Dear Bill,
I agree with you. As a genre fan, I'm interested in finding
an author who delivers a reading experience that satisfies or
entrances me for whatever reasons. As a fan, I'm not
interested in a great work of art so much as in "a good
read." And I value writers who consistently deliver a good
read--however flawed their work. WARNING: I've learned from
my short time on RARA-AVIS that someone will raise the
question of what a "good read" is in a hard boiled genre. I'm
not interested in promoting more conversation about
categories and definitions.
And by the way Bill Denton, I think you are a master
moderator---but I don't think you can simply say "hey guys
stick to "hard boiled" as the topic of conversation. I do
think that discussions about the tools of analysis we share
to evaluate our responses to "hard boiled" works (or any work
of creation) are critical to insuring the quality of our
discussions.
Keith
billha@ionet.net wrote:
>
> I'm really less interested in rating particular
authors than the somewhat anti-
> academic proposition that FOR GENRE FANS (which we
are), a career of many not-
> quite-masterpieces may elevate an author as high (or
higher) as a career of 2-3
> masterpieces. Less interested in our standards for
masterpieces and choices,
> than how we apply them in choosing the authors we
like. What about it?
>
> Be interested in responses if I haven't fogged the
question too much.
>
-- # 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 : 27 Apr 2000 EDT