Hell, no harm in discussing him -- he just tends to provoke a
lot of loud and angry opinions, is all.
Why I think a lot of serious fans have problems with
Parker:
-- He's been spectacularly successful at a time when a lot of
other, better writers (in my opinion, of course) in the genre
like Stephen Greenleaf can't seem to find an audience.
-- Even his admirers admit his latest books aren't up to
snuff, yet the decline in quality hasn't affected his
sales.
-- I don't think he's really a hardboiled novelist anymore.
The last time his name came up I posited the theory that you
can have PI novels that aren't hardboiled novels. I think
Parker is a prime example of this. That doesn't make them
bad, necessarily, but if you come to his work expecting
hardboiled attitudes I think you'll come away
disappointed.
I was contempuous of Parker for a long time, until I started
reading some of his imitators and realized that what Parker
does, he does extremely well. I'm just not a big fan of what
he does, is all. (I'd like to see Hawk get his own series,
frankly.)
Each his/her own, though.
doug
--- Jess Nevins <
jjnevins@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> And on what grounds do we exclude Parker,
then?
> He's too successful? He's not good
enough?
> If either or both of those are the case, then
would
> someone
> send me a list of hard-boiled and noir authors
who
> we're nonetheless not allowed to discuss?
>
> jess
===== Doug Bassett
dj_bassett@yahoo.com
__________________________________________________ Do You
Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of
Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/
-- # 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 : 15 Dec 2000 EST