Quote:
Originally Posted by wyndslash
...i'm curious now  |
So was I.
It turns out I have the full five book set (Webscriptions!) so I read it last night. (It's even built like the old ACE Doubles! Two separate stories.)
It is *very* pulpish.
Tongue-in-cheek, mostly, and generally amusing.
A bit of a farce in parts, a bit serious in others. Much better written that even the "modern" pulps. (Mack Bolan, etc.)
Even if you have a sense of humor, it'll (intentionally) offend about 70% of the world population.
The darn thing holds together, though; fast-paced, breezy, amusing.
Not to be taken seriously but it would make a pretty fun action flick for Bruce Willis, except hardly anybody in hollywood would be amused by its "neanderthal conservative" narrative tone.
A bit of clarification: I doubt pulpish shoot'em ups is what these Esquire "men's fiction" ebooks are aiming for. The NYT report:
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.co...-mens-fiction/
has this quote:
Quote:
|
David Granger, the editor in chief of Esquire, said he has lamented the loss of space that magazines devoted to publishing fiction. The New Yorker is perhaps the most visible home for fiction in the magazine world, but many other magazines have cut back.
|
If their idea of a "visible" home for fiction is the NEW YORKER, I seriously doubt that pulpish fun is on their agenda. More likely what they mean is there is a shortage of fiction for well-bred, proper thinking, alfuent urban males (and those that would like to pass as such). And there is no question there is a shortage of such material in ebook form. Not sure there is much of a market for that kind of "men's fiction" but if there is one, it is very much underserved.
Whatever they think they're doing, I'm pretty sure they'll never be putting anything half as over-the-top as Ringo's GHOST. They'll never get past the first page...