Gerald wrote:
"Bottom line about this teacher-student thing: Yes, Parker
was inspired and influenced by Chandler, but he took Spenser
in his own direction. In fact, I don't see them in
competition. I see Parker telling his own stories just as
Healy, Crais, and Lehane do."
Like many (most?) artists, Parker wore his influences on his
sleeve in his early work. But of course he stepped out of the
shadow. He's no Chandler Jr. (I want to say, even when he
wants to be, but I've gotta admit I haven't read Poodle
Springs or the other, so I can't really say). Even in his
first, Godwulf, with its many Chandlerisms, Parker was
already showing he was his own man.
"I prefer to judge whether authors perform to their own
potential. By his last two books, Chandler wasn't."
Now wait a minute, your argument in favor of Parker is that
if you cut off his output at a certain point, he's great.
However, your argument against Chandler is that if you look
at all of his books, he went downhill. Although I disagree
where that cutoff should take place (as I did with Parker,
cutting him off earlier), why doesn't Chandler also get
measured only by the books written before the dropoff?
Mark
-- # 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 : 19 Nov 2001 EST