Once you get past all the racist jabs, you’re left with a pretty good book. Some unnecessary filler slows down the story, but Mr. Big as the villain, fun action sequences and Bond actually Bond-ing about makes up for it. So y'all can argue about sexism, feminism, objectifying women, misogyny, etc. I'm pretty sure many girls today would jump at a chance to be a Bond girl even for a day. He does treat his women well. Even Bond haters cannot deny that. I'd never mix the attribute of “womanising” with “misogyny”. I mean, Bond is anything BUT misogynistic. A true gentleman, a gallant knight to the ladies. Even if his flaw is that he likes all of them. In the movies, we all saw what happened when Bond allowed his emotions to get in the way of his mission. He becomes someone else. Not quite Bond as we know it. Solitaire is pretty brainless in both the movie and the book. But in the movie they create this whole "she is psychic because she's a virgin and if she ever has sex she'll lose her magic powers" - which is a popular trope but very unnecessary.

You’re very beautiful,’ said Bond. ‘You kiss more wonderfully than any girl I have ever known.’ He looked down at the bandages on his left hand. ‘Curse this arm.’ he said. ‘I can’t hold you properly or make love to you. It hurts too much. That’s something else that Mr. Big’s got to pay for.’” The British Secret Service agent James Bond is sent by his superior, M, to New York City to investigate "Mr Big", real name Buonaparte Ignace Gallia. Bond's target is an agent of the Soviet counterintelligence organisation SMERSH, and an underworld voodoo leader who is suspected of selling 17th-century gold coins to finance Soviet spy operations in America. These gold coins have been turning up in the Harlem section of New York City and in Florida and are suspected of being part of a treasure that was buried in Jamaica by the pirate Henry Morgan. Also, Fleming seems to go out of his way to over explain things at times. The narrator even points out in a short interview at the end of the book that Fleming seems to like to flaunt his knowledge of obscure things, often including descriptions or tangents in the book that aren't really necessary. I felt better about thinking that way myself after hearing the narrator agree with me. I'm not sure what Fleming was like as a person, but I have the sneaking suspicion he might have been a bit of a difficult snob. I might be wrong....but it's the impression that I get. The book was littered with filler that did little to progress the story. We get this rundown of voodoo, which just went on for too long and lost my interest. We get this rundown of Bond’s flight to Jamaica, which was f***ing boring as hell. Then we get this rundown of Jamaica and its history, which was bland and purely used as a transitionary chapter. It felt as if chapters were added to lengthen the book, which ended up adding next to nothing to the main story.Another cool final line to a chapter on p191. ‘The stars winked down their cryptic morse and he had no key to their cipher.’ p87 – Universal Export is mentioned. I don’t remember this being mentioned in Casino Royale, so this could be the first mention of the cover name for Bond’s employers. Yet another great final chapter line on p241. ‘The first tears since his childhood came into James Bond’s blue-grey eyes and ran down his cheeks into the bloodstained sea.’ So tell me again, James, which finger is broken? Because unless it's that 11th finger, the one you keep in your trousers, a broken finger is a pretty lame excuse for withholding stud service. Our man’s a bit of an exception,” said M. “He’s not pure negro. Born in Haiti. Good dose of French blood. Trained in Moscow, too, as you see from the file. And the negro races are just beginning to throw up geniuses in all the professions - scientists, doctors, writers. It’s about time they turned out a great criminal. After all, there are 250,000,000 of them in the world. They’ve got plenty of brains and guts. And now Moscow’s taught one of them the technique.”

I also appreciate the absolutely ridiculous parts of this book like when Bond straight up fights an octopus. Now that is something I wish was in the “Live and Let Die” movie (1973) with my main dude Roger Moore! If you saw the movie, then you know that Bond finding an octopus isn’t that crazy. Bond obviously doesn't joke with his food. He's a womaniser, to be certain. A womaniser in his line of work will naturally see women in the light of the company they offer. Catching feelings totally goes against the character that Bond is. If people have issues with how the author writes his protagonist, then maybe they should write their own, simple.

Chapman, James (2007). Licence to Thrill: A Cultural History of the James Bond Films. New York: I.B. Tauris. ISBN 978-1-84511-515-9. Fleming’s own attitudes towards women shine through his Bond character with regard to Solitare, the white woman who he rescues from Mr. Big. Fleming seems to have regarded women as conquests and told many people that women were more like pets to him than people [per Andrew Lycett’s biography of IF]. Fleming was well known as a womanizer and was accused by several people of being ‘a cad and a bounder,’ something which he did not dispute. Solitare is mostly a prize for Bond, something to be enjoyed once the action is over with. Upton, John (August 1987). "The James Bond Books of Ian Fleming". The Book and Magazine Collector. London: Diamond Publishing Group (41).

The book is totally different from the film and there was not going to be a connection with New Orleans. Instead, we follow Bond on an adventure that leads from New York, to Florida, to Jamaica. I have to say I really enjoyed reading about Bond and Felix Leiter enjoying the nightlife in Harlem. And I don’t think I detected any racism at all from the characters themselves during these scenes. It was all just the terms that Fleming was using in places. UPDATE: Okay, I saw the film version (1973) with Roger Moore. What a joke! It's almost a spoof movie. Moore is a dork, and wholly unconvincing as a charming secret agent. I like Jane Seymour in general and her beautiful eyes, but she just had no personality in this movie. The plot is only loosely based on the book and it ends up being very silly.Not many," said Bond. "And then one day when you're playing your little game you'll suddenly find yourself pinned down like a butterfly." I wondered if Casino Royale was some sort of Batman Year One kind of thing and James would begin to progress as an agent with each book. Okay, I'd known that Ian Fleming is on record as having been a racist and sexist bastard, but somehow I had managed to not really notice that much the first time I'd taken a spin through the Bond novels. And there were a couple of bits I took issue with in my recent re-read of Casino Royale, sure, though they were few and far between. Bond turned brusquely away from the window. A romantic picture, perhaps. But it must have been something like that.” Accusations of the writing being misogynistic are poorly founded, in my opinion. I think that people who see it this way have simply chosen to. Bond treats his girls well. Patriarchal, some might say. I say it's a unique character. One taking life as it comes, braving danger and enjoying two of most enjoyable things in life, the things that make a Bond kind of life worth it, even for a short while: good food, and women.