"Instead what we get far too often is the pornography of
violence, nothing more, nothing less."
Kevin, you say that like it's a bad thing.
Actually, joking aside, I agree with you. While I have
nothing against violence in a book, even enjoy it when it is
used well -- for instance, decades later, I still remember
very vividly the death of the Lieutenant in Naked and the
Dead; or in Derek Raymond's books -- far too often it is
overblown and gratuitous. That's why I tossed aside Rex
Miller's Slob both times I tried to read it; the extreme
violence against women wasn't shocking, just boring (and how
can Harlan Ellison possibly rationalize his endorsement of
Miller after his public railing against DePalma's similar
aesthetic?).
Often, the threat of violence can be far more effective.
Wasn't it Poe who suggested that the reader's imagination can
fill out a far more terrifying picture than any author can
write? And Hitchcock who said it was the anticipation that
created suspense, not the explosion?
Mark
-- # Plain ASCII text only, please. Anything else won't show up. # 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 : 01 Sep 2003 EDT