Anthony Dauer wrote:
>All authors including (or especially including)
diarists or historians write
>even nonfiction from a subjective point of view ...
reporters report the
>reality of our daily existence with a subjective
slant based upon their own
>beliefs as well as their perspectives ... history is
his-story quite
>literally at times. Oh, there's undeniable facts of
course ... Lincoln is
>dead ...
Sure, I agree. But that still doesn't explain why hard-boiled
writing is considered more realistic than the cozies. That
world existed too, you know, and while most people were
unlikely to experience life in an English country vicarage, I
suspect the appeal of reading about it was at least in part
one of vicarious experience and admiration for those who did.
That, it seems to me, is what hard-boiled fiction depends on
too. In this respect it's rather like the protestant
reformation: if the cozies are the Catholic church, offering
liturgy in Latin and demanding heavy taxes, the American
hard-boiled writers, like Martin Luther, offered a translated
bible, and a liturgy people could understand. That doesn't
mean the contrivances went away, though, they just became
better presented for local conditions.
Cheers Chris
-- # 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 : 09 Sep 2000 EDT