Bond's morality

edited April 2011 in General Discussion Posts: 4
It seems to me that Bond is a three-dimensional character squeezed into a two-dimensional persona. He is worldly, widely read, fluent in many languages, many customs. He is not independently wealthy, he does not pursue a life in the cultured world, but likes to dress and play in among the rich and famous, like a game he needs to master.

He has a morality and he is an assassin. He values life, yet his job is to take life. He sees himself as a protector of others, but who protects him. I wonder if there were a story line where he had to protect those who could not protect themselves. Say an episode where he is shepherding children out of a dangerous situation, such as a war zone. Maybe a priest is also part of the group.

Bond would not be one to discuss his inner feelings. That would not be part of the character. But through the other characters, we would gain insight on Bond's morality. In all the movies and books, I do not recall Bond having a scene with kids. It would be interesting to see Daniel Craig, as Bond, in a scene interacting with kids.

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,257
    Quoting Stuart: Bond having a scene with kids. It would be interesting to see Daniel Craig, as Bond, in a scene interacting with kids.
    I'm willing to disagree with that, Stuart. Bond doesn't need to show me his morality. And somehow I just don't think Bond in a scene with kids could work. The little elephant boy in TMWTGG was used for comic relief and even then, it just wasn't right IMO.
  • KerimKerim Istanbul Not Constantinople
    Posts: 2,629
    That scene with the kid named Bibi wasn't exactly right either.
  • AgentJamesBond007AgentJamesBond007 Vesper’s grave
    Posts: 2,634
    Bond doesn't need morality. Him being around children is strange (Bibi, Elephant Boy, etc.) but can be used for a bit of comic relief. Anyways welcome to MI6 Community @Stauart!
  • SharkShark Banned
    edited April 2011 Posts: 348
    Bond is an essentially moral creation, with a chivalric and rather old-fashioned moral code. That, along with his sense of humour, distinguishes him from being an outright sociopath.
  • If he were American, I believe he'd be called a cowboy. Being American, I may take more from that than others but run with me here....he's a more heroic character despite some pretty heavy vices...yet no one seems to care about those...he's just that much of a badass. And a gentleman.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,257
    That's a nice book indeed, Agent005. I like to analyse Bond, only not too deeply. I don't think Bond was meant to be taken to Freud's couch, have his inner universe explored in full detail. All is good but in small doses.
  • Posts: 228
    If Bond ever was in a scene with kids, I'd like for him to rescue children from crazed terrorists overtaking a London school-house. This could work if done as a small pre-mission leading into a more wide-spread mission involving the terrorist group, perhaps quantum.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Bond is more anti-hero, more vigilante. He does good deeds, yet uses methods of the enemy and does evil things to meet his needs or succeed in his mission. In my mind there is no true hero, because perfection is impossible. The draw of characters like Bond, the anti-heros, is that they have flaws and complexities. There is no straight laced analysis of them. They do great things, yet some of their actions are questionable, and in that debate over good and evil is as interesting and palpable as the passage Fleming wrote in CR, which is some of the greatest writing I've ever read.
  • Posts: 228
    Bond is more anti-hero, more vigilante. He does good deeds, yet uses methods of the enemy and does evil things to meet his needs or succeed in his mission. In my mind there is no true hero, because perfection is impossible. The draw of characters like Bond, the anti-heros, is that they have flaws and complexities. There is no straight laced analysis of them. They do great things, yet some of their actions are questionable, and in that debate over good and evil is as interesting and palpable as the passage Fleming wrote in CR, which is some of the greatest writing I've ever read.

    Couldn't agree more. Great summary of Bond.
    Yet when I read this I can only imagine Connery and Craig if were applying this to the actors portrayals.
Sign In or Register to comment.