Well, Dr. Centor (I guess it's "Dr.", right?), I don't think
I can comment on your "lumpers and splitters" analogy until
you tell me a little bit more about what a "splitter" does.
But as for your final questions:
--- Robert Centor <
rcentor@yahoo.com> wrote: I've just
> finished listening to the unabridged tape of
Loren
> Estleman's "A Smile
> of the Face of the Tiger". This book meets
my
> criteria. I offer Amos
> Walker as a classic example of the protagonist
that
> I favor. Is this
> hard-boiled?
I've only read one Amos Walker book, SUGARTOWN, and I
definitely consider that hardboiled. I didn't much care for
the book, but that doesn't make it any less hb.
Does defining hard-boiled help us find
> authors to read?
Well, it can. In my local library they have some reference
books entitled something like "I've Read This, Now What?"
which tries to make associations between authors: "If you
like Loren Estleman you might also like x, y, z." I think the
process of definition can be a more slightly highbrow version
of the same thing.
> What purpose does the definition of that
genre
> serve?
Ah, one of those simple questions that have really
complicated answers. On some basic level, of course, all this
definition stuff doesn't have any purpose -- it's just a way
to pass the time. Occasionally I indulge myself here because
I enjoy doing it -- I like thinking about things like
this.
That said, I would also say this. Presumably if you're here
you care enough about hb fiction to want to talk about it,
discuss it, etc. -- and the process of definition can help
you do that, because it makes you more aware of what you like
out of the genre, what you value in it. I don't think there's
anything wrong with knowing that.
Also, I personally see cultural life as basically the
establishment and working through of traditions. When I take
my crack at defining "hb", I'm taking my crack at describing
an existing tradition that I like and value. To my way of
thinking, a tradition is vital when new writers continue to
contribute to it, extend it further while retaining the heart
of what made it important. So for me, personally, the process
of defining hb is important because it enables me to see the
outlines of the tradition clearly, gives me a sense if things
are going well or badly, basically gives me a place to plant
my feet.
Unlike some others here, I don't fear that the hb approach is
in danger of becoming fossilized, a museum piece, etc. In
fact, I fear just the opposite -- I fear that the hb approach
is in danger of being vitiated, that too many writers who
aren't hb are going to pass as hb, and that the sense of what
is hb is going to get muddled. If that happens, we might get
our fair share of good books -- hell, statistics being what
they are, we probably will-- but I still think something
important will be lost.
doug
===== Doug Bassett
dj_bassett@yahoo.com
__________________________________________________ Do You
Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from
anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/
-- # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03 Sep 2000 EDT