Schrader's Notes on Film Noir

Schrader’s “Notes on Film Noir” is a quite informative look at film noir as a period of United States film history rather than as a genre. It’s interesting that Schrader insists on film noir’s lack of generic status. At first, I was inclined to disagree, but if one examines his argument more closely it makes sense. It’s not that film noir lacks conventions of conflict and setting, which define the genre of the western, for example, but rather that conventions—of a kind—of mood and tone define it. I’m assuming that what he means is that this type of definition does not conform to the usual parameters of film genre’s defining qualities.

Additionally, it’s intriguing that he posits film noir’s critical “neglect” as stemming from its dependence on style rather than theme—on “choreography” rather than “sociology.” This is also what makes film noir unique in the history of film. Is Schrader arguing that film noir was neglected because it not only reflected the sociological climate of its time but also judged it when other types of film didn't (“film noir attacked and interpreted its sociological conditions,” he says)?

I wonder what Schrader would have to say now about film noir’s status as “neglected.” Is it still considered by critics to be inferior to more conventionally generic film genres like the gangster film? And what about film noir’s continued influence on American film post-1970s? Would he be surprised and impressed by neo-noir and heavily film noir influenced films like those of Tarantino and Rian Johnson's Brick?