"Breaking the Ice" - Your views on John Gardner's Icebreaker (1983)?
Silhouette Man
The last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,844MI6 Agent
As there's never been a specific thread here on John Gardner's third James Bond continuation novel Icebreaker (1983) I thought that I would remedy this fact and start a thread where we can discuss, review, criticise and even help conduct some research on the novel.
For many literary Bond fans (myself included) this is one of John Gardner's best James Bond novels, and some even call it the best. It's known that it was one of John Gardner's personal favourites from his Bond back catalogue, his ultimate favourite being the similarly plotted The Man From Barbarossa (1991).
Icebreaker saw John Gardner return the literary Bond to the subject of the Nazis, past and present (see Sir Hugo Drax in Ian Fleming's Moonraker) and a neo-Nazi group called the National Socialist Action Army (NSAA) who were killing Communist Party members and associates the world over in a terrorist campaign designed to usher in a Fourth Reich in Europe. The NSAA may have been based on this similarly titled neo-Nazi political party of the early 1980s in Britain which also attacked Communists and was involved (like the villain Count Konrad von Glöda) in arms smuggling to further its nefarious ends.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Action_Party
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this novel and what I've written about the possible inspiration for Gardner's NSAA villain's organisation in this thread. Let's get a good conversation going here.
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
Comments
In reflection, I think it is my favourite, just pipping Licence Renewed.
I recall that in the James Bond Bedside Companion Raymond Benson was quite critical of Icebreaker and called it a significant step down from the first two novels, and perhaps if I was to reread the novel some of the cracks would start to appear. But I can honestly say that I liked it more than a number of the weaker Ian Fleming titles.
That's interesting! I don't remember that bit of what the Bedside Companion said about Icebreaker being not as good as the 1st 2 books, but it was the synopsis from the Bedside Companion that helped me chose Icebreaker as the first Gardner Bond novel to read! Ironically, Licence Renewed, the 1st Gardner Bond, is the only continuation novel that I haven't finished reading because it got tedious for me to read.
For Special Services ( which read like a script for an unmade Film)
It has many good points, and the story is interesting and involving.
Sadly for me it was the start of Bond being part of a team ( once was ok,
But Bond afterwards. Seemed to be always in some sort of team outing) and
Gardner's obsession it seemed, to then add double and triple agents to
His stories. So often that when reading a new Bond book, you'd be looking
Out for who was going to be the " Double" in this one.
The torture scene was very good, Bond as always takes one hell of a beating.
I was looking forward to what the guy that worked with Ferrari would do with Saab. But I think those projects were cancelled. Even though Bond drove a Saab, I never really considered it a Bond car. Certainly not comparable to a DB5.
The NSAA may have been based on this similarly-titled Neo-Nazi political party of the early 1980s in Britain which also attacked Communists and was involved (like the villain Count Konrad von Glöda) in arms smuggling to further its nefarious ends.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Action_Party
I'm currently researching this for an article on the real world origins of Gardner's NSAA in Icebreaker (1983).
I've also since found this. I don't know whether or not it is influenced by Gardner's Icebreaker but it is interesting nonetheless:
http://www.popsike.com/LEGION-88-ICEBREAKER-85-TEST-LP-SKINHEAD-FRENCH-OI/4813090475.html
Any suggestions on all of this would be greatly appreciated!
Seem to be around. Sometimes gaining in popularity ( in certain areas) then falling into the
Background again.
I think most of these groups are involved in crime, drugs, guns and protection as ways of getting
Funds. Infact for many the right wing politics is ( in my opinion) simply a cover for their criminal
activity.
I notice the article mentions numerous far-right groups attaining some degree of notoriety in the early eighties. I was a teenager then and we were only really aware of the National Front, so this is quite interesting, in a sociopolitical-historical fashion.
It's certainly likely that Gardner borrowed the name of the group and adapted it for the novel. The aims of each are entirely different however - although both share Nazi (or neo-nazi) overtones.
I like Icebreaker.
It's very like a Bond movie in construction: a pre-adventure sequence, a briefing, an extended chase or two, infiltrating the enemy camp, a journey to a fantastical hideout, torture, escape, the cavalry to the rescue, a resolving coda. You will find most of these ingredients in all Bond movies.
Although there are an early couple of chapters in Madeira which drag it is much pacier than Gardner's usual output; the group dynamic and the cross, double & treble crosses feels very fresh - it certainly was when I first read the book in 1984. Bond also feels very real in this one; he's fallible and gets hurt.
It always gets a thumbs up from me.
Thank you all for your contributions on this thread of mine. They are all very much appreciated. I am planning on writing up an article for my blog on the influence of British Neo-Nazis such as the National Socialist Action Party (NSAP) on Gardner's fictional National Socialist Action Army (NSAA) in Icebreaker (1983). There seems to have been a truly staggering amount of these far-right groups beyond the famous ones we've all heard of like the British Union of Fascists and the National Front. In theory any one of them could have been an influence on Gardner but the NSAP certainly has a better claim than most given the similarity of the name to the NSAA and the fact it was around at the time he was writing Icebreaker.
I agree with chrisno1 above that the Wikipedia article on the NSAP quoted above is very interesting indeed and I'd like to note that I have invested in a copy of R. Hill & A. Bell, The Other Face of Terror- Inside Europe’s Neo-Nazi Network (Collins, 1988) on which the bulk of said article I posted above is based. I find the untold story of how Gardner (presumably) came up with the NSAA as the villainous organisation in Icebreaker deeply fascinating and I think it is certainly worth telling in an upcoming blog article.
Signing off for now. Just want to end by saying: If anyone else feels like throwing in their sixpence on this topic, I'd love to hear from you, as always!
Calvin Dyson's Review of John Gardner's Icebreaker (1983):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JE0K2SuC18M
He lacks an extensive vocabulary. Is he very well read? He complains about the plot twists. Has he ever researched the plot arcs of a Le Carre or Gavin Lyall or William Gardner? I understand he's quite popular on the web. No mention of Gardner's writing style, how he creates tension and character and place; he seems to think the detail about an electric shock from an elevator button is superfluous, but this tells us about the age of the elevator and the type of place Bond is visiting without having to spell the detail. It's an example of 'showing not telling'. Gardner is quite effective at that in this novel, and I feel absorbed in the locations. Dyson seems to prefer FSS because he's reimagining it from a real location he's visited - where's his genuine imagination? Did he read IB and not understand how Gardner creates place and atmosphere? If he can't understand how to deconstruct a novel into its formal structures of character, place, plot, point of view and atmosphere - which you must have for a novel to succeed - then I don't think he can be considered a reliable critic. Ahhhh. Whatever.
What did you make of it @Silhouette Man ?
I'm not sure how well read he is more generally but I think I'm right in saying that in terms of the literary Bond this is his first read through the original Fleming Bond novels and short stories and the Bond continuation novels. It seems to me at least that he's primarily more of a film Bond fan than specifically a literary Bond fan. I suppose that's fair enough and there are many fans (even a majority of fans?) in the same boat. As someone who's been a Bond fan since he was a child and being slightly older than Calvin Dyson (exactly five years to the day in fact) I do find it a little curious that as such a big Bond fan he's only relatively recently turned to the literary Bond as well as the film Bond with which he's much more familiar. I was the type of fan who devoured anything I could find about James Bond as I came across it being it the films or thew novels. In fact, I'd say that my enthusiasm for all things Bond was at its peak during my teenage years before life, university, work and general adulthood got in the way and complicated matters. That's why I always find it a bit odd that many film Bond fans haven't read the books and some even have no interest in reading them.
Even though it is still nice to see a major figure in the Bond fan community such as Calvin Dyson covering the original and continuation Bond novels, I agree that some of his reviews do leave a bit to be desired. Of course it makes for better copy and better videos to humorously criticise the Gardner novels and this has been the approach of Jim of CBn's The 007th Chapter series for instance. However, such a highly critical stance often sells Gardner and his Bond novels short, and it would be refreshing for once to see a review focusing on the positives. Of course it's much easier as a critic to pull a piece of work down than it is to create it in the first place. Dyson seems to be continually amazed by what he perceives as the crazier elements of the Gardner novels, but I don't think many of these things truly jumped out at me as a young Bond fan when I first read them. Maybe I'm just pretty easy going and accepting when it comes to literary Bond but I for one was grateful for the extra Bond adventures Gardner and the others provided at the time. He refers to the neo-Nazis in the Ice Palace as campy, but I think that was just the standard Fourth Reich neo-Nazi plot beloved by many previous post-war thriller writers. I think Gardner actually puts an interesting spin on things by having the main villain being a Finnish ex-SS man and not simply a German Nazi aiming to be the new Fuhrer. This is still James Bond and not a Mel Brooks musical! Spy thrillers of the Fleming/Gardner mould are hardly meant to be highly realistic spy thrillers of the (still contrived) John Le Carré school but are rather escapist fantasies based within the espionage world. I like how you highlighted the comment about the lift buttons giving Bond electric shocks when he pressed them, @chrisno1. You're right in that it subtly gives an indication of the rather seedy and down-at-heel nature of the hotel and how this barren and snowy landscape is all a far cry from the more glamorous and tropical locations Bond usually frequents in his missions. Gardner is often a much more nuanced and classier writer than he's given credit for. This should come as no real surprise to anyone aware of the fact that he'd been writing bestselling spy thrillers for a good 20 years before he produced Icebreaker.
Mr Dyson’s approach is endemic to the vapid, content-churning cadre of third rate social media influencers who have taken to styling themselves the “Bond Community.” It’s all about self-promotion with this set, and very little of what they produce has any real substance. It’s notable that you rarely see any members of the “Bond Community” engage in meaningful discussion on these boards.
Apologies for the rant, but that review rubbed me the wrong way because Icebreaker is, in my estimation, one of the finest continuation novels. I actually rate it alongside some of the lesser Flemings. So to see it maligned by someone who, as Chrisno notes, has no apparent foundation to offer a literary critique, struck a nerve.
No apology needed. I'm tempted to listen to some more of his reviews, just so I can let loose some indignation.
I find Calvin Dyson's film reviews hilarious and I particularly recommend his takedown of NSNA - shooting fish in a barrel I guess but highly entertaining nonetheless. It lasts something like 50 mins if I recall, it's like one of my lengthy reviews on Last Bond Film but he does fun little excerpts and things.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
True, Calvin isn't much of a literary critic and I've disagreed with quite a few of his comments regarding the Gardner novels. But I'm no critic either, I just find it interesting to hear another Bond fan's opinion, be it Calvin Dyson with his style of review or Chrisno1 who gives a more thorough critical analysis. I'm glad Calvin has taken the effort to cover these books on his channel, and I doubt they are videos that attract all that many views compared to other subjects. But, Chrisno1 mentioned Le Carre and others. I've sometimes wondered how Calvin would respond to those novels if he were to review them. He certainly hasn't shown much love for the Le Carre or Deighton film adaptations that he has covered.
While I maybe wouldn't put it quite so forthrightly you do certainly have a point there. I'm not singling out any content creator specifically, but I have noticed something of a disconnect between the YouTube Bond stars and those who post on Bond forums often anonymously under a username. It seems to generally be a case of never the twain shall meet which is a pity, but there it is. I suppose when successful creators can start to monetise their content there is no longer any incentive to engage in the often in-depth discussions on Bond forums such as this one as it is all free at the point of use and not behind a paywall. The way they look at it is probably that the more time they spend on Bond forums is time wasted that could be better spent creating new video content for YouTube. As the old saying goes, I think that you really can have too much of a good thing. Indeed, there is now so much Bond content online that it's impossible to keep up with it. I tend to just prioritise those subjects that I'm most interested in within Bond and even then there's too much.
Hi,
So then... Icebreaker... What can I say... It is entertaining and I just luuuuv having Finland as a setting for a Bond book. Although the ending with its double and triple agents reeks a bit of deus ex machina.
But, and this is something I have wondered quite a bit in relation to other books with real world locations if people generally feel the same, as a born and bred Helsinki native I have hard time recognizing Gardners Helsinki. It has the feeling of a poorly written travel brochure, as if Gardner had done his research at the local James Cook office. As an example: when Bond visits Paula Vacker at her residence, the building described is 1) actually an office building, 2) it is described being next to Esplanade park, and therefore as centrally located as possible with all the hotels worthwhile visiting in the ´80s Helsinki close by, but "Bond had never been to that part of the city" and 3) the description of the building it self is more fitting for something in Tallin or Moscow, than central Helsinki. Only thing missing is the stale smell of sweat, yesterdays cigarette smoke and cabbage soup. There is also something off about the description of the meals he has in Finland, that I can't quite put my finger on. And maybe it's just me 😎 but winter isn't quite as dangerous as Gardner makes it out to be, I mean Bond is supposed to have his winter operations refreshers regularly with Royal Marine Commandos in Norwegian Lappland (according to Gardner himself, if I remember correctly). So why the cheese and whine about Helsinki winter? Also the water torture smacks a bit of fantastic, Gardner obviously hasn't done any ice swimming... I don't have the book at hand, it's one of those I have stashed away to make room in the bookshelves, so I can't go into more detail. The Lappland part of the story is quite spot on, and there I get the feeling that John Gardner might have even visited the locations.
What comes to his NSAA and its Finnish roots, could be possible, there were some staunch opposition to socialism and communism in Finland after the war. But with the Allied Control Commission in Helsinki and later the pro Soviet politics in force, anybody tied in politics with these types of views were effectively sidelined and anybody within military found new employment opportunities over seas. I don't know of any Finnish officers rising to rank of real power in the Nazi war machine, but that is not really necessary for the plot. There were 1400 Finnish volunteers in the SS Viking division, of which 256 were KIA 14 MIA 686 wounded. Of the 14 MIA some might have been captured by the Soviets. Remaining men were returned to Finland in 1943 and subsequently relocated in various military units in the army.
-Mr Arlington Beech