›

Anthony Burgess discussion

245

Comments

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    I am putting forward a hypothesis: Burgess was dissatisfied with the route the series had taken and wrote his script trying to kill Bond, and thus the series, with it. His script is out there, it is also very Apocalyptic.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    I am putting forward a hypothesis: Burgess was dissatisfied with the route the series had taken and wrote his script trying to kill Bond, and thus the series, with it. His script is out there, it is also very Apocalyptic.

    Well, it all seems to be very complex, so you could be right. This'd make a great blog article at a later date!
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Bumping this thread because I remembered something: Burgess and Fleming had the same agent at some point.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    Bumping this thread because I remembered something: Burgess and Fleming had the same agent at some point.

    Oh, which one? Was it Peter Janson-Smith?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    Bumping this thread because I remembered something: Burgess and Fleming had the same agent at some point.

    Oh, which one? Was it Peter Janson-Smith?

    I need to reread the autobiography. The agent got too busy when the novels started being adapted to the cinema, so he "gave" Burgess to one of his associates. He didn't do so badly himself. Ironically, Fleming died before he could see his creation become really famous, while Burgess lived to see his endure fame... But thought said fame was very cumbersome.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited September 2013 Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    Bumping this thread because I remembered something: Burgess and Fleming had the same agent at some point.

    Oh, which one? Was it Peter Janson-Smith?

    I need to reread the autobiography. The agent got too busy when the novels started being adapted to the cinema, so he "gave" Burgess to one of his associates. He didn't do so badly himself. Ironically, Fleming died before he could see his creation become really famous, while Burgess lived to see his endure fame... But thought said fame was very cumbersome.

    A bit like Ian Fleming himself on his fame and success. He told his friend Amherst Villiers, "Ashes, dear boy. Ashes" when he enquired what it was like now that he had finally got the fame and fortune he had craved so long. So material wealth and Earthly success is clearly not everything as Ian Fleming's semi-tragic life attests to.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    Bumping this thread because I remembered something: Burgess and Fleming had the same agent at some point.

    Oh, which one? Was it Peter Janson-Smith?

    I need to reread the autobiography. The agent got too busy when the novels started being adapted to the cinema, so he "gave" Burgess to one of his associates. He didn't do so badly himself. Ironically, Fleming died before he could see his creation become really famous, while Burgess lived to see his endure fame... But thought said fame was very cumbersome.

    A bit like Ian Fleming himself on his fame and success. He told his friend Amherst Villiers, "Ashes, dear boy. Ashes" when he enquired what it was like now that he had finally got the fame and fortune he had craved so long. So material wealth and Earthly success is clearly not everything as Ian Fleming's semi-tragic life attests to.

    Thankfully Burgess lived much older and had time to write a lot more, however he always felt that his work was overshadowed by A Clockwork Orange, which he considered a very minor novel.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    Bumping this thread because I remembered something: Burgess and Fleming had the same agent at some point.

    Oh, which one? Was it Peter Janson-Smith?

    I need to reread the autobiography. The agent got too busy when the novels started being adapted to the cinema, so he "gave" Burgess to one of his associates. He didn't do so badly himself. Ironically, Fleming died before he could see his creation become really famous, while Burgess lived to see his endure fame... But thought said fame was very cumbersome.

    A bit like Ian Fleming himself on his fame and success. He told his friend Amherst Villiers, "Ashes, dear boy. Ashes" when he enquired what it was like now that he had finally got the fame and fortune he had craved so long. So material wealth and Earthly success is clearly not everything as Ian Fleming's semi-tragic life attests to.

    Thankfully Burgess lived much older and had time to write a lot more, however he always felt that his work was overshadowed by A Clockwork Orange, which he considered a very minor novel.

    Yes, I suppose that can happen to a lot of authors, especially if their work is made into a famous film as was Burgess's work.
  • 007InVT007InVT Classified
    Posts: 893
    Here's a good article about him on Fleming: http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2013/03/anthony-burgesss-007-obsession
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    007InVT wrote:
    Here's a good article about him on Fleming: http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2013/03/anthony-burgesss-007-obsession

    Oh I'm so going to read this right now.
  • 007InVT007InVT Classified
    Posts: 893
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Always fascinating to hear Burgess.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited March 2014 Posts: 18,281
    Those interested in Anthony Burgess's connections with James Bond may be interested to know that I have finally posted a new "comeback paper" on my The Bondologist Blog pet project on this subject matter. The paper is entitled "Anthony Burgess on The Spy Who Loved Me (1977): Double Standards or was his screenplay for the film a Parody with a Point?" Please feel free to read it and comment upon it if you so wish here:

    http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/anthony-burgess-on-spy-who-loved-me.html
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    I am putting forward a hypothesis: Burgess was dissatisfied with the route the series had taken and wrote his script trying to kill Bond, and thus the series, with it. His script is out there, it is also very Apocalyptic.

    I agree; see my new blog paper posted above, @Ludovico!

  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Those interested in Anthony Burgess's connections with James Bond may be interested to know that I have finally posted a new "comeback paper" on my The Bondologist Blog pet project on this subject matter. The paper is entitled "Anthony Burgess on The Spy Who Loved Me (1977): Double Standards or was his screenplay for the film a Parody with a Point?" Please feel free to read it and comment upon it if you so wish here:

    http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/anthony-burgess-on-spy-who-loved-me.html

    Thanks. I am going to read it.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited March 2014 Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Those interested in Anthony Burgess's connections with James Bond may be interested to know that I have finally posted a new "comeback paper" on my The Bondologist Blog pet project on this subject matter. The paper is entitled "Anthony Burgess on The Spy Who Loved Me (1977): Double Standards or was his screenplay for the film a Parody with a Point?" Please feel free to read it and comment upon it if you so wish here:

    http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/anthony-burgess-on-spy-who-loved-me.html

    Thanks. I am going to read it.

    My pleasure. I hope you enjoy it. Let me know either on the blog or in this thread if you do, dear @Ludovico.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    I wanted to write about it on the blog, but couldn't comment!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited March 2014 Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    I wanted to write about it on the blog, but couldn't comment!

    Why not? Do you have to sign in first or something. I'd really love to hear your thoughts there.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    I wanted to write about it on the blog, but couldn't comment!

    Why not? Do you have to sign in first or something. I'd really love to hear your thoughts there.

    It seems I need to sign to Google Plus first, my own Blogspot account does not work on it (which is strange).
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited March 2014 Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    I wanted to write about it on the blog, but couldn't comment!

    Why not? Do you have to sign in first or something. I'd really love to hear your thoughts there.

    It seems I need to sign to Google Plus first, my own Blogspot account does not work on it (which is strange).

    Oh! You should be able to add a comment on that paper by pressing the "3 comments" link or by following this link that takes you straight to it:

    http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/anthony-burgess-on-spy-who-loved-me.html#gpluscomments

    I hope this is of some help? If not get back to me.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Does it work if you press the link "Sign in with different account" at the bottom of the Google+ page I wonder? Might be worth try. You can leave your comments in either this thread or the one dedicated to the updating of The Bondologist Blog alternatively if you so wish.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Nope. It keeps asking me to create a Google+ account.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Could you give us your thoughts here then? It seems that Google has taken over my blog's freedom of reply, which is a bit of a pity but I don't know if there is anything constructive that I can do about it. Any ideas at all?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    My thoughts about it... I am not sure Burgess's script is parodic. I have not read it of course, so I am saying this carefully, all I have was what he wrote about it in his autobiography. It seems to me that it was a satire, and a rather ferocious one. I think his attitude towards the Bond franchise and how it had departed from Fleming was bordering contempt, which probably explains the satire. His TSWLM is like a Bond movie on heroin, or at least opium (which he claimed to have smoked, by the way). It is also influenced by his own taste for Apocalyptic themes. Many novels of Burgess deal, in one way or another, directly or not, with the end of civilization, or at least the end of culture. It is the case of A Clockwork Orange, Kingdom of the Wicked, Earthly Powers, The Wanton Seed, Any Old Iron and his own spy thriller, Tremor of Intent. His treatment of TSWLM is similar: in a way, he answers the question what would happen to Bond if he was living the end of days, if the Apocalypse was truly happening. Of course, Burgess does not take the easy route of the nuclear holocaust or the sci-fi device that had already started to plague the Bond movies since YOLT. His villains are anarchist and iconoclasts. Of course, Bond was supposed to be dead by the end of the movie, which is both a statement about what the franchise had become and one about what culture in general and British culture in particular had become.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    My thoughts about it... I am not sure Burgess's script is parodic. I have not read it of course, so I am saying this carefully, all I have was what he wrote about it in his autobiography. It seems to me that it was a satire, and a rather ferocious one. I think his attitude towards the Bond franchise and how it had departed from Fleming was bordering contempt, which probably explains the satire. His TSWLM is like a Bond movie on heroin, or at least opium (which he claimed to have smoked, by the way). It is also influenced by his own taste for Apocalyptic themes. Many novels of Burgess deal, in one way or another, directly or not, with the end of civilization, or at least the end of culture. It is the case of A Clockwork Orange, Kingdom of the Wicked, Earthly Powers, The Wanton Seed, Any Old Iron and his own spy thriller, Tremor of Intent. His treatment of TSWLM is similar: in a way, he answers the question what would happen to Bond if he was living the end of days, if the Apocalypse was truly happening. Of course, Burgess does not take the easy route of the nuclear holocaust or the sci-fi device that had already started to plague the Bond movies since YOLT. His villains are anarchist and iconoclasts. Of course, Bond was supposed to be dead by the end of the movie, which is both a statement about what the franchise had become and one about what culture in general and British culture in particular had become.

    Wowsers, thank you @Ludovico, those are words of gold! Did you enjoy my article, then? I have Burgess's autobiography but I want to go into more detail on it at a later date.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    Yes I.enjoyed it quite a lot.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    Yes I.enjoyed it quite a lot.

    Thanks, glad to hear it. There will be more in the same vein (and hopefully better) on the way in the coming weeks and months.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,124
    I am watching Jesus of Nazareth right now and watched recently Moses the Lawgiver. Both scripted by Anthony Burgess. While Jesus is more Zeffirelli's Jesus and a fairly straightforward adaptation from the Bible (but the best adaptation IMO, far more intelligent, historically accurate and Jewish than any other), his Moses is a complete deconstruction of the Exodus. You can also find themes recurrent in Burgess' other works: the burden of freedom (in Moses compared to bitter herbs), the unreliability of the narrative and the fallibility of heroes (not Jesus himself, but his disciples are anything but holy). And what brilliant dialogues!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Ludovico wrote:
    I am watching Jesus of Nazareth right now and watched recently Moses the Lawgiver. Both scripted by Anthony Burgess. While Jesus is more Zeffirelli's Jesus and a fairly straightforward adaptation from the Bible (but the best adaptation IMO, far more intelligent, historically accurate and Jewish than any other), his Moses is a complete deconstruction of the Exodus. You can also find themes recurrent in Burgess' other works: the burden of freedom (in Moses compared to bitter herbs), the unreliability of the narrative and the fallibility of heroes (not Jesus himself, but his disciples are anything but holy). And what brilliant dialogues!

    Yes, I mentioned those two in my last blog paper in March. Well worth viewing then, @Ludovico?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    edited April 2014 Posts: 15,124
    Very much so! All Burgess work is.
Sign In or Register to comment.