A New Writer For Each Bond Book...A Good Idea, Or Bad Idea?

tommychameleon

I remember reading somewhere that, it was Glidrose's plan back in the day, to have a different writer for each subsequent book after Fleming's death. After Faulks and Deaver's attempts, it seems like that is the current plan of action IFP are taking.

My question to you guys is, do you think a new author each time is a good idea? Personally, I DONT think it's a good idea, because each author is going to have their own vision and idea of what Bond should be, meaning every book is going to have a different feel. Some maybe more Fleming style, and some may read more like a Roger movie. So where do we find our rhythm as readers?

I have to admit, I felt like CB was a little 'thrown' together. I usually have a mental picture of Bond in my mind when I'm reading the books. Not of any of the actors but my own vision of what he'd look like. For the first time, I couldn't picture Bond, when reading CB. For me it didn't really feel like he was Bond, just some generic spy. Which pains me, massively, I must admit. It felt to me like a lot of the twists were just there for the sake of it, rather than to serve a greater good in terms of story. Don't even get me started on the...

Spoiler:

bit where he hangs his coat up on the cliffside as a diversion. I mean come oooooon!

It kinda makes me feel like, would these different writers really 'get' what the literary Bond should be and do they really care deeply enough about the character? Or is it more an opportunity to get their name out there in the press, to boost sales of their next book?

Personally, I'd say Charlie Higson is a man who GETS IT! I've read 4 of the Young Bonds and they feel more like Bond than any of the continuation novels post Colonel Sun. If that guy got the job, I'd be a happy man!

Over to you...I'm interested to hear your thoughts!

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

I see what you mean, and you make valid points. I guess the plus side to having a new writer each continuation novel is that we don't have to worry about any "sequels" so to say. Bond does what he is written to do with a few supporting characters, and then he never has to see them again. So, the writer gets to do what they want with those supporting characters and villain/s without worrying about having to continue the story in another novel. It stops clutter and keeps the plot in one book. I don't think Bond mentions his past jobs already written by various writers in continuation novels in the past. Am I right about that?

Agent007391

I would rather have one author for a period of six-seven years, then move on to another author. Gardner spent too much time as a continuation author, and his later books were not as good as his early ones (Brokenclaw and Never Send Flowers stand out as the the two worst, imo). Benson (from what I've read) did a manageable job during his six years as the continuation author, and he didn't stay on long enough to burn out.

tommychameleon

I think having each author produce 5 books as their 'set' would be perfect. I still haven't read By Royal Command but the quality control in the Young Bond books is amazing. 5 books, then a refresh with a new author, sounds like a good idea to me.

I'd love to see what Higson could do with adult Bond.

Virage

Agreed, Higson For Next Bond Book!

Agent007391

I do like SilverFin, but I'll only like an adult Bond book by Higson if he actually calls him "Bond" instead of "James". I don't feel like I'm reading the same character, for some reason. It's only when, in my head, I change the "James" to "Bond" that it feels right.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

Agent007391 said:
I do like SilverFin, but I'll only like an adult Bond book by Higson if he actually calls him "Bond" instead of "James". I don't feel like I'm reading the same character, for some reason. It's only when, in my head, I change the "James" to "Bond" that it feels right.

Well, when you are a kid most will call you by your first name. In adolescence, as you become of age, you can then often find yourself being call Mr. in front of your last name by superiors or advisors. So is the case here I'd say.

Agent007391

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 said:

Agent007391 said:
I do like SilverFin, but I'll only like an adult Bond book by Higson if he actually calls him "Bond" instead of "James". I don't feel like I'm reading the same character, for some reason. It's only when, in my head, I change the "James" to "Bond" that it feels right.

Well, when you are a kid most will call you by your first name. In adolescence, as you become of age, you can then often find yourself being call Mr. in front of your last name by superiors or advisors. So is the case here I'd say.

Yes, I understand why the novel calls him "James", I just said it didn't feel right, that's all.

tommychameleon

Agent007391 said:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 said:

Agent007391 said:
I do like SilverFin, but I'll only like an adult Bond book by Higson if he actually calls him "Bond" instead of "James". I don't feel like I'm reading the same character, for some reason. It's only when, in my head, I change the "James" to "Bond" that it feels right.

Well, when you are a kid most will call you by your first name. In adolescence, as you become of age, you can then often find yourself being call Mr. in front of your last name by superiors or advisors. So is the case here I'd say.

Yes, I understand why the novel calls him "James", I just said it didn't feel right, that's all.

Hahaha. That made me laugh :-)

Agent007391

tommychameleon said:

Agent007391 said:

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 said:

Agent007391 said:
I do like SilverFin, but I'll only like an adult Bond book by Higson if he actually calls him "Bond" instead of "James". I don't feel like I'm reading the same character, for some reason. It's only when, in my head, I change the "James" to "Bond" that it feels right.

Well, when you are a kid most will call you by your first name. In adolescence, as you become of age, you can then often find yourself being call Mr. in front of your last name by superiors or advisors. So is the case here I'd say.

Yes, I understand why the novel calls him "James", I just said it didn't feel right, that's all.

Hahaha. That made me laugh :-)

What made you laugh?

tommychameleon

- "Well, when you are a kid most will call you by your first name. In adolescence, as you become of age, you can then often find yourself being call Mr. in front of your last name by superiors or advisors. So is the case here I'd say."

- "Yes, I understand why the novel calls him "James", I just said it didn't feel right, that's all."

This bit :-)

timmer

First off, I am in favour of books period. ie Please give us books. Simplest way to achieve that might be to have the same person write them. ie Deaver.
His first effort was "OK". I grant him a second effort, even an advance on a third. Then we can reassess.

SaintMark

timmer said:
First off, I am in favour of books period. ie Please give us books. Simplest way to achieve that might be to have the same person write them. ie Deaver.
His first effort was "OK". I grant him a second effort, even an advance on a third. Then we can reassess.

I agree, but it would cut down on his Lincoln Rhyme novels which would be a shame.

Bounine

"For the first time, I couldn't picture Bond, when reading CB. For me it didn't really feel like he was Bond, just some generic spy. Which pains me, massively, I must admit. It felt to me like a lot of the twists were just there for the sake of it, rather than to serve a greater good in terms of story."

I agree whole heartedly with this statement. I enjoyed CB but there were too many twists. One or two is okay but Deaver threw in an abundance of them and I think it affects the flow of the narrative for the worst. In terms of Bond himself, this was the major downside for me. This just wasn't Bond we were reading about except maybe in the last two pages. So much of his original personality was missing which made me feel like an extremely disappointed kid at Christmas time. Yes, a generic spy is how I would also describe our protagonist in Deaver's book. At his book signing, Deaver told me that he wanted Bond to be liked by everyone. Blaspheme.

In terms of whether a different writer should scribe each book, that's a difficult one. I don't like Deaver's Bond so in this case I want a different author for the next one. However, if they do employ a different writer and I'm pleased with what he did with Bond then I would want him to stay on. One can still have continuity with different authors but I don't mind too much if there isn't any reference to previous stories.

Yes, I think Charlie Higson is the man for the job. I just hope he wouldn't hold back in regard to some of Bond's less likeable qualities. During his talk back in 08 be expressed an interest in writing about Bond's adventures during World War 2. This is something I would love to happen. I would love him to keep writing Bond books that lead up to Bond joining the service. At this point, we would have the adult Bond. I'd also be in favour of Higson jumping in and writing adult Bond books set in the present time.

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

It pains me to admit it, but the Fleming-esque Bond feel was missing in CB. We could replace Bond with any other spy guy and get the same effect. There was no real, tangible Bond-esque elements. The parts that were Bondish were the parts with Bond and Ophelia, and the ending was good, but Bond decides to let Ophelia go. I don't think Fleming's Bond would've done that. And I don't know what Fleming's Bond would do with Jordaan, considering that she'd never put out.

Bounine

Fleming's Bond would have put Jordaan in her place upon first meeting her or he would have just acted flippant with the intention of annoying her. Afterwards when out of ear shot he would have muttered "bitch" out loud as he did following his first meeting with Domino in Thunderball. There was none of that in CB. Deaver's warped version of Bond bowed graciously to her every remark. 8-|

timmer

SaintMark said:
I agree, but it would cut down on his Lincoln Rhyme novels which would be a shame.

Right, then maybe two authors rotating titles is the way to go. They should be able to read each other's books and maintain continuity.

4EverBonded

Bounine said:
"For the first time, I couldn't picture Bond, when reading CB. For me it didn't really feel like he was Bond, just some generic spy. Which pains me, massively, I must admit. It felt to me like a lot of the twists were just there for the sake of it, rather than to serve a greater good in terms of story."

I agree whole heartedly with this statement. I enjoyed CB but there were too many twists. One or two is okay but Deaver threw in an abundance of them and I think it affects the flow of the narrative for the worst. In terms of Bond himself, this was the major downside for me. This just wasn't Bond we were reading about except maybe in the last two pages. So much of his original personality was missing which made me feel like an extremely disappointed kid at Christmas time. Yes, a generic spy is how I would also describe our protagonist in Deaver's book. At his book signing, Deaver told me that he wanted Bond to be liked by everyone. Blaspheme.

In terms of whether a different writer should scribe each book, that's a difficult one. I don't like Deaver's Bond so in this case I want a different author for the next one. However, if they do employ a different writer and I'm pleased with what he did with Bond then I would want him to stay on. One can still have continuity with different authors but I don't mind too much if there isn't any reference to previous stories.

Yes, I think Charlie Higson is the man for the job. I just hope he wouldn't hold back in regard to some of Bond's less likeable qualities. During his talk back in 08 be expressed an interest in writing about Bond's adventures during World War 2. This is something I would love to happen. I would love him to keep writing Bond books that lead up to Bond joining the service. At this point, we would have the adult Bond. I'd also be in favour of Higson jumping in and writing adult Bond books set in the present time.

Just saying again I do not have a good oipinion of Deaver; no more, please, from him.
I would not mind giving Higson a try.

Samuel001

Bounine said:
Yes, I think Charlie Higson is the man for the job. I just hope he wouldn't hold back in regard to some of Bond's less likeable qualities. During his talk back in 08 be expressed an interest in writing about Bond's adventures during World War 2. This is something I would love to happen. I would love him to keep writing Bond books that lead up to Bond joining the service. At this point, we would have the adult Bond. I'd also be in favour of Higson jumping in and writing adult Bond books set in the present time.

It may never happen but Higson has said if he were to continue Young Bond the next books would be a trilogy focusing on Bond's years at Fettes College with another - and final - possible 'series' telling everything else about Bond which includes his WWII years. That would of course bring Bond up to where we know him in Fleming's work. And Higson's new Young Bond would target older readers.

May never happen mind, but more Young Bond from Higson would be great. It could happen in a few years once Higson has finished his zombie series.

tommychameleon

Bounine said:
During his talk back in 08 be expressed an interest in writing about Bond's adventures during World War 2. This is something I would love to happen. I would love him to keep writing Bond books that lead up to Bond joining the service. At this point, we would have the adult Bond. I'd also be in favour of Higson jumping in and writing adult Bond books set in the present time.

Samuel001 said:
It may never happen but Higson has said if he were to continue Young Bond the next books would be a trilogy focusing on Bond's years at Fettes College with another - and final - possible 'series' telling everything else about Bond which includes his WWII years. That would of course bring Bond up to where we know him in Fleming's work. And Higson's new Young Bond would target older readers.

THIS...THIS IS WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN!

I've written that in capitals to show how passionate I am about it. Higson, really, truly 'gets it!' Deaver could have been writing any old character...he simply does not 'get it.' CB felt, cheap, rushed, generic and written for the sake of it. It had none of the obvious care, attention and genuine love for Bond that good old Charlie clearly has.

Bounine

Oh yeah, I'd forgotten about Fettes. Certainly it may never happen but it would be wonderful. Don't know if Charlie is keen on writing adult Bond post Casino Royale or the new contemporary Bond but it would be great if he did.

timmer

Truth is, Deaver's book really did suck. As Bond books go, its one of the worst and I've read them all. The character was never lamer. The book's failings have been widely elaborated on elsewhere, so I won't rehash. Suffice it was a bad Bond book. Not necessarily a bad read, but a bad Bond book. That said, I'll take a bad Bond book, if that's all IFP can serve up.
I would prefer Higson though, because he's a legit Bondphile.
But something is better than nothing. I can't be a purist here, because pure ended with Fleming. We've been making due with other's best efforts ever since. Granted some best efforts are better than others.

tommychameleon

timmer said:
Truth is, Deaver's book really did suck. As Bond books go, its one of the worst and I've read them all. The character was never lamer. The book's failings have been widely elaborated on elsewhere, so I won't rehash. Suffice it was a bad Bond book.

Agree 100%.

Kennon

Carte Blanche sucked pretty much indeed. But why let Deaver have a second go then, to get another weak book? What bunk. I'd rather have no Bond than this awful excuse for a thriller. If you're that hard a junkie you are better off with a Gabriel Allon or Jack Reacher, just think BOND every time they are mentioned.

No, definitely no second Deaver-Bond for me, ta muchly.

Agent007391

Kennon said:
Carte Blanche sucked pretty much indeed. But why let Deaver have a second go then, to get another weak book?

You're assuming he wouldn't get better. I read the Resident Evil movie novelizations by Keith RA DeCandido, and the first two were crap (oddly enough, just like the movies), yet the third one was great. I say (and keep in mind, I've never read Carte Blanche, outside of a snippet I read at Walmart while waiting for my family to get the groceries), even if Carte Blanche wasn't that good, maybe his next book will be better, and then his next book even better.

tommychameleon

I do wonder whether it's more an attempt to get the literary Bond back in the public eye, by using a name author, rather than actually turn out a quality end result. The key HAS to be that, whichever author they use, they're a hardcore fan of the Bond books, rather than a casual 'enjoyer' of the books/movies.

With every sentence Higson writes, you KNOW, he truly loves it...the end result? Awesome books, that, for me, truly stand up to Fleming. Not only that, they were hugely successful, too. It would be interesting to see the sales figures of all the books side by side. Is there anywhere we could find that information?

Kennon

Agent007391, CB didn't become what it is for lack of experience on Deaver's side. That guy is a prolific seasoned mystery writer in his own right and has sold millions of books in different languages already. It's just that Deaver's idea of a rebooted Bond doesn't go well with Bond IMO. And frankly I'm not eager to observe Deaver's learning process, why should I? CB is likely exactly what Deaver wanted it to be, so there's no reason why he should change anything about his idea of Bond. I for one don't want another go by him.

Agent007391

Kennon said:
Agent007391, CB didn't become what it is for lack of experience on Deaver's side.

I never said lack of experience. There was a great line in an Amazon review, I think for the TWINE novelization, about Raymond Benson, where the reviewer said that Benson seemed "nervous" about writing Bond. Perhaps this is what Deaver feels.

Kennon said:
That guy is a prolific seasoned mystery writer in his own right and has sold millions of books in different languages already.

I only really knew him as the author of "The Bone Collector" until Carte Blanche was announced, then, all of a sudden, dozens of copies of his books were all over the Goodwill. (Not trying to contradict you, just telling you how I know of him.)

Kennon said:
It's just that Deaver's idea of a rebooted Bond doesn't go well with Bond IMO.

Well, the big problem with the opinions of Bond fans (myself included) is that we always have an image of how we want Bond to be, and even how we want his reboots to be, that if it doesn't line up with us, we hate it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that when I finally read Carte Blanche that I'm going to love it, and in fact, from what I've heard on here and on Amazon, I'll probably hate it. I do give him credit for trying, however.

Kennon said:
CB is likely exactly what Deaver wanted it to be

Isn't this how any book by any author should be? We just read it, we don't have to agree with it or even like it, but the author has to live with it throughout the whole time he/she is writing it.

Now, don't get me wrong, your opinion is very important, and I'm not trying to say you're wrong.

DoubleD

+1 for Higson. As poster says, he really 'gets it'.

My opinion on all these reboots is simply this. I don't think they work.

I don't believe Fleming Bond can exist in the modern World, he just wouldn't fit right. I think he would struggle to get the job done with an attitude arguably well past its sell-by date and the inter-character relationships that worked so well in period Bond just don't exist anymore.

IMO. Keep it period. And if possible. Get Higson on it.

Kennon

Agent007391 said:

Kennon said:
Agent007391, CB didn't become what it is for lack of experience on Deaver's side.

I never said lack of experience. There was a great line in an Amazon review, I think for the TWINE novelization, about Raymond Benson, where the reviewer said that Benson seemed "nervous" about writing Bond. Perhaps this is what Deaver feels.

Probably. Still, he's not exactly a rookie where plain old writing is concerned. And my feeling is that CB is a pretty average thiller or mystery or whatever. If it hadn't been for Bond I wouldn't have finished it. Hell, if it hadn't been for Bond I wouldn't have picked it up in the first place. Deaver delivered a book that to me just wasn't all that engaging. But you really should read it and make up your own mind.

Agent007391 said:

Kennon said:
That guy is a prolific seasoned mystery writer in his own right and has sold millions of books in different languages already.

I only really knew him as the author of "The Bone Collector" until Carte Blanche was announced, then, all of a sudden, dozens of copies of his books were all over the Goodwill. (Not trying to contradict you, just telling you how I know of him.)

Deaver is a big name in his own field where 'series' is the name of the game, and he has no less than four series under his belt, two of which are running, the Rhyme series for a whoppin 15 years now. He is capable enough of 'thrilling' - both in his series' characters and in stand-alone. But his Bond book wouldn't have been considered his best even by his loyal fanbase.

Agent007391 said:

Kennon said:
It's just that Deaver's idea of a rebooted Bond doesn't go well with Bond IMO.

Well, the big problem with the opinions of Bond fans (myself included) is that we always have an image of how we want Bond to be, and even how we want his reboots to be, that if it doesn't line up with us, we hate it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that when I finally read Carte Blanche that I'm going to love it, and in fact, from what I've heard on here and on Amazon, I'll probably hate it. I do give him credit for trying, however.

Kennon said:
CB is likely exactly what Deaver wanted it to be

Isn't this how any book by any author should be? We just read it, we don't have to agree with it or even like it, but the author has to live with it throughout the whole time he/she is writing it.

Now, don't get me wrong, your opinion is very important, and I'm not trying to say you're wrong.

For all I know CB may have been a raving success and everything the Fleming estate people hoped for. Can't really say anything beyond my own feeling about the book. The vibes I got don't indicate Deaver would do anything different in another go. That's why I'm not a friend of him handing in another NuBond. Course he might hit it then, or with the next or the one after that. But I'd prefer somebody else. I'd even make do with all the unnecessary OverseasDevelopmentGroup and the background Deaver invented. What I need to get is a Bond a can care for and I doubt Deaver can deliver that for me. I'm happy for all those who love CB and Deaver's take but I won't bother to pick up another Bond by him. Unless all you guys are raving about how good it is and how well Deaver finally nailed his Bond.

Samuel001

Lots of Carte Blanche discussion here:

http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/813/the-carte-blanche-discussion-thread/p6

It seems many are thinking along the same lines. The book, really, wasn't all that.

Categories

In this Discussion

Announcements