FolioDeux Blog

FD has probably mentioned this before, but it happened again — the mail included a request for a charitable donation accompanied by not only printed address labels but a nickel glued to the pleading letter.

Now, FD loves the post office and still writes actual letters and still mails in checks for bills, no on-line bill payments for FD!  But not even FD could use even a portion of the address labels that are sent with charity donation requests — FD can’t even use those that correctly spell FD’s somewhat challenging first and last names.  (Oddly enough, no charitable organization has yet sent FolioDeux any labels.)  Sending these out seems like a waste of the money the charity is trying to raise.

The “we’re sending a nickel” (or in the case of the Mt. Vernon association once, a George Washington-faced quarter) to somehow shame you into sending us a lot of money back technique is even worse.  FD assumes this works on enough people to convince the charities to continue the practice, but it seems sleezy in the extreme.  A check of the American Institute of Philanthropy’s charity rating guide confirmed what FD’s suspected:  the sending organization in this latest case was rated as “D” on an A – F scale.

FD does intend to write about something other than mysteries soon.  But not today.

Today, FD is thinking about a small series of mysteries written by Kathryn Miller Haines (here’s a link to her web site with lots of information).  There are four so far.  The protagonist is a stage actress, living in New York in the 1940s.  Lots of fun period details and a fairly good homage to the “hard boiled” writing of the 1940s.

Not surprisingly for a series set in the 1940s, the protagonist, Rosie Winter, professes a love of the “pulps.” More interesting to FD is that Rosie Winter has friends.  This may sound natural, but is actually a little unusual.  Detectives often have sidekicks:  Watsons and Archies (and here’s a link to an eye-popping Nero Wolfe site) to narrate and do some of the dirty work.  But too often, and especially when the protagonist is a woman, there’s no actual friend.  Oh, sometimes there are friends who serve some plot necessity:  some one to die, some one to conveniently show up or have an essential skill.  It seems to FD that in the majority of mysteries with women protagonists, the friends are either plot specific or absent completely and the protagonists are, like so many male protagonists in mysteries, “a lonely man” as Chandler defined his heroes.  But women without friends seem unrealistic, and a woman protagonist who has only acolytes (like Nancy Drew) or a woman with a cat, or an older male friend, or her husband, but no real women friends, well, that interferes with the suspension of disbelief that is really essential to a satisfying mystery reading experience.  So it was a delight to find that Rosie Winter’s world includes female friendships.

Usually, FD will finish almost any mystery.  But when one picks up a book with insufficient information, based just on the back cover blurbs, there can be mistakes.  Recently, FD abandoned an Iris Johansen book.  Many people admire her work, but FD is through with serial killers obsessed with specific detectives.  Especially those who dismember young women along the way.  Somehow, FD didn’t grasp that was what would be found in “Blood Game,” though the title should have provided a hint!

And last night, FD decided that Peter Temple’s Truth isn’t going to be finished, either.  Temple is a well-respected, prize-winning Australian author (here’s an older interview), but his style doesn’t work for how FD reads mysteries.  Temple’s novel is written primarily in dialogue, and although there is a glossary provided for non-Australians, it’s just too much work for that half-hour before the light gets turned off.  FD did notice that like many other mystery novels these days, Truth includes an Audi, in this case sighted on page 43.  It would seem that Audi has made a deal with mystery writers; sometimes it’s the detective, sometimes it’s a a victim, so far FD hasn’t seen any criminals driving Audis…

FD was at the local library today, choosing a mystery (lately, FD only BUYS non-fiction, or the occasional hardcover by a favorite writer, but most novels and certainly mysteries, get borrowed).  Walking around the library, looking idly at the shelves, FD was reminded that it is the practice of the local library to only keep books on the shelf if they are being checked out.  That means, for instance, no copy of No Orchids for Miss Blandish even though it is a classic mystery novel (which FD still hasn’t read!), that has been made into several movies (which FD still hasn’t seen!) and should be available to all mystery buffs! (read a little about it, here)

Of course libraries exist to serve the desires of patrons, which, at least here, seem to focus on mystery series, various “best sellers” and fantasy, fantasy, fantasy.  But shouldn’t libraries also be places where you can discover books you didn’t know you wanted to read?  FD suspects that some books do get to stay on the shelves even after the public stops checking them out — as long as a librarian loves them.  How else to explain certain nineteenth-century tomes?  It shouldn’t have to be this way.  Yes, space is a consideration.  But FD’s local library would have space for more books if fewer duplicate copies of transient best sellers were kept!  Who is still reading The DaVinci Code (FD would like to say “who ever read…” but alas, FD knows that wouldn’t be true).

In the meantime, there’s  The Neglected Books Page where one can find out about other interesting titles, that, frustratingly, may not be available immediately from one’s local library.  But one can dream, and add titles to the “someday” list…