Mon 10 Nov 2008
Archived Review: ROSS MACDONALD – The Drowning Pool.
Posted by Steve under Authors , Characters , Reviews[8] Comments
ROSS MACDONALD – The Drowning Pool.
Bantam, paperback reprint; movie tie-in edition, 1970s. Hardcover first edition: Alfred A. Knopf, 1950. Many reprint editions, both hardcover and soft.
I wasn’t thinking very much about it, so when I picked this book up and started to read, I found myself caught up in a small time warp, which caught me by surprise, but it was one of my own making.
I’ll explain.
On both covers, front and back, there are a dozen or more color shots taken from the movie, released in 1975. Lots of photos of Paul Newman, in other words, in all kinds of situations, plus a handful more with Joanne Woodward in them — all rather tiny, but the immediate effect was to put me in a mellow 70s sort of mood, when both Paul and Joanne were much younger, and so was I.
So when I hit page 9, where Lew Archer stops at one of those old-fashioned motor courts that consists of small cottages that the owner walks you down to and lets you inspect the accommodations before you register, it was jarring, and it immediately sent me back to the copyright page only to discover that — whoa! — the book came out in 1950.
It wasn’t a 1970s book, at all. (And it took only a little more effort to look up the fact that The Drowning Pool was only the second novel that Archer appeared in; the first was The Moving Target, from 1949. Where does the time go?)
We don’t learn a whole lot about Archer’s background in this book. Previously married and now separated, or perhaps more likely, divorced, that’s about all we learn about him — except for his strong standards of right and wrong. Beware to the client who hires him and changes her mind. Once hired to do a job — in this case, to discover who sent a woman with an already shaky marriage a letter that threatens to tell all — he’s in it to the end.
Beginning with a marriage on the rocks, Archer’s slow but methodical investigation expands to include a daughter who at 15 is too young to attract the such serious intentions from the family chauffeur; her grandmother, the matriarch of the family; a police chief who is obviously smitten with Archer’s client; a weak-kneed husband who never had to work a day in his life; and oil — which means money, trouble, and murder.
It’s a complex case, laid out by Macdonald in simple fashion. It would have been easy to make a tangled mess of the various threads of the plot darting here and there — Archer is on the road a lot, and in serious trouble more than once — but the telling is clean, straight-forward, and filled with enough picturesque similes and metaphors to fill a book.
Here are just a few — I can’t resist:
Page 77: “For an instant I was the man in the [distorted] mirror, the shadow-figure without a life of his own who peered with one large eye and one small eye through dirty glass at the dirty lives of people in a very dirty world.”
Page 79: [talking to a very young prostitute] “Her breasts were pointed like a dilemma. I pushed on past.”
Page 82: “[Graham] Court was a row of decaying shacks bent around a strip of withering grass. A worn gravel drive brought the world to their broken-down doorsteps, if the world was interested. A few of the shacks leaked light through chinks in their warped frame sides. [The office] looked abandoned, as if the proprietor had given up for good.”
Right now I don’t remember much of the movie, whether it followed the book very well or not, but either way, I think I’ll always have Paul Newman in mind when I read any of the Archer books. This one is a good one, and while all the clues point one way, except for one or two puzzling gaps, which — as it turns out — are nothing to be concerned about. Macdonald knew what he was doing, and any loose ends are firmly nailed down, solidly, to perfection, and with no seams showing.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Ross Macdonald has always been a big favorite of mine ever since I discovered the Lew Archer novels in the 1960’s. I’ve read all his work and I intend to start rereading them soon. I know this is almost sacrilege, but I put Ross Macdonald on the same high level as Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett.
November 11th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
I can’t think of any author I’d put ahead of these three either, Walker. Maybe Cornell Woolrich, but as I think about it some more, maybe not.
— Steve
November 11th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
When I was collecting first editions heavily in the 80’s, MacDonald was one of the “BIG THREE” I was after. (The Big Three being: Chandler, Hammett & Macdonald.) I still say he’s right there among the other two even today, although according to the Dunn half of Dunn & Powell books, he’s fallen out of favor as an author people are after. I reread two of his books just this Spring that I haven’t read in over twenty years. The first was “The Ivory Grin” and after finishing it I said “This HAS to be his best book”, then I read “The Doomsters” which was even better! He’s still one of the greats!!
November 11th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Vintage Books/Black Lizard is doing a good job of keeping a lot of Ross Macdonald’s books in print, in trade paperback form. I just noticed a bunch of them at Borders this afternoon.
John D. MacDonald may be fading now, but I think Ross is making a comeback. We’re not the only ones reading (and re-reading) his work.
— Steve
November 12th, 2008 at 2:11 am
I have all of John D. MacDonald’s books and have read all of the Travis McGee series but I now would have to say that he is no longer a favorite of mine. Travis has dated badly and I no longer can stand it when he gets on his soapbox and starts preaching about some injustice. Or how about when he seduces some young girl and “improves” her life through sex. These scenes used to make me laugh but I no longer find them funny.
However, strangely enough, I find that I like some of his pulp novelets for Black Mask, Dime Detective, Detective Tales, New Detective, all in the late 40’s and early 50’s. I’m not talking about the two collections(Good Old Stuff and More Good Old Stuff), which I understand he revised and bought up to date.
Getting back to Ross Macdonald, I agree with Paul Herman about The Ivory Grin and The Doomsters. These novels are so well done that I think this has to be his best work, but then you read another and it’s even better. You simply can’t go wrong with Ross Macdonald’s novels.
November 14th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
[…] glad you did your recent post on Ross Macdonald because this reminded me that it was important for me to reread some of his […]
January 24th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
I know some will be horrifed, but in recent years Ross Macdonald’s place beside Hammett and Chandler as the holy trinity of the hard boiled school has been pushed aside in favor of Mickey Spillane, much as Macdonald pushed James M. Cain out of the picture. Hopefully Macdonald will come back into the picture and regain some of his key position, but with many of his champions older or out of the field it may take a while.
I think part of the problem is that there isn’t much to Lew Archer. Even Macdonald’s biggest fans have to admit Lew is at best a cypher with little more than a voice. Originally the model was William Holden (look at the Mitchell Hooks illos for the early Bantam books), then he became Paul Newman after the success of Harper, though neither Peter Graves nor Brian Keith really fit the bill. But as Gertrude Stein said of Oakland, in relation to Archer, there’s no there there.
I love the books, but when I finish one I still only have a vague idea of Archer compared to the vivid impression of Spade, Marlowe, Nick Charles, Travis McGee, or even Mike Hammer. Archer is mostly a semi disembodied voice, and even when he is taking a beating and in danger he (and the reader) seems detatched. That isn’t true of the early books like Moving Target (virtually a pastische of Chandler) or Drowning Pool, but as the series progressed Archer seemed to draw into himself and into Kenneth Millar’s mind, and become less and less of a human and more and more of a voice.
It’s a splendid voice, literate and clever, but there is something missing from it that I think ultimately will damn Archer to fall farther into obscurity. I think I would know Marlowe or Hammer or even McGee if I met them, but I’m not sure I would know Archer if he introduced himself to me holding up one of Macdonald’s books and pointing to the cover. He’s a style and an attitude, but not really a character, which works for what Macdonald wanted, which was that Archer not get in the way of the story or become the story the way Marlowe did, but isn’t very helpful for longevity.
November 9th, 2013 at 5:50 pm
Great review. I enjoyed reading the various reviews of THE DROWNING POOL that turned up for FFB. Everyone truly brought their own style to the table.