In a message dated 12/2/03 4:20:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
miker writes:
Chandler made the PI more human. He borrowed the
angst-ridden hero
from Hemingway and applied it to hardboiled. Readers
absolutely love
their protagonists struggling against those inner
demons. Hammett's
Con Op was just too tough to be convincing, and when
Hammett tried to
make him more touchy-feely, like in THE DAIN CURSE, the
results were
less than satisfying.
As Jim Doherty has mentioned, Chandler set a new
standard for the PI,
and that standard still stands today.
miker
>>
Actually, I find the Continental Op with his matter-a-fact
toughness to be far more convincing than Philip Marlowe.
Don't get me wrong, I love Chandler's romantic vision of the
knight going down mean streets but I don't view that stylized
world and character as more convincing. The best Op isn't to
be found in the novels. Read the short stories and
novelettes.
I do agree with Jim Doherty's opinion that Chandler has been
the more influential--which is most certainly not to say I
judge him as the superior writer.
On a separate note: Patrick Anderson reviewed Mickey
Spillane's SOMETHING'S DOWN THERE in Monday's Washington
Post. He went on at great length about being a Spillane fan
from his youth and then, regretfully, panned the new novel.
What I found unusual, and objectionable, is that he gave away
the endings of both I, THE JURY and VENGEANCE IS MINE in the
course of the review. Then after his pan of the new novel, he
urged readers to search for tattered copies of the two
earlier novels. The same novels he just tattled the endings.
I think that's a bit odd.
Richard Moore
-- # Plain ASCII text only, please. Anything else won't show up. # 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 : 02 Dec 2003 EST