About 30 pages into W.L. Heath's VIOLENT SATURDAY I realized
that it reminded me of O'Hara's APPOINTMENT IN SAMARRA. They
both fit into the
"social history" slot. What does that mean? From what I can
tell, it means that beyond the plot the author is attempting
to accurately portray people and their surroundings in a
certain era. In the case of these two books, both authors
demonstrate a willingness to stray from the plot in order to
accomplish this goal. Although I found it refreshingly
different and entertaining, the style definitely diverges
from the more typical hardboiled insistence on following the
plot like a bloodhound's nose to the trail. Comparing the two
authors, I found Heath to be a sharper and more perceptive
observer than O'Hara. His depiction of poor old Elsie Cotter
and the hotel porter Sugar is pure gold. Heath is also better
than O'Hara at coloring and depth to the surroundings:
"They had been brought up in old homes, where there were
cherry corner cupboards and sugar chests, and crystal that
had come down the French Broad River and survived the Civil
War."
Along with the inevitable criticism that arises from
deviating from the plot, VIOLENT SATURDAY has more inner
monologues than any book I've read in a long time that's
written in the third person.
With all this said, although the book might meander a bit on
it's way to the end, it is a wild, savage ending well worth
the wait. A good and enjoyable book.
miker
-- # 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 : 17 Jan 2003 EST