Welcome to Writers Talkback. If you are a new user, your account will have to be approved manually to prevent spam. Please bear with us in the meantime
From the books section of the online Times, Ian Rankin has done the foreward to a Rough Guide to Crime. You can read his piece on: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/crime/article1971762.ece
Finally had time to read this properly, and even though it is very short it poses some questions.
This is a quote from the piece, I'd like to know if you agree or disagree.
From the Guardian 23rd June 07.
'Is there still something disreputable about it? I continue to find the crime novel the perfect vehicle for an unflinching discussion of contemporary issues. After all, the detective has an all-areas pass to every aspect of the contemporary urban scene, and this is a way for the crime writer to take the reader into forbidden territory; for instance, it was always my mission in the Rebus books to show people an Edinburgh that the tourist doesnt see. And crime fiction has always been good at articulating the fears that society has harboured at all moments of history such as the stranger who will casually take your life. Equally, the genre is able to deal with high moral purpose in quite as rigorous a fashion as did Dostoevsky in Crime and Punishment and Dickens in Bleak House.'
I agree with him. I think so many Crime Writers miss out on the chance to say something. I fell in love with Rebus in Fleshmarket Close, and that dealt with immigration. A subject only the strong hearted writer would attempt to open a debate about.
I agree that Crime of this calibre should be considered as literary.
Ian Rankin uses elements of Scottish Gothic (which he studied at Edinburgh University, and was doing a PhD on Muriel Spark when he wrote Knots and Crosses), and he is one of the Tartan Noir writers.
I agree too. I was very impressed with his arguments on that programme about Robert Louis Stevenson also.
Tartan Noir writers, who else is classed in this band Stirling?
Comments
This is a quote from the piece, I'd like to know if you agree or disagree.
From the Guardian 23rd June 07.
'Is there still something disreputable about it? I continue to find the crime novel the perfect vehicle for an unflinching discussion of contemporary issues. After all, the detective has an all-areas pass to every aspect of the contemporary urban scene, and this is a way for the crime writer to take the reader into forbidden territory; for instance, it was always my mission in the Rebus books to show people an Edinburgh that the tourist doesnt see. And crime fiction has always been good at articulating the fears that society has harboured at all moments of history such as the stranger who will casually take your life. Equally, the genre is able to deal with high moral purpose in quite as rigorous a fashion as did Dostoevsky in Crime and Punishment and Dickens in Bleak House.'
I agree that Crime of this calibre should be considered as literary.
Ian Rankin uses elements of Scottish Gothic (which he studied at Edinburgh University, and was doing a PhD on Muriel Spark when he wrote Knots and Crosses), and he is one of the Tartan Noir writers.
Tartan Noir writers, who else is classed in this band Stirling?