Re: RARA-AVIS: Re: willie or not

From: Patrick King (
Date: 18 Dec 2006

Well, in my opinion, Ruth Rendell is the most realistic and insightful writer working in mystery/noir fiction. I can't think of another writer who gets as close to the bone, or has as clear a way of describing the insanity from which crime springs than Rendell has. The Veiled One is a great example of how a policeman changes the facts to suit his theory of a crime with desasterous results. The Bridesmaid and Lake of Darkness are brilliant descriptions of homocidal mania. One wonders how she understands the problem so vividly without being a maniac herself. I think she's about the best dead or alive.

Patrick King
--- Jacques Debierue <> wrote:

> --- In, Patrick King
> <abrasax93@...> wrote:
> >
> > Well, Jacques, we're different types of people. I
> only
> > enjoy reading while I'm assessing the work I read.
> I
> > don't find it difficult at all. There's no 'test,'
> and
> > I enjoy using my mind this way. I'm not sure I
> could
> > behave any other way. I agree with you that most
> books
> > suck, however. I do find it funny that you started
> out
> > calling me an elitist and now you dismiss
> academics,
> > who have actually taken the time to try to
> comprehend
> > in depth the work in which they're interests lie,
> as
> > not having the foggiest idea of how a good book
> comes
> > to be written.
> I did not dismiss academics (actually, I am one). I
> said that they don't have any idea of how
> a good book gets written... do you know of any that
> know or claim to know that? I did not
> say that academics (or others) cannot produce
> interesting analyses of literary works. They
> can. When the analysis is good, I enjoy it, even
> though I may disagree. A tale well spun is
> always worth reading, even if it is a tale about a
> tale.
> >I'm guessing you're of the
> > good-books-by-accident school of thought.
> No. I don't think good books happen by accident,
> though some are considered good (or
> bad) by hasty consideration, fashion, favors owed,
> etc., which are accidents of a sort.
> Some books even become best-sellers by accident,
> though in these days of manufacturing
> the consumer, that happens less often.
> >If that's
> > the case, though, how can Ruth Rendell and
> Frederick
> > Forsyth be so consistently good?
> I don't think those guys are very good. Good, yes,
> but not very good. Probably what you
> mean is that they're pros, that they know how to
> write. With that, I agree.
> >Different strokes for
> > different folks, Jacques. You may be right for
> you,
> > but you're not universally correct. Believe me on
> > this!
> Alas, I know...
> Best,
> MrT

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 18 Dec 2006 EST