--- In rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Thornton"
<bthorntonwriter@...> wrote:
>
> Mark-
>
> I take your general point, but I just have to chime in here as
someone who
> likes HB/Noir and reads it, both the old and the new, that I don't
see where
> an interest in the literature in general connotes some sort of
acceptance of
> that sub-set's canon "en toto."
>
> After all, I'm a huge fan of Hammett, Chandler, MacDonald, Connelly
(took me
> a while to get past CITY OF BONES, but I managed to), Bruen, Starr,
Guthrie,
> Swiercynski, Prather, Dan J. Marlowe, Holmes, Cain, Woolrich, et.
a;., but
> that doesn't mean that I'm going to like all of it, or think its
"equally
> valid" as literature, even if I don't get it.
Well, no doubt it's all valid, but the question for the reader is
whether it's good. How could a novel or story not be valid?
> I find Spillane unreadable (Doherty and I have fought this battle,
no need
> to go over that ground again, Jim), Daly to be laughable, and
several others
> mostly forgettable.
Spillane has inspired action scenes, though. He had technique. His
characters evoke no sympathy in me, though, and I find them shallow.
> On the other hand, good for the authors of "urban" niche fiction for
finding
> a receptive audience, and being able to make some money doing it. That
> doesn't mean that their stuff is on a level commensurate with that
of even
> HOW STELLA GOT HER GROOVE BACK, THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA, or for that
matter,
> anything by the prodigiously talented Toni Morrison.
If they're not better than Toni Morrison, I doubt they'll capture me
as a reader... I was thinking along the lines of some Elmore Leonard
of street lit. I would be very interested in that, an internal view
with some distance and humor.
Best,
mrt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 07 Jan 2009 EST