I'd add self-reliant without getting rid of self-confident.
To go back to a previous assertion that characters have
questioned what they were doing, what comes to mind is a guy
out on the front line in the trenches in WWI or WWII. Scared
shitless and yet when the grenade comes hurtling over the
side, he jumps on it save his buddies. His buddies know he
was scared shitless, but how do they refer to him after his
sacrifice? Courageous and fearless. I see the same thing with
the hardboiled character, for all the questions amount to is
showing the character as not being arrogant. Self-confidence
would never come off as such if the character didn't question
their path, they'd come off as being arrogant instead. Once
the path rings true as it often does in fiction versus
real-life, the questions no longer matter and their
stict-to-itness become confidence. That's how I filet
anyway.
-- Anthony Dauer Alexandria, Virginia
2nd Annual Country Noir Issue ...
http://www.adau.net/judas_ezine/
... submit by 4 May 2002
-----Original Message----- From: George Upper Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 4:26 PM
That said, however, I think self-confident is the wrong phrase. Self-reliant is better. Jim D. could make a good argument that this is part of being tough, but I'm not sure I'd agree. It's one kind of tough, maybe, but I'm not sure one can be hard-boiled without being self-reliant.
-- # 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 : 01 May 2002 EDT