Robert Knott (1)
Author of Robert B. Parker's Ironhorse
For other authors named Robert Knott, see the disambiguation page.
About the Author
Robert Knott is an actor, writer, and producer. His extensive list of stage, television, and film credits include the feature film Appaloosa based on the Robert B. Parker novel, which he adapted and produced with actor and producer Ed Harris. This is his first novel. In 2014, his title Robert B. show more Parker's Bull River made The New York Times Best Seller List. (Bowker Author Biography) show less
Works by Robert Knott
Tagged
Common Knowledge
- Gender
- male
- Short biography
- Robert Knott is an actor, writer, and producer, as well as the author of the New York Times bestsellers Robert B. Parker’s The Bridge, Robert B. Parker’s Bull River, and Robert B. Parker’s Ironhorse. His extensive list of stage, television, and film credits include the feature film Appaloosa, based on the Robert B. Parker novel, which he adapted and produced with actor and producer Ed Harris.
A third-generation actor, writer, and producer, Robert Knott descended from colorful cowboy stock--his grandparents had a traveling tent show that followed the wheat harvest throughout the West. When the show closed, his family settled in Oklahoma, where he was born and raised.
The Old West may run through Knott's veins, but he's a seasoned Hollywood veteran. Plus, he writes like a dream, and his attention to every detail of history, weaponry, and language is spot-on.
Knott adapted and produced Appaloosa with actor and producer Ed Harris. Also among his credits is the television mini-series The Stand which is based on the Stephen King novel.
Knott was chosen by the Estate of author Robert B. Parker to carry on the Cole and Hitch series of western novels. - Nationality
- USA
- Associated Place (for map)
- USA
Members
Reviews
I can't bear to give this one the publisher's full title, which is Robert B. Parker's Bull River. With his second installment in the Virgil Cole/Everett Hitch series, Knott has really blown it. His Cole and Hitch are caricatures, not characters. Although I thought he did a decent job of carrying on the Western adventures of Parker's characters in Ironhorse, his tendency to overdo the choppy dialog between Virgil and Everett was annoying at times. In this novel, it's ludicrous. It takes show more subtlety to do simplicity well; Knott manages somehow to be heavy-handed with it. The intelligent communication and wry humor that Parker managed to convey with few words is totally lost here, as if all Knott got from reading Parker is that Virgil likes one-word responses. As one of the scriptwriters on the movie version of Appaloosa, he should have known better. Furthermore, Knott has created a Mexican character named Alejandro Vasquez who is a total mess, by which I mean his creator had no idea whether this man was fluent in English or barely able to put together a sentence in his native language; whether he was a stone killer or Robin Hood; whether he was dangerous or trustworthy. Maybe he was trying to keep the reader guessing. Sure, that's what he was doing. But I think he lost track himself. And there's more wrong with Bull River than that. It's too long; it takes too long to get to the action; it's full of what feel like linguistic anachronisms; cliches that Parker would have given a nifty twist are just cliches; scenes that ought to advance the action don't. Granted I read this from an ARC, but one assumes it had been subjected to some editing. If it had not been an ER acquisition, I would not have finished it. show less
This review was written for LibraryThing Early Reviewers.
The third novel in the continuation of the series (and 7th overall) finds Virgil Cole and Everett Hitch back in Appaloosa. They had just rebuilt the house Allie managed to burn to the ground in a cooking incident and are waiting for the weather to turn into winter - it is the second day of November and the hot weather is a bit surprising. The sheriff and his deputies are taking care of the town (which had grown considerably in the last couple of years) and our territorial marshal and his show more deputy are taking a break from the law.
Until a bridge is blown up at least - the biggest bridge in the area, just months before being finished explodes and falls down into the river. Meanwhile a traveling troupe shows up in town, the sheriff and two of his deputies go out of town on an errand and don't return and Everett falls in love again - this time with Séraphine, a futures teller who seems to really be able to see the future.
And just then the weather finally turns, stranding the troupe in town (without them even be able to set their tents in the foul weather) and Virgil Cole and Everett Hitch are off trying to figure out what happened with the bridge and where did the sheriff go.
On the plus side, Knott finally decided to stop trying to emulate Parker's style and instead started to develop his own - it pays homage to the original but without trying to sound like it (or not too often anyway - some of the dialog still seemed to try for it). It may not work completely but it sounds better and makes the story a lot more readable. He is nowhere near Atkins and I am not sure he will ever get there but the novel does not feel like a bad pastiche.
On the minus side is the story - the pacing is just wrong. I liked the final twist - it is a bit unusual for a western but who said that all westerns should be the same (even if technically the end is just a spin on an old tale everyone expected). But getting there was uneven - Séraphine being used as a deus-ex-machina to essentially kick start the proceeding and the butler's decision at the end of the novel felt like an author who had no idea how to tie the novel together. Séraphine was more of a narrative device through the novel and less of a character and unless Knott plans on bringing her back to town, it was just lazy writing (or unsuccessful anyway).
Overall I liked this one a bit more than the previous novel - it is nowhere near perfect (or objectively good) and if it was not about characters I like, I probably would have not continued with the series. But then the previous one was such a mess that the bar was very low. As it is, I plan to stick a bit longer and see where we are going.
PS: The novel can work as an entry into the series - short of a few repeated characters here and there (and none of them show up here), the series is more of a "The adventures of" type of a series than a proper sequential one -- Cole and Hitch never change and the only thing marking the order is how big Appaloosa is or what Allie had been up to (and what adventures they mention). The back story really does not come into play. While I prefer the modern type of series where the characters show some growth, I don't mind the old style ones occasionally. show less
Until a bridge is blown up at least - the biggest bridge in the area, just months before being finished explodes and falls down into the river. Meanwhile a traveling troupe shows up in town, the sheriff and two of his deputies go out of town on an errand and don't return and Everett falls in love again - this time with Séraphine, a futures teller who seems to really be able to see the future.
And just then the weather finally turns, stranding the troupe in town (without them even be able to set their tents in the foul weather) and Virgil Cole and Everett Hitch are off trying to figure out what happened with the bridge and where did the sheriff go.
On the plus side, Knott finally decided to stop trying to emulate Parker's style and instead started to develop his own - it pays homage to the original but without trying to sound like it (or not too often anyway - some of the dialog still seemed to try for it). It may not work completely but it sounds better and makes the story a lot more readable. He is nowhere near Atkins and I am not sure he will ever get there but the novel does not feel like a bad pastiche.
On the minus side is the story - the pacing is just wrong. I liked the final twist - it is a bit unusual for a western but who said that all westerns should be the same (even if technically the end is just a spin on an old tale everyone expected). But getting there was uneven - Séraphine being used as a deus-ex-machina to essentially kick start the proceeding and the butler's decision at the end of the novel felt like an author who had no idea how to tie the novel together. Séraphine was more of a narrative device through the novel and less of a character and unless Knott plans on bringing her back to town, it was just lazy writing (or unsuccessful anyway).
Overall I liked this one a bit more than the previous novel - it is nowhere near perfect (or objectively good) and if it was not about characters I like, I probably would have not continued with the series. But then the previous one was such a mess that the bar was very low. As it is, I plan to stick a bit longer and see where we are going.
PS: The novel can work as an entry into the series - short of a few repeated characters here and there (and none of them show up here), the series is more of a "The adventures of" type of a series than a proper sequential one -- Cole and Hitch never change and the only thing marking the order is how big Appaloosa is or what Allie had been up to (and what adventures they mention). The back story really does not come into play. While I prefer the modern type of series where the characters show some growth, I don't mind the old style ones occasionally. show less
This book is an attempt to keep alive a book series that ended with the death of the late Robert B. Parker. The point is worth emphasizing, since many a reader will likely be fooled. On the book's cover, Parker's name appears in enormous print over 6 times larger than the name of the actual author, an unknown by the name of Robert Knott. No, this is not "Robert B. Parker's Bull River" (the official title), although the novel does contain two characters who bear the names of Cole and Hitch, show more the protagonists of Parker's four western novels.
Knott tries to emulate the terse laconic dialogue of his predecessor, but his attempt lacks the understated wit and occasional charm of Parker's. Cole and Hitch are basically the same character -- it does not matter that the author so seldom indicates who is delivering what line, because the two are entirely interchangeable and communicate in one and two word phrases. Not only do they lack personalities, they have no histories; only once (by my count) is reference made to one of them having a past. And unlike the Cole and Hitch of Parker's novels, this duo loves four letter words -- the "f" word is sprinkled gratuitously throughout their conversations in a way Parker wouldn't have dreamed of. As for action, it is brief, bloodless, and as dry as a minimally written screenplay. Thus we get the superficial trappings of a Parker novel with none of the charm or brief moments of excitement.
The text mainly consists of monosyllabic conversations. Here's a sample:
Virgil said. "Last time I saw him he was young -- behind bars though."
"What for?"
"Stealing?"
"What'd he steal?"
"Cattle."
"You arrest him?"
"I did."
"And now he's a lawman."
"So it appears."
"He a gun hand?"
"Was."
"Any good?"
Virgil shook his head some.
"I only saw him go at it one time."
"He pull on you?"
"Matter of fact he did."
"What happened?"
"I shot him."
"He shoot back?"
"Nope."
"He clear leather?"
"Nope" Virgil said.
"Obviously he lived."
"He did."
"Where'd you shoot him?"
"Panhandle"
"No. Where?"
"Shoulder".
and so on, for page after page.
Why is the book called "Bull River"? The reader must wait until near the end of the book to find out, because on page 278, they get to a river:
The river was not wide, but it was full of powerful swift moving water.
"Bull River" I said.
"Looks like a goddam bull."
"Does" I said.
That's it for the river. They cross it and move on. How it's supposed to look like an herbivorous male mammal with sharp horns is never explained; and it doesn't matter since it was just there to lend its name for the title.
No, this work is not a success, even by the minimal standards of the least of Parker's works. show less
Knott tries to emulate the terse laconic dialogue of his predecessor, but his attempt lacks the understated wit and occasional charm of Parker's. Cole and Hitch are basically the same character -- it does not matter that the author so seldom indicates who is delivering what line, because the two are entirely interchangeable and communicate in one and two word phrases. Not only do they lack personalities, they have no histories; only once (by my count) is reference made to one of them having a past. And unlike the Cole and Hitch of Parker's novels, this duo loves four letter words -- the "f" word is sprinkled gratuitously throughout their conversations in a way Parker wouldn't have dreamed of. As for action, it is brief, bloodless, and as dry as a minimally written screenplay. Thus we get the superficial trappings of a Parker novel with none of the charm or brief moments of excitement.
The text mainly consists of monosyllabic conversations. Here's a sample:
Virgil said. "Last time I saw him he was young -- behind bars though."
"What for?"
"Stealing?"
"What'd he steal?"
"Cattle."
"You arrest him?"
"I did."
"And now he's a lawman."
"So it appears."
"He a gun hand?"
"Was."
"Any good?"
Virgil shook his head some.
"I only saw him go at it one time."
"He pull on you?"
"Matter of fact he did."
"What happened?"
"I shot him."
"He shoot back?"
"Nope."
"He clear leather?"
"Nope" Virgil said.
"Obviously he lived."
"He did."
"Where'd you shoot him?"
"Panhandle"
"No. Where?"
"Shoulder".
and so on, for page after page.
Why is the book called "Bull River"? The reader must wait until near the end of the book to find out, because on page 278, they get to a river:
The river was not wide, but it was full of powerful swift moving water.
"Bull River" I said.
"Looks like a goddam bull."
"Does" I said.
That's it for the river. They cross it and move on. How it's supposed to look like an herbivorous male mammal with sharp horns is never explained; and it doesn't matter since it was just there to lend its name for the title.
No, this work is not a success, even by the minimal standards of the least of Parker's works. show less
This review was written for LibraryThing Early Reviewers.
This book is the 3rd installment in the publisher's attempt to keep alive the Cole/ Hitch series of western novels, a series initiated by the late Robert B. Parker. I'm afraid I found it no better than Robert Knott's two previous contributions to the series.
I found The Bridge to be disjointed with a confusingly large cast of characters. (With over 50 characters, the reader may benefit from keeping a list). The dialogue is as tiresome as in previous works of the series -- often consisting of show more exchanges of short, laconic phrases between Cole and Hitch.
The plot centers on a massive new 300 ft. bridge that was built over the Rio Blanco Rover that has been blown up. A sheriff and his deputies who are sent to investigate disappear. It falls to Marshal Virgil Cole and his deputy Everett Hitch try to find out what's behind the situation. There's an unsavory band of supposed Union soldiers who make their way into town; a travelling theater troupe (which Cole's lady-love Allie has joined); and a mysterious fortune-teller named Seraphine (who seduces Hitch and who draws on her supposed psychic powers to advise him). With plenty of suspects for the bridge destruction, Hitch and Cole use their powers of detection as well as their skill with the revolver to bring justice to the territory.
The prose is clumsy, and owes too much to a late 20th century lexicon. (As an Amazon reviewer notes, what 19th century character would introduce someone as their “significant other”, or talk about "validating their existence" or reviewing their history on a "resume'"?). Further, the reader is left thinking that Seraphine may truly be able to tell the future – a supernatural element with little place in a western and a sop to the uncritical modern reader. As it turns out, the bridge destruction was part of a large insurance scam, likewise an unexpected turn for a "western." No matter-- by the end of the book, I didn’t care a great deal as to who did what. The fact that the story left several unresolved loose ends suggests that the author had lost interest as well. show less
I found The Bridge to be disjointed with a confusingly large cast of characters. (With over 50 characters, the reader may benefit from keeping a list). The dialogue is as tiresome as in previous works of the series -- often consisting of show more exchanges of short, laconic phrases between Cole and Hitch.
The plot centers on a massive new 300 ft. bridge that was built over the Rio Blanco Rover that has been blown up. A sheriff and his deputies who are sent to investigate disappear. It falls to Marshal Virgil Cole and his deputy Everett Hitch try to find out what's behind the situation. There's an unsavory band of supposed Union soldiers who make their way into town; a travelling theater troupe (which Cole's lady-love Allie has joined); and a mysterious fortune-teller named Seraphine (who seduces Hitch and who draws on her supposed psychic powers to advise him). With plenty of suspects for the bridge destruction, Hitch and Cole use their powers of detection as well as their skill with the revolver to bring justice to the territory.
The prose is clumsy, and owes too much to a late 20th century lexicon. (As an Amazon reviewer notes, what 19th century character would introduce someone as their “significant other”, or talk about "validating their existence" or reviewing their history on a "resume'"?). Further, the reader is left thinking that Seraphine may truly be able to tell the future – a supernatural element with little place in a western and a sop to the uncritical modern reader. As it turns out,
Lists
Awards
You May Also Like
Statistics
- Works
- 7
- Members
- 1,217
- Popularity
- #21,094
- Rating
- 3.3
- Reviews
- 69
- ISBNs
- 83
- Languages
- 1
