RARA-AVIS: Re: Article in GQ

Kevin Smith (kvnsmith@colba.net)
Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:18:34 -0500 Ah, it's good someone else read it. I was giving up hope.

Mario wrote:

>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.

Boy, do I agree!
>
>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.
>
Although, even within the bounds of the "traditional" territory, there are
some interesting variations. Some of the non-"pale male" eyes (be it women,
Hispanics, blacks, gays, whatever) of the last few years have opened up the
genre to whole groups of people who only a few years ago would have never
read the stuff, and there's the politicized works of folks like Paretsky,
Greenleaf and Michael Collins, the historical stuff by Max Collins and
Philip Kerr, the unfolding lifestories of long-time series characters like
Nameless and Scudder. While staying within the boundaries of the
"traditional" P.I. novel, they've likewise upped the stakes. Not everyone
I've mentioned appeals to everyone, but they all contribute something to
the genre. Part of the problem is that there are so damn many of them now
that merley average novels end up looking worse than they are. Remember,
there's always been a lot of crap.
But I remain convinced that the best of today's P.I. stuff can stand
proudly alongside any era's.

As long as writers are willing to play with the form (look how well
Chandler did with it), the P.I. novel will continue. And within the P.I.
form, there's certainly still a lot of room to play.

And Michael wrote:
>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.

And realism is a red herring, anyway...it isn't what we're here for,
really. Like Loren Estleman is fond of saying, he's not in the realism
business, he's in the hero business.

Once again, that's the June issue of GQ, and an article by Terence
Rafferty. Find it and read it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin Smith
Web & Graphic Design
New e-mail address! mailto:colba.net

#
# 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/.