[BRG] Live and Let Die
The Estate of John Darcy
Plot spoilers begin in paragraph 3. All through this review I make
comparitive references to 'Casino Royale', so my apologies to people who
have not read it.
LIVE AND LET DIE by Ian Fleming
James Bond, agent of the British Secret Service, is launched into his
first proper action-adventure, following his introduction in 'Casino
Royale'. His character established by the first book and layered-upon
here, we end up not only knowing what makes the man tick but also the
sort of stuff he is really made of, and his motivations which are not
always what you might expect of a ruthless trained killer.
This book was first published in 1954, one year after Fleming had
achieved considerable initial success with 'Casino Royale', but it is a
complete contrast to that first novel. For one thing it is longer, but
more importantly it is fast-paced and dominated by action and events
rather than (per CR) reflections, dissertations and character studies.
This is not to say that these elements are absent, but they are cast
into the role of fillers and segues rather than being the whole
narrative. This makes LALD *much* the better book and, with certain
minor reservations, the definitive answer for those newbies who ask
"Which book should I read first?"
THE STORY: Following more-or-less directly from his long rehabilitation
after 'Casino Royale', it is now January of 1954. Bond is dispatched by
M to Jamaica via the United States, to investigate the activities of a
certain "Mr Big" and in particular to link him to a gold-coin smuggling
operation. In New York Bond links up with Felix Leiter, the CIA agent
who backed him up in Royale, and together they make an initial foray
into Harlem to "take a look at Mr Big". They strike trouble - this
Russian-trained mastermind of negro-operated crime knows all about
Bond's presence in America and that Bond is aimed at him - but thanks to
a timely piece of mutiny and some luck both Bond and Leiter escape with
minor injuries.
The mutiny is provided by 'Solitaire', real name Simone Latrelle, a
partly-psychic French-Haitian girl who has been The Big Man's prisoner
and servant and (he intends) his future wife. She does not intend, and
her instincts lead her to not only trust Bond when she first encounters
him as a prisoner, but also to risk everything to escape under his
protection. Neither of them are particularly safe, though. Escaping to
Florida by train they are spotted and only escape being killed by having
the intuition to sneak off the train at an early stop. Thus they arrive
at St Petersburg, and are reunited with Leiter, but whilst the men check
out Mr Big's local establishment Solitaire is kidnapped back by Big's
hoodlums. Things get worse for Bond when Leiter decides on a late-night
recce of Mr Big's place and is returned to Bond half-eaten by a shark.
Bond gets his revenge on Mr Big's man for that episode, before moving on
the Jamaica.
The original thread of the story is picked up in Jamaica - Mr Big has
discovered Bloody Morgan's treasure in a small cove on the northern
coast of the island and has been transporting the huge haul of coins
secretly back to the States via St Petersburg on his motor yacht
Secatur. The Service man in Jamaica lines up local assistance in the
form of Quarrel, a Cayman Islander with a fisherman's wisdom to aid
Bond's cause, and Bond sets out to reach Mr Big's hideaway with the
intent of recovering Solitaire and the gold, and taking out the
villain. A few twists and turns and tense moments of despair later,
Bond does accomplish his mission and finishes battered and bruised but
with the girl by his side.
That is a lengthier plot summary than I gave for CR, but less detailed.
There is just *so* much crammed into this book. Highlights include Bond
and Leiter moving through Harlem bars from the comfortable to the
downright dangerous (and getting caught, of course), the train trip to
Florida, Bond's escapade with 'The Robber' at the St Petersburg
worm-and-bait warehouse, Bond's underwater approach to Mr Big's island
and the big finale which will read familiar to those who have seen FYEO
(movie).
Bond's character is not really expanded beyond the CR portrait *in
essence*, but seeing him in action reveals so much more about the way he
operates. The presence of Solitaire on the train, and her connection to
him personally, governs much of what he does from then on. The attack
on Leiter provokes him into revenge, although he does undertake some
investigative work in this part of the story as well. He is definitely
under the heavy influence of friendship when the first half of CR would
seem to give a picture of a man who neither wanted nor meeded close
friends. For all his ruthlessness (for the first time we actually have
Bond killing people - in CR it was merely talked about and the deaths
which occurred were not his doing), Bond has a sensitive core.
Obviouslym this was touched by Vesper in the previous book but Bond's
bitterness over that surely lingers somewhere?
Which brings me to a *crucial* part of the whole Bond saga. I have
often suspected that Fleming wrote Live and Let Die for the purpose of
*restarting* the Bond series. He had crafted CR as a character study,
but with the brand name now "known" he went completely the opposite way,
writing an action story and almost discarding the baggage from the
previous book. I say "almost" - the plastic surgery on Bond's hand (to
deal with the cuts made by the Smersh assassin) is dealt with in Chapter
2.
"... as Bond though of the man with the stiletto who
had cut them he clenched his hands on the wheel ...
Bond had sworn to get back at them. He had told M as
much at that last interview. Was this appointment
with M to start him on his trail of revenge?"
Hang about. The man with the stiletto had saved Bond's life. Fleming
is playing revisionist games with Bond's history here. The reason Bond
decided to target Smersh was because of the overhanging threat of death
which had pressured and compromised Vesper, and thus led to Bond's
personal tragedy in respect of her. His revenge on Smersh had nothing
to do with the assassin who killed Le Chiffre and assaulted Bond,
otherwise we would have been told about it when Bond was still in
hospital - au contraire, in hospital he was talking resignation. He
hardens his resolve *after* Vesper's suicide. In LALD Fleming does not
merely ignore Vesper but tries to change Bond's motivation. This is why
I suspect he may have wanted to push that earlier book into the shadows
by imposing small differences in this more memorable edition.
"He was glad to ... gaze out at his first sight of
America since the war."
What a sheltered life he leads - no assignments for nearly 9 years
requiring him to pass through the United States? But what about this
from CR -
"Bond had once worked in Jamaica ..." (Ch 1)
I wonder when? Then there is this gem at the end of LALD -
"The first tears since his childhood came into James
Bond's blue-grey eyes ..."
... but his "eyes were wet and he dried them" after reading Vesper's
suicide note. See what I mean? Fleming chose to ignore much of what
went before. More grist for the mill comes in the form of Service
protocols -
"He was on to 'The Link', the outside liaison officer who
was the only man in London he might telephone from abroad.
Then only in dire necessity." (CR, Ch 27)
In LALD, Ch 9, Bond rings HQ and is put through directly to M. And if
you ask me, his guarded conversation is easily decipherable by anyone
with a passing knowledge of the night's chaos in Harlem. So much for
the indirect control which Fleming so minutely detailed for the Royale
operation.
Felix Leiter makes his starring performance in this book, although he is
eliminated from the game well before the end. His rapport with Bond his
firmly established, after they were little more than working associates
in Royale, but here we are left in no doubt that they are (or have
become) firm friends. He is revealed to be a very multi-talented
operator with considerably more influence in the CIA than might have
been expected of an agent pulled out of NATO Joint Intelligence
specifically for the purpose of teaming with Bond on this mission ...
but never mind. We never see Bond stitching up reinforcements or
liaison assistance with the alacrity that Leiter demonstrates, and this
makes it all the more surprising that Leiter would go alone into the
danger of facing 'The Robber' - but perhaps not surprising that he
didn't fare well. Definitely a behind-the-lines man and not a field
agent. So why does he pop up in the field several times as the years go
by? Ha. Ours not to question Fleming's storytelling, right?
Solitaire is a damsel in distress and a turncoat, making her a very
complex female lead character and a complete contrast to Vesper. Vesper
had a dark secret, but Solitaire is established immediately as a
sympathetic character who is completely open to Bond and antipathetic to
the villain (who has been clothing and feeding her). Her backstory is
interesting if not entirely convincing, but I always find myself
wondering how she accumulated the $5000 she has hidden in her bag - a
fortune in those days, the equivalent of Bond's annual income (as
revealed in the next book). Aside from the complexity she adds to
Bond's mission, the sexual element she adds to the story in spite of no
actual copulation in the whole book, and the twist she creates at the
end by the mere fact of being there ... Solitaire does very little in
the story. She protects Bond in that first interview with Mr Big, she
escapes, she gets recognised by the enemy in St Petersburg and is
kidnapped, and then she is present for the finale. Whilst I find her a
most attractive character (in print, that is, notwithstanding that I
find Jane Seymour quite attractive as well) I have to confess that she
is closer to a pawn than a queen in this story.
Mr Big, of course, is an ogre as most of Fleming's villains will turn
out to be in coming books. He shares similarities with the broad
spectrum of them in having gross physical characteristics as well as
highly developed meglomania and self-aggrandising delusions. The fact
that these delusions usually spring from a base of actual power and
achievement is immaterial - faced with Bond, the man may as well ask for
reassignment to the Minors because he is clearly outclassed. Is he?
Bond's nasty habit of survival in this book is fairly lucky in that it
should have been easy enough for Mr Big to simply arrange for Bond to be
hit by a truck or something. After all, he is supposed to be not only a
genius but a Smersh agent with 5 post-war years of Russian training.
For some reason, in spite of his obvious menace in the Harlem scenes, he
does not seem to me to "have the goods". And the whole voodoo Baron
Samedi thing which supposedly underpins his mystique and power is laid
on a bit thickly for me - particularly when the whole thing boils down
to a simple gold smuggling case. Are the US Customs and Coast Guard
really so unimaginative as to not check the deep ballast in a fish tank,
poison fish or not?
I mentioned "minor reservations" way back at the start. They are the
same ones which most people touch upon when mentioning this book in
newsgroup articles. Fleming goes to great pains to create an authentic
atmosphere in the Harlem and the train scenes, but in doing so (and
probably faithfully to that era) he leaves a legacy which many find at
least distasteful if not actually offensive. I would consider these to
be more serious reservations if it were not for PULP FICTION, in which
we see black gangsters in Jules and Marcellus Wallace using the term
"nigger" not only of themselves but of any of their associates. Fleming
may have been aware of the rapid dating of his terminology, anyway. In
a subsequent book Fleming has Bond reflecting upon an admonition Leiter
had given him regarding the N word. Personally, I find the phonetic
spelling of accented dialogue more distracting that that word in LALD.
Finally, this book continues the style of having nearly all the action
described from Bond's point-of-view. There are some important
exceptions - Whisper at the big switchboard and our insight into
Solitaire's thoughts on the train - but for the rest it is like CR.
Unless Bond sees/hears it, neither do we. This would change
dramatically in 'Moonraker', the next book, with excellent results IMHO,
but the effect here is to have the reader once again deeply identifying
with the Bond character. Having done this with two books - the
slow-paced one with the longueurs and the fast-paced one with the
running and shooting and train-tripping and diving and so on - James
Bond was now firmly established in the marketplace as the premier
paperback hero of the 50s. Live and Let Die was the most reprinted and
biggest selling Bond novel until sales of 'Doctor No' and 'From Russia
With Love' were boosted by the movies. I can easily understand why.
Historical Note: There was indeed a pirate named Henry Morgan who
became Governor of Jamaica, but the guff about his treasure of gold
coins and a tiny island in a small cove on the northern coast of Jamaica
is purely that - guff. To read about the real Morgan, visit
http://www.data-wales.co.uk/morgan.htm
--
Cheers,
John
"Do you like 'Cavalliera Rusticana', Terry?"
"I've never had it, Mr Fawlty."
John P Darcy
<snip>
Er, sorry about the weirdness. Forgot to change my identity back after
a humourous post in another newsgroup :/
Michael Cummins
>
> <snip>
>
> Er, sorry about the weirdness. Forgot to change my identity back after
> a humourous post in another newsgroup :/
>
John,
While I don't totally agree with you I liked that very much. Have you done
likewise with CR? Do you have a site for this/ these essays?
I hope you continue.
--
M. Cummins
------------------------
"Ni raibh d'oidhreacht aige ach an geal- ghaire do bhronn Dia air, agus gur
chreid se na chroibhe go raibh an saghal mor ar mire"
--Scaramuis le Rafael Sabatini
Spectre
The Estate of John Darcy <hungdrawna...@xpleiades.8m.com> wrote
> LIVE AND LET DIE by Ian Fleming
>
> James Bond, agent of the British Secret Service, is launched into his
> first proper action-adventure, following his introduction in 'Casino
> Royale'. His character established by the first book and layered-upon
> here, we end up not only knowing what makes the man tick but also the
> sort of stuff he is really made of, and his motivations which are not
> always what you might expect of a ruthless trained killer.
>
> This book was first published in 1954, one year after Fleming had
> achieved considerable initial success with 'Casino Royale', but it is a
> complete contrast to that first novel. For one thing it is longer, but
> more importantly it is fast-paced and dominated by action and events
> rather than (per CR) reflections, dissertations and character studies.
> This is not to say that these elements are absent, but they are cast
> into the role of fillers and segues rather than being the whole
> narrative. This makes LALD *much* the better book and, with certain
> minor reservations, the definitive answer for those newbies who ask
> "Which book should I read first?"
I agree that LALD is the better book and one of my favourites on reflection
from the books I have read so far (6).
I think newbies should read CR first though because that was the first book
and sets up the series.
<story snip>
Yes, the phonetic language is annoying at times, and the use of the 'N' word
is offensive.
> Finally, this book continues the style of having nearly all the action
> described from Bond's point-of-view. There are some important
> exceptions - Whisper at the big switchboard and our insight into
> Solitaire's thoughts on the train - but for the rest it is like CR.
> Unless Bond sees/hears it, neither do we. This would change
> dramatically in 'Moonraker', the next book, with excellent results IMHO,
> but the effect here is to have the reader once again deeply identifying
> with the Bond character. Having done this with two books - the
> slow-paced one with the longueurs and the fast-paced one with the
> running and shooting and train-tripping and diving and so on - James
> Bond was now firmly established in the marketplace as the premier
> paperback hero of the 50s. Live and Let Die was the most reprinted and
> biggest selling Bond novel until sales of 'Doctor No' and 'From Russia
> With Love' were boosted by the movies. I can easily understand why.
>
> Historical Note: There was indeed a pirate named Henry Morgan who
> became Governor of Jamaica, but the guff about his treasure of gold
> coins and a tiny island in a small cove on the northern coast of Jamaica
> is purely that - guff. To read about the real Morgan, visit
> http://www.data-wales.co.uk/morgan.htm
I was interested in Bloody Morgan too, and I saw a rum bottle in my home
called 'Captain Morgan's' and I found out it was named after Henry Morgan!
John P Darcy
> While I don't totally agree with you I liked that very much. Have you done
> likewise with CR? Do you have a site for this/ these essays?
Working on a site. Well, the work is completely in my head ... I'll get
to it eventually :)
The Shadow
thoughts.
Even though I do enjoy the story it has to be the one book that does not
hold up well as far as the language used. The old radio program Amos&Andy
comes to mind, chapter five's title is an eye sore. Did not really care
for the "who do, you do, the voodoo that you do" element since I am not a
believer in that sort of nonsense but on the whole I did enjoy the book.
Now it is not War And Peace but it is an entertaining as pulp fiction. Call
me crazy but I enjoyed Casino Royale more then his second effort. LALD's
biggest strength is Felix, in my opinion his character brings the story back
to reality.
Michael Reed
> > often suspected that Fleming wrote Live and Let Die for the purpose of
> > *restarting* the Bond series. He had crafted CR as a character study,
> > but with the brand name now "known" he went completely the opposite way,
> > writing an action story and almost discarding the baggage from the
> > previous book. I say "almost" - the plastic surgery on Bond's hand (to
> > deal with the cuts made by the Smersh assassin) is dealt with in Chapter
> > 2.
I disagree on a personal level that LALD bests CR, I in fact put this in the
lower middle of Fleming's works. It has some nice scenes in its chapters,
but to me it doesn't flow like a novel. LALD juts from one spot to another.
However, I am interested in the point you raised above. I do not know if we
have any fans who read the books upon original release. By the time most of
us were engaging in them, the reader could assume it was the "latest" Bond
adventure, meaning one could assume Bond would not be killed at would return
anew. I wonder how Fleming tried to anticipate reaction to this book. He
will, on his following novel, use a final scene that does not try to put
Bond in danger, but instead finish off the storyline that needed closure.
This time, Fleming tries to set up a battle royale as if the reader should
question what Bond's fate will be. I don't really think Fleming wrote
assuming the reader would feel this way unless he was still going "one novel
at a time."
I know from reading about Fleming that Moonraker, the next BRG topic, was an
intentional attempt to write to impress filmmakers, with its scenes at the
Cliffs of Dover. LALD was Fleming writing to please himself. While he
succeeded, and impressed more critics and fans alike, over time I feel this
book indeed restarts the character of Bond - but at a detriment to CR, not
an improvement. Because Bond's thoughts take a back burner to action scenes
most of the way through, we don't identify as much as follow Bond's
exploits.
That said, Bond's battle with The Robber is among my favorite Fleming
movements, and is outstanding. For me, the following sections never reach
the height of intensity. I did not like Solitaire as a character, as she
isn't the kind of person one would expect to meet anywhere. Where the
characters are fantastic, you could meet a "local hero" like Hugo Drax, or a
slimy gambler like Le Chiffre, Solitaire is a bit past Fleming's world of
beyond the probable but never beyond the possible.
--
Michael Reed
ree...@core.com
re...@hmss.com
Her Majesty's Secret Servant - www.hmss.com
alt.fan.james-bond FAQ - www.ianfleming.org/mkkbb/afjbfaq/
John P Darcy
> Because Bond's thoughts take a back burner to action scenes
> most of the way through, we don't identify as much as follow Bond's
> exploits.
Bond's thoughts *do* take secondary status to the action, but this is
not to say that they are not there. It remains the case that the reader
sees and "feels" the scenes through Bond's senses and no-one elses
(except for one or two very isolated passages which I mentioned in my
review). Bond's thoughts in the Harlem bars, his ruminations after
Solitaire's kidnapping and Leiter's mauling, and his reflections on the
size of the task and the prize as he is preparing to approach the Isle
of Surprise - these remain quite solid as a means for the reader to
identify with Bond.
> That said, Bond's battle with The Robber is among my favorite Fleming
> movements, and is outstanding. For me, the following sections never reach
> the height of intensity.
That has something to do with the change of the pace of the action.
Bond travels to Jamaica and spends a week there awaiting Mr Big's
arrival, and is in no danger at all during that time. Even his
underwater approach to the island is slow-paced because, well, the mode
of travel is slow. The intensity does not build because there is some
inevitability about the sequence of events after St Petersburg, and even
when the Secatur starts up (trawling Bond and Solitaire behind) there is
the knowledge of the limpet mine and something far short of uncertainty
as to the fate of the good guys - but perhaps this is merely the
reaction of someone born in 1968 who knows in advance that Bond
survives. In 1954, there may have been greater uncertainty for the
reader, but for the really intense finales we'll have to wait for FRWL,
GF and (less so) TB.
> Solitaire is a bit past Fleming's world of
> beyond the probable but never beyond the possible.
Fleming was far more exposed than we to the world of the fantastic and
improbable which exists in the minds and spirits of the Carribean. I do
not consider it improbable that he based the character of Solitaire - or
her second-sight abilities - on some story he had heard in Jamaica.
--
Barry King
>
> The Estate of John Darcy <hungdrawna...@xpleiades.8m.com> wrote
>
> > LIVE AND LET DIE by Ian Fleming
> > I mentioned "minor reservations" way back at the start. They are the
> > same ones which most people touch upon when mentioning this book in
> > newsgroup articles. Fleming goes to great pains to create an authentic
> > atmosphere in the Harlem and the train scenes, but in doing so (and
> > probably faithfully to that era) he leaves a legacy which many find at
> > least distasteful if not actually offensive. I would consider these to
> > be more serious reservations if it were not for PULP FICTION, in which
> > we see black gangsters in Jules and Marcellus Wallace using the term
> > "nigger" not only of themselves but of any of their associates. Fleming
> > may have been aware of the rapid dating of his terminology, anyway. In
> > a subsequent book Fleming has Bond reflecting upon an admonition Leiter
> > had given him regarding the N word. Personally, I find the phonetic
> > spelling of accented dialogue more distracting that that word in LALD.
>
> Yes, the phonetic language is annoying at times, and the use of the 'N' word
> is offensive.
I've always read '60's era Signet paperback editions of the Fleming
books. I gather from these any other comments on the newsgroup that
these editions, particularly of this book, must have been somewhat
bowlderized; unless the "N" word being referred to is "Negro," it seems
to be missing from my copy. Can anyone inform me just what the
differences between the originals and the Signet editions are?
Even without the overtly offensive language, Fleming's racial attitudes
do make one wince. The notion that African Americans in the middle of
the 20th century could be so pervasively controlled by fear of Voodoo
is, I think, more offensive than any single word could be. Fleming's
tendency to catagorize people along racial and ethnic lines is at its
most bothersome here, perhaps because he is dealing with mid-century
America and his portrayal of its black population is at odds with my own
experience of a time and place not too far removed from the one he
describes.
That rather large caveat aside, I do like LALD a lot. The action comes
fast and furious, with astonishing violence after the mostly sedate CR.
It does seem more a part of the series to come, while CR seems like a
kind of prologue. Fleming's descriptions of the settings -- the luxury
of the St. Regis, the humorous horror of the hordes of "oldsters" in St.
Petersburg, the beauty of the Jamaican beach house and the exotic
foriegn universe of Bond's nighttime underwater trek to the island --
are classic.
--
Barry King
--
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man
who cannot read them."
-Mark Twain
John P Darcy
> I don't know about recent editions, but the Signet edition I have,
> printed in 1963, titles chapter V "Seventh Avenue," and does not include
> the dialog you quote.
I have two LALDs. The one on which I based my article and my last post
is 1978 Triad/Panther and features a sultry lady draped over a large
gold automatic pistol. I also have it in an omnibus volume (with DAF
and DN) and this is 1973 Jonathan Cape. Chapter V is identically titled
and worded in the two of them.
> Do you know if there are similar cuts in any of the other books?
Sorry. And given that I have a variety of editions of the books, I now
start to wonder what *I* am reading. My OHMSS is a 1989 Coronet
edition, and it is the youngest on my shelf. I have several from the
Triad/Panther set and also several from the Pan editions featuring a
potpourri of props from the storyline in a photo still-life on the
covers.
Perhaps more differences will reveal themselves as we work through the
series.
--
Barry King
John P Darcy wrote:
> And, as someone else posted, the title of Chapter V is a modern-day
> disgrace. If one of Agatha Christie's books can be retitled "And Then
> There Were None" (the last line of the verse from which the original
> title was taken) then I remain surprised that Glidrose have not renamed
> this chapter in more recent editions.
I don't know about recent editions, but the Signet edition I have,
printed in 1963, titles chapter V "Seventh Avenue," and does not include
the dialog you quote. Damn, that's disturbing. I've always thought of
the Fleming books I've read as the "real" James Bond and now I find he's
been edited. I guess I'll have to find an original edition somewhere to
quiet the fanboy completist in me.
Do you know if there are similar cuts in any of the other books?
--
John P Darcy
> I've always read '60's era Signet paperback editions of the Fleming
> books. I gather from these any other comments on the newsgroup that
> these editions, particularly of this book, must have been somewhat
> bowlderized; unless the "N" word being referred to is "Negro," it seems
> to be missing from my copy. Can anyone inform me just what the
> differences between the originals and the Signet editions are?
The word "negro" appears many times, but the word "nigger" is also in
evidence. Chapter V is titled "Nigger Heaven", from a reference inside
the chapter.
[Leiter speaking to Bond] "... Just listen to the
couple behind you. From what I've heard they're
straight out of 'Nigger Heaven'."
The passage which follows that, being an exchange between two people in
the booth behind Bond, is entirely written in the phonetic-speak which
annoys me so much, and which is a stereotypical concoction of the worst
kind.
"Guess ah jist nacherlly gits tahd listenin' at
yuh," said the man languidly. "Why'nt yuh hush
yo' mouff'n let me 'joy mahself 'n peace 'n
qui-yet."
...
The man's voice suddenly sharpened. "Wha' dat
Birdie he mean tuh yuh, hey?" he asked suspic-
ously. "Perzackly," he paused to let the big
word sink in, "perzackly wha goes 'tween yuh 'n
dat lowdown ornery wuthless Nigguh?"
That is the first occurrence of the big N Word, and perhaps Fleming
thought it was OK to put it into the mouth of "one of them" - but for
all Fleming's intimate knowledge of Jamaica and his exposure to coloured
people there, can someone tell me how many times he had been to NYC?
Just where did he source his material for the dialogue and accents he
puts in the mouths of the non-whites in this book? Crikey - it's dated
and unconvincing stuff.
In Chapter X, when Bond and Solitaire are talking on the train for the
first time, she refers to "his nigger gangsters". That seems to be the
last use of the N Word (Yes, I just skimmed the whole book in ten
minutes to be sure) but there are plenty of other references and
characterisations of African-descent people which would probably cause
offence if written today - more simplespeak from a cab driver in St
Pete, negroes working naked in Bloody Morgan's treasure cave. I guess
in hindsight it is not merely the *words* used as much as the *tone*
used. Fleming spends this entire book talking down every black person
in sight *except* Mr Big himself.
And, as someone else posted, the title of Chapter V is a modern-day
disgrace. If one of Agatha Christie's books can be retitled "And Then
There Were None" (the last line of the verse from which the original
title was taken) then I remain surprised that Glidrose have not renamed
this chapter in more recent editions.
--
Thedukeofdeath
him. No one ever said he was Hemingway. And Mark Twain was a master of
writing phonetically.
I had a good laugh to myself when I saw "Lootenant" spelled like that. I
thought, "Why did he do that?" Then I realized that Lieutenant to Fleming is
LEFTtenant.
The Duke