Tom's Thoughts and Ideas

Recently I found myself craving a return to the James Bond universe. For my whole life the movies were a staple of movie nights and just general family culture. They are all mostly great, with some major exceptions. But it was only recently that I learned that they were books first. I guess I just did not really pay attention to the “Based on X by Ian Fleming” in all the credits for the early films. Though, for some one must cut me some slack. If you are watching Goldfinger and paying attention to any of the words on the screen during the credits you are a nut. But, I learned that there are 14 +- Bond novels and I wanted to read them.

A small aside, as of writing I have only read the first three, and more posts will be forthcoming as I get through them in the next few months. I got a really good deal on a 14 book box set so I have them all. Seeing them all in front of you is something of a daunting task to be sure.

The first is Casino Royale, published in 1953. I ordered this one individually to get my feet wet before making a larger financial commitment. All of the Bond novels are fairly short being around 250-300 pages. So I read this entire book on a plane going across the US. A good rule of thumb that is true for most of the Bond books vs movies is to throw out any ideas that you have about the books from the movies. In my mind they are entirely different works and should be engaged with as such. The best example of this will come later, but in this book around a third of the page space is Fleming narrating a game of chemin de faire (which given how good a writer Fleming is not boring and even captivating). And near on the entire novel takes place in one small French town and it’s casino. This is clearly very different than the globe spanning adventure of the 2006 movie. (I know that there is a 1967 movie, but we do not talk about that) The book Casino Royale is a very close and personal narrative where the reader has a deep view of Bond’s thoughts and feelings. Thus far it is the most personal and introspective novel by a mile (I suspect OHMSS may take that crown though). I think that this is because this is the first Bond book and while the character we know as Bond James Bond is about 80% there, there is still a bit of him that is lacking and this book is where the audience sees him become himself. The plot is not Bond’s first outing as a spy, but it is a defining one for his character. A part of the 2006 movie that I really appreciate now is how emotional Bond is, since while it is not the same work as the book it keeps a similar tone in how Bond grows throughout the story. Casino Royale also does a wonderful job at riding the line between spy thriller and pulp camp. I say this with great admiration, since pulp often does not go together with being serious, but Fleming does it masterfully. Parts of the book are very serious and tooth clenching, and some parts feel like they could be out of a Marx brothers movie. From what I have read Fleming had a great respect for pulp literature and that shows through clearly. The short and sweet narrative never stops and just keeps ratcheting up the tension. Yet, after the main plot with the villain ends, the book keeps going. The “epilogue” of the novel is a spectacularly thrilling and quiet section where everything feels happy ever after until the whole world seems to start unraveling. So when the book actually ends, it ends on a tragic and emotionally resonant tone rather than a triumphant or violent one. Fleming does a great job at making Bond our sympathetic protagonist while leaning in to the cruelty and less than tasteful opinions that the guy has. Interestingly enough, I really bought the romance in this novel to a shocking degree. One always knows that the Bond girls are stereotypically shown to be fairly flat and disposable. Yet, here, (and again OHMSS I suspect) the Bond girl really makes Bond vulnerable emotionally in a way that we rarely saw in the movies. I honestly believe that Connery would not be able to act to the script if they did a true adaptation of this book since his Bond was not a vulnerable person at all. The charisma and gentlemanliness combined with brutality and harsh attitude towards women is certainly all there in the book. Connery could and did do all that with spades. But I honestly think that the emotional side of Bond was only perfected halfway through the Moore era (and say it with me OHMSS as well). Bond is also not a superhero, in fact he is something of a dunce for a lot of the book. I think that the best way to describe Bond in all the books so far, but certainly this one, is that he is human. James Bond is a human, which is honestly really refreshing compared to some other interpretations of the character being invulnerable. This book is one of the strongest first entries to a series like this that I have ever encountered. It is really good both as a standalone spy thriller, and only becomes better when you take it alongside the others. A solid 7/10 for me.

Now unfortunately I must speak poorly on James Bond. The second Bond novel, Live and Let Die, is not all that good. It certainly has elements that are amazing, the Fleming style and plot progression is top notch, and the characters are pretty good (other than some which I will speak on in a moment). But there are a few glaring things in this book that make it the worst so far by a mile. This book follows James Bond going to Harlem, Florida, and Jamaica to try and stop the Soviets from selling pirate treasure to fund their intelligence operations in America. Indeed, that is a bonkers plot. It is executed with some measure of grace, but even for a Bond story it is insane. But even worse than the plot is the through and through racism that pervades and poisons the book to its core. I honestly think that this book has more slurs and racist imagery towards African-Americans than George Wallace could muster up on his most racist day. Like holy shit! The amount of times Fleming uses some derivation of the N-word or some other racial epithet is truly staggering. Fleming also occasionally writes in “jive” which is a whole other can of horrid worms. In all honesty, I had planned to write this post like a week and a half ago but I was unable to get through this book for a while since it was such a slog of muck and racism all the way through. As good and engaging as some parts of this book are, and even contending with the whole “it was written in 1954” argument, it is still a trail blazer in terms of how much racism it can pack in per page. One element that is particularly bad is that the book has a lot of voodoo imagery and plot points in it, and Bond seemingly thinks that he is unable to trust any black people since they are inherently susceptible to voodoo and thus might sell him out to the villain. This leads into two comments I have about the characters: 1, the villain of the story Mr Big is the quintessential Bond villain as we have all come to love. He is an amazing over the top monologuing villain who always captures Bond without killing him normally, preferring elaborate and crazy schemes compared to a head full of lead. While he is a mostly flat character, seeing him go toe to toe with Bond and being smart is a wonderful read. 2: Bond on the other hand, has a brain that looks like a chicken breast in this book. In Casino Royale, Bond was smart but impulsive and a bit silly, here Bond is just a bona fide moron for a lot of the book. The main character of our book just does random crap and expects it to work out fine, and it does far too often. This is not to say that Bond has no smart moments, but they are far too few for my liking. One slightly redeeming part of this bad novel is that Fleming has some interesting insights and takes on the Norman Rockwell America of the mid 50s that I think are somewhat sage. I will not spoil, but Fleming’s take on America is interesting. Besides these small points of good, the book on the whole is arguably irredeemable. It could be the greatest spy story ever told (it is not) and it would still be a bad read because of all the flagrant racism. It takes over certain parts of the book to such an extent that it becomes actively not fun to engage with. The really bad stuff is all in the first 125ish pages and things calm down once Bond leaves New York, but having that be the first third of the book is really not a good way to have people finish the book. And when one does get to the end it is something of a whimper rather than a bang (though there is certainly one heck of a bang). The Bond girl is also not really a standout. Solitaire (her silly Bond girl name) is madly in love with Bond and there are some interesting dynamics between her, Bond, and Mr Big, but they do not really redeem her character all that much. Comparing her to the Bond girls who directly proceed and follow her does not make her look any better either. As I said, Vesper in Casino Royale is a wonderful and nearly three dimensional character who Bond respects as well as sleeps with. And the Bond Girl in Moonraker (the next book) may be the most interesting and fun Bond girl that I have ever seen. So Solitaire has some stiff competition surrounding her. It makes her shortfalls more obvious and egregious. All these issues and small pros combine to make a book that is a pile of mud with a few gems hidden away. Gems are great, but I am not a fan of the mud. I have not seen the movie adaptation in a long time, but since if I recall correctly it was an early Moore, my hopes are not high. This movie came out when they still wanted him to act like Connery. The book really put a damper on my enthusiasm going forward. A deeply disappointing 4/10.

But thank God that Moonraker was next. That is not a sentence that I ever thought I would write. The James Bond in space movie book is good!!?? Yes! It is fantastic. It is byfar the best of the three and I think that it would be hard for any of the later books (even ones like From Russia with Love, Goldfinger, or OHMSS) to outshine it fully. They are likely to be better, but this book, especially after Live and Let Die, was like an adrenaline shot right into my brain in terms of how good it was. Everything about it, besides a few small things, was wonderful and a pleasure to read. I do honestly think that this book should be on the preverbal Mt RushMoore (har har) of the Bond books. When I finished it I was shocked. I will tell only a small spoiler, James Bond remains entirely earthbound for the whole book thank goodness. This book, even compared to the others, needs to be read as an entirely separate work from the movie that shares its name. The only thing beyond the names of characters that they share is that there is a rocket of some type that the plot revolves around. The first third or so of the book is just about Bond and M in a high class London gambling club trying to find out if the main villain is cheating at cards. This small narrative then expands into the real spy story that is so so well written and compelling. Everything flows and builds on itself with total ease. This is the best example of Fleming’s writing style so far. It is hard to put the book down since there is no real downtime. Every event perfectly leads into the next. The book also keeps the villain and evil scheme close to the chest for most of the story. The sense of unknown and investigation is really strong. The book feels like a real mystery thriller compared to a schlockfest pulp novel with shooting and death on a huge scale that other pulpy spy novels can devolve into. The reader really feel like they are following Bond at every step of his investigation into this situation and we do not know anything more than he does beyond the basic Bond tropes. The book does lean more into the silly, as there are a group of German scientists who all have huge mustaches and matching outfits. That feels right out of 60s Bond. But somehow, these silly elements feel totally proper and normal in the world that Fleming created. While Casino Royale was a really good example of Fleming blending pulp with serious, Moonraker is his perfection of that craft. I love this book. I was blown away. As I mentioned earlier, the Bond girl in this book is amazing. She runs entirely contra to the classic formula that we all know and learn to deal with. Gala Brand (almost a normal name) is almost totally aloof when dealing with Bond until the end of the book. And she does not fall in love with or sleep with Bond!!! It is a wonderous thing. She has a fiancée and remains loyal to him. This allows for the dynamic between Bond and her to be actually interesting and one where they respect one another as people. While Bond does want to sleep with her and there are still pervy scenes, because of course, but on the whole it is a professional relationship that never goes anywhere. I would say that it subverts the Bond tropes, but I am not sure that the third book in a series really constitutes tropes yet. But, this relationship is really awesome to read, and while I know it will not get nearly this good until OHMSS at least, I fear that this is a once in a series phenomenon which is a shame. But it is yet another reason why Moonraker is an amazing book. I recommend Moonraker most out of the first three by a good amount. It is good to read them all in order, but I think that this book will be a good litmus test to figure out if you as a reader will enjoy the series. The only negative thing is that the villain of the book is a bit on the underwhelming side and the final ending is not as dramatic as I would have liked. But I can say that the rest of the book makes up for this in spades. A solid 9/10.

The next post of mine about Bond will hopefully come soon, and it will be reviews of “Diamonds are Forever”, “From Russia with Love”, and “Dr No”. I have high hopes for the next set. These books are really good, and so far the ranking goes.

1: Moonraker
2: Casino Royale
3: Live and Let Die