I learned something about myself while reading this: I don't like spy novels. I like novels like The Thirty-Nine Steps or The Mask of Dimitrios, but I don't think I like novels about professional spies. I prefer novels about ordinary men--well, maybe overly clever, active, ordinary men--who find themselves in the middle of mysteries. So I guess the way to put it is that I like laymen spy novels. 
 I liked the film of Casino Royale very much. It's one of the few Bond films I felt like watching again--it and Skyfall. And I loved Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. (I still plan to read that, despite the revelation gained from this book.) But when reading about a character, it's more intimate. I don't see anything wrong with wish-fulfillment type reading, but when it comes to the spy thriller, I like a main character that I could convince myself that I could be. Obviously, I read fantasy and science fiction and don't feel like I could be those heroes--at least not in most of them. But there's something different about this. I guess, it's that I get more enjoyment out of seeing what these ordinary people would do in the insane situations, rather than seeing what a professionally trained spy would do. 
 Now that I think about it, I think it's more wish-fulfillment than trying to see myself in a character like James Bond, because since a character like Richard Hannay is relatively ordinary, I get to lie to myself and say, 'I could've done that.' There's not a point in Casino Royale where I could legitimately say that. 
 But aside from that personal preference, I would say the story is quick-paced and the writing is rarely clumsy, lending itself to easy reading. It slows towards the end, but even then, Fleming's easy-flowing narrative helps with getting passed this slump. 
 I could see myself reading more Bond novels, but then again, if I never do, oh, well.