'll ease out of Daniel Woodrell country with the observation that none of the characters in the three novels that make up the "Bayou Trilogy
" is a winner in anything like the conventional sense. Call me sentimental, but I call that a refreshing perspective.
n excavation into the book pile today turned up a mystery set in contemporary times with a prologue in the fourth century A.D. that had arrows being fired, meaning shot. Flaming arrows were used as early as the ninth century B.C., Wikipedia tells me, but I recall no indication that these arrows were of that variety. I also suspect that to fire
as a synonym for to shoot
a weapon did not enter English until after the invention of gunpowder and guns well after the fourth century. That would make its use in this book a distracting anachronism.
The same excavation turned up a book that referred to a man who killed a number of women over more than a decade as a "mass murderer." He was not. He was a serial killer.
Where were the editors of these books?
© Peter Rozovsky 2011
Labels: bad editing, Daniel Woodrell, editing, The Bayou Trilogy, things that drive me nuts, Who needs copy editors?