New James Bond novels - what do you want to see?
Keith Gow
>fifteen minutes, what idea would you pitch at them?
>
Perusing through Raymond Benson's "The James Bond Bedside Companion"
has reacquainted me with the particulars of Bond's early life,
clearing up a few misconceptions.
The chronology is imperfect, but here's the best stab at it:
1924 - James Bond born to Andrew Bond and Monique Delacroix
Bond's early life was mostly spent abroad. While living in Germany, he
acquired a first class command of French & German
1935 - Bond's parents are killed in a climbing accident
Living with Aunt Charmian Bond in Pett Bottom, she completes his early
education and prepares him for Eton.
1936 - Bond enters Eton at age 12. His career there was "brief and
undistinguished". He left after two semesters, after *allegedly*
getting into trouble with one of the school's maids.
(Note: what the trouble actually is isn't refered to in Fleming's
canon... which allows Mr Higson some room, as long as Bond it removed
from the school)
Aunt Charmian removes Bond from Eton and sends him to Fettes. While
Bond was inclined to be solitary by nature, he did form strong
friendships here - particularly among athletic circles.
1940 - Bond, at age 16, loses his innocence. (Fleming's line in "From
a View to a Kill" is perfect - "That had started one of the most
memorable evenings of his life, culminating in the loss, almost
simultaneously, of his virginity and his notecase"!)
1941 - Bond leaves school, at some point attends the University of
Geneva briefly. He enters the Ministry of Defense this same year
(pretending to be 19 years of age) and becomes a Lt in the Special
Branch of teh Royal Naval Volunteer Services
1945 - Bond has achieved the rank of Commander. M accepts Commander
Bond into the Secret Service
Bond gains his Double-O status after completing two jobs - one in New
York and the other in Stockholm
Even this brief history gives me hope that some good *might* come of a
"prequel" Bond story, but the whole Young James Bond concept is still
worrying.
His Eton days might still work richly as backstory to his years at
Fettes, where at least he is a boxer and proficient in judo and has
athletic friends.
And, yes, by this timeline above, it seems he's a Commander in the
Royal Navy at 21 (!) and has his 00 by 25. So young isn't necessarily
bad... it's just I'd much rather begin with his visit to Paris than
right back when he's a shy orphan without facial hair or much more to
him than the fact he speaks two languages, has lived abroad and is, by
nature, a loner.
-- Keith Gow --
Tim Pollard
news:407b8a2c...@News.Individual.NET...
> >Here's a new thread idea, then -- if you could have IFP listen to you for
> >fifteen minutes, what idea would you pitch at them?
What I'd like to see *much* more than 'Young James Bond' (which seems to
want to fill in a gap in the market that doesn't actually exist) is a series
of 'World of James Bond' books, each penned by as series of guest authors in
the 'Robert Markham' style as discussed elsewhere - books set in the 'Bond
universe' but perhaps only briefly relating to Bond himself, or having him
make a 'special guest appearance'. Maybe (and most obviously) they could be
the adventures of the other, mostly unsung as yet '00' agents, or even some
Felix Leiter adventures. Test the ground with an anthology of short stories
in the same mould first maybe, but 'World of Bond' stories set
contemporarily with our hero sounds a damned sight better than 'Harry Potter
joins MI6'.
--
Regards
Tim Pollard
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
- Captain Mal Reynolds, 'Firefly'
JD
well, of course). I think you could even use the name Markham, and
just give the idea to several writers at the same time. And then you
could have a novel about 006 in Kenya and 005 in Nepal and whatever
you wanted, and they could all meet Q, and M and deal in the same
world as Bond - but they wouldn't be Bond. They'd have different
characters, and you could choose your favourite. It could be a bit
like the old Nick Carter books, but with the flavour and hopefully
some of the class of Fleming - as well as the branding (I can already
see them all with similar covers and typefaces, and different
variations of the 007 gun logo). Bond could appear briefly or be
mentioned in them all. Perhaps he wasn't available for the mission.
You could even go back to the 60s, and have the missions the other 00
agents were doing while Bond was doing his original missions - and you
could cross-reference it that way. 'Bond's been brainwashed, 003, so
we need you to go into Prague and get this document for us.' The
advantage with this is that you wouldn't actually be in any danger of
screwing up Bond himself. You'd be playing with the world around him,
but it could be fairly minimal. No need to labour the connections -
just enough for them to fit. IFP are the only people who can reap the
rewards of having Bond clones. So why not take on Clancy and Ludlum
and the rest?
Some more ideas:
* A first-person Bond novel, written by a world-class writer. As
previously discussed, get William Gibson or whoever to re-imagine the
character. Think of Frank Miller's work on Batman and Daredevil, or
Alan Moore's on Superman.
* Failing this, a book of short stories featuring or about Bond, by
world class writers.
* Set the books in the 60s. I've seen a lot of discussion on this list
of setting the films in that era. It's not going to happen. I've also
seen a lot of people suggesting that the Gardner or Benson books be
used by EON. Again, that won't happen. So why not combine the two
impossibilities into one possibility? They're going for period now
with Higson - why not go for the right period, and have a series of
60s-set Bond novels? Package them like they're from the Sixties, even.
JD
-------
Love spy novels?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/spynovels
Leviathan
> or even some Felix Leiter adventures.
I must confess, I've long nursed a fantasy of writing some Felix Leiter
adventures. I really like the character a great deal, and have thought a
lot about what kind of man he is. I'd write them mpodern-day, with his past
in the Bond novels intavt.... And we'd find that, deep down inside the
light-hearted Leiter, there's a real craziness there, and a real rage. This
is a guy who was literally fed into a shark, and watched parts of himself
disappear forever into its awful gullet. There are scars that show, in the
stump of his right arm and left leg... But the ones inside him, the ones on
his psyche, are probably a lot more terrible... And a lot more interesting.
--
Jonathan Andrew Sheen
http://www.leviathanstudios.com
Leviathan of the GEI (Detached.)
jsh...@leviathanstudios.com
"What'dya expect? I'm a New Yorker!"
-Anonymous New York Firefighter, 9/12/01
Tim Pollard
Absolutely - in fact 60's contemporary Bond is *exactly* what I did mean,
because (as you rightly say) the other 00's etc. must have had equally
important things to do. It'd also mean we could get a few alternate
viewpoints of Bond, or views of the 'Bondiverse' - there was a very
interesting episode of the cartoon 'Batman' TV series on a while ago with
some kids wandering aroung Gotham City discussing Batman, and each telling a
story about him they knew to be true - one kid told a real 'Golden Age'
story from the early comics, with Batman and Robin (in comic garb) fighting
the Joker in museum of gigantic instruments.
"That's not what Batman's like, my ucle told me this..." and went on to tell
the story of the Frank Miller Dark Knight Batman. A third kid then says
neither of those stories are correct, and points out that Batman wears a
rubber suit with moulded nipples <g>... and then, as they've wandered into a
deserted building a baddy sets fire to it, and they are all saved by the
appearance of Bats himself - the twist at the end being that they *still*
can't agree what they saw and what happened, even after he's left.
And the joy of all that was that each story was *almost* impossible to
resolve, as the times, styles, artwork and appearance of each was *totally*
different... but that that's how people perceived Batman to be... and that
would work excellently for Bond as well I'd have thought - maybe some
stories could be 'Moore-ish', but some Connery/Dalton etc. In fact it might
be quite interesting to write the same story, but told in the style of each
actor!
And I love your idea with the packaging/logos too...
Richard Newman
I agree that this is a very good idea. Use situations hinted at in previous
novels and or films to create stories featuring other 00's or characters in
the world of Bond. This has worked very well within the world of Star Wars
and Star Trek and if the estate keeps control of the characters and ok's the
plot (as George Lucas does if I recall) then we wont get any of those
continuity errors that wind us up. The works of Tom Clancy explore not only
the character of Jack Ryan, but several books feature other characters
mentioned within the world of the hero from The Hunt for Red October.
This is a technique that would entice people back into the literary world of
Bond and could make much more money than "The Famous Five vs. Baby Blofield"
(I hope Higson's books don't end up like this) We could also still
experience the dark tone of the originals in a variety of time lines.
I would love to see the world of Alec Trevelyan explored just before he came
to recall the fate of his parents at the hands of the British government
(long before he went bad and got squished by a falling satellite dish) , or
perhaps the story of as yet unnamed agent going through selection at the
training ground in the Falkland Islands.
My personal favourite (and I would happily write it myself) would be the
story of the meteoritic rise of the agent who has been sent to hunt a
"revenge filled" Bond, who is after the murderer of the wife of Felix
Leighter.
Just thinking about it now there is so much scope, the common thread would
have to be Bond of course, but the opportunities are endless. I think I'm
going to write the first chapter of one and put it on this news group.
Richard
"Leviathan" <jsh...@leviathanstudios.com> wrote in message
news:58cd04a81dc1f87f...@news.1usenet.com...
Mac
Tim Pollard timpo...@yahoo.com writes:
> "Keith Gow" <kw...@vicnet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:407b8a2c...@News.Individual.NET...
>
>>> Here's a new thread idea, then -- if you could have IFP listen to
>>> you for fifteen minutes, what idea would you pitch at them?
>
>
> What I'd like to see *much* more than 'Young James Bond' (which seems
> to want to fill in a gap in the market that doesn't actually exist)
> is a series of 'World of James Bond' books, each penned by as series
> of guest authors in the 'Robert Markham' style as discussed elsewhere
> - books set in the 'Bond universe' but perhaps only briefly relating
> to Bond himself, or having him make a 'special guest appearance'.
> Maybe (and most obviously) they could be the adventures of the other,
> mostly unsung as yet '00' agents, or even some Felix Leiter
> adventures. Test the ground with an anthology of short stories in the
> same mould first maybe, but 'World of Bond' stories set
> contemporarily with our hero sounds a damned sight better than 'Harry
> Potter joins MI6'.
I mentioned something similar a few years ago -- "Moneypenny's Day Off" was
one of my suggested titles...
--
--
~~Mac
Recently viewed or re-viewed: DRAGONSLAYER (1981)
Sam I Am
>I must confess, I've long nursed a fantasy of writing some Felix Leiter
>adventures. I really like the character a great deal, and have thought a
>lot about what kind of man he is. I'd write them mpodern-day, with his past
>in the Bond novels intavt.... And we'd find that, deep down inside the
>light-hearted Leiter, there's a real craziness there, and a real rage. This
>is a guy who was literally fed into a shark,
Twice! (LOL)
>and watched parts of himself
>disappear forever into its awful gullet. There are scars that show, in the
>stump of his right arm and left leg... But the ones inside him, the ones on
>his psyche, are probably a lot more terrible... And a lot more interesting.
Man, I so wish we could see that series of books. I'll bet it'd be a
fascinating read.
Sam I Am
>Absolutely - in fact 60's contemporary Bond is *exactly* what I did mean,
>because (as you rightly say) the other 00's etc. must have had equally
>important things to do. It'd also mean we could get a few alternate
>viewpoints of Bond, or views of the 'Bondiverse' - there was a very
>interesting episode of the cartoon 'Batman' TV series on a while ago with
>some kids wandering aroung Gotham City discussing Batman, and each telling a
>story about him they knew to be true - one kid told a real 'Golden Age'
>story from the early comics, with Batman and Robin (in comic garb) fighting
>the Joker in museum of gigantic instruments.
>"That's not what Batman's like, my ucle told me this..." and went on to tell
>the story of the Frank Miller Dark Knight Batman. A third kid then says
>neither of those stories are correct, and points out that Batman wears a
>rubber suit with moulded nipples <g>... and then, as they've wandered into a
>deserted building a baddy sets fire to it, and they are all saved by the
>appearance of Bats himself - the twist at the end being that they *still*
>can't agree what they saw and what happened, even after he's left.
Tim, that was one of my favorite episodes of the entire Batman series, and
for the very reasons you bring up.
JD
'Double O Section operational
Ian Fleming Publications Ltd is thrilled to announce the commission of
a new series of books based on the world of Ian Fleming's James Bond.
Fans of the books and films will know that the "00" in 007 signifies
that Bond has a licence to kill. "Double 0 Section" is a new series of
full-length novels following the adventures of the MI6 department's
other agents. Four such agents are mentioned in passing in Fleming's
novels. ‘We thought this was a golden opportunity,' said Iain
Ryder-Carr of Cygnet, who will be publishing the series. ‘Who hasn't
read the books or seen the films and wondered about the lives of 008
and 009?'
The new books, which are to be written by a team of writers, will be
set in the world – and the time – of Fleming's Bond. We've gone back
to the Sixties,' said Mr Ryder-Carr. ‘The writers have taken passing
references in the original novels and mapped out the whole Double O
Section: the agents, their backgrounds, and their missions. In
Moonraker, we learn that 0011 has been missing in Singapore for two
months. Now we'll find out what happened to him.' Cygnet is billing
the series as a "return to the glory days of Ian Fleming's
action-packed Cold War spy thrillers".‘
007 himself will also make appearances in the adventures – on and off
the page. ‘Bond has a rivalry with 008, who is often M's choice to
replace him if a mission goes wrong. We'll learn more about their
complex relationship, and how Bond fits into the hierarchy of the
group.' M, Major Boothroyd, Mary Goodnight and other Fleming
characters will also feature in the novels – as will several of Bond's
villains. IFP plans to release one book every three months, with
cross-marketing and promotion across the new brand. A deal for
video-game tie-ins is already in negotiation.'
JD
The more I think about Tim's idea, the more I like it. As a boy
growing up watching Bond films, I always loved the idea that there was
a 008. In the movies when we saw the other double O agents, I wanted
to know more about them. I think the main problems with the book
franchise (by which I mean the adult ones) have been that they haven't
had enough promotion or money put behind them. They haven't really
been thought through. Amis' Colonel Sun and Gardner's Licence Renewed
got an enormous amount of publicity, but after that attention fell
flat. Most people don't even know that there *are* Bond continuations.
I think the present set-up is very unattractive for any potential
writer. Gardner felt very constrained at being branded forever as the
man who walked in Fleming's shoes. That's why I think it's a mistake
to have the writer's name on the covers: it's a distraction. The real
event is that these are Bond books. And they should be *known about*
and *readily available*. Tom Clancy has a whole series of books out
that use characters he's created, and new writers are still coming up
with novels based on plots Robert Ludlum noted down before he died.
I keep thinking about the NIck Carter series. Carter was one of the
most published characters in fiction – a detective in dime novels
since the 19th century. The rights to him were bought by Condé Nast in
the Sixties, and they reinvented him as a superspy called Killmaster.
He was "the American James Bond". Condé Nast got dozens of writers to
knock the books off - there were over 200 of the things, eventually.
"There isn't a writer in America today who hasn't written a Nick
Carter novel," Martin Cruz Smith told me a couple of years back - he
wrote six himself. It was like an apprenticeship for thriller writers
- money in the bank, experience notched up. Writers' names weren't on
the books.
I think IFP should do the same - not have one writer, but several.
That way, it won't be a millstone around their neck, and there won't
be this pressure to compete with Fleming. The 00 idea also takes some
of that heat off. When Bond has fast food or goes to Euro Disney or
whatever in Gardner's books, that's actually affecting Fleming's
character - but you *have* to do that if you write books set now
featuring 007. With books set in the 60s featuring 003 and 009,
however, you wouldn't need to contradict Fleming at all. You wouldn't
have the age continuation problem, either. And you could use it to
explore different sides of Bond without ruining him. One of the 00
agents could die, for example. Or go rogue a la 006 in Goldeneye. Some
Fleming fans like the idea of the ruthless, cold, dark Bond - one of
the characters could really play up that element, and could be
involved in really gritty spy stories. Another 00 agent could be a bit
more of the caddish Bond of the films, a bit more Mooreish. You'd have
your favourites.
I sense that IFP have the idea that people don't read this kind of
book anymore. They do. Ludlum and Clancy are selling lots and lots.
Ludlum's sold over 200 million books! People are *crying out* to read
Bond-like books - why not give them to them? These other writers are
becoming brands: 'Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell' is a successful video
game. Fleming, Bond, licence to kill, 00, MI6, M, Q, the Sixties,
London - put that all together and you've got a mighty powerful brand
to attract the same kind of attention Amis and Gardner first got, I
reckon.
A few years ago, I found a second-hand spy novel called The Quiller
Memorandum. It was about a British spy - or "shadow executive" -
working for an organisation known as The Bureau. It was filmed in the
60s with a screenplay by Harold Pinter, a score by John Barry, with
Alec Guinness and Max Von Sydow. It's part of a 19-book series by a
British writer called Elleston Trevor, using the pseudonym Adam Hall.
I'm a big fan. Here's part of a post I made to the Quiller Yahoo group
back in June 2001, when we were discussing the idea of continuation
novels:
"Something I have been interested in for a while is the idea of
parallel existences. Bear with me. Quiller could be seen as a parallel
Bond figure, or his shadow - but there are also shadow Bonds (003,
008, 009 etc), and parallel Quillers: those other executives on other
missions quiller briefly mentions, or scowling in a corner waiting to
take over if he cops one from a long gun after all. when I read other
spy novels, I just yearn for the bureau. I moan when they get
something wrong, or state the obvious, or can't think straight. There
are many elements that make up quiller, but I think some of them could
be left to the 19 books that we have, and some carried over. I'm not
sure trevor would have wanted someone else toying around with moira.
Ditto the character's voice. But what about taking one of those
aformentioned men - Purdom, Fielding, whoever - and writing adventures
from their point of view? So that we would have not another Quiller
series, but another Bureau series. Ferris, Loman, Croder, Shepley
could be incidental characters, but the new protagonist would have his
own style, and his own quirks, and would not destroy our image of
Quiller. This would, of course, take a very gifted writer to pull off,
but a straight continuation would be far harder. This could be a much
fresher approach (would make it easy to modernise a little) and
possible a more respectful one... You could even have quiller pop up
occasionally, like this excerpt from The Jaguar Code:
"I called the number and Pilbrow picked up after one ring. I started
to debrief, but about halfway through I got the distinct impression
that he wasn't listening.
'Listen,' I said. 'Is this still on?'
'On?' He likes everything to be spelled out, Pilbrow, so that nobody
can argue over the tapes later. It makes sense, I suppose, but I was
tired and exhausted and had half my arm missing, so I wasn't really in
the mood for playing silly buggers.
'Yes. On. Jaguar.'
There was a long pause. It chilled me to the bone, and I told him so.
'There's something we need to discuss,' he said. Here we go.
'Just tell me,' hissing through my teeth, 'If I'm still on.'
'We have every confidence in you…' he began, but I cut him off with a
raft of abuse and then he told me, wearily, knowing what was coming
next.
'
Croder has sent for Quiller,' he said. 'I believe you know each
other?'
So. Quiller. Yes, I know him. Miami, Lagos, that godawful party in
Tibet. Seen him round the Caff sometimes, sniffing around for the word
on future missions like a vulture circling his own corpse. A Bureau
legend, over thirty missions down, but also a madman. Never carries a
gun, because he thinks they're for children. Well, fair enough: we all
have our superstitions in this game - personally, I never use a
portable phone, no matter how hard it is to get to a meeting point or
a call box: they're insecure and bad for your cranium. The fool can
get shot in the back for all I care. But he is not, I repeat NOT,
stealing this baby from under my nose.
'Quiller?' I said, trying to keep it casual. 'Getting on a bit, isn't
he?'"
Keith Gow
lyrical:
<snip>
>Some more ideas:
>
>* A first-person Bond novel, written by a world-class writer.
This is a great idea. The whole Young Bond adventures got me wondering
how James Bond actually thought at that age and then realised we only
ever got glimpses of Bond from Fleming.
>As
>previously discussed, get William Gibson
Could you have picked a worse person as a suggestion for First Person
Narrative?
<snip>
>* Failing this, a book of short stories featuring or about Bond, by
>world class writers.
>
Also a good idea.
>* Set the books in the 60s.
I think they've already shot themselves in the foot for this idea to
work. With Gardner and Bendon contemporzing the character it would
seem very strange to go back... although if it worked better as a
continuation of Fleming's character (not as a the ageless character we
get in both novel and film form now), it would be worth reading.
-- Keith Gow --
Keith Gow
<jsh...@leviathanstudios.com> waxed lyrical:
>On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:19:20 +0100, Tim Pollard wrote:
>
>> or even some Felix Leiter adventures.
>
>I must confess, I've long nursed a fantasy of writing some Felix Leiter
>adventures. I really like the character a great deal, and have thought a
>lot about what kind of man he is. I'd write them mpodern-day, with his past
>in the Bond novels intavt.... And we'd find that, deep down inside the
>light-hearted Leiter, there's a real craziness there, and a real rage. This
>is a guy who was literally fed into a shark, and watched parts of himself
>disappear forever into its awful gullet. There are scars that show, in the
>stump of his right arm and left leg... But the ones inside him, the ones on
>his psyche, are probably a lot more terrible... And a lot more interesting.
>
Well this idea would work well, because Leiter is a rich character and
recognisable. The whole "World of Bond" concept is a little strange,
though, particularly if you are creating other characters to exist
there. What's alluring about the "World of Bond" is the character of
James Bond - not any old schmo who is a secret agent.
-- Keith Gow --
Peredur Davies
> >* Set the books in the 60s.
>
> I think they've already shot themselves in the foot for this idea to
> work. With Gardner and Bendon contemporzing the character it would
> seem very strange to go back... although if it worked better as a
> continuation of Fleming's character (not as a the ageless character we
> get in both novel and film form now), it would be worth reading.
The only way they could get round publishing novels set 'in the past' would
be to do them clearly pre-, or co-, Fleming. That is, Bond would have to be
younger, if they set it before CR; or they could present Bond's 'missing'
adventures. It says in MR that Bond has three or so missions a year, yet we
usually only hear about one.
What about an author going back and 'filling in' where possible, perhaps
reintroducing characters in the preceding novelor from a couple of novels
back. Kind of the thing Bernard Cornwell is doing with his Sharpe series:
writing novels which not only predate his existing canon, but which also fit
in in between, giving him the chance to reuse characters who have, say, died
during the course of the original novel arc.
I'm not saying we should see "The Return of Goldfinger" or "Bond has more
fun with Honey Ryder", but it would be a fun and interesting way toi use a
Bond that was the same age and time as Fleming's character, without having
to resort to prequels, postquels, or parallel universes.
That'd be the aim of my 15 minutes, anyway...
Yours,
--
------- Peredur G.C. Davies --------
Queens' College, Cambridge University
Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic dept.
-----------------------------------
For you are such a smart little craft--
Such a neat little, sweet little craft--
Such a bright little, tight little,
Slight little, light little,
Trim little, prim little craft!
-----------------------------------
"Keith Gow" <kw...@vicnet.net.au> wrote in message
news:407d154c...@News.Individual.NET...
> On 13 Apr 2004 06:18:15 -0700, spyno...@yahoo.co.uk (JD) waxed
> lyrical:
>
> <snip>
> >Some more ideas:
> >
> >* A first-person Bond novel, written by a world-class writer.
>
> This is a great idea. The whole Young Bond adventures got me wondering
> how James Bond actually thought at that age and then realised we only
> ever got glimpses of Bond from Fleming.
>
> >As
> >previously discussed, get William Gibson
>
> Could you have picked a worse person as a suggestion for First Person
> Narrative?
>
> <snip>
> >* Failing this, a book of short stories featuring or about Bond, by
> >world class writers.
> >
>
> Also a good idea.
>
>
> -- Keith Gow --
Peredur Davies
partner, a sounding board and buddy for Bond, and so if out on his own he
wouldn't have the same appeal, I don't reckon. He's great in Fleming's
novels because he's lighter, more laid-back, more carefree than Bond is, and
without that contrast he could just come over as a bit annoying. Maybe?
Yours,
--
------- Peredur G.C. Davies --------
Queens' College, Cambridge University
Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic dept.
-----------------------------------
For you are such a smart little craft--
Such a neat little, sweet little craft--
Such a bright little, tight little,
Slight little, light little,
Trim little, prim little craft!
-----------------------------------
"Keith Gow" <kw...@vicnet.net.au> wrote in message
news:407d154e...@News.Individual.NET...
Tim Pollard
"JD" <spyno...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b4cd1c7d.04041...@posting.google.com...
> An imaginary press release. ;)
>
>
> 'Double O Section operational
>
>
> Ian Fleming Publications Ltd is thrilled to announce the commission of
> a new series of books based on the world of Ian Fleming's James Bond.
>
> Fans of the books and films will know that the "00" in 007 signifies
> that Bond has a licence to kill. "Double 0 Section" is a new series of
> full-length novels following the adventures of the MI6 department's
> other agents. Four such agents are mentioned in passing in Fleming's
> novels. 'We thought this was a golden opportunity,' said Iain
> Ryder-Carr of Cygnet, who will be publishing the series. 'Who hasn't
> read the books or seen the films and wondered about the lives of 008
> and 009?'
>
> The new books, which are to be written by a team of writers, will be
> to the Sixties,' said Mr Ryder-Carr. 'The writers have taken passing
> references in the original novels and mapped out the whole Double O
> Section: the agents, their backgrounds, and their missions. In
> Moonraker, we learn that 0011 has been missing in Singapore for two
> months. Now we'll find out what happened to him.' Cygnet is billing
> the series as a "return to the glory days of Ian Fleming's
> action-packed Cold War spy thrillers".'
>
> the page. 'Bond has a rivalry with 008, who is often M's choice to
> replace him if a mission goes wrong. We'll learn more about their
> complex relationship, and how Bond fits into the hierarchy of the
> group.' M, Major Boothroyd, Mary Goodnight and other Fleming
> villains. IFP plans to release one book every three months, with
> cross-marketing and promotion across the new brand. A deal for
> video-game tie-ins is already in negotiation.'
*sigh*... perfection.
--
JD
through Google, which takes "anywhere between three and nine hours",
so apologies if everyone's making similar points while this is lost in
cyberspace. :)
Just read the first three parts of the Benson interview on CBn. Very
interesting. Like Gardner, he's somewhat bitter at the reception he's
got (I don't blame him), and he seems unhappy about some of the stuff
that happened with Glidrose/IFP. Again, I think there's far too much
attachment to who is writing the books - it's a lose/lose situation.
The press will always react in the way he's described as long as this
continues. The way to beat it is to forget the press and just come out
with *product*. This messing around doing research for months, and the
"official Bond writer" thing does not work. Cruz-Smith wrote very
decent Carter thrillers in a matter of weeks. There's a new Ludlum
every few months, it seems. I don't believe Benson's right when he
says that publishers don't think Bond books will sell - the way
they've been done, yes. But print runs of 5,000? Are they insane?
Teenage boys all over the world should be regularly devouring new Bond
novels - how can they, when there are only 5,000 copies printed?
Ludlum has sold 200 million books. The Spy Who Came In From The Cold,
a 1965 thriller that's dark and dingy and doesn't have a lot of action
and was set in the Cold War, has never been out of print, and has sold
20 million copies. Walk into any airport bookshop and pick up a novel
about an MI6 or CIA agent, whether it be Andy McNabb or Colin Forbes
or Stephen Hunter. Dan Brown currently has two novels in the top five
of the New York Times best-selling paperbacks and one in the hardback
top five - according to Benson, you need 100,000 just to break the
list at all!
Thrillers sell, and there's no bigger brand in thrillers than Bond.
Fleming still has enormous cachet - an untapped cachet, I think. They
need to seriously invest in promotion and marketing to get this thing
off the ground. And they need a hook. Benson mentions that Glidrose
discussed the possibility of returning to the Cold War with him, but
eventually rejected it. Benson liked the idea (and still does). In
Gardner's time, it was the other way round, apparently:
"What I wanted to do was take the character and bring Fleming's Bond
into the eighties as the same man but with all he would have learned
had he lived through the sixties and seventies... I described to the
Glidrose Board how I wanted to put Bond to sleep where Fleming had
left him in the sixties, waking him up now in the 80s having made sure
he had not aged, but had accumulated modern thinking on the question
of Intelligence and Security matters. Most of all I wanted him to have
operational know-how: the reality of correct tradecraft and modern
gee-whiz technology. When I finished talking the board gave what I can
only describe as a corporate beam and said this was the way they had
already decided it should go. I had satisfied the members of the
Glidrose Board that I was the one to do the job..."
From http://www.john-gardner.com/bond.html
I think you *could* continue doing it this way, and make a success of
it. But I think a return to the 60s would be a much better idea - it
has a hook that die-hard fans, casual fans and newspaper editors would
love. It's partly what they're trying to do with Higson - but makes a
lot more sense (it could also tie in to Higson, of course - Bond goes
period across the board). I *love* all those old 60s spy novels, and
I'm sure a lot of other people do, too. Why not take on a bit of that
flavour? I suppose the worry is how to attract younger fans - but you
can do that, I think, and still be in the Sixties. I realise younger
fans might find Fleming a little dated - but I don't think that means
that having him compete with Jack Ryan will get them on board. Bond
works on a lot of levels - I think you could have Fleming-feel 00
novels set in the Sixties that could appeal to modern audiences. I
really do.
Tim, your Batman thing reminded me once more of Alan Moore. In the
early 90s, he took over writing a comic book called Supreme. Supreme
was a very obvious rip-off of Superman, but more violent. Moore used
the character to comment on Superman, having him visit Supremacy City,
where he got to meet all the other Supremes from the past. He used it
to riff on the Superman myth - but he didn't destroy Superman in doing
so. Similarly, with Watchmen, he originally wanted to use a bunch of
old super-hero characters DC had bought the rights to. But they were
worried he'd render then unusable, so he used them as influences,
renaming them. I think you could do the same with 004 and 009 et al.
You could have a hell of a lot of fun with Fleming's universe, and we
could see how Bond is viewed by others. We could have some great
self-referencing. We could have villains who have met Bond now meeting
002. 'Do all double 0 agents have lessons in wine-tasting?' We could
gain insight into how certain Bond adventures played out back home, or
what their wider consequences were - perhaps they weren't all as
successful as they appeared. We know quite a bit more about the Cold
War now, of course. You could do a lot of radical stuff, but without
risking what Benson risked with Doubleshot.
Anyone know people at IFP? ;) We need to lobby for this to happen!
Keith Gow
waxed lyrical:
>Keith wrote:
>
>> >* Set the books in the 60s.
>>
>> I think they've already shot themselves in the foot for this idea to
>> work. With Gardner and Bendon contemporzing the character it would
>> seem very strange to go back... although if it worked better as a
>> continuation of Fleming's character (not as a the ageless character we
>> get in both novel and film form now), it would be worth reading.
>
>The only way they could get round publishing novels set 'in the past' would
>be to do them clearly pre-, or co-, Fleming. That is, Bond would have to be
>younger, if they set it before CR; or they could present Bond's 'missing'
>adventures. It says in MR that Bond has three or so missions a year, yet we
>usually only hear about one.
>
That is a reasonable suggestion, however if there was a choice, I'd
rather see pre-CR stories - his early years in the Service, rather
than stories that come between Fleming Adventures mostly because that
causes continuity headaches (for author and dedicated reader).
-- Keith Gow --
JD
> Well this idea would work well, because Leiter is a rich character and
> recognisable. The whole "World of Bond" concept is a little strange,
> though, particularly if you are creating other characters to exist
> there. What's alluring about the "World of Bond" is the character of
> James Bond - not any old schmo who is a secret agent.
I don't agree. There's a lot that's alluring about Fleming's world
that isn't Bond - the villains, their lairs, the girls, their names,
the guns, the excitement, the gadgets, the sidekicks (Leiter, Bill
Tanner, Q), the cars, the food, the flair, the clothes, the Sixties,
the locales...
All of these can exist without Bond. But yes, 007 himself is, of
course, enormously alluring, and that's why Fleming's novels work. I
don't think, though, they'd get away with anyone writing Bond's
missing adventures. That would be so ripe for comparing to Fleming, so
sure to piss fans off, and would be ripped to shreds by the press and
quickly consigned to bargain bins. Change a couple of quirks of the
character, however, and rename him 008, and I think all those problems
disappear: it's would no longer be seen as a competition with Fleming.
Handled properly, I think it would revitalise interest in Fleming's
work and put them rightly at the head of a brand. Look at what other
great British brands like Burberry and Dunhill have done in the last
few years. They've reinvented themselves. They've used their cachet as
a quality luxury items and they've reached out to a new generation who
like the idea of wearing a Burberry coat and flicking a Dunhill
lighter. Couldn't that be extended to Fleming's entire world? World of
Bond or 00 Section books could simply be classy accessories to an
already existing brand. And isn't that what we want: an accesory? We
don't want to try to replace or replicate the core product: it doesn't
need replacing. And I think that's why Gardner and Benson failed to
light the public's imagination.
People who buy Tom Clancy's Power Plays series of books - and plenty
do - know they aren't written by Clancy. They say so on the cover.
They buy them because they want *more Clancy*: he's a brand that means
something to them (exciting techno-thriller). They don't care overly
if they're not quite as good as Clancy's own stuff: they already own
all that. This stuff is supplementary. I think it needs a lot of
thinking through by some people who really know Fleming and who have
vision and decent instincts - but I certainly think there's a way to
have well-written books inspired by Fleming, using the globally
renowned Fleming brand, that sell hundreds of thousands of copies.
What's stopping them?
Tim Pollard
They're arguing over how much of a consultancy fee they want to pay us?
<g>
snark^
warbled on about "New James Bond novels" in alt.fan.james-bond <<=
> JD waxed lyrical:
> >As previously discussed, get William Gibson
>
> Could you have picked a worse person as a suggestion for First Person
> Narrative?
I agree. Neuromancer is one of my all-time fav sci-fi novels but
Gibson's not a terribly wonderful writer. If you want a Bond story done
in 1st person by a guy who's already got half a handle on the requisite
lechery and the type world spies inhabit then surely George McDonald
Fraser is your man...
--
snark^ #gameplanet channel on the etg IRC network snark(at)
www.gameplanet.co.nz ICQ: 1471203 paradise(dot)net(dot)nz
Absorb
news:fgSec.16029$4N3.13537@newsfe1-win...
> And the joy of all that was that each story was *almost* impossible to
> resolve, as the times, styles, artwork and appearance of each was
*totally*
> different... but that that's how people perceived Batman to be... and that
> would work excellently for Bond as well I'd have thought - maybe some
> stories could be 'Moore-ish', but some Connery/Dalton etc. In fact it
might
> be quite interesting to write the same story, but told in the style of
each
> actor!
I can see it now...Bond vs. Predator...
Absorb
----------------------------------------------
"I wish I'd thought of that...oh wait, I did." -Batman
Absorb
> Well this idea would work well, because Leiter is a rich character and
> recognisable. The whole "World of Bond" concept is a little strange,
> though, particularly if you are creating other characters to exist
> there. What's alluring about the "World of Bond" is the character of
> James Bond - not any old schmo who is a secret agent.
I agree.
It's obvious here from the response to this idea that a lot of people would
really enjoy this, but I can't say that I'd be one of them since I tend to
like specific characters. If I get bored watching an episode of "Justice
League" because Batman isn't in it, there's no way I'm going to pick up a
"World of Bond" book so I can read about someone who isn't 007.
Keith Gow
<snark...@tulgeywook.org> waxed lyrical:
>=>> The runes were cast, the portents thundered and then Keith Gow
> warbled on about "New James Bond novels" in alt.fan.james-bond <<=
>
>> JD waxed lyrical:
>> >As previously discussed, get William Gibson
>>
>> Could you have picked a worse person as a suggestion for First Person
>> Narrative?
>
>I agree. Neuromancer is one of my all-time fav sci-fi novels but
>Gibson's not a terribly wonderful writer.
Gibson is great with concepts but lousy with characters and narrative.
-- Keith Gow --
Keith Gow
waxed lyrical:
>"Keith Gow" <kw...@vicnet.net.au> wrote in message
>news:407d154e...@News.Individual.NET...
>
>> Well this idea would work well, because Leiter is a rich character and
>> recognisable. The whole "World of Bond" concept is a little strange,
>> though, particularly if you are creating other characters to exist
>> there. What's alluring about the "World of Bond" is the character of
>> James Bond - not any old schmo who is a secret agent.
>
>I agree.
>
>It's obvious here from the response to this idea that a lot of people would
>really enjoy this, but I can't say that I'd be one of them since I tend to
>like specific characters. If I get bored watching an episode of "Justice
>League" because Batman isn't in it, there's no way I'm going to pick up a
>"World of Bond" book so I can read about someone who isn't 007.
>
There's not much about the "World of Bond" that is unique to that
universe either, really. Many spy movies contain similar gadgets,
women, locales, stunts, etc, etc.
That said, I wouldn't be adverse to perhaps short stories exploring
Felix Leiter or M or Moneypenny or Mary Goodnight - but Bond would
always have to make at least a cameo ;-)
-- Keith Gow --
Keith Gow
lyrical:
<snip>
>Thrillers sell, and there's no bigger brand in thrillers than Bond.
>Fleming still has enormous cachet - an untapped cachet, I think.
I agree. I cannot understand why the Bond name isn't used to sell the
novels. I know the Bond fan base is nothing like the Star Wars or Star
Trek fan base, but in relative terms Bond should sell far more than he
does as far as books are concerned.
Both SW and ST have dozens of licenced novels in their empire. I'm not
suggesting that sort of flood would work, but again it's a question of
degrees - surely a yearly Bond book would sell well if marketed
correctly.
Perhaps Glidrose/IFP were trying to maintain some respectibility by
not overusing their franchise - but they've hindered it to the point
of catatonia almost. Stopping the continuation franchise to begin a
prequel franchise is a bad idea (whatever you think of the prequel
franchises likely level of quality?)
Why did IFP think to continue the "modern day" Bond novels to satisfy
regulars as well as introduce a Young James Bond series? Do they
really think parallel series would be overkill? Aren't they pitching
at two different audiences here? (Charlie Higson seems to think they
are - with him being happy to write a "kids book" not just "a book
about a kid")
-- Keith Gow --
JD
> It's obvious here from the response to this idea that a lot of people would
> really enjoy this, but I can't say that I'd be one of them since I tend to
> like specific characters. If I get bored watching an episode of "Justice
> League" because Batman isn't in it, there's no way I'm going to pick up a
> "World of Bond" book so I can read about someone who isn't 007.
You say you wouldn't buy novels without Bond - but at the moment,
that's what a lot of Bond fans are doing. According to this very
interesting article about the branding of thrilling writers
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/08/1031115971394.html
Clancy's last novel, Red Rabbit, had a print run of *two million* in
the US alone. I think it's fair to assume that a lot of those readers
have seen a Bond movie or 20, and are interested in Fleming's
character. And I think it's also fair to assume that hardly any of
them have read any of Benson's novels.
I'm trying to look at this practically. The thread idea is we've got
15 minutes to lobby IFP - I wouldn't waste my time lobbying them with
ideas that have zero chance of being realised. Ideally, we'd all like
to see more Fleming novels about James Bond. As Fleming's no longer
with us, we can't have that. Since his death, several writers have
tried to continue the series. They've succeeded to varying degrees.
Benson wrote six books, none of which made the best-seller lists. Very
few copies were printed, and the public at large has no idea that Bond
continuation novels even exist. These continuations seem to be on
hold, while the IFP tries a new strategy: Charles Higson writing
30s-set novels about a 13-year-old Bond at Eton. That's the situation
at the moment. Do you really think that's a better idea than the World
of Bond one?
Continuations are, by their very nature, compromises. You can either
accept that Ian Fleming is not around and simply try to drum up
interest in his books - re-editions, etc - and leave it at that. Or
you can try to think of other ways to make money from the Fleming
brand.
The best way of making money is to provide people with a product they
want. So far, they haven't done that. But if we accept as a given that
anything from IFP is not going to be as great as a Fleming Bond novel
- how can they capitalise on that massive market that's buying Tom
Clancy's books? Clancy and his publishers have already seen what to
do, and have employed a stream of writers to create Clancy Universe
novels. And Clancy's still alive! But publishing new novels featuring
James Bond hasn't captured the public's imagination. Some of that is
to do with the writers they picked, I think. When I interviewed Peter
Janson-Smith a few years ago, he said that the search for a
replacement for Amis was always concentrated on a journeyman
thriller-writer (although he didn't use that word). "We reasoned that
someone as famous [as Amis] wouldn't want to take on another writer's
character for any length of time." A fair point. I asked him what had
qualified Gardner for the job. He seemed stumped for an answer. The
Sherlock Holmes continuations he'd done? Ah, yes, that was a factor.
The other thrillers he'd written? Yes, sort of. The Boysie Oakes
series? Well, actually he didn't think those were particularly good...
Of course, things had soured between Gardner and Glidrose by then, but
I did get the distinct impression that they hadn't cared too much
about who had written the books. Another problem was the direction
Glidrose let Gardner take, I think. A bigger problem has been they
haven't had the money to promote these books. They need to do a deal
with someone, and badly.
But I think there's also just a problem with the premise of Bond
novels not written by Fleming. A lot of people will give another
formulation of what you've said - not that they don't want to read
books without Bond, but that they don't want to read books with Bond
that are written by someone other than Ian Fleming. That's surely been
the verdict so far. However, they're very interested in Bond, and they
enjoy reading thrillers written by a team of writers about ruthless
CIA agents donning wetsuits and visiting exotic locales under the
Clancy brand. So why on earth wouldn't they enjoy reading thillers
about ruthless MI6 agents donning wetsuits and visiting exotic locales
under the Fleming brand?
I put it to you, sir, that they would!
A Tart's Handkerchief
>Both SW and ST have dozens of licenced novels in their empire.
Dozens? Ha -- Trek has HUNDREDS. But your point is still made. :)
Tim Pollard
"A Tart's Handkerchief" <r...@tunnel.com> wrote in message
news:2ots705beqtt38bns...@4ax.com...
> In the world according to kw...@vicnet.net.au (Keith Gow):
> >Both SW and ST have dozens of licenced novels in their empire.
>
> Dozens? Ha -- Trek has HUNDREDS. But your point is still made. :)
And yet it's only in the past few years they've realised that not every
novel has to be about Kirk/Picard etc. - even when I was young, I often
wondered 'if all this happens to the Enterprise, what happens to the other
ships in Starfleet?'. We saw a few, but they always turned up in the same
way as other '00' agents in Bond books - 'to show you how the monster
worked' (to mix my TV sci-fi metaphors).
Now though they're doing novels about other ships and parts of Starfleet,
referencing the usual heroes of course, but doing exactly what I'd like to
see happen with the 'World of Bond'. Shame they're not better novels
though... <g>
Absorb
news:b4cd1c7d.0404...@posting.google.com...
*snip*
> But I think there's also just a problem with the premise of Bond
> novels not written by Fleming. A lot of people will give another
> formulation of what you've said - not that they don't want to read
> books without Bond, but that they don't want to read books with Bond
> that are written by someone other than Ian Fleming. That's surely been
> the verdict so far. However, they're very interested in Bond, and they
> enjoy reading thrillers written by a team of writers about ruthless
> CIA agents donning wetsuits and visiting exotic locales under the
> Clancy brand. So why on earth wouldn't they enjoy reading thillers
> about ruthless MI6 agents donning wetsuits and visiting exotic locales
> under the Fleming brand?
Oh, I'm sure they would. What I meant by my response was that *I* would not
probably not be interested in these "World of Bond" books, not that they
wouldn't be widely popular or anything, especially if the positive response
here is any indication.
> I put it to you, sir, that they would!
*smile*
I'm one of the few females here :)
Levi Ramsey
> And yet it's only in the past few years they've realised that not every
> novel has to be about Kirk/Picard etc. - even when I was young, I often
> wondered 'if all this happens to the Enterprise, what happens to the other
> ships in Starfleet?'. We saw a few, but they always turned up in the same
> way as other '00' agents in Bond books - 'to show you how the monster
> worked' (to mix my TV sci-fi metaphors).
>
> Now though they're doing novels about other ships and parts of Starfleet,
> referencing the usual heroes of course, but doing exactly what I'd like to
> see happen with the 'World of Bond'. Shame they're not better novels
> though... <g>
Where's Rich Handley when you need him?
--
Levi Ramsey
le...@cygnetnet.net
How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is, after all, so poorly lit...
Currently playing: Metallica - Load - The House That Jack Built
Linux 2.6.2-3mdk
09:06:00 up 40 days, 8:22, 12 users, load average: 1.22, 0.81, 0.52
JD
misunderstanding at IFP. They seem to have been under the impression
during the tenures of both Gardner and Benson that people don't buy
thrillers any more. They all go to see the films, and nobody reads,
and so really we're only going to get the scraps anyway. That seemed
to me to be Janson-Smith's attitude, at least. Gardner also seemed to
be under the impression that he was seen by Glidrose as nothing much
more than a quick money-maker - but that they weren't even expecting
to make that much money. I'm reading between the lines in both cases,
but there is other evidence that this has been Glidrose/IFP's
attitude. Benson says in the CBn interview:
'The real reason [for lack of sales of the continuations by him and
Gardner] lies in the fact that there is apathy toward Bond novels on
the retail side of the publishing business. There seems to be an
attitude on the bookshop level that Bond novels don't sell and so they
don't order many copies. The books aren't prominently displayed in the
shops and therefore go unnoticed. Reviewers tend to ignore them, as
they are thought of as inferior imitations of Ian Fleming. Make no
mistake—Gardner's Bond books and my Bond books were not failures. They
made money for the publishers. There was never a title that was in the
red. The publishers had it down to a science as to how many copies to
print. They *knew* how many they would sell. I think Zero Minus Ten's
first printing in America was something like 30,000. In Britain there
were only 5,000 printed. That's not a tremendous amount, but they all
sold. The book was reprinted in both countries. But in order to be a
New York Times Bestseller, a book has to sell at least 100,000. It's
been a long, long time since a Bond novel sold that many copies. I
think that's one reason why IFP chose to suspend the books for a
while, even though both Hodder and Putnam were happy with the sales
and would have kept going. The problem is that very few non-Bond fans
seek out the books and buy them. They serve a niche market. The Star
Wars and Star Trek books do better than Bond novels because there's a
much bigger fan base for those franchises...'
I think a lot of this is plain old wrong. Star Trek does *not* have a
larger fan base than James Bond. James Bond's one of the best known
brands in the world - and it has a heritage as a literary brand that
Star Trek does not have. As for booksellers not displaying them
because they feel they won't sell - well, that's a vicious circle.
They *don't* sell! As for reviewers shunning them, well I don't see
Clancy complaining, or Stephen Coonts, or Dale Brown or Stephen Hunter
(*all* of whom, incidentally, have spin-off thrillers not written by
them at the moment).
But notice that the IFP only print as many as they *know* will sell. I
suspect this is a very British attitude. 'Best of a bad lot, really.
Yes, of course, very prestigious brand. Wonderful flair as a writer.
Privilege to be on the board. And we might make some money off a few
silly books dashed off by some novice. But compete? Seriously? With
the Amellicans? Oh, old chap. Not so sure about that.' ;)
I just spent a few minutes perusing Barnes and Noble's website. They
have first chapters and excerpts of a lot of books. Here are some
excerpts I found from recent thrillers. I don't have sales figures,
but they're all selling *many* more copies than Benson or Gardner ever
did - as I've already pointed out, Red Rabbit apparently had a print
run of *two million* in the States alone. Give these excerpts a quick
once-over, and then tell me if you still feel there isn't a way to
have the same kind of success with books that make use of the brand
they are all paying homage to/making away with the cash from under the
IFP's noses. ;)
JD
-------
Love spy novels?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/spynovels
'The CIA's effort to assassinate Fidel Castro, which had been run out
of the office of the Attorney General during the time of Camelot, had
been right out of Woody Woodpecker, with a sprinkling of the Three
Stooges: politicians trying to imitate James Bond, a character made up
by a failed Brit spook. The movies just weren't the real world, as
Ryan had learned the hard way, first in London, and then in his own
living room.
"So, Dan, how good are they really?"
"The Brits?" Murray led Ryan out onto the front lawn. The removers
were vetted by SIS-but Murray was FBI. "Basil is world-class. That's
why he's lasted so long. He was a brilliant field spook, and he was
the first guy to get a bad vibe about Philby-and remember, Basil was
just a rookie then. He's good at administration, one of the most agile
thinkers I've ever come across. The local politicians on both sides of
the aisle like him and trust him. That isn't easy. Kinda like Hoover
was for us once, but without the cult-of-personality thing. I like
him. Good dude to work with. And Bas likes you a lot, Jack."
"Why?" Ryan asked. "I haven't done much of anything."
"Bas has an eye for talent. He thinks you have the right stuff. He
flat loved that thing you dreamed up last year to catch security
leaks-the Canary Trap-and rescuing their next king didn't exactly
hurt, y'know? You're going to be a popular boy down at Century House.
If you live up to your billing, you might just have a future in the
spook business…"'
From Red Rabbit by Tom Clancy
‘Once you get past the overall irony of the situation, you realize
that killing a guy in the middle of his own health club has a lot to
recommend it.
The target was a yakuza, an iron freak named Ishihara who worked out
every day in a gym he owned in Roppongi, one of Tokyo's entertainment
districts. Tatsu had told me the hit had to look like natural causes,
like they always do, so I was glad to be working in a venue where it
was far from unthinkable that someone might keel over from a fatal
aneurysm induced by exertion, or suffer an unlucky fall onto a steel
bar, or undergo some other tragic mishap while using one of the
complicated exercise machines…'
From Hard Rain by Barry Eisler
‘After a medium-rare hamburger and a bottle of Taiwanese lager at
Smokey Joe's on Chunghsiao-1 Road, Jon Smith decided to take a taxi to
Kaohsiung Harbor. He still had an hour before his afternoon meetings
resumed at the Grand Hi-Lai Hotel, when his old friend, Mike Kerns
from the Pasteur Institute in Paris, would meet him there.
Smith had been in Kaohsiung-Taiwan's second-largest city-nearly a
week, but today was the first chance he'd had to explore… Hatless, in
civilian clothes, he strode along the waterfront, marveling at the
magnificent harbor, the third-largest container port in the world,
after Hong Kong and Singapore. He had visited here years ago, before a
tunnel was built to the mainland and the paradisaical island became
just another congested part of the container port. The day was
postcard clear, so he was able to easily spot Hsiao Liuchiu Island,
low on the southern horizon.
He walked another fifteen minutes through the sun-hazed day as
seagulls circled overhead and the clatter of a harbor at work filled
his ears…'
From Robert Ludlum's The Altman Code by Robert Ludlum & Gayle Lynds
‘The first warm winds of spring gusted along Paris's narrow back
streets and broad boulevards, calling winter-weary residents out into
the night. They thronged the sidewalks, strolling, linking arms,
filling the chairs around outdoor cafe tables, everywhere smiling and
chatting. Even the tourists stopped complaining-this was the
enchanting Paris promised in their travel guides.
Occupied with their glasses of vin ordinaire under the stars, the
spring celebrators on the bustling rue de Vaugirard did not notice the
large black Renault van with darkened windows that left the busy
street for the boulevard Pasteur. The van circled around the block,
down the rue du Dr Roux, and at last entered the quiet rue des
Volontaires, where the only action was of a young couple kissing in a
recessed doorway.
The black van rolled to a stop outside L'Institut Pasteur, cut its
engine, and turned off its headlights. It remained there, silent,
until the young couple, oblivious in their bliss, disappeared inside a
building across the street.
The van's doors clicked open, and four figures emerged clothed
completely in black, their faces hidden behind balaclavas. Carrying
compact Uzi submachine guns and wearing backpacks, they slipped
through the night, almost invisible. A figure materialized from the
shadows of the Pasteur Institute and guided them onto the grounds,
while the street behind them remained quiet, deserted...'
From Robert Ludlum's The Paris Option by Robert Ludlum & Gayle Lynds
‘The dark-clad figure turned, slowly, smoothly, menacingly. The blank,
staring eyes were expressionless, robotic. The figure lifted a weapon
from the floor, an immense M168 six-barreled Vulcan cannon, and
pointed it right at Patrick McLanahan. From less than thirty meters
away, he could not miss…'
From Wings of Fire by Dale Brown
‘I didn't know who we were going to kill -- just that he or she would
be among the crowd munching canapés and sipping champagne on the
terrace of the Houses of Parliament at three P.M., and that the Yes
Man would identify the target by placing his hand on their left
shoulder when he greeted them.
I'd done some weird stuff over the years, but this job was scaring me.
In less than ninety minutes, I was going to be shitting on my own
doorstep big-time. I only hoped the Firm knew what it was doing,
because I wasn't too sure that I did…'
From Last Light by Andy McNab
JD
> There's not much about the "World of Bond" that is unique to that
> universe either, really. Many spy movies contain similar gadgets,
> women, locales, stunts, etc, etc.
:) Not unique to the World of Bond, no. But seriously associated with
Bond in the mind of the public. Ian Fleming wasn't the first writer to
come up with a suave secret agent who travelled around the world -
look at Jean Bruce's OSS117 series, for example - but he is certainly
the best known, by a very long way. When other writers want to do
something Bond-like, they have certain restrictions. In the 60s, Jack
Higgins wrote a few books about an MI6 agent called Paul Chavasse.
Effectively, they were his attempt at a Bond novel. He's recently
given a bit of a polish to a couple of these and published them again
- because Higgins is a brand, they would have sold, oh, I don't know,
a couple of times more than all of Benson's Bond novels put together?
James Bond is the world's most famous secret agent. Jack Ryan, Dirk
Pitt and all the rest of these characters are Bond *clones*. They have
succeeded - on a massive scale - by using elements from Ian Fleming's
world. There's a huge market for books about secret agents with
gadgets, women, locales and the rest - and they have filled it.
Consider these elements:
A man in a dinner jacket
Walther PPK
Vodka Martini
A megalomaniacal villain
A woman with a double entendre for a name
Clever gadgets
Exotic locales
Savile Row suits
Amazing stunts
Aston Martin
Fine wine
Scrambled eggs ;)
None of those are copyright by IFP. But only the IFP can use all of
them and have the result accepted. They're part of the world of Bond -
and they have huge global appeal. Added to these, you have the
specific elements IFP do have dibs on:
"Ian Fleming"
"007"
"James Bond"
M
Major Boothroyd
Miss Moneypenny
Felix Leiter
Bill Tanner
Double O Section
and you have one of the most powerful and recognisable brands in the
world. Clancy, Ludlum, Hunter, Brown, Coonts and more all have books
out written by other people. Do you really think that IFP couldn't get
writers of a similar (hey, or better) calibre to write similar
thrillers - but incorporating some of the above elements? I'm being
mercenary here for a moment. Just from a sales point of view. Get some
of those chaps to write a dozen spy thrillers, but tell them to add in
all the World of Bond stuff above. That plot for a new Tom Clancy
Op-Centre spin-off they were thinking of writing - let them use that
if they want. Give the guys who write the clones the chance to use the
real thing. They probably type "James Bond" in place of "Jon Smith" in
the first drafts anyway. :) Now relaunch the brand, promote it
massively, and print up hundreds of thousands of copies of the books,
all flashily presented.
Why *wouldn't* that work?
Now imagine if you did the same thing, but also took care to be a
little more classy than the other guys have been, and actually thought
about how to make the idea true to Fleming. Get the writers to re-read
Fleming and map out carefully what they want to use, and what they
don't. Get writers who will research thoroughly and who can write with
some flair. Perhaps get writers who are already Fleming fans .
Shouldn't be that hard - that's all of the people writing the Clancy
stuff, I reckon. Maybe see if you can find someone British, so they
actually sound like they know what they're talking about, too. And
perhaps now you have a huge success story *and* something that
satisfies fans. :)
It's taken a couple of days of brainstorming to come up with this
stuff. Imagine what could be done if some people - gasp! - actually
sat down and *properly* thought this all through. They might come up
with an idea for a series set in the Thirties with Bond at Eton, or
someth...
Oh. Right you are. :)
JD
> I cannot understand why the Bond name isn't used to sell the
> novels. I know the Bond fan base is nothing like the Star Wars or Star
> Trek fan base, but in relative terms Bond should sell far more than he
> does as far as books are concerned.
Indeed.
> Both SW and ST have dozens of licenced novels in their empire. I'm not
> suggesting that sort of flood would work, but again it's a question of
> degrees - surely a yearly Bond book would sell well if marketed
> correctly.
I think so. Let's look at the competition, shall we? :) These are
books not written by the original authors. Some of them have a "with"
credit, but that usually means the brand author simply had control
over the end result - but didn't actually slog away writing the thing.
Obviously, if you look at the number of novels Clancy has supposedly
co-authored.
Robert Ludlum's Covert-One series:
1. The Hades Factor (2000) (with Gayle Lynds)
2. The Cassandra Compact (2001) (with Philip Shelby)
3. The Paris Option (2002) (with Gayle Lynds)
4. The Altman Code (2003) (with Gayle Lynds)
5. The Lazarus Vendetta (2004) (with Keith Farrell and Gayle Lynds)
This is as well as Ludlum novels that have appeared since he died.
Tom Clancy's Power Plays
1. Politika (1997) (with Martin H Greenberg)
2. Ruthless.Com (1998) (with Martin H Greenberg)
3. Shadow Watch (1999) (with Martin H Greenberg)
4. Bio-Strike (2000) (with Martin H Greenberg)
5. Cold War (2001) (with Jerome Preisler)
6. Cutting Edge (2002) (with Jerome Preisler)
7. Zero Hour (2003) (with Martin H Greenberg and Jerome Preisler)
Tom Clancy's Op Center
1. Op-Center (1995) (with Steve Pieczenik)
2. Mirror Image (1995) (with Steve Pieczenik)
3. Games of State (1996) (with Steve Pieczenik)
4. Acts of War (1996) (with Steve Pieczenik)
5. Balance of Power (1998) (with Unknown)
6. State of Siege (1999) (with Steve Pieczenik and Jeff Rovin)
7. Divide and Conquer (2000) (with Jeff Rovin)
8. Line of Control (2001) (with Jeff Rovin)
9. Mission of Honor (2002) (with Jeff Rovin)
10. Sea of Fire (2003) (with Jeff Rovin)
Call to Treason (2004) (with Steve Pieczenik and Jeff Rovin)
Tom Clancy's Net Force
1. Net Force (1998) (with Steve Perry and Steve Pieczenik)
2. Hidden Agendas (1999) (with Steve Pieczenik)
3. Night Moves (1999) (with Steve Pieczenik)
4. Breaking Point (2000) (with Steve Perry and Steve Pieczenik)
5. Point of Impact (2001) (with Steve Perry and Steve Pieczenik)
6. Cybernation (2001) (with Steve Perry and Steve Pieczenik)
7. State of War (2003) (with Steve Perry)
8. Changing of the Guard (2003) (with Steve Perry and Larry Segriff)
Tom Clancy's Net Force Explorers
1. Virtual Vandals (1998) (with Diane Duane)
2. The Deadliest Game (1998) (with Bill McCay)
6. End Game (1998) (with Diane Duane)
3. One Is the Loneliest Number (1999) (with Diane Duane and Steve
Pieczenik)
4. The Ultimate Escape (1999) (with Unknown)
7. Cyberspy (1999) (with Bill McCay)
8. Shadow of Honor (2000) (with Mel Odom)
9. Private Lives (2000) (with Bill McCay)
10. Safe House (2000) (with Diane Duane)
11. Gameprey (2000) (with Mel Odom)
12. Duel Identity (2000) (with Bill McCay)
13. Deathworld (2000) (with Diane Duane)
14. High Wire (2001) (with Mel Odom)
15. Cold Case (2001) (with Bill McCay)
16. Runaways (2001) (with Diane Duane)
17. Cloak and Dagger (2002) by Russell Davis and John Helfers
18. Own Goal (2002) by Steve Pieczenik
19. Death Match (2003) by Diane Duane
Dale Brown's Dreamland (with Jim DeFelice)
1. Dreamland (2001)
2. Nerve Center (2002)
3. Razor's Edge (2002)
4. Piranha (2003)
5. Strike Zone (2004)
6. Armageddon (2004)
Clive Cussler's NUMA Files
1. Serpent (1999) (with Paul Kemprecos)
2. Blue Gold (2000) (with Paul Kemprecos)
3. Fire Ice (2002) (with Paul Kemprecos)
The Numa Files Collection (omnibus) (2002)
4. White Death (2003) (with Paul Kemprecos)
Lost City (2004) (with Paul Kemprecos)
Clive Cussler's Oregon Chronicles
1. Golden Buddha (2003) (with Craig Dirgo)
2. Sacred Stone (2004)
Then there's the house names. Nick Carter doesn't exist anymore, but
there are plenty others that do. Don Pendleton's Mack
Bolan/Executioner series, for example. This began in 1972, and it's
now a house name, and still going strong. There are three series now:
Executioner, Stony Man and "SuperBolan"! Since *last year*, there have
been:
290. Pursued (2003) (by Mike Newton)
291. Blood Trade (2003) (by Douglas P Wojtowicz)
292. Savage Game (2003) (by Chuck Rogers)
293. Death Merchants (2003) (by Tim Tresslar)
294. Scorpion Rising (2003) (by David Robbins)
295. Hostile Alliance (2003) (by Jerry Van Cook)
296. Nuclear Game: Moon Shadow Trilogy I (2003) (by Mel Odom)
297. Deadly Pursuit: Moon Shadow Trilogy II (2003) (by Mel Odom)
298. Final Play: Moon Shadow Trilogy III (2003) (by Mel Odom)
299. Dangerous Encounter (2003) (by Andy Boot)
300. Warrior's Requiem (2003) (by Mike Newton)
301. Blast Radius (2003) (by Chuck Rogers)
302. Shadow Search (2004) (by Mike Linaker)
303. Sea of Terror (2004) (by Mike Newton)
304. Soviet Specter (2004) (by Unknown)
305. Point Position (2004) (by Unknown)
307. Hard Pursuit (2004) (by Unknown)
308. Into the Fire (2004) (by Unknown)
309. Flames of Fury (2004) (by Unknown)
in the first,
63. Freedom Watch (2003) (by Michael Kasner)
64. Roots of Terror (2003) (by Ron Renauld)
65. The Third Protocol (2003) (by Unknown)
66. Axis of Conflict: The Terror File I (2003) (by Unknown)
67. Echoes Of War: The Terror Files II (2003) (by Unknown)
68. Outbreak (2003) (by Unknown)
69. Day of Decision (2004) (by Mike Linaker)
70. Ramrod Intercept (2004) (by Dan Schmidt)
71. Terms of Control (2004) (by Unknown)
72. Rolling Thunder (2004) (by Unknown)
74. The Chameleon Factor (2004) (by Nick Pollotta)
in the second, and
88. Sleepers (2003) (by Mike Newton)
89. Strike and Retrieve (2003) (by Ron Renauld)
90. Age of War (2003) (by David Robbins)
91. Line of Control (2003) (by Jon Guenther)
92. Breached (2003) (by Jon Guenther)
93. Retaliation (2003) (by Mike Newton)
94. Pressure Point (2004) (by Ron Renauld)
95. Silent Running (2004) (by Michael Kasner)
96. Stolen Arrows (2004) (by Nick Pollotta)
97. Zero Option (2004) (by Unknown)
in the third. And they have just as good packaging as Benson's
efforts, if not better: http://tinyurl.com/3dvqx. These are all
published by Harlequin – who also do the romances, of course. They're
trashy, they're gung-ho – and they sell. Clearly, or they wouldn't be
on book number 309. I'm not suggesting a flood, either. But if IFP
only printed 30,000 of Benson's books in the US, and 5,000 in the UK,
it's not hard to see that they can't have hoped to compete - or make
very much money. I'm not saying churn out 10 Bond novels a year and go
really downmarket. But a house name - Ian Fleming's James Bond 007 -
and a *few* writers, writing a *few* novels, that have some class and
a lot of distrubition must, surely, be possible. Every one of the
novels I've just listed probably outsold Benson. A lot of the people
reading them must surely be interested in buying similar books that
feature James Bond.
It's not rocket science. Is it?
GSHATTERHAND
>From: "Tim Pollard" timpo...@yahoo.com
>Date: 4/15/04 7:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Now though they're doing novels about other ships and parts of
Starfleet,>referencing the usual heroes of course, but doing exactly what I'd
like to>see happen with the 'World of Bond'.
Novels featuring the adventures of Felix Leiter, Moneypenny, Tanner, maybe
young M........something seems inappropriate about this for the Bond franchise.
Some kind of an unhealthy diffusion of the Bond universe. BTW no offense
intended here. : )
As much as I like and look forward to Bond I have trouble understanding much
interest in the adventures of his allies. A Star-Trekinized Bond strikes me as
unseemly. (I think there's actually some novels featuring Sulu, aren't there?)
Then again, I was a big fan of Lois Lane and Jimmy Olsen comics. So I don't
know……..
Rich Handley
>Where's Rich Handley when you need him?
I be right here.
Keith Gow
lyrical:
<snip>
>So why on earth wouldn't they enjoy reading thillers
>about ruthless MI6 agents donning wetsuits and visiting exotic locales
>under the Fleming brand?
>
Quite simply - because they can get that sort of thing under other,
more recognizable brands already!
The problem with the Bond novels is clearly IFP doesn't know how to
market them.
-- Keith Gow --
JD
> Novels featuring the adventures of Felix Leiter, Moneypenny, Tanner,
> maybe young M........something seems inappropriate about this
> for the Bond franchise. Some kind of an unhealthy diffusion
> of the Bond universe.
I can understand your point. As I said before, franchises are a
delicate business, and by their nature compromises. But isn't it more
inappropriate to have continuation novels featuring James Bond
himself? I think that's a large reason why the Gardner and Benson
books haven't reached a wide public. Ironically, they just seem like
cheap cash-ins, out of the canon oddities. The public seems very
reluctant to see Fleming's character so roundly messed with. Gardner
took Bond out of the Double-O Section, gave us a gadget expert called
Q'ute, and had him eating fast food. I think that and much more
besides has been seen as inappropriate, and unhealthy diffusion. It's
ironic that today the films are seen as canon and books put out by Ian
Fleming's literary estate are considered well outside it. But the
films are also continuations, of course - they have been for years.
I'm going on about this because, well, it interests me, but also
because I think Tim has cracked onto a brilliant idea and I feel
there's a sliver of a wisp of a ghost of a chance that someone
somewhere might print this thread out and it might land on the desk of
someone at IFP, and as they sit in their well-appointed office, we
might actually have our virtual 15 minutes, and at the end of it some
chap in a Huntsman suit might place his reading specs back in their
case and say to himself: 'Some of these ideas might fly.'
:)
According to Benson, IFP turned down his original title suggestion of
The World Is Not Enough because it wasn't 'Bondian'! I think this
speaks volumes about the way the continuation has been handled. Benson
suggests that until EON film the continuation novels, this situation
might continue. But EON aren't going to film continuation novels - why
would they pay for a story and then pay more writers to adapt it into
a screenplay, when they can just pay those writers to come up with the
story in the first place?
So I think IFP need to think of another strategy. And that's why I
think a Sixties-set series about the other Double-0 agents would work.
To really succeed, I think you'd need several books out there, and
they'd all have to be very well distributed and promoted. You'd want
the covers to be eye-catching and professional and appealing to
today's audience - but at the same time, they'd need to be classy and
respectful to Fleming. The books themselves, I think, would have to be
straightforward thrillers that could *almost* exist if they had all
the Fleming-esque elements removed - but have enough of his world in
them so that the branding isn't hollow. That way, they can happily be
devoured by Bond fans around the world, but comfortably stand outside
the canon, content that they will never be in it and that they aren't
affecting any of Fleming's work, and unencumbered by writers anguished
at being compared to Fleming.
Here's a couple of solid examples of how I think this could be
achieved, just in case anyone's still listening. ;)
IAN FLEMING PUBLICATIONS
PRESENTS
DOUBLE-0 SECTION: YEAR 00
This could be the first book in the series, and it's the story of how
the Double-0 Section originated. What is an MI6 like when agents don't
have a licence to kill, then?
It's 1946, and British intelligence is coming down from its euphoria
after helping to defeat the Nazis. There are already new battles to
face, and the various organisations are jostling for position. MI6 and
SOE are at loggerheads. In Berlin, MI6's most effective and ruthless
agent hunts down a leading German businessman, who he has evidence
committed particularly atrocious war crimes. He kills him. But it's
peace-time now, and his superiors in London refuse to sanction the
murder. Our hero is on the run from the police in the streets of
post-war Berlin. This is a suspense thriller in the vein of Geoffrey
Household's Rogue Male. We would inter-cut with scenes back at MI6
headquarters in London, where we find a young novice agent called
James Bond monitoring the situation. The book ends with our hero
reaching headquarters and presenting his case. M announces a new
assignation for agents who have a 'licence to kill' - ie will be
sanctioned and supported diplomatically if necessary - and appoints
our hero 001. He laconically remarks that the label might have helped
him had he been awarded it a few weeks earlier.
IAN FLEMING PUBLICATIONS
PRESENTS
DOUBLE-0 SECTION: ENGLAND EXPECTS
It's 1964, and the mission is Crash-Drive and Ultra Hush. James Bond
is missing, presumed dead, but MI6 can't let anyone know that - least
of all their enemies.
Due to various diplomatic pressures, Moscow has agreed to hand over
Guy Burgess and Donald Maclean - but only if Bond comes to collect
them. 009 - who bears a close resemblance to 007 - takes a crash
course in becoming James Bond. You can have a lot of fun here, of
course. Lots of jokes at Bond's expense. Have him go to the same
tailor, lessons on how to seduce a woman - banter with Boothroyd and M
galore. A riff on The Prisoner of Zenda, if you like.
I don't think either of these would alter Fleming's already existing
world. They would be additions that could be taken or left without
affecting what we already know of James Bond.
JD
> On 15 Apr 2004 02:30:51 -0700, spyno...@yahoo.co.uk (JD) waxed
> lyrical:
>
> <snip>
> >So why on earth wouldn't they enjoy reading thillers
> >about ruthless MI6 agents donning wetsuits and visiting exotic locales
> >under the Fleming brand?
> >
>
> Quite simply - because they can get that sort of thing under other,
> more recognizable brands already!
More recognisable? If you ask the person in the street in London,
Paris, New York, Accra or Delhi to name a fictional secret agent, do
you really think they'd say Jack Ryan or Dirk Pitt before they said
James Bond? I don't.
When Jack Higgins wanted to do a series on a British agent called Paul
Chavasse, or Colin Forbes started his series about the SIS's Tweed or
Elleston Trevor started Quiller off, or Clancy started Jack Ryan -
they probably all had someone say they wouldn't be successes because
readers could already get that sort of thing under another more
recognisable brand - Bond.
The Executioner series is still going strong! Hardly more recognisable
than Bond, is it? But they're churning out one a month or something.
Someone is buying those tales of derring do by secret agents. I bet
each one of that 300-plus series has sold more than any of the
Gardners or Bensons.
Ian Fleming's James Bond is a brand that isn't being utilised to its
fullest potential. It's got a *hell* of a lot more recognition than
any of its competitors.
snark^
warbled on about "New James Bond novels" in alt.fan.james-bond <<=
> James Bond is the world's most famous secret agent. Jack Ryan, Dirk
> Pitt and all the rest of these characters are Bond *clones*.
Time for a minor digression. [It's just a jump to the left...] Anyone
know who wrote the new Dirk Pitt(tm) novel _Trojan Odyssey_? I'm pretty
sure it's not old Clive because not only are some of the customary Dirk
Pitt(tm) tropes changing (intro of Son/Daughter; aging of Pitt) but the
style and feel of the narrative is different too. Is it Paul Kemprecos
taking over? (did the Kurt Austin novels do that badly?) If it is
Kemrpecos he's gotten a much better handle on Cussler's style this time
around.
Going back to Cussler's books it is worth noting that the early Pitt
novels had a very Bond-like feel to them; re: Pitt's misogynistic
attitudes towards women and they had a more tight/taut espionage type
plot. In _Night Probe_ however Pitt easily defeats a thinly disguised
older Bond and it might be that Cussler finally got the Bond homage
stuff out of his system through this. As the series continues
afterwards he develops a style of his own -- which just happened to
include even more unbelievable at-the-last-second stunts and death
defying situations all solved by the increasingly godlike Dirk Pitt(tm).
Levi Ramsey
> The Executioner series is still going strong! Hardly more recognisable
> than Bond, is it? But they're churning out one a month or something.
> Someone is buying those tales of derring do by secret agents. I bet
> each one of that 300-plus series has sold more than any of the
> Gardners or Bensons.
As I understand it, the Gardners were selling at bestseller status into
the late 80s. The late 80s was Gardner's nadir; IMHO from Death is
Forever through Cold [Fall] he was on a general upswing.
I suspect that the miserable performance of the middle Gardners, combined
with the films' hiatus, caused Glidrose to retreat.
--
Levi Ramsey
le...@cygnetnet.net
How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is, after all, so poorly lit...
Currently playing: Rush - Hold Your Fire - Open Secrets
Linux 2.6.2-3mdk
06:05:00 up 41 days, 5:21, 13 users, load average: 1.18, 0.74, 0.77
JD
> Neuromancer is one of my all-time fav sci-fi novels but
> Gibson's not a terribly wonderful writer. If you want a Bond story done
> in 1st person by a guy who's already got half a handle on the requisite
> lechery and the type world spies inhabit then surely George McDonald
> Fraser is your man...
I was really just throwing Gibson out there because I'm tired of
mentioning Bret Easton Ellis. ;)
George MacDonald Fraser is a superb writer, and of course has already
been involved with Bond, writing the Octopussy screenplay. The
Flashman series is absolutely superb, and one of the great things
about it, of course, is the research. If GMF turned his hand to
writing a 60s-period Fleming-style spy thriller, we'd be in for a
treat.
But he'd be a fool to do that. He's now 81 - why on earth would he
want to finish his career doing books based on another writer's
character? What would be in it for him? Not the money, certainly. The
kudos? Hardly? It would be almost guaranteed to wipe out his entire
life's work in the mind of the public. From being the man who brought
us Flashman, he'd be remembered as the man who continued Ian Fleming's
series. Just as Gardner is seen in that light - rather than as the
creator of Herbie Kruger. Not an attractive proposition.
The whole mantle of "Bond continuation writer" is a curse. I think the
only way to do it is to take the pressure off by having several people
do it - perhaps even anonymously. They should be anonymous in spirit,
anyway. It shouldn't be built up quite as it is. The general public is
not aware of who writes the Bond screenplays, and not could they care.
Nobody's comparing those guys with Fleming outside the hardcore
fan-base, because everyone accepts that they aren't trying to emulate
Fleming anymore. Obviously, the comparison will always be greater when
it comes to writing novels, but I still think that it's a PR own goal
trying to get newspapers and magazines to interview Gardner or Benson,
the new chap who writes the Bond books. Because the way they've set it
up is that it's not going to appeal to a MacDonald Fraser or a Jack
Higgins or anyone well known. So they're going to have someone not
that well known, like Gardner or Benson - who will then be crucified
for not being up to scratch. The public relations 'hook' of having a
writer following in Fleming's footsteps worked well twice - for Amis
and for Gardner's first book. It will be *very* hard to get it to work
again, I think. Someone like Gibson might work because it would be a
one-off radical reinvention of Bond - an experiment.
But I prefer Tim's idea! ;)
JD
> more recognizable brands already!
>
> The problem with the Bond novels is clearly IFP doesn't know how to
> market them.
Damn this Google delay! I think I've just seen what you were saying,
Keith - that you were agreeing with me! Right? ;)
Levi: re best-sellers. Have you ever seen a thriller that didn't
proclaim itself a best-seller? What do we actually mean by that term?
I don't think any of the post-Fleming novels were *real* best-sellers.
Not on the same scale as Fleming's books, or The Day of The Jackal, or
The Eye of the Needle or The Eiger Sanction or The Spy Who Came In
From The Cold or The Hunt For Red October. Benson says 30,000 of his
novels were printed in the US – compare to two million of Clancy's
latest. Most people could not name a non-Fleming Bond novel - most
people could name The Day of The Jackal and The Hunt for Red October.
After the death of Don Pendleton, the creator of The Executioner
series, there was a court case because there were actually two
competing franchises by different publishers. You can read about it
here:
http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~rhendler/entertainment_law/warner.htm
Two interesting statements: Pendleton's books were selling half a
million copies each. After he stopped writing the series, Harlequin
still managed to sell 12 million of his books in six years (they were
releasing more than one a year, though). They will be selling less now
- but as little as 30,000? I doubt it very much. There are actually
five series, not three as I said earlier. They're churning them out -
novel number 97, novel 206, novel 309. They're making money, surely.
And the average person in the street hasn't even heard of *these* -
most of them are buying Red Rabbit. And while all this goes on,
Raymond Benson was trotting around the globe paying out of his own
pocket to research his one book a year, which 5,000 people could buy
in the UK.
GSHATTERHAND
>Date: 4/16/04 4:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time
GSHATTERHAND wrote:
>> Novels featuring the adventures of Felix Leiter, Moneypenny, Tanner, >>
maybe young M........something seems inappropriate about this >> for the Bond
franchise. Some kind of an unhealthy diffusion >> of the Bond universe.
JD wrote:
>I can understand your point. As I said before, franchises are a>delicate
business, and by their nature compromises. But isn't it more>inappropriate to
have continuation novels featuring James Bond>himself? I think that's a large
reason why the Gardner and Benson>books haven't reached a wide public. . . .
GSHATTERHAND:
You may be right. You're really making me think about it.
JD wrote:
.>So I think IFP need to think of another strategy. And that's why I>think a
Sixties-set series about the other Double-0 agents would work.>To really
succeed, I think you'd need several books out there, and>they'd all have to be
very well distributed and promoted. You'd want>the covers to be eye-catching
and professional and appealing to>today's audience - but at the same time,
they'd need to be classy and>respectful to Fleming. . . . . >I don't think
either of these would alter Fleming's already existing
>world. They would be additions that could be taken or left without>affecting
what we already know of James Bond.
Your examples are intriquing and your vision of their place in the Bond
universe easy to accept.
James Page
"New James Bond novels - what do you want to see?"
"Them burnt", well, according the vast majority of people I've heard
on the subject. Seems a shame so many people are pre-judging them
before they've even read a single line.
On a side note, Higson has already completed book one.
JD
> Time for a minor digression. [It's just a jump to the left...] Anyone
> know who wrote the new Dirk Pitt(tm) novel _Trojan Odyssey_?
I've no idea - but opinion seems divided over at the Dirk Pitt forum:
Steven Wandy
co-writing the Pitt series with him. Nothing official has been admitted
about Trojan Odyssey, but the kids were introduced at the end of the
previous book so it was apparent that that was the direction Clive planned
on going in. Supposed in an interview he claimed that he and Dirk were
co-writing the next few books with the intention of Dirk taking on more (or
all) of the responsibilities eventually. Realize that Dr. Cussler is getting
on in years and he probably plans this for the other two series (Numa Files
and Oragon Tales).
JD
> IAN FLEMING PUBLICATIONS
>
> PRESENTS
>
> DOUBLE-0 SECTION: ENGLAND EXPECTS
>
> It's 1964, and the mission is Crash-Drive and Ultra Hush. James Bond
> is missing, presumed dead, but MI6 can't let anyone know that - least
> of all their enemies.
>
> Due to various diplomatic pressures, Moscow has agreed to hand over
> Guy Burgess and Donald Maclean - but only if Bond comes to collect
> them.
Just realised this one wouldn't be possible *quite* as I've outlined
here - Burgess died in '63 and Bond was declared dead in The Times in
November '62! :) But these were just off-the-top-of-my-head
suggestions to show the kind of thing that could be done. You could
perhaps set it in mid-'62 and have a character loosely modelled on
Burgess...
No, I'm not going to work out all the details - do your own work, IFP!
;)
Keith Gow
lyrical:
>kw...@vicnet.net.au (Keith Gow) wrote in message news:<407f7c9...@News.Individual.NET>...
>> On 15 Apr 2004 02:30:51 -0700, spyno...@yahoo.co.uk (JD) waxed
>> lyrical:
>>
>> <snip>
>> >So why on earth wouldn't they enjoy reading thillers
>> >about ruthless MI6 agents donning wetsuits and visiting exotic locales
>> >under the Fleming brand?
>> >
>>
>> Quite simply - because they can get that sort of thing under other,
>> more recognizable brands already!
>
>More recognisable? If you ask the person in the street in London,
>Paris, New York, Accra or Delhi to name a fictional secret agent, do
>you really think they'd say Jack Ryan or Dirk Pitt before they said
>James Bond? I don't.
>
I mean as literary figures. Tom Clancy is clearly a better known
literary brand than IFP's continuation series of Bond novels.
We're talking books in this case, not movies. The 007 Movies are
better known than the Jack Ryan movies, yes. But as far as books go,
the general public probably doesn't know they are/were still being
written.
They will, sadly, hear about this whole Young James Bond idea and
probably laugh at the idea of a 13 year old swilling martinis and
smacking his female teachers on the arse.
<snip>
>Ian Fleming's James Bond is a brand that isn't being utilised to its
>fullest potential. It's got a *hell* of a lot more recognition than
>any of its competitors.
Do you really think this has anything to do with Ian Fleming *now*?
-- Keith Gow --
Keith Gow
lyrical:
>kw...@vicnet.net.au (Keith Gow) wrote in message news:<407b8a2c...@News.Individual.NET>...
>
>"New James Bond novels - what do you want to see?"
>
>"Them burnt", well, according the vast majority of people I've heard
>on the subject. Seems a shame so many people are pre-judging them
>before they've even read a single line.
>
It's healthy skepticism.
>On a side note, Higson has already completed book one.
He would have had to, yes, given the long lead time in publishing.
He's probably not far off finishing book two of the two book deal.
-- Keith Gow --
snark^
warbled on about "Cussler/Dirk Pitt" in alt.fan.james-bond <<=
I saw Golden Buddha on the shelves alongside TO. I'd be thinking that's
what Paul Kemprecos is doing now -- when reading Blue Gold they (crew +
the good ship Oregon) really stood out as being the singularly neat idea
in a not-so-exciting adventure.
Kurt Austin was probably a little too close to Pitt, being an enigmatic
loner with almost the same set of quirks: Pitt collects cars, Austin
collects antique guns; Pitt owns a hangar, Austin sculls along the
Potomac; Pitt has startlingly clear green eyes, Austin has silvery grey
hair; Pitt has a slimy wop for an ethnically-diverse sidekick, Austin's
pal is a greasy dago... ;) (while Bond got a redneck Texan).
There was nothing wrong with his writing except for this setup -- it was
cookie-cutter stuff really and didn't work to well (less than original)
but with the Oregon maybe he found something worth writing about.
--
Up the airy mountain, Down the rushing glen,
We daren't go a-hunting; For fear of little men.
-- William Allingham, _The Fairies_
snark^
> I saw Golden Buddha on the shelves alongside TO. I'd be thinking that's
> what Paul Kemprecos is doing now -- when reading Blue Gold they (crew +
> the good ship Oregon) really stood out as being the singularly neat idea
> in a not-so-exciting adventure.
Oops, just checked up on it and it's Craig Dirgo who's ghostwriting the
Oregon books.
JD
> I mean as literary figures. Tom Clancy is clearly a better known
> literary brand than IFP's continuation series of Bond novels.
The Bond continuation novels aren't selling - but that doesn't mean
the Fleming brand isn't known. My point is that the books have the
*potential* to do better, because of the name recognition that Bond
offers. The general public already knows the brand from the films, and
although most don't actually read Fleming, his brand awareness is
still very high. Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan is not nearly as attractive a
brand in terms of name recognition as Ian Fleming's James Bond. The
trick is how to translate the love and affection that millions of
people around the world have for Bond into book sales.
I think one very simple point is that, rather than thrillers being
dead, this market actually *devours* thrillers. The kind of readership
that wants this kind of book isn't really prepared to wait a year or
two for the next installment - they're getting through the 19 Tom
Clancy's Net Force Explorer books, and they're looking for more. They
read a book like this a week. The Bond series can only look moribund
in comparison to that. I'm *not* saying let's have 20 a year - but
perhaps three or four? I think if more of these books are coming out,
the whole thorny question of 'canon' begins to evaporate. They're just
fun tie-ins. With Benson or whoever taking so long to write a book,
it's just asking to be compared to thriller writers like le Carre. IFP
seem to have forgotten that Ian Fleming took just six weeks to write
each of the Bond adventures. I'd actually impose that kind of time
limit.
<snip>
>>Ian Fleming's James Bond is a brand that isn't being utilised to its
>>fullest potential. It's got a *hell* of a lot more recognition than
>>any of its competitors.
>Do you really think this has anything to do with Ian Fleming *now*?
Very much so. :)
In the late 1980s, Alfred Dunhill and Burberry were both fashion
houses in a state of decline. They were being kept afloat by Japanese
consumers' infatuation with their brands, but it wasn't really enough.
But they realised that the Japanese had a point: they still stood for
classic British luxury. So they rethought, rejigged, relaunched and
rebranded. They made *lots of new products* that people could actually
buy, and they gave them a wide distribution. Both were very
successful. In Burberry's case, so successful that they eventually
went too far and actually cheapened the original brand once again
(because they flooded the market, effectively). But people who hadn't
dreamed of buying Dunhill suits or briefcases or lighters in 1989 were
snapping the label up by 1999. They reconnected the customer with the
idea of their classic brand.
There's more than a little of James Bond in Dunhill - it's a very
similar appeal, in fact. And when you look at Gieves and Hawkes'
recent rebranding, along with a stream of other classic forgotten
British fashion brands like Daks, Aquascutum, Pringle, Ballantyne,
Mulberry, Jaeger, Asprey - even Turnbulll and Asser! - as well as the
new brands influenced by them, such as Richard James and Oswald
Boateng, I think it's clear that a brand with the kind of
international recognition Ian Fleming has can work, too. A great many
of these rebranded labels are, of course, ones Fleming championed in
the Bond books! They're capitalising, in part, on the 'Ian Fleming'
appeal of their brands. Meanwhile, Fleming's estate sits in the pews,
watching films that take his character, build daft new plots around
him and sell him around the world. The films have done with Fleming
what the books should have continued to - continued after his death to
greater success. Nobody sees EON as cashing in on the Fleming brand -
so why should they think that if Ian Fleming's *estate* were to try to
do something similar?
IFP hasn't realised that it has something EON doesn't really have -
the *Fleming* brand. Fleming has the snob appeal, the retro appeal,
and the mark of quality, that brands like Alfred Dunhill have - only
more so. And I think that, coupled with the world of the late 50s/60s
and some clever thinking, it's potentially more powerful than the film
franchise. Rather than trying to compete with EON over the James Bond
brand, I think IFP would do very well to focus on the Ian Fleming
brand: the bespoke Gieves and Hawkes suit to the off-the-peg
anyone-with-enough-cash-can-have-one Brioni number, the Geo F
Trumper's blades to the Philips Sensotec.
I think you'd be surprised at how many people would buy into it.
Leviathan
> On 16 Apr 2004 01:49:50 -0700, spyno...@yahoo.co.uk (JD) waxed
> lyrical:
>
>>kw...@vicnet.net.au (Keith Gow) wrote in message news:<407f7c9...@News.Individual.NET>...
>>> On 15 Apr 2004 02:30:51 -0700, spyno...@yahoo.co.uk (JD) waxed
>>> lyrical:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>> >So why on earth wouldn't they enjoy reading thillers
>>> >about ruthless MI6 agents donning wetsuits and visiting exotic locales
>>> >under the Fleming brand?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Quite simply - because they can get that sort of thing under other,
>>> more recognizable brands already!
>>
>>More recognisable? If you ask the person in the street in London,
>>Paris, New York, Accra or Delhi to name a fictional secret agent, do
>>you really think they'd say Jack Ryan or Dirk Pitt before they said
>>James Bond? I don't.
>>
>
> I mean as literary figures. Tom Clancy is clearly a better known
> literary brand than IFP's continuation series of Bond novels.
>
> We're talking books in this case, not movies. The 007 Movies are
> better known than the Jack Ryan movies, yes. But as far as books go,
> the general public probably doesn't know they are/were still being
> written.
But that's exactly Jeremy's point. Proper marketing by IFP can change that.
Proper marketing that takes advantage of the James Bond "Brand" can say to
everybody who reads Clancy, "Bond did it first -- and nobody does it
better."
--
Jonathan Andrew Sheen
http://www.leviathanstudios.com
Leviathan of the GEI (Detached.)
jsh...@leviathanstudios.com
"What'dya expect? I'm a New Yorker!"
-Anonymous New York Firefighter, 9/12/01
Steven Wandy
> what Paul Kemprecos is doing now --
co-wrote the non-fiction books with.
> Kurt Austin was probably a little too close to Pitt, being an enigmatic
> loner with almost the same set of quirks: Pitt collects cars, Austin
> collects antique guns; Pitt owns a hangar, Austin sculls along the
> Potomac; Pitt has startlingly clear green eyes, Austin has silvery grey
> hair; Pitt has a slimy wop for an ethnically-diverse sidekick, Austin's
> pal is a greasy dago... ;) (while Bond got a redneck Texan).
The similarities are probably because Cussler actually created the
characters and storylines for the series. Kemprecos does the majority of the
writing for the books (atleast that is what is understood about their
"co-writing" from what I have read).
Leviathan
could be a great, fun chatracter in the "World of Bond" books?
He's shown up already in Pearson's "Authorized Biography of James Bond," a
sometime advisor to M, who comes up with some of the most harebrained
schemes... But also identified the need for the Bond-style secret agent,
able to blend in easily and cleanly with hte highest levels of society...
His name is Ian Fleming.
If Chelsea Quinn Yarbro (from whom I expect so much better) and Bill
Fawcett can make a nominal Fleming the hero of their Gawd-awful "Death to
Spies" and a second one out now that I don't know the name of, surely
Fleming's heirs can honor him with a truer, more complex pertrayal in the
pages of the World of Bond.
Peredur Davies
> He's shown up already in Pearson's "Authorized Biography of James Bond," a
> sometime advisor to M, who comes up with some of the most harebrained
> schemes... But also identified the need for the Bond-style secret agent,
> able to blend in easily and cleanly with hte highest levels of society...
>
> His name is Ian Fleming.
Well, such a thing has been done in the films Spymaker and Goldeneye (the
Charles Dance one); I've only seen the former, and it's fairly good.
I've never liked John Pearson's utilisation of Fleming as a persona within
the Bond universe. It does something chronic to the fourth wall, confuses
reality with fantasy (the latter of which Bond emphatically is), and is
rather unnecessary -- given that James Bond is pretty much Ian Fleming as he
would have liked to be.
If, on the other hand, you're suggesting that a character be written about
who is Ian Fleming in all but name, then what's the point, really? Do you
want him to be an author who spies? Or Fleming before he wrote, a
plan-master in the Intelligence services? If the latter, I'd accept that
it's a new slant, but not a character who would do much in the way of direct
action. How would you spice it up so that it's not just a man sitting in his
office all day colouring in maps? <g>
> surely
> Fleming's heirs can honor him with a truer, more complex pertrayal in the
> pages of the World of Bond.
Erm, but I feel strongly that Fleming is a real person. Fictional
biographies can grate; the abovementioned Spymaker ('The Secret Life of Ian
Fleming') was more Bond pastiche than anything else. There's already an
account of the life of Ian Fleming, more than one, and it's not fiction.
There's you truer and more complex version than 'Death to Spies'. Fiddling
about with Fleming's creation, hero and universe, is one thing, but fiddling
about with the life of the author himself is unnecessary, if not crude, in
my opinion.
Yours
--
------- Peredur G.C. Davies --------
Queens' College, Cambridge University
Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic dept.
-----------------------------------
For you are such a smart little craft--
Such a neat little, sweet little craft--
Such a bright little, tight little,
Slight little, light little,
Trim little, prim little craft!
-----------------------------------
"Leviathan" <jsh...@leviathanstudios.com> wrote in message
news:afa85855145e5be2...@news.1usenet.com...
> My God, we're all missing something both obvious and fun. You know who
> could be a great, fun chatracter in the "World of Bond" books?
>
>
> If Chelsea Quinn Yarbro (from whom I expect so much better) and Bill
> Fawcett can make a nominal Fleming the hero of their Gawd-awful "Death to
> Spies" and a second one out now that I don't know the name of,
>
JD
Licence rethought... Steven Crane reports on how Ian Fleming's estate
took on the James Bond films at their own game - and won
FIVE years ago, the idea that books put out by Ian Fleming's literary
estate would be best-sellers on both sides of the Atlantic would have
seemed absurd. Fleming's character - suave womanising secret agent
James Bond - was still featuring in blockbuster films, of course. But
Fleming's books were largely out of print, and even handsome
re-editions had lacked mass appeal. Sexism, homophobia and racism
aside, the novels had too leisurely a pace to compete with either the
Bond films or the glut of three-inch-thick techno-thrillers that
crowded the best-seller lists. Novels featuring Bond penned by other
authors had also failed to reach beyond die-hard fans, as had an
ill-advised foray into the children's market.
'We were in a bit of a mess,' admits Peter Hennessy of Ian Fleming
Publications, the writer's literary estate. 'The success of the films
had left us with very little room to manoeuvre. Not many people wanted
to read James Bond books that had already been filmed - and fewer
still wanted to read books that hadn't been.'
But in just five years, IFP has staged a remarkable comeback: at the
time of writing, four of its books are in the New York Times
best-seller lists. EVen more remarkably, only one of them - On Her
Majesty's Secret Service - was actually written by Fleming. The rest
are part of the World Of Bond series, penned by a team of anonymous
writers and telling the tales of the other secret agents in
MI6’s famous Double-0 Section. Teenagers in Iowa raised on the
Bond films have done what seemed unthinkable until recently: they've
fallen for Fleming.
'Our research showed that a lot of people were reading thrillers that
were very influenced by Ian Fleming's Bond books,' says Hennessy. 'The
films were still doing big business, and ironically many of the
classic British brands that Fleming had written about in his novels
were enjoying a renaissance. Jaguar, Aston Martin, Dunhill and
Burberry were using advertising aimed at men who wanted to feel like
they were James Bond. In short, everyone was making money off Ian
Fleming's character, spirit and ethos - except Ian Fleming's estate!'
Research also pointed up a curious phenomenon: many fans on internet
message boards for rival authors like Robert Ludlum and Tom Clancy
were using Bond-themed "handles". 'What was astonishing is that these
often referenced Ian Fleming's work. We noticed internet users with
names such as Shatterhand6 and MjrBoothroyd - names only Fleming
aficionados would have known.' But the crunch came when statistics
revealed an enormous affection for handles featuring the figures "00":
003, 004, etc. 'We realised that people liked the idea of seeing
themselves as alternate Bonds, in a way - colleagues of Bond.'
This realisation was to lead to great changes at IFP. Under the
leadership of Hennessy and a few other board members, meetings took
place throughout the summer of 2004 that resulted in a radical plan.
'We met with everyone and their aunt,' he says. 'Car manufacturers,
fashion labels, drinks companies - you name it.' At first, people were
reluctant to talk to the company, as it was seen as something of a
lame duck in comparison with EON, who make the films. But Hennessy
persuaded them that they were selling a different brand: "Ian Fleming"
rather than "James Bond". "It was James Macintyre at Condé Nast who
opened my eyes to the potential of that," he remembers. "He also told
me about "stealth wealth".'
Stealth wealth was a short-lived phenomenon at the start of the
millennium, in which wealthy young men began to tire of designer logos
and began wearing frayed cuffs and monogrammed shirts. The idea was
about quality and heritage rather than flashing one's cash about. They
bought classic cars, vintage watches - and first editions of Ian
Fleming novels. 'A lot of the fashion journalists we spoke to said
that they felt the Bond films had become devalued by product placement
- but only because they were the wrong products. Fleming always
admired the best product, not necessarily the most expensive or the
latest.'
As a result of this advice, IFP compiled a database of
"Fleming-friendly" brands. 'This was actually three separate lists.
The first consisted of brands that Fleming tells us James Bond uses in
the books. The second was made up of other brands he mentions - what
the villains and heroines drink and wear, for example. The third list
was of brands not mentioned at all in Fleming’s work - but which
we thought reasonably could have done so. This last, of course, was
the hardest of all, and involved a lot of heated debate among the
board members!'
The complete database became a kind of bible for IFP - every company
in it was approached to see if some form of collaboration might be
feasible. 'The result,' says Hennessy with atypical understatement,
'was heartening.' Almost all of the brands were still around - and
many were also in the process of remodelling themselves for a new era.
Having gauged an interest, the IFP board set about the real work:
creating a new series based around the world of Ian Fleming's James
Bond. Eight writers were hired, and set loose on Fleming's original
manuscripts. Their brief was to create eight new characters - 001,
002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 008 and 009. 'It took a year,' says Alexandra
Gray of Cygnet books, who helped with the selection of writers. 'A lot
of the ideas were too outlandish, or self-referential. IFP wanted
characters that could hold their own when compared to James Bond.'
(Gray scotches a rumour that all the writers have to take regular
examinations on Fleming's work. 'There are regular research meetings,'
she says.)
With all the characters approved, the writers were each given six
weeks to pen a thriller featuring one of them. 'That's how long Ian
Fleming gave himself,' says Hennessy. 'We decided to play things Ian's
way this time, and see what happened.' It worked: the first Bond books
were ready to hit bookstores in early 2006. Now Hennessy went back to
all the people he'd made contact with 18 months previously, and asked
them to deliver on their interest, negotiation specific proposals
based on the book outlines. In February 2006, a 16-page supplement on
Marrakesh centred around the 003 novel The Devil Wore Black appeared
in Condé Nast Traveller. Men's fashion magazine Arena Homme Plus went
back to the Sixties for a cover story in which Gieves and Hawkes,
Alfred Dunhill, Hilditch and Key and other prestigious British fashion
labels dressed the 'new' agents. And Scotch whisky company Lagavulin
ran a high-profile advertising campaign featuring quotes from the
novel Fire with Fire, in which 005 rhapsodised about their product.
The stealth wealth campaign was a hit - but mainstream success proved
more elusive. 'It did what we wanted it to do,' Peter Hennessy
insists. 'We never thought we'd have an overnight success on our
hands. The idea of the first books was to introduce stylish thrillers
in Fleming's mold to a new generation of fashion-conscious and
educated men, as well as picking up quite a few older readers who were
intrigued by the idea. It had always been planned as a stepping stone
to a wider market.'
Deliberate strategy or not, it paid off: with Ian Fleming firmly
repositioned as the classic British brand it had once been, the next
set of books capitalised on the momentum. Whether by accident or
careful planning, the 002 novel The Dying of The Light made headlines
across the world when it was learned that the book ended with James
Bond murdered. Had Ian Fleming's estate gone made? Was this an attempt
to alientate EON (it would suggest that the majority of their films
were featuring an imposter)? The resulting publicity (which harked
back to a similar stunt pulled by Ian Fleming himself with From Russia
With Love) led the book to leap to the top of the British best-seller
lists. Interest in America also began to pick up. (Of course, the next
novel in the series was to reveal that Bond hadn't died at all, and
that 002 had been the victim of a Smersh deception operation.) The
books now started to come quick and fast: distribution problems that
had plagued IFP in earlier years when it had been behind the James
Bond continuation novels of John Gardner and Raymond Benson were now a
thing of the past, and thriller fans started to get used to seeing
World of Bond novels in their local bookshops. 'I'd thought from the
start that part of the key to making this thing work was to simply
hammer the door down,' says Hennessy.
Under the watchful eye of IFP, the books ride a fine line. They are,
on the one hand, uncomplicated thrillers offering sex, violence and
the high life - a familiar formula offered by countless competitors,
but with the advantage of all the associations and recognition the
Fleming name once again affords (and how the publishers of Clancy et
al must envy the strapline that graces the covers, the unquestionable
authority of 'Ian Fleming Publications presents...'). But the books
also pay their respects to their heritage, with evocative descriptions
of 50s and 60s London and underplayed nods to the original adventures.
'A London without James Bond is a London not worth living in...' opens
England Expects, in which Charles Urquhart, 009, is called upon to
stand in for a presumed-dead Bond. Dexter Smythe, a villain in Ian
Fleming's short story Octopussy, appears in the World War Two-set
novel Year 00, affording a deft sketch of Ian Fleming before he became
a writer.
These and many other subtle references have laced the books with a
sense of flair and exuberance that has long been missing from the
big-selling thrillers - and from the James Bond films. It is perhaps
no coincidence that it has now been three years since Bond was last in
our cinemas; rumours are circulating that the oft-mentioned idea of
returning the screen Bond to the 60s may now finally happen. Some have
even suggested that films featuring the other double-0s are in the
works - Hennessy declined to comment with a smile. Nevertheless, the
backlash over Bond driving a Toyota in the last Bond film, 2006's
Ashes to Burn, makes an ironic contrast to the reversal of fortunes of
TVR, who have seen sales rocket as a result of 008's penchant for the
British-made sports cars. Fleming aficionados have embracred the
books, helped in part, one feels, by former Bond actor and Fleming fan
Pierce Brosnan's repeated endorsements of them. Not everyone is happy
with the series, however - Robert McCrum wrote a stinging article in
The Observer questioning IFP's motivations. Hennessy shrugs when I
mention it. 'You can't please everyone. But I don't see why the films
are seen as being above board but we're thought of as seedy cash-in
merchants. We are Ian Fleming's estate - and these books are more
faithful to Ian Fleming than the books have been in decades.'
Whatever the arguments for or against, there's no denying the public's
verdict on the new agents. Charles Osborne, 002, has proved the
favourite so far - his deep-seated hatred of 003 and his penchant for
using his licence to kill above and beyond the call of duty have made
him an unlikely anti-hero, and googling reveals over 100 sites devoted
to his exploits. This month marks the launch of Shatterhand, the 20th
book in the series - and Hennessy promises it will be a shocker. 'The
rumours are true,' he says. 'One of the double-0 agents dies.' Is it
wise to start killing off the geese that have laid the golden eggs? He
laughs at the suggestion. 'Fleming never said how many agents there
were in Double-0 section, you know. And,' he adds with a twinkle in
his eyes, 'There's a 0011 mentioned in Moonraker...'
From The Independent, April 18, 2009
Tim Pollard
"JD" <spyno...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b4cd1c7d.04041...@posting.google.com...
<standing ovation>
*Excellent*
--
Regards
Tim Pollard
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
- Captain Mal Reynolds, 'Firefly'
JD
The Fleming Factor
Licence rethought... Steven Crane reports on how Ian Fleming's estate
took on the James Bond films at their own game - and won
FIVE years ago, the idea that books put out by Ian Fleming's literary
estate would be best-sellers on both sides of the Atlantic would have
seemed absurd. Fleming's character - suave womanising secret agent
James Bond - was still featuring in blockbuster films, of course. But
Fleming's books were largely out of print, and even handsome
re-editions had lacked mass appeal. Sexism, homophobia and racism
aside, the novels had too leisurely a pace to compete with either the
Bond films or the glut of three-inch-thick techno-thrillers that
crowded the best-seller lists. Novels featuring Bond penned by other
authors had also failed to reach beyond die-hard fans, as had an
ill-advised foray into the children's market.
'We were in a bit of a mess,' admits Peter Hennessy of Ian Fleming
Publications. 'The success of the films had left us with very little
room to manoeuvre. Not many people wanted to read James Bond books
that had already been filmed - and fewer still wanted to read books
that hadn't been.'
But in just five years, IFP has staged a remarkable comeback: at the
time of writing, four of its books are in the New York Times'
best-seller lists. Even more remarkably, only one of them - On Her
Majesty's Secret Service - was actually written by Fleming. The rest
are part of the World Of Bond series, penned by a team of anonymous
writers and telling the tales of the other secret agents in
MI6's famous Double-0 Section. Teenagers in Iowa raised on the Bond
films have done what seemed unthinkable until recently: they've fallen
for Fleming.
'Our research showed that a lot of people were reading thrillers that
were very influenced by the Bond books,' says Hennessy. 'The
films were still doing big business, and ironically many of the
classic British brands that Fleming had written about in his novels
were enjoying a renaissance. Jaguar, Aston Martin, Dunhill and
Burberry were using advertising aimed at men who wanted to feel like
they were James Bond. In short, everyone was making money off Ian
Fleming's character, spirit and ethos - except Ian Fleming's estate!'
Research also pointed up a curious phenomenon: many fans on internet
message boards for rival authors like Robert Ludlum and Tom Clancy
were using Bond-themed "handles". 'What was astonishing was that these
often referenced Ian Fleming's work. We noticed internet users with
names such as Shatterhand6 and MjrBoothroyd - names only Fleming
aficionados would have known.' But the crunch came when statistics
revealed an enormous affection for handles featuring the figures "00":
003, 004, etc. 'We realised that people liked the idea of seeing
themselves as alternate Bonds, in a way - colleagues of Bond.'
This realisation was to lead to great changes at IFP. Under the
leadership of Hennessy and a few other board members, meetings took
place throughout the summer of 2004 that resulted in a radical plan.
'We met with everyone and their aunt,' he says. 'Car manufacturers,
fashion labels, drinks companies - you name it. At first, people were
reluctant to talk to us, as we were seen as something of a
lame duck in comparison with EON [who make the films].' But Hennessy
persuaded them that they were selling a different brand: "Ian Fleming"
rather than "James Bond". "It was James Macintyre at Condé Nast who
opened my eyes to the potential of that," he remembers. "He also told
me about "stealth wealth".'
Stealth wealth was a short-lived phenomenon at the start of the
millennium, whereby wealthy young men began to tire of designer logos
and began wearing frayed cuffs and monogrammed shirts. The idea was
about quality and heritage rather than flashing one's cash about. They
bought classic cars, vintage watches - and first editions of Ian
Fleming novels. 'The fashion journalists we spoke to said that they
felt the Bond films had become devalued by product placement - but
only because they were the wrong products. Fleming always admired the
best product, not necessarily the most expensive or the latest.'
As a result of this advice, IFP compiled a database of
"Fleming-friendly" brands. 'This was actually three separate lists.
The first consisted of brands that Fleming tells us James Bond uses in
the books. The second was made up of other brands he mentions - what
the other characters drink and wear, for example. The third list
was of brands not mentioned at all in Fleming's work - but which
we thought reasonably could have done so. This last, of course, was
the hardest of all, and involved a lot of heated debate among the
board members!'
The complete database became a kind of bible for IFP - every company
in it was approached to see if collaboration might be feasible. 'The
result,' says Hennessy with atypical understatement, 'was heartening.'
Almost all of the brands were still around - and many were also in the
process of remodelling themselves for a new era.
Having gauged an interest, the IFP board set about the real work:
creating a new series based around the world of Ian Fleming's James
Bond. Eight writers were hired, and set loose on Fleming's original
manuscripts. Their brief was to create eight new characters - 001,
002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 008 and 009. 'It took a year,' says Alexandra
Gray of Cygnet books, who helped with the selection of writers. 'A lot
of the ideas were too outlandish, or self-referential. IFP wanted
characters that could hold their own when compared to James Bond.'
(Gray scotches a rumour that all the writers have to take regular
examinations on Fleming's work. 'There are regular research meetings,'
she says.)
With all the characters approved, the writers were each given six
weeks to pen a thriller featuring one of them. 'That's how long Ian
Fleming gave himself,' says Hennessy. 'We decided to play things Ian's
way this time, and see what happened.' It worked: the first Bond books
were ready to hit bookstores in early 2006. Now Hennessy went back to
all the people he'd made contact with 18 months previously, and asked
them to deliver on their interest, negotiating specific proposals
based on the book outlines. In February 2006, a 16-page supplement on
Marrakesh centred around the 003 novel The Devil Wears Black appeared
in Condé Nast Traveller. Men's magazine Arena went back to the Sixties
for a cover story in which Gieves and Hawkes, Alfred Dunhill, Hilditch
and Key and other prestigious British fashion labels dressed the 'new'
agents. And Scotch whisky company Lagavulin ran a high-profile
advertising campaign featuring quotes from the novel Fire with Fire,
in which 005 rhapsodised about their product.
The stealth wealth campaign was a hit - but mainstream success proved
more elusive. 'It did what we wanted it to do,' Peter Hennessy
insists. 'We never thought we'd have an overnight success on our
hands. The idea of the first books was to introduce stylish thrillers
in the Fleming mold to a new generation of fashion-conscious and
educated men, as well as picking up quite a few older readers who were
intrigued by the idea. It had always been planned as a stepping stone
to a wider market.'
Deliberate strategy or not, it paid off: with Ian Fleming firmly
repositioned as the classic British brand it had once been, the next
set of books capitalised on the momentum. Whether by accident or
careful planning, the 002 novel The Dying of The Light made headlines
across the world when it was learned that the book ended with James
Bond murdered. Had Ian Fleming's estate gone mad? Was this an attempt
to alientate EON (it would suggest that the majority of their films
had featured an impostor)? The resulting publicity (which harked
back to a similar stunt pulled by Ian Fleming himself with From Russia
With Love) led the book to leap to the top of the British best-seller
lists. Interest in America also began to pick up. (Of course, the next
novel in the series was to reveal that Bond hadn't died at all, and
that 002 had been the victim of a Smersh deception operation.) The
books now started to come quick and fast: distribution problems that
had plagued IFP in earlier years when it had been behind the James
Bond continuation novels of John Gardner and Raymond Benson were now a
thing of the past, and thriller fans began to get used to seeing
World of Bond novels in their local bookshops. 'I'd thought from the
start that part of the key to making this thing work was to simply
hammer the door down,' says Hennessy.
Under the watchful eye of IFP, the books ride a fine line. They are,
on the one hand, uncomplicated thrillers offering sex, violence and
the high life - a familiar formula offered by many of their
competitors,
but with the advantage of all the associations and recognition the
Fleming name once again affords (and how the publishers of Clancy et
al must envy the strapline that graces the covers, the unquestionable
authority of 'Ian Fleming Publications presents...'). But the books
also pay their respects to their heritage, with evocative descriptions
of Fifties and Sixtiess London and underplayed nods to the original
adventures.
'A London without James Bond is a London not worth living in...' opens
England Expects, in which Charles Urquhart, 009, is called upon to
stand in for a presumed-dead Bond. Dexter Smythe, a villain in Ian
Fleming's short story Octopussy, appears in the World War Two-set
novel Year 00, affording a deft sketch of Ian Fleming before he became
a writer.
These and many other subtle references have laced the books with a
sense of flair and exuberance that have long been missing from the
big-selling thrillers - and from the James Bond films. It is perhaps
no coincidence that it has now been three years since Bond was last in
our cinemas; rumours are circulating that the oft-mentioned idea of
returning the screen Bond to the Sixties may now finally happen. Some
have
even suggested that films featuring the other double-0s are in the
works - Hennessy declined to comment with a smile. Nevertheless, the
backlash over Bond driving a Toyota in the last Bond film, 2006's
Ashes to Burn, makes an ironic contrast to the reversal of fortunes of
TVR, who have seen sales rocket as a result of 008's penchant for the
British-made sports cars.
Fleming aficionados have embraced the books - helped in part,
one feels, by former Bond actor and Fleming fan Pierce Brosnan's
repeated endorsements of them. Not everyone is happy with the series,
however - Robert McCrum wrote a stinging article in The Observer
questioning IFP's motivations. Hennessy shrugs when I mention it.
'You can't please everyone. But I don't see why the films are seen
as being above board but we're thought of as seedy cash-in merchants.
We are Ian Fleming's estate - and these books are more faithful to
Ian Fleming than the books have been in decades.'
Whatever the arguments for or against, there's no denying the public's
verdict on the new agents. Charles Osborne, 002, has proved the
favourite so far - his deep-seated hatred of 003 and his penchant for
using his licence to kill above and beyond the call of duty have made
him an unlikely anti-hero, and googling reveals several dozen sites
devoted to his exploits. This month marks the launch of Shatterhand,
the 20th book in the series - and Hennessy promises it will be a
shocker. 'The rumours are true,' he says. 'One of the double-0 agents
dies.' Is it wise to start killing off the geese that have laid the
golden eggs? He laughs at the suggestion. 'Fleming never said how
many agents there were in Double-0 section, you know. And,' he adds
with a twinkle in his eyes, 'There's a 0011 mentioned in Moonraker...'
From The Independent, April 18, 2009
Peredur Davies
> Licence rethought... Steven Crane reports on how Ian Fleming's estate
> took on the James Bond films at their own game - and won
<snip!>
Well, I'm liking the idea more and more, but it's good to see you're not
getting obsessive with the idea or anything, JD ;)
On one point, at which juncture does Fleming state that there are (say)
eight other 00-agents? I thought Moonraker only mentions three in total.
This doesn't stop invention, of course, but do you reckon the concept of a
big bevy of agents bearing the licence to kill is taking a tip from Eon, not
Fleming? Remember Rhino's sig from Dr No -- I've always liked that it's a
select few who bear the licence to kill. Even eight agents lessens its
punch; keeping it down makes it more of a prize. I think, further, that it's
a mistake to assume that 007 is called 007 because there were six operatives
before him. There are no mentions of even _any_ other Double-O agents in the
first two novels, as far as I recall.
How about a world of Bond where there's only two others: 003 and 0011 (if
they are indeed the souls mentioned in MR). Perhaps, if you wished, a new
member could be introduced as a "rookie", whom Bond takes under his wing...?
Ach, just thoughts.
> Novels featuring Bond penned by other
> authors had also failed to reach beyond die-hard fans, as had an
> ill-advised foray into the children's market.
Well at least the latter will be set in real-Bond-time, and not updated.
Those who seek a period fix will, hopefully, get it.
Yours,
Peredur Davies
To ask an autghor to write such a novel as a "World of Bond" book in six
weeks is unreasonable. That Ian Fleming could do it in the 60s is because he
was, well, Ian Fleming, and had no need of research: he'd lived through the
War in the hub of Intelligence, he'd been around the world well enough, he'd
savoured the high life and knew the brands he would use and provided James
Bond with this luxury.
No author IFP would choose for this task would be of a similar age nor era
to Fleming, and thus could simply _not provide_ such a detailed and
convincing description of 1950s/60s England/Europe/World without doing
research-- research that would take him rather more than six weeks. Fleming,
remember, set Bond in his own time, and though we look back on it as a
quaint Sixties thriller series, it was modern-day for its audience when it
was published. How many authors will have had the war/secret service
experience of IF? None. So, presumably, they'd have to base most of it on
Fleming's own descriptions. Fine, in its own way, but it would be derivative
to the point of boredom. We'll want our 00-agents to go to where Bond did
not, for variety's sake, but how do we know what said locale was like in the
50s without Fleming and without research? Without time to do so, even a
month, it's difficult.
Fleming wrote on his own experiences, to a point, and knew whereof he spoke.
New WoB authors would be playing off Fleming's bat. I'm sure you and I would
want WoB books to be period-authentic -- for, if they are not, what's the
point? -- but you can't dash off a novel set in a period you don't know
about in a month and a half, not when the period and ambience are ninety
percent of the whole point.
I'm not wanting to rain on anyone's parade, because, done with wit,
subtelety, care, passion and a couple of cast-iron balls, this idea could
really work. But it has to be on-kilter with Fleming, or it's just a
rip-off, and you can't expect someone to be able to write with Fleming's
knowledge without first acquiring said knowledge.
Yours,
--
------- Peredur G.C. Davies --------
Queens' College, Cambridge University
Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Celtic dept.
-----------------------------------
For you are such a smart little craft--
Such a neat little, sweet little craft--
Such a bright little, tight little,
Slight little, light little,
Trim little, prim little craft!
-----------------------------------
"Peredur Davies" <pg...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:c5uddc$il9$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk...
JD
> Well, I'm liking the idea more and more, but it's good to see you're not
> getting obsessive with the idea or anything, JD ;)
Oh, sorry, I thought this was a group for fans of James Bond. ;)
Yes, okay, I've spent a bit of time thinking about this in the last
few days. Wouldn't it be good if IFP got as obsessive, though? Perhaps
they have, perhaps they have. :)
> On one point, at which juncture does Fleming state that there are (say)
> eight other 00-agents? I thought Moonraker only mentions three in total.
Moonraker mentions 008 and 0011. The former is also mentioned in
Goldfinger. 009 is mentioned in Thunderball, and 006 mentioned in
OHMSS.
> This doesn't stop invention, of course, but do you reckon the concept of a
> big bevy of agents bearing the licence to kill is taking a tip from Eon,
not Fleming?
Eight is hardly a 'big bevy' in an organisation with as many agents as
MI6, is it? These gentlemen have to save the entire world between
them! ;)
> Even eight agents lessens its punch; keeping it down makes it more of a prize.
That's a good point, but I still don't think eight's so many and the
idea's so much easier to get a grip of for the general public. 'Oh,
right, 001, 2, 3, etc, up to 9 - I see.' If it's just 006, 008, 009
and 0011 you immediately have to deal with 'where did 001s to 5 go?'
> I think, further, that it's
> a mistake to assume that 007 is called 007 because there were six
operatives
> before him. There are no mentions of even _any_ other Double-O agents in
the
> first two novels, as far as I recall.
I don't see how that means they don't or didn't exist. There simply
wasn't a need to mention them. When he gets a new secretary, however,
and we're told that she's a fine-looking woman, we get a bit of
background that the bets are on that either Bond or 006 will get her
into bed first - because it's relevant, that's all. There's no need
for Bond to have thought about all of the double-0 agents.
> How about a world of Bond where there's only two others: 003 and 0011 (if
> they are indeed the souls mentioned in MR).
See above. There are four others - but I still think 0011 would be
best left until it's a pretty well-established series. :) (He says,
like it'll ever happen!)
> Perhaps, if you wished, a new
> member could be introduced as a "rookie", whom Bond takes under his
wing...?
Lots of ideas like that are possible, surely.
> I've thought of a couple more points of information. <g>
Good!
> To ask an autghor to write such a novel as a "World of Bond" book in six
weeks is unreasonable. That Ian Fleming could do it in the 60s is
because he
was, well, Ian Fleming, and had no need of research: he'd lived
through the
War in the hub of Intelligence, he'd been around the world well
enough, he'd
savoured the high life and knew the brands he would use and provided
James
Bond with this luxury.
Well, first of all the six weeks, like everything else I've written,
is just a suggestion. I'm trying to make my suggestions specific,
because then they're more easily imagined and the proposition
(hopefully) becomes that much juicier. It could, of course, be 12
weeks, or 16, or what-have-you. It could be four agents and three
writers, too - a lot would depend on deals with publishers and
printers, budgets, etc. However, I think six weeks has a lot going for
it from a publicity angle: these writers would be following in
Fleming's footsteps. It would give broadsheets and others a chance to
comment 'Ian Fleming's novels were always meant to be thrillers, with
all that that word entails - not some mighty works of ponderous art.
Three cheers to Fleming's estate for bringing back some of that sense
of vigour and fun to the exercise...' or words to that effect.
> No author IFP would choose for this task would be of a similar age nor era
to Fleming, and thus could simply _not provide_ such a detailed and
convincing description of 1950s/60s England/Europe/World without doing
research-- research that would take him rather more than six weeks.
Indeed. But The Independent article mentioned (will mention?) that the
series took a year to 'create' - I took that as meaning the main
characters *and* the background, ie research and development. :)
> Fleming, remember, set Bond in his own time, and though we look back on it as a quaint Sixties thriller series, it was modern-day for its audience when it
was published.
And many of the novels are actually set in the 50s.
> How many authors will have had the war/secret service
experience of IF? None. So, presumably, they'd have to base most of it
on
Fleming's own descriptions.
Or biographies of Fleming. Or history books. Plus their imaginations
(which he also used, remember).
> Fine, in its own way, but it would be derivative
to the point of boredom. We'll want our 00-agents to go to where Bond
did
not, for variety's sake, but how do we know what said locale was like
in the
50s without Fleming and without research? Without time to do so, even
a
month, it's difficult.
As I said, they get a year to do research. And once they've done the
research once, it would get significantly easier - they would already
know the basics, but would have to research the locations more.
Fleming's novels took place in his *version* of the 50s and 60s, and a
good deal of it is fantasy. There weren't any mastermind villains with
ludicrously-monikered assistants trying to take over the world with
grand schemes. A lot of Fleming's world wasn't historically accurate -
it's the tone that matters above everything else, perhaps. That's not
to say they should have period blunders. I think it would be great if
they could be true to Fleming and also reflect on the time. Period
needs to be researched just as location does - but that's what being a
writer is about. Martin Cruz Smith completed one of his Nick Carter
books in *six days*, he told me. It's very readable. :) Still, if it
was a real problem, give them a bit longer, by all means. I do think
that one a year is far too few to make any kind of impact, though.
> Fleming wrote on his own experiences, to a point, and knew whereof he spoke.
New WoB
WoB, is it now? ;) And *I'm* obssessed? LOL! No, no I like it!
> authors would be playing off Fleming's bat. I'm sure you and I would
want WoB books to be period-authentic
Absolutely.
> -- for, if they are not, what's the point? -- but you can't dash off a novel set in a period you don't know about in a month and a half, not when the period and ambience are ninety percent of the whole point.
I really don't think it's insurmountable. A year of reading copies of
Town, Vanity Fair etc, and watching contemporary films and reading
books about the period. A small staff of researchers and fact-checkers
to aid you. And then go for it. A lot of the work has already been
done: Fleming's books work as much for the attittude as anything else,
and that simply takes good writing chops to play with properly. The
Fifties and Sixties also weren't as different as they sometimes appear
- it's not like we're dealing with the 19th century or something.
(Incidentally, it took George MacDonald Fraser just 90 days to write
his first Flashman novel - and he still writes them very quickly,
apparently.)
> I'm not wanting to rain on anyone's parade, because, done with wit,
subtelety, care, passion and a couple of cast-iron balls, this idea
could
really work.
Well put. I'm not saying it would be easy - far from it. It would take
a hell of a lot of work, and people with the right instincts in
charge.
> But it has to be on-kilter with Fleming, or it's just a
rip-off, and you can't expect someone to be able to write with
Fleming's
knowledge without first acquiring said knowledge.
I don't. All the writers would have a year to research the period.
Then, to work! :)
When do we start a petition, then?
A Tart's Handkerchief
>The Fleming Factor
>Licence rethought... Steven Crane reports on how Ian Fleming's estate
>took on the James Bond films at their own game - and won
Oh, man...
If only it were true.
Peredur Davies
> Oh, sorry, I thought this was a group for fans of James Bond. ;)
Nah, try alt.fan.gardening.titchmarsh. George Lazenby posts regularly on
begonias.
> Yes, okay, I've spent a bit of time thinking about this in the last
> few days. Wouldn't it be good if IFP got as obsessive, though? Perhaps
> they have, perhaps they have. :)
No sweat. I was just impressed by the lengthy pseudo-article, is all <g>
> Moonraker mentions 008 and 0011. The former is also mentioned in
> Goldfinger. 009 is mentioned in Thunderball, and 006 mentioned in
> OHMSS.
My bad. That makes five. I reckon that's a tighter number than eight, but
it's anyone's call. Still, I am a bit confused as to what Fleming's system
was. Whatever the urban legends, did he just choose 007 because it sounded
cool (0011, as I think you agree, doesn't exactly slip off the labio-velar)?
> Eight is hardly a 'big bevy' in an organisation with as many agents as
> MI6, is it? These gentlemen have to save the entire world between
> them! ;)
Doesn't Bond get to save it most of the time? <g> I have to say, if every
00-agent spent his years foiling global plots, it could get rather
unbelieveable, even after Bond-story standards. Perhaps a couple of the 00s
could be of the same import as 007, but others could be involved on a more
'intimate', mano-a-mano level with his enemies, where it might not be of
extreme consequence for the world, but for the characters involved, and for
the ultimate good of Great Britain, it's mandatory.
> That's a good point, but I still don't think eight's so many and the
> idea's so much easier to get a grip of for the general public. 'Oh,
> right, 001, 2, 3, etc, up to 9 - I see.' If it's just 006, 008, 009
> and 0011 you immediately have to deal with 'where did 001s to 5 go?'
That assumes the general public is a pedantic feller, right? <g> Yeah, I get
your point, but, especially as Fleming didn't state anything of the kind, I
don't see why we should assume the other 00s are 1 through 6 (and on).
Perhaps if they made the WoB novels strictly 00-by-00, then they'd get into
difficulty with people confusing one with another. "Damn, I've bought the
003 one when I meant 005!" They aren't that dissimilar, after all. Maybe a
wise move would just be to release them as one brand, still X a year,
withoiut having to assign them by brand to a particular character? I don't
really think that's the best way, though, but I can't work out the best way
to distinguish the licencetokillees from one another... Maybe call the
novels after the _names_, not the numbers? "A Charles Urquhart novel", or
whatever. (P.S. You apparently like the name Charles as an agent name ;)
> I don't see how that means they don't or didn't exist. There simply
> wasn't a need to mention them. When he gets a new secretary, however,
> and we're told that she's a fine-looking woman, we get a bit of
> background that the bets are on that either Bond or 006 will get her
> into bed first - because it's relevant, that's all. There's no need
> for Bond to have thought about all of the double-0 agents.
Fair point. By the way, something has just struck me -- in TB, all the 00's
(at least in the film, can't recall the book shamefully) are assigned
different parts of the world to seek out Blofeld/the bombs. A good WoB novel
would be set around one of the other 00s being sent on a wild goose chase to
somewhere pointless, and becoming embroiled in a plot there, probably not
involving SPECTRE, but it might be amusing for that agent to return home
expecting due praise, and have his laurels snatched by 007, who happens to
have saved the world from nuclear annihilation.
> See above. There are four others - but I still think 0011 would be
> best left until it's a pretty well-established series. :) (He says,
> like it'll ever happen!)
I don't like the idea of there being 11 00-agents, by the way -- that's
almost a busload <g> My point is that Fleming stated that 0011 exists -- he
didn't state that 001 or 004 did, for example, but they might still be the
thrust of these novels. If we are trying to expand on a world to which
Flemmers hinted, then shouldn't we be using his characters before inventing
new ones? Just a thought.
> Well, first of all the six weeks, like everything else I've written,
> is just a suggestion.
<snip>
> It could, of course, be 12
> weeks, or 16, or what-have-you.
<snip>
> I think six weeks has a lot going for
> it from a publicity angle: these writers would be following in
> Fleming's footsteps.
<snip>
> But The Independent article mentioned (will mention?) that the
> series took a year to 'create' - I took that as meaning the main
> characters *and* the background, ie research and development. :)
Fine; if you provide the author with one year overall time to create the
novel, then that's ample time to do research. I was just worrying you
expected these guys to provide, say, an outline in a fortnight, and then
rush off to their bedsits to thrash off a bestseller in six weeks <g> A
novelist, though, would surely not actually be 'not writing' for the time
when he's not researching-- I'd bet he'd put away a few paragraphs based on
the stuff he's just researched about. So the '6-week' (etc.) idea would go
out of the window.
And I'm not sure how well the papers would deal with it, actually -- sure,
Ian Fleming could write a super novel in a month and a half, but can Joe
Whoever? And will it be any good? If somebody told me the novel I was about
to read was written, start to finish, in less time than a school term, then
I'd be a bit put off, to be honest.
Still, for some reason, I like the idea of an enforced timeline. It provokes
freshness and cohesion (or it ends up a bloody mess!).
> And many of the novels are actually set in the 50s.
Indeed.
> Or biographies of Fleming. Or history books. Plus their imaginations
> (which he also used, remember).
<snip>
> As I said, they get a year to do research.
This makes a difference to my point; a year is plenty (in fact, it's the
time Raymond Benson took to research his novels, which you commented on
before as being overlong, didn't you? Sorry if I'm just confused <g>)
> Fleming's novels took place in his *version* of the 50s and 60s, and a
> good deal of it is fantasy. There weren't any mastermind villains with
> ludicrously-monikered assistants trying to take over the world with
> grand schemes. A lot of Fleming's world wasn't historically accurate -
> it's the tone that matters above everything else, perhaps.
Yes, yes, I didn't think otherwise. Any reasonably talented author can make
up 'history' in his imagination, and convince his readership. But--
> That's not
> to say they should have period blunders. I think it would be great if
> they could be true to Fleming and also reflect on the time. Period
> needs to be researched just as location does....
That's my point, if anything. Admittedly, once an author had a book or two
under his wing, the period would be fixed in his head, but there still needs
to be a deal of research. If the publishers were to give the author this
freedom, then all would be well. I still thought, though, that your idea was
to have these books produced in a flash, and not have too long a time in the
making?
> Martin Cruz Smith completed one of his Nick Carter
> books in *six days*, he told me. It's very readable. :)
Impressive. Can one still buy Nick Carter novels (in the UK)? I'd like to
read a book written in six days! <g> (Probably better than Never Send
Flowers -- <begin grumble at having spent the past few weeks trundling
through a turgid pseudo-crime thriller with a crass, undeveloped ending,
masquerading under the title of a 'James Bond novel'.)
> WoB, is it now? ;) And *I'm* obssessed? LOL! No, no I like it!
Me? Obsessed? I'm just, er, creative ;)
> I really don't think it's insurmountable. A year of reading copies of
> Town, Vanity Fair etc, and watching contemporary films and reading
> books about the period. A small staff of researchers and fact-checkers
> to aid you. And then go for it.
This could work. Agreed. Though, if/as a novelist, I'd want to do most of
the research myself. Still, in this WoB fantasy, the authors would be,
presumably, treated as mostly pulp writers -- i.e. where they just do the
writing, and
it's not seen as much of a creative or novel (no pun) output...?
> The
> Fifties and Sixties also weren't as different as they sometimes appear
> - it's not like we're dealing with the 19th century or something.
As someone who lived in neither decade, it seems distant, certainly, but
it's still, I suspect, markedly different from today. The main blunder would
be to include things that aren't of the right time-period, i.e. which
haven't been invented yet, though this could be easily corrected with
factual manuals -- but this would be less of a problem for someoine who'd
been there, who wouldn't have to check everything, than someone who's 20
years out of joint, and needs to reassure himself on every slight detail;
certainly a lengthy, if not tedious, process.
> (Incidentally, it took George MacDonald Fraser just 90 days to write
> his first Flashman novel - and he still writes them very quickly,
> apparently.)
Bloody good they are, as well. It's been a while since his last one, though,
hasn't it?
> Well put. I'm not saying it would be easy - far from it. It would take
> a hell of a lot of work, and people with the right instincts in
> charge.
Which is why I'm glad that the last two authors IFP have signed have been
notable for being Bond fans (Mr Gardner is not one of them). It's a step in
the right direction, shorely.
> When do we start a petition, then?
I vote we get straight to the placarding.
Yours,
Frankymole
>> Here's a new thread idea, then -- if you could have IFP listen to
>> you for fifteen minutes, what idea would you pitch at them?
>>
>
> Perusing through Raymond Benson's "The James Bond Bedside Companion"
> has reacquainted me with the particulars of Bond's early life,
> clearing up a few misconceptions.
>
> The chronology is imperfect, but here's the best stab at it:
>
> 1924 - James Bond born to Andrew Bond and Monique Delacroix
>
> Bond's early life was mostly spent abroad. While living in Germany,
he
> acquired a first class command of French & German
>
> 1935 - Bond's parents are killed in a climbing accident
>
> Living with Aunt Charmian Bond in Pett Bottom, she completes his
early
> education and prepares him for Eton.
>
> 1936 - Bond enters Eton at age 12. His career there was "brief and
> undistinguished". He left after two semesters, after *allegedly*
> getting into trouble with one of the school's maids.
>
> (Note: what the trouble actually is isn't refered to in Fleming's
> canon... which allows Mr Higson some room, as long as Bond it
removed
> from the school)
>
> Aunt Charmian removes Bond from Eton and sends him to Fettes. While
> Bond was inclined to be solitary by nature, he did form strong
> friendships here - particularly among athletic circles.
>
> 1940 - Bond, at age 16, loses his innocence. (Fleming's line in
"From
> a View to a Kill" is perfect - "That had started one of the most
> memorable evenings of his life, culminating in the loss, almost
> simultaneously, of his virginity and his notecase"!)
>
> 1941 - Bond leaves school, at some point attends the University of
> Geneva briefly. He enters the Ministry of Defense this same year
> (pretending to be 19 years of age) and becomes a Lt in the Special
> Branch of teh Royal Naval Volunteer Services
>
> 1945 - Bond has achieved the rank of Commander. M accepts Commander
> Bond into the Secret Service
>
> Bond gains his Double-O status after completing two jobs - one in
New
> York and the other in Stockholm
>
> Even this brief history gives me hope that some good *might* come of
a
> "prequel" Bond story, but the whole Young James Bond concept is
still
> worrying.
>
> His Eton days might still work richly as backstory to his years at
> Fettes, where at least he is a boxer and proficient in judo and has
> athletic friends.
>
> And, yes, by this timeline above, it seems he's a Commander in the
> Royal Navy at 21 (!) and has his 00 by 25. So young isn't
necessarily
> bad... it's just I'd much rather begin with his visit to Paris than
> right back when he's a shy orphan without facial hair or much more
to
> him than the fact he speaks two languages, has lived abroad and is,
by
> nature, a loner.
>
> -- Keith Gow --
Don't forget he gets his turbocharged Bentley in 1933...
--
Frankymole
~~~~~~~~
The alt.tv.prisoner FAQ can be found at:
http://www.web-sighted.co.uk/franks/faq.html
Information about Six of One, the disgraced Prisoner Appreciation
Society, can be found at: http://www.sixofone-info.co.uk/
JD
> My bad. That makes five. I reckon that's a tighter number than eight, but
it's anyone's call. Still, I am a bit confused as to what Fleming's
system
was. Whatever the urban legends, did he just choose 007 because it
sounded cool (0011, as I think you agree, doesn't exactly slip off
the labio-velar)?
I suspect he chose 007 largely because it sounded cool. Fleming had,
above all, an innate sense of what had the right 'ring' to it. I don't
think he had properly thought through the 'licence to kill' - it seems
that any agent without a licence to kill simply has to kill someone in
cold blood in order to get the licence. Doesn't make a lot of sense.
This kind of thing is why you'd spend a year (or more - I'm just
throwing it out there) looking at the Fleming novels and mapping a
plausible and consistent world from the elements in them that are
subsidiary to James Bond.
> Doesn't Bond get to save it most of the time? <g>
At the moment, yes. But is that believable? Are all MI6's other
double-0 agents useless? I like the idea that 008 is primed to take
Bond's place if he fails - you could also reverse that role, and have
another mission in which Bond is in the background, chewing his lip as
he holes up nearby waiting for 004 to get it in the neck.
'Is he still around?' I asked. 'Bond?'
Carruthers nodded feebly.
'Get the bloody man back home, will you? He's giving me the creeps.'
'It's the way it works,' he said. 'You know that as well as anyone -
you shadowed 009 last year for that job in Peking. We'll just have to
put up with him, I'm afraid.'
(Hell Has No Exits, Chapter 12)
> I have to say, if every
00-agent spent his years foiling global plots, it could get rather
unbelieveable, even after Bond-story standards. Perhaps a couple of
the 00s
could be of the same import as 007, but others could be involved on a
more
'intimate', mano-a-mano level with his enemies, where it might not be
of
extreme consequence for the world, but for the characters involved,
and for
the ultimate good of Great Britain, it's mandatory.
Yes, that's exactly how I'd imagined it. The advantage of having an
ongoing series featuring several characters is that you can really do
a lot of things. 002 might resent 007 because he always gets the
glamorous missions: 'He swans around the bloody cocktail party
circuit, plays everything by ear, and somehow manages to come home to
a hero's reception...' You could have a much tighter, smaller
mission: an action-packed spy thriller like many another, only it's
set in the late 50s and the framing is Fleming's MI6 and universe. But
you wouldn't need to try to come up with the next Blofeld, I don't
think. I do think it's a great opportunity to use Smersh, though. The
organisation actually existed, until Kruschev disbanded it in 1958.
EON can't use SPECTRE for legal reasons, and they can't use Smersh
because they're set in the present day. WoB could actually use both,
if they wanted, couldn't they?
>That assumes the general public is a pedantic feller, right? <g>
Yeah, I get
your point, but, especially as Fleming didn't state anything of the
kind, I
don't see why we should assume the other 00s are 1 through 6 (and on).
If IFP were to go ahead with this idea, there would have to be lots of
things assumed. The trick is to make the right assumptions - ones that
seem plausible, exciting and respect Fleming's world. In OHMSS Fleming
mentions that 006 and he were competing for Mary Goodnight's
affections. Bond is now out of the game with Tracy, of course - but
continues to flirt with Goodnight anyway, just a bit. If you were to
have a 006 novel, you could make more of this and include a scene in
which 006 does actually seduce Goodnight. But as Fleming never stated
that this happened, it would, of course, be an assumption. 006 - and
the others - would have to have tastes in clothes, drinks, cars,
women, and the rest. Fleming, obviously, never told us what they were
- he only mentioned the other agents in passing. But I think it would
be fair to assume that they're not all going to have precisely the
same taste as James Bond. That wouldn't just be implausible: it would
be extremely dull, and render the entire exercise pointless, pretty
much.
So how *would* they differ from Bond? You could assume, for example,
that 009 is a black 25-year-old woman - but that would clearly be a
*wrong* assumption, considering the universe. Although Fleming didn't
state as much, I think we can surmise that the other double-0 agents
are white males between the ages of 30 and 50, that they attended
public school and possibly Oxbridge, and that they have, very broadly
speaking, a similar outlook on the world as James Bond has: as British
secret agents at the very top of their game, physically and mentally,
and having faced death many times, they will have a fund of shared
experiences. But it's the details that will make it. I don't think
there should be too many of these - you can overload the thing if
you're not careful - but, again, you can make reasonable assumptions.
That's essentually an extension of the third list of the marketing
database: what brands not mentioned in Fleming's books could fit in
his world? When M tells Bond to change his gun at the beginning of Dr
No, Major Boothroyd offers the Walther PPK because he thinks it would
suit 007. He admits that in tests several other guns performed better,
but something about the style of this is a good match with Bond's way
of working, his temperament and his character. I'd say it's plausible
that Boothroyd might have a similar conversation with 006, but that he
gives him a different gun, because 006 likes to do things differently
from 007.
Of course, IFP will already have had similar discussions about this
kind of thing with the current Bond-at-Eton project. I just think this
idea's a much better one! And IFP has previously considered Cold War
settings for Bond books, remember:
'The issue of keeping Bond in the Cold War era is under discussion.
There are fans who are in favor of it, and there are fans who are dead
set against it. I know that EON would probably never do a retro-Bond.
It's ultimately up to Glidrose and the Fleming family on how to
proceed with that one. We'll probably address the issue more seriously
after the turn of the century. ' (Raymond Benson in an interview with
Walter von Tagen III)
> Perhaps if they made the WoB novels strictly 00-by-00, then they'd get into
difficulty with people confusing one with another. "Damn, I've bought
the
003 one when I meant 005!" They aren't that dissimilar, after all.
Maybe a
wise move would just be to release them as one brand, still X a year,
withoiut having to assign them by brand to a particular character? I
don't
really think that's the best way, though, but I can't work out the
best way
to distinguish the licencetokillees from one another... Maybe call the
novels after the _names_, not the numbers? "A Charles Urquhart novel",
or
whatever. (P.S. You apparently like the name Charles as an agent name
;)
I thought they could all be packaged in a style a little reminiscent
of the thrillers of the time. At the top of the cover, you could have
'IAN FLEMING PUBLICATIONS PRESENTS' followed by 'A CHARLES URQUHART
009 ADVENTURE' in very large type and then 'LOVESHY'. All of the
covers would have a similar design and look, but each would also
feature an illustration of the agent in question, and these would be
the same for each book. Readers would have their favourite agent, of
course - but would buy all the books, ideally. And it would be a
matter for discussion, wouldn't it? 'Which do you think is best?'
> Fair point. By the way, something has just struck me -- in TB, all the 00's
(at least in the film, can't recall the book shamefully) are assigned
different parts of the world to seek out Blofeld/the bombs. A good WoB
novel
would be set around one of the other 00s being sent on a wild goose
chase to
somewhere pointless, and becoming embroiled in a plot there, probably
not
involving SPECTRE, but it might be amusing for that agent to return
home
expecting due praise, and have his laurels snatched by 007, who
happens to
have saved the world from nuclear annihilation.
That's an excellent idea. :)
I don't like the idea of there being 11 00-agents, by the way --
that's
almost a busload <g> My point is that Fleming stated that 0011 exists
-- he
didn't state that 001 or 004 did, for example, but they might still be
the
thrust of these novels. If we are trying to expand on a world to which
Flemmers hinted, then shouldn't we be using his characters before
inventing
new ones? Just a thought.
I think you're right, actually. You could start with a few books about
006, 008 and 009, and by the time you had a few books out there you
could have built up the world enough - and provided enough plausible
background information - to smoothly bring in 005 (you could also have
had 008 casually mention 005 in one of the books). Or why not have a
publicity coup with a 001 adventure - how the Double-0 section
started. If you planned it carefully enough, you could actually make
each new agent that appeared generate publicity. 'This month, GQ gets
a peek at the new Double-0 agent from Ian Fleming Publications. We
look at the background and the style of 004...' Men's magazines and
Sunday supplements would be an ideal partner for this kind of thing -
you could have lots of features on how the books are researched,
interviews with Savile Row firms, etc. They'd love it.
> Fine; if you provide the author with one year overall time to create the
novel, then that's ample time to do research. I was just worrying you
expected these guys to provide, say, an outline in a fortnight, and
then
rush off to their bedsits to thrash off a bestseller in six weeks <g>
A
novelist, though, would surely not actually be 'not writing' for the
time
when he's not researching-- I'd bet he'd put away a few paragraphs
based on
the stuff he's just researched about. So the '6-week' (etc.) idea
would go
out of the window.
No, I don't think so. They're looking through old copies of Tatler and
guide books (Thrilling Cities would be required reading, of course),
researching the politics of the time - Hungary, the Congo, etc -
checking out the National Archives, talking to their fathers about
restaurants they used to visit, listening to old records, and making
notes and thinking up ideas. But to write the book itself - they'd
have six weeks. That's one idea - this thing would work without this
proviso, of course.
> And I'm not sure how well the papers would deal with it, actually -- sure,
Ian Fleming could write a super novel in a month and a half, but can
Joe
Whoever? And will it be any good? If somebody told me the novel I was
about to read was written, start to finish, in less time than a
school term, then I'd be a bit put off, to be honest.
I think there would be a few people put off *at first*. But a lot of
people would like the idea, and once you had a few novels out and
built up a head of steam, I think a lot of people would give them a
go. Especially if you were about to buy a Clancy spin-off instead. I
also think it's much more off-putting to have just one novel a year,
attached to one writer. It's Ian Fleming's world, and this is a
side-step from it. It's fun. They're readily available spy thrillers
set in the Cold War with elements you already know and love from Ian
Fleming's novels. They're adventures, and they are there to be
devoured.
> Still, for some reason, I like the idea of an enforced timeline. It provokes
freshness and cohesion (or it ends up a bloody mess!).
Indeed.
>> And many of the novels are actually set in the 50s.
> Indeed.
Sorry - I know you knew that! :)
> This makes a difference to my point; a year is plenty (in fact, it's the
time Raymond Benson took to research his novels, which you commented
on
before as being overlong, didn't you? Sorry if I'm just confused <g>)
A year to research the entire series, though - not each book.
> Admittedly, once an author had a book or two
under his wing, the period would be fixed in his head, but there still
needs
to be a deal of research. If the publishers were to give the author
this
freedom, then all would be well. I still thought, though, that your
idea was
to have these books produced in a flash, and not have too long a time
in the making?
Not sure there'd be *that* much to do. You've mapped out the character
and his background. You've now decided what car he drives and what
music he likes and all that. You've read loads about the period, and
you know about pre-decimal currency and that speed bumps didn't exist.
You've figured out how the telephone exchange worked, and made a note
that it could sometimes take hours to get through to the right person
- a possible plot point. You're immersed in the period, and you have
lots of notes to consult. Now you want to set the second book in Rome
in 1962. So you ask the IFP research team to find you some
contemporary guides to Rome and rent a few Fellini DVDs and wonder
whether or not 004 couldn't meet an American actor who then copies all
his traits for a cheap spaghetti spy thriller he's filming. You wonder
what liqueurs were in vogue in Rome in 1962, and ask IFP to make a few
calls for you.
> Can one still buy Nick Carter novels (in the UK)? I'd like to
read a book written in six days! <g>
They're all out of print, but you can find them online at Ebay and
abebooks and lots of other places. Most are very bad, but I think Cruz
Smith's ones are very readable little spy thrillers. The one I
mentioned was about a plot to kill Franco - in another, Carter teams
up with a former British agent clearly modelled on 007.
> This could work. Agreed. Though, if/as a novelist, I'd want to do most of
the research myself. Still, in this WoB fantasy, the authors would be,
presumably, treated as mostly pulp writers -- i.e. where they just do
the
writing, and it's not seen as much of a creative or novel (no pun)
output...?
Benson and Gardner both had to submit plot outlines to IFP for
approval, had titles changed and had their books edited by several
parties and subject, effectively, to committee approval. Neither were
happy about it, but I think that's because they were the only writers,
and had their names on the covers. Had they been one of five writers
for books with no name but Ian Fleming Publications on the covers, I
don't think that would have been a problem. I'd give the writers the
same amount of creative freedom - possibly more - as Benson and
Gardner had, but I'd allow a lot of the grunwork of the research to be
done by recent graduates with surnames like Ponsonby. :) I'm really
talking about getting precise period details right here. For a
Rome-set book, you could actually have the protagonist visit Brioni's
shop, which had been there since 1945. But what kind of fabrics did
they have, and what style of architecture did the boutique have? Can
someone find out for me - I need it for Chapter Five.
> As someone who lived in neither decade, it seems distant, certainly, but
it's still, I suspect, markedly different from today. The main blunder
would
be to include things that aren't of the right time-period, i.e. which
haven't been invented yet, though this could be easily corrected with
factual manuals -- but this would be less of a problem for someoine
who'd been there, who wouldn't have to check everything, than someone
who's 20
years out of joint, and needs to reassure himself on every slight
detail;
certainly a lengthy, if not tedious, process.
You'd have other people read it, of course. Just like they will
Higson's stuff.
>> (Incidentally, it took George MacDonald Fraser just 90 days to
write
>> his first Flashman novel - and he still writes them very quickly,
>> apparently.)
> Bloody good they are, as well. It's been a while since his last one, though, hasn't it?
I think Fraser's a good example of why this would work, actually.
Flashman, of course, is actually not his character, but Thomas Hughes.
Flashman was the bully in Tom Brown's Schooldays. MacDonald Fraser has
taken a minor character and fashioned a new set of adventures around
him. A small part of the pleasure comes from Flashman already having
existed - but the series doesn't affect Tom Brown's Schooldays. Of
course, Fleming is a different case - but there are some similarities
in the way it worked. I also think that setting it in the 50s/60s
means that the books will have a much longer shelf life, because they
won't, ironically, date. In one of Gardner's novels, some of Bond's
colleagues are wearing jeans to work. Do you really want to read an
80s-set Bond adventure now? Setting them during the Cold War makes
them timeless.
> l probably address the issue more seriously after the turn of the century.
Which is why I'm glad that the last two authors IFP have signed have
been
notable for being Bond fans (Mr Gardner is not one of them). It's a
step in
the right direction, shorely.
I actually think that Higson might produce something brilliant: a
well-researched period piece that's faithful to the Fleming legacy and
which would appeal to both children and adults. I just don't think it
will appeal to *huge numbers* of them. The Thirties won't appeal to
children, and they won't appreciate the research. Adults might not
want to read about young James' adventures after a while: they'd long
for more bite. So it falls between two stools. So does this idea - any
idea of a continiuation does, including the films - but I think the
stools are much close together. It will appeal to teenage boys between
15 and 75. :) The youngest readers won't appreciate the period, but I
think from about the age of 20 many will. Certainly around the age of
25 it becomes attractive to Bond fans. And it's also attractive to
those in their 30s, 40s, 50s and beyond. As for the adventure side of
things, they too would appeal to a wide age range. At 15, I'd grown
out of Jennings and Darbyshire and was reading Jack Higgins and
Alistair Maclean. I'm now 30, and I'd obviously far rather read the
same kind of thing than I would a junior version of it. My instinct is
that I'm not alone - but I could be proved wrong.
> I vote we get straight to the placarding.
:)
JD
> For a Rome-set book, you could actually have the protagonist visit
> Brioni's shop, which had been there since 1945. But what kind of fabrics > did they have, and what style of architecture did the boutique have? Can
> someone find out for me - I need it for Chapter Five.
On second thoughts, I take back this idea. ;) One of the dangers, as I
say, is overloading the thing, both with self-referencing and brands.
I don't think there would be nearly as many brands mentioned as there
are in Fleming's novels - but just enough incidental details to bring
the time and place to life. So you might have someone mention that the
villain had spent the afternoon having a new suit fitted in Via
Barberini before going on to the opera, and leave it at that. :) I'd
also use Bond himself sparingly, and resist the temptation of bringing
him into every adventure and having everyone continually mention him.
I'd save him for the occasional dramatic flourish, rather than being a
constant matter of discussion. Repeated references to 'Oh, 007 would
never do that' would spoil the fun.
Just putting the finishing touches to this banner here. :)
JD
> As someone who lived in neither decade, it seems distant, certainly, but
it's still, I suspect, markedly different from today. The main blunder
would
be to include things that aren't of the right time-period, i.e. which
haven't been invented yet, though this could be easily corrected with
factual manuals -- but this would be less of a problem for someoine
who'd been there, who wouldn't have to check everything, than someone
who's 20
years out of joint, and needs to reassure himself on every slight
detail;
certainly a lengthy, if not tedious, process.
Sorry, I didn't really give this a decent response.
I think the key is not to make it *overly* period. A lot of it would
actually be about taking things away rather than putting them in. So
whereas in a Clancy thriller today you have agents using satellite
navigation systems to get things done, these would be much more
stripped-down-to-the-basics thrillers. Yes, you'd have to be careful
not to trip up, but as I say it's quite easy to check. Lots of people
are around who remember the 50s very well, and as long as you didn't
build any crucial plot points around something that hadn't yet been
invented, minor mistakes could easily be corrected at am early draft
stage. I am actually writing a spy thriller set in the Sixties,
featuring an MI6 agent, :) and I took around nine months doing the
research. When I started writing, I was putting in tons of fascinating
details I'd dug up. I'm now realising much of it is superfluous and
over the top, and that you can capture a lot with very small details.
A mention of 'The Observer Colour Magazine', for example, does a lot:
it's not called that anymore, and something about the extra word
evokes (for me anyway) a bygone Britain. So less can be more. The
research was still very important, though - I know the period and the
locations I'm using like the back of my hand as a result, and so the
*feel* is coming through now, almost without me having to work at it.
Well, I hope they arem anyway! :)
Leviathan
> Leviathan wrote:
>
>> He's shown up already in Pearson's "Authorized Biography of James Bond,"
>> a sometime advisor to M, who comes up with some of the most harebrained
>> schemes... But also identified the need for the Bond-style secret
>> agent, able to blend in easily and cleanly with hte highest levels of
>> society...
>>
>> His name is Ian Fleming.
>
> Well, such a thing has been done in the films Spymaker and Goldeneye
> (the Charles Dance one); I've only seen the former, and it's fairly
> good.
>
> I've never liked John Pearson's utilisation of Fleming as a persona
> within the Bond universe.
See, I've always loved it.
> It does something chronic to the fourth wall, confuses reality with
> fantasy (the latter of which Bond emphatically is), and is rather
> unnecessary -- given that James Bond is pretty much Ian Fleming as he
> would have liked to be.
But that's where the fun comes in. Fleming as he'd like to be, versus
Fleming as he was. Fleming as he was was a strange, contrary, fascinating
character, a bundle of contradictions. I'd like to see him as a minor
character, an advisor to M, perhaps a talent scout, steering possible
prospects M's way. M would disapprove of almost everything about him, but
still be charmed by him. And, in spite of himself, would be led by Fleming
into sending men out on bizarre espionage schemes that would, all too
often, pay off in a big way. Sort of a womanizing, self-destructive,
ironical Kronsteen.
>> surely Fleming's heirs can honor him with a truer, more complex
>> pertrayal in the pages of the World of Bond.
>
> Erm, but I feel strongly that Fleming is a real person.
He certainly is. But as a public figure, he's "fair game" for anybody who
wants to include him in their fiction. The result is crap like "Death to
Spies."
Since that's going to be out there and stay out there, no matter what, I'd
at least liek to see the publishing organization that bears Fleming's name
honor him with a better, more worthy, and ultimately more entertaining
role.
Frankymole
> I keep thinking about the NIck Carter series. Carter was one of the
> most published characters in fiction - a detective in dime novels
> since the 19th century. The rights to him were bought by Condé Nast
in
> the Sixties, and they reinvented him as a superspy called
Killmaster.
> He was "the American James Bond". Condé Nast got dozens of writers
to
> knock the books off - there were over 200 of the things, eventually.
> "There isn't a writer in America today who hasn't written a Nick
> Carter novel," Martin Cruz Smith told me a couple of years back - he
> wrote six himself. It was like an apprenticeship for thriller
writers
> - money in the bank, experience notched up. Writers' names weren't
on
> the books.
>
> I think IFP should do the same - not have one writer, but several.
> That way, it won't be a millstone around their neck, and there won't
> be this pressure to compete with Fleming.
Plus with (say) 3 authors you could bring out a book each year, each
demonstrating a variety of locales, plots and styles, and each having
had 3 years of research and writing-effort put into them.....