Very well written essay.
An unintended salute to arrangers and choreographers.
I live in Mexico half of the year, specifically in Mazatlan. Although Osborne does a credible job of portraying the seamy side of the culture and country, he totally misses the joy and exhilaration that also infuse the Mexican experience. Although I did somewhat enjoy his incomplete atmospherics, the plot was MIA. Two thirds of the way through I gave up. I just did not care anymore. Just to be clear, I really enjoyed his novel Beautiful Animals. Perhaps - as he suggests - this was just not his subject matter.
Wow, Mr. Osborne! What a formidable job!
Stand (as it were) at the door of the tomb and summon Philip Marlowe. Bid him walk forth--take up the threads of his old life--be a gumshoe again.
I am an ardent Chandler aficionado--though I cannot claim to have read ALL the novels. I've read four--but those I've read over and over. Love 'em all! Every one!
Two things:
(1) This I have read about Somerset Maugham (years ago). Had a play he wanted produced. "Okay" said the director, "but on one condition.
"Compose seventy five epigrams and put 'em in your play."
So he did. The job only took a few hours.
Chandler could turn out an epigram with the best of them. Epigrams are not writing. Not really. They're epigrams. But the mysteries are loaded with smart, scintillating phrases:
"My bank account was trying to crawl under a duck."
"You might have something there--but I wouldn't squeeze it."
(2) Description. THIS you cannot fake. No way. Chandler had a marvelous eye--and oh! how that matters.
In "Farewell, My Lovely"--that description (chapter 8 is it?) of Marlowe driving out along the Pacific in the twilight (after the dust and grit of Bay City)--looking out at the gulls ("flying bomber formation')--climbing that long flight of stairs . . .
. ..oh Mr. Lawrence, I LOVE that chapter. I read it over and over again.
Mr. Osborne--
--you sound like a worthy successor--
--to Raymond Chandler himself.
And that, sir, is high praise.
Thank you.
Read the book. Made me sad.
Thanks to Laurence Osborne for this fascinating and revealing piece. I am a great admirer of his other novels - The Forgiven; Ballad of a Small Player; Beautiful Animals; and Hunters in the Dark (the latter churlishly and inappropriately reviewed in the NYT by Lee Child - which was like having McDonalds' head chef review an Alain Ducasse restaurant - and whose review focused weirdly on and took umbrage with a descriptor in the jacket copy written, likely, by the publisher's marketing staff). I am, clearly, a great fan of Mr. Osborne's work. Oddly, I am in the midst of reading (or re-reading - I am at an age when I am not always quite sure) Graham Greene's "The Comedians," and it is a great pleasure to see not only Mr. Osborne's literary affiliation to Greene, but how Mr. Osborn has invigorated Greene's style and tradition of cultural investigation and conflict for today's world more attuned to issues of race, class and colonialism. I'm excited to see how and where he takes us with Philip Marlowe and the rich multifaceted elements of Mexico's people, culture and landscape.
1
I read Osborne's book. It's really a poor attempt at Chandler, resulting in possibly the worst Marlowe depiction I could imagine. And the story is lame, dull, uninspired.
Osborne can write, but he should have left Chandler & Marlowe alone.
This reminds me of my screenwriting days, when I was asked by the producer Jerry Bick who produced, The Long Goodbye, to do a screen adaptation of, The Lady in the Lake. All the same issues you faced and clearly handled neatly - fear of the pastiche, the cliches, feeling like both the ventriloquist and the dummy - I didn’t handle so well and the project went the way of so many Hollywood efforts. Still, it was fun for me to inhabit that special voice while trying to breathe new life, and my own POV, into the process. I admire your courage and success in taking on such a challenge.