New James Bond Book

[ylris611203]

Sometimes, with humour, you have to read between the lines.

That’s not humour that’s a couple trying to be funny.


They may not sell well but they endure.

Endure….that’s what the James Bond novels have done.


The ads are context sensitive. Talk about Bond, they'll advertise Bond. Talk about toilet paper they'll no doubt recommend a book on the subject.

Yes, the point I am making is that the books are still going strong.

One last thing as said by chris:

The James Bond is not the biggest ever film franchise. There has only been twenty official James Bond movies. There was thirty-one Carry On... movies and that's nowhere near the largest. Take a look at this.

Carry-on was not a franchise.

 

[Gem]

Hello Chris,

Both Gem and Shade talk about 'quality' literature, but neither seem to be able to be able to express themselves very well.

Shade manages to express himself very well, in every single one of his posts. Perhaps you're just not reading them right
As for me - let me know what's puzzling you and I'll be happy to clarify.

Maybe they should give the 'pulp fiction' a go

I started this thread because I was curious about the new author, why? Because I have read most of the Bond books and enjoyed them all to various degrees - I would hardly have started a thread on a subject that I didn't find appealing.
At the risk of repeating myself and reoffending you - the Bond books are not literary works by any stretch of the imagination. By 'quality' I mean the likes of Steinbeck or Ishiguro or if we're talking about the spy genre then John Le Carre. In other words I may enjoy eating plums but i'm not going to start calling them vegetables (I know bad analogy - but if you need clarification just ask).

take the plums out of their mouths and read for enjoyment.

If I'm not reading for enjoyment then what on earth am I reading for?

I'll go suck on my plum now .

 

[ValkyrieRaven88]

Just out of curiosity, I have a question to ask of those who have read the books. Are they worth reading? Are they any good?

 

[Gem]

ValkyrieRaven88,

Just out of curiosity, I have a question to ask of those who have read the books. Are they worth reading? Are they any good?

I'd say give them a go - it's the only way you're going to know if you'll like them or not.

 

[Shade]

Both Gem and Shade talk about 'quality' literature, but neither seem to be able to be able to express themselves very well.

Chris, can you clarify where I've been unable to express myself very well? Otherwise that might look like your second personal attack on me in this thread.

take the plums out of their mouths

Can you explain this too please? Have I stumbled unwittingly into a class war?

read for enjoyment

I'll second Gem's response to this. Why else would I read?

Quality literature, is a label used for books that don't sell very well.

What have sales got to do with anything?

 

[ylris611203]

To many ‘I thinks’ and not enough accurate information.

And, some remarks made are very condescending to the folk who read JB.

 

[Stewart]

And, some remarks made are very condescending to the folk who read JB.

Strange. The only two people on this thread who have read any James Bond books don't feel condescended to. In fact, we both agree that there's nothing special about them. Bizarrely, you are arguing for them yet you have already stated that you haven't read them. How does that work?

 

[Shade]

Again, Chris, can you clarify where I've been unable to express myself very well?

And again, can you please explain or justify the 'plums in their mouths' comment?

I'd like to get this resolved.

 

[ylris611203]

Strange. The only two people on this thread who have read any James Bond books don't feel condescended to. In fact, we both agree that there's nothing special about them. Bizarrely, you are arguing for them yet you have already stated that you haven't read them. How does that work?

Where did I state that I had not read them?............I have every JB book by all four authors.

 

[ylris611203]

Again, Chris, can you clarify where I've been unable to express myself very well?

And again, can you please explain or justify the 'plums in their mouths' comment?

I'd like to get this resolved.

To many 'I thinks'

If someone speaks with a plum in their mouth, they speak in a way that shows they are from a very high social group. Maybe someone that reads what they think to be 'quality' literature while undermining the more popular fiction without really knowing much about it.

 

[Shade]

Too many 'I thinks'

If I want to tell people what I believe, or give my opinion as opposed to convey facts, then I think it's perfectly legitimate to say 'I think' and it doesn't cloud clear expression at all.

Having said that, reviewing this thread, I haven't used the phrase 'I think' in any postings (until this one).

Can you explain then why you said I seem to have difficulty expressing myself clearly? I'm sorry to go on about it, but it's a pretty insulting thing to say and I want to find out why you said it.

If someone speaks with a plum in their mouth, they speak in a way that shows they are from a very high social group.

Actually I know what 'plums in their mouth' signifies, but I didn't (and still don't) see why it applies to what I said. While I will admit to liking what I think are good books, this has nothing to do with my social background or upbringing, which for the record is thoroughly working class. Again I'm sorry to harp on about it, but I think it's insulting to stereotype people into social groups - and to dismiss them as having 'plums in their mouth' - because of the books they read.

 

[Stewart]

Where did I state that I had not read them?............I have every JB book by all four authors.

Sorry, I misread the following bit that actually referred to Lee Child:

Although I have not read any of his books

 

[Gem]

To many 'I thinks'

*I think* perhaps he was referring to my post:

Oh and the last book was about 10 years ago (I think).

Chris, I didn't have the time on that particular day to find out exactly when the last book was published. Neither am I in the habit of declaring things that I haven't checked to be 100% accurate - so the 'I think' was meant to say 'as far as I am aware this is true, but correct me if i'm wrong'.

If someone speaks with a plum in their mouth, they speak in a way that shows they are from a very high social group. Maybe someone that reads what they think to be 'quality' literature while undermining the more popular fiction without really knowing much about it.

Thank you for the lesson, although as Shade pointed out you weren't asked what the phrase meant you were asked what you meant (or rather what your intentions were) by using that phrase.
I have to say that you're insinuations sound a little nasty,perhaps you should think things through a little before you decide to post - bringing things like class into the discussion makes me question what your intentions are. I'm not going to sit here and go over my backgorund with you but if I did you would feel a tad silly about making assumptions.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you're basically saying that we discriminate against popular fiction, I could list the number of popular fiction books I have bought & read this year alone, but I see no reason to. What I will say is you are doing exactly in reverse what you're accusing us of - you're undermining 'quality' literature as well being derogatory about us.

Shade has admitted that he has not read the Bond books, in fact in one of his earlier posts he asks whether they are any good - here was your chance to enter into a discussion about the books and give your opinion on why they should be read. Perhaps even post a review or two. But instead you chose to focus your attentions elsewhere.

I don't believe I or even Shade have been condescending at all, but if anyone does feel that way then kindly let me know.

 

[ylris611203]

These are the remarks I refer to.........................

Lee Childs? Didn't they say "highly respected"?

…there have already been three or four who've been churning them out since Fleming's death.

Hm, haven't exactly been troubling the literary prize juries, have they?

And yes you're right the books were hardly 'quality' literature

What chance is there of a book being any good when it's a continuation of a franchise and character that's been worked on by a handful of other novelists already?

What chance of there being any artistry contained within the covers? Not very novel, really...

Rhetorical Questions

 

[Gem]

Lee Childs? Didn't they say "highly respected"?

I'm pretty sure that Shade said this humorously but... Lee Childs is highly beloved by his fans, is he highly respected by people within the publishing industry? I don't know perhaps he is, perhaps you should link us to some sources to say he is. Actually don't bother, this is getting too ridiculous.

there have already been three or four who've been churning them out since Fleming's death.

Churning them out - ie. many have been published.

Hm, haven't exactly been troubling the literary prize juries, have they

Chris, you replied to this by saying this

Most good books don't win prizes

and Shade agreed :

True.

So why are you bringing this up again?

And yes you're right the books were hardly 'quality' literature

Yes I stand by that, and I believe I qualified it by giving you examples of what I meant. I never said the Bond books were bad or rubbish, I just wouldn't put them in the same category as say something by John Le Carre (if you haven't read my examples of 'quality' literature then perhaps you should - just the same way that you recommended us to read popular fiction).

What chance is there of a book being any good when it's a continuation of a franchise and character that's been worked on by a handful of other novelists already?

Oh come on Chris, that is a valid question, you could have replied with 'Actually Shade they are/or are not rather good because....'.

What chance of there being any artistry contained within the covers? Not very novel, really...

Once again if you felt that Shades reasoning was wrong then prove it to him by discussing the books in depth.

You've ignored my question with regards to your intentions, and instead of focusing on the books seem intent on creating arguments.

EDIT: I see you've edited your post to add

Rhetorical Questions

, if you didn't want a response then why bother posting? No need to answer, its just a rhetorical question.

 

[Shade]

Chris, I am having to ask you for the third time to explain where I have been unable to express myself clearly. You have not done so yet. All you have done is cut and paste a selection of phrases from my posts, which presumably you understood well enough to apparently be able to take offence from them. But you have not explained why or where they are not clearly expressed.

You have also still not explained the comments about 'plums in their mouths'. Why does asking questions about the literary worth of the James Bond books "show [that I am] from a very high social group"?

This is a discussion about James Bond books which has got sidetracked by your personal attacks, Chris. Please deal with these questions properly so that we can get back on track.

 

[Stewart]

Oh, by the way, when I was out for lunch I took the opportunity to have a nosey through a couple of Lee Child's books. There's absolutely nothing remarkable about the prose - but we knew that! - and it seems that Child writes in that dull as dishwater way whereby you can read a passage (innocent of the author) and you don't know if you are reading him, Patterson, Twelve Hawks, or any of the myriad authors who write such banal drivel. That thriller style where there's no style at all.

From what I remember of Casino Royale, having this guy write a Bond novel would be an insult to Fleming who, at least, can be recognisable by his writing.

Perhaps they'll get Terry Goodkind to write the new Bond novel. Or Terry Pratchett.

 

[Shade]

To pursue this second digression: there are plenty of samples of Child's prose on his website. 'Nothing remarkable about the prose' pretty much sums it up, Stewart. Even his own website's synopsis of his first novel, Killing Floor, calls the narration "crude".

 

[Stewart]

I see he's one of those 'book a year' men. Is it only Joyce Carol Oates (from what I've heard) that seems capable of putting out a book a year and actually having a level of consistent high quality?

You don't think they've got Andy McNab or that shitpot Chris Ryan to write the new Bond novel?

 

[Shade]

Is it only Joyce Carol Oates (from what I've heard) that seems capable of putting out a book a year and actually having a level of consistent high quality?

Updike maybe? Or is that one every two years? Roth? I think there's a thread on this somewhere. Interestingly, I suppose Updike's books in a way are as formulaic as tinpot thrillers - the sex, the women, the religion, the microscopic detail - it's just that the writing is better.