Anthony Burgess Picks Goldfinger for "99 Novels: The Best in English since 1939"

Dragonpol

Villiers53 wrote:

[quote="Dragonpol"

Or what they deem to be the "reality" of espionage anyhow, within the remit of their own Intelligence experience and mindful of the "chilling effect" of the Official Secrets Acts 1911-1989. In many ways their espionage universe is as much as construct as it is in Fleming, though perhaps less obviously so, and though they would never admit it themselves, unlike the always above board Fleming himself of course.

Now this I don't agree with at all. Every DG that has ever been at the head of Mi6 has praised the authenticity of Le Carre in particular.
David Cornwell had many years as a field operative and his only construct is the names he gave to the organisation and some positions and trade crafts. His novels are so close to reality you could substitute the name Kim Philby for Bill Hayden and you would have the whole Cambridge Spies saga.
[/quote]

Well fair enough. Perhaps I went too far with that last comment, @Villiers53.

Ludovico

RE, the influence of the movies on the readers. I do not think it applies at all for Burgess. Because he thought very little of then.after FRWL for one and because he came to James Bond by the novels, before the movies were released. Let's not forget that he had the same agent as Fleming.

Interesting about sincere manicheism, especially since Burgess was sometimes accused (wrongly) of writing Manichean novels.

Dragonpol

Ludovico wrote:

RE, the influence of the movies on the readers. I do not think it applies at all for Burgess. Because he thought very little of then.after FRWL for one and because he came to James Bond by the novels, before the movies were released. Let's not forget that he had the same agent as Fleming.

Interesting about sincere manicheism, especially since Burgess was sometimes accused (wrongly) of writing Manichean novels.

I very much agree on that. Burgess was around as the novels each came out before the film versions were even released, so he obviously did form his views on the Bond novels pretty early on. He reviewed Octopussy and The Living Daylights (1966) on its release, for instance.

Ludovico

I think something like CR or YOLT would have been more his kind of novel, that said there is something Burgessian about the character of Goldfinger. And when you take away the genre, which I always find difficult, maybe GF is the best literature, i don't know.

Dragonpol

Ludovico wrote:

I think something like CR or YOLT would have been more his kind of novel, that said there is something Burgessian about the character of Goldfinger. And when you take away the genre, which I always find difficult, maybe GF is the best literature, i don't know.

Outsiders would consider Goldfinger the best novel, not merely a Bond novel, I'd imagine.

timmer

" It is unwise to disparage the well-made popular. There was a time when Conan Doyle was ignored by the literary annalists, even though Sherlock Holmes was evidently one of the great characters of fiction. We must beware of snobbishness."

Very well written piece from Burgess. Goldfinger is one of Flemings most exciting and enjoyable reads.
Bond is the epitome of the "well-made popular" both the books and the tried and true film template.

Perilagu_Khan wrote:

Rather strange Burgess' affection for one of Fleming's lesser efforts. Alas, Anthony Horowitz seems stricken by the same odd malady.

I do think Burgess is impressed with Fleming's ability to present something so outlandish, as so darned readable. Fleming treats something that is so very implausible as if it was quite plausible, without batting an eye. The audacity.
This is the charm of the films as well - real danger and suspense - but within a context of utter implausibility. Brilliant, not to mention entertaining as hell.
It's why I love Bond!

My two favourite book series are the Fleming Bonds and Warren Murphy and Richard Sapir's Destroyer novels.
Both portray escapist nonsense but with a smart dangerous edge, although Fleming's world of 007 is comparatively far more grounded than the Destroyer series which can real crazy.

timmer

double post. please delete

Perilagu_Khan

I'm not convinced GF is any splashier or more outlandish than many other Bond novels, specifically MR, DN, OHMSS and YOLT. As for Auric Goldfinger himself, he is arguably one of the more low-key Fleming villains from a personality standpunkt.

Ludovico

For me, YOLT is the most outlandish, almost an anti spy thriller in fact, more like a borderline supernatural tale.

Dragonpol

Ludovico wrote:

For me, YOLT is the most outlandish, almost an anti spy thriller in fact, more like a borderline supernatural tale.

Well, there are definitely making Gothic influences on display in the YOLT novel. Kind of a horror novel in a way and not a true spy novel, as you say. It contains some of Fleming's most creative writing, though.

Perilagu_Khan

Dragonpol wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

For me, YOLT is the most outlandish, almost an anti spy thriller in fact, more like a borderline supernatural tale.

Well, there are definitely making Gothic influences on display in the YOLT novel. Kind of a horror novel in a way and not a true spy novel, as you say. It contains some of Fleming's most creative writing, though.

Yes, YOLT definitely has a sense of the macabre to it. The closest Fleming ever came to Poe, and he did admire Poe. Then there is all of the voodoo in LALD, which also has a horror vibe, albeit of a different nature from what exists in YOLT.

Dragonpol

Perilagu_Khan wrote:

Dragonpol wrote:

Ludovico wrote:

For me, YOLT is the most outlandish, almost an anti spy thriller in fact, more like a borderline supernatural tale.

Well, there are definitely making Gothic influences on display in the YOLT novel. Kind of a horror novel in a way and not a true spy novel, as you say. It contains some of Fleming's most creative writing, though.

Yes, YOLT definitely has a sense of the macabre to it. The closest Fleming ever came to Poe, and he did admire Poe. Then there is all of the voodoo in LALD, which also has a horror vibe, albeit of a different nature from what exists in YOLT.

I intend to write more on that theme, but here is a little something that covers the subject matter of Blofeld's Castle of Death in the YOLT novel:

http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/ian-flemings-thrilling-inspiration-for.html

Might be of interest, @Perilagu_Khan.

Ludovico

Somehow, YOLT reminds me of Apocalypse Now, mixed with Dante's Inferno.

But we digress. I read Burgess's forward to YOLT. I remember some fascinating things in it, comparing James Bond and Sherlock Holmes, and saying that neither are really purely British, in fact that they have traits that are not insular, but on the contrary very Continental.