Wikipedia:Peer review/From Russia, with Love (novel)/archive1

From Russia, with Love (novel)

From Russia, with Love is the fifth in Ian Fleming's series of Bond stories, and the one where he got his structure and form bang on the nose, according to many. It's a 'proper' spy novel (as opposed to its predecessor) and was written during one of the cold points of the Cold War. This article has undergone a re-build recently, bringing in information from new sources, re-structuring the article along the lines of the previous Bond novel re-writes, and giving a few passages a brush-up to bring them in line with the MoS. A visit to FAC is the post-PR aim. Many thanks to all who care to constructively comment. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 21:14, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Ian Rose

One of my fave Bond novels, I reviewed at GAN and have had it on my watchlist ever since. I haven't exactly gone through the current version word-for-word and copyedited as I normally do except a couple of quick fixes, but I'll say that the recent additions seem to fit seamlessly -- at least I found the article to flow as easily as I remember it when I last reviewed. Specific points:

• "Although Fleming provides no dates within his novels, John Griswold and Henry Chancellor—both of whom have written books on behalf of Ian Fleming Publications—have identified different timelines based on events and situations within the novel series as a whole. Chancellor put the events of Diamonds Are Forever in 1955; Griswold is more precise, and considers the story to have taken place between June and August 1954." -- was this lifted from the Diamonds Are Forever article with the intention of modifying to refer to FRWL? It doesn't seem to bear any direct relation to this article as it stands, unless we're to infer that FRWL takes place after 1955 as it occurs after Diamonds...
• "naming the armourer in Dr. No as Major Boothroyd" -- don't think you need "as".
• "Rosa Klebb was partly based on Colonel Rybkin of Soviet Intelligence" -- this is a bit cryptic, do we know any more about this Colonel? We explain a bit about the Jamaican chap Grant is based on so we could afford to say a bit more about Rybkin (if known).
• Style -- don't have my copy handy but from memory Bond doesn't appear until close to half-way through the novel; any source mention this somewhat unusual device?

I think the introduction of the copy I have (by Charlie Higson, IIRC) discusses this. I shall try to dig it up... Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:51, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Caeciliusinhorto, [I've already addressed the point with information from Benson. - SchroCat (talk) 18:08, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

• Themes -- I think I raised "the enemy within" when reviewing Ian Fleming and you did add something but I was specifically thinking of the communist trade union May mentions in FRWL; did we ever find a ref in a reliable source highlighting this instance?
• MOS: in Characters and Themes you use long lashes with no spacing, in Reception you use short dashes with surrounding spaces -- either style is correct but you should standardise.

I wish to put it on record that Ian's correction of his typo is an unforgivable act of vandalism. Bring back the long lashes! Tim riley talk 18:58, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Well since this is a PR I'll happily bow to peer pressure and reinstate the long lashes -- I just hope no-one mistakes it for latent S&M tendencies... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

• Image licensing looks fine.
• Didn't check reference formatting but the sources all looked prima facie reliable to me.

That's it for now, Gav -- I'll keep this PR on my watchlist and weigh in again if I have more time or if I think I can contribute to any discussion. In any case, look fwd to seeing at FAC in due course! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:59, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

• Cheers Ian - and it's one of my fave ones too, so I hope I've done it justice. I've made some revisions based on your suggestions, with one exception: you've out-Bonded the sources again with "the enemy within" reference! I've added a few new sources since the GA, and none of them make any reference to it, unfortunately. I think it's one of those things that is a key point when looking at similar small bits within the over-arching series, but one which doesn't carry enough weight within the novel to make enough impact. Thanks again for the comments - SchroCat (talk) 14:14, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley

Doing my usual preliminary skim-through for typos – a close reading to follow later – and I've just run across "Saltzberg". I didn't like to change it, what with it being more than fifty years since I read the book as a schoolboy agog for sex and violence, but I imagine this ought to be Salzburg. More anon, Tim riley talk 15:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

• Lead
  • "Counterintelligence" – the OED hyphenates the word
  • You know my view about piping titles: I reckon Sir Anthony Eden is easier on the reader's eye – it doesn't break the flow as Sir Anthony Eden does. (Also for the mention of Eden in the main text.)
• Characters
  • "the Soviets are the main and sole enemy" – if you're the sole enemy you must ipso facto be the main one, surely?
• Plot inspirations
  • "whom Fleming's biographer, Andrew Lycett, described…" – you don't want the commas: they make Lycett Fleming's only biographer.
  • I don't think I'd blue-link Berlin
• Characters
  • Some readers get very exercised about "in order to", and without getting hot under the collar about it I too am not sure that it is an improvement on plain "to".
• Style
  • Not sure why single rather than double quotes for 'hooks'
  • "Fleming used well-known brand names and everyday details to produce a sense of realism" - I believe I may have mentioned before that some of his contemporaries thought this wasn't the only reason: thus the publisher Rupert Hart-Davis in April 1957: "Last week a friend told me (and I believe it) that when Ian Fleming mentions any particular food, clothing or cigarettes in his books, the makers reward him with presents in kind: 'in fact', said my friend, 'Ian's are the only modern thrillers with built-in commercials.'"
• Themes
  • "journalist William Cook" – a false title that I could do without. (Another for "publishers Jonathan Cape" later).
  • "don't show teeth any more – only gums" – a spaced en-dash rather than your usual unspaced em dashes. The MoS encourages us to make minor changes in punctuation within quotations when doing so is in the interests of consistency throughout an article.
• Publication history
  • "the publication of From Russia, with Love was accompanied by a promotional campaign that capitalised on this exposure" – I don't doubt that Lycett says this, but I'm puzzled about it. Eden had resigned in January '57 and his reputation was in tatters – not at all the sort of thing you'd think the publishers would want to have Bond associated with, and I can't find any mention of him apropos the book in the archives of the Express, Mirror, Times or Guardian for 1957.

That's all from me. The article is easily up to the standard of the series. Tim riley talk 17:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

• Many thanks Tim, I've addressed your comments throughout - as useful and positive as always. - SchroCat (talk) 21:04, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments from Dr. Blofeld

Apologies for the delay, you know the reason ;-)

Can genuinely find very little fault with this:

• "In August 1956, for fifty guineas, Fleming commissioned Richard Chopping to provide the art for the cover, based on Fleming's design; the result won a number of prizes.[18][19] After From Russia, with Love had been published, Fleming received a letter from a thirty-one-year-old Bond enthusiast and gun expert, Geoffrey Boothroyd, criticising the author's choice of firearm for Bond: his suggestions came too late to be included in From Russia, with Love, but one of Boothroyd's guns—a .38 Smith & Wesson snub-nosed revolver modified with one third of the trigger guard removed—was used as the model for Chopping's image.[20] Fleming later thanked Boothroyd for his suggestions by naming the armourer in Dr. No Major Boothroyd.[21" -this has some rather long sentences and I found heavy to read, perhaps a slight rewording might improve it.

I've re-worked the middle (very long) one, so this should a little better now. - SchroCat (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

• Is it worth linking Salzburg? Does that quality as a major city?
• "Rosa Klebb is described as being physically repulsive, with poor hygiene and with gross tastes.[42][43] Eco—and Anthony Synnott, in his examination of aesthetics in the Bond novels—consider that despite Klebb being female, the character is more akin to a "sexually neuter" individual.[38" - I can't remember if there was a nod to her being a lesbian in the novel? That would be worth mentioning.

• I've mused over this one a bit (it's more than a nod to her being a lesbian - it's overtly clear, but only in one scene), but that says more about Fleming than anything else. I'm trying not to make any suggested connection between her "gross tastes" - her sadistic tendencies etc - and her sexual preference, which is only a brief mention and not germane to the story. - SchroCat (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

• Anthony Boucher rather reminds me of some of the personalities we have on wikipedia, I'm sure you know what I mean ;-)

• Too many!! - SchroCat (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Very good article, really little to complain about.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:03, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks Doc, much appreciated! - SchroCat (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments from Ceoil

Man I love the film, but never read the book. Still very pleased to see this here. I'm editing as I read through, but not precious, so feel free to revert as you see fit. Ceoil (talk) 10:25, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Ceoil: your edits have been great. You must try the book: if you don't take my word for it being the best of the lot, take Ian Rose's! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 11:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments from Moisejp

• Confused: The caption of the Orient Express photo says "Bond was drugged during his meal" but the main text says "Nash has drugged Romanova". The lead says Fleming "returned to Britain by the Orient Express" (and the photo caption implies also this) but the Plot inspirations section says only that Fleming returned from Istanbul "by train"; it does not specify that it was the Orient Express. The photo caption says "the restaurant was closed when Fleming travelled the line" but the Plot inspirations sections says "there was no restaurant car" (not the same thing as there being a restaurant car that was closed). Moisejp (talk) 03:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• I tweaked it to clarify, but then removed the image and caption: it doesn't help aid any understanding or show something that needed to be showed. - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Plot:

• All the characters are only referred to by their last name, except the text alternates between using Tatiana Romanova's first and last names. Maybe only use her last name for consistency?

• Done - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Why are there quotation marks around "death warrant"?

• Because it's an uncommon term, but one that is used in the book. - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• OK. I would have thought that "death warrant" is the most common term (I see in Wikipedia it links to "execution warrant", but that would not be the first term I'd think of). Anyway, no big deal. Different people have different concepts of what is common (and of course there are regional differences in English), so it's all good. Moisejp (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Just confirming that Kronsteen has no first name in the book?

• Corrent: he's only ever referred to by the one name. - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Back to this caption: "Bond was drugged during his meal, but the restaurant was closed when Fleming travelled the line". The structure with the two clauses separated by "but" suggests there is maybe supposed to be a kind of juxtaposition of two contrasting ideas. But I don't see how Bond's being drugged is in any way related to Fleming not having entered the restaurant car. May I suggest something like "A crucial encounter/scene in the book takes place in the line's restaurant car, but this part of the train was closed when Fleming travelled the line." Moisejp (talk) 03:59, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Removed (see above) - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• "Kerim takes Bond to a meal with some gypsies, where they witness a fight between two women interrupted by an attack by Bulgarian agents. In retaliation, Bond helps Kerim assassinate the top Bulgarian agent involved." I wasn't sure what the "retaliation" was in response to. Did the Bulgarian agents attack the two women (who were presumably unknown to Bond and Kerim)? Or did the agents attack Bond and Kerim? Moisejp (talk) 04:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Tweaked - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Background and writing history: No comments.

Plot inspirations:

• "As with several others of his works, Fleming appropriated the names of people he knew or had heard of for the story's characters. Red Grant, a Jamaican river guide—whom Fleming's biographer Andrew Lycett described as "a cheerful, voluble giant of villainous aspect"—was used for the half-German, half-Irish assassin,[22][23] while Rosa Klebb was partly based on Colonel Rybkin—a real-life member of the Lenin Military-Political Academy about whom Fleming had written an article for The Sunday Times." This begins talking about how Fleming appropriated names for his characters, but in the case of Rosa Klebb, there's no indication of appropriating a name, only a background. Unless he rearranged the letters in Colonel Rybkin to make most of Rosa Klebb? If this is the case, I don't think it is clear. Moisejp (talk) 04:29, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Tweaked slightly, which should now be a little clearer. - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

More comments to follow soon. Moisejp (talk) 04:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks, Moisejp, I look forward to seeing any more comments you have. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Your changes to my comments above all look really good, thank you. Moisejp (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Themes:

• The lead teases us by mentioning the Saint George and the Dragon theme, and I was expecting to get more details in the main text. But the main text basically only says that a writer identified the theme. I'm not very familiar with Saint George (I think I may have studied it a long time ago). What would you think about including a sentence or two summarizing what Saint George did with the dragon, and how Bond's actions in this story mirror Saint George? Moisejp (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• I now see in the footnote you have a few other little hints about the story's—and other Bond novels'—relation to Saint George and the Dragon. But I was expecting something meatier, something at the plot level. Does the "theme" of Saint George end at little mentions of dragonflies and characters whose name means dragon? Moisejp (talk) 20:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• I'll see if there anything more that can be squeezed out of the sources. Most refer to this novel briefly on this point (the whole St George thing is more clear later in the series), but I'll see what I can do. - SchroCat (talk) 21:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

I think that's all of my comments. As you've seen, I also did some copy-edits. It was a pleasure to read this. I believe I reviewed a couple of your Bond novel articles for GA several years ago, but not this one. If you happen to have time and interest, I also have a peer review going on: Wikipedia:Peer review/Title TK/archive1. But I know you have other projects on the go including reviewing Wikipedia:Peer review/Emma Stone/archive1. So no worries if you're too busy. Cheers, Moisejp (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks Moisejp. I'm much obliged to your edits and comments. I'll try and get round to Title TK in the next few days, although I have let Frankie dangle for a little too long for comments on his! I'll certainly try and make time for you anyway. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks to one and all who came along. I'll address the final St George point today and file for FAC shortly. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:20, 18 April 2016 (UTC)