This thesis argues that the espionage fiction of Graham Greene, Ian Fleming and John le Carré published between 1945 and 1979 illustrates a number of discontinuities, disjunctions and paradoxes related to space, sovereignty and national identity in post-war Britain. To this effect, the thesis has three broad aims. Firstly, to approach the representations of space and sovereign power in the work of these authors published during the period 1945-1979, examining the way in which sovereign power produces space, and then how that power is distributed and maintained. Secondly, to analyse the effect that sovereign power has on a variety of social and cultural environments represented within spy fiction and how the exercise of power affects the response of individuals within them. Thirdly, to establish how the intervention of sovereign power within environments relates to the creation, propagation and exclusion of national identities within each author’s work. By mapping the application of sovereign power throughout various environments, the thesis demonstrates that the control of environment is inextricably linked to the sovereign control of British subjects in espionage fiction. Moreover, the role of the spy in the application of sovereign power reveals a paradox integral to the espionage genre, namely that the maintenance of sovereign power exists only through the undermining of its core principles. Sovereignty, in these texts, is maintained only by weakening the sovereign control of other nations.

The thesis analyzes a historical development of James Bond films in a background of the Cold War between years 1962-1989. A fictional character James Bond is a cultural phenomenon, which became an absolute world-wide symbol from the point of popular culture since the sixties in 20 century. The main part of the thesis focuses on movies with agent 007 and describes the ideological base, which we can investigate. Secondarily, Bond's past is handled. Therefore, a development of the literary figure, who moved from spy novels to the screen, is analyzed in here. Further, parts of the thesis mention social background, which was greatly influenced by Bond topic in the second half of the 20th century. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Ian Fleming’s debut novel Casino Royale (2015) introduces the iconic character James Bond. The savvy British spy who must save the world from Soviet villain is a cultural icon the world over. Yet not much is known of his personal political leanings. Fleming once claimed that James Bond’s politics lies just left of center. In this essay I analyze where James Bond lies on the left-right political scale by using Cichoka & Dhont’s (2018) “Big-five personality model”.Research has been made about the contextual, historical and political settings of the Bond novels such as Jeremy Black’s (2001) “The politics of James Bond: from Fleming's novels to the big screen” which serves as a complement to this research. Black’s (2001)claims suggest that Britain struggled for dominance after The Second World War as they were financially in ruin and although Britain lost some of its colonies, they still had many territories under their control. However, with the rising power of the Soviet Union, the nationalistic feeling in Britain grew as their reputation as a powerful empire needed to be upheld. Therefore, a need for a strong British symbol grew, which also acted as a reason for why Fleming created James Bond.The essay concludes that James Bond represents a specific part of Great Britain. The analysis has shown James Bond is a product of his time by symbolizing the longing for the return of the great British empire. This is supported by the fact of him scoring low on categories such as Agreeableness and Openness combined with the fact that he harbors anti-Communist beliefs. The analysis show that he acts in a manner that would highlight the colonial days of Britain where their strength had not yet diminished as opposed to the times after the Second World War. As such, the actions of James Bond, together with his explicit views suggest that he lies slightly more towards the right on the political scale and thus, disputesthe claim of Ian Fleming.