The fundamental aspects of a James Bond Novel.

saunders

On reading the free WHSMITH author feature on <I>'Carte Blanche'</I> I noted with interest that Jeffery Deaver writes that when he sat down with Ian Fleming Publications and Fleming's family they were all in agreement on certain fundamental aspects of the novel:

<I>The book would be set in the present day.</I>
<I>Bond would be a young, thirty-something agent for the British government.</I>
<I>His operational number would, of course be 007 .</I>
<I>Readers would find many of the characters in the prior books making appearances.</I>
<I>It would take place in several exotic locations around the world.</i>

Now for me I agree totally on three of the points, disagree on one and don't consider the other one important enough to warrant being a 'fundamental aspect', but my question would be if you had the decision, what would be your list of fundamental aspects for a continuation Bond novel?

MrSpy

For me:

1. The prose be written at least on a level par with Fleming.
2. It doesn't have to be exactly the character Fleming created -- Fleming himself played with his invention, so there's room for variation there -- but nothing in the ms should *violate* what is set down by Fleming.
3. If Fleming's supporting cast is not used, original supporting characters should be as memorable as Fleming's.

Those would be my major concerns if I were editing or publishing a Bond continuation novel. More focused on overall continuity of quality than anything else. If it's good, if it satisfies, if it works, even the strictest of purists will say, "It's not Fleming, but the author has made it his own."

saunders

I wish you were publishing the novels MrSpy, those are three great fundamental aspects that I would fully agree with.
One more aspect that I would add to yours:

The book would be set in the early sixties and the time frame would place it within a few months of the end of TMWTGG.

boldfinger

I wholeheartedly agree with Mr Spy.
I think to set the book in the early 60s is not necessarily a good thing. Fleming set his stories in his present days, I think that concept should be kept.

The_Preacher711

"Readers would find many of the characters in the prior books making appearances."

That line bothers me slightly.... Have images of a Benson-esqe(spit) tactic of wheeling out a character the fans will recognise, only to bump em off or otherwise ruin the character by chapter 2.... other than the core characters, I don't feel the need to have any other faces conviniently pop up.

I do agree about the novel following TMWTGG by a few months though.

MrSpy

"following TMWTGG by a few months"

My problem with this is that you'll get what Faulks gave us, a weak imitation of Fleming. Better to strive for the quality of Fleming's prose -- lean, precise, witty -- than try to continue his actual work. Just my opine...

gregdaulton

I agree with what was said about Faulks' writing. It was a rather weak imitation of Fleming. Gardner is my favorite.

The fundamental aspects of a James Bond novel IMHO are:

The book would be set in the present day.
Bond would be in his mid to late 30's
A strong supporting cast (old characters or memorable new ones)
Exotic locales must be used
There needs to be a love interest/femme fatale (Bond girl)

Virage

All this "Must be set in modern day" & "Must be mid-30s"

The Young Bond Books disprove it

It needs to be larger then life, Villein wise and location wise a smart sense of humor

Darius

The problem with setting a Bond continuation novel in the present day is that it clashes with the movies. The Fleming Bond novels dried up in the early sixties owing to Fleming's death, but the movies continued holding the "keep Bond in the here and now" flag high as they went.

As it turns out the movies became a vast commercial franchise that in terms of income and branding, positively dwarfs the literary Bond. This means that the amount of people investing about twelve hours to read a Bond novel are far fewer than those who go to the movies, sit back and enjoy a couple of hours passive entertainment. "Hell, we're all busy people -- I don't have time to read a novel!" How many times have we all heard this plaint?

In short, Bond books set in the present day seem clichéd because the movies have been there, done that and have the sweatshirt to prove it. However, there are no only a few Bond movies set back in Bond's natural habitat of the Cold War, post WWII paranoia that was the fifties sixties and (at a pinch) the seventies. With production costs being a prohibitive factor in the production of a sixties Bond movie, surely, this then is the niche that the books should be inhabiting.

I think that Anthony Horrowitz's success with Trigger Mortis among fans of the literary Bond should speak for itself here.