Talk:History of crime fiction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Crime task force. (rated as Top importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a group devoted to the the study, and improvement of Wikipedia articles on the subject, of History. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

This article was created wholly out of material from crime fiction when that article was refactored. A short introduction was created in crime fiction to point here. :ChrisG 01:05, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Contents 1 First detective story 2 Paragraph "Crime fiction in history" needs work 3 Kickass article — but..... 4 Hard boiled section - tolerable essay, bad encyclopedia entry

[edit] First detective story

The Norwegian teacher and author Maurits Christopher Hansen (1794–1842) wrote a "criminal anecdote", Mordet paa Maskinbygger Roolfsen, as early as 1839. I haven't read it personally, but several Norwegian sources (like [1]) claim it's the first real crime fiction story. Methinks that should be mentioned in the article. –contrapuncti 13:00, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Paragraph "Crime fiction in history" needs work

IMHO the important introductory paragraph "Crime fiction in history" is misleading or simply wrong in several respects.

"It was only after 1900, that novels and stories depicting crime and its consequences came to be recognised as a distinct literary genre, and spawned specialist writers. The earlier novels and stories were typically devoid of systematic attempts at detection: There was no private detective, whether amateur or professional, trying to figure out how and by whom a particular crime was committed; there were no police trying to solve a case; neither was there any discussion of motives, alibis, or the modus operandi, or any of the other elements which make up the crime novels of subsequent ages."

(1) "No systematic attempts at detection" -- While I am no hardcore Holmesian, it seems to me that the work of Sherlock Holmes is strongly characterized by such attempts.

(2) "No private detectives in fiction before 1900" -- From Sherlock Holmes: "... made his first published appearance in 1887. ... Sherlock Holmes described himself as a "consulting detective", an expert who is brought into cases that have proven too difficult for other (typically official) investigators". -- Although the exact phrase "private detective" is not used here, Holmes perfectly fits the definition. http://www.bartleby.com/61/89/P0568900.html

(3) "No police trying to solve a case" -- The way in which the relationships between the police and Poe's C. Auguste Dupin (see entry on The Purloined Letter) and Sherlock Holmes ("Law enforcement officers with whom Holmes has worked include George Lestrade, Tobias Gregson, Stanley Hopkins, and Athelney Jones, all four of Scotland Yard, and Francois Le Villard of the French police. Holmes usually baffles the police with his far more efficient and effective methods, showing himself to be a vastly superior detective.") vary between cooperation and competition are an important underpinning of these earlier stories.

(4) "neither was there any discussion of motives, alibis, or the modus operandi " -- I believe that such discussion is frequently found in the Sherlock Holmes stories, while on the other hand Raymond Chandler's uber-hard-boiled detective Philip Marlowe makes a point of emphasizing that many crimes have no discernable "MO" (in the sense of "long-term pattern of behavior"), but are random acts of passion or even simply inexplicable from a rational point of view.

[edit] Kickass article — but.....

This is a comprehensive and fairly thorough history of the development of Crime Fiction and its subgenres, and I have found it hugely helpful. Two things detract from the otherwise impeccable professionalism of the article:

-No conclusion: no summary, no wrapup, nothin. It just - stops. It's decidedly unsatisfying and makes it look as though the author got bored and quit.

-The personal language/bias: You mentioned Donna Leon in the last paragraph, about Police Investigation themes. You then disqualify her from this category and call her works boring as batshit and imply you cant possibly fathom why the Germans find her so popular. If you think she's terrible, pick a better example. Random isnt always best. I suggest you pick something that elucidates your points.

I'm hardly qualified to either offer a better alternative or add a conclusion, though, so if anyone who knows their subject matter notices this, it'd be a great help. This page is frequented by extension English students Australia-wide. There's about twenty thousand of us a year, so rest assured your work will be avidly plagiarized.

[edit] Hard boiled section - tolerable essay, bad encyclopedia entry

The hard boiled section is written with enthusiasm and interest, but it's a bit sophomoric and off-target in places. There's rambling bits and some real puzzlers (a half paragraph on The Jungle and the lack of safety measures in the meat-packing industry, with a toss-off reference to Bovine spongiform encephalopathy?) that bloat the entry.

The bulleted list that starts off the section read like a how-to list and the breezy use of absolutes like "always wears a gun", "invariably asks for a downpayment", "turns out to be a heavy drinker"--true nine times out of ten, maybe, but not incontrovertible truths about the genre--really take the legitimacy of the article down several notches.

The quotes are good and, as I said, there's a lot of energy behind the entry. But it reads more like an essay or term paper to me than an overview of the hard boiled genre.

70.174.133.17 15:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)