I don’t see the need for maker’s name, but if you feel it adds something, it should be Arnott supercharger controlled by a magnetic clutch. This has been done with a 4¼ engine.
FROM AUBREY FORSHAW
5th April, 1962
Dear Ian,
Extreme pressure following a long-weekend accounts for my delayed answer to your note regarding this Bond’s Bastard Bentley.
I feel a bit of a hit-and-run daddy if the car born in THUNDERBALL was sired by any remarks of mine. My own idea of a special toy was an R-type 1954 chassis with the latest series 2 engine – the Vee 8. The THUNDERBALL vehicle is using the chassis I would not have chosen – the S2 and an engine I’ve never heard of a Mark IV. But it’s all so very ‘special’ particularly with a 9.5:1 compression ratio, that nobody is likely to crib.
However, let’s get down to legitimising the bastard and meeting your wish to pour on more power by the casual flick of a dashboard switch.
I’ve got this planned and am entertaining the Rolls Tech. Expert next Thursday so that we can make this love-child a genetic possibility.
In your new copy you mention cylinder head (singular) so you have still the straight six engine – presumably 4.8 litres and I’m basing the engine treatment on this supposition although I’ll cover an alternative for the twin heads of a Vee 8.
You mustn’t add puff without lowering compression, particularly from your stated 9.5:1 – so the car should use 7.5:1 with a couple of Weber carbs, normally aspirated, which will give you lashings of docile power, but for le moment critique we will fit a by-pass to the manifolds, feeding from a Shorrocks supercharger the clutch engagement of which is effected by solenoid from your little switch. In fact, your bearings (big-end and main) are more likely to complain than are well-fitted cylinder heads but the proposition of a ‘special’ capable of, say, 140 or so is quite feasible, assuming a suitable back-axle ratio.
I imagine it is the B’s sheer size and weight under unfavourable circumstances that will allow the girl-friend to get away in a less potent, but more wiggle-worthy machine – this could easily be, but she’d better have something pretty good; not so quick of course, not so accelerative, but with a better look and roadability.
I hope you can await my further thoughts and we will then put you in a position to confute any criticisms – always supposing that “Headquarters motor pool” enjoys happy relations with the Exchequer.
TO AUBREY FORSHAW
11th April, 1962
My dear Aubrey,
Thank you a thousand times for the priceless gen which I am afraid I find myself quite incapable of working up into prose as I must obviously start again and get the whole thing right from the beginning.
Would you be an angel and just take that extract from the book and dictate to the secretary how it should run, using your own choice of the R-type 1954 chassis with the series 2 engine – the Vee 8.
I know this is greatly imposing on you, but if I try and translate your high grade stuff into English I shall only get it all wrong again.
Please don’t pay any attention to what I have actually written. What I beg you to do is to re-write the piece so that it is according to your specifications and technically possible.
Forgive all this labour I am asking of you and just put it down to the hazards of being my publisher.
Happy Easter!
FROM AUBREY FORSHAW
April 30th, 1962
Dear Ian,
I return your passage of motor mystique with the deathless prose intact but for detail additions which authenticate without inviting too many queries from the aficionados.
You may rest assured that Bond is now driving a Feasible Proposition (there have been stranger marques) the bits all being Bentley and susceptible of assembly into one car.
I am now off to the International Publishers Conference in Barcelona and shall not be back until third week in May. When I return I will furnish you with a kind of record card containing dimensions, ratios, revs. etc., so that questions to Headquarters Motor pool can be answered – but I’ll undertake to deal with any such questions if you so wish.
Only one of your main requirements proved a bit difficult, namely the introduction of the Vee-8 engine. So you have an
‘R’ type chassis (1955)
the big 6 engine 4.9 litres
an Arnott blower
a 13:40 back axle ratio
16 x 6.70 wheels (Dunlop RS/5 tyres)
which would give a theoretical 126–162 m.p.h.
at 4,500 revs (the red line). Actually
about your 125 m.p.h. Max revs in top
would take an endless road to achieve without
a blower – so your addition is justified, and
your acceleration quite something.
Keep up the good work.
TO AUBREY FORSHAW
1st May, 1962
A thousand thanks for your letter of April 30th and for your wonderful help over the Bentley.
At last we will get Bond into the right kind of vehicle and he will damn well have to stay there until you let him out of it.
It was indeed kind of you to take so much trouble.
TO ROBIN DE LA LANNE MIRRLEES, ESQ., Rouge Dragon, The College of Arms, London, E.C.4.
25th April, 1962
My dear Robin,
I heard so late of the tragedy of dear Frances and am so bad at writing letters of commiseration, that I didn’t write to you.
She was a dear person whom I came to like greatly and there is nothing I would rather have than some small memento of hers when you get around to sorting things out.
Now to the book. First of all many thanks about haemophilia, it was stupid of me to have got it wrong.
The book is a tremendous lark and while it has a bit of a rag at the expense of an invented Pursuivant called Griffon Or, Rouge Dragon then enters the story in fine style and plays a worthy part in tracking down the villain.
The text is now with the typist and should be ready in a couple of weeks or so. Then I would love for us to meet anywhere you suggest and slip you a copy sub rosa, which I would be most grateful if you would read for mistakes or improvements, making the freest use of your red ink.
You will find that your advices have been put to the most splendid use and the book is in fact dedicated to Rouge Dragon and a certain Hilary Bray, who, through you, makes a valuable contribution as a cover name for James Bond.
But please keep all this highly confidential and far away from the world of the College, who might prove stuffy about being dragged into a thriller, though they needn’t worry and come out of it all most fragrantly.
I will get in touch with you as soon as the typescript appears.
TO WILLIAM PLOMER
9th May, 1962
Michael is coming to see me this evening about some drawings for the Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang series, so I am then going to deliver into his hands the gigantic volume, surely as long as the Koran, which I have just finished correcting.
Normally, as you know, I prefer you to see my oeuvres before anyone else in Capes, since it is always your verdict, and only yours, that I care about.
So please don’t think that this break in continuity is a slur upon you, in fact it is sparing you an extra few days from the annual labour.
Thank you for your sympathetic note to Annie about the reviews [of The Spy Who Loved Me]. It has certainly been an uncomfortable two or three weeks having to digest a second breakfast every morning of these hommany grits – well deserved though they may be.
Only Wolverhampton and Bristol, bless them, have been kind. There live obviously the intellectual elite of England!
I hope at least some of OHMSS will bring a wry smile to your careworn features, and of course I long for the sheets of green bumph.
Let us have lunch soon please. What about Wednesday, 23rd May at the Charing Cross?
FROM WILLIAM PLOMER
10th May, 1962
My dear Ian,
I think you have had quite enough hominy (please note spelling) grits to be going on with, but, as my governess used to say, the higher one climbs, the thicker the clouds.
I hope you didn’t think me tiresomely carping about the intro to the Hugh Edwards book.4 It’s simply that I want to protect you from laying yourself open to any more impertinence from reviewers. I didn’t want them to say, “Look, he’s telling us that he can read,” or “Why does he tell us that about himself instead of sticking to the man & book he is introducing?” I was myself much interested in all you had to say, & I have a weakness for many neglected books & authors.
I am up to my clavicles in dung, but what are a dung beetle’s clavicles for, if not for upholding many forms of that commodity.
Vive Wolverhampton! Vive Bristol!
TO LEONARD RUSSELL, ESQ., 14 Albion Street, London, W.2.
14th May, 1962
My dear Leonard,
You are always doing kindnesses for me, would you please do me one more?
Phyllis Bottome will be eighty on the 31st May and she is ill and low in spirits, and I thought it would be terribly kind if you could put a little paragraph in Atticus about her.
Her real name is Mrs. Ernan Forbes Dennis, and their address is Little Greenly, 95, South End Road, Hampstead, N.W.3. Telephone No. Hampstead 0579; in case an Atticus runner could have a word with him on the telephone to get some notes – the number of books she has written; copies sold; the most popular, etc.
A possible point of interest is that when Ernan was Vice-Consul for the Tyrol he took a few boys and taught them German for the diplomatic. It was our first contact with a ‘famous writer’, and it may be that by a process of osmosis we imbibed some of Phyllis’s undoubted talent, because of the very few boys who stayed with them in Kitzbuhel three, myself, Ralph Arnold of Constables and Nigel Dennis have ended up successful writers, though in very different spheres.
So far as I am concerned I wrote my first story at Phyllis Bottome’s behest when I was about nineteen, and I remember my pleasure at her kindly criticisms of it.
I am afraid this is rather straw bricks, but it would be terribly kind if you could somehow knit together a paragraph about her and cheer her up.
Forgive this chore but I promise to repay with a book review if and when you find anything appropriate.
TO MICHAEL HOWARD
24th May, 1962
My Dear Michael,
I am having my portrait painted – so is [racing driver] Graham Hill – by a man called Amherst Villiers who invented the supercharger on James Bond’s 4½ litre Bentley. He has been taking a course with Annigoni5 and we are obliged to sit for him out of friendship.
Now, he is a motor car and guided missile designer of absolutely top calibre and, in fact, designed the crankshaft for Graham Hill’s B.R.M. which has been winning lately. I put to him our problem about getting a good car drawn for Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang, and he is amused and has agreed to have a bash.
We have obviously got to get this car right before either Trog or Haro can do the subsequent illustrations, and once they have something to copy it shouldn’t be too difficult.
I guess Amherst will do a spiffing job and really make it look as if it will work. So I have written him the enclosed and sent copies of the stories, and we will see what happens.
TO AMHERST VILLIERS, ESQ., 48A Holland Street, London, W.8.
While sitting for Villiers, it occurred to Fleming that he might be able to assist with the illustrations for Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang.
24th May, 1962
My Dear Amherst,
Here are now the stories which it won’t take you long to read.
The point is that while Jonathan Cape’s have got one or two artists lined up for the figures, landscapes, etc., they can’t find anybody with enough technical know-how and imagination to draw a suitable Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang.
What I and Cape’s would very much like from you is a design for the cover to run right round the spine of the book for each story, again showing the car, but in the first adventure with its wings spread, in the second adventure with its wheels turned sideways so that it can motor across the Channel, and in the third adventure soaring up into the air with wings and perhaps some jet apparatus in the rear end.
Also on those centre spreads it would be nice to have one or two detailed little sketches of the dashboard, the radiator grill open with the fan belt extruded to provide a screw for air and water, and similar little imaginative details such as you might presumably add in the margin of any car for which you were doing a first rough design.
If you are kind enough to make the sketches, please make them as large as you like and then when we get down to actual book production Capes will talk to you about colour, sizes, etc., etc.
Although the guts of the car are supposedly antiquated, we would like to make it really snazzy looking to excite the imagination of children between about 7 and 10, so it can have every kind of entrail coming out of the side, air scoops, straps around the bonnet, etc. And, of course, the facia board will be crowded with knobs and switches, etc.
It is a long sleek sports car and I had in mind something between a pre-war Le Mans Mercedes and a 45 Renault. But you will surely come up with something more imaginative than this.
I think you can use up to three basic colours plus black and white. The chrome presents a problem, but these are only preliminary sketches and we can iron out these problems later.
It is terribly kind of you to suggest doing this and I am writing to Capes today telling them of the project.
See you next Wednesday at 3.30 for a further sitting in the dentist’s chair.
TO WILLIAM PLOMER
24th May, 1962
My dear William,
I hope you will agree that this paper, foisted on me by the film company, will bring Spring to Rustington!
A thousand thanks for lunch and for the splendid green sheets. Naturally I agree with the majority of your comments, and I am horrified to see how much inward groaning goes on in the book. I will go back to school on these L.G.F.s6 and see if I can’t spruce them up a degree or two.
But to hell with you and Money [Manet],7 I am going to go straight to Rothenstein8 and see if I am not right.
The crankshaft designer, who turns out to be a pupil of Annigoni, is making me look like a mixture between Nehru and Somerset Maugham. As you can imagine I am longing for Annie’s comments on the picture.
FROM WILLIAM PLOMER
25th May, 62
My dear Ian,
“O! O! 007!” I exclaimed when I saw your new writing paper. And what shall I say when I see your portrait?
About Manet & all that, it’s just that that paragraph slightly holds up the reader and the action so near the beginning. It makes (I think) the take-off less smooth. One begins (at least this one begins) worrying as to whether the seaside landscape you are describing really is in the least like the one painted by Boudin &c., in its human & incidental constituents. And also this sudden injection of art-history makes one wonder if there isn’t some clue to a later development that one ought to look for. And, apart from heraldic information (which, as you happily point out, is a lot of bezants) I don’t think there are any other allusions to art history &c., so this paragraph stands out too conspicuously. But you will think I am making a huge fuss about nothing & you may be groaning outwardly as well as inwardly.
I much enjoyed our Charing Cross lunch but of course missed you at your own table yesterday.
What is so good about your books is their sharp focus. Everything is clear, so makes a clear
impression. I feel sure that OHMSS will rout the objectors.
TO MR. ROBERT KENNEDY, Hickory Hill, McLean, Virginia
The previous year President J. F. Kennedy had publicly endorsed Fleming’s books. Now, in a reply to similar praise from his brother ‘Bobby’, Fleming reiterated his thanks.
20th June, 1962
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
Thank you very much for your charming note of June 1st, and I am delighted to take this opportunity to thank Kennedys everywhere for the electric effect their commendation has had on my sales in America.
My last book, The Spy Who Loved Me, has had an extremely mixed reception, due largely to the late appearance of James Bond. But I can now tell you that my next and longest to date, has James Bond in from the first page to the last, and all Kennedys will be receiving a copy around next Easter.
Incidentally, you may be amused to pass round the enclosed translation from Izvestia9 of May 29th last. I am most amused to learn that I have been selected by the Russians as part of America’s strong right hand!
Over here we are all watching with fascination your gallant attempts to harass American gangsterdom. If James Bond can be any help to you please let me know and I will have a word with M.
Again with my warmest thanks for your kindness in writing.
TO MICHAEL HOWARD
31st July, 1962
Here is now the College of Arms final rendering of the true Bond coat of arms marked 1., and Rouge Dragon doesn’t think there will be any objection to using it since the line is extinct.
I have no idea how you and Dickie are going to turn this into a jacket, but I think your idea of the thumb and forefinger holding a pen coming up from the right hand bottom corner is a good one. And it strikes me that the vellum on which Dickie would be writing could be perhaps turned up at one corner with brass drawing pins used to hold down the other three corners.
On reflection, I wonder if it wouldn’t be better to get the whole title in however small, as otherwise the whole thing is going to look a bit stark.
The Man with the Golden Typewriter Page 32