Mark Sullivan wrote:
> Tribe wrote:
>
> "I'm certainly not gonna defend Ellroy's use of
language and the like.
> It bugs some readers and others like his stuff
notwithstanding (count me
> among the later). But Mark, I'm sure you're not
saying that because
> things weren't kosher back then, they shouldn't be
written about."
>
> You're right, I'm not saying that. My problem with
Ellroy is not his
> use of epithets, but his uncritical use of them
(uncritical as in
> simplistic; I'm not saying he should automatically
criticize any use of
> harsh words; casual dismissal is as uncritical as
casual acceptance).
> By setting his books in a time when those words and
attitudes were more
> acceptable, often endorsed, and insisting he is
using the words simply
> for temporal verisimilitude, Ellroy is sidestepping
the issues of
> writing and using those words in the 1990s. Authors
like Lansdale use
> the "N" word fairly often, but are aware of its
shadings when coming
> from different mouths.
What, *exactly*, would you like Ellroy to do differently?
Should realism in dialogue be sacrificed to avoid offending
modern sensibilities?
There is no issue of writing and using those words in the
1990s--not if you're
going to remain faithful to the time and place your writing
is set in. To presume otherwise is to rip the spine out of
history, and that's a far worse sin than portraying race hate
and prejudice faithfully.
> I agree with this, too. Although some of
Chandler/Marlowe's comments
> bother me, I can understand them in context and set
them aside.
> Chandler was a man of his time. However, Ellroy is
also a man of his
> time and that time is now. He is not a writer of the
'50s using those
> words, but a man of the '90s, choosing to write
about the '50s, so he
> can glibly use those words and dance away whenever
he is criticized for
> it.
Glibly? He's portraying a historical time and place with
accuracy. What's glib about that?
> However, I am not saying '90s values should be
imposed upon the past if
> that is the setting. I think Mosley walks that line
very carefully (of
> course, his main theme revolves around questions of
changes in racial
> treatment so he engages the questions I think Ellroy
ducks). All I'm
> saying is that I've come to question why Ellroy's
books are always set
> in the past; it makes me wonder if he might not
think of it as a golden
> age of sorts.
Do you have any evidence for this idea other than a dislike
of Ellroy? Ellroy prefers a time period to write in. That
hardly means that he thinks of it as a "golden age of sorts,"
it just means that he finds it more interesting to write in
that era.
Do you think, somehow, that his writing would be better if he
-avoided- using that language?
jess
-- # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 02 Sep 2000 EDT