'James Bond: The Authorized Biography of 007' | Meet the REAL James Bond | Book Review

[@MrBonehead332]

I could listen to Calvin talk about the books for hours, please never stop this series I absolutely love it!

[@johnkennethwiseman682]

he does some great live streams

[@Powerbandm]

Agreed! These are the KZbin channels that deserve millions of views!

[@calvindyson]

Thanks for this! Very much appreciate it :D

[@MatthewHarkin]

John Pearson the author and John Pearson the book character both disliked this video

[@davidjames579]

Just wait till he writes Calvin Dyson: The Authorised Biography

[@esprit0077]

It is a very clever book. And the fact it is not the same character as in Fleming's books is a nice twist. The stories told by the real James Bond are a treat for 007 specialists because we can compare with the Fleming's stories. It puts everything in perspective and pays homage to the talent of Fleming. Pearson knows how to write and to me the only reason why you did not like it is that you read it AS a USUAL Bond novel, which is not.

[@terrancelayhew5931]

I literally read this two weeks ago. Generally I agree, the dissonance created by Pearson saying he’s not the same Bond of the books, but at the same time leaning so much on your love for the stories is distracting. I thought it just sucked most of the wonder and glee from the stories to replace it with self-seriousness. Almost as if they were making a grim and gritty reboot of the character immediately after the original series ended.

[@calvindyson]

Completely agree with you, Terrance!

[@greedycapitalist8590]

If you think the premise of this book is audacious, you want to look into the Wold Newton Family sometime. In the 1970s, Philip Jose Farmer wrote two fictional biographies - "Tarzan Alive" and "Doc Savage: His Apocalyptic Life". The premise of these books was that not only were these two characters loosely based on real people, but that they were both members of an extended family that included an unusually large number of heroes and villains, including the likes of James Bond, Sherlock Holmes and even Captain Nemo (aka Professor Moriarty). Really wild stuff.

[@SuperGrumpyDaddy]

First read this back in 1975 as a 14-year-old, and reread it as part of my Bond reread earlier this year, and I have to say I quite enjoyed it. I like that Bond hates his being in a series of popular novels (and films), he’s an older, grumpier man and it’s all a bit of fun. I like the way Pearson weaves stories around tidbits from Fleming’s books, but the ending kind of lets it down a bit. Love the disclaimer on the back of my copy, ‘For security reasons there can be no photographs in any edition’ 😂

[@astrocitizen]

Hoo boy. Can't wait to see his reaction to the James Bond in Alan Moore's BLACK DOSSIER.

[@klaudiagrob]

3:08 perhaps the point is making big bucks from the big title such as James Bond. Ive never read it.

[@jamesbondnorthamerica3890]

Nice review these parts made me think of the movies: Bad guys putting a bomb under Bond’s bed - Never Say Never Again M stating that finding a list of agents is more important than 009 - Skyfall 007 program being shut down- Spectre

[@michaelgrist72]

I really enjoyed it! I totally get your criticisms of it. For me I really enjoy the idea of a young James Bond in the 1930's and 1940's and I would of loved it if they explored a commander Bond in WWII a bit more.

[@billlucas4675]

Regardless of your opinion despite being over 40 years old the book stills holds up the way Fleming's novels still hold up. BTW Pearson stated that 11/11/20 was Bond's birthday. Happy Birthday Commander.

[@BigMack1959]

I read this over 40 years ago and was glad that I'd borrowed it from a library instead of buying it.

[@davidjames579]

I'd advise anyone to get it out of a library, to see what you think. Worth a go at least once.

[@jamesatkinsonja]

I'm not sure if Pearson was going to follow up the sequel hook in the story involving Irma Bunt in another book but I doubt we missed much. Excited to hear your doing the Christopher wood novelisations too.

[@jenniferschillig3768]

I always thought the idea of Bond having a (biological) brother (long before Spectre botched the idea of a foster brother for Bond) rather interesting. Even Raymond Benson said at one point that he'd toyed with the idea of using the character of Henry from Pearson's biography. I think it would have been interesting to have Henry be a contrast to his flashier brother with a different kind of heroism...the heroism of an ordinary man, a heroism that's rooted in loyalty and love and quiet strength, which would come through in some crucial moment when Bond's sort of heroics won't fit the bill. In short, a Samwise Gamgee figure, with his own "I can carry you!" moment.

[@jamesatkinsonja]

I'm presumably Benson decided against using Henry as there was a lot of pressure at the time for the novel series to tie into the films as much as possible.

[@BenCol]

Hey, at least it dispels the codename theory. He literally is a real man named James Bond!

[@waltervontageniii4660]

The Character Pearson describes is physically more like Tarzan than Bond.

[@wagdawgwag872]

Which is interesting because not only did Tarzan have his own fictional biography, but he's in the same family tree as Bond in that universe.

[@clifffor1179]

Read it back in the 80's out of curiousity "between Bond films". I thought it was an ok timefiller but it's a bit like reading about a real life Clark Kent who was like Clark Kent but not Superman. He wants you to think he's James Bond/Superman but he's only James Bond/Superman in his own mind. Can't believe some think of it as canon. It should not be used as a serious reference book. Wasn't it originally thought of as a spoof?

[@echoeco214]

This one is a curio among Bond literary fiction. Large swaths of it simply don't work and leave me scratching my head. But it just occurred to me that this was probably written prior to the film Live and Let Die, so the continued survival of filmic, and I suppose literary, Bond was very much in question. This era of the '70s saw the rise of Italo Calvino and I suppose that deconstructionism could have influenced Pearson. Overall, it's interesting and certainly more daring than the novels that would follow, but in the end, this book does not work.

[@greatvaluestevemcqueen7048]

I actually enjoyed this one more than I thought I would.

[@MarvinFalz]

The prospect of the "authorized" biography expanding on the character sounds intriguing, but I'm on the same page with you, Calvin, that I wonder why I should care about the character when other important information from before is declared to be false. That's where my problem with different Bond actors comes from. The character hasn't changed much through the years, but the portrayals differ vastly. (If anything the public perception has changed.) But as much as I find it jarring, how Bond in the Craig era is tonally and visually darker than ever before, and moreover puts the personal relationship between a psychologically scarred Bond with his mother-substitute M in the foreground, it's at least not completely out of the world. Bond in Dr. No was a professional, who in all that cruelty, that the job brings, still has a heart. Which to me would be btw. the most interesting character portrayal, a coherent character development inside of the Bond lore. Craig's Bond is in a crisis - the missing family, his job, his lost faith in his boss, and his lost love - weigh down on him, but in the end he overcomes all that to become the Bond we know from the former installments. And who dares to fall in love a second time with Tracy.

[@calvindyson]

Great comment, Marvin! Thanks very much for this. Some thought provoking stuff concerning Craig's Bond. You're very right!

[@JAMES49442]

I liked this book. I thought the whole idea was very clever and well done.

[@dvader518]

There’s a James Bond Jr. novel unrelated to the cartoon: The Adventures of James Bond Junior 003 1/2.

[@andrewstrachan8737]

Enjoyed the review. Reminded me that somewhere I have a copy of this book I purchased back in 1981!

[@DeedUNo]

How about the new 007 book- With a Mind to Kill- A Horowitz?

[@ethantoise4073]

read it, its great

[@tudortentiu]

Make a video about Licence Renewed, i'm reading it rn and it's fascinating

[@trevor-johnsen]

I do like the few bits that were "untold" adventures... but overall, not a very exciding read

[@willgillies5670]

A personal fave of mine.

[@phillipgreen2082]

I remember seeing this in a local bookshop and snatched it up was really looking forward to reading this but to be honest I found it very hard going it just didn't work for me I couldn't connect with the story at all big thumbs up from south Wales

[@al007italia]

I read this many, many years ago (okay I'm showing my age), so my memories may not be the best. There were some good things about the book, and there was some that I did not like. Part of the problem with this so-called biography is what Fleming said in "You Only Live Twice" in the obituary. In that obituary Fleming made it sound that the novels we're almost to accurate. That they came close to violation of the Official Secrets Act. Now this biography makes it sound like the Fleming novels we're not that accurate.

[@advancedrebel]

Love your review (as always). But I think I liked it more than you did. I love the Meta element of the book. I thought the novel's idea of Fleming writing Bond books to confuse Smersh was intriguing. We did a review of it a little while back at the James Bond Complex. It seems Edgar shares more your opinion than I did.

[@calvindyson]

Thanks for this! Yes I always listen to the James Bond Complex book reviews and it was cool to hear your positivity about this! I've also spoken to Ajay Chowdhury about this and he's a big fan of it too. Like so many things in Bond there are people who like it and don't which makes for some good discussion! :D I'm sure I've said this before but your podcast is excellent by the way!!

[@advancedrebel]

@@calvindyson oh shucks. You're going to make me blush.

[@skylongskylong1982]

Pearson also did a so called authorised biography of Biggles in the eighties, and it was bloody terrible. He had no idea of the characters traits.

[@davidjames579]

Interestingly he wrote an authorised biography of The Kray Twins. I wonder if he got that right?!

[@simoncolenutt5228]

@@davidjames579 I thought that last one was pretty good

[@davidjames579]

@@simoncolenutt5228 Interestingly The Krays hired him based on his biography of Ian Fleming.

[@aperson22222]

So there was never supposed to be a continuation of the series under Amis. Rather, the pen name Robert Markham was supposed to be used by a number of Fleming-adjacent writers to pen one book apiece. One other book was written for these purposes in 1966 (which would actually have preceded _Colonel Sun_ and been first in the series), _Per Fine Ounce_ by the South African author Geoffrey Jenkins. Tragically, the publisher commissioned this work, then rejected it for publication, and all but a couple of pages have never seen the light of day, 55 years later and counting. 😢

[@christopherwilson3754]

I thought it was a fun read up until the end. Bunt and the bunnies. Good Lord.

[@th3lonef0x4]

Have you read forever and a day by Anthony Horowitz yet? It's a prequel to casino royale and I would recommend it.

[@calvindyson]

I haven't yet but I will definitely get to it someday! Trying my best to go through all the books in order of publication but I may make exceptions and review some of the newer works inbetween Gardner's and Benson's as they both have quite long series in their own rights.

[@andrewstrachan8737]

Forever and a Day is a cracking Bond novel. Closer to Flemings novels than the updated attempts of Gardner and Benson!

[@MatthewHarkin]

Oh damn! This has been sitting on my shelf for a couple of years now and I never got around to actually reading it. I haven't heard that much discussion around it so I wasn't really aware it was considered controversial but I couldn't agree more with the point you're making. I don't mind it at all when source material is modernised yet makes a genuine attempt with continuity and at-least tries to remain faithful - but it becomes a huge problem when people decide to take huge and random unwarranted liberties with established source material. You see it all the time with movies too (cough Terminator cough cough) where for some reason studios think it's okay to directly contradict or outright change key aspects of a legacy to make their product look better in comparison or just to be controversial for the sake of being controversial. It's so insulting, especially when your main demographic are people who are genuinely invested in something and just want to see things handled by people who can fully appreciate and respect what they're adapting? Very reassuring to see that things haven't really changed much. 😂 😂 Keep it up buddy! Loving your videos. So excited for you to get onto the Benson/Gardner novels! I'm so in the dark when it comes to those (except diana-gate of course 😂) so it'll be really interesting to at-least get a general breakdown of those novels cos I find them SO intriguing.

[@davidjames579]

From Calvin's review and some of the comments on here, I guess the book is Marmite. But I hope everyone reads it once. Some spoilers ahead: I like it as an extensive things you didn't know about Bond (even if in truth, as Calvin says, this Bond isn't Fleming's), and some of the eccentric ideas. Not only does John Pearson write himself into the story, but Fleming is a character, and he and Bond go on some missions together! In a sense, Fleming is Bill Tanner, as he and Bond are mates and work together. One of the highlights for me was Fleming taking Bond to the premiere of Dr No, and of course not introducing him as Bond. Bond apparently likes Connery, but finds the film as far fetched as the novels. There's also a wonderfully cold bit where 17 year old Bond has had his first romance with an older, much more experienced French woman. Bond is approached by a friend of his family who he trusts, and who claims to work for British Intelligence. He convinces Bond that his lover is selling secrets to the Nazi's. Initially Bond works as a spy, gaining intelligence and bringing it back. Then the spymaster tasks Bond to kill his lover as she knows too much. Bond agrees, and takes her out for one last assignation. Then kills her. Later, he discovers the spymaster was mistaken, and she was innocent all along. Regardless of it being about the REAL James Bond rather than Fleming's, I think it works really well as an imaginative Elseworlds take on Bond, and filler in of some stuff you might have wondered about, such as what happens to Bond's son with Kissy Suzuki. And the only post You Only Live Twice story to feature Bond catching up with Irma Bunt to finally get justice for Tracy. Except, well sadly, it's just Bond's next mission, we never actually get to find out what happens.

[@calvindyson]

The annoying thing about the Irma Bunt twist at the end is that I'd much rather be reading THAT story! There are definitely some interesting bits of stories in this but I just rubbed up against the very concept from the start.

[@moodyguymick]

I read this book about 30 years ago so my memories of the content are a little faded now, however I seem to remember a few details for example Bond's childhood, his brother ( Harry ? ) the death of his parents in a mountaineering accident and his being expelled from school due to a dalliance with either a teacher or school nurse..... I think. Anyway, it was a good bedtime read, as I recall.

[@jamesatkinsonja]

I suppose this is the closest we'll get to a 'wes craven's new nightmare' meta look at bond [though whether that is something anyone needed is up for debate]. I guess the biography element was to stop it just being a Fleming rehash [such as the recent captain kirk biography]. I did like the part where the guy who scars Bond in Casino Royale get's another shot at bond as that was a lose end but as you say it and others would have worked better as stand alone stories.

[@bmrberlin]

I absolutely agree. To try making Bond a real person in this way is kind of useless.

[@davidthomas283]

I asked about this book on another KZbin video, you did review it, my apologies.

[@andrewstorm8240]

What topic would you pick to focus a JB book around?

[@Bond8789]

I've never read this one. I will do one day. But I don't consider it as part of the overall cannon. With respect ro Pearson, it sounds as more of a novelty, then something to be placed post Colonel Sun, and pre Licence Renewed (or the Wood novelisations).

[@davidjames579]

I don't really think of it as canon either. The Bond being profiled in a book is as ridiculous an idea as Moore's complaint that Bond is known by every barman in the world. And I'd say the same to Fleming saying in YOLT that novels had been written of Bond's missions. It's pretty dumb. But that aside, Pearson's book is entertaining.

[@CardboardBoxA]

I was very distracted by the Janus control center music in the opening of the video

[@WhiteJarrah]

You plan on reviewing R.D. Mascott's James Bond Jr novel?

[@calvindyson]

Might well do! Maybe along with the Charlie Higson Young Bond series when I've finished reading all of adult Bond!

[@djjonasc]

Definetely look forward to those books, Calvin! I read "SilverFin" and "Blood Fever", and I really loved them. Since they are technically cannon, the explanation in "SilverFin" of how Bond is so super-powered at time (for example in "Dr. No") is really wierd, but I plan on finishing the series anyway sometime - I got halfway into "Double or Die" seven years ago and didn't finish it.

[@greenmonsterprod]

Holy cow! Somebody else remembers that one? I read that back when I was in elementary school, back before "Star Wars" came along.

[@catbrownlee7413]

Will you be reviewing Tomorrow Never Dies on the PS1?

[@calvindyson]

I certainly will! Hopefully before NTTD comes out but we'll see. The game reviews are often the most time consuming ones to make.

[@AlexKnight009]

* I've heard that there are actually some people who believe that there was an unofficial interview with Ian Fleming, where he supposedly confessed to basing the character of James Bond, on a real man who served in his "30 Commando Assault Unit" during World War II. Supposedly, after the war this man went to work for the "S.I.S."(Secret Intelligence Service). * There are those who believe that this man was portrayed as "Corporal Bob Rains" in the film called "Age of Heroes", played by "Danny Dyer". Whether there really was a Bob Rains, or if that was even his real name, you know, who knows. Interestingly enough, Sean Bean also stars in the film as well, so I thought that was an interesting coincidence. Almost as if they were trying to say something.

[@adoptedlobster9900]

Can you review the awful night fire game boy game?

[@calvindyson]

If I can figure out a way to record footage of my playthrough then sure! I never actually owned that game when I was younger but I remember playing it at a friends house and... Yeah, we turned it off quickly and went back to the Gamecube version!

[@BenCol]

@@calvindyson Get a Game Boy Player - if you still have your GameCube. The GBP allows you to play GB/GBA games through the GC. Not sure how expensive they are though, I got mine 2nd hand for cheap, but that was before the GC was considered retro - I think in recent times the demand may have gone up because the GC is now retro and therefore cool again. But worth looking into if you don't want to fiddle about with emulators.

[@austinwalker2000]

Okay Im only 3 mins into this vid so I haven't really gotten to your criticisms or anything nor have I read the book however the idea that James bond was based on a real person but exaggerated is likely to be somewhat true this story is obviously fiction but it has been speculated Ian Fleming, likely drew inspiration from more than one secret agent he learned of from his experience working with British naval intelligence.

[@thechaosvibration1181]

First off I wanna say something controversial but bred out of respect as content creator and bond fanatic. The first time I discovered your channel I wasn't very impressed. But the reason I'm saying this is because your work has really proven me wrong over time. Even when I don't agree. So congrats there, I'm pretty stubborn. Also really enjoyed your thoughts on this. After No Time To Die, I found myself thirsting for a Bond novel. Read all Flemings, stomached as much Rey Benson as I can, and enjoyed the Horowitz. I just can't with John Gardner lol....I elected this one cause minus some Fleming passages the re read value is rather low for me. And Fleming well I have to be In a specific mood. Anyway I decided to re read this, cause I remember loving it, and didn't get into it at all this time. I enjoyed the 4th wall, I loved the meeting Bond in the flesh. But the SparkNotes of his missions, and those decisions also urked me. As well as which stories were considered "real missions". I also found bonds story with women to be very well uninspired. Like we got a Vesper before Vesper with the girl from his childhood like he never learns. I'd say "fan fiction" suiarized the book nicely. Do you have a carte blanche review by Jefferey deaver by the way?

[@syncof1190]

Will you be doing any re ranking of your earlier James Bond lists?

[@expendableindigo9639]

A “true” Bond that’s more mundane? Wonder if he saw 1967 Casino Royale.

[@ENLIGHTENMENT789]

I really enjoyed this novel, 007 first genuine falling in love and crashing the car, causing his facial scar, never referenced in the films at all. Pearson has a warm inviting style in his writing I found totally lacking in Colonel Sun. As with Sebastian Faulks- Devil May Care, I found it very cardboard false Fleming and with very little story to fill these two novels, unlike the biography which was brimming with fresh ideas. If you didn't like this, just wait till you get to the latter Gardner books.. truly awful and a struggle to get through to the end.

[@dvon1097]

Is License Renewed your next review?

[@TrumbullComic]

I tried reading The Authorized Biography of 007 a number of years back and my reaction was much the same as yours, Calvin. It honestly began to lose me with the revelation that Bond had a younger brother. That just didn't seem like James Bond at all to me. If anyone is an only child, it has to be James Bond. I'm also not a fan of the "Oh, this character is not as fantastic as you'd always believed" and "The original author got it wrong" traps that these homage books so often fall into. Philip José Farmer did that with his biographies of Tarzan and Doc Savage, and it honestly drained the characters of a lot of their excitement in trying to make them more credible. Author Sam Siciliano has written a number of books about Sherlock Holmes and practically the first thing he does in them is declare that Holmes wasn't that close with Doctor Watson and actually much preferred the company of his cousin, Dr. Henry Vernier. And moreover, Watson got a number of things wrong about Holmes in his stories. Okay, but.... You're not really writing about Sherlock Holmes anymore, are you? It honestly seems so lazy and self-indulgent that you wonder why the author didn't just create their own Holmes-like character. If you're writing a classic character, do your homework to get it right.

[@davidjames579]

Ahhhh Calvin. I'm sorry you didn't like this. I think my takeaway from it is yeah the premise is kinda insulting, in that it is like it is saying all that stuff you love? Total rubbish, I'l tell you the better version. And I do find exception with the reason given for Pearson being hired to write the book (by publishing Bond's adventures and life it'll embarrass the KGB into leaving Bond alone, because they'll think they've been wasting their resources pursuing a fictional character. Er....like North By Northwest in reverse, except they've seen and fought Bond). However, getting past that, I just find it nectar to devour all those details about Bond's life. While Pearson is saying this is a diff Bond, I nevertheless can ignore that, and just enjoy it as Bond's life. There are numerous tweaks to Bond's history across the book and film series (and cartoons, if you inc James Bond Jr!), so I can happily enjoy each at the time I intake, rather than necessarily taking them as a collective canon. I think it's fun to have variety in Bond, and not that it should stick rigidly to a Fleming created outline. At the end of the day, it's more Bond, so I'll gladly take it!

[@calvindyson]

Glad to hear you enjoyed it, David! Agree with you that continuation authors shouldn't have to stick rigidly to a Fleming created outline. I hope more authors try to break the mould as time goes by.

[@djtforever1414]

I read this book when I was a kid. I don't remember anything about it other than the claim Bond was real.

[@calvindyson]

Testament to how memorable it is I suppose!!

[@pauljohnson271]

Respectfully disagree. I loved this book.

[@SpaceCattttt]

I've actually for years considered writing a book based on this exact concept. But instead of dismissing Fleming's character as essentially being false, I wanted to create an alternative universe Bond who was really boring as a person and unremarkable in every way. Sort of like a real spy would be. Of cpurse, this would make for a pretty boring read as well, but that's exactly what I wanted. I think it would be perversely funny to transform the most interesting man in the world into someone you can't wait to see leave the room. But considering the legal nightmare I'd have to swim through in order to obtain my "license to kill Bond " by the Fleming estate, I ultimately decided against it.

[@aaronmastriani1556]

James Bond as a "real" spy wouldn't necessarily be boring, as John Le Carre's George Smiley has shown.

[@SpaceCattttt]

@@aaronmastriani1556 Oh, I'd make him boring! And I've always thought that both Smiley books were awful.

[@waltervontageniii4660]

Read this in one sitting. Counted 3 dozen discrepancies from Fleming’s character. Starting with the year Pearson gives for Bonds’s birth. Feel free to slip this one.

[@waltervontageniii4660]

The book is shite. Plain and simple. Let's start with where Pearson says Bond was born. It's wrong. Bond was born in Scotland, otherwise he never would have gotten to sneak into service at age 17 in WW2. The British were very aware of where people was born, and young men especially. If he had been born in Germany Bond would have been registared as an alien. So, alien, you lie about your age and try to get into a sabotage school (Bond originally joined SOE and then 30AU, which is where he met Fleming). Skip this book and read Fleming.

[@wildsmiley]

Never read this, but any book that takes all the Fleming adventures and says Moonraker didn’t happen... nope, won’t be reading this one.

[@tremelo8508]

Funny enough Moonraker is the one book where the Bond girl has absolutely no interest in Bond.

[@paulmonahawk4921]

this book is totally w**ky

[@BenCol]

I had no idea this was considered a continuation novel by the fandom, I thought it was just a novelty thing. So I haven't read it, and I don't plan to. I like metafiction when it's fictional characters acknowledging they're fictional and using it to comment on and deconstruct the rules and nature of the fiction they inhabit (whether it's more for laughs like 'Deadpool' or Abed in 'Community', or saying something more meaningful like the play 'Six Characters in Search of an Author'), but when it's pretending fictional characters are real I just switch off, I can't take it seriously. I say that, but I like things like Orson Welles' 'War of the Worlds' radio play, and the BBC's 'Ghostwatch', which pretended fiction was reality. But they were self-contained stories, they weren't taking an established fiction and going "oh no it wasn't!" Which is what Pearson is doing here, I gather. Pearson probably wasn't trying to fool us, he probably respected our intelligence and knew we wouldn't mistake this for non-fiction, he probably wrote this with a knowing wink. But I suspect the conceit that Bond was a real person probably gets old very quick - just like the whole "oh no it isn't!" routine in pantomimes.

[@davidjames579]

The funny thing is it really doesn't need the device of this being a biography of a real person called James Bond. It ties itself into loops, and yet it really doesn't need to. A straight forward biog of the character JB, written as a conventional biog (as if about a real spy, but with no mention of the books and films, and the public knowing JB) would have worked fine. But by being all meta, it treads a fine line with parody. Making me think of Sir James Bond complaining of the current Bond being a sex maniac, in Casino Royale (1967). I know Pearson was Fleming's Assistant at The Sunday Times, and wrote the first biog of him, so maybe it was kind of a joke between friends, or something he thought he would appreciate. Unfortunately to an outsider, this aspect comes off as a bit smug. That aside, it's only the conceit I have a problem with. I personally found the book very entertaining, and liked the details of Bond's life.

[@BenCol]

​@@davidjames579 Yes, it does seem a bit of a parody, like one big joke that we're not meant to take seriously as opposed to a proper novel. Perhaps that's what it was meant to be, but the publisher wanted a more legitimate Bond book so published it as something it wasn't. That's just me ruminating and speculating, though. Either way, a straight up biography of the fictional character would've worked better, without all this mucking about with fourth walls that nobody asked to be broken.

[@aperson22222]

If one novel had to be decanonized, I’m fine with it being _Moonraker._