At 09:48 PM 16/08/2007, you wrote: Jim:
>Cloak-and-dagger has been regarded as a sub-genre
of
>crime fiction for almost as long as there's been
a
>separate distinct genre of fiction devoted to
crime.
>Going back to stories like Poe's "The
Purloined
>Letter," Conan Doyle's "The Naval Treaty,"
"The
>Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans, and "His
Last
>Bow," etc.
Much of the early spy work is about their guys spying here,
which I suppose might be a crime, if a special category. But
much of Le Carré ©s about our guys over there, so does that
still qualify as a crime novel?
>Gallimard's Serie Noire included lots of spy
stories
>on their list, including Cheyney's "Dark"
series.
>
>Standard references on noir invariably mention
spy
>fiction. For example, THE BIG BOOK OF NOIR
includes
>entire chapters on Donald Hamilton and THE
KREMLIN
>LETTER, and Silver & Ward's FILM NOIR includes
entries
>on BERLIN EXPRESS and THE HOUSE ON 92ND
STREET.
>
>So spy fiction is, by common consensus, regarded as
a
>sub-genre of crime fiction capable of being given
a
>noir treatment.
I'm kind of surprised you're willing to accept consensus on
this. I know we're talking a technicality here, but I'm
speculating on where this would go if the technicality is not
observed. If a romance was dark and sinister and/or
unrequited (doomed) but there was no crime depicted, would it
be noir if others said so? Or would it be a romance with a
noir(ish) theme?
Just asking, Kerry
------------------------------------------------------ The
evil men do lives after them http://www.murderoutthere.com
------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 17 Aug 2007 EDT