On Wed, 3 Jun 1998, Mario Taboada wrote:
> Kevin Smith on Rafferty:
>
> <<It's a pretty good article, with enough meat
in it to spark a
> half-dozen or so threads in this list, not the least
of which is the
> assertion that today's private eyes "feel like
nostalgic diehards, worn
> down by the strain of keeping the Chandler faith
alive...as a compelling
> myth, the private eye is history.">>
>
> Good article. While I agree that many private-eye
novels and even entire
> series sound a bit tired (in some cases, were born
tired), there are
> always exceptions.
>
> As to how believable a quixotic P.I. is in our day, I
would argue that
> Chandler's Marlowe wasn't exactly believable in the
forties and fifties
> either. It's the quality of the writing and the
characters that draw the
> reader - I take it for granted that there is an
automatic suspension of
> disbelief when the author really delivers a good
story.
>
> It's also interesting to notice how certain gifted
authors have
> circumvented the limitations of the P.I. as hero.
Mosley, making Rawlins
> a regular guy who gets into messes; Burke, by having
Robicheaux be a
> very peculiar sort of cop; Ellroy, by pushing the
procedural in
> interesting (even crazy) directions; Sallis, by
making the crime and
> investigation subsidiary to an existentialist drama;
Gores, by adopting
> the techniques of the procedural while nominally
adhering to the P.I.
> formula, and so on. These guys succeed because of
unusual ingenuity and
> talent, but many others who still plow the
traditional P.I. territory
> often produce pale, tired, cliche-ridden works that
only contribute to
> sinking the formula further.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mario Taboada
> #
> # 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/.
>
#
# 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/.