Whatever one thinks of Christie, there must be something for
all her books to continually be in print. There must be quite
a few authors who wish they had whatever she had. Perhaps its
the lack of graphic sex, violence and language that make us
here like her so much. Ian Rankine's comments were
interesting. He named five greats, then added that tomorrow
it could be a different five, and added that his influences
were not on the list. Anyway, I think the Times list has done
what it and all other best/greatest lists are meant to do.
Provide a basis for argument and show that the bottom line is
that's it is all very subjectiv.
John
John
--- In
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck" <chuckelp@...>
wrote:
>
> The Brits are a loyal bunch, don't you
know.
> <smile>
>
> --- In
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, Patrick King
<abrasax93@> wrote:
> >
> > Come on! Scott Turow & Sara Pretsky make
the cut but
> > Tony Hillerman doesn't. When in comes to
writing
> > plots, Hillerman can stand shoulder to shoulder
with
> > the best. He blows Turow & Pretsky out of
the park.
> >
> > Agatha Christie is number 3? For what? Selling
books?
> > She's one of the worst crime writers of all
time. Her
> > success is driven by the vast number of
undiscerning
> > readers in the world.
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 22 Apr 2008 EDT