RARA-AVIS: Re: are authors the best judge of their work?

From: trentrey (trent@violentworldofparker.com)
Date: 28 Nov 2009

  • Next message: Steve Gerlach: "Re: RARA-AVIS: Harlequin"

    A couple of comments about previous comments.

    Harlequin _brags_ about censoring their crime books here. They were going to be on my Christmas list. They have been struck:


    I'm astonished Ellroy said what he said about The Cold Six Thousand. I liked it on first read (after adjusting to the style) and on a second read concluded that it was almost the equal of American Tabloid, which is about as high a praise as I can give a novel. It's much better than Blood's a Rover.

    I'm against editing already-printed books, but I think very minor exceptions can be made. In The Cold Six Thousand, a character chews Nicorette gum a couple of decades before it hit the market. Removing that one word in the reprint would have eliminated a jarring anachronism. So I guess I'm not a purist.

    Mr. Ardai: If I recall correctly, you edit some of your reprints (I seem to remember you asking Donald Westlake to make changes to Somebody Owes Me Money). Do recall correctly, and if I do, what do you use as a basis for those decisions?

    If you think it will cause a shitstorm on this message board, feel free not to answer. ;)

    --Trent The Violent World of Parker

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 28 Nov 2009 EST