Why James Bond remains the pinnacle of modern masculinity

"Bond, James Bond."

Some time ago over the Christmas break, I was engaged in a conversation with some friends about good exemplars of masculinity and manliness in stories. After reflecting on this brief discussion, it occurred to me that the obvious ones were Aragorn, Eomer, Theoden and James Bond.

All these characters are clearly manly and respectable men in their own right and aspirational examples of masculinity. And yet, Bond enjoys a pre-eminence that other manly characters cannot seem to hold a candle to.

I don’t think anyone has seriously tried to explain this so I am going to give it my best shot. I believe there are two reasons for Bond’s pre-eminence as an aspirational masculine figure.

The Modern Placement

All the other characters I have mentioned share many of the admirable masculine qualities that Bond has in spades but they do not inhabit the modern post war setting. Aragorn would be completely out of place in the modern world even if he wore a suit but Bond belongs here and is an accomplished man of the times.

He is a man in time and in place.

This placement helps Bond to be less of an abstract inspiration like Aragorn who is so far removed from our world that his virtues and strength can seem intangible. Aragorn knows herb lore, swordplay, survival skills and the history of a land which isn’t real.

Bond’s virtues and skills, however, are very tangible and comprehendible. Bond knows how to drive and ride most real vehicles, how to use most real firearms, how to play most games in a casino and how to pair wines with meals. These skills are far more relevant and attainable for men in the modern day.

The Social Cool

This explanation of placement is essential but not sufficient for explaining why Bond enjoys such high status as an aspirational model of masculinity in our current age. For instance, John Wick shares Bond’s martial skills (in fact, he is probably a better fighter than 007), wears sharp suits and is also situated in the modern world but he isn’t nearly as aspirational.

So what separates James Bond from John Wick since they are similar? I’d argue it is social cool that sets them apart. For all his skills and positive attributes, John Wick is not a capable socialite, although he is obviously not socially clueless. Mr Bond may as well be the platonic essence of what a social man is in comparison to Mr Wick; his ju-jitsu may be rusty but his confidence and charisma are the real ace up his sleeve.

James Bond acts like a man of ability, competence and power and, because of his manner, everyone from the villains to the audience respects him as a man. Bond’s social cool gives him the ability to navigate social hierarchies, walk in high and low circles and respond to verbal attacks with suave wit. He speaks the language of the elite and speaks it well with the confidence of someone who has status. Bond acts and holds himself like an elite man even though he doesn’t have the fortune of other elites such as Goldfinger. 007 doesn’t act like a plebeian or speak like a street thug, instead, he acts with class, confidence and intelligence and this makes him admirable.

Now on the face of it, this social cool may not seem manly per se but, when one considers the context of modern western society, this is highly masculine.

What makes a man is his capacity to perform the three Ps – Protect, Provide and Procreate – no matter the environment. In the western world, you increase your capacity to execute the three Ps by acquiring more and more money and you do that by getting a job and then embarking on a successful career or using said job to manoeuvre into another more lucrative one.

Bond’s gravitas, his ability to read rooms, his capacity to be pleasant, confident, humorous and witty give him a set of social skills which would aid him greatly in all modern western work environments. If Bond were to choose a career in finance, business or any other corporate sector, he would do exceptionally well with his social cool (although one imagines he’d find these normal high salaried jobs rather boring).

Bond’s social cool also allows him to win the affections of beautiful, classy and sexy women. However, I don’t believe his ability to seduce women is in-and-of-itself the reason why Bond’s social cool is admired, instead, his success at seduction is merely the proof of his charisma. These things are the cause of such widespread admiration. Even if Bond didn’t bed a beautiful woman in every film, he’d still be cool and still be aspirational as a consequence. 

“Goodbye, Mr Bond.”

I do not believe that James Bond will forever remain the aspirational figure and yardstick by which we measure manliness and masculinity in the western world. 007 has enjoyed a brilliant and impressive run but he only makes sense in a modern world based on specific political and social realities.

And that modern world is changing. The post cold war order is crumbling; the western world is losing power and America looks like an empire which is about to cannibalize itself. Great Britain is in her twilight and Ian Fleming would hardly recognize what England has turned into.

Unlike other characters, Bond has been reimagined slightly in every iteration. The most recent Bond (Daniel Craig) was probably the furthest we have seen from the original character we find in the books and in the first few films starring Sean Connery but he was still recognizable as Bond and he still lived in a world where the political and economic realities of a powerful America and generally prosperous Great Britain seemed concrete.

I don’t believe the next Bond, regardless of the chosen actor, will manage to impress or awake the same enthusiasm among audiences today. And it is because the character is from another time and almost an entirely different place. He is a defender of the status quo.

Ten years ago, I do remember a general sense among most of the British population that the way things were in the country – i.e. the status quo – were okay. Sure, the 2008 recession was a recent memory and there were groups of left and right wingers who argued for political and cultural changes but they were in the minority and the majority were essentially centrists who believed only small changes were necessary for course correction.

Times have changed. Everyone but the most wilfully ignorant or happily insulated knows that the current order of things isn’t working for the average guy anymore. The prosperity in Great Britain is dwindling with every new tax and every new cost of living increase. Newspapers suggest that car ownership may become a thing of the past in the next ten years but such a prediction would have been unthinkable ten years prior.

Western civilization is in decline which means that the present is miserable and the future only looks bleak. So a hero who simply defends the status quo cannot hope to excite audiences who know that change is needed more than defence or preservation.

Of course, the film studios could decide to set the new Bond stories in the past. Perhaps audiences can look forward to a faithful film adaptation of Casino Royale? This would help to make the new iteration of James Bond admirable because he’d be defending a status quo and a world order which seemed to work better for everyone living in the west. However, he’ll become a more distant character if this route is taken because he’ll be confirmed as a hero of the past rather than of the present day.

James Bond is now a man out of time and out of place.

So who is going to be the next aspirational masculine figure in culture? I cannot even hope to predict who such a character might be but I feel confident making a few predictions about what he might be like.

My gut tells me he’ll be a bit like Loid Forger from Spy x Family. To be clear, I don’t mean that the next aspirational masculine figure will necessarily be a spy or an anime character, in fact, I highly doubt he will be an animated character of any kind. No, what I mean is that the next aspirational masculine figure will be a warrior of some kind and a family man. He won’t be the pathetic type of family man whose wife wears the trousers and is secretly resented by his children. He’ll have gravitas and he’ll be cool.

The next aspirational masculine figure will have this kind of energy - Art by @NotiuNotiu4

As well, I predict that this new aspirational figure will not only be a family man but also a man who belongs to a brotherhood or clan. In other words, he’ll be a community man as well as a family man. A man who has allies and roots and whose story is not only about defending but also building in a world marked by the tribulations we currently face. I don’t believe his only purpose will be his family either; to be exciting and inspirational as well as aspirational, he will also have other grand missions.

I would also stress that he will need to be physically and chronologically placed in the modern world. This new character cannot exist in a fictional world, a past society or a speculated future one; he’ll have to be a contemporary man.

Loid Forger almost meets the mark, however, his story takes place in a different universe in a country inspired by 1970’s East Germany under the Soviet regime and he clearly works for a nation which is a reference to the NATO countries during the Cold War period. He is another Guardian Hero who is defending his country by attempting to prevent a world war, in other words, he is protecting the status quo rather than trying to change it or build something different.

Like James Bond, Loid Forger is yesterday’s hero for when times were better. Except, unlike Bond, his placement is completely fictional so Bond is a more real character.

Again, I don’t know who the next aspirational masculine figure/s will be but I’m confident he/they’ll be similar to what I have suggested above.

I just hope that these new aspirational masculine figures will come onto the scene sooner rather than later, as the Homer Simpson clones of the last thirty years needed to be replaced before they were ever made.