Dear Bob,
A brilliant critic can show us why a work is a great work of
art. Public acclaim can over time lead us and
critics/academia to re-evaluate why a work endures in
popularity.
In the end, I believe that all we can do as individuals is
use our own judgment--based on our interests, experience,
sensibilities, and so on. To my mind there is an additional
frame that complicates this whole process of judgment. Some
"masterpieces" are the highest examples of a work of art
within a tradition. Other masterpieces are sui generis, or
break with tradition. Moby Dick, in American literature,
really had no predecessor form. this made it less accessible
and acceptable than the greatly popular travel works like
Omoo and Typee which made Melville a celebrity.
Actually, i think it is more interesting, and probably less
difficult to address the problem of "What is a classic?" When
we try to define a classic, there is already an implication
that the mold or category has been accepted. A classic
represents some historical lineage. A tradition. It connected
with the past. It has a time frame. A masterpiece may be a
classic, But a masterpiece is not necessarily a classic--and
often breaks new ground. Picasso, Joyce, Miles Davis,
Melville's Moby Dick....some of their greatest masterpieces
are not classics because they stand outside a tradition, and
although they may have left influences on the continuing
development of traditional art, their great works are beyond
creating a new tradition.
In my opinion, Carroll John Daly single-handedly invented the
first person, tough guy, vernacular avenging private eye with
violence exploding at every turn. Spillane said that Daly and
Race Williams (along with comic books) were his greatest
influence.
But Hammett wrote the masterpieces. And Chandler used
language in the tough guy form so wonderfully, that his often
lyrical first person narrator can be read again and again
just to have that marvelously inventive voice in your
ear.
Hammett's work does not resonate with lyrical imagery. His
third person narration in the Maltese Falcon is a cypher in
comparison to the wonderful plot, and the magnificent
dialogue.
I think Chandler wrote terrible plots, but whether in first
or third person, his narrative voice--at least for me--is
where all the pleasure and the masterwork lies.
Race Williams and Three-Gun Terry by C. J. Daly were sui
generis acts of creation that created a mold. The hard boiled
detective is born fully developed in Daly's work--a
vigilante, hard drinking, tough talking, criminal slang,
mafia intrigue, violence at every turn. A great
accomplishment. In this sense they are classics. But I would
not call any of his works "a masterpiece."
Keith
Bob Toomey wrote:
>
> Keith argues the point and then:
>
> > And what is the value of Public acclaim in the
standards by which we judge a
> > work of art?
>
> Leaving us where? If neither critical nor public
acclaim count in
> identifying masterpieces, how is the determination
made?
-- # 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 : 26 Apr 2000 EDT