Raymond Chandlers The Long Goodbye I think is better than The Big Sleep becuase it is more about how dark and dreary LA can be. A place where it used to rain (and its raining again now!), and where no one connects even though that is all they want to do. Its a lonely book. Like five stars that live in the same sky but somehow never quite share their shine. Loved Lennox though.

Οι αποχαιρετισμοί αποτελούν ευγενές υλικό, στο οποίο η τέχνη καταφεύγει ακάματα. Παράδοξο, καθότι η καθημερινότητά μας είναι γεμάτη από τέτοιους, πάσης φύσεως, σε βαθμό κοινοτοπίας. Κι αν η κοινοτοπία παραμένει η συγκολλητική ουσία της καθημερινότητάς μας, το αυτό δεν ισχύει ευτυχώς στην περίπτωση της τέχνης.

Εκεί, ο αποχαιρετισμός λαμβάνει διαστάσεις δυσθεώρητες, αποτελεί υλικό άξιο τραγωδίας, οι χειρονομίες μετατρέπονται σε διακηρύξεις και οι σιωπές -πριν ή μετά- σε ουρανομήκεις κραυγές. Στα χέρια ενός συγγραφέα-στιλίστα όπως ο Ρ. Τσάντλερ, το μυστήριο, το έγκλημα, η δράση και όλα εκείνα τα στοιχεία που συναποτελούν το noir είδος καθαίρονται από την παραδοσιακή και κυριολεκτική τους χρήση για να ανέλθουν σε μια άλλη σφαίρα, εκείνη της τέχνης (γι’ αυτό και δεν έχει καμία σχέση με το βρετανικό, απλοϊκής γραφής, whodunit).

Αν ο Hammett υπήρξε ας πούμε ο ιδρυτής του είδους, ο Chandler υπήρξε ο θεμελιωτής, ο καλλιτέχνης, ο Προμηθέας που έκρυψε τη φλόγα της τέχνης και εμφύσησε ζωή σε κάτι που μέχρι πρότινος θεωρείτο περιθωριακό. Το noir είναι αμερικανικό δημιούργημα. Είναι η εκδίκηση της Δημοκρατίας του Νέου Κόσμου ενάντια στο σάπιο, ολιγαρχικό φάντασμα του Παλιού Κόσμου (κυρίως της Βρετανίας) που αντιμετώπιζε τους χαρακτήρες ως πιόνια σε μια σκακιέρα, ως χάρτινες φιγούρες.

Το noir έκανε μια σαφή ταξική στροφή και έφερε το…ρεμπέτικο στην όπερα. Βούτηξε στα λύματα, αλίευσε από τον υπόνομο, αγάπησε το περιθώριο, τους πένητες, τους λοξίες, τους αποτυχημένους, τους παρίες. Έδειξε ότι το έγκλημα διαπράττεται όχι χάριν της αισθητικής φύσεως ευχαρίστησης που θα αποφέρει σε εκείνον που επιλύει τον γρίφο, αλλά ως αποτέλεσμα πασχόντων ανθρώπων. Ανθρώπων που έχουν σπρωχτεί στο περιθώριο, ανθρώπων που ο έρωτας, η ζήλια, οι ενοχές, η απληστία οδήγησε εκεί. Και πίσω από εκείνους ένα εξίσου διεφθαρμένο σύστημα, μαικήνες και κροίσοι που χειραγωγούν, εξουσίες όπως ο τύπος έτοιμες να ξεπουληθούν στον μεγαλύτερο πλειοδότη, αρχές αστυνομικές και δικαστικές έρμαια των ισχυρών.

Και εν τω μέσω αυτών, μια ηθική αρχή: ο ιδιωτικός ντετέκτιβ (εν προκειμένω, ονόματι Φ. Μάρλοου). Ένας απευθείας απόγονος του Δον Κιχώτη, κι ακριβώς όπως εκείνος, ένας ήρωας μισερός, χθόνιος όχι υπερκόσμιος, με αδυναμίες και σημαντικά ελλείματα. Η επιλογή του ντετέκτιβ ως κεντρικού ήρωα, προσφέρει δύο σημαντικά πλεονεκτήματα: αφενός δεν ανήκει υποχρεωτικά στο σύστημα (αν και λειτουργεί εντός του), αφού σε αντίθεση με τον αστυνομικό δεν είναι υπάλληλος του κράτους, επομένως αυτονομείται τόσο όσον αφορά την επιλογή των πελατών του όσο και στον τρόπο δράσης του.

Αφετέρου, λόγω των αστυνομικών δεξιοτήτων του και του ρόλου του, χρησιμοποιείται ως «δίκης οφθαλμός», ως όργανο δικαιοσύνης, όχι με την τυπική και νομικίστικη μορφή της (είπαμε, δεν είναι κρατικός λειτουργός) αλλά στην πλέον αφηρημένη, ενίοτε αφελή, αλλά συγκινητικά δονκιχωτική εκδοχή απονομής Δικαιοσύνης. Η οποία μπορεί να μην είναι καθ’ όλα ή σε κάθε περίπτωση νόμιμη, πλην όμως στοιχίζεται απόλυτα με το γνωστό (αναγνωστικό) «κοινό περί δικαίου αίσθημα».

Ο ντετέκτιβ όσο κι αν βυθίζεται στο τέναγος του εγκλήματος και της διαφθοράς, όσο κι αν τον μολύνει η περιρρέουσα ατμόσφαιρα σήψης, βγαίνει πάντα αλώβητος. Όχι, εδώ δεν ισχύει ο μανιχαϊστικός τρόπος σκέψης του τύπου «μέρος του προβλήματος ή μέρος της λύσης» – όλοι είναι αναπόφευκτα μέρος και των δύο. Όπως έχω ξαναγράψει, ο ήρωας μένει σχεδόν πάντα στο παρασκήνιο αφήνοντας τις πληγωμένες ψυχές που βρίσκει στον δρόμο του να αφηγηθούν τις αλήθειες τους που είναι σχεδόν πάντα ψέματα – όχι απαραίτητα εσκεμμένα, κυρίως διότι οι άνθρωποι πρώτιστα ψεύδονται στον εαυτό τους. Είναι ο ιδανικός παρατηρητής (όπως κι ο συγγραφέας εξάλλου), το private eye που επισκοπεί τα ανθρώπινα πάθη, τις αδυναμίες, τα ελαττώματα των παραβατικών, των πενθούντων, των εγκληματιών και των θυμάτων τους, όλων εκείνων που διέρρηξαν τους δεσμούς τους με το κοινωνικό σύνολο.

Στο, κατά τον συγγραφέα, κορυφαίο έργο του, ο Μάρλοου καλείται να επιλύσει εγκλήματα, αν κι αυτό αποτελεί το έναυσμα για τον συγγραφέα να μιλήσει για τη φιλία, για τον έρωτα, το πάθος και τη ζωή. Γράφει για ανθρώπους που υποφέρουν γιατί δεν είναι τέλειοι, γιατί είναι ελαττωματικοί, γιατί συχνότερα υποπίπτουν στα πάθη και τις ανασφάλειές τους και γι’ αυτό εγκληματούν. Γράφει για την εξουσία που διαφθείρει, αλλά και για ανθρώπους που διαφθείρουν άλλους ανθρώπους. Και μετά σταματάει τη δράση για λίγο και στρέφεται σε ένα νεύμα, σε μια κίνηση, σε ένα ποτήρι ουίσκι και στον σερβιτόρο του οποίου το βλέμμα δηλώνει παραίτηση, σε έναν τύπο γυναίκας, στο παιχνίδι του φλερτ, στο υπαρξιακό άγχος του πρωταγωνιστή.

Και εκεί ακριβώς μεγαλουργεί ο μεγάλος συγγραφέας αναδεικνύοντας την ομορφιά, σύμφωνα με τα λεγόμενα του Αντόρνο: «Να θεωρήσουμε όλα τα πράγματα όπως αυτά θα εμφανίζονταν από τη σκοπιά της λύτρωσης… να δούμε τον κόσμο όπως θα εμφανιστεί κάποια ημέρα στο μεσσιανικό φως». Και ο Φίλιπ Μάρλοου του Τσάντλερ είναι ένας εκπεσών άγγελος που αναζητά ματαίως τα «φτερά τα πρωτινά του τα μεγάλα», προσδοκώντας την επιστροφή, την ίδια στιγμή γνωρίζοντας πόσο μάταιη είναι η ελπίδα του.

https://fotiskblog.home.blog/2021/05/...

This is my first time reading The Long Goodbye, continuing my first run-through of the Chandlers, and I have to say I'm rather amazed.

The prose in all of these is really something else. Gorgeous comes to mind, as does sharply evocative; like having a 6 1/2 screwdriver melted down to be turned into a cocktail drink at the ritziest bar in LA.

I've never read a murder mystery that gave me such a rich impression of a steamy romance, but here we are. This super short book went down SMOOTH. If you see my eyes bugging out it's only because of the fumes.

Definitely a must-read for ... anyone.

It was good getting back to reading some Chandler and following Marlowe around as we wind up the final touches on this year. Reportedly, The Long Goodbye, the sixth of the seven books in the Marlowe series, was the most personal to Chandler. There are two characters (Lennox, Wade) who are central to the plot who are emblematic of some of the personal vices and pitfalls in Chandler’s own life. I have heard also that this was Chandler’s favorite of his novels.

I would say that in this novel more so than any of the other Marlowe’s I have read, there is less a focus on the actual plot (which does get quite a bit confusing in the second half), and more focus on the actual character of Marlowe. Within the scope of the plot, Marlowe’s commentary and cynicism is there, but also there is a bit of a more reflective, philosophical nature to him as he tries to care for a drunk friend (Lennox) and, then later, tries to solve a murder mystery that has unfolded.

I really thought Chandler’s prose through Marlowe’s point of view and perspective is so on point and sharp: “Guys with a hundred million dollars live a peculiar life, behind a screen of servants, bodyguards, secretaries, lawyers, and tame executives. Presumably, they eat, sleep, get their hair cut, and wear clothes. But you never know for sure. Everything you read or hear about them has been processed by a public relations gang of guys who are paid big money to maintain and create a usable personality….”

At one point, Marlowe becomes entangled and embroiled himself in the murder case and suspected, and, along the way, must deal with many seedy, unpredictable, and unsavory characters in the city as he tries to solve the case on his own. There are quite a few shenanigans pulled by these said characters, and it is always interesting how Marlowe tries to read them and size up the potential damage before he proceeds.

I would venture to say that, while The Long Goodbye is definitely a mystery (there is one key mystery at hand, but one could make the case that there are two or three other minor mysteries to be revealed), I think most of the emphasis is on the study of Marlowe.

The ending (or endings, as I felt like there were several “endings” here) does get a bit murky and muddled, and the finale might be a tad unbelievable, but I guess I could forgive it because over all I was just impressed with how Chandler put everything together.

There is also a film version, 1973’s “The Long Goodbye”, with Elliot Gould in the role of Marlowe, that I’m interested in viewing.

An excellent 6th Philip Marlowe novel, this was excellently put together with an intriguing intricate plot that is bigger in scope and detail than previous Marlowe novels coming in at 450 pages. This moved along in a nice manner with great dialogue and humour which aids the well put together plot. Really enjoyable and highly recommended..

I've read this one two or three times and just love the prose. I'll be reading it again soon and I don't say that about many books.

Reading Chandler is like unravelling a ball of tangled yarn, just when you think you've found the end you hit another knot.

“I went out the kitchen to make coffee - yards of coffee. Rich, strong, bitter, boiling hot, ruthless, depraved. The life blood of tired men.”

I'm not a big fan of this type of book. Its pages are populated with tough, hard-bitten, cynical men, who think that wise cracking and punching people are normal ways to communicate. The world in here is filled only with the dregs of humanity - be they millionaires or unemployed bums, they are all the scum of the earth. The reason being, we learn by inference, is that the world is a hollow cheat, and nearly all humans are rotten to the core just waiting an excuse to lie, steal or kill.

It's not a view I'm all that fond of and the short clipped sentences, smart-ass patter and the constant contempt for humanity (especially it often seems, the female part of it) wears me down.

The 'hero' of Raymond Chandlers series is the private detective Philip Marlowe a perfect example of this hard boiled sort of guy. He's straight (both morally and sexually), doesn't like being given the run around and generally thinks everything is pretty lousy.

“I'm a licensed private investigator and have been for quite a while. I'm a lone wolf, unmarried, getting middle-aged, and not rich. I've been in jail more than once and I don't do divorce business. I like liquor and women and chess and a few other things. The cops don't like me too well, but I know a couple I get along with. I'm a native son, born in Santa Rosa, both parents dead, no brothers or sisters, and when I get knocked off in a dark alley sometime, if it happens, as it could to anyone in my business, nobody will feel that the bottom has dropped out of his or her life.”

I won't give a synopsis of the plot, like most of these types it's hopelessly convoluted and all you really need to know if you read it is that nearly everyone in the book will be trying to use Marlowe in some way or be lying to him, or be trying to beat him up because he's a smart talking wise guy who should learn to keep his mouth shut.

Philip Marlowe isn't the sort of guy who thinks tact is a virtue when dealing with rich people. As he puts it “I belonged in Idle Valley like a pearl onion on a banana split.” Which is kinda sweet in a way; this must have been a time when a banana split was somehow considered luxurious and a little bit decadent... :-)

He's independent and won't kiss anybody's arse no matter how large their bank account. In fact he pretty much despises the wealthy right from the get go, because: “There ain't no clean way to make a hundred million bucks.... Somewhere along the line guys got pushed to the wall, nice little businesses got the ground cut out from under them... Decent people lost their jobs.... Big money is big power and big power gets used wrong. It's the system.”

Of course he probably also despises you if you're a cop, a drunk or a woman. Really, it's not much of a surprise that Phillip Marlowe doesn't seem to have a whole lot of friends :-)

I found this a little more interesting than my previous dips into the genre, mostly because the woman hating was kept to a low (comparatively) and the plot was followable until the end when I started losing the thread a little. So I've probably marked it a little higher than I normally would.

This knocked my socks off. I've read some of his others and they were good. This one is excellent.

Not only does it get the language and mores of a certain place and time, but doubles down on the core self-identities of at least 4 different people. Philip Marlowe being just one of the soul captured. Post-war and high detachment times in both moneyed and shoddy surroundings. But despite the unstudied language and the earthy emotional and visual overloads, the pure clean regard of man to man's "essence" comes through completely. There is no trouble for that stream (despite very little truth telling) in translation between Marlowe and Lennox.

My radar surmised the perp before the book reveal, but just before.

And was this "ahead of its era" in the copper dissing mode or what! They parleyed like Dragnet in parts but they sure certainly didn't deal consequence the same. For those of you who even know what Dragnet was.

This also has layers. With the crust of high elegance covering a seeping, teeming underlay of both stale disdain and putrefying long term soggy wounds. Marlowe is also even more rude, self-involved and most often uncaring than usual in the all around, but at his most intimate to connection here at the same time. Much more than in his other escapades, IMHO. Almost like a "Band of Brothers" thing going on. I saw that a lot with the WWII and Vietnam veterans of age myself. Not often, but with such intensity that nearly all else became "the others".

Well, I am certainly going to read Little Sister and the others I'd missed now.

Whew!

Last thought that I couldn't get out of my mind all throughout the last third of the book! How the juxtaposition of today's (nearly 2018) opinion of men's sexual advance and women's role in the workplace for sexual alliances when it occurs. How that has been earthquake altered into such a crooked set of "eyes". Seeing so many women in business of all levels (from the factory warehouse line to the high Loop CEO offices)in the 1960's and 1970's myself! How they played the aggressive role, not every time for sure but quite often. (More than Joanie on Mad Men and especially in power/foreman factory positions.) How they (THE WOMEN)would do the visual overload so craftily and use the sex card to climb into "better". And how now in a kind of Roundhead Cromwell kind of calling out, the power monger is always slated as the nasty testosterone flawed man side of being the user! What blindness to a recognition in their being reverse directions to the dance. So much so as it has occurred in past reality especially, in order to obscure one and demonize the other while in the same sweep also judging and sentencing by rote while using the standards of one era for censure and outcomes in another!

Hands down the best of Raymond Chandler and Philip Marlowe. I loved it. So many strong lines, I could have highlighted almost the whole book! I think this book shows Marlowe in his very best light, but was also pretty sad.

At first The Long Goodbye seemed like a far more complex book than The Big Sleep because the character of Marlowe, heartless and invincible and infallible in the latter, in the former is fleshed out with various forms of weakness (subjectively defined). These include a tendency towards the romantic, bravado and braggadocio, insatiable curiosity (the bane of many existences, not least the young elephant's), and an inability to let well alone. A sharp contrast is drawn between his masterful and knowing demeanor and his apparent standing in the world, but the very sharpness raises questions about the validity of the contrast itself. Is Marlowe a picaresque tough guy battling his way through a big cruel world with every tool he's got? Is he a blustering, bumbling, overcurious smart ass with a tendency for emotional overinvestment in his work? Is he a misunderstood hero sacrificing himself on the altar of justice? Is he playing the other characters like chess pieces? Is he clued in or clueless, or both, and if so then which is the act? Is he a self-deluded loser?

I think this ambiguity, or complexity, is deliberate on Chandler's part. You could ask the very same questions about him, and about the book, but in Marlowe's words, "it's a nice quiet way to go crazy. You don't even scream, but you come awfully close."

Chandler does with words what Gershwin did with musical
notes. The result here is a personal work. Yet, the Altman movie is far better than the book.