RARA-AVIS: Mallory's Oracle

Mark Sullivan (ANONYMEINC@webtv.net)
Wed, 5 Aug 1998 23:40:25 -0400 (EDT) I finally got around to reading Carol O'Connell's Mallory's Oracle,
Rafferty's GQ article recommendation for the future of hardboiled
fiction. I hope not. I agree with most of his description of the
novel, such as its being comic booky, but I don't think of that as a
positive thing. (If I want a comic book story, I'll read a comic book,
which I do.) It's the same reason I never read a second Burke book by
Vaachs (Shella and Bad Blood, however, were great). And the prose was
as repetitive as Vaachs's sometimes was--if I had to read one more time
how Burke's dog was trained I was going to scream. In the same way,
O'Connell keeps reminding us of Mallory's amorality learned on the
street.

O'Connell sets up a kind of Nero Wolfe/Archie Goodwin partnership
between Mallory and Charles Butler, but that doesn't work when they are
both geniuses and neither is particularly street-smart (and Mallory
should be far more street-smart for all of the times we are reminded she
grew up there). Therefore, the book must contrive to make sure that
neither of these two geniuses are privy to all of the facts or, being
geniuses, how could they not solve the case. As much effort is expended
in coming up with reasons why the two should withhold evidence from each
other as is spent on the actual story.

Another problem with "genius" detectives is the reliance on arcane
problems. The puzzle must be worthy of the detective's intellect, plus
the detective must solve it before the reader. When a reader figures it
out before the detective, it doesn't make the reader feel smart, it
makes the detective seem dumb--if s/he is a genius, why didn't s/he
figure it out before I did? In addition, genius detectives need genius
foes to make it challenging. I guess I'm trying to say I've read
several too many serial killer novels and am bored with them unless they
offer something a bit different (like Raymond in Dora Suarez or Kerr in
Philosophical Investigation, respectively).

My final problem with "genius" detectives is that they fit well into my
idea of hardboiled. They are another element of an elite. One of the
things I like about much hardboiled is the ordinariness of the
protagonist, and how they are as much about the struggle to keep on
keeping on as they are about solving the crime. It is the character
that pushes the story, not the puzzle. Much of the appeal to me is in
the struggle to retain independence against increasing odds. It is no
big deal when someone of independent means, like Sandford's hero (I know
he is wel-liked on this list, but I never got past the first Prey book
for exactly these reasons), tells everyone where to go. It is, however,
a big deal when a struggling detective risks the next paycheck or the
client.

So I probably won't be reading any more or Carol O'Connell's books.

Mark

#
# To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to majordomo@icomm.ca.
# The web pages for the list are at http://www.vex.net/~buff/rara-avis/.