I hesitate to cite examples of twists because of spoilers, but it generally a bit of new information which is something neither Bond nor the reader knew about, and contradicts previous assumptions - and it is revealed with a flourish. It's not quite Sixth Sense stuff, admittedly.
I phrased the thing about novel titles badly - what I mean, is the first of those listed such as Dr No and Thunderball, well, they are specific to the plots of those books - but don't necessarily make for good songs. Others - the second lot listed, could apply to most Bond novels - Live and Let Die, for instance - and also make for good songs. It seems odd that the recent novels lean towards the latter style of title, despite there never being any chance of them being filmed, nor requiring a song. But I'm not saying the likes of Dr No or Moonraker are bad titles per se, they're not. But none of the new lot follow in that vein, when they easily could have, that's all.
I don't really find the idea of twists in the continuation novels to be hugely compelling, as you say; twists is a bit of a strong term. I don't think revealing new information undermines the concept of Bond or anything.
Gardner is a different matter: he very clearly made the plots up as he was writing the books, so everyone was always turning out to be double or triple agents constantly as he ran out ideas of how to end each chapter. Not really twists either, considering how often it happened, but I guess they are more like the generally held concept of twists.
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,834MI6 Agent
edited September 25
I think there were some twists in the Fleming Bond novels and short stories too to be fair. The most notable of these is the revelation that "national hero" Sir Hugo Drax in Moonraker is in fact a fanatical Nazi who has assumed the identity of a dead British soldier in the chaos of the aftermath of World War II. There was also Vesper Lynd turning out to be a traitor working for the Soviets in Casino Royale and Kristatos in 'Risico' turning out to be not an ally as first thought but the villain of the piece.
I agree though that these sort of twists weren't as common in the works of Fleming. I think John Gardner was the first to use these sorts of twists from For Special Services onwards and nearly every novel had some sort of twist or double or triple cross with characters not being what they seem. Icebreaker was certainly the most egregious example of this! Gardner did this in his own novels from his Boysie Oakes works in the 1960s onwards so it was par for the course for his novels. One reason why Fleming didn't use traitor twists very often (Vesper Lynd is really the only true example I can think of) is that I think in his universe British agents and staff shouldn't be traitors. Villains were always foreign, always "the other". So having a British traitor went against the grain for Fleming in his works even though the Burgess and Maclean Affair occurred in the real world while he was writing his novels. Both Vesper Lynd and Maria Freudenstein were of foreign extraction so this explains why Fleming was content to have them as traitors. In fact, in his worldview, it was almost to be expected from such people.
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
Yes, it is. It's all the more effective too as Fleming didn't use this type of twist again, unlike how some later Bond continuation authors did. He built up tension and intrigued in other ways. The twist on the identity of Trigger is another good example. I knew I'd probably missed one! 🙂
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
or Dr Shatterhand revealed to be Blofeld, thats even bigger than the other twists because of how the shock reveal ties back to the previous novel and Bonds state at the start of this one. the other examples seem more like random new information in comparison. You Only Live Twice has an almost supernatural fairy tale logic underlying its plot.
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,834MI6 Agent
That's another great example. I don't know how I forgot that one to be honest but it's probably because we rarely ever talk about these twists as a feature of Fleming's Bond work. They're much more of a feature of John Gardner's Bond novels and of the continuation Bond novels more generally. It's nice to recognise that it somewhat originated with Bond's creator though.
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
In fairness, the plot twists date back to Gardner, starting with Icebreaker. The twists were kind of the point of that one, and I think they work there. But it got very tiresome by the end of his tenure, and I agree that it’s not really a welcome feature of the more modern continuation novels.
One twist in the films I overlooked is the Mr Big/Kananga unmasking in Live and Let Die, that they are one of the same. Personally I'm not sure this worked terribly well, because Mr Big didn't quite convince as a character due to his lumpy visage, or we didn't get to know him much beforehand. Having read the book I didn't quite get this plot strand - Mr Big was the main villain in that, not Kananga, if that makes sense. It's a bit convoluted in much the same way as the double Vulcan pilot in the film Thunderball, it does make things more interesting I suppose but...
So as not to ignore @Miles Messervy 's post, I really didn't read many of the Gardner's, just the first two as they didn't sit right with me. Those books did seem to be of a different era somehow and I got the impression the twists were more along the lines of fake loyalties or allegiances being exposed, like Ray Winstone in Indy and Crystal Skulls, than upending the narrative, recent twists seem to pull a trick on the reader more than the character as often as not.
Comments
I hesitate to cite examples of twists because of spoilers, but it generally a bit of new information which is something neither Bond nor the reader knew about, and contradicts previous assumptions - and it is revealed with a flourish. It's not quite Sixth Sense stuff, admittedly.
I phrased the thing about novel titles badly - what I mean, is the first of those listed such as Dr No and Thunderball, well, they are specific to the plots of those books - but don't necessarily make for good songs. Others - the second lot listed, could apply to most Bond novels - Live and Let Die, for instance - and also make for good songs. It seems odd that the recent novels lean towards the latter style of title, despite there never being any chance of them being filmed, nor requiring a song. But I'm not saying the likes of Dr No or Moonraker are bad titles per se, they're not. But none of the new lot follow in that vein, when they easily could have, that's all.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Thunderball is specific to the plot?
I don't really find the idea of twists in the continuation novels to be hugely compelling, as you say; twists is a bit of a strong term. I don't think revealing new information undermines the concept of Bond or anything.
Gardner is a different matter: he very clearly made the plots up as he was writing the books, so everyone was always turning out to be double or triple agents constantly as he ran out ideas of how to end each chapter. Not really twists either, considering how often it happened, but I guess they are more like the generally held concept of twists.
I think there were some twists in the Fleming Bond novels and short stories too to be fair. The most notable of these is the revelation that "national hero" Sir Hugo Drax in Moonraker is in fact a fanatical Nazi who has assumed the identity of a dead British soldier in the chaos of the aftermath of World War II. There was also Vesper Lynd turning out to be a traitor working for the Soviets in Casino Royale and Kristatos in 'Risico' turning out to be not an ally as first thought but the villain of the piece.
I agree though that these sort of twists weren't as common in the works of Fleming. I think John Gardner was the first to use these sorts of twists from For Special Services onwards and nearly every novel had some sort of twist or double or triple cross with characters not being what they seem. Icebreaker was certainly the most egregious example of this! Gardner did this in his own novels from his Boysie Oakes works in the 1960s onwards so it was par for the course for his novels. One reason why Fleming didn't use traitor twists very often (Vesper Lynd is really the only true example I can think of) is that I think in his universe British agents and staff shouldn't be traitors. Villains were always foreign, always "the other". So having a British traitor went against the grain for Fleming in his works even though the Burgess and Maclean Affair occurred in the real world while he was writing his novels. Both Vesper Lynd and Maria Freudenstein were of foreign extraction so this explains why Fleming was content to have them as traitors. In fact, in his worldview, it was almost to be expected from such people.
Oh yes Risico is probably the best example of that sort of thing. Even Living Daylights has a twist of a kind with the identity of Trigger.
Yes, it is. It's all the more effective too as Fleming didn't use this type of twist again, unlike how some later Bond continuation authors did. He built up tension and intrigued in other ways. The twist on the identity of Trigger is another good example. I knew I'd probably missed one! 🙂
or Dr Shatterhand revealed to be Blofeld, thats even bigger than the other twists because of how the shock reveal ties back to the previous novel and Bonds state at the start of this one. the other examples seem more like random new information in comparison. You Only Live Twice has an almost supernatural fairy tale logic underlying its plot.
That's another great example. I don't know how I forgot that one to be honest but it's probably because we rarely ever talk about these twists as a feature of Fleming's Bond work. They're much more of a feature of John Gardner's Bond novels and of the continuation Bond novels more generally. It's nice to recognise that it somewhat originated with Bond's creator though.
Excellent point.
In fairness, the plot twists date back to Gardner, starting with Icebreaker. The twists were kind of the point of that one, and I think they work there. But it got very tiresome by the end of his tenure, and I agree that it’s not really a welcome feature of the more modern continuation novels.
One twist in the films I overlooked is the Mr Big/Kananga unmasking in Live and Let Die, that they are one of the same. Personally I'm not sure this worked terribly well, because Mr Big didn't quite convince as a character due to his lumpy visage, or we didn't get to know him much beforehand. Having read the book I didn't quite get this plot strand - Mr Big was the main villain in that, not Kananga, if that makes sense. It's a bit convoluted in much the same way as the double Vulcan pilot in the film Thunderball, it does make things more interesting I suppose but...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
So as not to ignore @Miles Messervy 's post, I really didn't read many of the Gardner's, just the first two as they didn't sit right with me. Those books did seem to be of a different era somehow and I got the impression the twists were more along the lines of fake loyalties or allegiances being exposed, like Ray Winstone in Indy and Crystal Skulls, than upending the narrative, recent twists seem to pull a trick on the reader more than the character as often as not.
Roger Moore 1927-2017