Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
In this Discussion
Should Boyd Novel Reference "Colonel Sun" or "Devil May Care"
My understanding is that the upcoming William Boyd novel will feature a 45 year old James Bond in the year 1969. So my question is, where exactly is the novel picking up? Should Boyd reference the events in Amis' "Colonel Sun?" Or in Faulks' "Devil May Care?" Or not reference either and have Bond's story take place just after Fleming's "The Man with the Golden Gun?" Personally I'd like this novel to follow "Colonel Sun," and to just pretend that "Devil May Care" didn't exist. Perhaps Bond could muse about Ariadne, or recall the ear torture he was subjected to by Colonel Sun. Any thoughts?
^ 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
You've literally written word for word exactly what I was about to say.
I salute you Sir there are not many on here with the intelligence and good taste of the Wizard.
By the way, I intentionally don't want to post in the Bond 24 & Beyond category since it's impossible to keep track of it all.
If The Sun is the source for that, I wouldn't hold my breath on that one as they are full of dung.
Let Boyd have the chance to write a fresh Bond novel without having to be shackled to the interpretations of the lesser authors.
I seriously doubt that BOND 24 will be an adaptation of DEVIL MAY CARE. I don't see EON going back now to adapt the continuation novels, especially when their screenplay is being written by an Academy Award nominated screenwriter. Why waste a screenwriter of that pedigree on a novel that wasn't really received all that well and has been forgotten by the general public.
With regards to the question posed by the OP, I think that Boyd should just stick with writing his own story and not need to namecheck any of the other novels. If he does feel the need to make references, then both COLONEL SUN and DEVIL MAY CARE should be referenced, as they are a part of the Fleming-era timeline, for better (CS) or worse (DMC).
No, Boyd wouldn't include any of Gardner's or Benson's stories because they occuured outside of the timeline, in the 80s and 90s.
Sorry I didn't really make myself clear, what I was trying to suggest was that whoever writes a future Bond novel and regardless of what era they set it in, they shouldn't feel they need to be a slave to the writings of any of the previous continuation authors. I would argue that by recognising and including references to other authors works you start to dilute the character and his world as created by Fleming.
Not that I want to seem like I'm picking on him personally, but Raymond Benson is an extreme example of what can happen when you stray too much from the original source material, with his references to Amis, Gardner and the films, his version of Bond lost any sense of credibility in regards to Fleming's original works.
ISBN should not even refer to Devil May Care let alone anyone else.
Very true!
As my friend Jeremy Duns could only turn up four pages of its manuscript despite an intensive search by Jenkins' son of his fathers papers, let me say now that I very much doubt that. There is no access to Per Fine Ounce. That's just a myth, I'm afraid...
Agreed. I don't care if the CS events aren't mentioned though.
Obviously, Gardner's '80s reboot was a generation jumper as was the works of Benson and Deaver.
With Amis, Faulkes and now Boyd, IFP have allowed authors to tread on hallowed '60s soil and if they want to maintain any semblance of character development some level of orchestrated coherence would surely be necessary?
For that to happen you would have to assume IFP have a coherent strategy and know what they're doing.
That's a leap of faith I'm not prepared to take I'm afraid.
On recent past evidence I resignedly have to agree, Ice. I only hope that Solo by William Boyd will knock the literary strategy critics for six and I have faith that it will do just that.
When do you expect a literary critic to admit that any book about the further adventures of 007 would be good?
Well, it's happened sometimes in the past, but not a lot if they are even deigned worthy to be reviewed at all, I would say.
Well, it's happened sometimes in the past, but not a lot if they are even deigned worthy to be reviewed at all, I would say.
I once sat in the cinema with somebody who I knew was the movie critic of a major regional paper. The movie being a Brosnan Bond movie and the man was clearly enjoying himself laughing out loud and all that. Then I read his review which made it seem that anybody watching the movie was losing precious time to a substandard actionmovie. When I met him later in a pub I inquired after this particular review and me seeing him enjoying himself. The man told me that his reputation did require him to do a review on certain movies in a certain way if he wanted to be considered a serious reviewer. Ever since then I consider critics biased by their own reputation.
That said I will read the reviews on Solo and still make up my own mind.
Again the wisdom of @TheWizardOflce shines through - I fear the best we can hope for is a damn fine stand alone Bond novel then we'll all be braying like hell for him to do another. I think Boyd is going to prove to be our literary Sam Mendes!
Very interesting and indeed revealing story. I think you are right - they are restricted in some big way by their own reputation as a critic and building their profile as a serious no-nonsense critic who does not sway to the breeze of populism when it comes to film reviews.
I'm also very much in agreement with you on the making your own mind up. As O.F. Snelling said in his early study of James Bond, books and films would sell to an audience regardless of whether there were critics or not, showing that equally the general public on the whole are not that overly swayed by reviewers either, I think. Given some of the reviews that the literary and cinematic James Bond products have received over the years, perhaps that's just as well!
If Boyd writes a good book then I don't think it really matters if he hasn't mentioned any of Bond's past assignments. Well, I won't care anyway. I certainly hope he hasn't mentioned DMC though!
Only a month to go! Hopefully September (and maybe October as I might still be reading it then) will be the highlight of 2013.