Thanks Domino Effect. Thought it was pronounced as 'done'. Not exactly a very Bondian name for a henchman Niall Dunne. Doesn't exactly rate up there with Donovan Grant or Oddjob. But it personifies the whole book - doesn't rate with anything Fleming wrote.
In one of my post in another forum, I wrote:
If you have not read any of James Bond, is a very good book, but if you read the books Fleming, Gardner .....no, do not look like the Fleming books, and the writer takes many licenses, such as changing the lives of parents of Bond, change the name to Q
NEW- at Waterstones bookshops they have one copy each of a Trade Paperback of Carte Blanche at £13.99.
It is the same size as the hardback-so may be scarcer in the future. With red title lettering.
It is not the smaller size CB paperback which is due out on May 25th.
I liked it and I didn't like it. I thought that the villian characters were pretty good. Also when I read fiction, I still like to learn-For example, I learned alot about Jamaica from reading Fleming. I feel I learned more about S. Africa and Dubai from reading this.
I don't like Bond's interaction with women in this book. I feel he comes across as too romantic. Too hopeful and needy. To me, Bond should have a very glib, unattached view of females (apart from respect for his work collegues). He likes to get laid, but to him it's all about the mission......He even is described as having a twin bed ! I don't know about the UK, but here in the States, a twin bed is very small....harly sufficient for bedroom gymnastics.....Something massive like Roger Moore's king size bed on a platform in LALD is more suitable.
I did like the description of him having a Bentley GT as his daily driver and an XKE in Brittish Racing Green as his second car....Also that they both barely fit in his garage is cool too.
Having just finished rereading CARTE BLANCHE on the kindle the main issue I have with it, the one that sticks out massively on second read is the recurring habit Deaver has of giving us a chapter from one POV (contacting Mathis for help with the surveillance, chasing the van in the Bentley, meeting Hydt as the south african arms dealer) and then revealing a new piece of information, normally involving Bond having been particularly clever. for me at least, this trait of the narrative just becomes more and more irritating as the story progresses because it means that I spent a lot of my time trying to work out what we weren't being told instead of concentrating on what we were.
this cheat, to artificially ramp up the tension, is something Fleming never used, with each of his stories (Spy Who Loved Me exempt) being pretty much entirely from Bond's Point of View.
I really don't think Deaver understood the character of Bond enough to write this book. In CB he comes over as a very one-dimensional character and though I enjoyed the opening of the book, I lost the will to live by it's end. Far too much texting on his phone for me.
"Thank you very much. I was just out walking my RAT and seem to have lost my way... "
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
I think Deaver knew Bond extremely well. Which is why he didn't concentrate on Bonds character too much in this novel because people who are avid readers of Fleming's work would already be familiar with Bond and he needed no fleshing out at all. It's always been a mistake when other writers started to explore Bonds character. Only Fleming could do that with any conviction. I think Deaver was right not to delve too deeply into Bond himself in his update. That would have been extremely difficult. Even Fleming kept Bond's character one dimensional in some of his best works.
Was it Fleming's Bond? Of course not. Only Fleming could give us that. But it was a pretty damned good stab at bringing Bond into the more modern and realistic novel spy genre we have today. Comparing Carte Blanche to Fleming's work is like comparing Casino Royale to the first four Connery films or Jeremy Brett's Sherlock Holmes to the modern Benedict Cumberbatch's series. It's very different. Just enjoy it as a modern take on an old favourite.
The literary Bond that we all know and love belongs in the Fifties and Sixties. You cannot transpose that exact character into a modern environment without changing him quite considerably. That's something we have to accept. I think Deaver knew that too and to try too hard would have been a big error. It is only amongst us die hard fans that he was criticized so much. To the general reader and passing Bond fan, Carte Blanche received exceptional reviews.
Thought it was an excellent book, which improves with each re-reading - find it sad that the next bond novel will be a period set book instead of a continuation - and think it's one of the best non - Fleming written books (alongside Colonel Sun and Devil May Care which were both similarly excellent) and far superior to either Gardner or Benson's efforts
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
I think the problem with Gardner and Benson's Bond was the enormous change in his character and behaviour. Yes, they had Bond set in a more familiar environment with the usual regular characters, but they changed Bond himself too much. Gardners Bond turned him into a pompous pawn that had an air of superiority within himself, that just didn't seem real. His quoting of poems and classic literature was certainly not Bond. And Benson's Bond, well, he was lifted directly from the films and had little bearing on the literary Bond in any shape or form.
That is what happens when you lift a period character and plonk him in the modern world. We know Bond's character and he doesn't need to be expanded on and can work well as a one dimensional character. Not so much in his own time period, but certainly when surrounding him in a different and more contemporary one. Deaver was treading this fine line and got it right for me. I know Bond well as Fleming's work is the bible (or collection of bibles ) for me. But that character would be almost imbecilic in todays fast paced hi tech world. He has to change to work. It was a bold choice to change almost everything in Carte Blanche. But it has become one of my favourite Bond novels, which is interesting as upon first reading it, I thought.. MEH!
I encourage anyone to read it again. To do so slowly and take in the minutiae and details. It a very well written and structured novel that has been exceptionally well researched and planned. The changes to Bond's past while go against the grain for some people, but we shouldn't get weighed down in the past. This is a modern Bond novel and not Fleming. A literary reboot. I'm sad that it isn't being followed up.
Going back to the thought that Deaver didn't know Bond. I spent quite a bit of time talking to him about the literary Bond, Fleming and the modern intelligent services too. He definitely knows his Bond as he is very much a huge fan of Fleming's work. He has a vast knowledge of the British forces too and I was surprised he knew so much about 14 Company and the more intricate side of the UK's intelligence system.
Well I've finished Carte Blanche in pretty good time. Five days.
Pros:
.It's very well written overall. Deaver did his research and put some thought into it.
.Severan Hydt is a creepy bastard and that makes him a solid villain in my eyes.
.I like the scenes set in Serbia, London, and Dubai. Good locations also.
.I like the Philly character and her banter with Bond. Wish we'd seen more of her.
.I liked seeing Leiter and Mathis.
.Dunne, while underused, was a decent henchman.
Cons:
.Bond as a character is too PC.
.Very slow/bloated during the Cape Town scenes. Could've been about a hundred pages shorter.
.Why have Bond working for that new organization and not MI6? Totally unnecessary.
.Forgettable Bond girls. Especially the South African one. I've already forgotten her name.
.Only Q can be the head of Q Branch. Not the Indian guy. Again I forget the name.
.Didn't like the idea of Bond's parents being spies.
Other:
.There is a sequence in England where Bond has to escape a demolition in three minutes. I instantly thought of SP. Only this was a little more original.
.I think the opening in Serbia would make a great PTS.
Final Thoughts:
While a good spy thriller, I didn't feel like I was reading a Bond thriller. However, with a just a few changes and some tightening this very easily could've been a superb novel and a good movie for 2010. It's definitely inspired me to read the other continuation novels finally after almost nine years of being a Bond fan.
Overall, enjoyable but forgettable.
7/10
-{
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
edited December 2017
Q is the head of Q branch. It's just a moniker for Quartermaster. The was no 'Q' in the Fleming novels, just a Q Branch.
Fleming based Bond's service on SOE, that's why he works for another body separate from MI6, it was Deaver giving a nod to SOE and Fleming's connection with that organisation when he created the ODG. M was the head of SOE - Gubbins. As you said, Deaver really did do his research, and to his credit, the SOE connection wasn't as well known as it is today due to the documents being released recently. Kudos to Deaver for that.
Agreed, it's not like reading a traditional Bond novel. This Bond isn't born of the early 20th century, but of the 70's. And couldn't ever be the same as the character Fleming created, or the Bond of the films. It was a character in development and Deaver should have done two more. I think it's the best modern Bond. In fact, it is the only modern Bond, all the other novels have the same Bond but older. Much older, or period set. this is the first time Bond has been re-written for a modern reader. It worked and was very successful.
Q is the head of Q branch. It's just a moniker for Quartermaster. The was no 'Q' in the Fleming novels, just a Q Branch.
Fleming based Bond's service on SOE, that's why he works for another body separate from MI6, it was Deaver giving a nod to SOE and Fleming's connection with that organisation when he created the ODG. M was the head of SOE - Gubbins. As you said, Deaver really did do his research, and to his credit, the SOE connection wasn't as well known as it is today due to the documents being released recently. Kudos to Deaver for that.
Agreed, it's not like reading a traditional Bond novel. This Bond isn't born of the early 20th century, but of the 70's. And couldn't ever be the same as the character Fleming created, or the Bond of the films. It was a character in development and Deaver should have done two more. I think it's the best modern Bond. In fact, it is the only modern Bond, all the other novels have the same Bond but older. Much older, or period set. this is the first time Bond has been re-written for a modern reader. It worked and was very successful.
I wouldn't have minded another Deaver book. He did show potential. I was aware that Q wasn't in the novels. I just like an excuse to complain I guess. ) Wasn't aware of the Fleming connection to the SOE. Very interesting.
-{
This thread bump is timely because I recently re-read Carte Blanche.
When I initially read it shortly after it’s release, I remember enjoying it but thinking that Deaver may have slightly missed the mark. After reading it again, I must say that it’s truly a shame Deaver didn’t write another one because he did the best job possible of re-imagining the character for modern times. And I believe that Bond belongs in the present. I would much rather read something fresh and modern like Carte Blanche as opposed to an endless rehash 50s/60s era Bond (which feels irrelevant and will always pale in comparison to Fleming, regardless of how carefully the pastiche is executed).
I suppose at this point the ship has sailed and we will never get another Deaver Bond novel, but I’m still holding out hope. He definitely left some threads dangling.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
This thread bump is timely because I recently re-read Carte Blanche.
When I initially read it shortly after it’s release, I remember enjoying it but thinking that Deaver may have slightly missed the mark. After reading it again, I must say that it’s truly a shame Deaver didn’t write another one because he did the best job possible of re-imagining the character for modern times. And I believe that Bond belongs in the present. I would much rather read something fresh and modern like Carte Blanche as opposed to an endless rehash 50s/60s era Bond (which feels irrelevant and will always pale in comparison to Fleming, regardless of how carefully the pastiche is executed).
I suppose at this point the ship has sailed and we will never get another Deaver Bond novel, but I’m still holding out hope. He definitely left some threads dangling.
I suppose at this point the ship has sailed and we will never get another Deaver Bond novel, but I’m still holding out hope. He definitely left some threads dangling.
I believe Antony Horowitz is working on a sequel to Trigger Mortis, so it looks like he's got the job for now. I suppose they could have two separate continuation novelists on the payroll at the same time, but thatd be unprecedented, and the fact they're each writing in separate timelines (about separate Bonds) could get confusing. Carte Blanche is the only one of the four recent oneshots I haven't read, so maybe I should, for completionism's sake. So, I gather the character is a new Bond, born in the 70s or so (certainly well after FlemingBond's last adventure). Which sounds similar to the whole Daniel Craig concept. So is DeaverBond the same as CraigBond, or yet another newBond?
pretty soon someone's going to need to write Crisis in Infinite Bond Timelines (joke for fans of DC Comics)
I avoided Horowitz’s first Bond and will likely do the same with the new one. Nothing against him. After Solo, I just decided that I’m sick of imitation Fleming.
Deaver did not do pastiche. But make no mistake: Deaver’s Bond is not not the film Bond. He is the literary Bond supplanted to the present day and updated accordingly (he’s a “former” smoker, Afghan war vet, not a bigot, etc.). But other elements, such as the descriptions of food and drink, are still there. Bond drives a Bentley. He wears a Rolex. You won’t have any trouble recognizing the character.
I suppose they could have two separate continuation novelists on the payroll at the same time, but thatd be unprecedented, and the fact they're each writing in separate timelines (about separate Bonds) could get confusing.
like a bozoclown I forgot there's something called the Young Bond series, probably because I've never read it and I don't see it getting discussed here much
are the events in the Young Bond books ever referenced by any of the Grownup Bond continuation authors? are they consistent with what Fleming wrote, or Pearson's 007 Biography? or is it yet another selfcontained continuity, contradicting other versions of Bond we've seen in recent years?
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
I suppose they could have two separate continuation novelists on the payroll at the same time, but thatd be unprecedented, and the fact they're each writing in separate timelines (about separate Bonds) could get confusing.
like a bozoclown I forgot there's something called the Young Bond series, probably because I've never read it and I don't see it getting discussed here much
are the events in the Young Bond books ever referenced by any of the Grownup Bond continuation authors? are they consistent with what Fleming wrote, or Pearson's 007 Biography? or is it yet another selfcontained continuity, contradicting other versions of Bond we've seen in recent years?
I’ve read all the Charlie Higson Young Bond stories and I’m 1.5/4 through Steve Cole’s, so to the best of my knowledge (also in trying to remember what’s been mentioned in the continuation novels), nothing in Young Bond beyond the details established by Fleming, has been referenced in the adult Bond books. In the preface of Charlie Higson’s “Danger Society,” he acknowledges that Fleming likely didn’t envision anything else interesting or fantastic as he’d written that occurred in Bond’s young life, but like John Pearson, Young Bond is written within the parameters of the scant details given by Fleming, but of course with much creative yarn-spinning. Case in point is the maid with whom James got into trouble at Eton, an episode which Higson elaborated on to be much more and disparate than what that phrase likely implied to the mind of readers.
The advantage of the Young Bond stories over the majority of the continuation novels, except those that maintained Fleming's original timeline, is that of course they were more consistent with Fleming's original creation, as well as the context of the key historical events that shaped Bond's world.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
thanks Superado
I should give the Young Bond books a try
I keep forgetting about them because they're usually filed in the "young adult" section rather than mystery/thriller, with all the other Bond related books
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
I suppose they could have two separate continuation novelists on the payroll at the same time, but thatd be unprecedented, and the fact they're each writing in separate timelines (about separate Bonds) could get confusing.
like a bozoclown I forgot there's something called the Young Bond series, probably because I've never read it and I don't see it getting discussed here much
are the events in the Young Bond books ever referenced by any of the Grownup Bond continuation authors? are they consistent with what Fleming wrote, or Pearson's 007 Biography? or is it yet another selfcontained continuity, contradicting other versions of Bond we've seen in recent years?
I’ve read all the Charlie Higson Young Bond stories and I’m 1.5/4 through Steve Cole’s, so to the best of my knowledge (also in trying to remember what’s been mentioned in the continuation novels), nothing in Young Bond beyond the details established by Fleming, has been referenced in the adult Bond books. In the preface of Charlie Higson’s “Danger Society,” he acknowledges that Fleming likely didn’t envision anything else interesting or fantastic as he’d written that occurred in Bond’s young life, but like John Pearson, Young Bond is written within the parameters of the scant details given by Fleming, but of course with much creative yarn-spinning. Case in point is the maid with whom James got into trouble at Eton, an episode which Higson elaborated on to be much more and disparate than what that phrase likely implied to the mind of readers.
The advantage of the Young Bond stories over the majority of the continuation novels, except those that maintained Fleming's original timeline, is that of course they were more consistent with Fleming's original creation, as well as the context of the key historical events that shaped Bond's world.
thanks Superado
I should give the Young Bond books a try
I keep forgetting about them because they're usually filed in the "young adult" section rather than mystery/thriller, with all the other Bond related books
You're welcome, Professor Potts! I highly recommend Charlie Higson's books, which I find very atmospheric. Only last month, I saved reading the short story "A Hard Man to Kill" from the Young Bond guide book, "Danger Society" and it was very satisfying though only around 50 pages long. I'm reading Steve Cole's books out of order; the 2nd one of his I'm reading is Strike Lightning and it's been a struggle!
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
I enjoyed Carte Blanche. While not perfect, it does seem that Deaver was successful in putting together a Fleming-Style Bond for the 21st Century. He used many of the same Fleming deceits, like brand name drops, and the character seemed very much like the Bond of the books. I'd buy another Deaver Bond book without flinching.
The other throw-back books where OK, but really - WHY?
Still trying to forget Deaver's acting turn on As The World Turns. He was fine, but the laughable serial killer plot really needed his writing assistance.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
I tried the young Bond books Hurricane Gold, but it wasn't for me. I like my Bond
Drinking, shagging and shooting villains in the face
I'm content knowing that this young, gentlemanly lad will eventually be doing those things ) Seriously, though, the rapport between young Bond and the young ladies is pretty interesting, kind of like adult Bond without the eventual conclusion, and the villains are pretty good too, esp. in how they get what's coming to them...but there's where the reality gets challenged, when young Bond undergoes painful physical trials and torture, very, very Fleming. X-(
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
Comments
NEW- at Waterstones bookshops they have one copy each of a Trade Paperback of Carte Blanche at £13.99.
It is the same size as the hardback-so may be scarcer in the future. With red title lettering.
It is not the smaller size CB paperback which is due out on May 25th.
Bleuville.
I still haven't been able to finish it.
That is all.
@merseytart
I don't like Bond's interaction with women in this book. I feel he comes across as too romantic. Too hopeful and needy. To me, Bond should have a very glib, unattached view of females (apart from respect for his work collegues). He likes to get laid, but to him it's all about the mission......He even is described as having a twin bed ! I don't know about the UK, but here in the States, a twin bed is very small....harly sufficient for bedroom gymnastics.....Something massive like Roger Moore's king size bed on a platform in LALD is more suitable.
I did like the description of him having a Bentley GT as his daily driver and an XKE in Brittish Racing Green as his second car....Also that they both barely fit in his garage is cool too.
this cheat, to artificially ramp up the tension, is something Fleming never used, with each of his stories (Spy Who Loved Me exempt) being pretty much entirely from Bond's Point of View.
Was it Fleming's Bond? Of course not. Only Fleming could give us that. But it was a pretty damned good stab at bringing Bond into the more modern and realistic novel spy genre we have today. Comparing Carte Blanche to Fleming's work is like comparing Casino Royale to the first four Connery films or Jeremy Brett's Sherlock Holmes to the modern Benedict Cumberbatch's series. It's very different. Just enjoy it as a modern take on an old favourite.
The literary Bond that we all know and love belongs in the Fifties and Sixties. You cannot transpose that exact character into a modern environment without changing him quite considerably. That's something we have to accept. I think Deaver knew that too and to try too hard would have been a big error. It is only amongst us die hard fans that he was criticized so much. To the general reader and passing Bond fan, Carte Blanche received exceptional reviews.
And welcome to AJB, btw! -{
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
That is what happens when you lift a period character and plonk him in the modern world. We know Bond's character and he doesn't need to be expanded on and can work well as a one dimensional character. Not so much in his own time period, but certainly when surrounding him in a different and more contemporary one. Deaver was treading this fine line and got it right for me. I know Bond well as Fleming's work is the bible (or collection of bibles
I encourage anyone to read it again. To do so slowly and take in the minutiae and details. It a very well written and structured novel that has been exceptionally well researched and planned. The changes to Bond's past while go against the grain for some people, but we shouldn't get weighed down in the past. This is a modern Bond novel and not Fleming. A literary reboot. I'm sad that it isn't being followed up.
Going back to the thought that Deaver didn't know Bond. I spent quite a bit of time talking to him about the literary Bond, Fleming and the modern intelligent services too. He definitely knows his Bond as he is very much a huge fan of Fleming's work. He has a vast knowledge of the British forces too and I was surprised he knew so much about 14 Company and the more intricate side of the UK's intelligence system.
Pros:
.It's very well written overall. Deaver did his research and put some thought into it.
.Severan Hydt is a creepy bastard and that makes him a solid villain in my eyes.
.I like the scenes set in Serbia, London, and Dubai. Good locations also.
.I like the Philly character and her banter with Bond. Wish we'd seen more of her.
.I liked seeing Leiter and Mathis.
.Dunne, while underused, was a decent henchman.
Cons:
.Bond as a character is too PC.
.Very slow/bloated during the Cape Town scenes. Could've been about a hundred pages shorter.
.Why have Bond working for that new organization and not MI6? Totally unnecessary.
.Forgettable Bond girls. Especially the South African one. I've already forgotten her name.
.Only Q can be the head of Q Branch. Not the Indian guy. Again I forget the name.
.Didn't like the idea of Bond's parents being spies.
Other:
.There is a sequence in England where Bond has to escape a demolition in three minutes. I instantly thought of SP. Only this was a little more original.
.I think the opening in Serbia would make a great PTS.
Final Thoughts:
While a good spy thriller, I didn't feel like I was reading a Bond thriller. However, with a just a few changes and some tightening this very easily could've been a superb novel and a good movie for 2010. It's definitely inspired me to read the other continuation novels finally after almost nine years of being a Bond fan.
Overall, enjoyable but forgettable.
7/10
-{
Fleming based Bond's service on SOE, that's why he works for another body separate from MI6, it was Deaver giving a nod to SOE and Fleming's connection with that organisation when he created the ODG. M was the head of SOE - Gubbins. As you said, Deaver really did do his research, and to his credit, the SOE connection wasn't as well known as it is today due to the documents being released recently. Kudos to Deaver for that.
Agreed, it's not like reading a traditional Bond novel. This Bond isn't born of the early 20th century, but of the 70's. And couldn't ever be the same as the character Fleming created, or the Bond of the films. It was a character in development and Deaver should have done two more. I think it's the best modern Bond. In fact, it is the only modern Bond, all the other novels have the same Bond but older. Much older, or period set. this is the first time Bond has been re-written for a modern reader. It worked and was very successful.
-{
When I initially read it shortly after it’s release, I remember enjoying it but thinking that Deaver may have slightly missed the mark. After reading it again, I must say that it’s truly a shame Deaver didn’t write another one because he did the best job possible of re-imagining the character for modern times. And I believe that Bond belongs in the present. I would much rather read something fresh and modern like Carte Blanche as opposed to an endless rehash 50s/60s era Bond (which feels irrelevant and will always pale in comparison to Fleming, regardless of how carefully the pastiche is executed).
I suppose at this point the ship has sailed and we will never get another Deaver Bond novel, but I’m still holding out hope. He definitely left some threads dangling.
Spot on!
Carte Blanche is the only one of the four recent oneshots I haven't read, so maybe I should, for completionism's sake. So, I gather the character is a new Bond, born in the 70s or so (certainly well after FlemingBond's last adventure). Which sounds similar to the whole Daniel Craig concept. So is DeaverBond the same as CraigBond, or yet another newBond?
pretty soon someone's going to need to write Crisis in Infinite Bond Timelines (joke for fans of DC Comics)
Deaver did not do pastiche. But make no mistake: Deaver’s Bond is not not the film Bond. He is the literary Bond supplanted to the present day and updated accordingly (he’s a “former” smoker, Afghan war vet, not a bigot, etc.). But other elements, such as the descriptions of food and drink, are still there. Bond drives a Bentley. He wears a Rolex. You won’t have any trouble recognizing the character.
are the events in the Young Bond books ever referenced by any of the Grownup Bond continuation authors? are they consistent with what Fleming wrote, or Pearson's 007 Biography? or is it yet another selfcontained continuity, contradicting other versions of Bond we've seen in recent years?
I’ve read all the Charlie Higson Young Bond stories and I’m 1.5/4 through Steve Cole’s, so to the best of my knowledge (also in trying to remember what’s been mentioned in the continuation novels), nothing in Young Bond beyond the details established by Fleming, has been referenced in the adult Bond books. In the preface of Charlie Higson’s “Danger Society,” he acknowledges that Fleming likely didn’t envision anything else interesting or fantastic as he’d written that occurred in Bond’s young life, but like John Pearson, Young Bond is written within the parameters of the scant details given by Fleming, but of course with much creative yarn-spinning. Case in point is the maid with whom James got into trouble at Eton, an episode which Higson elaborated on to be much more and disparate than what that phrase likely implied to the mind of readers.
The advantage of the Young Bond stories over the majority of the continuation novels, except those that maintained Fleming's original timeline, is that of course they were more consistent with Fleming's original creation, as well as the context of the key historical events that shaped Bond's world.
I should give the Young Bond books a try
I keep forgetting about them because they're usually filed in the "young adult" section rather than mystery/thriller, with all the other Bond related books
You're welcome, Professor Potts! I highly recommend Charlie Higson's books, which I find very atmospheric. Only last month, I saved reading the short story "A Hard Man to Kill" from the Young Bond guide book, "Danger Society" and it was very satisfying though only around 50 pages long. I'm reading Steve Cole's books out of order; the 2nd one of his I'm reading is Strike Lightning and it's been a struggle!
Drinking, shagging and shooting villains in the face
The other throw-back books where OK, but really - WHY?
I'm content knowing that this young, gentlemanly lad will eventually be doing those things