although i agree with you, i will disagree anyway.
i firmly believe that a hard-boiled character can (or cannot) exist in a non hard-boiled book. and the phrase 'hard-boiled' can be replaced in the previous sentence with 'noir', etc.
likewise, a non hard-boiled character can (or can not) exist in a hard-boiled book. and you can replace, etc.
morality can be immoral (though not amoral). right can be wrong (and usually is).
--- On Sat, 9/19/09, JIM DOHERTY <email@example.com> wrote:
From: JIM DOHERTY <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: RARA-AVIS: Re: good news/terrible news
Date: Saturday, September 19, 2009, 8:57 AM
"but that's no fun. and certainly not hard-boiled. in fact it's absolutely cozy."
While being hard-boiled (or noir for that matter) characters not necessarily moral, neither are they inherently immoral.
The determining factor in hard-boiledness is certainly not morality or else a character like Chandler's Marlowe, forever agonizing over doing the right thing, or Hammett's Spade, resisting an almost overwhelming sexual temptation in order to turn in the killer of a partner he didn't even like, would never qualify as hard-boiled, let alone characters who wear the compasson on their sleeve like Macdonald's Archer, Thomas B. Dewey's Mac, or Pronzini's "Bill."
Of course this has nothing to do with keeping the Philly Library open.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
RARA-AVIS home page: http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 19 Sep 2009 EDT