It was a tremendously restorative weekend. Big changes are afoot for me professionally, and I got the revisions for Gamble out the door Friday afternoon so there was not much to do but wait, and read. While the former is not my favourite, the latter most definitely is. I polished off two Trevanians (Eiger Sanction and Loo Sanction), and decided that while I was there I might as well try some Ian Fleming, which oddly enough I never had. Casino Royale was thus sampled and finished.
It scratched a definite itch. All three bore deep imprints of a certain type of “men’s fiction” (usually from the late 70s-early 80s, but with some exceptions), so occupied with proving “manliness” and “intellectual superiority” the emotional stuntedness of the protagonists is almost ignored save for when a bit of bathos is thought advisable. (Hemlock’s pretensions made me nearly scream with mirth.) Honestly they reminded me of nothing so much as early Clive Cussler novels or a certain type of Western–though I’m not saying that as an insult, I read Cussler like candy growing up since those books were of the few allowed upon the single small bookshelf my adult caregivers thought showed them to be both daring and reasonably well-educated. (There were more books hidden under my mattress than on that particular piece of shelving, but I digress.) They also reminded me, tonally, of MacDonald’s Travis McGee series.
There’s a great deal of misogyny marinating that style of book, but if I waited for misogyny- and fridging-free reads…well, we all know it. It’s tiring; I roll my eyes and move on.
The thing I think saves the genre’s better offerings is the fact that the protagonists are always, without exception, shown to be emotionally stunted and deeply unhappy. I can see why Eastwood wanted to make Eiger into a film, and I think Daniel Craig’s Bond is far more in the style of book-Bond than any other. The urbane wit and suspense is covering up complete paucity in other areas, and Craig really leaned into that. (Some honor must also go to the script, I’m sure.) And I’m forced now to grin ruefully and shake my head at the boys (and even adult men) who breathlessly informed me that Dirk Pitt or Jonathan Hemlock or James Bond or McGee (or or or) were their heroes. (Or role models, which is both pitiable and risible at once.)
I do wonder if the reveal was conscious on the writers’ part.
I could’ve pressed onward with Fleming, but I think the itch is gone. Instead I cracked Fernando Pessoa’s Book of Disquiet, which is giving me a certain type of existential feeling. It reminds me of Anais Nin’s diaries, actually; the feel in my head is largely the same with a few outcroppings of different stone to hold. I’m also trying a gothic that is giving me a bit of trouble; I am told it loosens up in the second third but am unsure if I’m gonna make it that far.
This week is full of meetings, plus starting on Chained Knight revisions. I will be forced to be social all the way through Friday, which will bleed off working energy but cannot be helped. I’ve scheduled a lot of administrivia, which can be handled even when I’m exhausted. Silver linings, and all that.
I do wonder why the Muse wanted those particular spy thrillers thrown into the creative mill. It’s interesting grist; we’ll see if anything happens with it. And now a certain Boxnoggin wishes I’d stop muttering while staring at the glowing box, for he has real action to commit upon the pavement of our fair neighbourhood.
Off I go.