In a message dated 2/10/00 11:04:58 AM Pacific Standard Time,
greg@swans.org writes:
<< The only point I disagree with is NOT reducing it to
formula. You're far too kind. Most pulp writing was exactly
that: formula, often imposed by the editor. >>
The formula as I see it was fast-paced action in very short
bursts. Short sentences, short paragraphs, short chapters,
etc. All leading up to a climax, often violent. They worked
fast and in a stream of consciousness way, though. And this
formula allowed them to inject a great deal of themselves,
personally. I believe we all think in sentence fragments, and
this is one way I can tell, when browsing in the Salvation
Army, if a book is hard-boiled or not. Are the sentences
grammatically correct, or are they the way people think? (And
is there a seminude twist and/or a guy with a heater on the
cover?) I feel I can tell a lot more about a pulp writer than
a writer of
"literature." So yes, it's a formula. But it brought out a
great deal in the writer, in terms of how they feel about the
human animal, etc.
-- # To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to majordomo@icomm.ca. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 10 Feb 2000 EST