Re: RARA-AVIS: Article in GQ

michael david sharp (msharp@umich.edu)
Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:47:19 -0400 (EDT) As pop lit crit goes, Rafferty's article is pretty good. I didn't agree w/
everything he wrote, but he clearly reads this stuff (hardboiled/pi
fiction) voraciously and writes about it passionately. I think he *says*
that Chandler said that the ideal p.i. isn't necessarily "realistic," but
it is at least possible/plausible. Rafferty was arguing that Chandler's
assertion, for a variety of reasons, no longer holds true, and that all
the current pi's (or many, anyways), seem like tired relics, representing
more nostalgia than actual connection to contemporary concerns. The
article is short and well-written and likely to provoke response.
Recommended. Michael

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael D. Sharp Email: msharp@umich.edu
Department of English Lang. and Lit. Phone: (313) 761-8776
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Fax: (313) 763-3128

On Wed, 3 Jun 1998, Mario Taboada wrote:

> Kevin Smith on Rafferty:
>
> <<It's a pretty good article, with enough meat in it to spark a
> half-dozen or so threads in this list, not the least of which is the
> assertion that today's private eyes "feel like nostalgic diehards, worn
> down by the strain of keeping the Chandler faith alive...as a compelling
> myth, the private eye is history.">>
>
> Good article. While I agree that many private-eye novels and even entire
> series sound a bit tired (in some cases, were born tired), there are
> always exceptions.
>
> As to how believable a quixotic P.I. is in our day, I would argue that
> Chandler's Marlowe wasn't exactly believable in the forties and fifties
> either. It's the quality of the writing and the characters that draw the
> reader - I take it for granted that there is an automatic suspension of
> disbelief when the author really delivers a good story.
>
> It's also interesting to notice how certain gifted authors have
> circumvented the limitations of the P.I. as hero. Mosley, making Rawlins
> a regular guy who gets into messes; Burke, by having Robicheaux be a
> very peculiar sort of cop; Ellroy, by pushing the procedural in
> interesting (even crazy) directions; Sallis, by making the crime and
> investigation subsidiary to an existentialist drama; Gores, by adopting
> the techniques of the procedural while nominally adhering to the P.I.
> formula, and so on. These guys succeed because of unusual ingenuity and
> talent, but many others who still plow the traditional P.I. territory
> often produce pale, tired, cliche-ridden works that only contribute to
> sinking the formula further.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mario Taboada
> #
> # To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to majordomo@icomm.ca.
> # The web pages for the list are at http://www.vex.net/~buff/rara-avis/.
>

#
# To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to majordomo@icomm.ca.
# The web pages for the list are at http://www.vex.net/~buff/rara-avis/.