RARA-AVIS: Re: The Dark Night. No, the Noir Knight. No, the Black Knight. Oh, g

From: JIM DOHERTY (jimdohertyjr@yahoo.com)
Date: 27 Jul 2008

  • Next message: JIM DOHERTY: "RARA-AVIS: Re:The Dark Night. No, the Noir Knight. No, the Black Knight. Oh, good"


    Re your comment below"

    "I agree with you about [SIN CITY] not being noir. I'd call it instead hardboiled pulp with noir archetypes."

    What the hell does THAT mean? And, for that matter, how can something be replete with noir archetypes, and yet not be noir?

    Oh, I bet I know. "It has a dark, sinister atmosphere, but if I admit that's the defining element of noir, I'll be agreeing with Jim, so I'll just weasle out by referring to 'noir archetypes that are somehow not noir in themselves' and hope nobody calls me on it."

    I'd also take issue with Kevin's implication that, if it's not any good, or at least not very profound, it's not noir.

    Noir isn't a guarantee of either quality or depth. It's just a style for telling a crime story. Sometimes the style is used well. Sometimes it is used to suggest some meaningful theme.

    And sometimes it's neither very good nor very meaningful.

    As with anything else, quality and depth must be determined on a case-by-case basis.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 27 Jul 2008 EDT