Seems to me whether a book is from a feminine or masculine
point of view, if there is such a thing, is immaterial. What
I want to read is a good book with believable characters
involved in interesting situations. I don't even really care
whether it is officially "hard-boiled" or "cozy." I read some
of both, but more of the former.
My contribution to the gender discussion is that sure, maybe
in the best of all possible worlds there is no essential
difference psychologically between men and women (or maybe
not, the jury is still out on that one, I think), but we
don't live in the best of all possible worlds and those of us
who inhabit this world are affected in some way by our
gender, whether because we have bought into the stereotypes
to a greater or lesser degree or because we are reacting
against them.
Personally, I wish we'd get back to talking about books. I
just finished Pelecanos' Shame the Devil, which moved him to
the top of my list of writers. Whether it was this book or
the accumulated history of the D.C. series, I'm not sure, but
I really have come to care about these people, who are
certainly as real to me as you guys are.
Now I get weepy easily with visual mediums: I cry at movies,
standing ovations (even for people I don't like), Hallmark
commercials and when they play "My Old Kentucky Home" on
Derby day. Gender-related? Don't know. But I very seldom cry
in books and almost never in mysteries. This one got to me.
It did what the best "hard-boiled" does, in my opinion:
appeals to a tender place inside us that rebels against the
unfairness of the world.
So is Shame the Devil the end of the Nick and the boys? Has
Pelecanos given any indication whether this might eventually
become a quintet instead of a quartet?
Teri
-- # 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 : 28 May 2000 EDT