Aw hell, I gotta stand up for Daly a little.
His short stories are much more enjoyable than his novels. He gets to focus on the action and violence and tough-guy dialogue without worrying about sustaining much of a plot. His prose is mallet-like and his plots absurd, but in the short form this doesn't get in the way of an amusing payoff of hardboiled entertainment.
Just my two-cents, adjusted for inflation since the days of Black Mask.
John
________________________________
From: jacquesdebierue <jacquesdebierue@yahoo.com>
To: rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 5:35:49 PM
Subject: RARA-AVIS: Re: W.R. Burnett
--- In rara-avis-l@ yahoogroups. com, "Allan Guthrie" <allan@...> wrote:
>
> Just to stand up for Burnett in case anyone who hasn't read him thinks it's
> not worth the effort: DARK HAZARD is a superb novel. One of my all-time
> favourites in the genre. The two Dalys I've read were so bad I almost lost
> the will to live. These two writers are poles apart, in my admittedly warped
> opinion.
>
Yes, no comparison whatever. Burnett was generally good, whereas Daly was almost always bad. No, he was always bad, period. I do think Burnett got careless in his later career. Little Caesar remains a formidable novel.
Best,
mrt
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 18 Mar 2010 EDT