Bob V. wrote about Pelecanos' new book:
>So how's the book? I read Night Gardener a couple
weeks ago as an
>ARC, and it's damn good. There's much that's standard
Pelecanos:
>D.C. urban anthropology, music and pop culture
references (a
>Clapton album title is an actual plot point), the bad
in good
>people and the good in bad people, a big
Western-style shootout.
>There's also some new wrinkles, particularly a strong
domestic
>element and an uncommon ending. (No spoilers, but in
a month or so,
>I'll ask the list if anyone knows other stories that
use this type
>of ending.) If you're a Pelecanos fan, this book is a
must read. If
>you're a Pelecanos detractor (and I know there's some
on the list),
>you might want to give this one a shot.
This begs the question, Bob: if there is "much that's
standard Pelecanos" here, why should a "Pelecanos detractor"
(a club of which I am definitely a member) "want to give this
one a shot"?
I think it's a valid question. For my money, you can't rave
about someone about whom you are a self-described
non-objective fan, and then tell people who don't like his
work, "Hey, there's a lot of the stuff you didn't like in the
first place, but you really ought to try this book, because
you might like it. Even though I loved all of his other
books, and I unabashedly think this is awesome," if you'd
like to be taken seriously.
So let me ask: what did Pelecanos do well in this book that
he didn't do well (in your opinion) in others? This requires
a bit more objectivity on your part, and a concession that
Pelecanos has displayed some glaring weaknesses as a
writer.
Are his characters less cardboard cutouts? Does he stop
referring to the hero's jacket as "his leather"? (I always
looked for someone on a Harley when I read that) Are his plot
points less glaringly obvious (a la "Right As Rain" wherein
short hick drug mule with Little Man Complex, who wears
high-heeled cowboy boots, and who has built his own bar,
complete with the rail running along the bottom of said bar,
in which he will get his high-heeled boot caught during the
climatic gun battle with Quinn at the end of the book. Oh!
The heavy-handed, broadly telegraphed irony! I *SO* didn't
see *THAT* coming!)?
Seriously, if we who are "Pelecanos detractors" are to be
asked to reconsider his work, mightn't you, an unabashed
Pelecanos "stalker" address some of the things we found weak
in his earlier writing? It might call for you to be more
objective about the object of your literary man-crush, but
then again, it's the only way I would be convinced to spend
another nickel on anything by George P. ("The Wire" excepted.
I think his work on that series is exemplary. It's everything
that his writing is not. I'd be thrilled to watch anything
scripted by George P. Pelecanos. Can't explain the dichotomy,
but there you have it).
Brian Thornton
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 11 Aug 2006 EDT