In my introduction, a history of the thriller is maybe necessary -- if only in order to offset the negativity of my issues with noir. This discussion could revolve around Chesterton, Todorov, and Martin Rubin. Rereading Rubin just now I am seeing that he argues, following Chesterton's idea about the mythic within the detective story, that the nature of the thriller's urbanity is to redeem the mundane and banal elements of modern life, to revivify them. I'm not quite sure I agree with this though. Isn't this even maybe a bourgeois kind of neo-flaneur position? As in: "I'm so bored with the city that I need a thriller to help me imagine that there's something sublime in city life." I'm not sure how strict he is about this, but it neglects the epistemological bent of urban thriller narratives, the way the provide knowledge about the city. No?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment