From: Harry Joseph Lerner (
Date: 26 Nov 2009

  • Next message: Mark Sullivan: "RE: RARA-AVIS: Re: are authors the best judge of their work?"

    Hello All,

    In an attempt to tie together two current threads (padding & revising), at least in my own mind, I pose the following question re: JDM...

    I recently read ALL THESE CONDEMNED and though not a hefty tome by any standard, JDM does spend at least as much time on each character's background as on the main event of the story. There is a fine line between effective character development and distracting diatribe. Anyone have an opinion about ALL THESE CONDEMNED re: JDM's success or failure at walking this line? Even though it is less than 200 pages, is it 'padded' and thus could have used some 'revising', or did JDM pull off somehting of a literary tightrope-walking act?

    Best, Harry
    ________________________________________ From: [] On Behalf Of Bill Crider [] Sent: November 26, 2009 10:28 AM To: Subject: RARA-AVIS: JDM

    I'm with Walker Martin on JDM's revisions in THE GOOD OLD STUFF and MORE GOOD OLD STUFF. I wish he'd left the stories as they were originally published. Maybe not everybody remembers Primo Carnera, but they could look him up. It's like revising Hemingway. I can see it now. "The Gambler, the Nun, and the iPod."

    JDM had two novels that he wasn't thrilled with. WEEP FOR ME was reprinted once, but never again. The novelization of I COULD GO ON SINGING was never reprinted.

    Bill Crider

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


    RARA-AVIS home page: Yahoo! Groups Links

    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

    <*> Your email settings:
        Individual Email | Traditional

    <*> To change settings online go to:
        (Yahoo! ID required)

    <*> To change settings via email:

    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 26 Nov 2009 EST