William Ahearn wrote:
"I'm really not a wisenheimer....all I'm looking for--and not
necessarily from you --is the unified field theory that says
these are noir."
Since you're new here, William, let me give you some
background in the interest of saving you some time.
You won't get anything "unified" on Rara Avis (except perhaps
a "unified" acknoledgement of Rara Avis' inherent lack of the
afforementioned unity). The folks who linger around this
coffee clatch are a disparate and independent-minded lot. The
question of what is and is not noir and what is and is not
hard-boiled crops up about once a year (usually initially
posed or pounced upon by a list newbie. Sometime around 2002
I think I was the newbie in question), and we have never
reached a consensus, in spite of any number of lengthy
disquisitions from multiple viewpoints on the topics in
question.
So good luck with your quest. I can't wrap my head around why
anyone would want a "unified field theory" on any literary
concept. Then again, I agree with Soren Kierkegaard: "if you
define me, do you not negate me?"
In the case of noir fiction, the discussions themselves are
the point for me, and the lack of a solid, concrete, "THIS IS
NOIR" definition has helped me learn to be comfortable with
literary ambiguity.
;)
All the Best-
Brian Thornton
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 14 Sep 2007 EDT