What do you think?
Rate this book
James Bond (Original Series) #7
Goldfinger
A game of canasta turns out crooked and a golden girl ends up dead. It seems that Auric Goldfinger is a bad loser when it comes to cards. He’s also the world’s most ruthless and successful gold smuggler. As James Bond follows his trail, he discovers that Goldfinger’s real game is the heist of fifteen billion dollars of US government bullion. The final hand is played at Fort Knox, in a spectacular display of deception and intrigue.
Includes an exclusive bonus interview with Hugh Bonneville.
Includes an exclusive bonus interview with Hugh Bonneville.
9 pages, Audible Audio
First published March 23, 1959
807 people are currently reading
11916 people want to read
About the author
Ian Fleming
746 books3,408 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Ian Lancaster Fleming was an English writer, best known for his postwar James Bond series of spy novels. Fleming came from a wealthy family connected to the merchant bank Robert Fleming & Co., and his father was the Member of Parliament (MP) for Henley from 1910 until his death on the Western Front in 1917. Educated at Eton, Sandhurst, and, briefly, the universities of Munich and Geneva, Fleming moved through several jobs before he started writing.
While working for Britain's Naval Intelligence Division during the Second World War, Fleming was involved in planning Operation Goldeneye and in the planning and oversight of two intelligence units: 30 Assault Unit and T-Force. He drew from his wartime service and his career as a journalist for much of the background, detail, and depth of his James Bond novels.
Fleming wrote his first Bond novel, Casino Royale, in 1952, at age 44. It was a success, and three print runs were commissioned to meet the demand. Eleven Bond novels and two collections of short stories followed between 1953 and 1966. The novels centre around James Bond, an officer in the Secret Intelligence Service, commonly known as MI6. Bond is also known by his code number, 007, and was a commander in the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve. The Bond stories rank among the best-selling series of fictional books of all time, having sold over 100 million copies worldwide. Fleming also wrote the children's story Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang and two works of non-fiction. In 2008, The Times ranked Fleming 14th on its list of "The 50 greatest British writers since 1945".
Fleming was married to Ann Fleming. She had divorced her husband, the 2nd Viscount Rothermere, because of her affair with the author. Fleming and Ann had a son, Caspar. Fleming was a heavy smoker and drinker for most of his life and succumbed to heart disease in 1964 at the age of 56. Two of his James Bond books were published posthumously; other writers have since produced Bond novels. Fleming's creation has appeared in film twenty-seven times, portrayed by six actors in the official film series.
Ian Lancaster Fleming was an English writer, best known for his postwar James Bond series of spy novels. Fleming came from a wealthy family connected to the merchant bank Robert Fleming & Co., and his father was the Member of Parliament (MP) for Henley from 1910 until his death on the Western Front in 1917. Educated at Eton, Sandhurst, and, briefly, the universities of Munich and Geneva, Fleming moved through several jobs before he started writing.
While working for Britain's Naval Intelligence Division during the Second World War, Fleming was involved in planning Operation Goldeneye and in the planning and oversight of two intelligence units: 30 Assault Unit and T-Force. He drew from his wartime service and his career as a journalist for much of the background, detail, and depth of his James Bond novels.
Fleming wrote his first Bond novel, Casino Royale, in 1952, at age 44. It was a success, and three print runs were commissioned to meet the demand. Eleven Bond novels and two collections of short stories followed between 1953 and 1966. The novels centre around James Bond, an officer in the Secret Intelligence Service, commonly known as MI6. Bond is also known by his code number, 007, and was a commander in the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve. The Bond stories rank among the best-selling series of fictional books of all time, having sold over 100 million copies worldwide. Fleming also wrote the children's story Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang and two works of non-fiction. In 2008, The Times ranked Fleming 14th on its list of "The 50 greatest British writers since 1945".
Fleming was married to Ann Fleming. She had divorced her husband, the 2nd Viscount Rothermere, because of her affair with the author. Fleming and Ann had a son, Caspar. Fleming was a heavy smoker and drinker for most of his life and succumbed to heart disease in 1964 at the age of 56. Two of his James Bond books were published posthumously; other writers have since produced Bond novels. Fleming's creation has appeared in film twenty-seven times, portrayed by six actors in the official film series.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,582 reviews
June 27, 2022
(A-) 83% | Very Good
Notes: James Bond peels the snakeskin from the card-cheat to find a dragon in disguise, while lesbians make things difficult.
Notes: James Bond peels the snakeskin from the card-cheat to find a dragon in disguise, while lesbians make things difficult.
August 27, 2015
Reading, Good Reading!
GOOD AS GOLD
Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, the third time it’s enemy action.
This quote from the novel is quite relevant, since Goldfinger, the book, is separated in three parts precisely named after the terms: “Happenstance”, “Coincidence” and “Enemy Action”, describing the interaction between James Bond and Auric Goldfinger, respectively protagonist and antagonist in the story. Also, defining how the story in general is evolving in its own development.
Goldfinger is the seventh (007) novel in the series of James Bond original books, and you won’t be mistaken how relevant this story is, in the middle of the legacy of the most famous secret agent in literatura (and movies).
I have watched A LOT of times the film of the same name, and finally I was able to read the original novel. I liked that while both format have many similitudes, both are enough different to justify the reading and giving a great experience while doing it.
The Bond movies weren’t produced in the same order of the books, so Goldfinger while was the seventh book, it was the third movie, but definitely, besides being my favorite movie of the “Connery Era”, it was a crucial one to ensure turning the movie into a saga. In the movie is re-introduced the musical theme from Dr. No becoming now “The Bond Theme”. Also, it’s presented the (now famous) Austin Martin DB5 (on the novel it’s an Austin Martin Mark III, that I guess was the latest model at the time of the publishing of the book) starting a legacy of cool cars with techno-gadgets. And finally presenting “Pussy Galore”, one of the “Bond Girls” with one of the names most remembered by the audience (for obvious reasons) but also, if “Pussy” was a memorable character on the movie due being portraited by Honor Blackman (getting previous fame on the British TV series “The Avengers), on the book she is certainly one of the most complicated and unusual kind of “Bond Girl” ever, she isn’t just “somehing shining” in the scenario, but a relevant character in the story, with an important role in the plot, but also with an unexpected interaction with James Bond making her certainly unique in the long list of female characters attached to the “Bond Girls’ List”.
Prohibition is the trigger of crime
It was good to see that the character of Tilly Masterson has a longer role in the book than in the movie, and also due her relationship to Pussy Galore, becoming a more interesting character in the book.
Oddjob is the same as cool (and dangerous) henchman in the book as he is in the movie.
While both presentations of Auric Goldfinger (in book & movie) are quite similar, I was left with a sensation that Goldfinger is a little more menacing and smart in the movie version than his original presentation on the book.
It’s interesting the “introduction” of the story in the book, since until the main plot of “Operation Grand Slam” begins to kick off, the narrative is more like a noir detective one than an espionage secret agent tale.
Even while it could be called like a “braking scene” when James Bond is instructed about gold smuggling methods at the end of the first part in the book. I liked that scene since it’s a fair showing that while James Bond is formidable, it’s impossible for him to know it all about everything, so it’s a realistic touch (in the middle of this glamorous world of techno-cars and villain organizations) to see that depending of the details of certain mission, even a top agent from the 00-section of MI6 needs to learn new stuff to be better prepared on the field.
GOOD AS GOLD
Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, the third time it’s enemy action.
This quote from the novel is quite relevant, since Goldfinger, the book, is separated in three parts precisely named after the terms: “Happenstance”, “Coincidence” and “Enemy Action”, describing the interaction between James Bond and Auric Goldfinger, respectively protagonist and antagonist in the story. Also, defining how the story in general is evolving in its own development.
Goldfinger is the seventh (007) novel in the series of James Bond original books, and you won’t be mistaken how relevant this story is, in the middle of the legacy of the most famous secret agent in literatura (and movies).
I have watched A LOT of times the film of the same name, and finally I was able to read the original novel. I liked that while both format have many similitudes, both are enough different to justify the reading and giving a great experience while doing it.
The Bond movies weren’t produced in the same order of the books, so Goldfinger while was the seventh book, it was the third movie, but definitely, besides being my favorite movie of the “Connery Era”, it was a crucial one to ensure turning the movie into a saga. In the movie is re-introduced the musical theme from Dr. No becoming now “The Bond Theme”. Also, it’s presented the (now famous) Austin Martin DB5 (on the novel it’s an Austin Martin Mark III, that I guess was the latest model at the time of the publishing of the book) starting a legacy of cool cars with techno-gadgets. And finally presenting “Pussy Galore”, one of the “Bond Girls” with one of the names most remembered by the audience (for obvious reasons) but also, if “Pussy” was a memorable character on the movie due being portraited by Honor Blackman (getting previous fame on the British TV series “The Avengers), on the book she is certainly one of the most complicated and unusual kind of “Bond Girl” ever, she isn’t just “somehing shining” in the scenario, but a relevant character in the story, with an important role in the plot, but also with an unexpected interaction with James Bond making her certainly unique in the long list of female characters attached to the “Bond Girls’ List”.
Prohibition is the trigger of crime
It was good to see that the character of Tilly Masterson has a longer role in the book than in the movie, and also due her relationship to Pussy Galore, becoming a more interesting character in the book.
Oddjob is the same as cool (and dangerous) henchman in the book as he is in the movie.
While both presentations of Auric Goldfinger (in book & movie) are quite similar, I was left with a sensation that Goldfinger is a little more menacing and smart in the movie version than his original presentation on the book.
It’s interesting the “introduction” of the story in the book, since until the main plot of “Operation Grand Slam” begins to kick off, the narrative is more like a noir detective one than an espionage secret agent tale.
Even while it could be called like a “braking scene” when James Bond is instructed about gold smuggling methods at the end of the first part in the book. I liked that scene since it’s a fair showing that while James Bond is formidable, it’s impossible for him to know it all about everything, so it’s a realistic touch (in the middle of this glamorous world of techno-cars and villain organizations) to see that depending of the details of certain mission, even a top agent from the 00-section of MI6 needs to learn new stuff to be better prepared on the field.
June 30, 2019
A good ole fashioned penis measuring contest between Bond and his villain de jeur, Aurich Goldfinger.
Ever the conjurer of DC comics quality bad guys, Ian Fleming has here crafted a gem with Goldfinger – a Ted Nugent capitalist’s capitalist who lives to win at everything. And if you’re not cheating, you’re not trying. And we get a double helping of MALEVOLENT as his odd job man – Oddjob – is a Nietzschean superman Asian Mike Tyson action hero figure of badassery.
Good sports writing is an under appreciated field of endeavor in literature and Fleming demonstrates his ability with the long chapter devoted to the round of golf between Bond and Goldfinger. Clearly a golfer, Fleming fills this memorable scene with enough game jargon to impress any low handicapper. More than that, Fleming is able to aptly convey the primal competitive urges between these two alpha males that is contextually relevant to the story. (Bond is a 9 handicap BTW).
And of course the Bond girl – this time with as AWESOME a character name as anything this side of Neal Stephenson’s Hiro Protagonist:
Pussy Galore.
Bond and Goldfinger play cat and mouse and then mano y mano in a high stake bid to wreck the global economy through a spectacular and evil plot.
Critics may cite Fleming’s racist and sexist worldview and his over the top commentary in this visit with Bond, but if you’re easily offended you likely are not reading Fleming anyway. There’s also some elements that stretch the believability meter into the red, keeping this from being great.
All considered, good fun in one of the most memorable Bond novels.
Ever the conjurer of DC comics quality bad guys, Ian Fleming has here crafted a gem with Goldfinger – a Ted Nugent capitalist’s capitalist who lives to win at everything. And if you’re not cheating, you’re not trying. And we get a double helping of MALEVOLENT as his odd job man – Oddjob – is a Nietzschean superman Asian Mike Tyson action hero figure of badassery.
Good sports writing is an under appreciated field of endeavor in literature and Fleming demonstrates his ability with the long chapter devoted to the round of golf between Bond and Goldfinger. Clearly a golfer, Fleming fills this memorable scene with enough game jargon to impress any low handicapper. More than that, Fleming is able to aptly convey the primal competitive urges between these two alpha males that is contextually relevant to the story. (Bond is a 9 handicap BTW).
And of course the Bond girl – this time with as AWESOME a character name as anything this side of Neal Stephenson’s Hiro Protagonist:
Pussy Galore.
Bond and Goldfinger play cat and mouse and then mano y mano in a high stake bid to wreck the global economy through a spectacular and evil plot.
Critics may cite Fleming’s racist and sexist worldview and his over the top commentary in this visit with Bond, but if you’re easily offended you likely are not reading Fleming anyway. There’s also some elements that stretch the believability meter into the red, keeping this from being great.
All considered, good fun in one of the most memorable Bond novels.
November 5, 2020
It was going to be fun playing hare and hounds across Europe. The sun was shining out of a clear sky. Bond felt a moment's sharp thrill down his spine. He smiled to himself, a hard, cold, cruel smile. Goldfinger, he thought, for the first time in your life you're in trouble - bad trouble.
Bond is drinking bourbon in the Miami airport and philosophizing about life and death. He has just neatly taken care of heroin distribution ring. You may think of Bond as a cold, hard killer – but actually in the books he is very philosophical and is always thinking about life, death, and his place in the world.
Bond's flight is delayed and he's approached by a rich American named Du Pont, a small character from Casino Royale. This character is having a spot of trouble and Bond agrees to help him. It appears Du Pont, a millionaire, is being cheated at cards by a strange fellow named Auric Goldfinger. Du Pont can't figure out how Goldfinger is cheating him and tells Bond he'll give him $10,000 for solving the mystery. Bond, bored with his 'rough work' and in need of a break, agrees.
Goldfinger is, of course, a cheat. And Bond busts his game wide open and obtains proof, $10,000, and a gorgeous young woman named Jill Masterton who has been helping Goldfinger fleece people. Unfortunately for Bond, Goldfinger is involved in much more serious criminal activity than cheating at cards. And he loves revenge almost as much as he loves gold.
…
This book is a fascinating Bond book on many levels.
…
OFFENSIVE
Let's get the offensiveness out of the way first. This book is very offensive. It is derogatory towards the following: Mexicans, Jews, blacks, Koreans, lesbians, people with a cleft palate, gay men, feminists, Americans who live in the South... I think that's it.
The really offensive stuff is poured on Koreans and lesbians. Fleming just does not stop with his comments about these two groups. The book lets us know that:
Koreans have no respect for human life.
[Retired policemen] have a respect for human life. That is no good if I wish to stay alive. The Koreans have no such feelings. That is why the Japanese employed them as guards for their prison camps during the war. They are the cruelest, most ruthless people in the world.
Koreans enjoy eating cats.
“I am tired of seeing this animal around. You may have it for dinner.” The Korean's eyes gleamed.
Koreans enjoy hurting/raping/killing white women.
“The women are not much to look at, but they are white and that is all the Koreans ask – to submit the white race to the grossest indignities. There are sometimes accidents...”
Koreans are less than human.
...Bond intended to stay alive on his own terms. Those terms included putting Oddjob and any other Korean firmly in his place, which, in Bond's estimation, was rather lower than apes in the mammalian hierarchy.
You can find tons more – those are just the highlights.
Fleming also exhibits some rather bizarre ideas about lesbians and homosexuality in general. For instance, he blames women's lib for homosexuality in general. He's also confused about what a “lesbian” really is. Allow me to illustrate:
Bond came to the conclusion that [she] was one of those girls whose hormones had got mixed up. He knew the type well and thought they and their male counterparts were a direct consequence of giving votes to women and 'sex equality'. As a result of fifty years of emancipation, feminine qualities were dying out or being transferred to the males. Pansies of both sexes were everywhere, not yet completely homosexual, but confused, not knowing what they were. The result was a herd of unhappy sexual misfits – barren and full of frustrations, the women wanting to dominate and the men to be nannied. He was sorry for them, but he had no time for them.
Wow. I honestly was laughing so hard during this passage I thought I was going to choke. You could say, “Carmen, how could you possibly be laughing at this? You are a strong feminist.” Well, I'll tell you why: it's just so absurd. It's just so ridiculous that anyone ever thought this way that it cracks me up. Oh, gosh. Poor, confused Ian Fleming, you still had so much to learn about life.
And this is why I say Fleming doesn't understand what the word “lesbian” means: One of the allegedly lesbian characters ends up in bed with James Bond. When he says, They told me you only liked women. She said, “I never met a man before. Get that!??? Lesbians are only lesbians because they haven't met a “real man” who can put it down in bed for them. I couldn't help laughing hysterically at this thought, either. I have quite a few lesbian friends and it cracks me up that Ian Fleming really believes this. Too pathetic.
But wait – it gets worse. And this part I'm NOT laughing at, at all. The part where Fleming tells us that lesbians are created when girls or teenagers are raped. He believes being a lesbian is a defense mechanism in response to rape at a young age. Yeah, that's realistic. *rolls eyes* I never laugh about rape and am unable to find any humor in this misconception of Fleming's.
Okay, let's get off the topic of “James Bond books are very offensive” and instead get to the fun!
…
VILLAIN
Auric Goldfinger is a rather underdeveloped character. Bond is convinced that he is an evil criminal because he is a short and ugly man. Bond believes he can psychoanalyze every villain. I never agree with him, actually.
The only thing Goldfinger is really good for is making villain speeches. He is great at this. There are two very notable ones (although he gives about 6 or 7 villain speeches throughout the course of the novel). One is on his love for gold. It's creepy and you really see how gold is everything to him and how obsessed with it he is. The other notable villain speech is when he's lecturing Bond about how there have been no great criminals (until now!) and how he, Goldfinger, is the best and most original of all criminals, blah blah blah, you know how these criminal egomaniacs can never shut up about themselves. Bond seems to sit patiently and listen to every single speech, and I feel sorry for that long-suffering man. If I was with Goldfinger I would tell him to put a sock in it already. Jeez Louise, the man never shuts up. It's very fitting to the book, though, and really adds to the “James Bond-ness” of the whole thing.
I don't believe anything about Goldfinger's working for SMERSH. I just don't believe it. With his amazing love of gold and his insatiable greed, it's very strange to me that he's donating incredible amounts of money to the evil Russian organization. It doesn't make any sense. Bond figures he's after an Order of Lenin, but I'm just not buying it. It makes no sense and doesn't fit in with his motives and personality at all. I was scratching my head at this one. Especially since he was a refugee from Riga, a Balt who was fleeing the Russians as they swallowed his country up. It makes zero sense.
Oddjob is another villain in this book that I believe deserves a mention. This huge Korean man is built like a tank. Ian Fleming also gives him a cleft palate, which serves to further enslave him to Goldfinger, who is the only man who can understand what he's saying. He enjoys eating cats. He smells like a zoo. He is famous, of course, especially for his bowler hat which is lined with metal and he throws it at people to kill them. But, Oddjob has no background or personality. We get no indication that he has any intelligence higher than a dog – (this is exactly how Bond describes him, by the way.) Bond doesn't ever acknowledge Oddjob as a human, instead comparing him to various animals throughout the book and treating him as such.
JAMES BOND IS SHOWS MERCY AND GIVES HIS PROTECTION
One thing I really enjoyed about this book is how merciful Bond is. First of all, in the opening pages, Bond shows mercy on one of the men in the heroin ring. He could have easily killed this man or let him been arrested. Instead, he calls the man on the phone, disguises his voice, and warns him to quit the ring and quit dealing in heroin. He feels the man is basically a good man who just got caught up in something evil. My heart always melts when Bond is kind like this. It's not very frequent, especially towards a man.
The other shows of mercy and protection pertain to attractive young women. Bond shocked and amazed me with his treatment of Jill Masterton. Bond is bringing down Goldfinger for cheating at cards in the first part of the book. Now, from the minute Bond enters the room where Jill is helping Goldfinger cheat people, she's already dead. There's no way Goldfinger would forgive any kind of betrayal or even the fact that Bond is emasculating him in front of a woman (who's not even sleeping with him, by the way, only letting people think that she is. I was very worried about her. She is worried herself! She begs Bond not to expose Goldfinger.
Suddenly she reached out and put a hand on his sleeve. There was a Claddagh ring on her middle finger – two gold hands clasped around a gold heart. There were tears in her voice. “Must you? Can't you leave him alone? I don't know what he'll do to me. Please.” She hesitated. She was blushing furiously. “And I like you. It's a long time since I've seen someone like you. Couldn't you just stay here for a little more?” She looked down at the ground. “If only you'd leave him alone I'd do -” the words came out in a rush - “I'd do anything.”
Bond smiled.
No wonder men like these books so much.
(Well, now I know where Frank Miller got his inspirations for females in distress begging for mercy and offering their bodies up as payment for protection. o.O I seriously was plunged right back into SIN CITY and Miller's insane masturbatory fantasies.)
And I'm thinking, “Bond, you bastard.” And then he turns her down and says he must do the job – he's getting paid, and also Goldfinger is a horrible person who needs to be punished. And now I'm convinced that Bond is a real bastard because anyone could see that the woman is fried. “Have you no mercy, Bond?” I asked. I thought he was going to leave her to the wolves, I honestly did. Then he surprises me and melts my heart by taking Jill “as his hostage” and getting her out of Goldfinger's clutches. I was cheering. :)
He does even more – not only is she safe, far away from Goldfinger's clutches , but Bond gives her the $10,000 instead of keeping it for himself. He's worried about her and he really doesn't want her to go back to her job with Goldfinger. This way, she has the funds and means to escape and start a new life for herself.
Some people would, “Say 'Oh, this just is Bond making her into a whore.'” I completely disagree. Yes, the payment happens after they just spent 24 hours together in bed, but that's not why she did it, and it's certainly not why Bond is paying her. He's really worried about her safety. There's nothing 'dirty' or wrong in what happens between Jill and Bond and I was very happy and satisfied with the way he treated her. He went above and beyond his call of duty, I feel (in more ways than one, see WOMEN). I thought this whole relationship was charming and sweet. That's two mercies, plus the man one.
Another mercy - .
So in the end that's four mercies. I don't count I expect that of him and it's his responsibility. Even though this was a good thing he did in the book, I don't count it as “Bond showing mercy.”
So our grand total is 4. Pretty good, Mr. Bond.
WOMEN
Ah, yes. The women. Definitely one of the highlights of any James Bond books. Besides his complete obsession with breasts, which he always goes on and one about, I have to say I always really enjoy seeing what woman is going to enter the picture and how she and Bond will interact. Yes, I don't mind the sex at all, but his paragraph-long descriptions of a woman's breasts get a little tiring. (What can I say? I'm a heterosexual woman and this does nothing for me.)
Now, a notable difference between the book Bond and the film Bond is that the book Bond is less of a womanizer. Now, don't get me wrong, he's still a womanizer (M is always on his case about it), but he usually only has sex with one woman per novel, unlike in the films where the sky's the limit.
This is a rare instance of him sleeping with more than one woman in a single novel. He has sex with two different women in this book.
There are three women/love interests in the novel.
1.) Jill Masterton. Bond saves Jill from Goldfinger's clutches and takes her away from his sphere of influence. She has the palest blonde hair and deep blue eyes. She is 5'10” and has a swimmer's body. When Bond takes her away (“as a hostage”, LOL) they spend 24 hours on a train in which they have sex 5 times. Wow. That's pretty impressive, Bond. ;) And it's at her insistence: too.
It was as if the girl was starved of physical love. She had woken him twice more in the night with soft demanding caresses, saying nothing, just reaching for his hard, lean body. The next day she had twice pulled down the roller blinds to shut out the hard light and had taken him by the hand and said, “Love me, James” as if she were a child asking for a sweet.
However, we never really get to know her or know much about her. But I was more or less happy with this relationship as Bond is very good to her and he treats her right and does so much for her, I was pleased with his behavior.
2.) Tilly Soames Tilly is an enigma to Bond. Their relationship really starts long before they meet face to face, when Tilly passes James on the road in her convertible and he builds up in elaborate fantasy in his head about how much he'd like to spend the week with her exploring France. LOL No, but seriously, the fantasy is really sweet and cute and was also winning Bond points from me. It wasn't at all offensive and I was actually charmed by him when he's doing this.
When they meet, however, things don't go exactly as Bond had hoped. For one thing, he introduces himself to her by deliberately backing his car into her's and rendering it undrivable. We get more of this Frank-Miller-type writing and dialogue. Observe his thoughts:
Sorry, sweetheart. I've got to mess you up. I'll be as gentle as I can. Hold tight.
He then proceeds to back into her car. Then he says, “If you touch me there again you'll have to marry me.” That earns him a hard slap across the face. Bond thinks, If only pretty girls were always angry they would be beautiful.
I'm laughing at all of this, of course. Not only because I find Bond's antics amusing, but because the joke's on him. At least, I found it hilarious.
Again, not much character development or personality with her. She has black hair and deep blue eyes. She's an ice skater. Here's another little exchange with Bond to give you an idea of how things are between them:
Suddenly her eyes flared. “Only don't ever touch me or I shall kill you.”
There came a click of Bond's bedroom door. Bond looked mildly down at Tilly. “The challenge is attractive. But don't worry. I won't take it up.” He turned and strolled out of the room.
LOL It was fun to see these two spar. :)
3.) Last, but certainly not least, we have Miss Pussy Galore. She is a lesbian from Harlem who runs a gang of lesbian cat burglars/acrobats called The Cement Mixers. She has black hair and striking violet eyes.
Sadly, she is the most underdeveloped woman in the whole book. We barely get to know her. I was disappointed.
In summary on women, this is why I like the books where James Bond is with only one woman (which is the norm). This way, we get to actually know and (hopefully) like the female character and we get to really see a development of a relationship between her and Bond. Sometimes it's serious, sometimes it's just for fun, but either way, I like getting a more fleshed-out woman character in the book. I felt like this book was a rip-off. Three women but no chance to get to know them as people and see how they would interact with Bond in a relationship. And this is the funnest part for me. So I was disappointed.
HUMOR
As my final point, I must add that there is a hilarious scene where James Bond thinks he has died and believes he's going to/in heaven. It's a hoot and a half. Especially when he tries to figure out how he's going to introduce all his girlfriends to one another. I am adding a whole extra star just for this scene. It was the only time in this book when I felt I was laughing WITH Fleming instead of AT Fleming. He doesn't usually add humor to his books and I appreciated this little scene.
SUMMARY – All in all, this book was exciting, fast-paced, riveting, and a fun adventure. There were a few boring parts – for instance, Fleming's obsessed with cards and there were a few pages of boring card game descriptions. Also, as a warning, there are 18 (EIGHTEEN!!!!) pages of golf. Straight golf. Bond vs. Goldfinger. Honestly, I was sort of nodding off at this part. Fleming really does try to keep it interesting and I have to say it was not nearly as bad as it could have been, but I mean... come on. 18 pages of golf?! Have mercy on your poor readers. Another drawback to the book is how offensive it is. No holds barred. Especially the Korean stuff. There's almost no one left unoffended – the only people who are treated as people by Fleming are heterosexual white males who are NOT Jewish and preferably are British. If you can laugh at/brush off the homophobia, racism, and misogyny in the book – then it is a fun, gripping ride. If you can't – avoid this like the plague.
MOVIE UPDATE IN COMMENTS DUE TO LACK OF SPACE #11
Bond is drinking bourbon in the Miami airport and philosophizing about life and death. He has just neatly taken care of heroin distribution ring. You may think of Bond as a cold, hard killer – but actually in the books he is very philosophical and is always thinking about life, death, and his place in the world.
Bond's flight is delayed and he's approached by a rich American named Du Pont, a small character from Casino Royale. This character is having a spot of trouble and Bond agrees to help him. It appears Du Pont, a millionaire, is being cheated at cards by a strange fellow named Auric Goldfinger. Du Pont can't figure out how Goldfinger is cheating him and tells Bond he'll give him $10,000 for solving the mystery. Bond, bored with his 'rough work' and in need of a break, agrees.
Goldfinger is, of course, a cheat. And Bond busts his game wide open and obtains proof, $10,000, and a gorgeous young woman named Jill Masterton who has been helping Goldfinger fleece people. Unfortunately for Bond, Goldfinger is involved in much more serious criminal activity than cheating at cards. And he loves revenge almost as much as he loves gold.
…
This book is a fascinating Bond book on many levels.
…
OFFENSIVE
Let's get the offensiveness out of the way first. This book is very offensive. It is derogatory towards the following: Mexicans, Jews, blacks, Koreans, lesbians, people with a cleft palate, gay men, feminists, Americans who live in the South... I think that's it.
The really offensive stuff is poured on Koreans and lesbians. Fleming just does not stop with his comments about these two groups. The book lets us know that:
Koreans have no respect for human life.
[Retired policemen] have a respect for human life. That is no good if I wish to stay alive. The Koreans have no such feelings. That is why the Japanese employed them as guards for their prison camps during the war. They are the cruelest, most ruthless people in the world.
Koreans enjoy eating cats.
“I am tired of seeing this animal around. You may have it for dinner.” The Korean's eyes gleamed.
Koreans enjoy hurting/raping/killing white women.
“The women are not much to look at, but they are white and that is all the Koreans ask – to submit the white race to the grossest indignities. There are sometimes accidents...”
Koreans are less than human.
...Bond intended to stay alive on his own terms. Those terms included putting Oddjob and any other Korean firmly in his place, which, in Bond's estimation, was rather lower than apes in the mammalian hierarchy.
You can find tons more – those are just the highlights.
Fleming also exhibits some rather bizarre ideas about lesbians and homosexuality in general. For instance, he blames women's lib for homosexuality in general. He's also confused about what a “lesbian” really is. Allow me to illustrate:
Bond came to the conclusion that [she] was one of those girls whose hormones had got mixed up. He knew the type well and thought they and their male counterparts were a direct consequence of giving votes to women and 'sex equality'. As a result of fifty years of emancipation, feminine qualities were dying out or being transferred to the males. Pansies of both sexes were everywhere, not yet completely homosexual, but confused, not knowing what they were. The result was a herd of unhappy sexual misfits – barren and full of frustrations, the women wanting to dominate and the men to be nannied. He was sorry for them, but he had no time for them.
Wow. I honestly was laughing so hard during this passage I thought I was going to choke. You could say, “Carmen, how could you possibly be laughing at this? You are a strong feminist.” Well, I'll tell you why: it's just so absurd. It's just so ridiculous that anyone ever thought this way that it cracks me up. Oh, gosh. Poor, confused Ian Fleming, you still had so much to learn about life.
And this is why I say Fleming doesn't understand what the word “lesbian” means: One of the allegedly lesbian characters ends up in bed with James Bond. When he says, They told me you only liked women. She said, “I never met a man before. Get that!??? Lesbians are only lesbians because they haven't met a “real man” who can put it down in bed for them. I couldn't help laughing hysterically at this thought, either. I have quite a few lesbian friends and it cracks me up that Ian Fleming really believes this. Too pathetic.
But wait – it gets worse. And this part I'm NOT laughing at, at all. The part where Fleming tells us that lesbians are created when girls or teenagers are raped. He believes being a lesbian is a defense mechanism in response to rape at a young age. Yeah, that's realistic. *rolls eyes* I never laugh about rape and am unable to find any humor in this misconception of Fleming's.
Okay, let's get off the topic of “James Bond books are very offensive” and instead get to the fun!
…
VILLAIN
Auric Goldfinger is a rather underdeveloped character. Bond is convinced that he is an evil criminal because he is a short and ugly man. Bond believes he can psychoanalyze every villain. I never agree with him, actually.
The only thing Goldfinger is really good for is making villain speeches. He is great at this. There are two very notable ones (although he gives about 6 or 7 villain speeches throughout the course of the novel). One is on his love for gold. It's creepy and you really see how gold is everything to him and how obsessed with it he is. The other notable villain speech is when he's lecturing Bond about how there have been no great criminals (until now!) and how he, Goldfinger, is the best and most original of all criminals, blah blah blah, you know how these criminal egomaniacs can never shut up about themselves. Bond seems to sit patiently and listen to every single speech, and I feel sorry for that long-suffering man. If I was with Goldfinger I would tell him to put a sock in it already. Jeez Louise, the man never shuts up. It's very fitting to the book, though, and really adds to the “James Bond-ness” of the whole thing.
I don't believe anything about Goldfinger's working for SMERSH. I just don't believe it. With his amazing love of gold and his insatiable greed, it's very strange to me that he's donating incredible amounts of money to the evil Russian organization. It doesn't make any sense. Bond figures he's after an Order of Lenin, but I'm just not buying it. It makes no sense and doesn't fit in with his motives and personality at all. I was scratching my head at this one. Especially since he was a refugee from Riga, a Balt who was fleeing the Russians as they swallowed his country up. It makes zero sense.
Oddjob is another villain in this book that I believe deserves a mention. This huge Korean man is built like a tank. Ian Fleming also gives him a cleft palate, which serves to further enslave him to Goldfinger, who is the only man who can understand what he's saying. He enjoys eating cats. He smells like a zoo. He is famous, of course, especially for his bowler hat which is lined with metal and he throws it at people to kill them. But, Oddjob has no background or personality. We get no indication that he has any intelligence higher than a dog – (this is exactly how Bond describes him, by the way.) Bond doesn't ever acknowledge Oddjob as a human, instead comparing him to various animals throughout the book and treating him as such.
JAMES BOND IS SHOWS MERCY AND GIVES HIS PROTECTION
One thing I really enjoyed about this book is how merciful Bond is. First of all, in the opening pages, Bond shows mercy on one of the men in the heroin ring. He could have easily killed this man or let him been arrested. Instead, he calls the man on the phone, disguises his voice, and warns him to quit the ring and quit dealing in heroin. He feels the man is basically a good man who just got caught up in something evil. My heart always melts when Bond is kind like this. It's not very frequent, especially towards a man.
The other shows of mercy and protection pertain to attractive young women. Bond shocked and amazed me with his treatment of Jill Masterton. Bond is bringing down Goldfinger for cheating at cards in the first part of the book. Now, from the minute Bond enters the room where Jill is helping Goldfinger cheat people, she's already dead. There's no way Goldfinger would forgive any kind of betrayal or even the fact that Bond is emasculating him in front of a woman (who's not even sleeping with him, by the way, only letting people think that she is. I was very worried about her. She is worried herself! She begs Bond not to expose Goldfinger.
Suddenly she reached out and put a hand on his sleeve. There was a Claddagh ring on her middle finger – two gold hands clasped around a gold heart. There were tears in her voice. “Must you? Can't you leave him alone? I don't know what he'll do to me. Please.” She hesitated. She was blushing furiously. “And I like you. It's a long time since I've seen someone like you. Couldn't you just stay here for a little more?” She looked down at the ground. “If only you'd leave him alone I'd do -” the words came out in a rush - “I'd do anything.”
Bond smiled.
No wonder men like these books so much.
(Well, now I know where Frank Miller got his inspirations for females in distress begging for mercy and offering their bodies up as payment for protection. o.O I seriously was plunged right back into SIN CITY and Miller's insane masturbatory fantasies.)
And I'm thinking, “Bond, you bastard.” And then he turns her down and says he must do the job – he's getting paid, and also Goldfinger is a horrible person who needs to be punished. And now I'm convinced that Bond is a real bastard because anyone could see that the woman is fried. “Have you no mercy, Bond?” I asked. I thought he was going to leave her to the wolves, I honestly did. Then he surprises me and melts my heart by taking Jill “as his hostage” and getting her out of Goldfinger's clutches. I was cheering. :)
He does even more – not only is she safe, far away from Goldfinger's clutches , but Bond gives her the $10,000 instead of keeping it for himself. He's worried about her and he really doesn't want her to go back to her job with Goldfinger. This way, she has the funds and means to escape and start a new life for herself.
Some people would, “Say 'Oh, this just is Bond making her into a whore.'” I completely disagree. Yes, the payment happens after they just spent 24 hours together in bed, but that's not why she did it, and it's certainly not why Bond is paying her. He's really worried about her safety. There's nothing 'dirty' or wrong in what happens between Jill and Bond and I was very happy and satisfied with the way he treated her. He went above and beyond his call of duty, I feel (in more ways than one, see WOMEN). I thought this whole relationship was charming and sweet. That's two mercies, plus the man one.
Another mercy - .
So in the end that's four mercies. I don't count I expect that of him and it's his responsibility. Even though this was a good thing he did in the book, I don't count it as “Bond showing mercy.”
So our grand total is 4. Pretty good, Mr. Bond.
WOMEN
Ah, yes. The women. Definitely one of the highlights of any James Bond books. Besides his complete obsession with breasts, which he always goes on and one about, I have to say I always really enjoy seeing what woman is going to enter the picture and how she and Bond will interact. Yes, I don't mind the sex at all, but his paragraph-long descriptions of a woman's breasts get a little tiring. (What can I say? I'm a heterosexual woman and this does nothing for me.)
Now, a notable difference between the book Bond and the film Bond is that the book Bond is less of a womanizer. Now, don't get me wrong, he's still a womanizer (M is always on his case about it), but he usually only has sex with one woman per novel, unlike in the films where the sky's the limit.
This is a rare instance of him sleeping with more than one woman in a single novel. He has sex with two different women in this book.
There are three women/love interests in the novel.
1.) Jill Masterton. Bond saves Jill from Goldfinger's clutches and takes her away from his sphere of influence. She has the palest blonde hair and deep blue eyes. She is 5'10” and has a swimmer's body. When Bond takes her away (“as a hostage”, LOL) they spend 24 hours on a train in which they have sex 5 times. Wow. That's pretty impressive, Bond. ;) And it's at her insistence: too.
It was as if the girl was starved of physical love. She had woken him twice more in the night with soft demanding caresses, saying nothing, just reaching for his hard, lean body. The next day she had twice pulled down the roller blinds to shut out the hard light and had taken him by the hand and said, “Love me, James” as if she were a child asking for a sweet.
However, we never really get to know her or know much about her. But I was more or less happy with this relationship as Bond is very good to her and he treats her right and does so much for her, I was pleased with his behavior.
2.) Tilly Soames Tilly is an enigma to Bond. Their relationship really starts long before they meet face to face, when Tilly passes James on the road in her convertible and he builds up in elaborate fantasy in his head about how much he'd like to spend the week with her exploring France. LOL No, but seriously, the fantasy is really sweet and cute and was also winning Bond points from me. It wasn't at all offensive and I was actually charmed by him when he's doing this.
When they meet, however, things don't go exactly as Bond had hoped. For one thing, he introduces himself to her by deliberately backing his car into her's and rendering it undrivable. We get more of this Frank-Miller-type writing and dialogue. Observe his thoughts:
Sorry, sweetheart. I've got to mess you up. I'll be as gentle as I can. Hold tight.
He then proceeds to back into her car. Then he says, “If you touch me there again you'll have to marry me.” That earns him a hard slap across the face. Bond thinks, If only pretty girls were always angry they would be beautiful.
I'm laughing at all of this, of course. Not only because I find Bond's antics amusing, but because the joke's on him. At least, I found it hilarious.
Again, not much character development or personality with her. She has black hair and deep blue eyes. She's an ice skater. Here's another little exchange with Bond to give you an idea of how things are between them:
Suddenly her eyes flared. “Only don't ever touch me or I shall kill you.”
There came a click of Bond's bedroom door. Bond looked mildly down at Tilly. “The challenge is attractive. But don't worry. I won't take it up.” He turned and strolled out of the room.
LOL It was fun to see these two spar. :)
3.) Last, but certainly not least, we have Miss Pussy Galore. She is a lesbian from Harlem who runs a gang of lesbian cat burglars/acrobats called The Cement Mixers. She has black hair and striking violet eyes.
Sadly, she is the most underdeveloped woman in the whole book. We barely get to know her. I was disappointed.
In summary on women, this is why I like the books where James Bond is with only one woman (which is the norm). This way, we get to actually know and (hopefully) like the female character and we get to really see a development of a relationship between her and Bond. Sometimes it's serious, sometimes it's just for fun, but either way, I like getting a more fleshed-out woman character in the book. I felt like this book was a rip-off. Three women but no chance to get to know them as people and see how they would interact with Bond in a relationship. And this is the funnest part for me. So I was disappointed.
HUMOR
As my final point, I must add that there is a hilarious scene where James Bond thinks he has died and believes he's going to/in heaven. It's a hoot and a half. Especially when he tries to figure out how he's going to introduce all his girlfriends to one another. I am adding a whole extra star just for this scene. It was the only time in this book when I felt I was laughing WITH Fleming instead of AT Fleming. He doesn't usually add humor to his books and I appreciated this little scene.
SUMMARY – All in all, this book was exciting, fast-paced, riveting, and a fun adventure. There were a few boring parts – for instance, Fleming's obsessed with cards and there were a few pages of boring card game descriptions. Also, as a warning, there are 18 (EIGHTEEN!!!!) pages of golf. Straight golf. Bond vs. Goldfinger. Honestly, I was sort of nodding off at this part. Fleming really does try to keep it interesting and I have to say it was not nearly as bad as it could have been, but I mean... come on. 18 pages of golf?! Have mercy on your poor readers. Another drawback to the book is how offensive it is. No holds barred. Especially the Korean stuff. There's almost no one left unoffended – the only people who are treated as people by Fleming are heterosexual white males who are NOT Jewish and preferably are British. If you can laugh at/brush off the homophobia, racism, and misogyny in the book – then it is a fun, gripping ride. If you can't – avoid this like the plague.
MOVIE UPDATE IN COMMENTS DUE TO LACK OF SPACE #11
June 23, 2023
My fav of the Bond stories though the book is always going to get wrapped up in my head with the famous movie. And I prefer the Cold War storylines.
Movie: Loved the Aston Martin DB5 with all the accessories. Loved Shirley Bassey’s title track. Loved John Barry’s score. Loved Sean Connery. Loved Bernard Lee as M. Loved Honor Blackman. Loved the plot. And who will ever forget the woman painted gold (Shirley Eaton as Jill Masters)? It actually was filmed at Fort Knox in Tennessee.
Book: I liked Fleming’s writing style here. As usual there is more to the story than they can capture in a screenplay. I did like the plot about making America’s gold stock inaccessible. However I do think I enjoyed the Cold War stories a bit more when Bond was fighting SMERSH and the Russians.
Movie: Loved the Aston Martin DB5 with all the accessories. Loved Shirley Bassey’s title track. Loved John Barry’s score. Loved Sean Connery. Loved Bernard Lee as M. Loved Honor Blackman. Loved the plot. And who will ever forget the woman painted gold (Shirley Eaton as Jill Masters)? It actually was filmed at Fort Knox in Tennessee.
Book: I liked Fleming’s writing style here. As usual there is more to the story than they can capture in a screenplay. I did like the plot about making America’s gold stock inaccessible. However I do think I enjoyed the Cold War stories a bit more when Bond was fighting SMERSH and the Russians.
June 28, 2014
Rating: 4.8* of five
The 1964 film gets almost five stars. I doubt very seriously the book would get more than one.
So, first let's talk about the song. *swoon* If you don't like the song, don't ever tell me. I will unfriend you and make a voodoo dolly to do awful, awful things to you. Ever read The Wasp Factory? Yeah, that'll sound like Sunday school. K? Clear enough? Good.
Then there's Connery beefcakin' around in a skimpy swimsuit. There's a passel of cool cars, including the iconic Aston Martin DB5 *swoon* and a 1964 Thunderbird and a 1964-1/2 Mustang convertible *gasp* and...I'd better stop, things could get messy.
The real over-the-top-putter moment is the fight sequence in Fort Knox, with all that lovely (fake) gold. Odd Job, the villain with the lethal hat, comes to a shocking (heh) end, after a balletic slugfest. And of course the nuclear bomb inside the truckbed tool case is disarmed at...007 seconds to go!
I feel sure there was a plot in there somewhere, but frankly if you're watching Bond films for plot you're a sad creature. It's got verve and gusto and style. Watch it to bathe in the unrepentant sexism and piggery and racism of a bygone day, served up without malice. It's all there, it's all appalling by today's lights, but it wasn't put there to shock or edify as it would be today. That's just how it was, so that's what they show.
If they remake this one in the Craig reboot, I will be on tenterhooks waiting to see what they come up with to call Pussy Galore the pilot.
I loved every ridiculous frame of it.
The 1964 film gets almost five stars. I doubt very seriously the book would get more than one.
So, first let's talk about the song. *swoon* If you don't like the song, don't ever tell me. I will unfriend you and make a voodoo dolly to do awful, awful things to you. Ever read The Wasp Factory? Yeah, that'll sound like Sunday school. K? Clear enough? Good.
Then there's Connery beefcakin' around in a skimpy swimsuit. There's a passel of cool cars, including the iconic Aston Martin DB5 *swoon* and a 1964 Thunderbird and a 1964-1/2 Mustang convertible *gasp* and...I'd better stop, things could get messy.
The real over-the-top-putter moment is the fight sequence in Fort Knox, with all that lovely (fake) gold. Odd Job, the villain with the lethal hat, comes to a shocking (heh) end, after a balletic slugfest. And of course the nuclear bomb inside the truckbed tool case is disarmed at...007 seconds to go!
I feel sure there was a plot in there somewhere, but frankly if you're watching Bond films for plot you're a sad creature. It's got verve and gusto and style. Watch it to bathe in the unrepentant sexism and piggery and racism of a bygone day, served up without malice. It's all there, it's all appalling by today's lights, but it wasn't put there to shock or edify as it would be today. That's just how it was, so that's what they show.
If they remake this one in the Craig reboot, I will be on tenterhooks waiting to see what they come up with to call Pussy Galore the pilot.
I loved every ridiculous frame of it.
June 3, 2021
Another Bond adventure made world famous by the film treatment. Bond investigates the mysterious Goldfinger, a very rich man with bad-ties worldwide but as yet no real documented criminal presence. Features the delightfully named Pussy Galore. Dated, but still a interesting, if for anything to see how well the screenplay adapted the book! 4 out of 12
November 28, 2018
“The glamour isn’t worth the price”—Ales Kot
Well, I think I am just about done reading Ian Fleming’s stories of Agent oo7, James Bond, thank you very much. This is in spite of my being a completist; I set out to read the series and read them all I usually would do. But I think I sort of have the pattern here: Bond meets a villain, meets a “girl” and defeats the villain. You do what you can to ignore the (casual?) racism and misogyny in exchange for the glamour, and well, the best of James.
This one begins with Bond on vaca meeting a man who is being cheated at Canasta by Goldfinger; Bond exposes him, but then hangs out with him, having The Best Dinner of His Life at the Best Restaurant in the World. He plays golf with Goldfinger at the Best Golf Course in the World, where Bond finds Goldfinger also cheats at golf. They drive the Best Cars in the World, and drink the Best Whiskey. We, who want to Be Bond, take notes on all the specifically-named product placements. Sales soar.
Auric Goldfinger is the richest man in Great Britain, and he is obsessed with gold, he can’t get enough of it. One of Goldfinger’s assistants is Pussy Galore, who leads a band of mercenary lesbians. Auric (which also means gold; he’s a walking redundancy or tautology) finds Bond is Not on His Side, forces Bond to work for him in his goal to knock off Fort Knox (!). This plan does not work, but he does eventually “get the girl” and do the right thing in preventing AG from killing the 60K people he felt were expendable toward his goal. Thus proving that imperialist Bond is not as bad as Goldfinger. Goldfinger is really interested in winning, in accumulating, in money. He doesn’t really have what Bond has, which is lust for beautiful women. Goldfinger replaces the deadly sin Lust with Greed.
We know Bond is also a capitalist, and imperialist; he loves everything Goldfinger loves, the Best of Everything. He wants the Finer Things of Life, and we as readers are seduced as Bond is seduced (I admit I have noted some brands of alcohol Bond orders! I would love to own just one of his cars, even for a day!). We want those things, too. But the difference between Bond/us and Goldfinger is that we won’t do ANYTHING to get those finer things. We won’t allow 60K people to die so we can be the Richest Man in the World. He literally paints his women (normally prostitutes) gold before sex, which is a thing you know from book and film covers. Cool? Glamorous? Uh, no, painting skin all gold is not good for you, as it turns out. It can kill you. As Kot makes clear, “glamour is not worth the price you pay.” [Fleming, I am told, wanted the censors to allow calling Goldfinger Goldprick! They allowed Pussy Galore, though American publishers debated this, finally caving to Fleming.
Things I liked:
*Bond is a bit more complex in this book than any of the previous 6 Bond novels by Fleming:
“James Bond, with two double bourbons inside him, sat in the final departure lounge of Miami Airport and thought about life and death.”
*The premise is almost always ludicrous, with cartoon characters for female leads and villains, and crazy fifties (1959) pulp thriller plots, and this is still the fun part. Bond saves the world and America’s Gold and gets the Girl (why am I typing with all these caps?!) (more on the problem with the girl-getting part, later).
*I like what critique there is here of capitalism and greed, even implicated as Bond is in the process (until the end). I mean, Fleming is not critical at all of getting rich, but he ramps it up to ridiculous level in Goldfinger.
Things I didn’t like:
*Bond (and, I learn Fleming) goes out of his way to make a point about lesbians, in what is now a tired fashion: He assumes that Pussy Galore, a lesbian, and Tilly Masterson, a lesbian, just need the Right Man to “turn” them. A product of the time? Sure, but Bond has sex with both Tilly and Pussy, “changing their minds.” Fleming feels that lesbians are a product of women’s suffrage, which creates confusion about sexual identity:
“Bond came to the conclusion that Tilly Masterton was one of those girls whose hormones had got mixed up. He knew the type well and thought they and their male counterparts were a direct consequence of giving votes to women and 'sex equality.' As a result of fifty years of emancipation, feminine qualities were dying out or being transferred to the males. Pansies of both sexes were everywhere, not yet completely homosexual, but confused, not knowing what they were. The result was a herd of unhappy sexual misfits--barren and full of frustrations, the women wanting to dominate and the men to be nannied. He was sorry for them, but he had no time for them.”
Until he does:
“Bond felt the sexual challenge all beautiful Lesbians have for men.”
And so Bond “stoops” to have a brief (and we are told intense) “affair” (for one night) with Tilly. It’s a sign of righteous pity; Bond can heal a lost lesbian soul with his. . . body. And according to Fleming, he does!
Later, (lesbian gang leader) Pussy Galore (one of several offensive names for women Fleming invents, including Honeychile Rider, Octopussy, Holly Goodhead) comes on the scene and tells Bond: “You can turn off the charm; I’m immune.” But apparently she’s not. ( Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery features a character named Alotta Fagina, making fun of Fleming. But are these names funny, or misogynistic? I thought funny, as a clueless teenager; but do we have many such dismissive names for men in Fleming? I call this misogyny.
*I continue to find it fascinating, Fleming’s obsession with torturing Bond; in this one, Goldfinger’s assistant, Oddjob, is the guy for the job. Okay, a little sadistic cruelty, sure, why not, it’s an adventure story. But in every book?!
*Bond’s racism. In this one it is all about the “savage” Koreans, who are not really fully human.
*All the villains are physical “freaks;” Dr. No had prosthetic hands, after amputation, and this detail is to add to the fact that trans-humans are less than “normal,” they are monsters. Goldfinger here is very large, bald, a “freak.”
*It is interesting that Goldfinger is British, rather than American, because Bond hates the crude tasteless American style, Viva Las Vegas, but Goldfinger embodies the rich American greed here. But! Goldfinger isn’t really a “true” British citizen; he’s naturalized, actually Baltic, so he fails to meet the standard for the one-drop rule for white British superiority.
Okay, so I am done with Bond, and my juvenile fascination with him (oh, maybe for fun I’ll still rewatch some of the movies! This movie in particular I once loved, and will watch again soon, maybe. But the things that at one time for me made Bond attractive--the sex, the sadism, the vulgarity of money for its own sake—are not quite so fun anymore.
Well, I think I am just about done reading Ian Fleming’s stories of Agent oo7, James Bond, thank you very much. This is in spite of my being a completist; I set out to read the series and read them all I usually would do. But I think I sort of have the pattern here: Bond meets a villain, meets a “girl” and defeats the villain. You do what you can to ignore the (casual?) racism and misogyny in exchange for the glamour, and well, the best of James.
This one begins with Bond on vaca meeting a man who is being cheated at Canasta by Goldfinger; Bond exposes him, but then hangs out with him, having The Best Dinner of His Life at the Best Restaurant in the World. He plays golf with Goldfinger at the Best Golf Course in the World, where Bond finds Goldfinger also cheats at golf. They drive the Best Cars in the World, and drink the Best Whiskey. We, who want to Be Bond, take notes on all the specifically-named product placements. Sales soar.
Auric Goldfinger is the richest man in Great Britain, and he is obsessed with gold, he can’t get enough of it. One of Goldfinger’s assistants is Pussy Galore, who leads a band of mercenary lesbians. Auric (which also means gold; he’s a walking redundancy or tautology) finds Bond is Not on His Side, forces Bond to work for him in his goal to knock off Fort Knox (!). This plan does not work, but he does eventually “get the girl” and do the right thing in preventing AG from killing the 60K people he felt were expendable toward his goal. Thus proving that imperialist Bond is not as bad as Goldfinger. Goldfinger is really interested in winning, in accumulating, in money. He doesn’t really have what Bond has, which is lust for beautiful women. Goldfinger replaces the deadly sin Lust with Greed.
We know Bond is also a capitalist, and imperialist; he loves everything Goldfinger loves, the Best of Everything. He wants the Finer Things of Life, and we as readers are seduced as Bond is seduced (I admit I have noted some brands of alcohol Bond orders! I would love to own just one of his cars, even for a day!). We want those things, too. But the difference between Bond/us and Goldfinger is that we won’t do ANYTHING to get those finer things. We won’t allow 60K people to die so we can be the Richest Man in the World. He literally paints his women (normally prostitutes) gold before sex, which is a thing you know from book and film covers. Cool? Glamorous? Uh, no, painting skin all gold is not good for you, as it turns out. It can kill you. As Kot makes clear, “glamour is not worth the price you pay.” [Fleming, I am told, wanted the censors to allow calling Goldfinger Goldprick! They allowed Pussy Galore, though American publishers debated this, finally caving to Fleming.
Things I liked:
*Bond is a bit more complex in this book than any of the previous 6 Bond novels by Fleming:
“James Bond, with two double bourbons inside him, sat in the final departure lounge of Miami Airport and thought about life and death.”
*The premise is almost always ludicrous, with cartoon characters for female leads and villains, and crazy fifties (1959) pulp thriller plots, and this is still the fun part. Bond saves the world and America’s Gold and gets the Girl (why am I typing with all these caps?!) (more on the problem with the girl-getting part, later).
*I like what critique there is here of capitalism and greed, even implicated as Bond is in the process (until the end). I mean, Fleming is not critical at all of getting rich, but he ramps it up to ridiculous level in Goldfinger.
Things I didn’t like:
*Bond (and, I learn Fleming) goes out of his way to make a point about lesbians, in what is now a tired fashion: He assumes that Pussy Galore, a lesbian, and Tilly Masterson, a lesbian, just need the Right Man to “turn” them. A product of the time? Sure, but Bond has sex with both Tilly and Pussy, “changing their minds.” Fleming feels that lesbians are a product of women’s suffrage, which creates confusion about sexual identity:
“Bond came to the conclusion that Tilly Masterton was one of those girls whose hormones had got mixed up. He knew the type well and thought they and their male counterparts were a direct consequence of giving votes to women and 'sex equality.' As a result of fifty years of emancipation, feminine qualities were dying out or being transferred to the males. Pansies of both sexes were everywhere, not yet completely homosexual, but confused, not knowing what they were. The result was a herd of unhappy sexual misfits--barren and full of frustrations, the women wanting to dominate and the men to be nannied. He was sorry for them, but he had no time for them.”
Until he does:
“Bond felt the sexual challenge all beautiful Lesbians have for men.”
And so Bond “stoops” to have a brief (and we are told intense) “affair” (for one night) with Tilly. It’s a sign of righteous pity; Bond can heal a lost lesbian soul with his. . . body. And according to Fleming, he does!
Later, (lesbian gang leader) Pussy Galore (one of several offensive names for women Fleming invents, including Honeychile Rider, Octopussy, Holly Goodhead) comes on the scene and tells Bond: “You can turn off the charm; I’m immune.” But apparently she’s not. ( Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery features a character named Alotta Fagina, making fun of Fleming. But are these names funny, or misogynistic? I thought funny, as a clueless teenager; but do we have many such dismissive names for men in Fleming? I call this misogyny.
*I continue to find it fascinating, Fleming’s obsession with torturing Bond; in this one, Goldfinger’s assistant, Oddjob, is the guy for the job. Okay, a little sadistic cruelty, sure, why not, it’s an adventure story. But in every book?!
*Bond’s racism. In this one it is all about the “savage” Koreans, who are not really fully human.
*All the villains are physical “freaks;” Dr. No had prosthetic hands, after amputation, and this detail is to add to the fact that trans-humans are less than “normal,” they are monsters. Goldfinger here is very large, bald, a “freak.”
*It is interesting that Goldfinger is British, rather than American, because Bond hates the crude tasteless American style, Viva Las Vegas, but Goldfinger embodies the rich American greed here. But! Goldfinger isn’t really a “true” British citizen; he’s naturalized, actually Baltic, so he fails to meet the standard for the one-drop rule for white British superiority.
Okay, so I am done with Bond, and my juvenile fascination with him (oh, maybe for fun I’ll still rewatch some of the movies! This movie in particular I once loved, and will watch again soon, maybe. But the things that at one time for me made Bond attractive--the sex, the sadism, the vulgarity of money for its own sake—are not quite so fun anymore.
April 3, 2018
"Fear, Mr Bond, takes gold out of circulation and hoards it against the evil day."
- Ian Fleming, Goldfinger
A very enjoyable read except for a couple nagging complaints. I hate Fleming/Bond's attitude towards asians (Koreans in this book, but it was Chinese in Dr. No) and women (lesbians in this book). It doesn't age well. While I wasn't alive in the 50s, and I suspect it was more normal 60 years ago, it still reads a bit too heavy with white, masculine overcompensation.
I would have given this over-the-top spy thriller four stars, except for the sexist/racist complaints above. It produced one of the best Bond movies of all time and also introduced one of the worst-named, but most-interesting characters (Pussy Galore) in the James Bond universe. I loved the way the novel was structured into the three run-ins with Goldfinger (I. Happenstance; II. Coincidence; III. Enemy Action), with each run-in becoming more and more over-the-top. I loved the car chase, the golf game, etc. I think the best summary of this book came from Roy Perrott, writing for the Manchester Guardian, who said the novel was "hard to put down; but some of us wish we had the good taste just to try."
- Ian Fleming, Goldfinger
A very enjoyable read except for a couple nagging complaints. I hate Fleming/Bond's attitude towards asians (Koreans in this book, but it was Chinese in Dr. No) and women (lesbians in this book). It doesn't age well. While I wasn't alive in the 50s, and I suspect it was more normal 60 years ago, it still reads a bit too heavy with white, masculine overcompensation.
I would have given this over-the-top spy thriller four stars, except for the sexist/racist complaints above. It produced one of the best Bond movies of all time and also introduced one of the worst-named, but most-interesting characters (Pussy Galore) in the James Bond universe. I loved the way the novel was structured into the three run-ins with Goldfinger (I. Happenstance; II. Coincidence; III. Enemy Action), with each run-in becoming more and more over-the-top. I loved the car chase, the golf game, etc. I think the best summary of this book came from Roy Perrott, writing for the Manchester Guardian, who said the novel was "hard to put down; but some of us wish we had the good taste just to try."
December 30, 2021
Boredfinger! He’s the man, the man with the boring touch! A boring… zzz…
Auric Goldfinger, a man so obsessed with goooooold that Mike Myers’ caricature of the character was actually understated, wants to rob Fort Knox because it’s full of goooooold. Only one man can stop him: James Boooooond!
I’ve never read an Ian Fleming novel before and, after this, I’m not sure I ever will again! This book is so BORING - and it’s supposed to be an action spy thriller, which sounds exciting, until you read Fleming’s version of that here.
In the opening chapters, Bond is approached by a rich man he met in Casino Royale who tells him that he can’t beat this mysterious fellow, Goldfinger, at Canasta and asks Bond to sit in on the games to see what his trick is. I won’t say what the reason is but it’s a childishly simple explanation that sets the standard for the rest of the novel - and these opening chapters are the high point of the novel!
There’s an extensively tedious info dump on gold as it relates to world currency and a 40 page description of a golf game between Bond and Goldfinger. The golf game is easily the worst part of the novel, not least as I don’t care about the sport at all, a sport that is shockingly dull even when played at the highest level, but because it’s so irrelevant. All it reaffirms is that Goldfinger is a cheat, which was established by the preceding Canasta sequence. It doesn’t get much better after this unfortunately. Bond follows Goldfinger across the continent on a lengthy car ride where barely anything happens.
Alright, I’m gonna get into SPOILERS from here on out and get a bit Scott Evil-y too because he was so right about how Bond villains behaved back in the day - god, what a dummy Goldfinger is! Suffice it to say, I’m not recommending anyone bother with this novel - maybe I just read the crappiest Ian Fleming, maybe they’re all like this, but beware Boredfinger and try anything else instead.
So after Goldfinger discovers that Bond is a spy, he decides to NOT kill him, even though he’s a clear and present threat to his plan to rob Fort Knox, because he needs him to take the minutes of a meeting he’s having with mob bosses who are going to join him on the operation. Why the hell does Goldfinger need formal minutes - ie. evidence - of a major crime?!
But he also wants Bond to sit in on the meeting and let him know which mob bosses seem hesitant about joining him on the plan. Ok - except he’ll find this information out himself at the end of the meeting anyway when he asks each of them if they’ll join him. So what use is this information in hindsight? Especially as he immediately kills anyone who doesn’t throw in with him.
So then, once Bond’s singular purpose is completed, will Goldfinger kill him so that there’s no chance of Bond interfering with his masterplan? No. He keeps him alive, and involved in the operation - for no reason! This is the Scott Evil moment. The modern day reader looking back, baffled, as to why the villain just doesn’t simply shoot an unarmed, but obviously still dangerous, 007. Dumbfinger!
The plot in general is childishly simplistic. Based on nothing, Bond assumes Goldfinger is funding Soviet spies. It turns out he’s right but still it’s pure luck and you’d expect Bond to look for hard evidence rather than make flimsy assumptions before pursuing someone at great length. When Goldfinger’s flying a plane over Fort Knox and is challenged by the military air traffic control to explain himself, he tells them over the radio that he’s with Paramount Pictures location scouting for a movie, and they simply buy it without further questions or asking for evidence. Well that’s convenient! Not only are Goldfinger and Bond complete morons, so is everyone else in the book - it’s almost like the author is a moron too!
And then there’s the key plot point: how Bond foils Goldfinger’s plan. He manages to write a small note asking anyone who finds it to contact Felix Leiter in New York, for a reward of $5k, and tapes it to the underside of the plane’s toilet seat. So he’s hoping that someone who isn’t Goldfinger or one of his goons sees this note, contacts Felix for the reward money, and who will somehow be able to scupper Goldfinger’s plan in the nick of time.
WHICH ACTUALLY HAPPENS! A note on the underside of a toilet seat. Childishly simplistic. I couldn’t believe that this was the solution.
So Fleming’s Bond is an idiot. He goes off half-cocked on base assumptions, stumbles into the inner circle of a supervillain, and manages to save the day with the most absurd plan that only works because it has to - he’s James Bond. He’s also got some quite loathsome homophobic views. This stuff doesn’t really bother me - I take into account the era (this was written and published in the 1950s) - and it makes me laugh more than anything, especially as it’s so indefensible and makes Bond look so bad. This is Bond’s take on a girl he fancies but who won’t have sex with him: she’s obviously gay!
“Bond came to the conclusion that Tilly Masterton was one of those girls whose hormones had got mixed up. He knew the type well and thought they and their male counterparts were a direct consequence of giving votes to women and ‘sex equality’. As a result of fifty years of emancipation, feminine qualities were dying out or being transferred to the males. Pansies of both sexes were everywhere, not yet completely homosexual, but confused, not knowing what they were. The result was a herd of unhappy sexual misfits - barren and full of frustrations, the women wanting to dominate and the men to be nannied. He was sorry for them, but he had no time for them.” p.313-14
Dismissive and condescending, not to mention pig ignorant, enough for ya? This is also the novel where the classic characters Oddjob and Pussy Galore are introduced. Oddjob is Korean and he’s described in a casually racist way, often as an “ape”, who’s inarticulate, making sounds rather than words. Pussy, like Tilly Masterton, is a lesbian (you’d never guess from the name, eh? So subtle, Mr Fleming!) but only because she hasn’t met the right man. That’s right, Bond turns Pussy Galore straight because he’s such a real man and sexuality is clearly a choice. Take a bow, 1950s society! What a horrible “hero” Fleming’s Bond is.
Homophobia/racism aside, Goldfinger was still an awful novel. Thoroughly uninteresting, full of dull, unending chapters featuring a cast of dolts enacting an even stupider plot - I can only surmise that the Bond legacy is entirely thanks to the movies rather than Ian Fleming’s bottom-rung storytelling inability. Like I said earlier, maybe I was unlucky and somehow selected to read the worst Bond novel of the bunch, but I’m certainly not rushing (with love) to pick up another Fleming novel to see if I was wrong.
Avoid this turd-standard novel!
Auric Goldfinger, a man so obsessed with goooooold that Mike Myers’ caricature of the character was actually understated, wants to rob Fort Knox because it’s full of goooooold. Only one man can stop him: James Boooooond!
I’ve never read an Ian Fleming novel before and, after this, I’m not sure I ever will again! This book is so BORING - and it’s supposed to be an action spy thriller, which sounds exciting, until you read Fleming’s version of that here.
In the opening chapters, Bond is approached by a rich man he met in Casino Royale who tells him that he can’t beat this mysterious fellow, Goldfinger, at Canasta and asks Bond to sit in on the games to see what his trick is. I won’t say what the reason is but it’s a childishly simple explanation that sets the standard for the rest of the novel - and these opening chapters are the high point of the novel!
There’s an extensively tedious info dump on gold as it relates to world currency and a 40 page description of a golf game between Bond and Goldfinger. The golf game is easily the worst part of the novel, not least as I don’t care about the sport at all, a sport that is shockingly dull even when played at the highest level, but because it’s so irrelevant. All it reaffirms is that Goldfinger is a cheat, which was established by the preceding Canasta sequence. It doesn’t get much better after this unfortunately. Bond follows Goldfinger across the continent on a lengthy car ride where barely anything happens.
Alright, I’m gonna get into SPOILERS from here on out and get a bit Scott Evil-y too because he was so right about how Bond villains behaved back in the day - god, what a dummy Goldfinger is! Suffice it to say, I’m not recommending anyone bother with this novel - maybe I just read the crappiest Ian Fleming, maybe they’re all like this, but beware Boredfinger and try anything else instead.
So after Goldfinger discovers that Bond is a spy, he decides to NOT kill him, even though he’s a clear and present threat to his plan to rob Fort Knox, because he needs him to take the minutes of a meeting he’s having with mob bosses who are going to join him on the operation. Why the hell does Goldfinger need formal minutes - ie. evidence - of a major crime?!
But he also wants Bond to sit in on the meeting and let him know which mob bosses seem hesitant about joining him on the plan. Ok - except he’ll find this information out himself at the end of the meeting anyway when he asks each of them if they’ll join him. So what use is this information in hindsight? Especially as he immediately kills anyone who doesn’t throw in with him.
So then, once Bond’s singular purpose is completed, will Goldfinger kill him so that there’s no chance of Bond interfering with his masterplan? No. He keeps him alive, and involved in the operation - for no reason! This is the Scott Evil moment. The modern day reader looking back, baffled, as to why the villain just doesn’t simply shoot an unarmed, but obviously still dangerous, 007. Dumbfinger!
The plot in general is childishly simplistic. Based on nothing, Bond assumes Goldfinger is funding Soviet spies. It turns out he’s right but still it’s pure luck and you’d expect Bond to look for hard evidence rather than make flimsy assumptions before pursuing someone at great length. When Goldfinger’s flying a plane over Fort Knox and is challenged by the military air traffic control to explain himself, he tells them over the radio that he’s with Paramount Pictures location scouting for a movie, and they simply buy it without further questions or asking for evidence. Well that’s convenient! Not only are Goldfinger and Bond complete morons, so is everyone else in the book - it’s almost like the author is a moron too!
And then there’s the key plot point: how Bond foils Goldfinger’s plan. He manages to write a small note asking anyone who finds it to contact Felix Leiter in New York, for a reward of $5k, and tapes it to the underside of the plane’s toilet seat. So he’s hoping that someone who isn’t Goldfinger or one of his goons sees this note, contacts Felix for the reward money, and who will somehow be able to scupper Goldfinger’s plan in the nick of time.
WHICH ACTUALLY HAPPENS! A note on the underside of a toilet seat. Childishly simplistic. I couldn’t believe that this was the solution.
So Fleming’s Bond is an idiot. He goes off half-cocked on base assumptions, stumbles into the inner circle of a supervillain, and manages to save the day with the most absurd plan that only works because it has to - he’s James Bond. He’s also got some quite loathsome homophobic views. This stuff doesn’t really bother me - I take into account the era (this was written and published in the 1950s) - and it makes me laugh more than anything, especially as it’s so indefensible and makes Bond look so bad. This is Bond’s take on a girl he fancies but who won’t have sex with him: she’s obviously gay!
“Bond came to the conclusion that Tilly Masterton was one of those girls whose hormones had got mixed up. He knew the type well and thought they and their male counterparts were a direct consequence of giving votes to women and ‘sex equality’. As a result of fifty years of emancipation, feminine qualities were dying out or being transferred to the males. Pansies of both sexes were everywhere, not yet completely homosexual, but confused, not knowing what they were. The result was a herd of unhappy sexual misfits - barren and full of frustrations, the women wanting to dominate and the men to be nannied. He was sorry for them, but he had no time for them.” p.313-14
Dismissive and condescending, not to mention pig ignorant, enough for ya? This is also the novel where the classic characters Oddjob and Pussy Galore are introduced. Oddjob is Korean and he’s described in a casually racist way, often as an “ape”, who’s inarticulate, making sounds rather than words. Pussy, like Tilly Masterton, is a lesbian (you’d never guess from the name, eh? So subtle, Mr Fleming!) but only because she hasn’t met the right man. That’s right, Bond turns Pussy Galore straight because he’s such a real man and sexuality is clearly a choice. Take a bow, 1950s society! What a horrible “hero” Fleming’s Bond is.
Homophobia/racism aside, Goldfinger was still an awful novel. Thoroughly uninteresting, full of dull, unending chapters featuring a cast of dolts enacting an even stupider plot - I can only surmise that the Bond legacy is entirely thanks to the movies rather than Ian Fleming’s bottom-rung storytelling inability. Like I said earlier, maybe I was unlucky and somehow selected to read the worst Bond novel of the bunch, but I’m certainly not rushing (with love) to pick up another Fleming novel to see if I was wrong.
Avoid this turd-standard novel!
June 20, 2023
I have been thoroughly enjoying the Ian Fleming, James Bond books. I make specific the caveats that I would with any book written in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Noting the time period is important. The culture was very different. Things that were unremarkable back then will cause discomfort and even anger to an audience situated in the present. I would give a trigger warning for misogyny and racism, as I have with every single one of these Bond novels. If either of these things are completely unacceptable to you even when read within the cultural milieu of the past, then you should not read these early Bond books.
Goldfinger is book seven with Auric Goldfinger as a memorable villain, Oddjob is a memorable henchman, and Pussy Galore is a memorable Bond “girl.” Project Grandslam is the epitome of a ballsy heist; Goldfinger attempting to steal the gold from Fort Knox. This book is without a doubt in my mind one of the better, more memorable books in the series.
Goldfinger is book seven with Auric Goldfinger as a memorable villain, Oddjob is a memorable henchman, and Pussy Galore is a memorable Bond “girl.” Project Grandslam is the epitome of a ballsy heist; Goldfinger attempting to steal the gold from Fort Knox. This book is without a doubt in my mind one of the better, more memorable books in the series.
December 7, 2024
I first saw the film Goldfinger at the cinema (in a double bill with Dr No) in the 1970s & this year it celebrates its 60th anniversary. As I have recently watched the film yet again (& listened to John Barry's excellent soundtrack) I thought I'd revisit the novel as well.
Ian Fleming's 1959 James Bond adventure is the superb tale of Auric Goldfinger & his plan to commit the Crime de la Crime. Despite the epic scale of the novel Ian Fleming, as always, creates wonderfully drawn characters & every chapter is a joy to read.
I have no idea how many times I've read Goldfinger over the past 50 years, but somehow it remains as fresh now as when I first read it.
Being a James Bond fan does occasionally have its benefits. ITV Westcountry News did a feature this week to celebrate 60 years since the relaese of the film Goldfinger for my region (Devon, Cornwall & Somerset) & I was lucky enough to be interviewed (very briefly) to discuss 007. To celebrate this I bought this new edition of the novel, which is limited to 250 copies & has gilt-gold sprayed edges as well as a new cover & bonus content. It's available from www.ianfleming.com & is probably worth its weight in gold!!
Ian Fleming's 1959 James Bond adventure is the superb tale of Auric Goldfinger & his plan to commit the Crime de la Crime. Despite the epic scale of the novel Ian Fleming, as always, creates wonderfully drawn characters & every chapter is a joy to read.
I have no idea how many times I've read Goldfinger over the past 50 years, but somehow it remains as fresh now as when I first read it.
Being a James Bond fan does occasionally have its benefits. ITV Westcountry News did a feature this week to celebrate 60 years since the relaese of the film Goldfinger for my region (Devon, Cornwall & Somerset) & I was lucky enough to be interviewed (very briefly) to discuss 007. To celebrate this I bought this new edition of the novel, which is limited to 250 copies & has gilt-gold sprayed edges as well as a new cover & bonus content. It's available from www.ianfleming.com & is probably worth its weight in gold!!
December 4, 2023
My purpose with these reviews has never been to compare the books to the films but in this instance I want to come out and say that, for the first time in my view, the movie was actually superior to the novel in a number of ways. Spoilers ahead.
Beyond ALL THAT, this is a step further into recognizable Bond tropes as for the first time he's issued a tricked-out car, but nothing so fancy as the Aston Martin with machine guns behind the headlights in the movie, just reinforced bumpers and compartments to hide guns and oddments.
Also I guess his blade-concealing shoes count as a gadget? though we have not seen anything like a helicopter that fits in a suitcase or a wristwatch that shoots frickin' laser beams yet.
Goldfinger is an excellent adversary but I can't help but feel that Fleming already used a lot of his same characteristics with Hugo Drax just a few books earlier in Moonraker. James sussing him out as a cheat, this time both at cards and golf, is fun but familiar and his general boorishness and "enemy within" persona coming from the Baltic to England before the second world war were thus familiar, likewise his use of "exotic" (in this case Korean, for whatever reason) henchmen to further his nefarious schemes.
Some of Goldfinger's henchmen are more talented than others, though in the book it's Oddjob's phenomenal strength, martial arts skills and iron hard hands and feet that are his greatest threat.
Time for the now-traditional rundown of the book's principle "problematic" elements:
Casino Royale - Misogyny
Live and Let Die - Racial pandering
Moonraker - Paranoia re: 'Enemies within', particularly post-War Germans and the Soviets
Diamonds are Forever - Homophobia
From Russia With Love - Sexual Harrassment
Doctor No - More Racial Pandering! but this time of the "Yellow Peril" variety.
Goldfinger - Take your pick! but I'll go with Sexual Politics
Nope, Sean, he actually wrote all that bollocks.
I still recommend this one, if only as an intellectual exercise to compare and contrast to one of the more famous classic 007 films and also the possible apex of the Secret Agent fiction genre, for good or for ill, before it became a worldwide cultural phenomenon via films and television.
Beyond ALL THAT, this is a step further into recognizable Bond tropes as for the first time he's issued a tricked-out car, but nothing so fancy as the Aston Martin with machine guns behind the headlights in the movie, just reinforced bumpers and compartments to hide guns and oddments.
Also I guess his blade-concealing shoes count as a gadget? though we have not seen anything like a helicopter that fits in a suitcase or a wristwatch that shoots frickin' laser beams yet.
Goldfinger is an excellent adversary but I can't help but feel that Fleming already used a lot of his same characteristics with Hugo Drax just a few books earlier in Moonraker. James sussing him out as a cheat, this time both at cards and golf, is fun but familiar and his general boorishness and "enemy within" persona coming from the Baltic to England before the second world war were thus familiar, likewise his use of "exotic" (in this case Korean, for whatever reason) henchmen to further his nefarious schemes.
Some of Goldfinger's henchmen are more talented than others, though in the book it's Oddjob's phenomenal strength, martial arts skills and iron hard hands and feet that are his greatest threat.
Time for the now-traditional rundown of the book's principle "problematic" elements:
Casino Royale - Misogyny
Live and Let Die - Racial pandering
Moonraker - Paranoia re: 'Enemies within', particularly post-War Germans and the Soviets
Diamonds are Forever - Homophobia
From Russia With Love - Sexual Harrassment
Doctor No - More Racial Pandering! but this time of the "Yellow Peril" variety.
Goldfinger - Take your pick! but I'll go with Sexual Politics
Nope, Sean, he actually wrote all that bollocks.
I still recommend this one, if only as an intellectual exercise to compare and contrast to one of the more famous classic 007 films and also the possible apex of the Secret Agent fiction genre, for good or for ill, before it became a worldwide cultural phenomenon via films and television.
May 23, 2021
Secret agent James Bond is sent to investigate the activities of millionaire Auric Goldfinger & soon comes across a crime far bigger in scale than he could have ever imagined.
Ian Fleming effortlessly pulls the reader into Bond's world. Whether Bond is eating crab in Miami, discussing gold at the Bank of England or playing golf for a huge stake his world becomes brilliantly engrossing.
Fleming makes Goldfinger's insane plan to rob Fort Knox come across as almsot plausible. However, I always find Goldfinger's decision not to kill Bond as wildly unbelievable. That aside, 007's seventh adventure is another great story that never fails to entertain.
Ian Fleming effortlessly pulls the reader into Bond's world. Whether Bond is eating crab in Miami, discussing gold at the Bank of England or playing golf for a huge stake his world becomes brilliantly engrossing.
Fleming makes Goldfinger's insane plan to rob Fort Knox come across as almsot plausible. However, I always find Goldfinger's decision not to kill Bond as wildly unbelievable. That aside, 007's seventh adventure is another great story that never fails to entertain.
July 7, 2025
The usual sort of things, literature for teenagers, if they are reading anything else than books with vampires. Nothing essential from a dull game of golf till the end.
The plot is quite thin, the coincidences too many, the villain is smart enough to catch Bond, but not smart enough to kill him, even if he has more chances to do it. Bond himself not at his best, but his proverbial luck makes the difference. A book for subway-travelers...
PS: Someone may say that every book has its readers, as a matter of taste and age...
The plot is quite thin, the coincidences too many, the villain is smart enough to catch Bond, but not smart enough to kill him, even if he has more chances to do it. Bond himself not at his best, but his proverbial luck makes the difference. A book for subway-travelers...
PS: Someone may say that every book has its readers, as a matter of taste and age...
June 6, 2022
Bizarrely I have barely watched many full length Bond films over the years, with the exception of a couple of recent Daniel Craig efforts, although I had seen Goldfinger a few years ago. And even more bizarrely I had never read any Fleming before so I thought, when I found this lurking in the local library, that I would give it a go.
And I really enjoyed it! It is all quite preposterous but each plot twist was thrilling and exciting. It is amazing how much it dates now though - the role of women is so subordinate and ancillary and Bond's seductions seem quite ridiculous - there is even a part where Fleming describes Tilly Masterson as showing 'masculine/feminine master/slave reactions' which certainly doesn't chime with the sensitivities of our era, post third or even fourth wave feminism! Also the Cold War era Russophobia reads quite strangely today, although since the Russian invasion of Ukraine and tensions between the West and Russia maybe it has renewed relevance.
Despite this the focus on gold in particular is actually quite timely given the current inflationary pressures on currencies and the role of gold as a hedge and safe haven against currency debasement.
A cracking read.
And I really enjoyed it! It is all quite preposterous but each plot twist was thrilling and exciting. It is amazing how much it dates now though - the role of women is so subordinate and ancillary and Bond's seductions seem quite ridiculous - there is even a part where Fleming describes Tilly Masterson as showing 'masculine/feminine master/slave reactions' which certainly doesn't chime with the sensitivities of our era, post third or even fourth wave feminism! Also the Cold War era Russophobia reads quite strangely today, although since the Russian invasion of Ukraine and tensions between the West and Russia maybe it has renewed relevance.
Despite this the focus on gold in particular is actually quite timely given the current inflationary pressures on currencies and the role of gold as a hedge and safe haven against currency debasement.
A cracking read.
December 22, 2018
7th in the 007 canon, it finds Bond meeting an acquaintance in an airport. Mr DuPont says he's lost several thousand to a Mr Goldfinger in cards, and would Bond like to sit in and tell him how he's doing it?
Thus begins the adventure from London to Ft. Knox, involving 6 different crime syndicates in the plan to steal billions in gold.
Almost 60 years after it was written, it's interesting to see the society structure and politically incorrect status of Mr Fleming's world.
Thus begins the adventure from London to Ft. Knox, involving 6 different crime syndicates in the plan to steal billions in gold.
Almost 60 years after it was written, it's interesting to see the society structure and politically incorrect status of Mr Fleming's world.
September 4, 2016
"Casually, one hand reached out to the control panel and pressed down a switch. There came a slow metallic growl from the end of the table on which Bond lay. It curved quickly up to a harsh whine and then to a shrill high whistle that was barely audible. Bond turned his head wearily away. How soon could he manage to die?"
I've been trying to write up a review for Goldfinger - probably the most famous of the Bond adventures - for a couple of days now. Well, since this was a re-read, I guess you could say I have been trying to write down my thought for a couple of years!
The problem is that I didn't find this one as interesting a story as some of the others.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great characters in this - namely Auric Goldfinger and Tilly Masterton, and of course Pussy Galore, but the plot of this book was rather boring, especially when it became clear towards the end that the book heavily deviated from the film.
So, what about the characters?
In typical fashion, Fleming vilifies the baddies (Goldfinger and his assistant Oddjob) by endowing them with the appropriate physical descriptions.
Goldfinger is another caricature villain:
"Perhaps, Bond thought, it was to conceal his ugliness that Goldfinger made such a fetish of sunburn. Without the red-brown camouflage the pale body would be grotesque. The face, under the cliff of crew-cut carroty hair, was as startling, without being as ugly, as the body. It was moon-shaped without being moonlike. The forehead was fine and high and the thin sandy brows were level above the large light blue eyes fringed with pale lashes. The nose was fleshily aquiline between high cheek-bones and cheeks that were more muscular than fat. The mouth was thin and dead straight, but beautifully drawn. The chin and jaws were firm and glinted with health. To sum up, thought Bond, it the face of a thinker, perhaps a scientist, who was ruthless, sensual, stoical and tough. An odd combination. What else could he guess? Bond always mistrusted short men. They grew up from childhood with an inferiority complex. All their lives they would strive to be big – bigger than the others who had teased them as a child. Napoleon had been short, and Hitler. It was the short men that caused all the trouble in the world. And what about a misshapen short man with red hair and a bizarre face? That might add up to a really formidable misfit."
And Oddjob is another victim of Fleming's general racial stereotyping, which by now I am pretty much expecting from Fleming, even tho they are no less aggravating:
"Bond had had a good look at the chauffeur. He was a chunky flat-faced Japanese, or more probably Korean, with a wild, almost mad glare in dramatically slanting eyes that belonged in a Japanese film rather than in a Rolls Royce on a sunny afternoon in Kent. He had the snout-like upper lip that sometimes goes with a cleft palate, but he said nothing and Bond had no opportunity of knowing whether his guess was right. In his tight, almost bursting black suit and farcical bowler hat he looked rather like a Japanese wrestler on his day off. But he was not a figure to make one smile."
Yeah, this is the general description of Oddjob. The, in this instance, more than casual racism is added a little later:
"Now then,’ Oddjob had dressed and was standing respectfully at attention, ‘you did well, Oddjob. I’m glad to see you are in training. Here –’ Goldfinger took the cat from under his arm and tossed it to the Korean who caught it eagerly – ‘I am tired of seeing this animal around. You may have it for dinner.’ The Korean’s eyes gleamed."
However, Fleming's does like to make his villains interesting, and in Goldfinger, Fleming introduces his audience to new fighting skills that have been around in Europe but have not yet enjoyed the popular appeal that would come a couple of decades later.
‘Have you ever heard of Karate? No? Well that man is one of the three in the world who have achieved the Black Belt in Karate.
I thought this was interesting. It shows that Fleming is still trying to keep the stories fresh and interesting. The previous books have been outlandish and daring, but each had a slightly different twist. Fleming enthusiasts may be able to convey more insight on this than I can, but it would be interesting to find out if Fleming himself had some interest in Japan or Korea when writing Goldfinger (and the later You Only Live Twice), since he seemed to have turned to Asia for inspiration in both books.
Of course, as mentioned in previous reviews, Fleming either seems to not have been a great believer in fact checking or he preferred to make use of sensationalist claims for the benefit of the story, but the claim of there only being three Black Belts in the world (in 1959) is of course false.
In a way, I guess this is what irks me most about Fleming's writing. When the plot does not hold up, the rest of the books crumbles with awkward writing, made-up facts, and predictable characterisations. Except, ....
Well, every now and then, Fleming does something to surprise: either he comes up with an unexpected gem of a character like Pussy Galore:
‘Who is this Pussy Galore from Harlem?’ ‘She is the only woman who runs a gang in America. It is a gang of women. I shall need some women for this operation. She is entirely reliable. She was a trapeze artiste. She had a team. It was called “Pussy Galore and her Abrocats”.’ Goldfinger did not smile. ‘The team was unsuccessful, so she trained them as burglars, cat burglars. It grew into a gang of outstanding ruthlessness. It is a Lesbian organization which now calls itself “The Cement Mixers”. Even the big American gangs respect them. She is a remarkable woman.’
Yeah, don't get me started on the name or the idiotic ideas about sexuality in the book, but Fleming actually created another female character (the first since Gala Brand in Moonraker) that is more competent than Bond.
The second surprise was that Fleming actually gives Bond a chance to be human - in this one he tries to help Jill Masterton escape from Goldfinger, and later he helps her sister, Tilly, plot revenge.
So, while this was not the most exciting of Bond books - and it definitely suffers by comparison with its predecessor Dr. No - there are some interesting parts in it. It is just a shame that the plot is not one of them, and that the gimmicks are not enough to make it special.
I've been trying to write up a review for Goldfinger - probably the most famous of the Bond adventures - for a couple of days now. Well, since this was a re-read, I guess you could say I have been trying to write down my thought for a couple of years!
The problem is that I didn't find this one as interesting a story as some of the others.
Don't get me wrong, there are some great characters in this - namely Auric Goldfinger and Tilly Masterton, and of course Pussy Galore, but the plot of this book was rather boring, especially when it became clear towards the end that the book heavily deviated from the film.
So, what about the characters?
In typical fashion, Fleming vilifies the baddies (Goldfinger and his assistant Oddjob) by endowing them with the appropriate physical descriptions.
Goldfinger is another caricature villain:
"Perhaps, Bond thought, it was to conceal his ugliness that Goldfinger made such a fetish of sunburn. Without the red-brown camouflage the pale body would be grotesque. The face, under the cliff of crew-cut carroty hair, was as startling, without being as ugly, as the body. It was moon-shaped without being moonlike. The forehead was fine and high and the thin sandy brows were level above the large light blue eyes fringed with pale lashes. The nose was fleshily aquiline between high cheek-bones and cheeks that were more muscular than fat. The mouth was thin and dead straight, but beautifully drawn. The chin and jaws were firm and glinted with health. To sum up, thought Bond, it the face of a thinker, perhaps a scientist, who was ruthless, sensual, stoical and tough. An odd combination. What else could he guess? Bond always mistrusted short men. They grew up from childhood with an inferiority complex. All their lives they would strive to be big – bigger than the others who had teased them as a child. Napoleon had been short, and Hitler. It was the short men that caused all the trouble in the world. And what about a misshapen short man with red hair and a bizarre face? That might add up to a really formidable misfit."
And Oddjob is another victim of Fleming's general racial stereotyping, which by now I am pretty much expecting from Fleming, even tho they are no less aggravating:
"Bond had had a good look at the chauffeur. He was a chunky flat-faced Japanese, or more probably Korean, with a wild, almost mad glare in dramatically slanting eyes that belonged in a Japanese film rather than in a Rolls Royce on a sunny afternoon in Kent. He had the snout-like upper lip that sometimes goes with a cleft palate, but he said nothing and Bond had no opportunity of knowing whether his guess was right. In his tight, almost bursting black suit and farcical bowler hat he looked rather like a Japanese wrestler on his day off. But he was not a figure to make one smile."
Yeah, this is the general description of Oddjob. The, in this instance, more than casual racism is added a little later:
"Now then,’ Oddjob had dressed and was standing respectfully at attention, ‘you did well, Oddjob. I’m glad to see you are in training. Here –’ Goldfinger took the cat from under his arm and tossed it to the Korean who caught it eagerly – ‘I am tired of seeing this animal around. You may have it for dinner.’ The Korean’s eyes gleamed."
However, Fleming's does like to make his villains interesting, and in Goldfinger, Fleming introduces his audience to new fighting skills that have been around in Europe but have not yet enjoyed the popular appeal that would come a couple of decades later.
‘Have you ever heard of Karate? No? Well that man is one of the three in the world who have achieved the Black Belt in Karate.
I thought this was interesting. It shows that Fleming is still trying to keep the stories fresh and interesting. The previous books have been outlandish and daring, but each had a slightly different twist. Fleming enthusiasts may be able to convey more insight on this than I can, but it would be interesting to find out if Fleming himself had some interest in Japan or Korea when writing Goldfinger (and the later You Only Live Twice), since he seemed to have turned to Asia for inspiration in both books.
Of course, as mentioned in previous reviews, Fleming either seems to not have been a great believer in fact checking or he preferred to make use of sensationalist claims for the benefit of the story, but the claim of there only being three Black Belts in the world (in 1959) is of course false.
In a way, I guess this is what irks me most about Fleming's writing. When the plot does not hold up, the rest of the books crumbles with awkward writing, made-up facts, and predictable characterisations. Except, ....
Well, every now and then, Fleming does something to surprise: either he comes up with an unexpected gem of a character like Pussy Galore:
‘Who is this Pussy Galore from Harlem?’ ‘She is the only woman who runs a gang in America. It is a gang of women. I shall need some women for this operation. She is entirely reliable. She was a trapeze artiste. She had a team. It was called “Pussy Galore and her Abrocats”.’ Goldfinger did not smile. ‘The team was unsuccessful, so she trained them as burglars, cat burglars. It grew into a gang of outstanding ruthlessness. It is a Lesbian organization which now calls itself “The Cement Mixers”. Even the big American gangs respect them. She is a remarkable woman.’
Yeah, don't get me started on the name or the idiotic ideas about sexuality in the book, but Fleming actually created another female character (the first since Gala Brand in Moonraker) that is more competent than Bond.
The second surprise was that Fleming actually gives Bond a chance to be human - in this one he tries to help Jill Masterton escape from Goldfinger, and later he helps her sister, Tilly, plot revenge.
So, while this was not the most exciting of Bond books - and it definitely suffers by comparison with its predecessor Dr. No - there are some interesting parts in it. It is just a shame that the plot is not one of them, and that the gimmicks are not enough to make it special.
March 7, 2015
The movie has got to be better than this shit. Yes, I shall procure a copy for myself, and watch it all the way through. I must confess I have only seen parts of this cinematic Sean Connery classic, and the parts I have seen did offer up a slight sense of endearment for yours truly. But my attention span waned, and my movie prowess faltered, and I must confess I sometimes have the attention span of a fruit fly. But I shall push through, much as I did with this piece of male chauvinistic trash.
The golf scene proved longwinded and a bit of a bore. And I happen to really like golf. After the scene, though, I wanted to chuck my clubs through an open window and burn my golf shirts in a bonfire. So…I’ve got that going for me.
Pussy Galore is one of the best names of all time, right? Yes, you are absolutely correct. But the way she falls for James Bond made me want to hurl up a Happy Meal. She may have been a lesbian, but she’d never met a man like James Bond. I haven’t either, but that doesn’t mean I want to marry the bastard.
Even Auric Goldfinger felt limp-dicked compared to his grand cinematic self. And I’m sorry but I just didn’t buy Bond and GOLDFINGER working together. More than anything, though, I wanted to hear one of the most famous exchanges of all time, and I ended up with zip. Zilch. Nada. What exchange? You might ask. Why, it’s this one:
James Bond: Do you expect me to talk?
Auric Goldfinger: No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!
I think it’s safe to say I was screwed.
Cross-posted at Robert's Reads
The golf scene proved longwinded and a bit of a bore. And I happen to really like golf. After the scene, though, I wanted to chuck my clubs through an open window and burn my golf shirts in a bonfire. So…I’ve got that going for me.
Pussy Galore is one of the best names of all time, right? Yes, you are absolutely correct. But the way she falls for James Bond made me want to hurl up a Happy Meal. She may have been a lesbian, but she’d never met a man like James Bond. I haven’t either, but that doesn’t mean I want to marry the bastard.
Even Auric Goldfinger felt limp-dicked compared to his grand cinematic self. And I’m sorry but I just didn’t buy Bond and GOLDFINGER working together. More than anything, though, I wanted to hear one of the most famous exchanges of all time, and I ended up with zip. Zilch. Nada. What exchange? You might ask. Why, it’s this one:
James Bond: Do you expect me to talk?
Auric Goldfinger: No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!
I think it’s safe to say I was screwed.
Cross-posted at Robert's Reads
May 2, 2013
Goldfinger, movie trailer.
Oh, Bond. What are you up to now?
Lessee... "Mr Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: 'Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action.' Miami, Sandwich and now Geneva." - Auric Goldfinger
The book is broken up into these three sections detailing Bond's three interactions with Auric Goldfinger, a nasty sort of fellow who cheats at canasta and smuggles gold. This is the first of the Bond books I've read that takes place primarily in America (yee-haw!) and I was pleasantly surprised to see that Fleming wasn't all... well... "yee-haw" about his descriptions of America.
In the first section, "Happenstance", Bond is asked to check this Goldfinger out because a buddy of Bond's has lost money in canasta and he thinks Goldfinger is cheating. I sort of feel we have more important things for our MI6 agents to be doing with their time. It's not like Bond was just switching planes after a drug bust in Mexico; dude can't even catch a break by being allowed a nap next to the pool. No-no, let's put him back to work. Slacker.
In the second section, "Coincidence", Bond and Goldfinger play golf. GOLF. That was an exciting chapter. Also an exciting part in the movie. I kept waiting for a golf ball to explode or Bond's golf club is also a gun... but there was nothing like that in either the book or the movie. Oh well, can't win them all.
And then in the final section, "Enemy Action" and things get a bit more exciting and stuff goes boom (more so in the movie than the book).
Everyone knows Goldfinger for two reasons, whether or not they've read the book or seen the movie: Oddjob and Pussy Galore.
Let's start with Oddjob. He's the Korean driver-cum-assassin of Goldfinger. In the book he's described as having a cleft palate and, on more than one occasion, as being a "Korean ape". He doesn't speak, but speaks volumes with his wicked hat which can break people in half just by throwing it like a Frisbee. That's pretty cool, both in the book and the movie. But the racism is decidedly less cool. Goldfinger has a little army of Koreans helping out his outfit, and there's a whole section on page 129 (if memory serves) where Goldfinger talks about how nasty Koreans are, and if he didn't take them in, who knows what they'd do in the world. Um, thanks? Something about how all they want is a prostitute once in a while, I don't know, my eyes were glazing over by that point.
Oddjob in the movie is a bit more interesting. Again, never says a word (though not due to a cleft palate but because he's described as being "mute"), but he crushes stuff and that's fun.
Then there's Pussy Galore. Ah, Pussy.
Wow.
What is there to say?
She doesn't have that large a part in the book, which I found surprising. She's one of the mob members, and she had a role, and she and her outfit are described as lesbians (with a capital L because that's how it was in the '60s apparently); but in the movie, she has a larger role, she flies planes and she kicks a lot of ass. Literally.
One thing remained the same in the book and the movie (and is even more disgusting and sexist in the book) is that she throws her lesbian ways into the wind and falls into Bond's arms.
Sigh.
Because she never really knew a man, she says in the book. She was abused by an uncle and therefore men suck, but now that she sees how gentle a man can be (like Bond), she's willing to reconsider everything.
Jebus.
I think in this case I enjoyed the movie more than the book. The movie was flashier and so over-the-top bad one can't help but laugh. The book, however, is just sorta bad. Interestingly, Wikipedia says:
Saint George, huh? I'll get back to you on that one. In fact, I'll get back to you on whether or not I think Bond has gotten more or less complex as a character as well. Right now I'm not buying it. Not even a little bit.
Next up... Thunderball
Oh, Bond. What are you up to now?
Lessee... "Mr Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: 'Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action.' Miami, Sandwich and now Geneva." - Auric Goldfinger
The book is broken up into these three sections detailing Bond's three interactions with Auric Goldfinger, a nasty sort of fellow who cheats at canasta and smuggles gold. This is the first of the Bond books I've read that takes place primarily in America (yee-haw!) and I was pleasantly surprised to see that Fleming wasn't all... well... "yee-haw" about his descriptions of America.
In the first section, "Happenstance", Bond is asked to check this Goldfinger out because a buddy of Bond's has lost money in canasta and he thinks Goldfinger is cheating. I sort of feel we have more important things for our MI6 agents to be doing with their time. It's not like Bond was just switching planes after a drug bust in Mexico; dude can't even catch a break by being allowed a nap next to the pool. No-no, let's put him back to work. Slacker.
In the second section, "Coincidence", Bond and Goldfinger play golf. GOLF. That was an exciting chapter. Also an exciting part in the movie. I kept waiting for a golf ball to explode or Bond's golf club is also a gun... but there was nothing like that in either the book or the movie. Oh well, can't win them all.
And then in the final section, "Enemy Action" and things get a bit more exciting and stuff goes boom (more so in the movie than the book).
Everyone knows Goldfinger for two reasons, whether or not they've read the book or seen the movie: Oddjob and Pussy Galore.
Let's start with Oddjob. He's the Korean driver-cum-assassin of Goldfinger. In the book he's described as having a cleft palate and, on more than one occasion, as being a "Korean ape". He doesn't speak, but speaks volumes with his wicked hat which can break people in half just by throwing it like a Frisbee. That's pretty cool, both in the book and the movie. But the racism is decidedly less cool. Goldfinger has a little army of Koreans helping out his outfit, and there's a whole section on page 129 (if memory serves) where Goldfinger talks about how nasty Koreans are, and if he didn't take them in, who knows what they'd do in the world. Um, thanks? Something about how all they want is a prostitute once in a while, I don't know, my eyes were glazing over by that point.
Oddjob in the movie is a bit more interesting. Again, never says a word (though not due to a cleft palate but because he's described as being "mute"), but he crushes stuff and that's fun.
Then there's Pussy Galore. Ah, Pussy.
Wow.
What is there to say?
She doesn't have that large a part in the book, which I found surprising. She's one of the mob members, and she had a role, and she and her outfit are described as lesbians (with a capital L because that's how it was in the '60s apparently); but in the movie, she has a larger role, she flies planes and she kicks a lot of ass. Literally.
One thing remained the same in the book and the movie (and is even more disgusting and sexist in the book) is that she throws her lesbian ways into the wind and falls into Bond's arms.
Sigh.
Because she never really knew a man, she says in the book. She was abused by an uncle and therefore men suck, but now that she sees how gentle a man can be (like Bond), she's willing to reconsider everything.
Jebus.
I think in this case I enjoyed the movie more than the book. The movie was flashier and so over-the-top bad one can't help but laugh. The book, however, is just sorta bad. Interestingly, Wikipedia says:
Fleming developed the James Bond character more in Goldfinger than in the previous six novels, presenting him as a more complex individual, whilst also bringing out a theme of Bond as Saint George. The Saint George theme is echoed by the fact that it is a British agent sorting out an American problem.
Saint George, huh? I'll get back to you on that one. In fact, I'll get back to you on whether or not I think Bond has gotten more or less complex as a character as well. Right now I'm not buying it. Not even a little bit.
Next up... Thunderball
July 21, 2010
We watched Goldfinger last night on DVD - I'd seen it once before, around 1975, but I could hardly remember a thing about it. Really quite interesting! Some reactions:
The women
OMG. There are some scenes one could hardly believe. This was our favourite. Felix Leiter, Bond's opposite number from the CIA, turns up in Miami, where Bond is lounging by a swimming pool, having his shoulders massaged by an opulent blonde. They have the following exchange (from memory):
Leiter: Ah, Bond, I thought I'd find you in good hands!
Bond: Felix, this is Dink. Dink, say hello to Felix.
Blonde: Hello.
Bond: Dink, say goodbye to Felix. Run along now. Man talk. (He slaps her condescendingly on the ass)
And... she DOESN'T hit him, she DOESN'T say anything sarcastic, and she DOES run along! Wow. We were trying to remember if this really could have happened in 1964, but we were too young at the time.
The acting
We were pleasantly reminded of the Elvis movie Fun in Acapulco, a family favourite. Elisabeth thought Acapulco was better, mainly because the story was more plausible. I preferred Bond, on the grounds that Connery is a more competent actor than Elvis. But we both had to admit it was close.
The story
It sounded strangely familiar. The Chinese get together with an unscrupulous Western multi-billionaire, and hatch a scheme to create panic and chaos in the world's economic markets, starting with the US. They're both going to make a killing out of it. Where had we heard that before?
_____________________________________________
We heard on the news a couple of days ago that some enterprising trader has managed to corner Europe's entire supply of cocoa beans. They've started calling him Chockfinger.
Well, the script just writes itself, doesn't it? I can already see the naked girl lying sprawled on the bed, stone dead and covered in chocolate...
The women
OMG. There are some scenes one could hardly believe. This was our favourite. Felix Leiter, Bond's opposite number from the CIA, turns up in Miami, where Bond is lounging by a swimming pool, having his shoulders massaged by an opulent blonde. They have the following exchange (from memory):
Leiter: Ah, Bond, I thought I'd find you in good hands!
Bond: Felix, this is Dink. Dink, say hello to Felix.
Blonde: Hello.
Bond: Dink, say goodbye to Felix. Run along now. Man talk. (He slaps her condescendingly on the ass)
And... she DOESN'T hit him, she DOESN'T say anything sarcastic, and she DOES run along! Wow. We were trying to remember if this really could have happened in 1964, but we were too young at the time.
The acting
We were pleasantly reminded of the Elvis movie Fun in Acapulco, a family favourite. Elisabeth thought Acapulco was better, mainly because the story was more plausible. I preferred Bond, on the grounds that Connery is a more competent actor than Elvis. But we both had to admit it was close.
The story
It sounded strangely familiar. The Chinese get together with an unscrupulous Western multi-billionaire, and hatch a scheme to create panic and chaos in the world's economic markets, starting with the US. They're both going to make a killing out of it. Where had we heard that before?
_____________________________________________
We heard on the news a couple of days ago that some enterprising trader has managed to corner Europe's entire supply of cocoa beans. They've started calling him Chockfinger.
Well, the script just writes itself, doesn't it? I can already see the naked girl lying sprawled on the bed, stone dead and covered in chocolate...
October 23, 2011
1.Plot – Plot? Okay, it’s James Bond. Who doesn’t know the plot? Megalomaniac wants to rule the world. James Bond Kicks his ass, then gets laid at least twice.
Oh, all right, he played golf too.
I guess I just mean to say, this is an old book, that became an old movie. There were no surprises in the plot. Sean Connery’s Bond fits very well with Ian Fleming’s book.
Bond, on his way back to England after tracking down drug dealers in Mexico gets delayed at the airport. While there, he accepts a proposition from an acquaintance on a past mission. Someone’s cheating him at a cards (Baccarat).
It turns out that the man cheating at cards is the richest English Citizen on the planet. Bond foils the cheater and blackmails him into paying his acquaintance back and meets a hot chick. He enjoys a long weekend with the Goldfinger’s then, while on duty, he spends the time researching Goldfinger.
I could go on, but the plot is rather well known, if you have ever seen a James Bond movie, you’ve probably seen Goldfinger.
I Didn’t see many differences between the movie version and the book as far as the basic plot is concern. There were some differences I noticed in what we were able to see or learn about what was going on.
First, James Bond seems to be having some issues with traumatic Stress. This is one of the amazing things in the book considering the era that it had been written. It’s not much of a nod, just a little trouble sleeping, some alcohol abuse (Self-medication) and some guilt and remorse. This did more to change my appreciation for Ian Fleming than it did James Bond. As far as Bond goes, it also explains some of his cold nature, as they say, “Indifference is a point beyond rage.” I may be a bit crazy, but I think it’s kind of cool that, through what ever exposure to men in danger or who have had to kill people (likely the second world war), Fleming or some part of him noticed how traumatic brutality effected a human being, and that little ibt of it leaked out into his book during a time when most people tended to deny combat and trauma related mental health problems unless you were a victim.
Second, we got a chance to see how much James Bond really sweat things. The golf game is a particularly good example. AN example that got tedious after a few holes. The play by play for Goldfinger Vs Bond went on too long for me, but the benefit is that we got to see how much stress went on inside his head, that never shows in the movies at least not to the degree we got to see it in the book. Again we get to see bond stress when he realizes Goldfiner and Oddjob are going to cut him in to pieces.
Third we get to see Bond’s strength of will and determination when he’s able to hold his breath until he black out. Ordinarily, I’d write that off as fictional hogwash, but I believe that’s likely developed from a firsthand account from the second world war.
Fourth, I have again been reminded of an era where there were hints of a gender revolution building that hadn’t yet been realized. Where Fleming recognized women in his books, even the most potent of them, P. Galore was still shunted off to play nurse and be a boy toy (never mind that she was a lesbian). But this was a different time. This was a place where people thought Ginger was the sexy one and Mary Anne was a cute side kick.
Fifth, of the James Bond’s I’ve seen, Sean Connery played the role the closest to what it was supposed to be.
To Sum up thoughts about the plot. I’d say I was disappointed at how little James Bond had to do with foiling Goldfinger. All he seemed to do was get captured and sit on his hands until he managed to drop a note in the lieu. Even then Felix Lighter did more than Bond did.
2.Characters. How do you feel about James Bond?
I actually like the Sean Connery Bond more after reading the book. I appreciate Ian Fleming more, but I found that, other than Bond this read more like a graphic novel or a Comic Book. The characters were more, caricatures, other than Bond, though how much this is due to the era it was written than the author I can’t say. As for the individual characters?
James Bond actually came across as more human, rather than less Human. The ability to see inside his head and register his fears and remorse allowed the character to feel deeper and more complete than any move ever could. Other than that, he was much the same as the Connery Bond.
Goldfinger turned out to more devious and diabolical, but no real differences between what we saw on the screen and what we saw in the book.
Oddjob – finally I got to see what was so frightening about oddjob that made him dangerous above and beyond the other creepy lethal villains that bond faced in other stories. This is one character that the movie did not stand up to. Odd Job in the movie was scary, but physically, not like the book version, save he was Asian.
P. Galore – Does the woman’s name clue you in on what her value to the story turned out to be? This is the strongest female, good to semi-good, to semi bad, character in the Bond gallery until Jynx comes along and, other than having a likeable wit, if not particularly beautiful personality, is to run a ring of prostitutes, show her independence by being gay and then give that up to go to bed with Bond in order to save her skin at the end of the book. Okay, sign of the times I know, but even the girl who played Goldfinger’s boy toy in the beginning of the book had more redeemable human traits and she was helping Goldfinger filch thousands of dollars by cheating at cards.
3.Action: How good were the action elements out of 10? Best action scenes?
The best action scenes came at the end of the book. I’d rate them at about a 3, maybe a 4. I realize this is how books were written in the late 50’s and 60’s but I’ve read other books from the same era that had more action. I found the action clipped and rather than taking us through the action like Matthew Rielly, James Rollins and Clive Cussler, it was narrated like a flash back. I’d reclassify this book as a suspense thriller by todays standards. I understand that this is what we called “action” stories at one time. I’d offer, for comparison, Alistair MacLean’s books, written about the same time. MacLean’s writing is exciting. This was more like Yadda-yadda-ing sex.
4.How does this compare to the movie versions?
The book was better than the movie, but only marginally so and in aspects of “action” the movie was better.
5.Did the spy aspects feel authentic to you?
It’s likely the spy aspects were “too authentic” and that is why it was more boring than the movies.
6.Overall verdict: out of 10 or 5 stars?
Out of 5 stars, I’ll give it a 3. I might skip to a Bond story from a later time and see if Ian Fleming’s writing style changed with the times. I hate to say it, because my memory of the movies is still generally good, but this was a bit of a letdown for me.
7.Other books like this you'd recommend?
I’d recommend “Where Eagles Dare” and “Circus” by Alistair MacLean before I’d recommend Goldfinger, or even “The Enemy” by Desmond Bagely, which I think is very good.
It’s only fair that I recognize the difference in the world when Goldfinger was written and how the world is now and the differences in writing styles. This is, of course, only my opinion, but, for now, I’d rather watch the movies than read the books, and for me, that’s a shocking thing. I tend to believe that the books are always better than the movies.
Oh, all right, he played golf too.
I guess I just mean to say, this is an old book, that became an old movie. There were no surprises in the plot. Sean Connery’s Bond fits very well with Ian Fleming’s book.
Bond, on his way back to England after tracking down drug dealers in Mexico gets delayed at the airport. While there, he accepts a proposition from an acquaintance on a past mission. Someone’s cheating him at a cards (Baccarat).
It turns out that the man cheating at cards is the richest English Citizen on the planet. Bond foils the cheater and blackmails him into paying his acquaintance back and meets a hot chick. He enjoys a long weekend with the Goldfinger’s then, while on duty, he spends the time researching Goldfinger.
I could go on, but the plot is rather well known, if you have ever seen a James Bond movie, you’ve probably seen Goldfinger.
I Didn’t see many differences between the movie version and the book as far as the basic plot is concern. There were some differences I noticed in what we were able to see or learn about what was going on.
First, James Bond seems to be having some issues with traumatic Stress. This is one of the amazing things in the book considering the era that it had been written. It’s not much of a nod, just a little trouble sleeping, some alcohol abuse (Self-medication) and some guilt and remorse. This did more to change my appreciation for Ian Fleming than it did James Bond. As far as Bond goes, it also explains some of his cold nature, as they say, “Indifference is a point beyond rage.” I may be a bit crazy, but I think it’s kind of cool that, through what ever exposure to men in danger or who have had to kill people (likely the second world war), Fleming or some part of him noticed how traumatic brutality effected a human being, and that little ibt of it leaked out into his book during a time when most people tended to deny combat and trauma related mental health problems unless you were a victim.
Second, we got a chance to see how much James Bond really sweat things. The golf game is a particularly good example. AN example that got tedious after a few holes. The play by play for Goldfinger Vs Bond went on too long for me, but the benefit is that we got to see how much stress went on inside his head, that never shows in the movies at least not to the degree we got to see it in the book. Again we get to see bond stress when he realizes Goldfiner and Oddjob are going to cut him in to pieces.
Third we get to see Bond’s strength of will and determination when he’s able to hold his breath until he black out. Ordinarily, I’d write that off as fictional hogwash, but I believe that’s likely developed from a firsthand account from the second world war.
Fourth, I have again been reminded of an era where there were hints of a gender revolution building that hadn’t yet been realized. Where Fleming recognized women in his books, even the most potent of them, P. Galore was still shunted off to play nurse and be a boy toy (never mind that she was a lesbian). But this was a different time. This was a place where people thought Ginger was the sexy one and Mary Anne was a cute side kick.
Fifth, of the James Bond’s I’ve seen, Sean Connery played the role the closest to what it was supposed to be.
To Sum up thoughts about the plot. I’d say I was disappointed at how little James Bond had to do with foiling Goldfinger. All he seemed to do was get captured and sit on his hands until he managed to drop a note in the lieu. Even then Felix Lighter did more than Bond did.
2.Characters. How do you feel about James Bond?
I actually like the Sean Connery Bond more after reading the book. I appreciate Ian Fleming more, but I found that, other than Bond this read more like a graphic novel or a Comic Book. The characters were more, caricatures, other than Bond, though how much this is due to the era it was written than the author I can’t say. As for the individual characters?
James Bond actually came across as more human, rather than less Human. The ability to see inside his head and register his fears and remorse allowed the character to feel deeper and more complete than any move ever could. Other than that, he was much the same as the Connery Bond.
Goldfinger turned out to more devious and diabolical, but no real differences between what we saw on the screen and what we saw in the book.
Oddjob – finally I got to see what was so frightening about oddjob that made him dangerous above and beyond the other creepy lethal villains that bond faced in other stories. This is one character that the movie did not stand up to. Odd Job in the movie was scary, but physically, not like the book version, save he was Asian.
P. Galore – Does the woman’s name clue you in on what her value to the story turned out to be? This is the strongest female, good to semi-good, to semi bad, character in the Bond gallery until Jynx comes along and, other than having a likeable wit, if not particularly beautiful personality, is to run a ring of prostitutes, show her independence by being gay and then give that up to go to bed with Bond in order to save her skin at the end of the book. Okay, sign of the times I know, but even the girl who played Goldfinger’s boy toy in the beginning of the book had more redeemable human traits and she was helping Goldfinger filch thousands of dollars by cheating at cards.
3.Action: How good were the action elements out of 10? Best action scenes?
The best action scenes came at the end of the book. I’d rate them at about a 3, maybe a 4. I realize this is how books were written in the late 50’s and 60’s but I’ve read other books from the same era that had more action. I found the action clipped and rather than taking us through the action like Matthew Rielly, James Rollins and Clive Cussler, it was narrated like a flash back. I’d reclassify this book as a suspense thriller by todays standards. I understand that this is what we called “action” stories at one time. I’d offer, for comparison, Alistair MacLean’s books, written about the same time. MacLean’s writing is exciting. This was more like Yadda-yadda-ing sex.
4.How does this compare to the movie versions?
The book was better than the movie, but only marginally so and in aspects of “action” the movie was better.
5.Did the spy aspects feel authentic to you?
It’s likely the spy aspects were “too authentic” and that is why it was more boring than the movies.
6.Overall verdict: out of 10 or 5 stars?
Out of 5 stars, I’ll give it a 3. I might skip to a Bond story from a later time and see if Ian Fleming’s writing style changed with the times. I hate to say it, because my memory of the movies is still generally good, but this was a bit of a letdown for me.
7.Other books like this you'd recommend?
I’d recommend “Where Eagles Dare” and “Circus” by Alistair MacLean before I’d recommend Goldfinger, or even “The Enemy” by Desmond Bagely, which I think is very good.
It’s only fair that I recognize the difference in the world when Goldfinger was written and how the world is now and the differences in writing styles. This is, of course, only my opinion, but, for now, I’d rather watch the movies than read the books, and for me, that’s a shocking thing. I tend to believe that the books are always better than the movies.
September 4, 2018
2.5 stars
***2018 Summer of Spies***
I spent part of the Labour Day weekend finishing up my Summer of Spies and finishing up Goldfinger. I’ve had fun with earlier installments of Bond, but found this book a bit of a grind. It started, Goddess aid me, with card games yet again and then continued on with one of the only subjects that I consider more boring than cards, golf! There was much eye rolling and boredom on my part, but I realize that these subjects excite other people, and certainly were passions of Mr. Fleming.
Add to that statements like Koreans being “the cruelest, most ruthless people in the world” and a criminal organization consisting of lesbians under the direction of Pussy Galore, and well, this one went way off the charts of the stereotype-meter. I’ll take the TV show “Kim’s Convenience” over Oddjob any day for an example of Koreans in our society. Next time I’m feeling down about the role of women and minorities in our society and feeling like change is taking for-bloody-ever, I’ll pick up the next Bond book for a reminder of exactly how far we have come.
I will reiterate what I said in my review of Casino Royale, that I am surprised and pleased at the caliber of Fleming’s writing. I shouldn’t be so surprised, I guess, as he read a lot and spent a fair amount of time with literary people, including one of my favourites, Raymond Chandler. I guess that I’ve unfairly absorbed the literary judgements of his wife’s literary circle, who looked down their noses at Fleming’s work. I’m glad to have read several of the books that have created their own enduring niche in popular culture.
***2018 Summer of Spies***
I spent part of the Labour Day weekend finishing up my Summer of Spies and finishing up Goldfinger. I’ve had fun with earlier installments of Bond, but found this book a bit of a grind. It started, Goddess aid me, with card games yet again and then continued on with one of the only subjects that I consider more boring than cards, golf! There was much eye rolling and boredom on my part, but I realize that these subjects excite other people, and certainly were passions of Mr. Fleming.
Add to that statements like Koreans being “the cruelest, most ruthless people in the world” and a criminal organization consisting of lesbians under the direction of Pussy Galore, and well, this one went way off the charts of the stereotype-meter. I’ll take the TV show “Kim’s Convenience” over Oddjob any day for an example of Koreans in our society. Next time I’m feeling down about the role of women and minorities in our society and feeling like change is taking for-bloody-ever, I’ll pick up the next Bond book for a reminder of exactly how far we have come.
I will reiterate what I said in my review of Casino Royale, that I am surprised and pleased at the caliber of Fleming’s writing. I shouldn’t be so surprised, I guess, as he read a lot and spent a fair amount of time with literary people, including one of my favourites, Raymond Chandler. I guess that I’ve unfairly absorbed the literary judgements of his wife’s literary circle, who looked down their noses at Fleming’s work. I’m glad to have read several of the books that have created their own enduring niche in popular culture.
September 20, 2016
I was torn again here. 3 or 4? This novel has it's almost silly moments but mostly it's far more "adult" in it's themes. It's more violent, and the sex is a little more "there" than the ones that went before. While there isn't any real overt sex in the bond books despite their rep, the theme in this one ups the stakes a bit. If you saw the movie (and I'd guess most have) you have only a vague idea about the plot or characters in this novel. It's pretty well written considering that Fleming turned them out almost nonchalantly at times from what I've read. I'd say be aware that this is not really a youth book (though I and many other young teens found it and read it.) But it is an interesting story.
I'm rereading this for a group read, I may update my review.
I'm rereading this for a group read, I may update my review.
June 14, 2020
I’m a little disappointed with this addition to the James Bond series. I liked the structure of the book, with it being in 3 sections. But I didn’t feel the same depth of character like I have with other books. Especially as any possible love interest doesn’t appear until the end. But the biggest issue for me was the racism, sexism and homophobia. I have seen these in many of the bond books and often brush it off as being down to the time it was written. But this book seemed to take it all a step too far, and it made for uncomfortable reading. I’m hoping the next book is able to step away from this again. As I would hate for this to put a dampener on a series that I’ve really enjoyed up until now.
July 1, 2012
Very rarely does a film improve upon the source novel. The novel is too long, is illogical in some parts, offensive in others and makes the reader realize what a superb job screenwriter Richard Maibaum did in adapting it for the film. These weaknesses stand out in particular:
First, the behavior of villain Auric Goldfinger is completely illogical during the torture scene. You might remember the terrific laser beam scene in the film where Goldfinger, played by Gert Frobe, threatens to slice James Bond, played by the great Sean Connery, in half. In the film, Bond gets out of the mess by bluffing, making Goldfinger believe that he knows all about Operation Grand Slam, Goldfinger's plan to blow up Fort Knox. Goldfinger reasons that he can keep the CIA and the British Secret Service at bay by keeping Bond alive and making them think that Bond is his guest, not his prisoner.
The novel, in contrast, has Goldfinger threaten Bond with a saw. Bond doesn't mention Operation Grand Slam and has been a constant thorn in Goldfinger's side. Goldfinger has Bond dead to rights and, unlike in the laser beam scene in the film, has no logical reason to spare his life. However, just before Bond is about to be sawed in half, Goldfinger inexplicably spares him and forces Bond to pose as his secretary. There's a running joke that Bond villains seal their own fate by devising elaborate ways to kill him that allow Bond to escape. However, Goldfinger's action in this scene in the novel completely defy logic and cripple the story's credibility. Bond novels are an escape from reality -- an adult comic book -- but this plot development makes absolutely no sense.
In the novel, Goldfinger's plan is to rob Fort Knox of its gold supply. Fleming, unlike Richard Maibaum, apparently never realized how logistically impossible this is. Connery rightfully points out in the film that to rob Fort Knox would require a whole fleet of trucks and several days to complete. Maibaum's plan, while still fantastic, makes more sense -- detonating a nuclear weapon in Fort Knox to irradiate the U.S. gold supply and drive the value of his own supply up ten times over.
The film has a lot of Asian villains. Harold Sakata is terrific as Goldfinger's superpowered Korean henchman Oddjob, Burt Kwouk (Kato in the Pink Panther films) is Mr. Ling, a Chinese nuclear scientist who supplies Goldfinger with the bomb and most of Goldfinger's henchmen are Korean. However, the film, for the most part, avoids extreme racial stereotyping. Many of the villains are Asian, but there's no suggestion that simply being Asian is a source of evil. Asians would later play a prominent heroic role in You Only Live Twice.
The novel, in contrast, is vicously racist in nature. The nadir of this being Bond's statement that Koreans "are lower than apes." It's hard to believe that even in the pre-civil rights era of the 1950's, this statement could slip by without triggering a major protest from an Asian rights group. Today, it seems so ugly and hateful that I immediately lost a lot of respect for Ian Fleming. This is his hero who believes these vile things, so clearly what Bond believes, Fleming believes -- there's no way to separate the two. One wonders which other racial groups Fleming was bigoted against. It's a disgraceful moment in the Bond saga and a shameful comment on Fleming's view of the world.
Novels like Casino Royale, From Russia With Love, Dr. No, On Her Majesty's Secret Service and You Only Live Twice are classics and rank among my favorite novels. Goldfinger, however, falls way short of that standard. When I finished Goldfinger, I was left wishing that I had not read it and instead had left my impression of the story to the vastly superior film. The novel not only disappointed me, it made me think much less of Ian Fleming as a person.
the plotting has some solid moments but also many silly holes, such as GF working for SMERSH but never having heard of Bond(?!), GF keeping Bond alive, the plane not nose-diving immediately after the window is broken, Pussy's sudden about face (so to speak), etc etc. Yes, I know it's just a spy story, but certain loose ends need to be tied up a little more tightly for it to roll smoothly. And to be honest, Fleming is quite simply not a very strong writer. His ideas are interesting but he's a B-grade thrillerist and nowhere near the level of the true greats of the genre. Creating Bond as a character was his genius idea, and he was merely keeping the franchise alive at this point. There's precious little sense of fun here, mostly just ego and overkill and it's all rather plodding at more than one juncture.
First, the behavior of villain Auric Goldfinger is completely illogical during the torture scene. You might remember the terrific laser beam scene in the film where Goldfinger, played by Gert Frobe, threatens to slice James Bond, played by the great Sean Connery, in half. In the film, Bond gets out of the mess by bluffing, making Goldfinger believe that he knows all about Operation Grand Slam, Goldfinger's plan to blow up Fort Knox. Goldfinger reasons that he can keep the CIA and the British Secret Service at bay by keeping Bond alive and making them think that Bond is his guest, not his prisoner.
The novel, in contrast, has Goldfinger threaten Bond with a saw. Bond doesn't mention Operation Grand Slam and has been a constant thorn in Goldfinger's side. Goldfinger has Bond dead to rights and, unlike in the laser beam scene in the film, has no logical reason to spare his life. However, just before Bond is about to be sawed in half, Goldfinger inexplicably spares him and forces Bond to pose as his secretary. There's a running joke that Bond villains seal their own fate by devising elaborate ways to kill him that allow Bond to escape. However, Goldfinger's action in this scene in the novel completely defy logic and cripple the story's credibility. Bond novels are an escape from reality -- an adult comic book -- but this plot development makes absolutely no sense.
In the novel, Goldfinger's plan is to rob Fort Knox of its gold supply. Fleming, unlike Richard Maibaum, apparently never realized how logistically impossible this is. Connery rightfully points out in the film that to rob Fort Knox would require a whole fleet of trucks and several days to complete. Maibaum's plan, while still fantastic, makes more sense -- detonating a nuclear weapon in Fort Knox to irradiate the U.S. gold supply and drive the value of his own supply up ten times over.
The film has a lot of Asian villains. Harold Sakata is terrific as Goldfinger's superpowered Korean henchman Oddjob, Burt Kwouk (Kato in the Pink Panther films) is Mr. Ling, a Chinese nuclear scientist who supplies Goldfinger with the bomb and most of Goldfinger's henchmen are Korean. However, the film, for the most part, avoids extreme racial stereotyping. Many of the villains are Asian, but there's no suggestion that simply being Asian is a source of evil. Asians would later play a prominent heroic role in You Only Live Twice.
The novel, in contrast, is vicously racist in nature. The nadir of this being Bond's statement that Koreans "are lower than apes." It's hard to believe that even in the pre-civil rights era of the 1950's, this statement could slip by without triggering a major protest from an Asian rights group. Today, it seems so ugly and hateful that I immediately lost a lot of respect for Ian Fleming. This is his hero who believes these vile things, so clearly what Bond believes, Fleming believes -- there's no way to separate the two. One wonders which other racial groups Fleming was bigoted against. It's a disgraceful moment in the Bond saga and a shameful comment on Fleming's view of the world.
Novels like Casino Royale, From Russia With Love, Dr. No, On Her Majesty's Secret Service and You Only Live Twice are classics and rank among my favorite novels. Goldfinger, however, falls way short of that standard. When I finished Goldfinger, I was left wishing that I had not read it and instead had left my impression of the story to the vastly superior film. The novel not only disappointed me, it made me think much less of Ian Fleming as a person.
the plotting has some solid moments but also many silly holes, such as GF working for SMERSH but never having heard of Bond(?!), GF keeping Bond alive, the plane not nose-diving immediately after the window is broken, Pussy's sudden about face (so to speak), etc etc. Yes, I know it's just a spy story, but certain loose ends need to be tied up a little more tightly for it to roll smoothly. And to be honest, Fleming is quite simply not a very strong writer. His ideas are interesting but he's a B-grade thrillerist and nowhere near the level of the true greats of the genre. Creating Bond as a character was his genius idea, and he was merely keeping the franchise alive at this point. There's precious little sense of fun here, mostly just ego and overkill and it's all rather plodding at more than one juncture.
November 30, 2011
Running on fond memories of watching the Bond films in my childhood, I was recently inspired to pick this up. I wish I hadn't bothered. See, it wasn't the I didn't expect the sexism and the racism...ok I probably didn't expect the homophobia...but I didn't expect it to be so blatant! I expected useless women who's only function to the plot was to fall into Bond's arms or die, to be honest I'm used to it. I didn't expect a diatribe blaming homosexuality on women getting the vote. I didn't expect a character to die because she was lesbian. Admitedly, once a lesbian showed up I expected that Bond would cure her of this affliction with the power of his ALMIGHTY PENIS but, still, I can be annoyed that I was right and it did. Not to mention the child abuse thrown in to explain lesbianism. And, of course, the blatant racism. I'd expected that we wouldn't have any possitive characters who weren't white, but still, the out and out, blatantly stated racism was just too much for me.
I wouldn't recomend this to anyone and won't read it again. If James Bond is a real man that I think Pussy Glaore was better sticking with women.
I wouldn't recomend this to anyone and won't read it again. If James Bond is a real man that I think Pussy Glaore was better sticking with women.
February 18, 2019
Heinous crimes are described in ‘Goldfinger’, number 7 in Ian Fleming’s James Bond series! Goldfinger is pure evil! He not only kills a lot of people through torture, HE KILLS CATS!
The horror.
I need a moment.
I’m sorry. I can’t in all conscience give this book a decent review. I won’t give this fiend a platform. Omg. I’ll never recover from this. Never. I’m SO shaken, not just stirred.
James Bond, you are my hero, sort of, sometimes. Asshole. Gentle reader, Bond makes it right, anyway. Of course, if you have seen the movie, you know this, my friends. The book is almost like the movie, but more awful. An innocent feline, who was doing nothing except being a nice kitty....
*sob*
You go, Bond, instrument of Justice! Even if Bond is the most prejudiced fictional character and culturally ignorant idiot I have ever come across, he only kills murderers and torturers, right?
Warning: do not be expecting a White British World War II survivor and ex-intelligence agent writing in the 1950’s about a tough upperclass spy to be politically correct on any level.
The horror.
I need a moment.
I’m sorry. I can’t in all conscience give this book a decent review. I won’t give this fiend a platform. Omg. I’ll never recover from this. Never. I’m SO shaken, not just stirred.
James Bond, you are my hero, sort of, sometimes. Asshole. Gentle reader, Bond makes it right, anyway. Of course, if you have seen the movie, you know this, my friends. The book is almost like the movie, but more awful. An innocent feline, who was doing nothing except being a nice kitty....
*sob*
You go, Bond, instrument of Justice! Even if Bond is the most prejudiced fictional character and culturally ignorant idiot I have ever come across, he only kills murderers and torturers, right?
Warning: do not be expecting a White British World War II survivor and ex-intelligence agent writing in the 1950’s about a tough upperclass spy to be politically correct on any level.
February 12, 2022
This was fine enough I suppose. I just think that reading it now, it is quite dated and doesn’t have the same level of thrill as more modern novels have for me. Also like, there was a lot of long winding dialogue and golf scenes that weren’t the most engaging for me.
Additionally as a comment, the constant levels of racism, sexism and homophobia was kinda ridiculous. It did bother me a sizeable amount. I understand that for the time of publication, these were the views of the average white person for which this novel targeted. I think reading it from a modern perspective firstly shows how much we’ve come and secondly significantly reduced my personal enjoyment of the novel.
5/10
Additionally as a comment, the constant levels of racism, sexism and homophobia was kinda ridiculous. It did bother me a sizeable amount. I understand that for the time of publication, these were the views of the average white person for which this novel targeted. I think reading it from a modern perspective firstly shows how much we’ve come and secondly significantly reduced my personal enjoyment of the novel.
5/10
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,582 reviews