I would like to make an apology on this list for any
perceived slight to Ken Bruen. That was not my intention. I
misspoke. The point I was trying to make and will make here
is that I feel the connection between Ken Bruen, a fine
writer from an older generation, and this new group of
younger writers is important to note. The word "Mentor" would
have been more appropriate. However, there is another
interesting side to this relationship. Ken has been able to
recognize the freshness and potential of these new writers
where few others in the mystery writing establishment have
done so. Others who come to mind that have played this
mentoring role are Lee Child (particularly in helping
Cornelia Read) and Gary Phillips (in relation to "street
lit").
Tim
P.S. If I really work on this misspeaking perhaps I can run
for President.
On Feb 7, 2007, at 9:52 AM, Donna wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Brian said:
> >
> > Megan Abbott, Con Lehane, Edward Wright, and
Cornelia Read. If these
> > folks are a cross-section of the faces of
hard-boiled/noir writing
> > today, the genre and its legacy are in good
hands.
>
> Oh, how very well said. I discovered Con Lehane's
books a few years
> ago
> and have loved them ever since. I recently read
Megan Abbott's first,
> DIE A LITTLE, and it blew me away. I bought the
second one at LCC
> and if
> it's anywhere near as good as the first, she will
become one of my top
> 10 authors. I really loved DIE A LITTLE and haven't
stopped raving
> about
> it since. Cornelia Read and Edward Wright impressed
me on the panel
> so I
> went and bought their books. For me, the four
authors made that panel.
>
> And I agree there were some excellent,
straightforward questions from
> the audience which the 4 answered entertainingly and
with aplomb.
> > Not least of these was a reference that I can
only assume was
> > intended to be a joking one by Mr. Wohlforth to
Ken Bruen, a writer
> > referenced frequently (and positively) on this
list. ... I wasn't
> the
> > only one in the audience who took it that
way.
> >
>
> I also felt the same. I presume it was meant to be a
joke, but it
> didn't
> come across that way, and I felt it was insulting to
Ken - who not
> only
> happens to be a wonderful writer who deserves all
the accoldes he gets
> and more, but who is also a charming, funny, and
generous man who is a
> good friend. I'm sure he would not have been upset
if he were
> there, but
> I was upset on his behalf. If it WAS a joke, then it
wasn't a very
> funny
> one.
>
> > Unfortunately, that is not the role of the
moderator, at least
> not as
> > I understand it. In fact, he's supposed to be
there to keep that
> sort
> > of thing from getting out of hand.
>
> The panels which work best are those where the
moderator can fade into
> the background and have the focus be on the
panelists. It's nice at
> conventions if everyone who is a moderator also gets
a chance to
> actually be on a panel. That's when they should talk
about
> themselves. I
> love a good moderator who can bring out all the
panelists, who has
> read
> some of the work of each of them, can make the
questions relevant and
> give those panelists a chance to shine.
>
> Donna
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 07 Feb 2007 EST