It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
He is technologically challenged. Some may say a scientific pigmy.
Interesting perspectives about ‘Young Bond’.
PussyNoMore loves Higson’s take but found Cole shallow and commercially dirivative by comparison.
Charlie’s great skill was to respect Fleming’s narrative style and translate Bond lore in a way that worked both for a youth and an adult audience.
Those in doubt should compare the opening of ‘Silverfin’ with the opening of ‘Casino Royale’. It is just a brilliant piece of work.
Pussy sometimes thinks that Higson’s ‘Young Bond’ franchise suffers from the same macho prejudice that plagued ‘The Moneypenny Diaries ‘. That is to say, if it is not full on adult Bond it can’t be any good. This is a mistake. Both of the aforementioned are brilliant and are essential reading for any self respecting Bondonian.
Clearly somebody with consummate good taste.
PussyNoMore is, himself, an authentic English first edition !
@PussyNoMore I disagree on the Young Bond idea. as i've stated in the comic book thread, the whole idea of a 'young Bond' undermines the concept of Bond. When we don't know his background, he's just an ordinary person ending up in extraordinary circumstances (his current job). So we can relate and fantasize that we might have had a chance to find ourselves in the same situation. Fleming explicitly wrote Bond like that: it's basically Fleming's fantasy of himself.
Now if you go and make extraordinary stories of Bond when he was young, you take all that away. It has nothing to do with masculinity, it has everything to do with the 'realism' of the fantasy. As any fighter pilot can dream of becoming an ace, so should every man be able to feel a bit like Bond himself, and every woman fantasize about meeting him in the flesh. With unbelieveable stories (except to North Koreans, they're fedd stories KJU made 11 holes-in one on his first golf game) about how Bond saved the world ten times over before he was 20 you take that all away.
I’ve not read them. Are they specifically building up to becoming literary Bond, or could it be taken as leading to generic cinematic Bond?
I completely agree, it's just a bad concept imo, but to be fair we're looking at it as adult fans, when they were actually aimed at kids/teens weren't they? One of my nephews read one when he was younger and told me about it. So I think the idea might not work for a lot of us lot but it does have a place, introducing kids who probably didn't even know Bond started with books to Fleming's world. And I haven't actually read them but if a purist like @PussyNoMore enjoys them then I imagine they could have turned out a lot worse.
If I remember correctly, I more or less jumped straight from the Alex Rider books to reading Fleming, so that makes Horowitz writing Bond now extra enjoyable.
Edit: So it's easy to see how Young Bond could be a good introduction to the 'real thing' - even if it isn't totally Fleming in the way it's presented.
Bondologists, the Commander makes a good point. It is well thought through and in truth ‘The Pussy’ has never reflected on this aspect of things.
This is probably because it is the art of the fantasy as much as the fantasy itself that resonates with him.
That is to say, how do you take the tropes of Fleming’s Bond and the way he was written (the art of the fantasy) and construct a youth legend in an exciting way.
This is something that, in PussyNoMore’s not so humble opinion, Higson did with consummate skill.
Did the fact that he saved the world before he was twenty dilute the fantasy we all have about Bond’s adult life ? Not for this reader. Simply because for him, an essential part of enjoying Bond is just to dream.
We seem to have digressed from FAAD albeit, to good effect.
Are there any more reviered aficionados out there with reviews ?
I presume The Russian Roulette chapter is what borrows from the new previously unseen Fleming material. Horowitz deftly weaves this stuff into the story
The Acid Test chapter was very well done. We are getting some good insights into Bonds evolving 00 persona.
As for Young Bond, Cole has got him almost to age 16. He's quite formidable now, and very much on the secret service radar.
Horowitz in the early going here is referencing Bond's dangerous wartime exploits, where he did his share of killing, presumably as espionage operative, and subsequent recruitment to the secret service.
If the Young Bond saga is to continue, I'd consider jumping him ahead to age 18 and early encounters with the emerging Nazi threat.
This way we can get Bond up to a young adult age, now enjoying more adult liasons with women and the killing of nasty Nazis.
No more Bond as only formidable teenager.
Too true. ‘ The Acid Test’ chapter is fantastic.
Also...
But great stuff. There was some proper spying going on. Disguises, daring-do, last minute escapes and some quite poignant moments like..
I also like liked it that Bond is not really any different to the fully-formed Bond. None of the 'Bond begins and we find out what makes him ruthless' malarkey. He is ruthless, already.
It's been a while since I read a complete Bond novel, so I don't really know where it falls in the great scheme of things critically, but it's certainly a much better book than Carte Blanche, which I've still yet to get past the first few chapters, and you don't feel like the book's pandering to the fans of the films very much, which is how Benson's books always felt.
I do hope he does another, and that the next one is placed in the Fleming timeline like Trigger Mortis was, with a little character overlap, like Pussy Galore was. I don't mind those liberties being taken with a storyteller as capable as Horowitz.
One thing we haven’t discussed is the technique of the ‘double villain’ employed here.
This technique is particularly interesting because it allows two types of battles to take place in the same story.
Have any of you renowned Bondologists got any views on this ?
PussyNoMore thinks it’s a good job we didn’t follow SaintMark’s advice on this one!
https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/18743/forever-and-a-day-reviews-spoilers
I do have plenty of observations though. I say observations, rather than quibbles because the book as a whole hangs together well
It's a well recommended Bond read. That said I wonder about some of the authors choices.
What is he trying to tell us or more to the point, why is he presenting certain scenarios the way he does.
For example, I thought the final meeting with the CIA officer was written somewhat oddly.
That's one example. I have others.
Again, I consider these to be more observations, not quibbles so much, as we do have to extend a degree of narrative license to the author
I shall expand in due course in the other big spoiler thread.
In the meantime FAAD is I think a very significant contribution to the Bond lit canon.
It's a bold provocative read. It had me engaged from beginning to end.
I find it impossible to compare the books to the movie series because they are two different beasties.
Horowitz is welcome gift after the famous writer trilogy who did manage to not mess up the literary side of Flemings heritage but in some way did not improve it either. Horowitz, Higson and Samantha Weinberg all did better than expected.
In the round, surely we aren't so precious. Isn't it simple? Is the book a rattling good yarn and does the author capture Fleming's high old tone ?
The Pussy thinks that Anthony Horowitz does a bang up job on both counts and prays that IFP hangs on to him.
Frankly, as fare as the Fleming original material is concerned - come on, it's for the birds (sorry Birdleson). It comprises six vignettes (there are actually four left) that were skeletal outlines for a TV series that never made it to the screen. They contain nothing of any significance and are purely a marketing ploy.
However, I do take exception to the negative use of the "for the birds" comment, @PussyNoMore. On the other hand I wouldn't want to limit the use of that phrase. Hmm. It's actually something to encourage. So, okay. Never mind.
RichardTheBruce, you are correct. It was intended as a respectful observation but worry not, PussyNoMore’s rattle remains firmly in his pram.
Absolutely !