._,___ Excellent post, Mark. Right in the heart of the
problem. :
"Mark wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if we don't lose something as
we become "experts" in our genre. As we read more and more in
the field, we inevitably become pickier, which is fine when
we are just talking about quality of writing. But do we also
start losing some of the simple enjoyment of being immersed
in a story as we simultaneously analyze it in the back of our
heads: Is this hardboiled? Noir? How does it relate to other
books in the field? Other books by this author? How does it
fit into the evolution in the field? I am still carried away
by books, but it doesn't seem to happen as deeply as
often."
-We all go through these phases due to the
enlarging of our reader experience, and it leads often to new
ideas, new angles. Not for the fun of being new, but elements
hidden behind multiple apparently unlinked knowledges may
suddenly be leading to a more complete way to see things in
literature. Absolute certainty (except for factual elements,
of course) about subjects that are all tinted with
subjectivity is pure delusion. We also must be ready to
evolve and to learn more, or at least to be open to it.
Otherwise we will finish as old hardheads, mumbling always
the same things about crime lit and its diversity.
And you're right:: too much readings, even if it
reinforces your analysis power, rises your expectations and
may kill the pleasure you could otherwise find in some
readings. Age could have the same effect. It's also therefore
that we can be almost sure that being carried away by some
books, even if I's happening more rarely than before, is a
sign that we face a work of exception… And if we continue it
is only because we still are hoping for it.
"Then again, we also pick up things a causal reader probably
wouldn't, homages, parodies, intertextual references, get
jokes a beginner might not. For instance, I mentioned
recently how I recognized a bunch of Chandler references in
Ted Lewis's Boldt, from a character named Florian to a club
called the Blue Dahlia. And in re-reading Sallis's
Long-Legged Fly, I picked up a passing joke I missed the
first time. Lew is looking at the names on some New Orleans
mailboxes and sees W. Percy and R. Queneau. I knew who Walker
Percy was the first time I read it, but I had never heard of
Raymond Queneau before, nor the literary movement he's
associated with, Oulipo (not that I've read him, but I did
recognize the name this time). "
-Yes, even decoding depends on experience,
cultural backgrounds etc.
In my case, French educated, I spotted
immediately the reference to Raymon Queneau, but missed the
Walker Percy one. My background is different…. Not
better.
PS: Maybe you will be interested to know that in
the OuLiPo association there is, since some years now (1973)
, a section called OuLiPoPo, wherein the last "Po" is for
"Polici貥", by ref to Litt鲡ture Polici貥 (crime lit in French;
"polici貥" being an adjective which derivates from the word
police - police : same meaning as in English ). Some French
noir contemporary authors refer themselves as inspired by
OuLiPo and/or "pataphysique", Amongst them: Franz Bartelt
(very black humor in farcical stories mixed with some cold
horror; a skilled stylist) - J-B Pouy, talented writer who
mixed unannounced Oulipo tricks in "some" of his novels, like
starting each chapter (26 total) by a different letter- in
alphabetical order, or things even more of the
surrealist/pataphysique orientation like publishing a book
written by an Austrain philosopher, announced as translated
by Pouy; in fact he invented the life and bibliogr of the
fake philosopher, and wrote the book in French
(but along humor and derision he wrote also deeply
moving noir stories).
E.Borgers
POLAR NOIR
http://www.geocities.com/polarnoir
---------------------------------
Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos
mails vers Yahoo! Mail
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 10 Jul 2007 EDT