What Does Raymond Chandler Have To Teach Us? - CrimeSpace2024-03-29T01:44:11Zhttps://crimespace.ning.com/forum/topics/what-does-raymond-chandler?commentId=537324%3AComment%3A257051&feed=yes&xn_auth=noExcellent point about explain…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-12-27:537324:Comment:2592462010-12-27T14:23:22.451ZDana Kinghttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/DanaKing
Excellent point about explaining, Minerva. When I wonder if I need to explain something, I fall back on the mantra, "What Would The Wire Do?' Simon et al explained very little, and improved the show greatly by (not) doing so. The Wire would have been just another TV show if they had made sure everyone got everything. It's viewers had to commit to catching and hanging on as best they could. Not the key to mass market success, but certainly for quality.
Excellent point about explaining, Minerva. When I wonder if I need to explain something, I fall back on the mantra, "What Would The Wire Do?' Simon et al explained very little, and improved the show greatly by (not) doing so. The Wire would have been just another TV show if they had made sure everyone got everything. It's viewers had to commit to catching and hanging on as best they could. Not the key to mass market success, but certainly for quality. For my money, Chandler is the…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-12-27:537324:Comment:2592362010-12-27T07:54:18.537ZminervaKhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/minervakoenig
<p>For my money, Chandler is the king of "show, don't tell." I can't give a specific example at the moment (flat on my back, prisoner of several cats), but I would add:</p>
<p> </p>
<p>6. Never explain. If you have to explain, you've either put something in that isn't necessary, or left something out that is essential.</p>
<p>For my money, Chandler is the king of "show, don't tell." I can't give a specific example at the moment (flat on my back, prisoner of several cats), but I would add:</p>
<p> </p>
<p>6. Never explain. If you have to explain, you've either put something in that isn't necessary, or left something out that is essential.</p> Elmore's website just list Th…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-12-06:537324:Comment:2577662010-12-06T22:24:36.167ZJack Getzehttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/JGetze
Elmore's website just list The Friends of Eddie Coyle as one of Leonard's favorite books.
Elmore's website just list The Friends of Eddie Coyle as one of Leonard's favorite books. This is a link to Chandler's…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-12-04:537324:Comment:2576072010-12-04T00:30:27.962ZJoyce Ann Fugithttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/JoyceAnnFugit
This is a link to Chandler's famous essay published in <i>The Atlantic Monthly (now The Atlantic)</i> on writing crime novels: <i>The Simple Art of Murder</i>:<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.en.utexas.edu/amlit/amlitprivate/scans/chandlerart.html" target="_blank">http://www.en.utexas.edu/amlit/amlitprivate/scans/chandlerart.html</a><br/>
I believe he is making the point that a good story should be about "redemption."
This is a link to Chandler's famous essay published in <i>The Atlantic Monthly (now The Atlantic)</i> on writing crime novels: <i>The Simple Art of Murder</i>:<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.en.utexas.edu/amlit/amlitprivate/scans/chandlerart.html" target="_blank">http://www.en.utexas.edu/amlit/amlitprivate/scans/chandlerart.html</a><br/>
I believe he is making the point that a good story should be about "redemption." May I suggest reading George…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-11-27:537324:Comment:2571402010-11-27T00:06:52.783ZSusanhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Susan
May I suggest reading George V. Higgins' The Friends of Eddie Coyle? Almost all dialogue, not a word wasted. Higgins conveys character through dialogue like no one else ... even Elmore Leonard was a fan of his.
May I suggest reading George V. Higgins' The Friends of Eddie Coyle? Almost all dialogue, not a word wasted. Higgins conveys character through dialogue like no one else ... even Elmore Leonard was a fan of his. I said pretty much the same (…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-11-25:537324:Comment:2570822010-11-25T19:12:50.959ZI. J. Parkerhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Ingpark
I said pretty much the same (a lot more scathingly) in "What are you reading?". I started HIGH WINDOW, and was appalled and bored by the totally useless mass of detail in the scene description that starts the book. I next saw the same detail in character description and found the character to be an absolutely flat rendition of the proverbial "rich bitch." From that point on, the plot looked predictable and I tossed the book.<br />
<br />
Much of the older detective fiction suffers from flat characters and…
I said pretty much the same (a lot more scathingly) in "What are you reading?". I started HIGH WINDOW, and was appalled and bored by the totally useless mass of detail in the scene description that starts the book. I next saw the same detail in character description and found the character to be an absolutely flat rendition of the proverbial "rich bitch." From that point on, the plot looked predictable and I tossed the book.<br />
<br />
Much of the older detective fiction suffers from flat characters and puzzle plots. No excuse for that, and one of the reasons I don't read those books any more. That includes British and American detectives. The excess of detail and length of speeches may be more the customary style of the time. Point by Point
1. Keep in le…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-11-25:537324:Comment:2570742010-11-25T16:51:42.610ZJackBludishttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/JackBludis
Point by Point<br></br>
<br></br>
1. Keep in lean.<br></br>
Chandler wastes a lot of words with overly long descriptions that others here call "setting the scene." But many people just love that. I'm not among them.<br></br>
<br></br>
2. Make Dialogue Count.<br></br>
I can't argue with this one. But he does deliver long-winded speeches that although unrealistic work well in context.<br></br>
<br></br>
3. Set A Scene.<br></br>
See 1. Keep in lean.<br></br>
<br></br>
4. Create Characters With More Than One Dimension. I think almost every…
Point by Point<br/>
<br/>
1. Keep in lean.<br/>
Chandler wastes a lot of words with overly long descriptions that others here call "setting the scene." But many people just love that. I'm not among them.<br/>
<br/>
2. Make Dialogue Count.<br/>
I can't argue with this one. But he does deliver long-winded speeches that although unrealistic work well in context.<br/>
<br/>
3. Set A Scene.<br/>
See 1. Keep in lean.<br/>
<br/>
4. Create Characters With More Than One Dimension. I think almost every major or secondary character in every Chandler story is holding something back.<br/>
If no one holds anything back, there is no story. But he does do great characters.<br/>
<br/>
5. Create Chemistry Between Characters.<br/>
Again, if a writer doesn't do that, where is the story.<br/>
<br/>
Comment:<br/>
Rather than call this, "What Does Raymond Chandler Have To Teach Us?" Jim Thomsen might have said, "What makes good fiction."<br/>
<br/>
Yes, Chandler is pretty good but I recently read "The Big Sleep," "The Long Goodbye," and "Fairwell, My Lovely," back-to-back-to-back, and I saw many flaws in Chandler.<br/>
<br/>
Overly long social comment that really was not part of the story.<br/>
<br/>
Very long speeches.<br/>
<br/>
Great figures of speech, but also metaphors and similes that seemed to be force in with a shoehorn.<br/>
<br/>
All the criticism being said, I feel that Chandler is probably the best private-eye writer of all time, although "The Maltese Falcon" is the best private-eye novel. Dashiell Hammett wrote "The Maltese Falcon" for those one or two who don't know--although probably no one following this thread.<br/>
<br/>
I specify "Private-eye writer" to differentiate from other sub-genres. I am sure PI is not everyone's read preference.<br/>
<br/>
But if that's all we can say bad about a writer, he's a pretty good one. Damn good in fact. True, but Chandler wasn't liv…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-11-25:537324:Comment:2570512010-11-25T00:35:41.320ZSusanhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Susan
True, but Chandler wasn't living in the 11th Century.<br />
<br />
Then again, I think we can view the "gun" as metaphorical for something ominous and threatening.
True, but Chandler wasn't living in the 11th Century.<br />
<br />
Then again, I think we can view the "gun" as metaphorical for something ominous and threatening. Certainly not. They didn't ha…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-11-24:537324:Comment:2570132010-11-24T14:34:55.540ZI. J. Parkerhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Ingpark
Certainly not. They didn't have guns in the eleventh century.<br />
<br />
Swords and knives work pretty well, though.
Certainly not. They didn't have guns in the eleventh century.<br />
<br />
Swords and knives work pretty well, though. Just attended the NE Crimebak…tag:crimespace.ning.com,2010-11-24:537324:Comment:2569802010-11-24T01:14:18.473ZSusanhttps://crimespace.ning.com/profile/Susan
Just attended the NE Crimebake writer's conference (highly recommended) and a writer on one panel (How to write page turners) said Chandler advised that when things get dull, send in a man with a gun.<br />
<br />
Works for me. How about you?
Just attended the NE Crimebake writer's conference (highly recommended) and a writer on one panel (How to write page turners) said Chandler advised that when things get dull, send in a man with a gun.<br />
<br />
Works for me. How about you?