Bill [
abc@wt.net] wrote:
<< You can't trust me, either, Mario.
Here's how the review (by Terry Teachout) begins: "Some
mystery lovers perfer Raymond Chandler, others Dashiell
Hammett. For the benighted latter,
. . ." You can't exactly expect an even-handed review after
that beginning.
>>
Who is the managing editor of the Book Review these days? Is
the Review's seeming anti-mystery stance a top-down opinion
or just that of its reviewers?
And perhaps "anti-mystery stance" is a bit too general. After
all, the Review has a crime & mystery section. But maybe
what I mean is a stance that leans against the obviously
hard-boiled. Sure, Chandler is hard-boiled, but his prose is
obviously a bit more literary than Hammett's pared-down
prose
(which isn't unliterary at all). But crime novels that aim
more for the popular/mainstream market -- I include
Connelly's work here -- often more obviously follows the
Chandler school than the Hammett school. I think the Review
aims more for the imagined NY mainstream than for whatever
else may exist in the crime field.
--Duane
-- # 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 : 07 Sep 2001 EDT