Re: RARA-AVIS: Re: talking tough

Date: 02 Jun 2009

  • Next message: Patrick King: "Re: RARA-AVIS: Re: talking tough"

    Dave, man, TRY picking up? Another case of books overfat with filler? Know what you mean though, but isn't that what noir is about--the "doomed" thing. Aren't we defeated by our own foolishness, by our illusions and sometimes, our allusions? It's not really noir if it's only "them" that's fucked, am I right?

    What's with this neo-noir thing BTW? Have we agreed that noir itself is dead? I'm not fighting it. Pretty much thought No Country for Old Men summed it all up, myself. Put the old genre out of her misery, that did. After Stansberry called for defib, stat, have we agreed the nurses left the room? Cutbacks in the budget, probably. I'm just poking the corpse, unaccustomed as I am to crossing the line into concensus.

    Redemption at last? Kerry

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: davezeltserman
      Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 12:34 PM
      Subject: RARA-AVIS: Re: talking tough

      --- In, Kevin Burton Smith <kvnsmith@...> wrote:
    > One of the problems some neo-noir writers seem to have is this
    > patronizing theme that being working class or unemployed means having
    > no class. Being unemployed doesn't necessarily automatically make you
    > start saying "Fuck" every two words, or suddenly want to take a belt
    > sander to your wife.

      You hit exactly on what bothers me with so many of the neo-noir books I try picking up. That, and also just really dumb, bad behavior to advance the plot.



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

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 02 Jun 2009 EDT