tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516189026477178777.post3749765353584578400..comments2024-03-27T22:32:02.739+01:00Comments on Beneath the Stains of Time: Two ShooterTomCathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03415176301265218101noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516189026477178777.post-19083497713744065222017-03-17T13:54:14.737+01:002017-03-17T13:54:14.737+01:00Well, I mostly read the 1980s, pre-Shackles novels...Well, I mostly read the 1980s, pre-<i>Shackles</i> novels and very much enjoyed those. One of the titles from the 2000s, <i>Schemers</i>, has a good locked room, but the Tamara character had one of those annoying, modernistic story-lines. <br /><br />Otherwise, this was, for me, the first time with these two authors that politics got in the way of a good story. But, as said, I'm mostly familiar with their work from the 1980s. So I guess I'll stick to that period for the Nameless series. TomCathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03415176301265218101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516189026477178777.post-39687602491012687632017-03-16T18:23:28.107+01:002017-03-16T18:23:28.107+01:00I liked the early Nameless stories like The Vanish...I liked the early Nameless stories like The Vanished. The two books you named were early Pronzini Nameless and I thought both were all right. After Shackles, however, his style changed and I came to really detest them. The ones that particularly turned me off were Sentinels and the one whose title has been mercifully deleted from my memory about the death of his partner Eberhardt (a quick check shows it is probably Illusions). I had a look at the later ones, but I did not see anything there to change my low opinion of the books. I thought it had been only a routine series from the start and it got progressively worse, especially with the introduction of overt propaganda.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516189026477178777.post-69339004491456917212017-03-16T12:30:36.134+01:002017-03-16T12:30:36.134+01:00Well, at least the locked room story and Quincanno...Well, at least the locked room story and Quincannon chasing the murderer was fun. So I got something out of the book, but yes, the second story-line was riding on a political hobbyhorse and did not really care for it. <br /><br />No idea what you read before giving up on Pronzini, but don't let that keep you from reading <i>Hoodwink</i> and <i>Scattershot</i>. TomCathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03415176301265218101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5516189026477178777.post-62974188820313467412017-03-16T03:00:41.511+01:002017-03-16T03:00:41.511+01:00I think your comment about the political position ...I think your comment about the political position of the authors is well stated. A mystery is for entertainment and instruction, not for political propaganda. When the author uses his book for political propaganda rather than entertainment, he is defrauding you, because you spent your money to get the advertised mystery, and he gave you something else which benefitted him rather than you. I quit buying Bill Pronzini's books a good many years ago especially because of their overt propaganda content.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com