Goldfinger (James Bond Novels) (Paperback)

by Ian Fleming (Author)
Key Phrases: Colonel Smithers, Fort Knox, New York (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal
The allure of James Bond was best described by Raymond Chandler, who insisted that 007 is "what every man would like to be and what every woman would like to have between her sheets." Who can argue with that? This month marks the 40th anniversary of the film release of Dr. No, which was the first Bond adventure to make the big screen, and two big coffee-table books are being published to honor the occasion (LJ 10/1/02, p. 96). Shockingly, Fleming's original novels have gone out of print, but Penguin here reproduces a trio of the British secret agent's early outings, released in 1952, 1958, and 1959, respectively, sporting stylish cover art. These stories were racy for the nifty Fifties but are quite tame by today's standards. Still, they can be fun.
Copyright 2002 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Product Description
Auric Goldfinger, the most phenomenal criminal Bond has ever faced, is an evil genius who likes his cash in gold bars. This powerful villain is planning the biggest and most daring heist in history-robbing all the gold in Fort Knox.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 272 pages
• Publisher: Penguin (Non-Classics) (August 27, 2002)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0142002046
• ISBN-13: 978-0142002049
• Product Dimensions: 7.6 x 5 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 6.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (30 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #17,677 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

• This is item 7 in The James Bond Series.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

10 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Class never goes out of style, August 29, 2002

By	Steve Pearl (uk London, UK) - See all my reviews

Goldfinger has an effortless grace that is simply beyond most thriller writers. And this is the point; Fleming could really write. Yes, Goldfinger is just a potboiler fantasy, but it is suffused with beautiful writing; elegant simple sentences that contain real wit and character. It was Fleming's longest book and yet compared to a Clancy or a Ludlum it is little more than a short story. But in contrast to the turgid, plot ridden lumps that so many writers today (and in fairness, for the last thirty years) seem compelled to churn out, Fleming's brevity and clarity, his development of character, the pace and humour he injects, all shine out.

Reading again the account of the game of Canasta or, especially, the round of golf, is to feel a sense of joy and appreciation of his sheer skill with words. (In contrast, can any one really read Tom Clancy and not, by about page 400, emit a despairing cry of "get on with it!".)

And Goldfinger is a great story. It's far fetched and unlikely, but it roars along with a logic that lasts as long as the book does.

And yes of course it's dated, and Fleming's views would not hold up to much scrutiny in 2002. But are today's readers such sensitive little flowers that they cannot accept that the ideas and views of another time are totally valid when expressed in the context of that time?

Goldfinger was written by a man who had an instinctive lightness of touch, who was writing when people did not mistake information for knowledge, and who above all wrote for the sheer enjoyment of it all.

And that's what Goldfinger is...sheer pleasure and sheer enjoyment.

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A solid James Bond novel with a few quirks, December 7, 2006

By	Roger J. Buffington (Huntington Beach, CA United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 100 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

First of all, let me disclose that I really like all of Ian Fleming's James Bond novels, and I particularly like and admire Fleming's lean, understated style of prose. Fleming is underrated as a writer, and James Bond is more than a comic book cutout character.

Goldfinger as a novel has some appealing attributes. The scene in which Bond plays a game of golf with Auric Goldfinger (with the stakes higher than they seem) is a masterpiece. Goldfinger the villain is an ingenious character. The reason I deprived this novel of two stars is first of all that the ending is tacked on almost as an afterthought. Sorry, it just didn't work, and it almost seemed like Fleming reached his page limit, and realized that he needed to wrap up the novel in the next twenty or so pages. Secondly, "Operation Grand Slam" involving a hodgpodge of criminals, seemed highly underdeveloped, and SMERSH would not have dared have a Soviet vessel upload the goal and hightail it to Russia. Nor would it have involved the sweepings of the US underworld in such a plan. It just did not work. Now mind, the idea of robbing Fort Knox is brilliant, and Fleming could have made it work. But here, in my opinion, it did not.

All these criticisms aside, I enjoyed "Goldfinger" the novel, and I recommend it, along with all of the other Bond novels, to anyone who enjoys good writing, a suspension of one's critical facilities for an afternoon, and, of course, James Bond.

5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Could be better....missing something, January 2, 2004

By	Timothy Greenman "GB fan" (Madison WI) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This book isn't necessarily bad, but Fleming was in way over his head while writing it. The plot is similar to the film in which Bond tangles with a supervillain out to rob Fort Knox (though in the film Goldfinger just wanted to ruin all the gold, not steal it) and his Korean caddy, but few can deny that the film is not only better but much, much easier to believe. In a scene in the film, Bond discusses just how ludicrous it would be to attempt such a robbery of Fort Knox...well, in the book, Goldfinger tries to concoct said robbery. Anyway, the book is seriously flawed. First off, Ian Fleming is not a great writer and when he tries to sell a bunch of scenes in which Bond starts feeling remorse and sickness about all the killing in his life, it's as flat as a wet martini. Le Carre did it much better. I dig the dark edge to Bond's character but the scenes are too many and are too long. Second, Goldfinger is this ruthless SOB who won't be pushed around by anybody, but Bond pisses him off not once but twice, embarassing him and stealing a chunk of his $ as well as one of his ladies. And yet Goldfinger, rather than throwing him to the canibalistic Koreans (Fleming was most definitely not PC by our standards) sucks up to Bond and tells him all about his scheme to knock off Fort Knox, giving him a completely useless job as a secretary, then feigning surprise when, shockingly, Bond betrays him. Third, I don't buy Goldfinger as SMERSH's treasurer. We hear a couple of very long speeches about him and then suddenly at the end of a chapter it's revealed that there's a chance Goldfinger finances SMERSH. I don't know, I just don't buy it. Four, the ending was no good. The book was getting a little long (thanks in no small part to an overview of EIGHTEEN HOLES OF GOLF) and I'm sure Fleming hastily thought up an ending where in a span of about three hours a lesbian (Pussy Galore, who in this book is a tough New York gangster who talks like the Katharine Hepburn character in "Bringing Up Baby" when she's pretending to be a man...Fleming's gift was never dialogue) becomes straight, falls in love/lust with Bond, becomes a total lackey to Goldfinger despite her anger towards men (she's his freaking stewardess!) and rolls off into the sunset with Bond.

That said, it's still a solid, entertaining read, much duller than some of the other books (Dr No is my favorite, Live and Let Die is solid as well as From Russia..., and I love the card game scenes in Moonraker and Casino Royale) but nonetheless fun. I particularly like the scene with five different gangs stuffed together on a train, driving into a town that's just been poisoned....or has it? Anyway, read it, but don't expect too much out of it.