If your comment on Auster (read below) is Œnot a judgement¹, then, as some
French say, Obama is not black...
The simple idea that Auster should not be included in discussions on any
crime writing, or noir, or whatever related to all the topics touched upon
in Rara, is highly symptomatic of the absurd ghetto into which he (Auster)
has been kept by a large part of the critique here in the US, and especially
the Crime Stories critics....and mrt is just repeating here their usual
credo: ³More technique than substance²...please...!!...is that what one
should call a Œclassificatory comment¹...(what are those by the way, where
do they start and where do they end being Œclassificatory¹...)...
Nothing else to add here since this terrain has been covered ample times in
Rara in the past ten years and nothing evolves on that front...
Better subject: Thanks a million to Duane for the article on Cody¹s demise
and I hope that nothing of such fate will occur to the great store in
Portland (Powell¹s)
Montois
On 1/19/09 4:38 PM, "jacquesdebierue" <jacquesdebierue@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com <mailto:rara-avis-l%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> Steve Novak <Cinefrog@...> wrote:
>> >
>> > Do we detect a litlle bias against Auster there...or are we about to
>> > re-ignate the ŒAuster-is-noir¹ controversy...?
>> >
>> > ...but..²on n¹est jamais prophète en son pays²...of course...and the
> fact
>> > that Auster is quoted in a list in the Guardian is therefore logical...
>> >
>> > ????
>
> It was not a judgment on Auster but merely a classificatory comment. I
> would never include him in such a list. He's a technical writer, a
> fluent writer, but not really a storyteller like crime literature
> pros. This is not the place to discuss his work, but I do think he is
> overrated by the critics. More technique than substance.
>
> Best,
>
> mrt
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 20 Jan 2009 EST