Well put, Jack. Which is why I'm far more interested in the internal verisimilitude of a novel than its external realism.
On a similar note, didn't Chandler write in one of his letters that he cold have easily broken down a hardboiled novel in much the same way he tore apart Milne's Red House Mystery?
Mark
> To: rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com
> From: buildsnburns@yahoo.com
> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 07:12:26 -0700
> Subject: RARA-AVIS: Implausible?
>
> When we are honest with ourselves, more than half of all mystery novels are implausible, and that's generous, and about 90% of TV mysteries are contrived.
>
> True crime is always enhanced, sometimes to make it seem more plausible, sometimes to streamline, and sometimes to tell a story that is not much of a story from a dramatic point of view.
>
> The implausibility in fiction or non-fiction comes in various aspects: plot, character, motivation, execution, and solution.
>
> A giant of a man forces Marlowe to go with him to a club? Why?
>
> Marlowe takes someone who is little more than an acquaintance to Tijuana? Why? (The movie was far more convincing in the why area.)
>
> People jumping up to courtroom confessions? Nah.
>
> My deceased father-in-law used to say, if someone didn't do something lame-brained stupid in the beginning, there would be no story.
>
> Why pick on Chandler or Christie or any of them. We suspend our disbelieve when we start to read. We try to make it plausible when we try to write.
>
> Maybe all fiction, mystery or not, is implausible, but we love it all the same.
>
> Jack Bludis
>
> "Shadow of the Dahlia," a Shamus finalist novel at Amazon.com
> and barnesandnoble.com new trade Paperback and downloads.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> 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 : 15 Oct 2010 EDT