50s-60s is not.
  • TriggerMortisTriggerMortis
    Posts: 158
    Ludovico wrote: »
    There is however a gigantic problem with it: Ian Fleming was contemporary to Bond. Whoever writes a Bond novel set in the 50s-60s is not.

    This I don't understand at all, All were contemporary when written - that's the whole gig!

  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,846
    Trigger Mortis will be good I am sure of that but it compounds the issue Again Can literary 007 exist in a post 9/11 world?
  • TriggerMortisTriggerMortis
    Posts: 158
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Trigger Mortis will be good I am sure of that but it compounds the issue Again Can literary 007 exist in a post 9/11 world?

    All is possible but aside from the franchise name, what's the differential advantage?
    That's more the point.

  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,846
    I dunno I just like Bond to be current in literay and in film don't get me wrong I enjoy reading the Fleming era which is no longer current and I am slowly wading through the Gardner era (Seafire is on my to read shelf and dare I say it I am looking forward to reading it)

    the most grievous crime Deaver did was invent a really cool back story for his 007 and deliver a crappy novel. After 9/11 I could see MI6 developed a shadow organization known as the 00 branch working to make sure terrorists are dealt with quickly swiftly and quietly without the public knowing about it. I could see this Bond working in Istanbul or Tangier... Suave sophisticated ruthless.... I could see this be a litereary franchise taking the Fleming idium (as described by Demond Llewellyn "Give bond the right clothes the right car the right girl set your story in the most beautiful and romantic places and take the story along so fast no one notices the idiosyncrocies")... I could see the writer using titles like "the Devil is in the Details" and (thought it was a game title) "BloodStone"... Apparently Deaver could not and gave a half hearted story....


    Like I said I don't mind the past or occasionally doing a novel in Fleming's timeline but I feel If Fleming were magically to come back to life and start writing he wouldn't set it in 1964 he would set it in 2016.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    TriggerMortis wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    There is however a gigantic problem with it: Ian Fleming was contemporary to Bond. Whoever writes a Bond novel set in the 50s-60s is not.

    This I don't understand at all, All were contemporary when written - that's the whole gig!

    What I mean is that if you write a novel set in the 50s or 60s, you are writing (to a degree) historical fiction. There is a temporal exoticism to the story that is entirely foreign to Fleming's, who is contemporary to the action. This is the problem when you write any story from a source set in the past.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,797
    Ludovico wrote: »
    There is a temporal exoticism to the story that is entirely foreign to Fleming's, who is contemporary to the action.
    Why do I understand so completely what you're saying here?

  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,846
    ok so why not bring bond into the post 9/11 world?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    There is a temporal exoticism to the story that is entirely foreign to Fleming's, who is contemporary to the action.
    Why do I understand so completely what you're saying here?

    Is it sarcastic, or is it truly a compliment?
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,846
    Something that dawned on me since 9/11 we have had 5 novels featuring the adult James Bond including Trigger Mortis yet only 2 were set in modern day. I genuinely am surpised by this
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,797
    Ludovico wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    There is a temporal exoticism to the story that is entirely foreign to Fleming's, who is contemporary to the action.
    Why do I understand so completely what you're saying here?

    Is it sarcastic, or is it truly a compliment?
    A compliment, sir!

  • carlos_D29carlos_D29 Houston,TX
    Posts: 27
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Something that dawned on me since 9/11 we have had 5 novels featuring the adult James Bond including Trigger Mortis yet only 2 were set in modern day. I genuinely am surpised by this
    I agree, I feel one of the problems from the recent novels is that 2 of them were in modern times while the others weren't, which to me causes some what of an issue to where the characters stands.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    There is a temporal exoticism to the story that is entirely foreign to Fleming's, who is contemporary to the action.
    Why do I understand so completely what you're saying here?

    Is it sarcastic, or is it truly a compliment?
    A compliment, sir!

    ah ok! Thanks.
  • Mark_HazzardMark_Hazzard Classified
    Posts: 127
    @Risico007 I don't see why there is no reason to exist for 007 in a "post-9/11 era". Today's world gives more reason to write a contemporary Bond story then not. Russia has gone back to some sort of Cold War politics, there are a lot of companies working as soldiers of fortune in the Middle East. The GFC has made some people very rich while the aftermath was disastrous for a lot of people. Then there is terrorism, China's become very powerful, digital technology provides a lot of opportunities for people who mean to do harm...

    The stage is set for both the literary Bond and the cinematic Bond. Unfortunately both don't really take they're chances yet (I'm also looking at SF, although quite some people might disagree).

    I'm walking around with an idea for a novel myself for quite some time now. It involves quite a few of the things mentioned above. I'm first re-reading some of my favourite originals, then I might have a go.
  • DRush76DRush76
    Posts: 533
    I never understood the need to continue the Bond novels, following Fleming's death. After all, Bond was his creation. I'm not saying that his novels were works of art. For me, they have always been a mixed bag. But . . . they are his creations and no one else's.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    DRush76 wrote: »
    I never understood the need to continue the Bond novels, following Fleming's death. After all, Bond was his creation. I'm not saying that his novels were works of art. For me, they have always been a mixed bag. But . . . they are his creations and no one else's.

    I agree about the continuations. Not only for Fleming but for Doyle, Stoker, Chandler, etc. Heck, even Agatha Christie!
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    DRush76 wrote: »
    I never understood the need to continue the Bond novels, following Fleming's death. After all, Bond was his creation. I'm not saying that his novels were works of art. For me, they have always been a mixed bag. But . . . they are his creations and no one else's.

    I dare say £££$$$ was a fairly big factor considering how successful Fleming's books were.
  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,987
    Many literary creations are ageless. Time moves forward, but the characters remain essentially the same age. I have no problem with a Bond who doesn't age. Literally, he would be well into his 90s by now. Rather than ignore Bond's (Fleming's) history, Deaver chose to recreate it, which was completely unnecessary. A Bond novel with no mention of a date specific youth and war history easily works.

    For me, a well-written Bond novel is not one that recaptures the times in which he
    was created, but one that recaptures the essence of the character. I am not distracted by the fact that in early novels Bond used a pay phone, whereas today he'd have a mobile.
    Sherlock deftly handles the time shift from past to present.

    I have no problem with Horowitz doing a vintage Bond, but a contemporary Bond in the right hands works as well. As for the Deaver Bond, the author apparently took the title to heart.


  • TriggerMortisTriggerMortis
    Posts: 158
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    DRush76 wrote: »
    I never understood the need to continue the Bond novels, following Fleming's death. After all, Bond was his creation. I'm not saying that his novels were works of art. For me, they have always been a mixed bag. But . . . they are his creations and no one else's.

    I dare say £££$$$ was a fairly big factor considering how successful Fleming's books were.

    A small thing called demand probably answers your point.

    Iconic characters and stories have been interpreted endlessly and often to very good effect. I don't see anything fundamentally wrong or objectionable in that.
    The phenomenally talented, late great PD James even wrote a fabulous continuity novel for 'Pride & Prejudice'.
    The questions for anybody writing continuity has to be is it done well and is it valid?
    The reason I prefer 'period Bond' is that it allows the author to be faithful to the idiosyncrasies of the original character. Many of which were inextricably linked to GB loosing the empire and the transition to a new world order.
    No doubt a modern Bond could be done albeit Benson and Deaver failed miserably.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    And it is far easier to sell a bad Bond novel by a continuator than a brilliant new original spy novel.
  • Risico007Risico007
    edited June 2015 Posts: 9,846
    With the write author one could sell a new bond novel.

    Remeber Carte Blanche was a best seller
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    The modern James Bond novel is very alive and kicking as shown by the release of various titles these last years with the Young Bond, Moneypenny files and continuation novels. There is a big enough market for them to keep releasing them.

    As for quality that is a whole different discussion. For me the Moneypenny novels were easily the best.
  • TriggerMortisTriggerMortis
    Posts: 158
    SaintMark wrote: »
    The modern James Bond novel is very alive and kicking as shown by the release of various titles these last years with the Young Bond, Moneypenny files and continuation novels. There is a big enough market for them to keep releasing them.

    As for quality that is a whole different discussion. For me the Moneypenny novels were easily the best.

    Here speaks a man who knows, 'The Moneypenny Diaries' are absolutely amazing and so little talked about in these column inches. They are truly original and completely thrilling.
    The other great Bond coup is, of course, Higson's 'Young Bond' series (unfortunately, Cole is no were near as good). I'm constantly amazed that some 007 fans haven't read them.
    I think the thought process is that these are books for women (TMD) or children (YB) and this is a huge misnomer. By ignoring them, folk are missing out on some of the very best of the franchise.

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    I don't read outside the Fleming canon.
Sign In or Register to comment.