But one observation is relevant. We have compared Anderson's sf with that of Wells, Heinlein etc and, less frequently but no less validly, we have also compared Anderson's works of fantasy based on Norse mythology with those of JRR Tolkien whereas, if Anderson had stayed with detective fiction and had not become so prolific in those other genres, then we would at this stage only have been comparing him with Doyle, Christie etc and that would have been to our considerable loss!
In fact, Anderson's incorporation of Sherlock Holmes into his Time Patrol series is a worthier sequel to Conan Doyle's canon than any number of original detective novels by Anderson.
5 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I've been wondering why the mystery genre never quite appealed to you. Even if I am no longer as big a fan of mysteries as I once was, I still retain fond memories of the works of John Dickson Carr, Dorothy L. Sayers, and Robert van Gulik, to name three.
The trouble with that brief inclusion by Anderson of Sherlock Holmes in "Time Patrol" is precisely that: it was brief! We don't truly get to see Holmes and Dr. Watson working in that story. A fuller treatment of how Holmes affected Anderson's works can be found in such SF stories of his as "The Martian Crown Jewels" or even one of the Hoka stories co-authored with Gordon Dickson: "The Adventure of the Misplaced Hound." Or "The Queen of Air and Darkness."
Anderson liked mysteries and plainly enjoyed writing them--but he was much better at writing SF, fantasy, or historical novels.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
We find that different things appeal to different people and afterwards we look for reasons. When I just looked at pictures in comics before I could read, I liked pictures of men on horseback (Westerns) a lot but preferred pictures of men in spacesuits (sf). Why? Why did many of my contemporaries love football whereas I was not remotely interested in it?
Surely mystery fiction is limited in ways that other genres are not?
I am enjoying Agatha Christie's EVIL UNDER THE SUN with its small island setting.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Of course I agree that we all have different tastes! What I was thinking was that you, with your philosophical interests, would have found much of philosophical and ethical significance in the works of Carr, Chesterton, Sayers', etc. Or of historical interest, as in van Gulik's Judge Dee stories.
I fear I was even less interested in Westerns than you were! Ever since I began to seriously read it was history, mysteries (at first), and then science fiction that most appealed to me.
And of course the mystery genre has limitations not to be found in others. Which will be true of all of them.
Is that Christie story the one also called TEN LITTLE INDIANS, which was also set on a small island?
Even as late as his HARVEST OF STARS books, Anderson retained a fondness for myseries. One of them includes an ingeniously contrived murder.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
No. Sheila pointed out that two Christie novels each have a different small island setting: EVIL UNDER THE SUN and TEN LITTLE NIGGERS, changed to AND THEN THERE WERE NONE, which must be the same as TEN LITTLE INDIANS.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Got it. I only read the one where people made a fuss about the title. But I think AND THEN THERE WERE NONE gives away too much of the plot.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment