Ian Fleming vs John le Carré

Want to join the debate? Check out the Intelligence Squared website to hear about future live events and podcasts: www.intelligenc...
__________________________
They are the titans of the spy novel, who have elevated thrillers to the level of literary fiction. Much imitated, much adapted by the big and small screens, Ian Fleming and John Le Carré have painted our picture of post-war espionage: Fleming through the dashing figure of James Bond, with his lush locations and Martinis as icy as his heart; Le Carré through his damning portrait of the British secret service drawn from his own time in MI5 and MI6. But which of the two novelists is the greater?
In this thrilling contest, Fleming’s case was made by Anthony Horowitz, creator of the bestselling Alex Rider spy novels and author of the official Bond continuation novel 'Trigger Mortis'. Championing Le Carré - whose memoir about his life as a former spy currently sits in the bestseller lists - was David Farr, Emmy-nominated screenwriter of the BBC’s adaptation of 'The Night Manager'.
‘Fleming is one of the very few writers - Charles Dickens and JK Rowling might be two others - who have transcended fiction, who have created stories that capture a particular time and place, that are universally recognisable and that are, it would seem, immortal,’ says Horowitz. ‘George Smiley is a fascinating character. James Bond is an icon. That’s the difference.’
By contrast, pointing to Le Carré’s own experiences in the secret service, Farr says: ‘John Le Carré turns espionage into existentialism. His canvas is betrayal - of the realm and of the heart. His greatness comes from the personal nature of that exploration.’
To illustrate their arguments, Horowitz and Farr called on a cast of actors to bring the novels to life.

[@KiskeyaLife]

John le Carré. No contest.

[@mrb5791]

An absurd statement considering the fact that none of Le Carre’s characters have had the impact on Pop Culture that James Bond has had.

[@mollers92]

​@@mrb5791 Equating popularity with substance or quality hardly works

[@martinnolan4800]

@@mrb5791 James Bond was only ever an escapist fantasy. It’s a quiet predictable formula, “beautiful” women, double entendres, car chases, etc. Le Carre’s characters are recognizable people. It tells the readers the truth about the hazardous, brutal dealings of states and multinationals.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

@@martinnolan4800 You are talking about the Bond films, not the novels which were far more nuanced.

[@martinnolan4800]

@@ricardocantoral7672 Full diaclosure! You're right, I haven't ever read the books.

[@michaelschramm1064]

To me it’s rather misguided to contrast and compare Fleming with le Carre in literary merit. It’s a bit like trying to define which is the better science fiction film, “2001: A Space Odyssey” or “Star Wars”. Fleming wanted to create a larger than life, somewhat flamboyant character, not to portray the world of espionage necessarily as it truly was. This is apparent to anyone like myself who has read both “The Spy Who Came in From the Cold” and “Goldfinger”. It would have been more sensible to compare someone like Len Deighton or Frederick Forsyth with le Carre-not Fleming.

[@mrb5791]

Or Robert Ludlum. Fleming is in his own genre, not a dismissal against him though.

[@AntKneeLeafEllipse]

Isn't that the point?

[@willmpet]

I read Ian Fleming when in high school. I read Le Carre when in graduate school. I preferred Le Carre Much More! Tarantulas aren’t poisonous, they only have dirty mouths!

[@pamelacorbett8774]

I agree, a pointless exercise, like comparing a banana with a pomegranate.

[@mohammedashian8094]

Actually the movies made bond flamboyant. in the novels he couldn’t care less for any of that fancy schmancy crap. I would go as far to say that if he was a real person he would REALLY not like Roger Moore’s because he was the most flippant and flamboyant one.

[@davidleonard8547]

There is a hidden depth to Fleming's Bond, not to mention his stories. When he was writing, novels were shorter, and that lent to a "punchier" style that moved the plot along rapidly. That said, Fleming's Bond and Hollywood's Bond are very different animals, and most people have no clue who Bond really is as a character. I enjoyed Fleming's Bond, but I must say that his stories are more adventure thrillers than serious spy novels. le Carre on the other hand is a far more literary author. His novels are longer, far longer, and far more complex. Of plot, and of character. There is a depth, and a darkness to his stories that Fleming lacks. His novels are far more realistic, to my mind. Bond is big and bold and brash. He does not hide. He does not skulk. He confronts his foes quickly and face to face. His world is dangerous, yet exciting. George Smiley is middle-aged, introverted, intellectual, introspective. It was George who reminded us that spying is lonely, terrifying, dangerous work, and that the spy's true battle cry is, "Don't look at me." Love them both, but I lean heavily towards Carre.

[@albertgrant1017]

Excellant analysis !

[@RaySpainPlayer]

Well said. I lean to Fleming. I'd like to see Denis Villeneuve interpret the character of Bond.

[@dobbersanchez1185]

Le carre's work also exposes the gross hypocrisies between the diplomatic relations of some nations and their practice of espionage. Flemming's work has glorified this hypocrisy.

[@johnlawrence2757]

This isn’t a sensible comparison, they work in different genres. The fact they use the same background is misleading. A more interesting debate would have been Le Carré and Deighton

[@unbrnwsh]

The best comparison I can make is that La Carre is the rare true hard-nosed journalist that reports facts and truth and Fleming represents the sensational journalists (almost all we see on TV these days) that make their Western audience suspend belief and feel real good.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

An apt comparison. Fleming never cared about gritty reality to Bond. However there are moments, quite a few actually, when Bond could not stomach the killing. For example, when Bond helped Kerim Bey shot his would-be assassin he made no attempt to hide his disgust but he did put it behind him.

[@josersandoval]

Andrew Weeraratne this is so spot on that all I can say “I agree with you, Mr Weeraratne”

[@JubileeGiggles]

Karla is definitely the most menacing, ruthless shadow of a character to never utter a word

[@mikearchibald744]

Yeah, Smileys people was kind of a let down.

[@bathroomsexmurder]

​@@mikearchibald744lol what planet are you on

[@frankengels7843]

I can not pick a favorite. Fleming's writing is almost poetic some times but reading those stories as a kid lead me to Le Carre. Both of these writers really lived a bit of the life they wrote about and that intrigues me too. Fleming was a cartoonist and Le Carre a photographer..that's how I see it. I am so glad to see this presentation. Very well done!

[@BluGiant14]

"cartoonist and photographer". Brilliant comparison.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

I think that Fleming was akin to a pulp comic artist.

[@MatthewMcVeagh]

It wasn't mentioned but I noticed Charlie Higson getting a question in there. :) If it wasn't for Le Carré I don't know if I would be interested in spy fiction. He turned a genre that was previously about action fantasy into a realistic psychological exploration of bureaucrats, detective work and ethics. He did indeed bring an element of the European existential novel to his stories, and it would be more interesting to compare him to Kafka or Heinrich Boell than Fleming or other spy writers. I don't like Bond, I don't find him exciting or attractive and don't like the implications Fleming is making about his world. Le Carré's protagonists have just as bent a set of ethics as Bond but it's addressed differently: rather than expecting us to bluntly accept behaviour that would ordinarily be seen as appalling on account of the espionage context, Le Carré wants to re-connect the spy world to the rest of the world, and to re-connect the lost, confused characters in search of their identity to the humanity they are fleeing by taking refuge in espionage.

[@alpsofsilence1461]

Very insightful, thanks.

[@MatthewMcVeagh]

@@alpsofsilence1461 You're welcome!

[@gopalmarar]

You just said it all.

[@nemo-nb3gh]

Le Carre head and shoulders above fleming . Le Carre correctly didn't see things in black and white or good guys vs bad guys nonsense

[@sambassil7825]

His name isn’t John Mc Carré. He’s very intellectual.

[@Lech_zaraz_wracam]

Le Carre and Fleming? Far away galaxies. Incomparable. I’m more on le Carre’s side. Entertainment is important but we have more than enough already. People, read le Carre!

[@Lech_zaraz_wracam]

I would like to hear Fleming’s comment on today’s reality. He knew what he is writing about but was not as brave as le Carre. A pitty.

[@Bond8789]

@@Lech_zaraz_wracam Bond came along at a time when rationing was still in effect in post war Britain. Ultra gritty reality wasn't what Fleming was aiming for. More of a distorted reflection of the real world. Bond drives a Bently, smokes Morland cigarettes (all known brands), but there is a benign bizarreness to Bonds world.

[@Lech_zaraz_wracam]

Bond8789 Yes, I agree. He knew how to position himself.

[@mrb5791]

I think there is a value for Escapist Entertainment. I don’t need all spy stories to strictly adhere to how the Spy Craft actually works, and that’s why even though Le Carre’s quality is leagues ahead of Fleming’s, Fleming is much more interesting because he injects these cartoonish ideas into his work, but can also flip the switch and represent how spy craft actually works. I think Casino Royale is the best example of that.

[@Lech_zaraz_wracam]

@@mrb5791 You have a point. It's not which one is better, it's what you value more. I have to admit, I read Fleming as a kid, now he's undigestable to me. [sorry for mistakes, English is not my strongest language].

[@michaelmazowiecki9195]

I read Fleming's books as a young teen le Carre as an adult. Fleming's characters are far shallower, escapist, glamorous. Le Carre's characters are far more complex, deeper, often cynical smoke and mirrors.

[@chokingmessiah]

This is incredible. Excellent performances and speeches by all.

[@arrystophanes7909]

Le Carre is autumn/winter reading; Fleming is spring/summer reading

[@kimcornelissen1529]

i watch James Bond but I will read John Le Carre. To me the better writer by far in this genre is Le Carre where as James Bond is a character in a movie.

[@mrb5791]

I agree

[@mohammedashian8094]

Actually the character in the novels is NOT the same as the one in the movies

[@peters6366]

Perhaps the difference is the Fleming is an actual War experienced end of Empire spy (e.g. Casino Royale) while LeCarre is a Cold War spy. Hence the former is more rough and tumble 'direct action" while the latter is below the radar approach of a posted Consular Cover?

[@gopalmarar]

Good point!

[@DeedUNo]

Before I.Fleming, Le Carre - there was Eric Ambler

[@suemarshall6185]

Comparing a screen writer to a classic, eloquent expert in his field? No contest for book lovers. I prefer his films, too - Alec Guiness was superb.

[@AustinBeeman]

Um. The Bond films were books first. And better than the films.

[@suemarshall6185]

@@AustinBeeman Yes indeed. Ian Fleming worked for naval intelligence, and Bond worked for Q. Very hard to find a writer of Le Carre's quality, though. He also was with naval intelligence, as was Hemmingway, out in Cuba.

[@mrb5791]

Le Carre’s the superior writer, but I wouldn’t go so far in saying his works were better adapted than Fleming’s. Goldfinger the film completely improves on the novel it was based on. I also find the film versions of From Russia With Love, or Casino Royale much more interesting and engaging than the film versions of The Spy Who Came In From The Cold, or Tinker Tailor Solider Spy.

[@ironpirites]

I haven't read all of Le Carré's novels but I have read a few of them. They are interesting for their psychological portraits of people in espionage. Ian Fleming is a better prose stylist in my opinion. There are very good passages of description in his books along with the fantastical plots and ogres of evil. Len Deighton is also a great prose stylist, giving us some very poetic writing in The Billion Dollar Brain certainly. His world is somewhat glittering and superficial, like the world of the media, but his plots are absorbing and entertaining. Le Carré's books are tied more tightly to the ordinary world than either of the other two writers I mentioned, but they are still mainly about people involved with espionage. Joseph Conrad's The Secret Agent is what a truly great writer does with the topic of espionage. None of the others mentioned here are in his league, although Le Carré's A Perfect Spy, in its study of the etiology of a duplicitous personality rises above the usual in the genre.

[@ezekielyu4294]

I agree about the performances. Top-notch. I'll have to side with Le Carre on this one. Just manifestly a better writer, although one tends to have more fun with Fleming - in my case, at least. Either way, an entertaining "debate!"

[@mrb5791]

Le Carre’s is definitely a better writer. Fleming’s work fluctuates in quality, but I prefer Fleming because when he’s at his best like Casino Royale, From Russia With Love, or On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (his best works), I get an entertainment factor that I simply don’t get with Le Carre.

[@travlishallingquest5719]

@@mrb5791 I would put Fleming’s third novel MOONRAKER, in that ranking as well.

[@BluGiant14]

stumbled upon this somehow. Brilliant idea, having this debate "formally" since I'm sure it's one that's happened in many circles before. Like Horowitz noted, it's difficult to appreciate le Carre as a youngster...I tried, and did not find my understanding and love of him until my mid-to-late 20s. Now I'm actually a bigger le Carre fan, though Fleming has his place in my heart.

[@paxwallacejazz]

Honestly le Carrié is far more frightening sinister confusing and real.

[@TheRealLeewon]

Would love to see a JRR Tolkien vs George R R Martin... sadly, think I'll have to stick to Epic Rap Battles of History for the present

[@emw1994]

Tolkien, hands down, if only because he's a more interesting person.

[@squamish4244]

That would be a hell of a smackdown, but Tolkien's sheer influence on the fantasy genre would probably be the deciding factor.

[@DAGDRUM53]

Absolutely, Ahab, and Tolkien could do what Martin cannot---finish what he started.

[@squamish4244]

SNAP

[@sernoddicusthegallant6986]

Please no I will never understand the internets obsession with comparing these two authors with so little in common other than being popular fantasies. Not to mention the more fanatical side of the Tolkein fanbase seems to have an inexplicably singular hatred for George Martin so the comments would likely be extremely toxic. When it comes to fantasy authors it would be far more fitting to compare Tolkien to Robert Jordan or George Martin to Tad Williams.

[@count_bodies_like_sheep9296]

John Le Carre. I don't see how you can even make the argument that Ian Fleming is better when John Le Carre actually served in MI5.

[@BrianRPaterson]

Before he became famous as the creator of James Bond in the 1950s, Ian Fleming (1908-1964) was an officer in the Royal Navy's Naval Intelligence Department. He devised a number of wartime schemes worthy of a Bond novel.

[@blackbird5634]

@@BrianRPaterson exactly. Fleming had to start from scratch, invent the airplane while flying it, and do it from the 'outside looking in' as it were. Le Carre (John Cornwell) had an entire institution already in place to fit himself into. There was a generation gap that included the paranoid minds of WW2 and now the post war lunacy of the cold war.

[@robertkennedy2258]

Horowitz and Farr both carry themselves like Smiley and Bond respectively.

[@elainedodge7156]

Love hearing the debates but am not sure why a choice is necessary. In each case, both authors are great and both write different aspects of the genre. Isn't that enough?

[@mohammedashian8094]

Apparently not to some people

[@calmcowboy]

I would eat Ian's books, brilliant and so imaginative but i feel as Le carré's books are more real and have sentences imprinted in me, because of the logic and truth behind them, showing experience and not imagination. :D love them both.

[@mohammedashian8094]

Fleming adds some of his war experiences into bond. Plus he specifically said that if he started sticking to close to the real espionage of MI6 he would get in trouble with the official secrets act

[@patrickvalo8822]

the readers are superb

[@LachlanMoir-hc2jj]

Le Carre' obviously. Bond is like a cartoon character. Bond is entertainment and is delightful at that, but Smiley is the literature.

[@jameswilliams9104]

Le Carre is, by any measure, a better writer than Fleming. That's just how it is. I like some of Fleming's books, too, but arguing that he's better than Le Carre is like arguing that Mt Everest is a ditch.

[@GT-wo2oj]

I enjoy debates like this but I wish they weren’t so posh people heavy!!

[@joefish6091]

its the class and social scene of the people in govt and professional MSM

[@johndavies1506]

I agree ,very posh heavy in the audience .

[@powerbite92]

@@joefish6091 These people are absolute t*ssers. Which is why they now chuck a non-stop hissy fit about anything that doesn't go the way they want it to..

[@powerbite92]

@The Knight Watcher Because this is an elitist event funded by the Rothschilds. They are opposed to the common man getting ANY voice on either side of the Atlantic. Hence at the start, the lady goes to great lengths to make it clear that she Doesnt Like Trump and so she is by extension a decent human being ... and toward the end the question is "Would Fleming vote Brexit?" - well, of course he would have, but again they go to great lengths to rehabilitate Fleming and mae it so that he would somehow be a Remainer and therefore, by extension, a decent human being. I have all the time in the world for the Queens English and well read prose - I have no time for these elitist scumbags in the pay of the very banking families that wish to do the West what they did to Tsarist Russia.

[@cjEureka]

I skipped straight tp My hero...John LeCarre....no comparsion

[@jamesburke2094]

Frederick Forsyth might be a little offended by being placed behind Fleming....

[@ротатоаск]

Yeah, even I was offended. Day of the Jackal and The Odessa File tops anything Fleming ever wrote.

[@nigelcowie6883]

This is marvellous - thank you for posting this!

[@petertrott5107]

Brilliant loved it. Le Carre for me. Perhaps let audience questions be answered after said.

[@iggyt6666]

This was fucking brilliant.

[@darticulate8751]

Oh do shut up!

[@nancyallen628]

what does the word "fucking" have to do with this excellent video??

[@squamish4244]

Le Carre's earlier works have outlasted the conventions of the 50s and 60s and the rest of his corpus is likely to outlast our era as well. Fleming is somewhat confined to the time period in which he wrote. He might have made a particular impact in gloomy postwar Britain but girls in bikinis and tropical adventures, while an endless source of fun, are not exactly standout tropes today.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

I think Fleming was more substantial than you think. Bond was often conflicted by his duties. Read the first chapter of Goldfinger and you'll witness Bond trying rationalize a murder he committed in Mexico.

[@lukasnummer1]

Ian Fleming is often falsely reduced to "girls in bikinis" and "tropical adventures". His novels are so much more than that. "From Russia with Love" is one of the best thrillers ever written, no doubt about that.

[@squamish4244]

I won't reduce him to that, just that when his books came out, those particular aspects of them would have made mre of an impression than they do today.

[@Bond8789]

"girls in bikinis and tropical adventures, while an endless source of fun" So, you've seen the films, you should try the books some time, they are quite different to the films. The literary Bond is not the superman he is often portrayed in the films, and by people who have no firsthand knowledge of the books.

[@powerbite92]

@@ricardocantoral7672 Fleming had moments of poetry littered throughout, I'd say he was an uneven writer.

[@porsche911sbs]

I really liked Simon Callow and Alex Macqueen's performances

[@justsayin397]

John le Carre all day long …. RIP you wonderful wonderful writer

[@SmithMrCorona]

To answer their questions on who would have been a Trump and Brexit supporter, it's very simple. Neither would have liked Trump. Politically, he would have intrigued Fleming, but Trump's Americanism would turn him off completely. Le Carre is not a conservative, and would be put off by everything he says and does - in fact he has said so publicly. Fleming would be all in favour of Brexit, and Le Carre - again, publicly - has said it's an awful idea propped up by lies.

[@evelynbaron2004]

Anyone interested in a really scathing review of Ian Fleming should refer to Shovelling Trouble by the late Modecai Richler. It is in turns outraged and hilarious. Great debate.

[@t.brogers8956]

As great as John Le Carré and Ian Fleming are. I'll take John Le Carré any day of the week. I just love John's more realistic approach to the world of espionage.

[@jmb92555]

Seriously? John Le Carre, a man with roots in the world of intel and espionage, whose books were both entertaining and thought provoking as well as educational vs Ian Fleming who wrote sensationalist (and entertaining) spy novels. Where is the comparison?

[@mohammedashian8094]

Fleming worked in naval intelligence during the war and had to build his way up it. Le Carré on the other hand (and this is not to diss him) had a different type of espionage by the time he joined MI6. Plus Fleming admitted that his novels are completely fictional BECAUSE he said he would get in trouble with official secrets act in London if he wrote it exactly the way it was. So there’s absolutely no reason to compare them

[@altafaltaf3004]

Agreed Mr.Care bores to bones.Mr.Fleming creates easy pace reading.

[@justsayin397]

Le Carre

[@timrandall9479]

This is comparing apples and oranges. Le Carre is more what espionage is like in the real world and Fleming is, like the man said, fantasy, but what fantasy! I like both for different reasons. Some of Le Carre's novels are boring as hell and the subject matter Is not to my taste. Fleming never bores. You can't be fair to either writer by saying he is best. Another great writer of spy fiction is Len Deighton, whose work is somewhere in between. The Ipcress File comes damn close to The Spy Who Came in from the Cold.

[@jamesbowen7530]

It surprises me that a debate about these two writers hardly makes a mention of their relative abilities in sentence construction, word choice, paragraph flow, and other elements of good writing. The flashy prose of Ian Fleming wouldn’t have made it past the red ink of any of my English professors, while the simple declarative sentences of John le Carre are really quite compelling. It also surprises me that there was hardly a mention of Agatha Christie. Fleming and le Carre may have each sold nearly one hundred million books, but Agatha Christie sold two billion, according to Guinness World Records. One of her titles alone sold one hundred million copies. To my way of thinking, she was a beautiful writer. Christie created the memorable - and perhaps more admirable - characters Miss Marple, Hercule Poirot, and other endearing persons. I like to say you could recognize any of them at the bus stop.

[@Rohilla313]

Agreed on Agatha Christie, but have you read Ngaio Marsh? Great detective fiction but her prose style is on a different level.

[@Tompag101]

Some odd questions from the audience, and I feel it does a disservice to those 4 fantastic actors to have them sat there in silence most of the night.. Great debate otherwise.

[@spanaker]

I kinda mixed on this. I like both of them. But simley is more realistic 🙃

[@DAGDRUM53]

At 47:00 David Farr extols a homo-eroticism evident in Le Carré’s books he finds 'dangerous & exciting.' I prefer Fleming's writing because such subtext is all but absent from the Bond books.

[@PalJoey-on1yi]

I definitely would not agree with Farr's homo-eroticism theme to begin with. As a "man" Smiley has been shorted on looks, strength, and aggression, and is really not so much occupied with sexual role as with compensating his own shortcomings with intelligence and caution.

[@BookTimeWithRyan]

I would vote for John LeCarré, but as far as who has taken up the baton, I think the closest work I've read to LeCarré is Robert Littell's The Company.

[@richarddyasonihc]

This debate became what it deserved to be, frivolous and little more than easy, cheap entertainment. I have never seen a’Bond movie’, for the very good reason that I only read two of This debate became what it deserved to be, frivolous and little more than easy, cheap entertainment. I have never seen a’Bond movie’, for the very good reason that I only read two of Fleming’s novels and a non-fiction book whi I think was titled ‘My favourite Cities’s Some 55years ago. I read the novels because my English teacher at school ridiculed them which made me curious. Discussing the merits of Hollywood films and popular actors Suied to such films is irrelevant to a debate about literature, and authors. I didn’t watch very much of this debate given that it started very early to be similar to comparing a penny arcade or amusement park with a library. For those who will no doubt think it, yes I am a product of the English Public Schools of the 50s & 60s. novels and a non-fiction book whi I think was titled ‘My favourite Cities’s Some 55years ago. I read the novels because my English teacher at school ridiculed them which made me curious. Discussing the merits of Hollywood films and popular actors Suied to such films is irrelevant to a debate about literature, and authors. I didn’t watch very much of this debate given that it started very early to be similar to comparing a penny arcade or amusement park with a library. For those who will no doubt think it, yes I am a product of the English Public Schools of the 50s & 60s.

[@kindnessfirst9670]

Ian Fleming and Le Carre seem like opposites to me. Le Carre is easily my favorite author. Movies don't do his books justice but the two 7 hour BBC TV productions of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Smiley's People were excellent. The similar production of The Perfect Spy was good too.

[@iainmacdonald7034]

This was excellent entertainment, thank you. And Happy New Year.

[@baeticus1]

Fleming is playful and light, le Carré is deep and serious. They are not part of the same league.

[@irish66]

What about Len Deighton?

[@Lech_zaraz_wracam]

Len Deighton! Yes, one of the few good ones! My vote for him!

[@sudeeptobasu620]

As a Fan of Spy Fiction, For Me Both Ian Fleming & John Le Carre are Great in Their Own Way & Certainly Both Had Made Spy Fiction Famous. Undoubtedly John Le Carre Gave Us Two Masterpieces of Cold War Spy Fiction Namely 'The Spy Who Came In From The Cold' & 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' and One of The Greatest Fictional Spies, 'George Smiley' & Some Great Novels in the Post Cold War Era. On the Other Hand, Ian Fleming Gave Post-War Britain One of Its Most Iconic Fictional Characters i.e. 'James Bond' , Well Fleming's Literary Bond Has Certainly More Depth Than His Cinematic Counterpart & Certainly Was Not Mere 'Fantasy'. Fleming Created Bond Out of His World War 2 Experiences & As a Composite of All Secret Agents & Commando Types He Met During The War. 'Sidney Railey' or 'Dusco Popov' did Exist as Spies in Reality. Moreover, Contrary To the Movie Bond's Ever Exciting Life Fleming Wanted Bond To Be a 'Blunt Instrument for the Govt' Gave Him the Dullest Name He Ever heard i.e. 'James Bond'! In 'From Russia With Love' We See Bond's Counter-Intelligence Officer Aspect When He Expressed His Opinion As to How to Counter 'Atomic Era Intellectual Spy' ...We Find the Same Tradecraft as Described by Fleming in 'Casino Royale'(1953) 60 Years Later in Frederick Forsyth's 'The Kill List'(2013). So Its Unfair To Discard Fleming's Bond as Totally Fantasy. George Smiley is Middle Aged, Plump, Introvert & Sharp But Bond Too, Despite His Vices Has a Vulnerable Side & is Certainly Not the 'Superspy Action Man' as in the Movies. Fleming's Bond is Not Even the Almost Superhuman Assassin as Some of His Successors in American Spy Fiction. Also, There is Difference Between Fleming & Le Carre's World View , Le Carre Brought Moral Ambiguity in His Cold War Plots But Fleming Was Product of His Time i.e. British Empire Era & in 1950s Communist 'Red Menace' Was At Its Height So Certainly Fleming's Fiction Shows Moral Certainity. Even Helen MacInnes , The 'Queen of Spy Fiction' Had the Same Trait. Len Deighton Came before JLC & Fleming Appreciated Deighton's Writing. Had He Lived For Few More Years, Seeing JLC or Deighton or Elleston Trevor's 'Quiller' He Might Have Shifted From 'Spy Adventure' , Fleming Experimented With the Character & His Short Stories are Appreciated. Finally, Perhaps Its Better to See Ian Fleming as the Bridge Between John Butchan, Somerset Maugham, Eric Ambler, Graham Greene, Manning-Coles Era and John Le Carre, Len Deighton Era.

[@jamesnaughton5657]

Farr does an awful job of advocating for Le Carre. Smug and pretentious, with vague mention of how he supposedly interrogates the human condition but without ever really establishing it. And to top it off he’s painfully progressive, which explains some of the directorial choices in his overrated adaption of The Night Manager.

[@RobertHunt-vd8vy]

Flemming dissing this man......Hope not...... Haven't watched this so it's doubtful......

[@jemconvery8937]

Simon Callow and Leslie Manville reading Connie Sachs and Smiley was breathtaking. Thoroughly enjoyed this.

[@petermortimer6303]

They almost sound like Beryl Reid and Alec Guinness, especially Leslie Manville

[@perseus9428]

Ian Fleming vs John le Carré = Justin Bieber vs Pink Floyd = McDonald's vs Joel Robuchon = Hershey's vs Dalloyau

[@zaklockman7527]

One thing that comes across the two novelist's characters is their very Englishness. Many heroes in American novels always win, win big, and have a rousing ride into the sunset with the girl. Bond, and Smiley both do win, but in the end have more questions about the validity of the victory, or the totality of it at all. Bond will often win the day but lose the girl, betray a trust, or be reprimanded for the efforts. George will lose the battle, but win the war, and lose his way within the journey.

[@damonarvid3548]

I'm not going to criticize the LeCarre advocate too much, but he did not choose the pick of the litter from the Smiley canon for dramatization. The last one, yes...

[@gregorygarcia7807]

M'be we can add Rohl Dahl to the mix and I like Chiity-chitty bang bang. All spies for UK

[@einarsteinnvalgarsson3333]

Why does the host keep calling him McCarré when it’s le Carré?

[@clarekuehn4372]

What date is the debate? Please put it in the description section of the video. 🙂

[@KOMET2006]

November 29th, 2016.

[@NoName-zn1sb]

Who's full of herself?!

[@childeroland2569]

Le Carre

[@mikebaty617]

this is a pointless opposition, clearly a false opposition. it can only appeal to the manichaean mindset.

[@ianpunchard2878]

anyone else feel this was somewhat elitist / highbrow and dare i say so are some of the replies on here too...

[@martind349]

The Russia House

[@stevenfielden8955]

Who's pointing the revolver through the curtains 15 minutes in??

[@MsV_English.Literature]

I vote for Le Carré, always! The spy master himself.

[@mrb5791]

Le Carre is a superior writer. No doubt about it, but if I was to choose between the two, I’d go with Fleming every single time. His work is all over the place, but when he’s at his best, he’s simply in a league of his own. Plus I prefer James Bond as a character than any of Le Carre’s.

[@tergre54]

Natural successor to James Bond? Maxwell Smart, of course.

[@SantiagoPinedaSanx]

poor Matthew Lewis, he only had a few lines to say.

[@davidhull1481]

Is this worth watching? I’m not happy that it’s been turned into some kind of cage match or sporting event with a winner and a loser. Please, someone convince me

[@MROTAKU-km6yd]

Please convince Is it okay 😑

[@powerbite92]

Its garbage mate. These luvvies are so full of themselves. Horowitz is an affirmative actioned prat talking nineteen to the dozen, the compere goes on about Trump at the beginning just to show which side shes on. They could have just had a chat where they discuss the merits and differences between each author. Instead they do this Its-a-Knockout garbage

[@jongadsby1623]

Totally wonderful!!!! was on the set for From Russia with love!!! read all the JB books including Colonel Sun and also my len Deighton and Gavin Lyall books As an ex ******* the more realistic are John Le Carre and also the ealso Stella Rimmington novels

[@Dragonfly-0010]

Honestly didn't think that David Farr came up with a legitimate argument for LeCarre, he made him sound quite boring to be honest, so am surprised he won.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

I think it is quite difficult to make Le Carre sound appealing. His material is just so dry.

[@MatthewMcVeagh]

Le Carré is better because he's deeper, more realistic, explores grey areas, brings in a European existential and psychological angle.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

Matthew McVeagh Just because​ one writes about gloomy reality does not mean he, or she, is superior to a writer who crafts entertainment. Fleming was a great writer who knew how to write colorful discriptions of actions and places. For example, when the SMERSH killer shot Le Chiffre there was no straight description of the gun shot and the aftermath. Instead, Le Chiffre "grew a third eye".

[@MatthewMcVeagh]

Yes I read your mentioning of the 'third eye' phrase in a different thread. I am not necessarily going along with those arguments, but they are broadly the ones that David Farr made. I would say Le Carré is superior because he plots better and because his realism allows us to appreciate what the spy world is really like, whereas Fleming spins a macho fantasy from his own private fantasies. Bond's world and activities are not real espionage; apart from anything else everyone knows who he is. It's an exciting, sensational scene of lovelies, grotesques, danger and derring-do. Le Carré revealed the non-brave, non-glamorous, non-sexy, ultimately sordid and ethically ambiguous world of real intelligence agencies, the same ones Fleming worked in but didn't write about.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

Matthew McVeagh​ Bond was definitely more Pulp than spy fiction. Fleming was not aiming for realism but on the other hand, that doesn't mean the books were one dimensional in nature. For example, look at The Living Daylights when Bond is ordered to kill in cold blood. He is sickened by the mission and the atmosphere of death surrounding him in post war Berlin, a depressing watseland that was a constant reminder of what happened during the War. Bond succeeds in his mission but he's so pissed off that he told his colleague that he didn't give a damn if he would be kicked out of the Double 00s. There was also a memorable scene in Goldfinger when a Bond is tormented by the guilt of killing a thug who was sent to kill him. He desperately tries to rationalize what he did but to no avail.

[@mi6uk]

I wonder what Ian Fleming or John le Carré would have thought of the latest Ipcress File TV series. They allegedly occasionally met up with Len Deighton but alas their meetings ended in arguments about who was best equipped to write the most realistic books. It's a shame all three focused on fiction. Fiction, fiction, fiction ... why are so many spy novels thus? Factual novels enable the reader to research more about what’s in the novel in press cuttings, history books etc and such research can be as rewarding and compelling as reading an enthralling novel. Furthermore, if even just marginally autobiographical, the author has the opportunity to convey the protagonist’s genuine hopes and fears as opposed to hypothetical stuff any author can dream up about say what it feels like to avoid capture. A good example of a "real" raw noir espionage thriller is the first novel in The Burlington Files series. Its protagonist, Bill Fairclough aka Edward Burlington, was of course a real as opposed to a celluloid spy and has even been likened to a "posh and sophisticated Harry Palmer". Apparently Bill Fairclough once contacted John le Carré in 2014 to do a collaboration. John le Carré replied "Why should I? I've got by so far without collaboration so why bother now?" A realistic response from a famous expert in fiction!

[@richarddyasonihc]

This debate became what it deserved to be, frivolous and little more than easy, cheap entertainment. I have never seen a’Bond movie’, for the very good reason that I only read two of This debate became what it deserved to be, frivolous and little more than easy, cheap entertainment. I have never seen a’Bond movie’, for the very good reason that I only read two of Fleming’s novels and a non-fiction book whi I think was titled ‘My favourite Cities’s Some 55years ago. I read the novels because my English teacher at school ridiculed them which made me curious. Discussing the merits of Hollywood films and popular actors Suied to such films is irrelevant to a debate about literature, and authors. I didn’t watch very much of this debate given that it started very early to be similar to comparing a penny arcade or amusement park with a library. For those who will no doubt think it, yes I am a product of the English Public Schools of the 50s & 60s. novels and a non-fiction book whi I think was titled ‘My favourite Cities’s Some 55years ago. I read the novels because my English teacher at school ridiculed them which made me curious. Discussing the merits of Hollywood films and popular actors Suied to such films is irrelevant to a debate about literature, and authors. I didn’t watch very much of this debate given that it started very early to be similar to comparing a penny arcade or amusement park with a library. For those who will no doubt think it, yes I am a product of the English Public Schools of the 50s & 60s.

[@richarddyasonihc]

This debate became what it deserved to be, frivolous and little more than easy, cheap entertainment. I have never seen a’Bond movie’, for the very good reason that I only read two of Fleming’s novels and a non-fiction book whi I think was titled ‘My favourite Cities’s Some 55years ago. I read the novels because my English teacher at school ridiculed them which made me curious. Discussing the merits of Hollywood films and popular actors Suied to such films is irrelevant to a debate about literature, and authors. I didn’t watch very much of this debate given that it started very early to be similar to comparing a penny arcade or amusement park with a library. For those who will no doubt think it, yes I am a product of the English Public Schools of the 50s & 60s.

[@richarddyasonihc]

This debate became what it deserved to be, frivolous and little more than easy, cheap entertainment. I have never seen a’Bond movie’, for the very good reason that I only read two of Fleming’s novels and a non-fiction book whi I think was titled ‘My favourite Cities’s Some 55years ago. I read the novels because my English teacher at school ridiculed them which made me curious. Discussing the merits of Hollywood films and popular actors Suied to such films is irrelevant to a debate about literature, and authors. I didn’t watch very much of this debate given that it started very early to be similar to comparing a penny arcade or amusement park with a library. For those who will no doubt think it, yes I am a product of the English Public Schools of the 50s & 60s.

[@johnrudy9404]

Long ago, I knew a guy in college who read Le Carre. Told me about it as best he could. Sounded to me like a bore. Bond was it. Years later watched the TV series TTSS with Guiness. Seemed interesting. Then saw Bullitt w Steve MacQueen. In it, there is a procedural sequence in which he and Norm Fell look through a trunk and itemize the contents. That scene seemed hugely impactful. The items would scream to the investigator, its meaning and relevance. I was hooked. Watching TTSS again in the 2000s, the grim, cold, unflattering world of REAL spy work hit home. Bond in one swoop, seemed silly.

[@markhughes7927]

It is not either or .......... the elan and verve of some of the passages in Fleming are extraordinary. So is his experience. Le Carre is all long slow compaction fully melded and meticulously threaded in its investigations. But do you touch evil like you do in Fleming’s ‘From Russia with love’? The great pity about Fleming’s writing is that it is patchy - brilliance and paltriness succeeding each other. Both writers have cultured tastes and refined societal knowledge - but with Fleming you feel the Rolex going over your wrist - the extended passage which opens Moonraker is breathtaking you are taken every step of the way through dangerous and privileged circumstances. Arf arf.......

[@brucesmith3072]

Fabulous show! Though like comparing DaVinci to Raphael. At 75yo, I think age has something to do with 'favorites'. Fleming's characters were much more palatable to young sexy minds. Le Carrè is later, but a great writer! Also, Fleming's stories adapt more to movies than Le Carré.Learned more about Le Carré through interviews - WONDERFUL MAN!

[@TheVanneo]

Farr said "we've done terrible things" mentioning empire. Well, off to check his early life to confirm my suspicions...Ah, I was correct. Yes David, your tribe has indeed done many terrible things but you're not really British so shut your mouth when it comes to history.

[@jstanley8342]

Two omissions on Horowitz' side: one is how the novel "The Spy who Loved Me" was written from the female's perspective and was panned; and how Fleming's novels are very much a nationalistic reaction to the US replacing the UK as the dominant power and the erosion of the Empire. They were probably deliberate omissions as Horowitz would've known they'd prove Fleming as both misogynistic and a likely Brexiter.

[@powerbite92]

a) how seriously are you taking this debate? b) "prove Fleming a *likely* Brexiter" - what world are you living in where dead people become 'likely Brexiters' and this is somehow important in any way?

[@jstanley8342]

@@powerbite92 a) About as seriously as I take nerding over Star Trek vs. Star Wars debates, which is fun but no tour in Ramadi. b) I only mention Brexit b/c I'm (reasonably) assuming the audience is mostly liberal, therefore mostly against Brexit, and consequently liable to view you more negatively if you were to suggest it, especially in these touchy times, and if you want to persuade people in a debate, you'd want to minimize that sort of connection and the potential risk it entails. Sheesh. How serious do you take these comments?

[@powerbite92]

@@jstanley8342 Hello >>> Joshua

[@waltergodsoe5526]

Fleming wrote comics, Le Carre art

[@Housey1985]

Simplistic view in extremis...

[@waltergodsoe5526]

@@Housey1985 Phooey

[@waltergodsoe5526]

@The Knight Watcher Fair enough

[@barracuda7018]

@@Housey1985 Almost levity...

[@PaulMcCaffreyfmac]

Le Carre is a brilliant writer by any standards but Fleming is strictly genre and as far from literary fiction as you could get. Exciting and all that but strictly pulp fiction. Don't let the films and our love for them cloud the issue.

[@PaulMcCaffreyfmac]

Don't get me wrong. There is a place in my reading life for Fleming and I would rather read Bond than most of the so-called 'police preocedural' stuff around these days but I still feel that LeCarre is a class apart.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

***** It's true that Le Carre's books were more provocative. Still, Fleming should at least be considered when thinking about the greats. His vivid discriptions and use of the English language was beautiful. Le Chiffre was not shot in the head, he grew a third eye ! That's frickin brilliant.

[@BluGiant14]

+Ricardo Cantoral I agree, Fleming was great with phrasing and a to-the-point style of sentence. And I actually re-purchased many of the old Bond stuff recently. But of the two, le Carre is the only one whose writing ever left me feeling any real emotion on the last page (heartbreak, with "A Most Wanted Man")

[@ricardocantoral7672]

skizz06 I can understand that because Fleming's Bond universe was fantastic. Le Carre was a lot closer to earth.

[@Apuleius_]

It's the other way around--the Bond films tend to cloud judgment of Fleming's work. And "Literary fiction" is itself a genre, no better or worse than others. Fleming himself isn't pulp fiction and wasn't considered such until after the films, as the initial reception of his books shows.

[@jasonsmith1155]

Oh, come on, seriously? If this is happening, when is the Harry Potter, Tolstoy debate going to be?

[@petertatiner7128]

Staggering percentage of Fleming over LeCarré supporters. Astonishing.

[@spodvoll]

I appreciate both perspectives, ie the realistic and the fantastic. And let's not forget that Fleming was no stranger to intelligence. The fact that his experience was gained during a hot war and not a cold war was clear in his literary work, as well.

[@tonydecastro6340]

John Le Carré, hands down.

[@mohammedashian8094]

Both are great. But I don’t think it’s necessary to compare because as others mentioned the way both guys write is NOT the same. Le Carré is more morally ambiguous Cold War novels. Fleming is more straight forward and simple but grounded allies against the Russians novels. Also there is a a generational difference between the two. Fleming is 22 years older than le Carré and he’s more of the ww2 generation (which is also where bond is from) le Carré on the other hand is more of the Cold War generation. Fleming also did admit that his espionage is fiction BECAUSE he said that if he started to do it more like the actual thing he would get in big trouble with the official secrets act in London

[@thomasjones2415]

Ian Fleming Wins Because He Created James Bond,

[@williampayne7431]

The introduction by the Fleming advocate says it all. Fleming writes at a ten year olds level. Le carre writes for adults.

[@mohammedashian8094]

In his goldeneye estate interview when asked about people criticizing his novels for having sex and violence, he simply said: “my books are meant for warm-blooded heterosexuals ADULTS, they’re not meant for school boys.” So I don’t know what the hell he’s talking about but he clearly forgot about that

[@matthewotto8322]

Definitely le Carré

[@preggioperson]

Why can’t we enjoy them all?

[@mohammedashian8094]

Because people are assholes and cannot be pleased

[@JubileeGiggles]

Notice they didn't give an answer to the girl who tried to prod Anthony about stripping Bond of his core masculine qualities. His character is quite "problematic", as it were.

[@thomsboys77]

Well, why should he? Bond is supposed to be a masculine character. If you took that away it would not be the same character

[@mcsquare4439]

If you were Bond having been thru what Bond had been thru, you could care less about a friggin’ centipede.

[@marshalllindsay315]

Millipedes are lethal, centipedes not so much. If he counted the feet go by and got centipede then yeah, he should have grabbed his slipper and beat it like a tarantula.