I don't think one can have a meaningful discussion of current
noir, or neonoir, without being specific: which authors,
which books. The only general thing that occurs to me is that
good books are invariable believable psychologically, they
have to be. This was noted by Twain and later by Chandler,
and probably by countless other writers and critics. I have
no particular interest in psychopaths, but in the right story
a psychopath can have a place. I do think these psychos have
been overdone. It is an easy way to allow things in a novel
that would not normally have a justification. The psycho did
it, he's a psycho, what do you expect!
A marvellous example of a psycho is Kent Harrington's _Dark
Ride_. The character is thoroughly explored, as is his
milieu, what made him, and the ending is beautifully ironic.
Elmore Leonard has also managed psychos with mastery. On the
other hand, when Ellroy, and later Connelly, started going
heavy on psychos, my interest in the work of these authors
died pretty quickly.
So it all depends on which authors, which books and which
psychos for what reason.
Best,
MrT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 02 Jul 2007 EDT