Dennis,
Re your comments below:
> In the first place, Jim, the fact that a
writer
> uses a plot, an old one at
> that, and it seems to be "borrowed" by
subsequent
> writers, doesn't make him
> influential. The plot could have come from
many
> more recent
> sources---Westerns, for example---as well as
ancient
> ones. The plot is not
> what makes a writer influential, the variations
he
> does on it, the ambience
> of the book, and the style do. Any influence
comes
> from how the writer goes
> about telling this plot. Hammett's influence
came
> from HOW he wrote, not
> what he wrote.
>
> A note on that: Slavish recreating of
Hammett's
> world, plots, society, and
> even dialogue and slang, by later writers is
pure
> imitation not influence.
I don't think we're that far apart here. It's quite true that
the reason Hammett is influential is not because of the plots
he used, per se, but because of the way he used them, his use
of language, of character, of milieu, etc.
Nevertheless, imitation, as you call it, is one way, arguably
the most obvious way, that influence manifests itself.
No one, for example, reading the last chapter of a PI novel
in which the hero discovers that the girl he's fallen in love
with is the villain, whom he then renounces and turns over to
the police (or, if he's Mike Hammer, shoots in the belly),
can fail, if he's familiar with Hammett, to see the seeds of
THE MALTESE FALCON in that scene. However,such a scene,
unless the author is able to give it a new spin, is, as you
would undoubtedly point out, mere imitation of the surface
details. That's still a form of influence, though.
Similarly, if, in a PI novel, the hero arrives in a corrupt,
gang-infested rural community, and craftily plays the rival
factions against each other so that, in effect, they clean
each other out of the community, that novel's debt to RED
HARVEST is just as evident.
Imitation may be the basest evidence of influence, but it's a
manifestation of influence nonetheless.
> Thank you much for the kind words about the
Jackson
> series by Willian Arden,
> and about A DARK POWER, and while I would like
to
> accept the comparison to
> Hammetts distant third in FALCON, my third
is
> nowhere near as rigorous as
> Hammett's---there isn't one moment when we are
privy
> to what Sam is thinking
> except through actions and dialogue. That is a
tour
> de force of writing,
> and I never came close. (Didn't really want to,
I'm
> not Hammett.)
You're dead right about that rigorously adhered-to
"camera/tape recorder" mode Hammett used. Few have managed
that same style as umcompromisingly. Perhaps Joe Gores in
INTERFACE. Maybe, to a degree, Donald Westlake in his
"Richard Stark" persona, but even Stark gets into Parker's
head now and then.
Still, the Jackson books, compared to the rest of your work,
particularly compared to the Fortune series, has a spare,
objective tone that's quite different. And Jackson himself,
less overtly concerned with doing right (though he's
presented as having a strict code of ethics and honor) than
Fortune, more concerned with doing his job in a professional
manner, is your most Hammett-like PI character.
JIM DOHERTY
Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes,
news and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
--------------------~--> Has someone you know been
affected by illness or disease? Network for Good is THE place
to support health awareness efforts!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/rkgkPB/UOnJAA/Zx0JAA/kqIolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
RARA-AVIS home page: http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rara-avis-l/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
rara-avis-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 08 May 2005 EDT