Almost 50 years since his death, the extraordinary achievements of Ian Fleming continue to have huge cultural and historical impact. Some of those achievements were recognised in the many obituaries written about Fleming, but a more personal and generous tribute was paid by Fleming's editor, William Plomer, in an address given at a memorial service on 15th September 1964. Plomer's address offers a fascinating view of Fleming's legacy and the Bond phenomenon at a time when books sales were rocketing and 'Bondomania' was about to strike with the release of Goldfinger. Plomer also alludes to factors that shaped Fleming's writing and world-view. Let's take a look at some of them.
A theme that runs throughout the address is that of Fleming's pursuit of knowledge and well-disposed view towards experts in their fields. Plomer describes, for example, Fleming's “admiration of what was well done”, and mentions later that Fleming was “a great finder-out”. This much is clear to any reader of Fleming's books. Not only did Fleming pack his writing with facts and accurate detail, but he was more than happy to acknowledge the experts who furnished him with the information, among them Geoffrey Boothroyd, who persuaded Fleming to change Bond's handgun, and Robin de la Lanne-Mirrlees, whom Fleming consulted on heraldry matters while preparing On Her Majesty's Secret Service.
Of Fleming's wartime experiences, Plomer says little – presumably there was still much that was officially secret – but he reveals more than is mentioned in the obituaries. The obituary in The Times, for example, almost passes over Fleming's war years entirely, pausing to mention only that Fleming found his experiences “'intensely exciting'”. Plomer's address leaves out some of Fleming's key achievements (such as his setting up of the 30 Assault Unit), but nevertheless alludes to Fleming's ability to cut through the red tape and military hierarchy to get things done. He also hints at Fleming's very significant contribution to the war effort, quoting Admiral Godfrey, who told Plomer that Fleming “'was a war-winner'”.
Intriguingly, Plomer reveals that it was Godfrey who introduced Fleming to underwater swimming, an interest that would be critical to the plots of Live and Let Die, Thunderball and other Bond stories. I had assumed that the interest developed during Fleming's visits to Jamaica and his experiences diving with Jacques-Yves Cousteau off Marseilles in 1953, but in reality Fleming caught the bug closer to home.
More intriguing is Plomer's reference to a book by “a then unknown writer” which Fleming read during his later youth and “turned out to have a lasting influence”. The author is not named, but a possible candidate is Phyllis Bottome, under whom Fleming studied while in Austria in 1927. Fleming credited Bottome for inspiring him to become a writer, and he would certainly have read her novels. Phyllis Bottome's first novel, The Dark Tower, was, however, published in 1916, and it seems unlikely that she would have been unknown even by the time Fleming arrived at Eton in 1921. If we allow some movement in the chronology, another candidate is Geoffrey Household, whose first adult novel, The Third Hour, was published in 1937. Fleming admired the book so much that he sent copies to friends. There may be other candidates, but in any case the book deserves to be required reading for students of Fleming and James Bond.
Much of Plomer's address is taken up by the success of the Bond books and also the nascent success of film series. There is, for example, a reference to fans forming James Bond clubs, a phenomenon, incidentally, verified by a story published in the Daily Express on 1st February 1963, which describes how Joanna Hare, the daughter of Labour minister John Hare and an undergraduate at Oxford University, had been identified by Oxford University's James Bond Club as the university's answer to the “perfect Bond girl”. Plomer also talked of the “cheerful reactions of film audiences”, and the “vast new publics [sic]” that respond to the films. The address alluded, too, to the criticisms that Fleming evidently continued to face concerning the moral tone of his work. In answer, Plomer merely said that readers and audiences found “the atmosphere anything but corrupt”.
William Plomer's memorial address was subsequently privately printed as a slim volume by the Westerham Press, and copies are available through specialist book dealers. As a window into the world of Fleming at the time of his death, it is essential reading.
References
Chancellor, H, 2005, James Bond: The Man and His World, John Murray
Gilbert, J, 2012, Ian Fleming: The Bibliography, Queen Anne Press
Plomer, W, 1964, Address Given at the Memorial Service for Ian Fleming, Westerham Press
The new Doctor Who was announced to great fanfare last week. Peter Capaldi, well known for his role as foul-mouthed spin-doctor Malcolm Tucker in BBC's The Thick of It, will be replacing current incumbent Matt Smith as the Doctor. There was much excitement and speculation in the press about who would take the role in the weeks leading up to the announcement. For Bond fans, this press interest recalled the frenzy of speculation that has traditionally preceded the casting of an actor in the role of James Bond, and there has been a number of similar elements to the media campaigns for both characters. In this post, I'd like to look at some of these elements, and examine the conditions that have led to such media interest in the casting for major TV and film characters.
Just as dozens of potential candidates for the role of James Bond are put forward in the media during casting, the list of possible Doctors has also been extensive. In 2005, before David Tennant was cast as the Doctor, some of the names mentioned in connection with the role included Bill Nighy, Richard E Grant, David Thewlis and Alan Davies. When David Tennant left the role in 2008, Russell Brand, Sean Pertwee, David Morrissey, and Robert Carlyle were among the actors considered by the media as potential replacements. The role ultimately went to Matt Smith, but when he quit earlier this year, the speculation resumed. This time, it appeared that David Harewood, Dan Stevens, Bill Bailey, Daniel Rigby, Damien Molony Aneurin Barnard, James Nesbitt, and Bond alumni Ben Whishaw and Rory Kinnear were in the running.
But there has been speculation about the who'd play the next Doctor Who almost since the first Doctor, William Hartnell, left the role in 1966. For example, an article in the Daily Mirror in February 1974 was headlined, “Who next? Jon Pertwee ('I can't stand Daleks') quits”. In January 1996, the Daily Express announced that “Our man McGann beats the stars to become the next Dr Who”, and in July 2002, the Express predicted that Buffy the Vampire Slayer's Anthony Head would be cast in the role.
The same sort of press interest has accompanied every period of casting for the next James Bond. If anything, the level of interest has been much higher and more intensive than that for Doctor Who. The tradition of speculating on the identity of the new Bond actor began during casting for the first Bond film, Dr No (1962). Many names were mentioned in connection with the role, including James Mason, Patrick McGoohan and David Niven, and famously the Daily Express ran a campaign to find James Bond, settling on model Peter Anthony. Over the course of the film series, actors have been put forward as potential candidates for the role, even when there was no position available, and there were particularly intensive periods of speculation in 1986, 1994 and 2005 ahead of the casting of Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig respectively.
Notably, recent media speculation on potential Doctor Whos has included consideration of black actors, among them Paterson Joseph and Chiwetel Ejiofor. Similarly, the press has championed black actors for the role of James Bond. The Sun in December 2004, for example, tipped Colin Salmon for the role, and more recently Idris Elba has had to address persistent rumours that he might be James Bond when Daniel Craig hangs up his dinner-suit. However, while the media have been open to the possibility of a female Doctor Who (Helen Mirren, Olivia Coleman and Sue Perkins have been among the names mentioned), the prospect of a female Bond has never been given any serious consideration.
Evidently, then, the search for the next James Bond and Doctor Who has usually been accompanied by intense media coverage. But what are the conditions that induce such speculation, and why are other serial fictional characters of less interest to the media? Clearly the media reflect the considerable public affection that there is for both Bond and Doctor Who (hence the casting for the roles of historical characters attracts little attention, even if the characters have been portrayed several times), and this in turn reflects the sense that the characters are bigger than any actor who plays him. In the case of Bond, this was a view that Eon Productions had sought from the start. In his autobiography (When the Snow Melts, 1998), Cubby Broccoli wrote that “if we cast an unknown actor, the public would be more likely to accept him as the character.” This recalled a view that Broccoli had expressed to Alan Whicker in 1967, agreeing with Whicker that after Connery, there would be other Bonds. On the face of it, Batman would seem to be an exception to this rule; casting for the role has also attracted a reasonable amount of media speculation, despite the fact that Batman has been played by top-flight Hollywood stars. But in this case, the actors have been largely hidden under a mask, which to an extent has anonymised the actors and allowed audiences to focus on the character. In contrast, Matt Damon is so strongly identified with the role of Jason Bourne, that there was no question that another actor would take the role following Damon's departure from the Bourne series.
Continuing this point, for the media to be encouraged to generate lists of potential actors for certain roles, there must generally be an established pattern of transition. Even with prolonged gaps between films, there has never been intense speculation about actors who might take on the role of Indiana Jones or Ethan Hunt, and it seems unlikely that the characters would appear on screen unless played by Harrison Ford or Tom Cruise. It is interesting to note that when Disney announced that episode seven of the Star Wars saga would be made, it was taken for granted that the actors who had appeared in the original trilogy would resume their roles, rather than the possibility that the roles would be offered to other actors.
It is difficult to gain an accurate view of this without a significant amount of research in press archives, but I wonder whether, in the UK at least, intense media interest in the casting for a serial character has until the past decade or so been confined to James Bond and to a lesser extent Doctor Who. Now there is (almost) as much speculation about who might play Batman, Superman and other characters. If this is the case, it may in part be a product of the changing means by which the media source their information. In the past, rumours about certain actors were generated by journalists themselves (whether based on anything substantive or not). Today, newspapers and other media organisations are as likely to respond to rumours generated by the public and disseminated through the internet, especially social media sites.
There is one other point worth making here. The idea of the next James Bond, or the next Doctor Who, is itself a meme that has currency in cultural space. It exists as an entity in its own right, serving as a phrase which is transmitted through various media and in conversation. To hear the phrase in the home, pub or the workplace triggers a sort of parlour game in which lists of actors are championed or dismissed. And even before the ink's dry on incumbents' resignation letters, the media and public speculation commences.
Ian Fleming Publications have published details of the cover of Solo, the forthcoming James Bond adventure by William Boyd. The design is stylish and dramatic, hinting at danger, intrigue and exotic locations. On the front of the dustjacket is the title Solo; the final O appears to be open, allowing us to peek through to the dramatic red colour of the boards beneath. The back of the dustjacket is emblazoned with the 007 motif, and this time the hardcover is seen through one of the zeros. The hardcover itself is decorated with representations of bullet holes and a gecko, which alludes to the novel’s African location.
Suzanne Dean, the designer, said that she didn’t “just want to depict a cinematic image”, and that she was influenced by designers such as Saul Bass (read her full statement here), but inevitably the bullet holes on the hardcover and the arrangement of the title and Bond’s code number on the dustjacket recall the gunbarrel sequence that opens (or closes) the James Bond films. The use of shadow and open elements on the dustjacket also give, to my mind, the design a trompe l’oeil appearance, perhaps in keeping with the famous Richard Chopping covers of Fleming’s novels.
I wonder, also, whether the gecko offers clues to the African location. I’m certainly no expert on geckos, but the shape of the one depicted is not too dissimilar from that of the West African forest gecko. In previous posts, I’ve speculated on the basis of Boyd’s previous work and experiences, the events of 1969, and the clues that he’s provided that Boyd would send Bond to West Africa, possibly Nigeria. Of course, the image might simply represent a generic gecko not specific to any location, but such animals do vary in shape and size, and the gecko depicted does not appear to be inconsistent with the West African species.
In lieu of a post of more academic value, I thought I'd publish pictures of the models of James Bond vehicles I've built out of Lego over the past few weeks. I started one evening with Little Nellie, the autogyro from You Only Live Twice. My daughter's small collection of Lego bricks and pieces was still out after she had been playing with it, and, after catching sight of my framed – and autographed – postcard showing the inventor of Little Nellie, Ken Wallis, flying his creation, I wondered whether I could reconstruct the vehicle using the Lego. The result was not hugely accurate, but it was recognisably Little Nellie.
Pleased with my effort, I thought of other Bond vehicles that could be recreated in Lego using the limited resources I had available. The following week, I settled on 'Wet Nellie', the submersible Lotus Esprit that appears in The Spy Who Loved Me. This model was, I felt, more successful than Little Nellie, probably because the Lego shapes leant themselves to the sleek form of the car.
For my next model, I turned to the Q-Boat from The World Is Not Enough. I just about had enough suitable pieces to produce a reasonable representation, although the curved form of the canopy covering the driver's seat and the structure of the rear of the vehicle were challenging.
Encouraged by feedback from Twitter, I collected all the yellow pieces I could find in order to build a model of the Citroën 2CV from For Your Eyes Only. I discovered that the curves of the vehicle were very difficult to recreate, and the result, though just about recognisable as a 2CV, was not particularly convincing.
Indeed, before I admitted via Twitter that the model was purporting to be the 2CV, some of my followers suggested that it was the tuk tuk from Octopussy. The tuk tuk, however, is more accurately recreated in Lego, as my model demonstrates.
I've had fun building these models. I don't pretend that they're very good, but I was pleased with what I had achieved. If there's a general lesson to learn from my model-building, apart from the fact that vehicles with curves cannot be recreated very well in Lego, it's that recognisable models of distinctive vehicles can be made using even a fairly basic set of pieces by focusing on key elements of the design, such as the rotor blades and yellow front end of Little Nellie, and the angles and fins of the Lotus Esprit.
[I've spelled out the swear words, so if potentially offended, look away now!]
I was watching A View To A Kill the other week and was surprised to hear one of the characters swear. I've seen the film countless times, but hadn't noticed before that the San Franciscan police captain utters the word shit as one of his patrol cars is smashed or crushed. Recently we have come to expect swearing in Bond films, but for most of the series, audiences have heard nothing stronger than 'hell', 'damn', or 'bloody'. We tend to think of Bond films as being free of stronger words, which makes their infrequent use all the more shocking.
If Skyfall was made in 1962, the film, with its five uses of the word 'shit', and one use of the word 'fuck', would have been heading towards an X-rating or may have been refused a classification without cuts. Dr No, by comparison, is extremely mild in its language. This may have reflected a deliberate policy of the film-makers to ensure that the film was family friendly, but it is worth noting that very few British films made at that time, even X-rated ones, used words stronger than those used in Dr No. As one Bond film followed the other, the style of the earlier films was retained, so that the films became well known for the absence of swearing. Over time, the series diverged from changes in everyday language, and the lack of swearing may also have contributed to the popular perception that the Bond films are family-orientated, even though film classifiers have consistently put them in categories suitable for older children and adults.
Skyfall tops the list for swearing, followed by Licence to Kill (1989), in which the word 'shit' is heard four times. Here, the attempt to present a tougher film that could compete with the crop of more adult-orientated action films such as Die Hard may have guided the screenwriters, but to me the result was unexpected and jarring on first viewing. The stronger language disappeared during the Pierce Brosnan era, but the lack of swearing also gave the films a somewhat old-fashioned quality. After all, it was a rare action/adventure film that didn't have some swearing. True Lies (1994), for example, a near-Bond film which helped fill the long hiatus between Licence to Kill and GoldenEye, included a fair few swear words.
Perhaps reflecting modern realities where words once thought shocking have been co-opted into everyday conversational speech to serve as fillers and to give emphasis, the swear words re-introduced into Daniel Craig's films now pass almost without comment (Casino Royale has one use of the word 'shit', while the word is heard twice in Quantum of Solace). Notably, James Bond is never heard to swear (if I remember aright), whereas Judy Dench's M is heard to swear the most. For a really honest portrayal of Ian Fleming's Bond, however, we should allow Bond to swear in the films. After all, he swears in the books. In Dr No, for example, he shouts out “Fuck them all” (rendered as “–them all” in the text) as he sees Dr No's staff observe his progress in the deadly obstacle course (chapter 17), and in Goldfinger (chapter 15), he tells the eponymous villain to “go and fuck yourself” (again, the obscenity is represented by a long dash).
It should be noted, though, that while he admitted to swearing, Fleming avoided spelling out the coarse language in his books. In an interview with Munro Scott of the CBC-TV's Explorations programme, he said that he didn't 'like seeing them [swear words] on the page', arguing that they held up the reader's interest. He imagined that readers would see the words and say, 'Good Lord! What's that?' Overall, Fleming viewed the use of coarse language as a 'bad literary device'.
While the Bond films have kept up with fashion, technology and politics, they have not kept up so successfully with changes in the use of language. The Daniel Craig era has seen the series catch up to some extent, although there remains a residual sense that swearing just isn't appropriate for a Bond film. It wouldn't be out of keeping with Fleming's character, though, if we permitted even James Bond to swear occasionally.
It's official. Following the phenomenal success of Skyfall, Sam Mendes will return to helm the twenty-fourth James Bond film, which will be released in the UK on 23rd October 2015. With the film over two years away, already social media sites and tabloids have been buzzing with speculation about what sort of film we can expect. Fortunately we can dismiss the suggestion that Sebastian Faulks' Devil May Care will form the basis of the next film. (If in the very unlikely event that a continuation novel will be filmed, let it be an early John Gardner, such as Icebreaker (a brilliant title) or Nobody Lives Forever (one of the most exciting of Gardner's Bonds)). More realistically, just what sort of film can we expect for Bond 24?
For a clue to what Bond 24 will look like, we have to look at the patterns of what has gone before. With John Logan returning for writing duties, we should expect a film that combines spectacle and action with emotional depth. There will be some traditional elements too. Bond's surrogate family – Moneypenny and Q, who rejoin M – is now back in post, and M's wood-panelled office seen at the end of Skyfall, which recalls the office of Bernard Lee's M, hints at a more conventional style of briefing. But don't expect the new M to be any less hands-on than his predecessor. As I've suggested in an earlier post, M's expanded role in recent films has in part reflected increasing political oversight of intelligence services, as well as advances in technology, allowing easier and more direct communication between individuals and closer tracking of agents. We may not see Mallory travel so extensively as his predecessor did, but there's a fair chance that he'll still be paying close attention to Bond's mission.
I think there'll be more humour in Bond 24, but the witty one-liners will continue to be underplayed. Those looking for a big film with less introspection and a greater sense of fun might not be disappointed, though. Across the series, the Bond films have tended to follow a trajectory of ever increasing scale as each film attempts to out-do its predecessor, followed by a purge as the series goes back to basics and the cycle is reset. Casino Royale represents a back-to-basics Bond, but it is arguable whether it marks the start of a new cycle. Certainly, both Quantum of Solace and Skyfall had bigger budgets than Casino Royale, but their plots have seemed somewhat limited in scope. The threat posed by Dominic Greene's plot is not fully realised, robbing audiences of a 'ticking bomb' denouement, while Raoul Silva's plans are focused on destroying individuals, not nations. That said, the simple desire to better the success of Skyfall might encourage the production team to think big and induce the sort of plot that gets Blofeld out of bed in the morning.
What about the one of the contentious aspects of the Craig era – the absence of the gunbarrel sequence from the start of the film? I don't have the figures, but I wonder whether its absence is contentious only to the relatively narrow constituency of Bond aficionados. For the casual Bond fan, or those introduced to Bond via Daniel Craig's films, I'd be surprised if its placement at the end of the last two films is an issue, and I don't remember any newspaper review of Skyfall bemoaning the gunbarrel's absence from the start. As much as it pains me to suggest it, I expect the gunbarrel to be kept at the end of the film. The gunbarrel at the start of the film was once very well established, but as soon as the sequence was significantly altered for Casino Royale, the spell was broken, making it easier to alter and relocate the sequence for subsequent films. While the association between the start of the film and the gunbarrel sequence has weakened, the association between the sequence and the end of the film has become stronger, and it now seems just as appropriate to close a film with the sequence as open it.
As for story, inspiration as usual will be drawn from the pages of Ian Fleming's novels. There's still plenty of unfilmed material, and my hope is that we'll see something based on the short story 'Octopussy', ideally with a bit of skiing thrown in. I'd like 'The Hildebrand Rarity' to be used as the title of Bond 24, but I fear I will be disappointed.
All this is idle speculation, but clues to what we can expect of Bond 24 are more likely to be offered by the films that immediately precede it than the films that date further back. The Bond films are not nostalgia-fests (which is one of the reasons why we are able to discuss the 24th film in the series), and the series has adapted with the changing times, being influenced as much by the prevailing cultural environment as influencing it. The series may not manage to bring all Bond fans with it (nothing wrong with that, of course), but it gains many new fans, who help keep James Bond alive into the next generation.
If you were a Daily Express reader during the late 1950s and 1960s, you would have been lucky enough to read the latest James Bond adventures before they appeared in the bookshops. With the exception of The Spy Who Loved Me, all Fleming's full-length novels from Diamonds Are Forever to The Man with the Golden Gun (plus occasional short stories) were abridged and serialised in the newspaper prior to publication. Fleming bibliographer Jon Gilbert includes a comprehensive account of these serialisations in his Bibliography, but it is worth highlighting here a number of aspects which provide some insight into the rise of the Bond phenomenon.
The first novel to be serialised was Diamonds Are Forever, whose first part was published on 12th April 1956 and heralded by an article by Ian Fleming on how he wrote the novel. Readers were invited to “meet James Bond, secret agent, meet M, his boss, and get ready to meet the girl you won't forget”, and the first part was accompanied by an illustration by Express artist Robb showing giant head of Bond behind a drawing of Tiffany Case.
From Russia, with Love appeared a year later, with the first part published on 1st April 1957. The Express proclaimed that “the 'Diamonds Are Forever' man writes a thriller that is hotter still”, and Robb's illustration showed a (clothed) Tatiana Romanova reclining on a bed. In a drastic abridgement, the Russian-set chapters forming the first quarter or so of the novel were reduced to a preface that took up half a column.
In keeping with Fleming's pattern of completing a new Bond novel each year, Dr No, the follow-up to From Russia, with Love, began its serialisation on 19th March 1958. The work was billed as “Ian Fleming's savage and scorching new thriller”, and was accompanied by an illustration by Robb of the three 'blind' men assassinating Commander Strangways. The first part of the next novel, Goldfinger, appeared on 18th March 1959 and was illustrated by a drawing of Goldfinger – by Raymond Hawkley this time – and a panel from John McClusky's comic strip of the adventure.
Later that year, Express readers were treated with a bonus – the serialisation of the short story, 'From a View to a Kill', which appeared on 21st September under the title 'Murder Before Breakfast'. The Express gave this serialisation more of a splash than it had the others, announcing it to be “the fastest thing in thrillers”, with a pace “tailor-made for the Express”. The serialisation of 'Risico' followed in April 1960 under the title 'The Double-Take'.
As Thunderball began its serialisation on 16th March 1961, the Express asked, “Is Bond's action-packed life beginning to tell?” The illustrations were by Raymond Hawkey, who depicted a somewhat middle-aged Bond in a sports jacket and firing a revolver. After a two-year gap, Bond was back with On Her Majesty's Secret Service, which began its serialisation on 18th March 1963. Robb returned to illustration duties and showed Tracy at the casino.
By the time You Only Live Twice was serialised from 2nd March 1964 onwards, James Bond had become a global phenomenon, and this was reflected in the fanfare that the newspaper gave the latest Bond adventure. “Begins today: For the Eyes of Express Readers Only”, proclaimed the Express, which interestingly reveals that Fleming's title 'For Your Eyes Only' had started to take life as an expression in its own right, with editors now recognising its potential to be adapted for headlines. The Express continued: “The world of James Bond is one of quick death and beautiful women. No other character in fiction has quite so enthralled people of every nation as has this Secret Service agent 007, licensed to kill and trained to do so with knife or with gun or bare hands.” With little mention of it in the earlier serialisations, Bond's code number had also gained significance, and as the introductory blurb in the Express suggests, its meaning was well understood in popular culture. Robb drew an illustration of M (his back to us) in conversation with Sir James Molony. Illustrations in later parts were clearly influenced by the films, as Bond now resembled Sean Connery.
Following the death of Ian Fleming in 1964, the Express was keen to promote the serialisation of his final full-length novel, The Man with the Golden Gun. With the first part was published on 22nd March 1965, the Express wrote, “Never before has there been a fiction character with the fascination of James Bond. Wherever intelligent people meet they talk of him. These coming day – by reading the Express – AND ONLY BY READING THE EXPRESS [Express' emphasis] – you can leap ahead in 'Bondery'.” The illustration by Robb showed a frightened Moneypenny in Bond's arms.
The novel was not the last Express readers had heard of Bond – at least outside the comic strip – and the following year, the short story 'Octopussy' was serialised, beginning 4th October 1965. Again, the Express was eager to promote the story, and it prefaced its serialisation (“a vintage week for connoisseurs of the thriller-hero of this decade: a story stamped with the personality of its author”) with a potted biography of Fleming, concluding that Fleming was “licensed to enthral”. As with 'For Your Eyes Only', the phrase 'licence to kill' had sufficient cultural value to be used idiomatically. The influence of the films is again apparent, as an illustration showed a Connery-esque Bond with Dexter Smythe.
On 18th March 1968, James Bond was back in Colonel Sun. Alluding to Kingsley Amis' earlier work on Bond, the Express revealed that “another entry in the Bond dossier has now been compiled.” The illustration by Robb showed a montage of characters and scenes from the book, recalling the contemporaneous style of Bond film posters.
The history of the Express serialisations to some extent reflects the rise of Bond phenomenon. The later serialisations were heralded with increasing fanfare as the introductions acknowledged the global success of James Bond. In addition, the serialisations provide markers for the point that phrases such as 'licence to kill' began to have cultural resonance outside the books, and they also reveal how the film series exerted its influence on the presentation of Fleming's work.
Reference:
Gilbert, J, 2012 Ian Fleming: The Bibliography, Queen Anne Press
