For His Eyes Only: The Women of James Bond

In the opening scene of Skyfall (Sam Mendes 2012), James Bond, played by Daniel Craig, moves from a dark entryway into the crowded streets of Istanbul. A car pulls up and he steps inside, temporarily a passenger rather than the instigator of the action. Here, audiences are introduced to Eve, played by Naomie Harris, the character who is revealed to be Miss Moneypenny, M’s iconic secretary, at the conclusion of the film. With Bond in tow, Moneypenny chases a black car through crowded streets, knocking off one side view mirror in the process, to which Bond casually quips, “It’s alright, weren’t using it.” When the other side view mirror is destroyed moments later, Moneypenny quips back, “I wasn’t using that one, either.” Moneypenny’s playful repartee with Bond is reflected in her ability, throughout the remainder of this scene, to keep up with the action as they navigate cramped Turkish streets. The image of Moneypenny as an action hero eclipses her traditional representation as M’s secretary and the doting admirer of Bond. This initial representation of Moneypenny suggests that twenty-first century audiences of the Bond franchise will be provided with a positive representation of a black woman with agency and power to match Bond’s own.

The climax of this scene, however, demonstrates that Moneypenny’s aggressive agency is out of place and unwelcome within this action narrative. As the chase progresses, Bond ends up engaging in hand-to-hand combat with the mercenary Patrice on top of a moving train with Moneypenny following alongside in her vehicle. Moneypenny remains in contact with M at MI6, reporting the events as they occur. When the road ends, Moneypenny exits her Jeep and prepares to take a shot at Bond’s assailant, warning M that “she may have a shot, [but] it’s not clean.” Despite the risk, M orders Moneypenny to shoot and she accidentally hits Bond, sending him plummeting into the river below.

Moneypenny’s bad shot initiates a narrative shift that repositions her as a transgressor of the system rather than a proper agent; the presence of a powerful black woman at the center of the action narrative exceeds the conventions of the genre and poses a threat to its representational codes. The initial depiction of Moneypenny as not only being “in” on the action but also capable of keeping pace with Bond threatens the framework of the action genre, which is predominantly coded as a white, masculine, and heterosexual space. Moneypenny’s bad shot literally challenges the prowess of Bond as the idealized white male hero, but this moment also signals her transgression of conventional narrative codes that demand women and racialized “Others” remain on the periphery, rather than at the center, of the action. Throughout Skyfall, Moneypenny is made to pay for her “bad shot” by engaging in a series of disciplinary interpellations that (re)articulate her “proper place” and effectively transform her from Bond’s equal to a supportive sidekick. Insofar as the film demands that Moneypenny be repositioned and disciplined to understand her “proper place,” the film’s narrative signals a broader inability on the part of action cinema to renegotiate representations of traditionally marginalized identities and to integrate racial and gendered “Others” into the center of the action.

MONEYPENNY’S “BAD SHOT”: PENETRATING BOND’S BODY

Recent analyses of Casino Royale (Martin Campbell 2006) and Quantum of Solace (Marc Forster 2008) emphasize the specularisation of Bond’s body, which becomes a visual guarantee of the ascendency and power of the post-Cold War British nation. Colleen M. Tremonte and Linda Racioppi argue that Bond’s body becomes an “object of the gaze” in Casino Royale that reverses an objectifying gaze that has focused solely on women (191). This specularisation, according to Lisa Funnell, represents a shift away from the “British lover tradition” and towards a more Hollywood mode of muscular masculinity in which “Bond’s body, rather than his libido, [becomes] the new locus of masculinity” (“Negotiating” 208). Where Skyfall differs is the extent to which Bond’s body is revealed as vulnerable. For as Klaus Dodds notes, Skyfall is the first Bond film that visualizes Bond’s aging and vulnerable body (121). This is clearly evident in the opening credits, which depict Bond’s body being pulled downward through the water by a woman’s hand and absorbed into a black pit that emerges from the riverbed. Clouds of blood transform the screen and images of Bond as a shooting target marred with bleeding bullet holes reinforce his vulnerability.

By focusing on the weakness of Bond’s body in the title sequence, the film draws a connection between the relative health of Bond and the strength of the British nation. As Dodds notes, it is Bond’s vulnerable body that “offers an opportunity to link his eventual rehabilitation to that of the national security state” (122). This focus enables Skyfall to establish a narrative of reconstitution, in which Bond must undergo a series of trials that enable him to assert his corporeal superiority. Bond’s resurrection as a virile action hero is linked to the ability of Britain to retain its power in an increasingly volatile and uncontrollable geopolitical climate (ibid. 120). If, as Moneypenny notes, Bond can be seen as an “old dog with new tricks,” Britain, too, must undergo a similar narrative reconstitution in order to maintain its representation as experienced and strong, its body politic bolstered by the traditional virtues embodied in the British bulldog that sits on M’s desk.

In this sense, the focus on the revival of Bond’s fit and hypermasculine body throughout the film reiterates the proper gender relations constitutive of a “healthy” British nation. Although women and people of color are not necessarily barred from this sphere, they are fundamentally conceptualized as “out of place” (Woollacott 110) and require a reorientation that resituates them at the margins of a male dominated arena (Tremonte and Racioppi 190). Moneypenny’s bad shot challenges the hyper-masculinity and strength of Bond’s body, quite literally by penetrating the typical sheen of the male action hero. Insofar as one of the underlying themes of Skyfall is Bond’s bodily rehabilitation and the restoration of his masculinity and heroism, Moneypenny’s initial actions interfere with this narrative arc, temporarily stalling this process of rehabilitation. Given Dodds’ argument that “‘resilience’ as with age and gender is something best thought of as being shaped by relations and interactions between different groups” (126), it is notable that the rehabilitation of Bond’s white, cisgendered, male body is stalled by his relationship with Moneypenny, whose racial and gendered Otherness is represented as an obstacle to Bond’s capacity to reconfirm his own masculinity. Craig’s Bond is reproduced as resilient through his interaction with Moneypenny as the racial and gendered Other; an exchange that allows Bond to come out on top but which forecloses the possibility that Moneypenny could achieve the same. Moneypenny’s bad shot, and the disciplinary actions she must undergo as a result, reveal the transgressive quality of a strong black woman interfering into and enacting violence within a space defined by gendered and racial parameters.

Moneypenny’s reorientation takes place on multiple levels, starting with MI6 as the bureaucratic agency that interferes to discipline her as a result of her mistake. In Skyfall—and the Craig films more generally—discipline is reframed as a bureaucratic necessity, and disciplinary violence is executed by agencies like MI6. This shift effectively obscures the fact that procedures that marginalize women are acts of discipline; instead, these acts are presented as necessary bureaucratic “adjustments” that enable the perpetuation of the normative social order. In this sense, Tremonte and Racciopi’s argument that violent women are put into their place by Bond (188) is modified in the Craig-era films; Bond’s attempts come second to the activities of the state/M16 and only reinforce the (ideological) violence that has already repositioned these women.

SKYFALL AND THE BIRACIAL BUDDY

The relationship between Moneypenny and Bond can be conceptualized through the lens of what Ed Guerrero calls the “biracial buddy” narrative, a dynamic that recurs in Hollywood action films of the 1980s. The biracial buddy formula establishes the white male lead as the hero with the “black buddy” as a supporting figure, invoking the idea of the white hero serving as “cultural and ideological chaperone” (Guerrero 239) to the black buddy. Insofar as they represent simplified versions of biracial homosocial bonding without unsettling the social hierarchy that positions whites as superior to blacks, biracial buddy films “present the audience with escapist fantasy narratives […] that mediate America’s very real and intractable racial problems” (ibid. 240). The first “black buddy” of the Craig era films is Felix Leiter, a recurring character in the series who was recast as a black man played by Jeffrey Wright in Casino Royale. Moneypenny effectively replaces Leiter as the “black helper” in Skyfall and she, unlike Leiter, is presented as a threat to Bond as she competes with him for heroic status. As a British agent, Moneypenny seeks to occupy the same “field” as Bond, whereas Leiter is an American agent who circulates in the same networks threatening Bond’s dominance. Leiter’s strength, knowledge, and heroic capacities can be accommodated by the narrative insofar as he uses them to assist Bond in his missions.

While Leiter’s masculinity marks him out as an appropriate operator, Moneypenny’s competence is constantly called into question. The Craig-era films take for granted the authority and competence of male agents, providing multiple opportunities for these men to recuperate and display their physical and professional superiority. The biracial buddy dynamic is therefore modified by the recalibration of the Craig-era films to reflect Hollywood action film conventions—a shift that inscribes the muscular, hypermasculine body and its physical fitness as the central signifier of heroic competence (Funnell, “I Know” 463). Leiter, who is representative of both male heroism and American interests, is acceptable as a black buddy, while Moneypenny is not. This is best illustrated through a comparison of the relative sacrifices of Leiter and Moneypenny. In Quantum of Solace, Leiter puts his career on the line by disobeying his superior in order to save Bond’s life and provide him with intelligence. Leiter’s “sacrifice” actually works in his favor, resulting in his promotion at the conclusion of the film. Moneypenny, alternatively, sacrifices her position in the field in order to assume the role of informant, and by the conclusion of the film, administrative assistant. The intersection of gender and nationality seems to determine how their respective sacrifices are coded within the narrative. While Leiter’s sacrifice proves that he is deserving of a promotion and a more important position in the field, Moneypenny’s narrative arc justifies her eventual demotion to a supportive and administrative role.

Moneypenny’s transition from autonomous field agent to supportive “buddy” is made clear after Bond returns to MI6 and reassumes his position in the field. During their first exchange after the shooting incident, Moneypenny apologizes to Bond and notes: “I’ve been reassigned. Temporary suspension from fieldwork. Something to do with killing 007.” Bond responds, “Well, you gave it your best shot,” only to have Moneypenny snap back with “that was hardly my best shot.” Although Bond’s comment, framed in a witty and flirtatious exchange, is not intended to be taken seriously, the underlying tension of his statement allows him the opportunity to rearticulate his own competency at the expense of Moneypenny (Dodds 126). Her origin story is minimized and made instrumental to Bond’s narrative of resurrection. Bond demonstrates his competence through this relational exchange that ultimately legitimizes Moneypenny’s removal from fieldwork by subtly endorsing MI6’s decision to reposition her in a supportive role.

The specter of Moneypenny as a threat to the stability of the existing system is foregrounded by Bond’s subsequent remark: “I’m not sure I could survive your best.” Bond’s hesitation is soon mitigated by his insistence that “[Fieldwork’s] not for everyone” in response to Moneypenny’s enthusiasm for returning to the field. This dialogue represents an indeterminate power relation between Bond and Moneypenny, while also demonstrating Bond’s role as ideological disciplinarian who represents and verbally sanctions Moneypenny’s repositioning by MI6. By diminishing her capabilities as a field agent, Bond’s dialogue acts as a form of disciplinary realignment that suggests Moneypenny does not have the skills or prowess to “hold her own” in the field. Furthermore, Bond’s quip implicitly suggests that, while Moneypenny may not be suited for the field, Bond himself will inevitably “bounce back,” effectively proving his own resilience and naturalizing his “right” to the field.

RACE, GENDER, AND THE ACT OF “SERVICING” BOND