Charlie wrote: I hate to open up the old definitions debate
again, but Motherless Brooklyn is hardly hardboiled. The
central character is a twitching mass of confusion and
desperate need - which is good, but hardly makes for
hardboiled. Personally I thought it was a trifle overlong.
Decent novel though, one of those ones that just had to be
************ That "tough and colloquial" definition can
handily be applied to a straightforward and unsentimental
writing style when there aren't any really rough and tough
characters. Vin Packer can be placed in this category along
with John O'Hara.
But to be honest, I would say that Lionel is indeed pretty
darned tough. He's persistent even in the face of danger,
isn't he? I'd call that tough. I don't think a character
needs to be a macho shitkicker to qualify as
And never hesitate to bring up the definitions debate. It's
always worth a go.
-- # Plain ASCII text only, please. Anything else won't show up. # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # firstname.lastname@example.org. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 16 Aug 2003 EDT