Messrs Chandler and Hammett

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

Chandler and Hammett:

I've been reading a bit of Chandler lately. Is that just me, or is he simply a better writer than Hammett? Not that the latter is a hack either, but where Chandler's short sentences have a laconic effect, Hammett's sound wooden sometimes. By the way, both showed they have a funny side, not only in sarcastic remarks, but also in a light-hearted and even fatuous way (Hammett: Thin Man, Chandler: Pearls Are a Nuisance)

Hammett sometimes reads like "And then a man came in. He was tall. And he was wearing a suit. And then he sat down on a chair. The chair was next to a table," and so on, while Chandler's short descriptions makes me stand right in the room next to the protagonists. (When I have too much time lol, I might excerpt descriptions of clothing for the Lounge.)


Chandler and Christie:

My impression is that people sometimes confound the setting with quality - I think Chandler's style is at least as good as Agatha Christie's, for instance, only he writes about hard-boiled guys who beat each other up and talk in slang, while Mrs Christie writes about well-mannered murderers, innocents and detectives whose mostly upper-class background is reflected in their speech. I like both.

 

[Flitcraft]

Chandler's criticism of Hammett was that the latter always told you everything- even when you could fill in the blanks for yourself.
For instance, Hammett will tell you: "I called him, but got no answer. I called him again and got no answer. I called a third time and got no answer. When I called again, he answered."

As to Chandler vs Christie- same genre, much different style. I've always found the mature Chandler- in the Marlowe stories- to be one of the most lyrical of writers, no matter how disturbing his subject matter.

 

[ideaguy]

Pardon the intrusion-for my two cents, try Raymond Carver.

 

[Shaul-Ike Cohen]

Thanks for reminding me to read some stories by Carver eventually!

 

[Johnnysan]

I also prefer Chandler to Hammett. I only regret that he was not more prolific in his writings! I also find the books by Ross MacDonald quite enjoyable and very similar in style to Chandler.

 

[BigSleep]

Either way I'm not sure there is a better line in any hard boiled detective story than "When your slapped you'll take it and like it." Thanks D.H.

 

[prof500]

Hammett sometimes reads like "And then a man came in. He was tall. And he was wearing a suit. And then he sat down on a chair. The chair was next to a table," and so on, while Chandler's short descriptions makes me stand right in the room next to the protagonists. (When I have too much time lol, I might excerpt descriptions of clothing for the Lounge.)

I remember thinking that Chandler was the better writer, in terms of literary style. But I recently read a collection of "Lost Stories" of Hammett, and the editor commented that he was known for his precise descriptions of clothing -- this was at least somewhat true in the collection.

 

[The Wingnut]

I read that book while in tech school! Indeed, Hammett was a snappy dresser himself and got quite caught up in the details. His background as a detective also made him detail-oriented. Detective work is all about noticing the tiny details.

I surprised my ex-girlfriend a number of times with my powers of observation, one time in particular helped her with a potentially very embarrasing situation with her business partner, a matter involving a small gold lapel pin. 'I would have never noticed!', quoth she. Details, dear, details.

 

[MudInYerEye]

I've never been able to stomach Chandler. Prose way too floral and nineteenth century for me. Hammet was lean and to the point.
Jim Thompson wrote circles around both of 'em. Horace McCoy as well. Nathanael West blew 'em all to smithereens.

 

[The Reno Kid]

I really like both. But I have to give a slight nod to Chandler.

 

[jake_fink]

Jim Thompson wrote circles around both of 'em. Horace McCoy as well. Nathanael West blew 'em all to smithereens.

McCoy wrote one good, indispensible book. His other work circles something, but not Hammett, Chandler or anyone else.

Nathanael West blew 'em all to smithereens.

I kind of agree, but... I'm guessing you're referring to Day of the Locust and not to the Dream Life of Balso Snell. Again, just one book. Reduce the output of Hammett and Chandler to their best work, say The Long Goodbye and The Glass Key (Maltese Falcon? The Continental Op?) and you have a pretty even race.

Anyway, there is no contest between the two. Chandler wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for Hammett. Nor Jim Thompson, James M Cain or any number of mystery writers you might name. Hammett pulled "naturalisitic" detective fiction out of the pulps and put it on the literary landscape forever.

MacDonald is a passable parodist and this Agatha Christie person was a apparently a writer of some sort, though you wouldn't know it from reading her books.

 

[MudInYerEye]

McCoy wrote one good, indispensible book. His other work circles something, but not Hammett, Chandler or anyone else.



I kind of agree, but... I'm guessing you're referring to Day of the Locust and not to the Dream Life of Balso Snell. Again, just one book. Reduce the output of Hammett and Chandler to their best work, say The Long Goodbye and The Glass Key (Maltese Falcon? The Continental Op?) and you have a pretty even race.

Anyway, there is no contest between the two. Chandler wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for Hammett. Nor Jim Thompson, James M Cain or any number of mystery writers you might name. Hammett pulled "naturalisitic" detective fiction out of the pulps and put it on the literary landscape forever.

MacDonald is a passable parodist and this Agatha Christie person was a apparently a writer of some sort, though you wouldn't know it from reading her books.

Hammett wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for Hemingway, who wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for Lardner, who wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for Twain, and so on, and so on...
And actually I was thinking at that moment of the great MISS LONLEYHEARTS, but I consider DAY OF THE LOCUST a superior novel. McCoy's straightfoward, vivid, and lightning-fast KISS TOMORROW GOODBYE (granted not his best) is still more palatable to me than any of Chandler's derrivative, condescending, syrupy tripe.
Another guy who outdid Chandler and Hammett is Jonathan Latimer, the ulitmate professional. I recommend picking up ANYTHING you can find by him, especially SOLOMON'S VINEYARD. For the matter, as far as hard-boiled writing is concerned, Hammett and Chandler couldn't touch O'Hara's APPOINTMENT IN SAMARRA or HOPE OF HEAVEN with a ten foot pole, ditto Faulkner's SANCTUARY (must-read for any fan of 30's crime fiction).

 

[Girl Friday]

Chandler is more edgy (for lack of a better word)... do you just love the references to him in the Big Lebowski or what?!?

I caught the blackjack right behind my ear. A black pool opened up at my feet. I dived in. It had no bottom.

 

[jake_fink]

Hammett wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for Hemingway, who wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for Lardner, who wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for Twain, and so on, and so on...
And actually I was thinking at that moment of the great MISS LONLEYHEARTS, but I consider DAY OF THE LOCUST a superior novel. McCoy's straightfoward, vivid, and lightning-fast KISS TOMORROW GOODBYE (granted not his best) is still more palatable to me than any of Chandler's derrivative, condescending, syrupy tripe.
Another guy who outdid Chandler and Hammett is Jonathan Latimer, the ulitmate professional. I recommend picking up ANYTHING you can find by him, especially SOLOMON'S VINEYARD. For the matter, as far as hard-boiled writing is concerned, Hammett and Chandler couldn't touch O'Hara's APPOINTMENT IN SAMARRA or HOPE OF HEAVEN with a ten foot pole, ditto Faulkner's SANCTUARY (must-read for any fan of 30's crime fiction).

Pal, I dig your bookcase. Do you like your hardboiled pulp in drugstore covers or do you just want the words?

I do disagree with the Lardner begat Hemingway chapter and verse, however. I think if Lardner were Hemingway's great influence Hemingway would not be the writer he was. He owes more, I think, to Sherwood Anderson and Gertrude Stein. That's the only nit I feel a need to pick.

Carry on.

 

[Jack Scorpion]

I actually consider Hammett the better. But, if you judge Hammet, you have to be reading Red Harvest or The Glass Key. Hammet was hit or miss. Some books of his I've read had me wondering if it was the same guy behind the pen (read: The Dain Curse, a terrible book).

Chandler on the other hand was Chandler all the time. I can't even decide which of his books is better than the next. They are all just chapters of the same story to me. Hammett's best beat Chandler, but Chandler beat most of Hammett.

Chandler considered Hammett to be a master of the genre.

Chandler hated Christie. His essays on the rules of a mystery story are just disguised comments on how Christie did everything wrong. I have to agree with him.

 

[magneto]

I also prefer Chandler to Hammett. I only regret that he was not more prolific in his writings! I also find the books by Ross MacDonald quite enjoyable and very similar in style to Chandler.

Seconded! I love MacDonald's Lew Archer detective novels; more Chandlerian than Hammettesque.

 

[MudInYerEye]

Pal, I dig your bookcase. Do you like your hardboiled pulp in drugstore covers or do you just want the words?

I do disagree with the Lardner begat Hemingway chapter and verse, however. I think if Lardner were Hemingway's great influence Hemingway would not be the writer he was. He owes more, I think, to Sherwood Anderson and Gertrude Stein. That's the only nit I feel a need to pick.

Carry on.

I'll take the books however I can find 'em, original or reprints, but a lot of the really good ones haven't been reprinted in decades (so sometimes the bullet gets bit).

I agree that Hemingway's work doesn't read much like Lardner's at all, but apparently Lardner was what got Hemingway interested in writing intially. He signed much of his early drivel for his high school paper "Ring Lardner Jr." I like Hemingway some (some a lot), but he was no Ring Lardner or Sherwood Anderson.

 

[martinsantos]

Funny to look into the older posts. This is interesting.

I prefer Hammett to Chandler. He has something dry, ever brutal, in his stories. I just prefer those with Continental Op. OK, Sam Spade is an icon, but Continental is better.

Chandler is great too. I ever prefer the short stories. And more good movies came from Chandler than from Hammett.

Just don't like the "carbon copy" made from him, like Ross McDonald. Good reading for an evening, but... If you have the original around, why to read the copies?

Another writer from that days, with similar spirit I like: Cornell Woolrich.

 

[John in Covina]

For me Chandler tends to be a better read. The writing flows better for me.

 

[martinsantos]

It's difficult to talk about reading flow to me... Except for "The Dain Course", all I readed in translations to Portuguese. Some of the original flow will, of course, disapear.

Hammett characters looks to me more human, and so more interesting... "Playback", by Chandler, is a lot unbelievable, with that ending. Just my thinking about.