Patrick King wrote:
> Robert B. Parker's
> detectives are all in AA.
Are any of Robert B. Parker's detectives actually in
AA?
> Who wants a hero who's
> trying to work through his problems?
Evidently, readers. Judging by book sales, the shallow,
cartoon-like hero who shoots first and never asks questions
later seems to definitely be out of favor.
Except, of course, in movies and comics like SIN CITY which
most people seem to agree is pure parody; not meant to be
taken seriously at all.
> That's not what
> this type of story is about.
Really? Re-read Chandler, whom you cite down below. Or read
him for the first time if that's what it takes. The books
could certainly be read as the story of one man trying to
work through his problems -- namely, how can a decent, moral
man can live in the world we have without becoming part of
the nastiness himself; to go down those fabled mean streets
and remain neither tarnished nor afraid.
Much of "this type of story," as you call it, addresses this
very theme over and over, almost everyone from the Op on
down. If you're reading hard-boiled fiction solely for guys
shooting each other, you're missing out on much of the appeal
and rich depth of the genre.
> Mike Hammer can shoot
> better when he's drunk. Alcohol doesn't phase
James
> Bond. Phillip Marlow can be beaten to a pulp and
still
> bring the killer in.
Ah, yes, Marlowe as caveman. That's what his character is
known for.
> I heard a news program last night stirring up fear
and
> loathing as they proclaim, "the most violent
video
> game ever!" A violent video game is like
military
> intelligence or postal service, an oxymoron.
No
> violence was ever committed playing a video
game.
> Skateboarding is violent, not video games. Anyone
is
> much safer reading or gaming about violent
subjects
> than they are actually doing them. I think this is
the
> real difference between hard-boiled and noir. Noir
is
> cautionary and realistic. Hard-boiled throws
caution
> to the wind.
Actually, most hard-boiled heroes rarely throw caution to the
winds. Being hard-boiled is pretty much the opposite of that.
It's about being cool in the face of violence, and not losing
it. It's not the guy with the gun who's necessarily
hard-boiled; it's the guy who stands up to the guy with the
gun and doesn't flinch who's hard-boiled.
After all, it doesn't take much to act like a tough man when
you're holding a gun. Which is why so many confused young men
feel the need to get one, I guess. It's quicker than waiting
to grow up.
> In a hard-boiled story, the hero can do
> anything and always succeeds in the end.
You seem to be confusing hard-boiled literature with comic
books. Or possibly video games. Or Bruce Willis movies. Have
you actually read any of the books you cite? To claim that
the heroes in the hard- boiled genre always succeed in the
end is to grossly misread the massive amount of evidence at
hand.
> It seems to
> me, people NEED this type of entertainment as
a
> release for their normal impulses.
I'm not sure most people NEED to play Chainsawing Nuns or
whatever to curb their "normal" impulses -- and it apparently
doesn't work, anyway. If that were the case, young men (the
principal players of video games) would not be the most
violent segment of society. Or are you suggesting that we
need more video games that feature more violence?
And how on earth is skateboarding violent?
Unless of course some poor boarder, deprived of violent video
games, whacks some porky gamer over the head for his
Doritos.
Kevin
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 05 Nov 2007 EST