Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Titus G <noone@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: RI February 2025
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2025 17:57:08 +1200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <101rbja$1c2g0$1@dont-email.me>
References: <m56dphF60haU1@mid.individual.net> <101onri$kavd$3@dont-email.me>
 <mab3mdFengU1@mid.individual.net>
Reply-To: noone@nowhere.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2025 07:56:59 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="727db1a2a513a8a3ce1709ff400d8838";
	logging-data="1444352"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/UFQbSW7xY2hMgI6b9Bwnx"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qmlnMqmg0nZMz1HrKDwit2PW+50=
Content-Language: en-AU
In-Reply-To: <mab3mdFengU1@mid.individual.net>

On 5/06/25 02:31, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> In article <101onri$kavd$3@dont-email.me>, Titus G  <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> On 3/04/25 18:18, Titus G wrote:
>>> On 3/04/25 16:32, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Meet the Tiger by Leslie Charteris
>>>> https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/72869
>>>
>>> Thank you for this detail and your thoughts. I loved The Saint when an
>>> impressionable youngster but do not recall this specific one.
>>> I'm off to Gutenberg.
>>
>> I enjoyed this but less so in the second half when I was sick of the
>> continual long winded reasonings why he was so superior in physical and
>> mental abilities to the rest of the world followed by idiotic decisions
>> to tempt fate in the worst possible way. It was fun for the trip back to
>> an earlier time of reading pleasure but I will not seek more. Thank you.
>>
> 
> You're welcome!
> 
> And yes, that fact that "Old House" could mean two different things
> both of which the gang was using(!) and then barging into one of
> them with no plan was a pure "how do I keep this moving?" :-)
> 
> I would point out, that, as I noted in the review, Charteris was
> very aware of his first novel's weak points and at various times
> resisted having it republished,

By the time I began it, I had forgotten that part of your review.

 so your milage with other Saint
> stories may vary.  I plan (long term) to continue and will post
> my results if & when.  I do recall my first foray through the 1930s
> stories very fondly.

OK. I probably would read another if there is a major change and will
look forward to your future reviews.