(3)
Red Harvest is one of the oldest hardboiled mystery novels, so what might read as cliché or derivative was actually original in 1929. The novel was fun, and the writing (the sparsely worded action, the ridiculously delicious and dry metaphors, and the detective/gangster idioms) was really quite enjoyable. But I found the constant action and revelations of new and important information unrewarding, if only because I had little time to form any connection with (and sometimes even an understanding of) the vast sea of characters. I found the nameless detective/protagonist’s slow decent into the world of crime, and his newly acquired bloodlust, to be the only interesting psychological aspect to this story.
Red Harvest is one of the oldest hardboiled mystery novels, so what might read as cliché or derivative was actually original in 1929. The novel was fun, and the writing (the sparsely worded action, the ridiculously delicious and dry metaphors, and the detective/gangster idioms) was really quite enjoyable. But I found the constant action and revelations of new and important information unrewarding, if only because I had little time to form any connection with (and sometimes even an understanding of) the vast sea of characters. I found the nameless detective/protagonist’s slow decent into the world of crime, and his newly acquired bloodlust, to be the only interesting psychological aspect to this story.
One final point: I just listened to a podcast that cast the
hardboiled detective as a dark but morally centered character, a type of
character contemporary culture doesn’t have.
But I didn’t find Red
Harvest’s protagonist to have any moral center. Even the classic “loyalty”
that seems to direct most hardboiled detective’s actions seemed relatively absent.
But this novel may be an exception to
the rule.
Rating out of 10: 7.5
No comments:
Post a Comment