What comes
to mind when you hear the word “detective?”
A man, of course, in a trench coat who seems to regularly smoke tobacco
and indulge in alcohol. A detective is
someone who young boys aspire to be like and that the public trusts to solve
the most difficult of crimes. Though
these stereotypes are seemingly true for early detective stories, the
crime-fighting drunkard is not exactly what parents today would want their
children watching.
Detective literature for children
became popular in the late nineteenth century and developed slower than
literature written for an adult audience.
This is arguably because the widespread belief of literacy in children,
in many places including Europe and the United States, did not arise until the
late nineteenth century (Rzepka). The
first published work for children is known to be The Adventures of Oliver Twist, but even before published works,
children were exposed to detection through fairy tale stories both written and
passed down by word of mouth (Rzepka).
Inspector Gadget began as a
television series first airing in 1983. The
original series portrayed Gadget as a detective who could not seem to solve
anything by himself. Most of the success
is thanks to his niece, Penny, and her dog.
However, Gadget does not recognize them as helpers in the case, much to
the audience’s dismay.
Walt Disney Pictures released Inspector Gadget, the
more family friendly action film, in 1999.
This movie was loosely based on the television series, but many of the
underlying ideas and crimes remained the same.
However, Penny and her dog were still not given proper recognition for their
contributions of capturing Dr. Claw in the movie. Do you think this exhibits bias against women or children detectives? Or would this take away from Inspector Gadget being the main character and detective in the movie?
Inspector Gadget is an idealistic
character whose talents soar beyond the typical detective, he is “the greatest
hero ever assembled.” Inspector Gadget
teaches children that it is okay to be different and to use these differences
to help others.
“Many crime stories including a
detective or similar character offer no mystery to be solved, but rather a
difficulty to overcome” (Rzepka). This
rings true for Inspector Gadget. . In
the beginning of the movie Inspector Gadget is unsure of how to use his new
body parts, but with practice and the help of Penny, he overcomes his struggle
and learns how to use them for the betterment of society. This type of role model is much better for
children then the detectives of the past.
Adults and
children alike enjoy the movie Inspector Gadget, but S.S. Van Dine would be
unhappy with a few aspects. Inspector
Gadget finds himself with a love interest, Brenda, and this violates rule
number three. He also is not necessarily
the only detective, violating rule number nine (Rzepka).
Overall,
newer detective/spy movies such as Inspector Gadget are much better for
children, compared to the old detective fiction. Parents can be more comfortable allowing their
children to indulge in the genre now that producers and writers have made a
conscious effort in directing their works toward a younger audience.
Newer and more wholesome examples of children's detective/spy movies.
If detective stories do not
perfectly fit into the mold S.S. Van Dine has put forth, are these
automatically poorly written stories?
Are the rules written by S.S. Van Dine relevant in more modern detective
fiction, or should they be considered rules of the past? Should there be exceptions to the rules in
the case of children’s detective fiction where parents would not want their
children to be exposed to the gruesome nature of “adult” crimes?
Van Dine, S.S.. "Twenty rules
for writing detective stories." American Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web.
2 Dec 2012. <http://gaslight.mtroyal.ca/vandine.htm>.
Rzepka,
Charles J. Detective Fiction. Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2005. Print.
Rzepka,
Charles J., and Lee Horsley. A Companion To Crime Fiction.
Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. Print.
I think it’s interesting that you question whether the Inspector Gadget works were intentionally written to violate the standards of S.S. Van Dine in order to appeal to a younger audience. I think an important distinction to be made is that S.S. Van Dine’s rules tend to apply specifically to hardboiled detective fiction. Given that the document was first proposed in 1928, which was far before any form of children’s literary movement, I believe he was writing to a much more mature audience. To answer your question, I do believe a new standard for detective fiction is necessary if we intend to consider unsuited works a violation of the rules of the past. With time comes change and a need for reevaluation. And, it’s also important to remember that Inspector Gadget exists as a marketing entity as well. Unfortunately, a lot of modern renditions of detective fiction are more than willing to sacrifice the integrity of the genre to apply to a bigger marketing audience and generate more profit. Essentially, it is art for profit’s sake rather than art for art’s sake.
ReplyDeleteColleen,
ReplyDeleteGreat job! Children’s detective fiction is definitely a growing genre and an interesting subject to examine. I agree with the idea that Van Dine’s rules, or really any other guidelines for creating detective fiction, should be amended in the case of children’s detective fiction. You mentioned in your post that young children “aspire to be like” detectives and look to them as role models. This is a pretty worrisome idea when considering the detectives we have discussed over the semester, who are gun wielding, shady men with a tendency for alcoholism and drug use. Though the frequency of substance abuse in detective fiction has decreased over the years, the morals of a detective, given by Van Dine, are not particularly family-friendly either. Even without Sam Spade’s alcohol problem, he is still a man of questionable morals, and even acknowledges this in the novel. The Van Dine detective is a man who is completely absorbed in a world of crime, with no regard for ethics, values, family, or apparently women’s rights. If this is the character requirement for detectives, and children are meant to admire and emulate these men, the rules must definitely be changed.
Thank you Sarah! I definitely agree with your comments. I believe that S.S. Van Dine has some very good and insightful points, but I do not believe they should be taken incredibly seriously in today’s detective fiction. Children of the past and children today should not be exposed to such things as drug and alcohol use or abuse, and I believe that producers such as Disney have taken this into account when creating new movies directed primarily at children. However, I also believe there is a fine line between such detectives being “corrupt” and just playing the part of the detective we have in our minds. Do you believe it is the filmmakers’ responsibility to produce detective movies directed toward children (leaving out the more “adult” themes)? Or do you think the parents should take responsibility of deciding when their children are of age to discern that drugs and alcohol are wrong in real life, but okay in detective fiction and movies?
ReplyDeleteAndrew, I agree with your statement that a new standard of detective fiction is in order as the genre and the literary world as a whole have both evolved greatly since Van Dine laid out these rules as the groundwork for the detective fiction genre. I also believe that Van Dine's rules should be looked as a set of guidelines for the game between the reader and the detective, not an indisputable set of principles that detective fiction must follow if it is to be taken as legitimate. A writer certainly needs to have an understanding of the rules before he or she can break them, but if no one were to ever strain from these rules then the genre could not evolve and the stories would become monotonous and repetitive.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the rules of the game are always going to be different for children. When Van Dine writes that no crime is worth the readers time save for murder and provides guidelines for the sexuality allowed in the story, he is assuming the audience is at a certain level of maturity. When the fiction is directed at children, the rules are inevitably going to be different.
It's fairly safe to say that Van Dine's rules must be altered significantly to properly aim detective fiction toward children. Whether Inspector Gadget or Tintin, Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew, children's detectives are just not going to be similar to the hard-boiled sleuth that was the norm in Van Dine's era. What the children's detective writer must accomplish is formulate a detective who fits Van Dine's description while also representing the values parents look for in role models.
ReplyDeleteAs far as whether Van Dine's rules are relevant in the modern era, I think they provide a nice set of guidelines but I don't think today's detective stories have to stay completely in line with them to be a good representation of the genre. Whereas in the times when the rules were written, any variations from the rules would have had a much bigger impact.
I agree with much of what has already been said and there is no reason to repeat it. however i do believe that Van Dine's rules still have a place and strong role in detective fiction. Just look at our class. We have only known about Van Dine for just over two months, and already we use it as a golden standard to judge all detective works. I do believe that children's detective fiction need not abide the rules, but that it should prepare them for adult detective fiction which does. Just as you wouldn't teach a child to count using calculus, you wouldn't introduce a child to detective fiction with something like the Maltese Falcon. Van Dine's rules may not be the best guide for modern detective fiction, but it still provides us with a fundamental basis for how we should view the reader in the genre. Most of the rules are not as much about sticking to those strict rules of what can be in a story, so much as protecting the ability of the reader to compete with the detective. Almost every rule is guided in this direction, and I believe it is important to still abide by this spirit, though the genre may and can change a great deal.
ReplyDelete