Showing posts with label literature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label literature. Show all posts

Friday, February 3, 2017

The Long Goodbye: Don Quixote in the twentieth century is a private detective


The arts in general owe a debt of gratitude not sufficiently recognized to William Randolph Hearst, the press tycoon: to serve as an inspiration for the film "Citizen Kane" and the novel "The Long Goodbye", should count for more than a simple anecdotal detail.


In the detective novel ranking, Raymond Chandler may be ranking second after Dashiell Hammet, author of "Red Harvest" and the archetypal "The Maltese Falcon", but for me, he will always be the first. He is the novelist I always wanted to be.

Chandler completed just seven novels, all about the same character, the private detective Philip Marlowe, living and surviving in the always ruthless Los Angeles. Unlike the "blond Satan" known as Sam Spade (Hammet's relentless detective), Marlowe's constant inner monologue, which serves as the basis for the novelist Chandler's narration, makes him much closer and more pleasing to the reader. Obviating this, the difference between Marlowe’s and Spade’s working methods is virtually non-existent.

Critics place "The Long Goodbye" under “Farewell, My Lovely” and "The Big Sleep", but I resent this having read the latter, because "The Long Goodbye" surpasses it by far. Chandler ages and matures, and this is reflected in detective Marlowe, who ages and matures in the same way. His healthy distrust not only of mobsters but also the legendarily corrupt Los Angeles Sheriff's Office (LASO), finally becomes plain misanthropy; Marlowe is more faithful to principles such as "friendship", “love” and especially "truth" than to people.

Philip Marlowe enters into a complicated friendship with an alcoholic veteran named Terry Lennox, with scars both on his face and in his spirit, who has no problem in becoming (for the second time!)  the paid cuckold of a millionaire heiress even more drunk and dissipated than he is. After awhile, the moocher appears at Marlowe's house, asking him to be taken to Tijuana. The detective agrees under the sole condition of not telling him anything at all. Returning alone to Los Angeles, Marlowe is arrested and beaten by the police after he refuses to answer questions.

When he’s finally let go, he discovers that Lennox is blamed for the brutal murder of his wife, who happens to be the daughter of a millionaire newspapers owner, and who appears to have brutally forced the official investigation to an end. Marlowe, who has posthumously received from Lennox a "portrait of Madison," that is, a $ 5,000 bill, feels that it is his duty to investigate non-stop, without granting a single concession, until he proves the veteran's innocence, who’s the real culprit and finds out how sordid is the sordid the real truth.

Los Angeles in the novel is the same city of vice and depravity that appears in so many other novels and films, and the detective is crossing thru the vile fountains where they sin and crime flourish. In one novel the fountain can be the anachronistic world of pornographic libraries and the everlasting illegal gambling dens, or like in this one, colonies of "artists" where alcohol and drugs are the order of the day, not to mention the golden cages for wealthy elderlies, better known as "geriatric nursing homes", and doctor's offices where the doctor is more than willing to relieve you with morphine of your "pain" if the price is right.

It is disheartening that many of the vices that Marlowe’s world fights seem to be legal (or very close to being) now. But Marlowe would not mind, he would go on fighting for the truth and serving justice. Throughout the seven novels written by Chandler, it is clear that Philip Marlowe never stops, despite the requests of the evildoers, his own clients and even the police. 

The social critique of the novel is poignant: a mocking radiography of the publishing industry, Hollywood scriptwriters, the LASO (whose head is focused only on doing well in newspaper photos and riding his beloved horse), the millionaire elite of the metropolis, the wrong way in which it is dgrowing, already on its way to become one of the largest in the world in terms of occupied territory, the press and the pettiness of the petty-bourgeois mobsters.

Also notable is the monologue where Potter, the ruthless and fearful tycoon, expresses to Marlowe his discontent with mid-twentieth-century society, starting with his own free-speech-mongering newspapers (only yearning to sell "sex, gossip and scandal" instead of serving their readers), and not limited to the hoopla represented by cosmetics and beauty articles. Another memorable monologue is that of Lieutenant Bernie Ohls, where he denounces how the deception of political correctness begins to permeate the police force, and grimly predicts that at the turn of ten years that police officers instead of practicing boxing and shooting, will be applying Rorschach and word association tests, so they could make the delinquents stop hating their mothers and finally reform.

Even more memorable, with an unmistakable reminder of self-deprecation is Marlowe's monologue, where he makes it clear that to become a detective one needs to be little less than a distressed Quixote, just to be getting punches, bullets and problems all the time, but that would never stop him from giving to a cop hell.

What about Hearst? In a not-so veiled form for the reader of the era, he is referred to one of the darkest facts in Hollywood history: the death of the film mogul Thomas Ince at the Oneida yacht, owned by Hearst. It is said that he may have accidentally died in place of Charlie Chaplin, whom Hearst tried to kill for seducing Marion Davies, his lover. William Randolph Hearst allegedly used all his strength to cover up the fact, not unlike how Harlan Potter closed the investigation of his daughter's murder, letting the corpse of Terry Lennox bear the blame. Marlowe is responsible for restoring his reputation by giving the culprit and making it public, which is a way of saying goodbye to his friend.

Also the ending is incredible; The last sentence of the novel says: "I never saw any of them again ─ except the cops. No way has yet been invented to say goodbye to them."

Saturday, July 9, 2011

Idols of Clay IV: A Beef with a Few Writers

In July, the month in which the sipmac team brings down more idols from their pedestals, they could not miss some writers. It might be true that no one can take away the dancing (dancing as being literary success or sales) from them, but with them we have anyway a couple of issues to fix:

Sam Clemens / Mark Twain: It is quite an experience to read Tom Sawyer with the innocent eyes of a child, and another one with the eyes of a cynical adult. In a nutshell, Mark Twain did not have any respect for his own characters. I do not mean to Aunt Polly (even if Mr. Twain mocks his prudishness without any consideration) or the inhabitants of St. Petersburg in general (more straitlaced, impossible), but the protagonists: Twain enjoys the lack of culture and sublimely naive vision that Tom and Huckleberry Finn with which they embrace the world. Just read the end of “Tom Sawyer” or the part of “Huckleberry Finn” in which he goes to the circus, or worse, the liberation of the slave Jim at the end of the novel.

Let's say that the only revenge he could take Tom was the fact that Clemens, the most unrepentant scoffer of the 19th century, was a spendthrift, forcing the author to keep writing Tom Sawyer sequels.
Ian Fleming: undoubtedly the creation of the “James Bond” character should grant him a place in the pantheon of letters, even if the critics could not even reluctantly agree. The literary James Bond is much more remarkable than his film counterpart. Still, please never make the big mistake of reading three of his novels one after the other. I started with "Goldfinger" and then went for "Casino Royale". By the time I read "From Russia with Love", I just read the approach of the plot, left the story in the part where Bond arrives in Turkey and then returned to the scene of the Nash monologue. I did not feel I missed anything.

Jorge Ycaza: no doubt his claim to the exploitation of indigenous people in Ecuador in "Huasipungo" is valiant, but although the priest's misdeeds were taken from real life, the book is not without an anticlerical whiff, not to mention other clichés that threaten to turn the novel into a pamphlet. For many readers there is not a problem, and "Ñucanchic Husipungo!" is a battle cry as good as any other, but the work does not surpass the propagandistic tone, especially in the agit-prop reeking final paragraph of the work.

Stephen King: "The Stand" endures the test of time and a thousand-odd pages were absolutely necessary to describe how today's society could crumble and collapse by spreading a deadly plague, and what happens immediately after the epidemic decimates the humanity is engaging, but turning Randall Flagg again and again as a villain, simply makes you completely lose respect for him, because nobody likes a villain who fails again and again (unless it is a comic book). Flagg is inept. Witness his failure in "The Eyes of the Dragon", then he appears again in "The Dark Tower"... the thing becomes repetitive and booooring.

Besides, other works by King began to falter over time and do not allow a rereading (Either "Pet Sematary" was mistranslated or it was plain awful from the beginning).

Tom Clancy is a great writer of best sellers, but I have never been thrilled by anything the guy has ever written. I do not remember if I read "Patriot Games" or "Clear and Present Danger", but it felt at the end like a lot of loose ends remained untied. Anyway, I should concede that the translation may have something to do well.


That's all for now (Cervantes, Shakespeare and Tolstoy, you can rest with easy by now.)
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, August 2, 2010

Christine, wherever you are, please take 'em up!


Have you ever been driving a F-150 through the desert at dawn? Watching the full moon four times bigger as you watch it in the city? It doesn't matter, if you can drive a car you may have your perfect driving moment and you may still be keeping to yourself, because it is kind of a zen experience you don't want to ruin by sharing it with a stranger.

Anyway, I should thank first Stephen King for introducing me to the then unknown pleasures of driving at the tender age of 13. I read his best-seller Christine, and boy did my life change after that. I thought I could relate a lot to Arnie Cunningham, who always had to put up with tons of misery until he found a little happiness and then his life force would be taken from him for good.
But he was driving the perfect car: a red-white '58 Plymouth Fury. Made just for him. Oh, did I tell you before how much I like rock 'n roll? Every time I see a fiftysomething Chevrolet Bel-Air, a Pontiac or an old Studebaker, I remember immediatly:


From the Beach Boys to the Beatles to Jan and Dean and a very long et cetera, driving a cool car and rock 'n roll music belong together. But not anymore. In the name of political correctness and enviromentalism, we have to endure this:

Driving a car won't be as fun as it used to be. Thanks for nothing, GM.

Christine, wherever you are, please take 'em up!

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

The newest ego-boosting tool for english-language bloggers!


Thanks to Ms. Cynthia Yockey for the tip, for starters. Dr. sipmac always wanted to analyze what was wrong with Paul Maršić, so that he went straight ahead to the I write like website, used a recent post about the french nagging police to let the computer program compare his writing, and voilá:


I write like
James Joyce

I Write Like by Mémoires, Mac journal software. Analyze your writing!


Later, sip used another post, the one with Jorge Luis Borges. Guess what the website said?


I write like
Leo Tolstoy

I Write Like by Mémoires, Mac journal software. Analyze your writing!


It looks already like Maršić's banking account is going to skyrocket this month... and If sip adds a few more paragraphs...

I write like
Cory Doctorow

I Write Like by Mémoires, Mac journal software. Analyze your writing!


Well, that is a heckuva website, as stimulating as egosurfing, I'm quite sure. BTW, will in the meanwhile the real Paul Maršić please stand up?

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

"Kick Ass" kicks the comic books and superhero movies standards you know where

Warning: No big spoilers here - safe to read

By Dr. sipmac


¿Jan Luc Picard or James Tiberius Kirk? ¿Star Wars or Star Trek? ¿Law and Order or CSI? ¿DC or Marvel? Dr. sipmac's heart still belongs to the DC Universe, and he remembers how when he was a child he used to think of the Marvel superheroes as second-rate Super Friends wannabes. While Superman had a succesful major motion picture, Captain America had a lame movie to offer (a little research tells Dr. sipmac that it had to be one of the two 1979 TV Movies starred by Reb Brown or both). It was sometimes utterly painful to watch Peter Parker being regularly abused by J. Jonah Jameson, even if it was a cartoon. Hey, you can tell anything you want about Clark Kent, but he never took abuse from anybody just the way Parker did. And, ¿have you ever seen the dreadful Marvel cartoons of the WWII era?

But nowadays Dr. sipmac recognizes that Marvel has done a superior job since the begining, and always had the ambition to aim always for something different and edgier than its competitor, even within the boundaries of the Comics Code Authority. And it has handsomely paid off: The X Men movies, the Hulk movies, the Fantastic Four Movies, the Iron Man movies... and on the other side, a lame attempt to revive the Superman franchise and (fortunately) the Dark Knight.
Maybe Dr. sipmac oversimplyfies in his analysis, but you may think he's getting the overall picture right. Marvel connects a lot better with the readers than DC does and sets the trend where competitors parasitically thrive. The trendsetting example this time is, as the title already revealed, "Kick Ass". There is a lot of reviews for this movie, sip is not going to try to top, but he feels the need to share still a few more thoughts.

As in Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius, literature, even in the form of the "despicable" comic books is approaching reality and slowly reshapingly it. In the Golden Age of Comic books it took an extra-terrestrial or a multi-millionaire to fight crime; in the Silver Age the lead was taken by a geek that gained radioactive superpowers, and the modern age artists like to praise the exploits of superheroes with no powers, even no special training. Just like Kick Ass. Well, and that modern age Batman, the awesome and lethal Hit Girl.

For sip, it was hauntingly attractive to write a story about a superhero-without-powers for years. Well, you can say it's too late, it is already been done. But you didn't knew that the first requirement for that implausibly plausible character was his insanity. Yes, for Dr. sipmac it was clear from the beginning that the protagonist had to be a complete nutcase, with his madness barely concealed. Sip imagined an insignificant hard working clerk, a worthless peon tired with his mindless job, that decides to "fight evil" after working hours. He would dress as... a giant bird. He would drive an old clunker across the city until he could find something he could fight for.

And now you may think, sip, it's really too late. You are talking about Big Daddy, the father of Hit-Girl. No, sip is surely talking, er... retelling Don Quixote. Just think about it: take the superpowers or the special skills away from a costumed hero and tell me what you get? Don't be shy... yes, a ridiculous, insane and senseless person. A Don Quixote.

It surely can be found ideology traces in the comic book-movie tandem, but you (maybe) never thought you could find even deeper meaning in this externally harsh and coarse presentation. We need more Don Quixotes in this world.

What are you waiting for? Go and watch the movie!

Friday, March 19, 2010

Jorge Luis Borges, Patron Saint of the Internet? Well, Yes and No.

If there is anybody of whom I can assuredly identify myself as an admirer, without bothering too much by recognizing it, without being ashamed by blushing, that’s Jorge Luis Borges. An Argentinean man of letters, poet, a writer of short stories, reviews, essays and literary critiques; he was born in 1899, died in 1986. Married twice. These are very schematic details of a very interesting life. What happens in between will be discussed here, in the accustomed way of Paul: eclectically, disorganized and incoherently.

Every writer/creator admitted to the Pantheon of the Greatest (immortal, universal literature classic- you know-) normally leaves to the posterity a very powerful image to be remembered for eons: Cervantes had Don Quixote and Sancho, Shakespeare had Romeo and Juliet and Hamlet, García Márquez had Colonel Aureliano Buendía. Others leave as a powerful image, not a character but a place: Thomas Moro left his Utopia, the same García Márquez has Macondo; Borges belongs in this second category. We vaguely could remember the affront suffered by Emma Zunz, or the affront perpetrated by Kilpatrick, but we always better remember Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius and the Library of Babel both as two of the most marvelous and at the same time monstrous visions of universal literature.

Talking about the extraordinary capacity that Borges had for playing (and toying, why not?) with ideas might be redundant, but one has to do it. To describe a world, in which Berkelian idealism molds every knowledge, perception, civilization and language (Bite on that bullet, Chomsky!), and in the meanwhile materialism is not a heresy, but the mother of all heresies, that is more than scholar’s trickery: it takes years to metabolize the whole short story and grasp all the ramifications coming out of it. I’m still thinking of Tlön (and Uqbar, and Orbis Tertius, for that matter), and I know I’ll never go too far.

Why? Because we’re not Jorge Luis Borges. Most of us weren’t born in a bilingual family at the crossroads of XIX and XX centuries, nor we didn’t spend our early childhood and adolescence in a big family library, nor we weren’t taken from Buenos Aires to Switzerland and then to Spain; i.e., we didn’t have our whole lives to prepare an erudition comparable to that belonging to the Universal Argentinean himself. Some people is going to elaborate about Infinite Monkey Theorem ad nauseam, but is remarkable indeed, that humanity had to wait some 1950 or 1400 (consider the source) years from the destruction of the Alexandria Library, for someone bold enough to conceive the Total Library: The Library of Babel, in which all the knowledge that was, is and will be exists, and the one that isn’t, too.That is Borges.

By the way, could you imagine the power of the Librarian that could grasp the order of such a library? Well, it would be bigger than a poultry inspector for the Buenos Aires municipal market, for sure. That ‘promotion’, from the post of head librarian, was an indignity our writer had to suffer, a courtesy of the newly arrived peronista regime, as a reminder of what totalitarian regimes, dictatorships and chieftains really mean to literature. But why bother, Borges himself said:
Dictatorships foster oppression, dictatorships foster servitude, dictatorships foster cruelty; more abominable is the fact that they foster idiocy.
I insist in things like these, because thanks to them, the Nobel Prize of Literature awards more ideological affinity than real talent. Borges, being basically a conservative, it is said he lost every chance of winning by committing the mortal sin of accepting an award in Pinochet’s Chile (he would regret that later). Besides, what about Kafka? Too much of an offbeat writer, or too much of a posthumous writer? And Joyce? And Proust? It is said that the greatest cable channel that never existed could be made with all the series Fox cancelled. Well, you could easily create quite an anthology with all the Nobel rejects.

Not all is bitterness: Borges could have make mistakes, but his achievements and regrets are securing the place he rightfully deserves in our time. For instance, being named by Wikipedia as his precursor, is a vindication. According to its Spanish article on him, the way the artistic and scientific works were published in Tlön, resembles a lot of that of the Wikipedia (with the same ideological bias uniformity, I might add).

Without fake modesty, I’ve been thinking of this for years, the question was if Borges preconfigured or preconceived the Internet. Nowadays anybody could say yes, being Internet a combination of the encyclopedic project Orbis Tertius, inserted in a Library of Babel (you know, the Labyrinths are kind of a Borges' specialty). What makes me doubt is thinking that the Internet era could not give birth to Jorge Luis Borges. Being born in these times, his energies would have been channeled into developing software, videogames or virtual reality environments. Our real and historic Borges deals a lot better  being considered as custodian and/or Saint Patron of the pre-Internet culture. It was the traditional culture, with its information-flow limitations, and the language barrier partially dissembled by someone who only realized after years that a part of his family spoke English and the other one spoke Spanish. That was the culture that allowed him to visualize in the virtual reality of the human imagination, the virtual reality of the computers.


I strongly recommend the reading of Jorge Luis Borges. FULL DISCLOSURE: I’m not even halfway to read his complete works yet.

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Dialoguing – A Pseudo-Mini-Soap-Opera in American Fashion


- Hi!
- Ya doin’?
- Uh-huh.
- You look like shit, son! What happened?
- Nah, just watching TV ‘till 3am every day…
- You’re nuts…
- …and the internet…
- You just better get a life, son.
- I do have one. I work. I care for my family. I don’t drink too much and stuff.
- But what’s the big deal with staying in front of a tube *for hours* just after everybody’s asleep? In a while you won’t be able to work and care for your family. Are you in trouble with your wifey?
- Nah, everything’s fine. It happens… hey pop, TV and Internet are like… my kind of junk, but I’m not hurting anybody.
- It’s my time to intervene son. You’re right. You’re like hooked. And you are hurting yourself.
- Just drop it, dad. I’ll sleep a little more on weekends.
- You have to confront your problem son, you’ll burn out.
- I don’t think so…
- Again, what’s the big deal watching this? You’re watching gossip-shows and conspiracy shit, I would even understand if you were watching porn, but this is boring.
- …well, you might be right, dad. The first rounds between Rosie and the Donald were ok, but I wish it were over now, but it keeps going and going. I am not interested anymore if Britney is wearing panties or not, if she was drunk at Pure or not. It was sorta fun to watch Tara being a dupe, but she’s looking more and more like a drunkard and it makes me pity her. K-Fed is not even worth to talk about. The gas smell over New York might be a mind-control device, or it means the big apple is really rotten, who cares. The 9-11 perpetrators were: the liberals, al-Qaeda, Skulls and Bones, all of them, take your pick.
- Yeah, er… it’s actually boring, you see?

Wednesday, April 19, 2006

In Cold Blood - A Political Prism?

Last Sunday I was reading the papers and I found an interesting piece about a well-known left-wing columnist commenting In Cold Blood – both the movie and the book. Until now, I have not seen the movie yet – so I won't discuss that part. But it seems the columnist and I read two different books - That's Art with a capital A, folks! You only need the rosy-red glasses to read a different work and you can sympathize with Perry Smith!

For me it was comprehension. You could see what a miserable life it was for the two murderers and their so-called adventures before and after their infamous massacre. But you could see that before there was a little ordinary life they could have continued.
You can go on and on about the Depression years, how difficult it was for the Smiths, but despite what the author says, they still had a chance – witness Bobo. The current TV-Law-and-Order version is that criminals have little chance of redemption. The Capote pals never found real remorse – according to the book. Maybe they found it, but then the author and the critic may have found it lessening the literary quality of the novel.

Anyway, sympathizing with the murderers feels like desecrating the Clutters' memory. That's the point. No piece victimizing the perpetrators will undo that.

Dr. sipmac has ranted.
Enhanced by Zemanta