Aw hell, I gotta stand up for Daly a little.
His short stories are much more enjoyable than his novels. He gets to focus on the action and violence and tough-guy dialogue without worrying about sustaining much of a plot. His prose is mallet-like and his plots absurd, but in the short form this doesn't get in the way of an amusing payoff of hardboiled entertainment.
Just my two-cents, adjusted for inflation since the days of Black Mask.
From: jacquesdebierue <email@example.com>
Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 5:35:49 PM
Subject: RARA-AVIS: Re: W.R. Burnett
--- In rara-avis-l@ yahoogroups. com, "Allan Guthrie" <allan@...> wrote:
> Just to stand up for Burnett in case anyone who hasn't read him thinks it's
> not worth the effort: DARK HAZARD is a superb novel. One of my all-time
> favourites in the genre. The two Dalys I've read were so bad I almost lost
> the will to live. These two writers are poles apart, in my admittedly warped
Yes, no comparison whatever. Burnett was generally good, whereas Daly was almost always bad. No, he was always bad, period. I do think Burnett got careless in his later career. Little Caesar remains a formidable novel.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 18 Mar 2010 EDT