Talk:Auric Goldfinger

Picture

I think that the picture should be replaced with one of just Goldfinger, it could be a little confusing on which one is him. Alex 23:55, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

I think it's fine, but if you want to add a caption, that would solve the problem just as well. K1Bond007 00:52, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

I added a caption, but I think it could be worded better. Alex 03:22, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Goldfinger's age

I have had one of my edits reverted by somebody saying "remove 1959 reference as there is no indication that it took place in 1959 and there are books that prove otherwise (Griswold claims 1957)"

To which I say: put in your reference, or I'll revert it back. Since you're going to insist on "strict rules of golf" may I point you to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction). WTF is "Griswold" and why should I take his word on Fleming's characters over what Fleming says about them in the novels? When writing about fictional characters WP takes the viewpoint of the reader in the real world.

On page 20 of the Penguin Books edition of Goldfinger (2002), Du Pont states that he's had a look at Goldfinger's passport, and his age is 42. Later we find from Smithers that Goldfinger has entered the UK in 1937 at the age of 20 (page 61). You do the math and you find the novel is set in 1959 or so. Since the Bond books were coming out at the rate of about one per year at this time, and Goldfinger was published in 1959, it is reasonable to assume it was written in 1958, and that Fleming was attempting to make it as contemporary as possible.

It must be at least 1957 since the DB III came out that year. But the fact that the newer DB 4 and the 3.8 L Jaguar XK150 S class (up from the 3.4 L Jag mentioned in the novel) came out in 1958 do not prove that Fleming intends 1957 for the novel action. If Fleming was trying to be anachronistic, he would not have used anything so late as a 1957 auto. Writing in 1958, Fleming may not have known about the very latest cars of 1958. In any case, since Bond draws his car simply from the motor "pool" (getting a choice of Jaguar or Aston Martin), there is no particular reason to think his car should be brand-spanking absolutely off-the-showroom-floor new for 1958 or even 1959. It does have a few modifications, but they are modest, and these "pool" vehicles of the British Secret Service are not the vehicles of the movies.

In any case, 1959 seems the intended internal date of the action in the novel, and there are no good reasons to think otherwise. And if you think so, let's see your references. From the novels first Sbharris 01:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

John Griswold. He's researched the timeline and chronology of Bond's adventures. See Amazon for his book, which he wrote for Ian Fleming Publications. Also Henry Chancellor and his book says 1957. Goldfinger was (for a fact) written in 1958, and because we offer no concrete proof that this story took place in 1959 (i.e., from the book itself and depending on the months used to make said calculation you could come up with '57 or '58) your specific year-edits should be left out. Keeping them clearly violates WP:NOR. User:K1Bond007

Nope. One of the exceptions to NOR is In some cases, where an article (1) makes descriptive claims the accuracy of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable adult without specialist knowledge, and (2) makes no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, or evaluative claims, a Wikipedia article may be based entirely on primary sources (examples would include apple pie or current events), but these are exceptions. A reasonable adult can tell you that a man who is 20 years old at any date in 1937 (even Jan 1 to make him as young as possible) cannot reach the age of 42 until some date in 1959. [Wups, error, if age 20 on any day in 1937 he cannot help but be 42 on at least one day in 1959, but of course may spend the rest of his year as a 42-year old in 1958 or 1960. 1957 is out.] ::If that's too much for you, you can note that the year of the novel's action is not noted, but that in the novel Goldfinger is said to be 42 at the time of his first encounter with Bond, and to have been a 20-year old refugee in 1937. You can then allow the reader to add 22 to 37.

The official WP policy here, BTW, is nonsense. All original writing involves synthesis in what data to leave in, what to take out, and how to order it. Analysis and interpretation can be performed with only those operations, by implication, and in fact always are.

One of Griswold's reasonings (and he has many, very detailed, very interesting explanations) is that in Goldfinger Bond is stated to have been a 00 agent for 6 years. FRWL (Ch6) states that Bond was a 00 in Dec 1950. Griswold's research goes so far as to say that Goldfinger specifically occrurred between Late-April through Early-June 1957. User:K1Bond007

Oh for crying out loud. Read THE book! On page 256, Bond is considering ways to wreck the plane Goldfinger has kidnapped him on, and he thinks of blowing the hatch before blowing a window: "Now what was it that had happened to that plane, flying over Persia back in '57? Bond sat for a while and stared with wide, unseeing eyes at the back of the seat in front of him. It might work! It just conceivably might!" To which I will add, yes, but what WON'T conceivably work is the idea that your character is thinking of some news event that happened "back in '57" unless he's at least two years removed from it. Otherwise it would simply be "last year" if it was now 1958. You say "back in so and so" and use dates, for longer periods of time than it's comfortable for you and Griswold to add to 1957. Too bad. In any case, the novel really is intended as contemporary for 1959, for internal reasons mentioned, and Griswold be damned. Just thought you'll like to know. Read it yourself again, why don't you? You're going to be snapping at my edits unless you do.Sbharris 06:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I really don't know why you're flipping out about this. All I did was revert one time with good reason. I never attacked you. I never insulted you. I never did anything that might in the very least piss you off except cite Official Wikipedia Policy. Thus far you have not proved 1959 for when the book takes place just like you never proved Pussy Galore was a nod to Catwoman. That was a fun addition. No original research. If you can prove it, then that's fantastic, lets add it, but you can't. Game over. Get upset, fight the system, do whatever, I don't care. But lets try not to break Wikipedia's policies and interject our own theories. You claim someone can do simple add&subtract to get the dates, but if the months in which the events occurred happen, you could get 1958. You don't know. That's the unfortunate truth. In the future, please don't break apart my comments. If you have a follow up, then please just start below in a new paragraph and please try and maintain some sort of civility instead of snapping at me for following and requesting others follow Wikipedia's policies. K1Bond007 01:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Not saying we should use this date either. That said, I shouldn't have removed Goldfinger's age according to DuPont. That was accurate and I took it out because I thought you were speculating. (We had a problem with another editor a while back, who randomly inserted ages for all characters based on nothing but guesswork and how old the actor who played the character in the movie was at that point.) K1Bond007 05:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Now, of course you're free to juxtapose any number of more complicated published arguments to this. The more the better. But deciding which facts and arguments to mention, and where, will constitute your own original synthesis of a much larger literature. You can't escape that, so try to be honest with yourself about it.Sbharris 09:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I never added it to the article. I merely disproved your theory with citable sources. WP:NOR, it doesn't get any more clear than that. K1Bond007 18:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine. I've updated the article to accord exactly with what the novel says about Goldfinger.Sbharris 20:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

That's cool. All I'm asking for. 22:14, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Rogue Agent rubbish

Of course the damn videogame is mentioned in detail... Trying to tarnish this character's permanent record, just like the people who made the diabolical game did? I'm sick of somebody trying to creep talk of stupid computer games into everything. Mr.bonus 01:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

This sort of goes along with Goldmember and the kind of morphing and re-use of famous characters in all kinds of fiction, in all kinds of later ways. Look at poor Tarzan. But the proper place for all of this (I think) is just a separate popular culture section, into which we can dump this stuff. I've gone ahead and done that. See if it raises your hackles any less. SBHarris 20:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Post World War II Smuggling of Gold From UK to France

During the period after World War II there was a premium on the price of gold in France over that in Britain. The British banned export of gold and there was a trade which developed in smuggling gold from England to France. One of the largest rings was run by a Lithuanian academic who purchased used gold jewellery and had it recast into bars and coins which he smuggled and resold through dealers in France. In the novel Auric Goldfinger is described as being in this line of business. It was legal provided that the gold was sold at fixed prices in the U.K. As well as Engelhard it is likely that part of Auric Goldfinger's description and activities came from this Eastern European. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.240.206.201 (talk) 12:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

That is very interesting. Perhaps you could include this information in the article somewhere, provided you find a reliable citation for it truthfulness. Auric Goldfinger, (I don't expect you to talk, I expect you to die) 12:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)