Raymond Chandler

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

http://ae-lib.org.ua/texts-c/chandler__red_wind__en.htm

It took me a long time to stumble upon Raymond Chandler; he wrote a lot of pulp detective stories and came to writing late in life at 45 years of age. His 4 Phillip Marlowe detective novels are classics of the genre. But he also wrote 2 horror stories and even romances. PROFESSOR BINGO'S SNUFF is a captivating horror story about a man who acquires the means to be invisible, but isnt sure when he's invisible and when he isnt; so the story has some humorous events within it.

I dont care for detective stories, but this one and the others are pretty damned good.

 

[uneven]

Chandler was a very interesting figure in a number of ways, and a very good (and very influential) writer. There actually are seven Philip Marlowe novels: The Big Sleep, Farewell, My Lovely, The High Window, The Lady in the Lake, The Little Sister, The Long Goodbye (my personal favorite), and Playback (which is way inferior to any of the others). There's also Poodle Springs, which purports to have been "completed" from Chandler's original writing by Robert B. Parker (author of the Spenser PI novels), but considering that Chandler wrote about three pages of it, it isn't surprising that it reads like a bad Spenser novel set in southern California.

Chandler was also a notable screenwriter, particularly for the brilliant Double Indemnity, which he co-wrote with Billy Wilder. He actually has a brief cameo in the film.

 

[Verdad]

I have read a couple of Chandler's novels as a kid, but what I remember of them is exactly nothing. No word, no picture, no impression, nothing. I know how the covers looked but have absolutely no recollection of what was within.

That made me want to refresh my memory, but upon trying to read this story, I can only say I'm not surprised I forgot Chandler the moment I put the books down. I'm rather surprised I read them in the first place. I mean, I don't know if it's just me, but I had to force myself through the first chapter, then had to give up. It made me crazy impatient, felt to me slower than Dickens on tranquilizers, and annoyed me with all the hard-boiled cleverness. I get that writing that way is immensely fun, what with all the cool similes, but reading it felt like torture. I've no idea if I'm being exceptionally impatient today or if Chandler is hopelessly outdated.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Chandler is dated, but the writing is excellent. I doubt if anyone reads Ross MacDonald or Earl Stanley Garner today, but Chandler remains in print.

 

[Verdad]

I might give it another try tomorrow, but it surprised me how tedious I found it. Don't get me wrong--I've no problem plowing through classics, I'm perfectly capable of finding reward in a lot of stuff that's madly slow by today's standards (Dickens, so long as I mentioned him, I do like) but this struck me like an unfortunate hybrid that is supposed to be entertaining but is not.

I'm not claiming my opinion is flawless, though. What do you feel is the best thing about Chandler?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

VERDAD

Chandler isnt literature. He was a master of pulp fiction. Light entertainment. But what impresses me is how well he handles complicated plots, and how well he describes things. I learn new words every time I read his stories. Dont get me wrong; one Chandler detective story is pretty much like all the others. The women are always the villains, the cops are gorillas, and Marlowe is always a wise-ass. He has the same genius the 3 STOOGES had, and every short they made is identical.

 

[Verdad]

Well, don't get me wrong again! I love my trash as much as the next person; I wasn't being intellectyool or anything. It just surprised me I couldn't make my way through this particular trash. Will let you know if I manage!

 

[uneven]

I've no idea if I'm being exceptionally impatient today or if Chandler is hopelessly outdated.

Or it could be that the style or genre just doesn't appeal to you. I don't particularly care for Chandler's stories, in any case. They are where he was learning to write. But it's entirely possible you wouldn't like anything by him. I've never liked Dickens or George Eliot, for example, and I find the bulk of contemporary literary fiction unreadable.

Different strokes, different folks kind of thing.

 

[uneven]

Chandler is dated, but the writing is excellent. I doubt if anyone reads Ross MacDonald or Earl Stanley Garner today, but Chandler remains in print.

To be a bit sententious, all writing is dated. Some of Updike's early novels read like alien history. What matters is whether it realistically evokes an era or not. I think Chandler does, but I can also understand that some readers would not find him interesting.

Both Macdonald and Gardner go in and out of print much more erratically than Chandler, though both still have a lot of readers. The late Warren Zevon quite loved Macdonald's Lew Archer books. Vintage published new editions of several of Macdonald's books last year.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Well, don't get me wrong again! I love my trash as much as the next person; I wasn't being intellectyool or anything. It just surprised me I couldn't make my way through this particular trash. Will let you know if I manage!

I'm reading THE HIGH WINDOW as I write this. There's another one, Jonathan Kellerman. He also writes whodunits. He writes well and I dont care for his books, but his writing is very good. I suppose what I'm saying is, writers can learn from Chandler and Kellerman without swooning over the genre.

 

[DeeZire]

I might give it another try tomorrow, but it surprised me how tedious I found it....

While I liked the writing, the way it was displayed on screen made reading difficult. Perhaps that could have been a factor?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

While I liked the writing, the way it was displayed on screen made reading difficult. Perhaps that could have been a factor?

Sure! Reading online always sux.

 

[DeeZire]

I guess I'm just used to the LIT format with the spaces between paragraphs and the larger font.

 

[water_side]

I have no real literary knowledge, but I'd like to fly the flag for Chandler, I've loved his books for years (The Lady in the Lake being my personal favourite). They are complex, dark, funny and just plain entertaining, which ticks most of my boxes.

 

[Verdad]

To be a bit sententious, all writing is dated. Some of Updike's early novels read like alien history. What matters is whether it realistically evokes an era or not. I think Chandler does, but I can also understand that some readers would not find him interesting.

If you wanted someone to put in a good word for Updike, no use looking at me. But sure, all art is dated, in that it inevitably belongs to an era. Not all of it ages with equal grace, though. And it's not necessarily some kind of high literary question. The thing with detective genre, in particular, is that we've seen a million movies and a gazillion TV series, probably more than on any other ten subjects combined. We know the permutations inside out and upside down. After we've been awash in it for decades, it's not really surprising that Chandler's old school approach elicits a bit of a "yeah, yeah, get to the point!" It's an area where we're particularly jaded.

That said, I don't think James is wrong in saying there's something to learn from Chandler. Writing detective stories in his manner clearly wouldn't fly today, but it's not to say there's nothing in his bag of tricks to apply elsewhere. Chandler is not a bad writer like Dan Brown is a bad writer. He just belongs to a time when entertainment happened at a way slower pace.

While I liked the writing, the way it was displayed on screen made reading difficult. Perhaps that could have been a factor?

Well, it shouldn't be decisive because I read a lot off the screen. I sometimes even convince myself it's the same. But it's not, no doubt about it. We're more tolerant of words on paper. The less than stellar parts kind of rush by. When I'm really gripped, I can honestly say there's no difference, but when it's so-so and I'm reading off the screen, the axe does fall faster.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

VERDAD

It's true that life in the old days took a significantly slower pace, and people expected plenty of pages filled with entertainment.

And there's plenty to learn from old styles of music, architecture, literature, painting, etc. People are still sorting out how the Egyptians built the Pyramids.

I keep a computer file filled with names for old things I come across in old books.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I read LADY IN THE LAKE last night.

Chandler does a good job with complex plots.