Re: The Big Five. Was The Big Six. Was; AR's 'silly books' ?


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Previous # Next ] [ Start New Thread ] [ TarBoard ]

Posted by Peter H on March 11, 2009 at 20:09:05 user Peter_H.

In Reply to: Re: The Big Five. Was The Big Six. Was; AR's 'silly books' ? posted by andyb on March 11, 2009 at 10:30:43:

I can see what Andyb is getting at. The problem with ‘whodunnits’ is that once you’ve read them and found out whodunnit, re-reading is never quite the same. The really classic detection stories are written so that the detective process itself is the main fascination, so that they can be re-read with pleasure. The Sherlock Holmes stories are a good example (for many). It doesn’t matter who did the crime, it’s the pleasure of following Holmes through very strange paths to get there. Personally, I think the detective process in BS does have a fascination, and I can re-read it. But I have to admit that BS is nowhere near my favourite AR book. It is rather obvious right from the start that George Owdon 'dunnit', and the ‘closing in’ process does not always maintain tension (IMO). So we rely on the charm of characters like Dorothea and the cheerfulness and stoicism of the D&Gs, and this works for me.


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
Eel-Mail:

Existing subject (please edit appropriately) :

or is it time to start a New Thread?

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

post direct to TarBoard test post first

Before posting it is necessary to be a registered user.


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TarBoard ]