MI6 reports from The London Book Fair, where William
Boyd, author
of the new Bond continuation novel 'Solo', was 'author of the
day' and was interviewed by Erica
Wagner,
Literary
Editor of The Times. Click
here to read the press release from
Ian Fleming Publications on the announcement of the new title.
William
Boyd In Conversation (1)
William
Boyd In Conversation (2)
Above: William Boyd announces
Solo as the name of new James Bond Book at London Book
Fair. Left to right: Richard Cable (MD, Vintage Publishing);
Corinne Turner (MD, IFPL), William Boyd (James Bond
Author), Gail Rebuck (CEO Random House Group) Simon
Littlewood (Intl. Director, Random House Group). Photo
Credit by Luke Sprague.
|
Q: I was wondering if you could give us an indication
of what countries Bond is going to visit?
WB - I'm allowed to give you, not countries but continents.
The three continents he visits in the course of the novel are
Europe, obviously, Africa (surprise, surprise), and the USA.
So, that's where his journey takes him. I've written a couple
of paragraphs explaining why the title is "Solo" and,
I can say that it's what happens to him in Africa that takes
him off to the USA. There are consequences!
|
 Order Now (Amazon UK)
Order Now (Amazon USA)
|
|
Q - I wonder if you could comment on the
genre, writing a spy novel, and whether or not you feel
you have made
James Bond more literary.
WB - Well, I don't think the division is that simple.
I think there's good writing and bad writing. I think you
can very easily distinguish between good writing and bad
writing with a simple test: Just look at the number of
stereotypes employed. Stereotypes of plots, stereotypes
of characters, stereotypes of language; the more stereotypes
there are, the worse the book. That's my touchstone for
evaluation. So, if you write well - and it doesn't mean
you have to write in a stylish way, but if you write well,
and your characters are real, and your plots are ingenious,
then I don't see the distinction between literary fiction
and genre fiction. Raymond Chandler is a superb writer
of novels, John le Care is a very important contemporary
novelist, but he happens to write spy novels and Chandler
wrote detective novels. I think that if the writing is
good then the genre is irrelevant. Many, many so called "literary" novelists
have written a spy novel, me included - I've written two
- Ian McEwan has written two, John Banville has written
a spy novel. Joseph Conrad wrote two, Graham Greene wrote
several. There's absolutely no reason why, if you think
of yourself as a literary novelist, you shouldn't venture
into a genre - just write as well as you can. |
Q - On the subject of genre, you have a very
broad range…I
just wondered if you were going to treat us to a horror story
and a science fiction story.
WB - Absolutely not! This is my twelfth novel and I realise,
when I look back at my fiction, I can see that there are two
patterns of triptychs, I wrote "New Confessions", "Nat
Tate", and "Any Human Heart", which are all attempts
to push fiction into the bounds of reality and to blur that boarder.
And when I look back at the novels "Restless", "Ordinary
Thunderstorms", and "Waiting for Sunrise" and
I see those as three genre novels, if you like. "Restless" is
a spy novel, "Ordinary Thunderstorms" is a kind of
contemporary thriller, and "Waiting for Sunrise" is,
I suppose, a kind of Buchan-esque adventure. I didn't plan to
do that, but, looking back, I see they form a kind of trilogy.
My next novel is going to be unlike anything I've ever written
before. I have to keep myself interested, and feel that I have
written my spy novels and my thrillers, and I've really enjoyed
doing them, but my plans for my next novel are completely different.
So, I'm not ticking the boxes. Again, I don't like fantasy, I
would never write a horror novel, and whilst science fiction
is something I enjoy, I would never take it on. So, exercising
my muscles in those three novels represent my visits to the genre.
Q - Are you showing Bond in middle age in "Solo" and,
if so, how does that manifest itself? Also, is there any way
a future author can bring him back and make him younger after
you portray him at forty-five?
WB - Well, define middle age! I mean, Daniel Craig is forty-five
years old and he's in great shape! So, I think (Bond) is "mature",
let's say. But it's interesting to contemplate Bond ageing. He's
not stuck in one age or time zone.
EW - Which he is in the films.
WB - Yes, he's eternally late thirties, early forties, I suppose.
But it's interesting to think of because you can document his
life - you know where he was born, you know when his parents
died, you know where he went to school, when he joined the Navy
- there is a biography of Bon which is there, but there's no
reason you couldn't go back a write a novel set in 1955. You
don't have to follow chronologically. Fleming was fifty-six when
he died - which seems an absurdly young age - but if he'd looked
after himself a bit better, he might have been alive in 1969
and could have written a Bond novel then. For me it was more
a question of being in the Bond era, it was more to be in the
world that Fleming created. I could have chosen any year, I suppose.
Y'know, I was thinking: "The Suez Crisis. What was Bond
doing then?" Conceivably, you could write a novel going
back and picking up Bond at that period. But then you'd have
to fit in with the Fleming biography - how old was he, what had
happened to him in his life, etc etc. It's an intriguing speculation,
but I don't think my novel being set in '69 preempts anything.
You can do anything you want, in a way.
Many thanks to Ben Williams,
Ian Fleming Publications and Colman Getty.
