> The case of Greenleaf is paradoxical: he has outdone
Ross Macdonald at =
his
> own game (and did it early, in State's Evidence, a
brilliant tour de fo=
rce
> in which there are so many skeletons in the closet
that nobody is who y=
ou
> think at the beginning of the book); as a stylist he
is second to none =
in
> the mystery field. Yet he is not nearly as popular as
his talent and
> achievements would suggest.
> Greenleaf is VERY good and I've enjoyed everything
that I've read by hi=
m.
> Some a little more than others, but that's true of
nearly every writer.=
=20
I agree with Mario to a point. I think STATE'S EVIDENCE is
excellent and
may be worthy of the appellation "classic" now or someday. I
certainly
recommend it either as a reading for this group or to anyone
who hasn't
read it. A long time ago a friend in the San Francisco Bay
area sent me
a clipping from the San Francisco Chronicle about three
notable young
mystery writers there: Geoffery Archer (BLACK GLOVE), Stephen
Greenleaf
and Bill Pronzini. I went out and bought a book by each of
them. I don't
think Archer ever did anything else, or at least I never
heard of it,
but as I recall BLACK GLOVE was just okay anyway. We know the
other two
authors went on to considerable success in the field. Ah, but
I digress.
I bought and read every Greenleaf the moment it came out. I
think that
STATE'S EVIDENCE, and GRAVE ERROR are very, very good.
DEATHBED wasn't
quite as good but an enjoyable read. But I thought TOLL CALL
was pretty
bad. It wasn't nearly as well written as the previous books,
the plot
was (hey, my opinion here) weak, the resolution less than
satisfying.
Next I read IMPACT (a non-Tanner) and didn't like it either,
so I
stopped buying and reading Greenleaf. The fact that I saw him
at a con
being really snotty to some fans didn't help, and I haven't
had one of
his books in my hands since. I've talked to other people who
agree with
me that TOLL CALL wasn't as good as his previous books. If
the ones that
followed weren't any better I'm not surprised he isn't
selling well.
Duane went on to say:
> Another underrated writer is Jonathan Valin, whose
Harry Stoner mysteri=
es
> I've found to be solidly written and very
entertaining.
I like Valin=92s books too, but I have a problem with them.
Yes, they are
solidly written and very entertaining. In fairness, I must
say I haven=92=
t
read the last three of Valin=92s books, I=92m just plain
behind on my
reading. That said, the problem is Harry Stoner as a
character isn't
doing much growing or developing. Seems to me that Stoner is
the same
guy in EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES as he was in FINAL NOTICE.
These days
I, and I think most readers of the genre, expect some
character growth
over the space of five or six books (unless it's a cozy
series, in which
case readers want things pretty much left alone). We see
character
development in Nameless, Dan Kearney, Sharon McCone and a lot
of
others.,=20
I'll concede that Spade, Marlowe, Archer didn't do a lot of
developing
as characters either, but they were written in a different
time. Perhaps
this is the reason Valin=92s books aren=92t more popular,
though I
unhesitatingly recommend THE LIME PIT, FINAL NOTICE and DEAD
LETTER to
any members of this list.
Rick
#
# 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/.