Re: RARA-AVIS: Daniel Woodrell on "Noir"

From: Brian Thornton (
Date: 31 Jan 2009

  • Next message: jacquesdebierue: "Re: RARA-AVIS: L'Amour"

    Thank you, O Sage, O Woodrell, for finally shining the beacon of knowledge upon we poor, benighted masses.

    Authors defining "noir" is sort of like porn actors defining money shots. Either you do it, or you don't.



    On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Michael S. Chong <>wrote:

    > "I just brought noir back to town, man. Both sides of that story do
    > exist, the unbelievably generous and kind smalltown stuff happens two doors
    > down from the shotgun shack and the woman who sells her twelve year old
    > daughter for ten bucks a throw. I focused on the noir. Not to start a
    > fracas, but hardly anything in books or films that others call noir would
    > pass muster as noir by my indices----a saxophone, a blonde and an unfiltered
    > cigarette do not make a thing noir. Pure noir is a direct bastard child of
    > Greek Tragedy, a bastard child that was raised by the bunch that would have
    > it, that being gutterbound underbelly proseteers and their disciples. Such
    > novels are among the few places to encounter the POV of the underclass
    > expressed as if to other underclass folk-that is to say as truthfully as can
    > be. I am as proud to be considered related to them (I mean, Thompson, Cain,
    > Edward Anderson, Charles Williams, Kromer, James Ross, LeSieur, Goodis and
    > the
    > rest) as I am to any of the sanctified names."
    > From an interview posted at
    > Michael
    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 31 Jan 2009 EST