Personally, I agree with you completely. I don't think
Hammett, Chandler, Cain, Thompson, Gardner, Charteris,
Spillaine, Fleming or any of the golden agers would have
improved any of their work by pushing it into a 300 page
format. But try to tell that to a current day agent or
publisher. They won't even read a 150 page book without
telling you to make it twice as long. I think it hurts the
level of writing in modern detective and noir fiction.
Eveything's padded. Editors do next to nothing, now. The game
is about selling readers a whole bunch of paper for their $8
paperback or $30 hardcover. It's not about the quality of the
writing, it's about the weight of the volume! I'd love to see
a return to a $2.00 paperback book. Don't tell me no one can
make money doing that. But no publisher is willing to try it.
The game is what it is and only a wild industrial left turn
is going to change it. Frankly, I'm a writer, not a
publisher. We all just have to play the hand we're delt until
we're in some sort of position to make a difference.
Here's to the book you can read through on a 2 hour
flight!
Patrick King
---
scatalogic@aol.com wrote:
> I may well be alone in this but novels (and
don't
> get me started on films)
> ARE OFTEN TOO FECKING LONG. Grrrrr. Not
enough
> brevity - particularly in
> hardboiled - a style that surely should be
condensed
> to a gooey slick on the
> bottom of the literary pan. I like a good short
un!
> Publishers, oi, stop it!
>
> Sorry, off my chest now.
>
> Join my Church:
> www.myspace.com/thereverendspadgedooley
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have
been
> removed]
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers,
not web links.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 11 Oct 2007 EDT