I wonder if Horrowitz, having chosen the 50s as his era, decides to write a more simple, stripped down novel a la LALD, DAF etc.
He will not be saddled by the Tracy, emotional breakdown baggage. And hopefully he can avoid some of the left-of-centre post modern emotional retconning of James Bond undertaken by Faulks and Boyd.
(I don't know how to describe what Deaver was up to: taking the piss?)
I may be fooling myself, but I have high hopes for Horowitz -{
And agree by moving Bond back to the 50s, we'll have a young Bond
In keeping with LALD and CR.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Would LIKE to have high hopes for Horowitz but been badly burned in the past.
Gardner's decline, Benson's inability, the potential offered and flowery pro-Fleming guff by Faulks and Boyd... then, garbage.
As you can imagine, my expectations were low for Deaver. And I wasn't disappointed in the almost illiterate (does anyone really write that way???) tripe he produced.
) we'll all deal with it at the time, for now I'm relishing the
Thought of a new " Early" Bond adventure !
I once put forward the idea of perhaps asking a handful of new
Upcoming writers to do a selection of Bond short stories. Then you
Might find someone who can, really write Bond.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
Just learned from the IFP website that in SHOOT TO KILL Bond attends "progressive school Dartington Hall in Devon. Here he makes new friends and enemies...."
This is news, I guess, to most Bond fans. And Ian Fleming.
I guess Steve Cole and family holiday in Devon a lot. And he just didn't fancy the trip up to Edinburgh?
)
I do enjoy your posts on the Bond Books,( you should do a review of them, It would be
fun reading ) ( or have I missed the thread).
I tend to have one eye on " Trying not to be too negative or nasty about a book, as I don't
want to upset anyone", so it's always a watered down tone with me. Where you tell it like it
is. ) which I find very refreshing -{ We don't all have to agree to have a fun discussion.
I started Solo again last night, and so far my opinion hasn't changed,....... Not good !
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
No, never done full reviews. Usually find that if the writing, flavour and plot aren't up to much, it doesn't matter what I think of the leading lady, the villain or the action sequences. And no one else should care either!
I know faults "in da community high command" who think every continuation is brilliant. That's usually because they have broken bread with the author. I find that rather sad.
If you've just started SOLO and you're disappointed your in strife because I think it works as a Bond until the Boyd effect comes in with the jaunt do the Dark Continent.
When you've done, though can you let me know: does JB find Marlon Brando, and why doesn't he encounter John Shaft stateside?
All reviews from Members are worth reading -{ But only mine are worthy
of being filmed as huge Bond epics !
Solo along with High time to kill ( R Benson) I really didn't like and wouldn't ever read again except
I've given my self this quest to read all the Books in Bond's time line.
( I think every knight should do a quest, at least once ! )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
One of the things that pees me off about HIGH TIME TO KILL even more than your average Benson is that the bugger chucks all his mates in it. Yup, just about every "character" is a pall of R Benson!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
) I din't know that ( as you can tell I'm no expert ) I found both Solo
and HTTK, a chore to get through. Both books have chapters followed by chapters
were nothing happens. . Not much happening in the hands of a skilled writer isn't
a problem, as I've come to love flemings short stories, QOS and Octopussy, which as
a young teen. I din't like. Now as I'm ( Only a little older ) ) I can appreciate the writing
in them.
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
I think what happened with Benson was that Glidrose/IFP were knocking them out so cheap they gave the editor the year off. )
Now Benson in interview says he was monitored morning, noon and night by Glid/IFP AND the Brit publishers AND the US publishers... which based on the evidence in hand is just bollocks.
I suppose thats the downside of writing for a Franchise such as Bond, you are restricted to what you can do with a previously established Character.
Which is why, as I said, there'll never be a long term author.
And on the subject of using someone else's established character is concerned, Steve Cole - the SHOOT TO KILL guy - has signed o to write about Charlie Higson's creation, not Ian Fleming's. I just think that's quite cheap and creatively unambitious on the part of Cole...
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,845MI6 Agent
I suppose thats the downside of writing for a Franchise such as Bond, you are restricted to what you can do with a previously established Character.
Well that was certainly the problem that John Gardner had with writing the books - he said in interviews that he'd have written far better Bond novels if Glidrose had let him be and just allow him to write Bond novels in his own style (he was a successful thriller writer of some note before her even tackled the Bond continuation of course) which meant starting with a character or situation and working the plot out from there. This was obviously very different from how Glidrose operated before green-lighting a new Bond novel - there had to be an outline and the opening chapters as well as three different sets of editors all vying to put their mark on the manuscript. Small wonder that Gardner was fed up towards the end of his run as James Bond continuation author!
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
I suppose thats the downside of writing for a Franchise such as Bond, you are restricted to what you can do with a previously established Character.
Well that was certainly the problem that John Gardner had with writing the books - he said in interviews that he'd have written far better Bond novels if Glidrose had let him be and just allow him to write Bond novels in his own style (he was a successful thriller writer of some note before her even tackled the Bond continuation of course) which meant starting with a character or situation and working the plot out from there. This was obviously very different from how Glidrose operated before green-lighting a new Bond novel - there had to be an outline and the opening chapters as well as three different sets of editors all vying to put their mark on the manuscript. Small wonder that Gardner was fed up towards the end of his run as James Bond continuation author!
Not QUITE sure Gardner was strong-armed into a style match. He never tried imitate Fleming, and certainly by WI LOSE OR DRAW he was writing in a style that was presumably his own (or at least doesn't seem too divergent to his own style in his own books I've read).
He may have felt nannied by Glidrose as a professional writer but of course, one could say that Gardner could have refused Glidrose's terms and insisting on doing it his way, with the time off he'd also talked about needing.
He didn't, and agreed to their T&C's. Presumably because of the £££££s.
Therefore, it's a bit difficult to have two much sympathy for his after-the-event winging.
Also he was ill of course - prostate cancer around the time of Brokenclaw and oesophageal cancer around the time of Cold.
I thought Brokenclaw was very good -{
1.On Her Majesties Secret Service 2.The Living Daylights 3.license To Kill 4.The Spy Who Loved Me 5.Goldfinger
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,845MI6 Agent
Gardner also told me that the money for writing the Bonds was adequate but the literary Bond continuation was not, as some supposed, a licence to print money. The films however are another matter...
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
Comments
He will not be saddled by the Tracy, emotional breakdown baggage. And hopefully he can avoid some of the left-of-centre post modern emotional retconning of James Bond undertaken by Faulks and Boyd.
(I don't know how to describe what Deaver was up to: taking the piss?)
I may be fooling myself, but I have high hopes for Horowitz -{
And agree by moving Bond back to the 50s, we'll have a young Bond
In keeping with LALD and CR.
Gardner's decline, Benson's inability, the potential offered and flowery pro-Fleming guff by Faulks and Boyd... then, garbage.
As you can imagine, my expectations were low for Deaver. And I wasn't disappointed in the almost illiterate (does anyone really write that way???) tripe he produced.
Thought of a new " Early" Bond adventure !
I once put forward the idea of perhaps asking a handful of new
Upcoming writers to do a selection of Bond short stories. Then you
Might find someone who can, really write Bond.
This is news, I guess, to most Bond fans. And Ian Fleming.
I guess Steve Cole and family holiday in Devon a lot. And he just didn't fancy the trip up to Edinburgh?
8-)
I doubt you'll get it.
( I haven't read any "young Bond", apart from Hurricane Gold, which I didn't
Really like )
I'm a bit into self-flagellation with them. Like to give myself a right good puritanical beating. Read 'em all.
Also read the Weinberg's.
Really do like self-inflicted punishment. :007)
I do enjoy your posts on the Bond Books,( you should do a review of them, It would be
fun reading )
I tend to have one eye on " Trying not to be too negative or nasty about a book, as I don't
want to upset anyone", so it's always a watered down tone with me. Where you tell it like it
is.
I started Solo again last night, and so far my opinion hasn't changed,....... Not good !
I know faults "in da community high command" who think every continuation is brilliant. That's usually because they have broken bread with the author. I find that rather sad.
If you've just started SOLO and you're disappointed your in strife because I think it works as a Bond until the Boyd effect comes in with the jaunt do the Dark Continent.
When you've done, though can you let me know: does JB find Marlon Brando, and why doesn't he encounter John Shaft stateside?
Oh, and who is the villain?
of being filmed as huge Bond epics !
Solo along with High time to kill ( R Benson) I really didn't like and wouldn't ever read again except
I've given my self this quest to read all the Books in Bond's time line.
( I think every knight should do a quest, at least once ! )
and HTTK, a chore to get through. Both books have chapters followed by chapters
were nothing happens.
a problem, as I've come to love flemings short stories, QOS and Octopussy, which as
a young teen. I din't like. Now as I'm ( Only a little older
in them.
Now Benson in interview says he was monitored morning, noon and night by Glid/IFP AND the Brit publishers AND the US publishers... which based on the evidence in hand is just bollocks.
Which is why, as I said, there'll never be a long term author.
And on the subject of using someone else's established character is concerned, Steve Cole - the SHOOT TO KILL guy - has signed o to write about Charlie Higson's creation, not Ian Fleming's. I just think that's quite cheap and creatively unambitious on the part of Cole...
Well that was certainly the problem that John Gardner had with writing the books - he said in interviews that he'd have written far better Bond novels if Glidrose had let him be and just allow him to write Bond novels in his own style (he was a successful thriller writer of some note before her even tackled the Bond continuation of course) which meant starting with a character or situation and working the plot out from there. This was obviously very different from how Glidrose operated before green-lighting a new Bond novel - there had to be an outline and the opening chapters as well as three different sets of editors all vying to put their mark on the manuscript. Small wonder that Gardner was fed up towards the end of his run as James Bond continuation author!
Also he was ill of course - prostate cancer around the time of Brokenclaw and oesophageal cancer around the time of Cold.
Not QUITE sure Gardner was strong-armed into a style match. He never tried imitate Fleming, and certainly by WI LOSE OR DRAW he was writing in a style that was presumably his own (or at least doesn't seem too divergent to his own style in his own books I've read).
He may have felt nannied by Glidrose as a professional writer but of course, one could say that Gardner could have refused Glidrose's terms and insisting on doing it his way, with the time off he'd also talked about needing.
He didn't, and agreed to their T&C's. Presumably because of the £££££s.
Therefore, it's a bit difficult to have two much sympathy for his after-the-event winging.
I thought Brokenclaw was very good -{