What do you think?
Rate this book
Ripley #1-3
Talented Mr. Ripley
Three classic crime novels by a master of the macabre – The Talented Mr. Ripley, Ripley Under Ground, and Ripley's Game – appear here together in hardcover for the first time.
Suave, agreeable, and completely amoral, Patricia Highsmith’s hero, the inimitable Tom Ripley, stops at nothing – not even murder – to accomplish his goals. In achieving the opulent life that he was denied as a child, Ripley shows himself to be a master of illusion and manipulation and a disturbingly sympathetic combination of genius and psychopath. Sent on a mission to Italy to coax an irresponsible young playboy back to his wealthy father in America, Ripley finds himself so fond of the young man that he sets out to be like him – exactly like him. The precarious charade that ensues is the first step to a life of elegance and ease – and perpetual danger.
As she leads us through the mesmerizing tangle of Ripley’s deadly and sinister games, Highsmith turns the mystery genre inside out and takes us into the mind of a man utterly indifferent to evil.
Suave, agreeable, and completely amoral, Patricia Highsmith’s hero, the inimitable Tom Ripley, stops at nothing – not even murder – to accomplish his goals. In achieving the opulent life that he was denied as a child, Ripley shows himself to be a master of illusion and manipulation and a disturbingly sympathetic combination of genius and psychopath. Sent on a mission to Italy to coax an irresponsible young playboy back to his wealthy father in America, Ripley finds himself so fond of the young man that he sets out to be like him – exactly like him. The precarious charade that ensues is the first step to a life of elegance and ease – and perpetual danger.
As she leads us through the mesmerizing tangle of Ripley’s deadly and sinister games, Highsmith turns the mystery genre inside out and takes us into the mind of a man utterly indifferent to evil.
904 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1985
74 people are currently reading
2335 people want to read
About the author
Patricia Highsmith
485 books4,981 followersPatricia Highsmith was an American novelist who is known mainly for her psychological crime thrillers which have led to more than two dozen film adaptations over the years.
She lived with her grandmother, mother and later step-father (her mother divorced her natural father six months before 'Patsy' was born and married Stanley Highsmith) in Fort Worth before moving with her parents to New York in 1927 but returned to live with her grandmother for a year in 1933. Returning to her parents in New York, she attended public schools in New York City and later graduated from Barnard College in 1942.
Shortly after graduation her short story 'The Heroine' was published in the Harper's Bazaar magazine and it was selected as one of the 22 best stories that appeared in American magazines in 1945 and it won the O Henry award for short stories in 1946. She continued to write short stories, many of them comic book stories, and regularly earned herself a weekly $55 pay-check. During this period of her life she lived variously in New York and Mexico.
Her first suspense novel 'Strangers on a Train' published in 1950 was an immediate success with public and critics alike. The novel has been adapted for the screen three times, most notably by Alfred Hitchcock in 1951.
In 1955 her anti-hero Tom Ripley appeared in the splendid 'The Talented Mr Ripley', a book that was awarded the Grand Prix de Litterature Policiere as the best foreign mystery novel translated into French in 1957. This book, too, has been the subject of a number of film versions. Ripley appeared again in 'Ripley Under Ground' in 1970, in 'Ripley's Game' in 1974, 'The boy who Followed Ripley' in 1980 and in 'Ripley Under Water' in 1991.
Along with her acclaimed series about Ripley, she wrote 22 novels and eight short story collections plus many other short stories, often macabre, satirical or tinged with black humour. She also wrote one novel, non-mystery, under the name Claire Morgan , plus a work of non-fiction 'Plotting and Writing Suspense Fiction' and a co-written book of children's verse, 'Miranda the Panda Is on the Veranda'.
She latterly lived in England and France and was more popular in England than in her native United States. Her novel 'Deep Water', 1957, was called by the Sunday Times one of the "most brilliant analyses of psychosis in America" and Julian Symons once wrote of her "Miss Highsmith is the writer who fuses character and plot most successfully ... the most important crime novelist at present in practice." In addition, Michael Dirda observed "Europeans honoured her as a psychological novelist, part of an existentialist tradition represented by her own favorite writers, in particular Dostoevsky, Conrad, Kafka, Gide, and Camus."
She died of leukemia in Locarno, Switzerland on 4 February 1995 and her last novel, 'Small g: a Summer Idyll', was published posthumously a month later.
Gerry Wolstenholme
July 2010
She lived with her grandmother, mother and later step-father (her mother divorced her natural father six months before 'Patsy' was born and married Stanley Highsmith) in Fort Worth before moving with her parents to New York in 1927 but returned to live with her grandmother for a year in 1933. Returning to her parents in New York, she attended public schools in New York City and later graduated from Barnard College in 1942.
Shortly after graduation her short story 'The Heroine' was published in the Harper's Bazaar magazine and it was selected as one of the 22 best stories that appeared in American magazines in 1945 and it won the O Henry award for short stories in 1946. She continued to write short stories, many of them comic book stories, and regularly earned herself a weekly $55 pay-check. During this period of her life she lived variously in New York and Mexico.
Her first suspense novel 'Strangers on a Train' published in 1950 was an immediate success with public and critics alike. The novel has been adapted for the screen three times, most notably by Alfred Hitchcock in 1951.
In 1955 her anti-hero Tom Ripley appeared in the splendid 'The Talented Mr Ripley', a book that was awarded the Grand Prix de Litterature Policiere as the best foreign mystery novel translated into French in 1957. This book, too, has been the subject of a number of film versions. Ripley appeared again in 'Ripley Under Ground' in 1970, in 'Ripley's Game' in 1974, 'The boy who Followed Ripley' in 1980 and in 'Ripley Under Water' in 1991.
Along with her acclaimed series about Ripley, she wrote 22 novels and eight short story collections plus many other short stories, often macabre, satirical or tinged with black humour. She also wrote one novel, non-mystery, under the name Claire Morgan , plus a work of non-fiction 'Plotting and Writing Suspense Fiction' and a co-written book of children's verse, 'Miranda the Panda Is on the Veranda'.
She latterly lived in England and France and was more popular in England than in her native United States. Her novel 'Deep Water', 1957, was called by the Sunday Times one of the "most brilliant analyses of psychosis in America" and Julian Symons once wrote of her "Miss Highsmith is the writer who fuses character and plot most successfully ... the most important crime novelist at present in practice." In addition, Michael Dirda observed "Europeans honoured her as a psychological novelist, part of an existentialist tradition represented by her own favorite writers, in particular Dostoevsky, Conrad, Kafka, Gide, and Camus."
She died of leukemia in Locarno, Switzerland on 4 February 1995 and her last novel, 'Small g: a Summer Idyll', was published posthumously a month later.
Gerry Wolstenholme
July 2010
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 142 reviews
April 13, 2022
Patricia Highsmith is just master of the moral dilemma of crime. The psychology and behaviour of Ripley is a fascinating study of a human. It beggars the question are we all capable of such behaviour, and the answer is yes.
September 1, 2007
Okay, so my interest was piqued by the movies, as I'd seen both The Talented Mr. Ripley and Ripley's Game (with John Malkovich). I loved the first novel in the book-- The Talented Mr. Ripley lived up to my expectations.
I found that I was dragging through Ripley Underground, as it just kept going on and on and on, and I kept asking myself, "Why? Why did he decide to do that? Why am I still reading this??" I wanted to get to Ripley's Game, which I thought would be better, as I remember liking the film, so I finished that one.
Ripley's Game was only marginally better than Ripley Underground. All I can say is that I'm happy to be finished with this. I want to see the movie just to see what I liked about it. The book moved so much more slowly than I was expecting. I can't say that I felt the sympathy for Tom Ripley that Highsmith reportedly felt.... Still, I'm glad I read them....
I found that I was dragging through Ripley Underground, as it just kept going on and on and on, and I kept asking myself, "Why? Why did he decide to do that? Why am I still reading this??" I wanted to get to Ripley's Game, which I thought would be better, as I remember liking the film, so I finished that one.
Ripley's Game was only marginally better than Ripley Underground. All I can say is that I'm happy to be finished with this. I want to see the movie just to see what I liked about it. The book moved so much more slowly than I was expecting. I can't say that I felt the sympathy for Tom Ripley that Highsmith reportedly felt.... Still, I'm glad I read them....
May 20, 2021
The Talented Mr. Ripley - 5 stars, a masterpiece
Ripley Under Ground - 4 stars, very good
Ripley's Game - 3 stars, solid.
It would be interesting to read "Ripley's Game" in a world where the previous two novels didn't exist, as both are so good. "Game" just can't compare.
Ripley Under Ground - 4 stars, very good
Ripley's Game - 3 stars, solid.
It would be interesting to read "Ripley's Game" in a world where the previous two novels didn't exist, as both are so good. "Game" just can't compare.
September 10, 2018
Three of Patricia Highsmith's best "Ripley" novels in one hardbound volume. While I feel there is some fall-off between THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY and the books that followed, all three are nonetheless entertaining and good. Having them together is a treat.
April 26, 2020
It's strange that I'd never bothered to add a "crime" shelf. Don't read many of the traditional murder mysteries. Here there is no mystery. The suspense comes from wondering what Ripley will do next and will he be caught.
Did you ever wonder how people can not possibly see that Clark Kent is Superman with glasses? Why can't people see through the disguise? Ripley too somehow has the ability to almost always thwart observers, even police detectives.
This volume is three Ripley novels. I've finished two of them at this point. Of course, the first, "The Talented Mr. Ripley" establishes the template. I was afraid the second would be a lesser work, but Highsmith manages to have it veer off into unexpected and suspenseful sideroads. However, there must remain the suspension of disbelief. The police are incompetent and in "Ripley Underground" there are criminal matters which Ripley admits to (his handling of Bernard's corpse) but he does not face any consequences. This is how a book becomes a crime novel and not a more serious work.
... and now I've finished the third (Ripley's Game). Ripley disappears in this one for quite a while, and we are to believe that a rather ordinary person can so easily be induced (with money) to be a murderer. However, Highsmith does have the ability to pull the reader into the story and move it along. Mostly the suspense comes because one wonders who will find out what is going on, and who will have to be killed next. In any event, it is never the police who connect all the dots.
Did you ever wonder how people can not possibly see that Clark Kent is Superman with glasses? Why can't people see through the disguise? Ripley too somehow has the ability to almost always thwart observers, even police detectives.
This volume is three Ripley novels. I've finished two of them at this point. Of course, the first, "The Talented Mr. Ripley" establishes the template. I was afraid the second would be a lesser work, but Highsmith manages to have it veer off into unexpected and suspenseful sideroads. However, there must remain the suspension of disbelief. The police are incompetent and in "Ripley Underground" there are criminal matters which Ripley admits to (his handling of Bernard's corpse) but he does not face any consequences. This is how a book becomes a crime novel and not a more serious work.
... and now I've finished the third (Ripley's Game). Ripley disappears in this one for quite a while, and we are to believe that a rather ordinary person can so easily be induced (with money) to be a murderer. However, Highsmith does have the ability to pull the reader into the story and move it along. Mostly the suspense comes because one wonders who will find out what is going on, and who will have to be killed next. In any event, it is never the police who connect all the dots.
April 28, 2024
THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY: 4 Stars
I'm a huge fan of the 1999 film (incredibly rewatchable time and time again) and I always wanted to read Highsmith's novel. It did not disappoint. What I first recognize is the perfect casting of the four main characters (Freddie Miles, being the fourth). Only in the persona of Marge Sherwood, did Gwyneth Paltrow's physical self vary slightly from the novel.
The novel plays out much differently than the film, and it was equally as good as the movie, if not better, simply to have access to the inner workings of a sociopath like Tom Ripley. While Ripley's fate plays out as if the Greek gods are with him (and Highsmith knew her era), that he was able to get away with murder, twice, and ultimately deceive Dickie's family with a forged will that left Dickie's entire trust and estate to Ripley, is absolutely impossible with today's technology. In 1950s Italy, though, things were still very primitive and hampered by time and distance.
Tom Ripley is a sociopath. Devious and cunning from the outset, bilking his accounts of money before he's hired to retrieve Richard Greenleaf back to the States. He's gifted in his evil genius and even as he becomes a murderer, the reader is still rooting for him to get away with everything, despite being on the edge of our seats awaiting his capture that never happens. His luck, his lies, his ability to fade into blandness, are his true gifts and he uses all of this without regret.
RIPLEY UNDER GROUND: 2 Stars
I was eager to spend more time with the scoundrel, Tom Ripley, to see what happened to him next, and I was not impressed with Highsmith's follow-up novel for a number of reasons.
The second Ripley novel has Tom married and living a comfortable life outside of Paris. He has fine clothing, a splendid home, a French wife and a couple of servants, all of this courtesy of his inherited trust from Dickie Greenleaf.
With his money, as a sort of side interest, Ripley has a small interest in a London art gallery that deals in paintings by the mysterious and absent (no spoilers here) artist Dewatt. The gallery owners and another painter have been forging Dewatt paintings for several years and contact Ripley (who was well-aware of the deception) that an American collector is disputing the validity of a painting he'd recently purchased.
I'm going to cut to the summary: there is subterfuge, phony impersonations, fake passports, various murders and disappearances, all in Ripley's orbit. I assume the time frame is somewhere in the mid-sixties, and still the police remain polite and trusting of Ripley's various explanations. Even more confounding to the believability of this story, is the number of people Ripley has included in his secrets, including his wife (who seems quite complicit in knowing some of what he's done, including murder). At no point does Highsmith give the reader any reason to accept this complicit behavior.
Everything seems to get somewhat resolved rather neatly, but as a reader, it doesn't seem very neat and is rife with missteps that in any investigation, including those in the 1960s, would have been uncovered and someone would be going to prison.
There is a bit of a cliffhanger at the end of this second novel, and I'm reserving the right to change my rating for this novel based on what happens in the third Ripley story.
RIPLEY'S GAME: 3 Stars
Highsmith redeemed herself a little in the third novel following her anti-hero, Tom Ripley. It still falls short of the magic that Ripley holds in the first novel and that is due to his adulthood.
I did enjoy reading more about someone other than Ripley, in this novel, Jonathan Trevanny, who is a pawn in Ripley's game. Jonathan also is the mechanism that allows Tom Ripley to regain his anti-hero crown in literature.
The body count is much higher in this third novel, five at the hands of Tom Ripley (with some help), two more who get caught in the crossfire of his game, and one who makes the ultimate sacrifice and gives Ripley another Get Out Of Jail Free Card.
I am done with Mr. Ripley, even though there are two more novels from Highsmith because she couldn't put the character to rest. I am giving the overall collection here three stars, an average of my ratings for each of the novels.
I'm a huge fan of the 1999 film (incredibly rewatchable time and time again) and I always wanted to read Highsmith's novel. It did not disappoint. What I first recognize is the perfect casting of the four main characters (Freddie Miles, being the fourth). Only in the persona of Marge Sherwood, did Gwyneth Paltrow's physical self vary slightly from the novel.
The novel plays out much differently than the film, and it was equally as good as the movie, if not better, simply to have access to the inner workings of a sociopath like Tom Ripley. While Ripley's fate plays out as if the Greek gods are with him (and Highsmith knew her era), that he was able to get away with murder, twice, and ultimately deceive Dickie's family with a forged will that left Dickie's entire trust and estate to Ripley, is absolutely impossible with today's technology. In 1950s Italy, though, things were still very primitive and hampered by time and distance.
Tom Ripley is a sociopath. Devious and cunning from the outset, bilking his accounts of money before he's hired to retrieve Richard Greenleaf back to the States. He's gifted in his evil genius and even as he becomes a murderer, the reader is still rooting for him to get away with everything, despite being on the edge of our seats awaiting his capture that never happens. His luck, his lies, his ability to fade into blandness, are his true gifts and he uses all of this without regret.
RIPLEY UNDER GROUND: 2 Stars
I was eager to spend more time with the scoundrel, Tom Ripley, to see what happened to him next, and I was not impressed with Highsmith's follow-up novel for a number of reasons.
The second Ripley novel has Tom married and living a comfortable life outside of Paris. He has fine clothing, a splendid home, a French wife and a couple of servants, all of this courtesy of his inherited trust from Dickie Greenleaf.
With his money, as a sort of side interest, Ripley has a small interest in a London art gallery that deals in paintings by the mysterious and absent (no spoilers here) artist Dewatt. The gallery owners and another painter have been forging Dewatt paintings for several years and contact Ripley (who was well-aware of the deception) that an American collector is disputing the validity of a painting he'd recently purchased.
I'm going to cut to the summary: there is subterfuge, phony impersonations, fake passports, various murders and disappearances, all in Ripley's orbit. I assume the time frame is somewhere in the mid-sixties, and still the police remain polite and trusting of Ripley's various explanations. Even more confounding to the believability of this story, is the number of people Ripley has included in his secrets, including his wife (who seems quite complicit in knowing some of what he's done, including murder). At no point does Highsmith give the reader any reason to accept this complicit behavior.
Everything seems to get somewhat resolved rather neatly, but as a reader, it doesn't seem very neat and is rife with missteps that in any investigation, including those in the 1960s, would have been uncovered and someone would be going to prison.
There is a bit of a cliffhanger at the end of this second novel, and I'm reserving the right to change my rating for this novel based on what happens in the third Ripley story.
RIPLEY'S GAME: 3 Stars
Highsmith redeemed herself a little in the third novel following her anti-hero, Tom Ripley. It still falls short of the magic that Ripley holds in the first novel and that is due to his adulthood.
I did enjoy reading more about someone other than Ripley, in this novel, Jonathan Trevanny, who is a pawn in Ripley's game. Jonathan also is the mechanism that allows Tom Ripley to regain his anti-hero crown in literature.
The body count is much higher in this third novel, five at the hands of Tom Ripley (with some help), two more who get caught in the crossfire of his game, and one who makes the ultimate sacrifice and gives Ripley another Get Out Of Jail Free Card.
I am done with Mr. Ripley, even though there are two more novels from Highsmith because she couldn't put the character to rest. I am giving the overall collection here three stars, an average of my ratings for each of the novels.
June 21, 2024
Let’s sum it up- the first novel was a solid entertainment, the second one was rather disappointing, and the third one was delightfully dark. What I loved most about this series is that lovely sense of traveling around Europe back to the middle of XX century.
August 6, 2013
You cannot but help feeling sympathy for Tom Ripley.
Ok he is psychopathic, he longs for the good things in life and does not shy away from murder to get to where he has to be. Tom has to be rich and he has to have all the beautiful things in life. A stunning wife who plays the harp and speaks with a quirky accent, they have yellow silk sofas and a cleaner who comes every day. if this life style requires a murder - or many murders, so be it. A dangerous man with his own warped values. Alain Delon played him very well in the French adaptation in the 50ies, but the books are so much better than the films. Patricia Highsmith at her best.
Ok he is psychopathic, he longs for the good things in life and does not shy away from murder to get to where he has to be. Tom has to be rich and he has to have all the beautiful things in life. A stunning wife who plays the harp and speaks with a quirky accent, they have yellow silk sofas and a cleaner who comes every day. if this life style requires a murder - or many murders, so be it. A dangerous man with his own warped values. Alain Delon played him very well in the French adaptation in the 50ies, but the books are so much better than the films. Patricia Highsmith at her best.
February 10, 2024
I saw the movie years ago. If I remember correctly the ending was a little different. The second and third novels cover new ground.
February 25, 2008
(Reprinted from the Chicago Center for Literature and Photography [cclapcenter.com]. I am the original author of this essay, as well as the owner of CCLaP; it is not being illegally reposted here.)
The CCLaP 100: In which I attempt over the next two years to read a hundred so-called "classic" novels for the first time, then write reports on whether or not I think they deserve the label
This week: "The Ripley Trilogy," by Patricia Highsmith (1955-1972)
Review #5 of this essay series
The story in a nutshell:
Known collectively as the "Ripley Trilogy," these three small novels by Patricia Highsmith tell the ongoing tale of one Tom Ripley, one of the more fascinating characters in the entirety of 20th-century literature. (And note, by the way, that Highsmith would go on to pen even two more books about Ripley after this original trilogy; the five-book series is now known by its fans as the "Ripliad.") Charming sociopath, vicious murderer, with a hyper-specific set of ethics that make sense only to him, Ripley and his exploits virtually defined the burgeoning "crime fiction" genre at its beginning, and helped define many of its standards right when it was just starting to become the marketplace juggernaut it still is in America and elsewhere.
That said, I think most will agree that the original 1955 novel that started them all, The Talented Mr Ripley, is far and away the best of the entire series: a look at the young Ripley in his mid-twenties, heading to Europe for the first time, and the experiences that would turn him for good from a "harmless" sociopathic con-artist into the cold-blooded killer he is in the other four books. It's a great little story, in fact, that I won't get into detail concerning so as to not ruin it for you; a story that very clearly defines many of the aspects we now take so much for granted in crime fiction, wrapped in an ingeniously dark plot regarding resort-hopping in Europe with the jet-set during the aesthetic height of the Modernist era. In contrast, then, both Ripley Under Ground and Ripley's Game (set in the same 1970s when they were written) find Ripley himself at a softer middle-age, ensconced in small-town bourgeoisie French life and leaving the "action" part of the crime plots mostly up to others now.
The argument for it being a classic:
As you can probably guess, fans of the Ripley stories claim that they virtually defined the crime genre that now accounts for more book sales in the US than any other type of book that exists; as such, they argue, the books should rightly be considered classics, despite their relatively young age and genre status. And for sure, a different group of activists would argue, the original '55 Talented Mr Ripley was also one of the first mainstream American novels to tackle the issue of homosexuality in a complex and multifaceted way; indeed, Highsmith was known for this subject throughout the length of her career, as well as being a public and practicing bisexual in her real life. It's a stretch for now, even her fans concede, to consider these in the same breath as Great Expectations and the like; the main argument comes from her most diehard fans, frankly, and I think is more about trying to establish how the future and posterity are going to look at the series.
The argument against:
"Really? Crime books from the 1970s? Included in the classical canon of all Western Civilization? Seriously?" I think that's pretty much the main argument against these being a classic, summed up in a smartass nutshell -- that they are simply too new, concern too niche a subject, and in the end are simply not written well-enough to be seriously considered classics, or at least for now. As is the case with a lot of books on the CCLaP 100 list, in fact, even its critics I think would agree that the Ripley books are at least well-written, and still very entertaining to just sit down and read; a strong argument can be made, though, that these books shouldn't nearly be considered by society at large as "books to read before you die."
My verdict:
I have to confess, I ended up with this whole screwed-up story behind trying to read these: I got through the first, The Talented Mr Ripley, fairly quickly and straight-forwardly (mostly because of already being a big fan of the 1999 movie version starring Matt Damon, Jude Law, Cate Blanchett and a whole lot more cool famous people), but then accidentally read the third book (Ripley's Game) instead of the second (Ripley Under Ground), and didn't really like it so never bothered to read the third (er, second...ugh). But ultimately it doesn't matter, like I said, because it's the first book that really stands out here; I want to make that clear, in fact, that The Talented Mr Ripley is still quite the engripping little yarn, both the book and movie form, despite me not willing to endorse it as a "classic." Ultimately Highsmith does something incredibly smart here in this first story, as far as exploring such dark topics as sociopathy and bisexuality in an age where you could get in real trouble for talking about such stuff too explicitly; she instead turns the subjects inward towards Ripley himself, and shows how it is certain core parts of his personality that manifest such easily-labeled behaviors afterwards, not vice-versa.
In the first novel, in fact, it's hard to definitively state that Ripley has a sexual orientation at all; it's more that he's simply obsessed with the idea of pleasing the people around him at all times, this desperate yearning inside of him to make sure that everyone else is having a good time, in any way that he can provide that. In effect it provides for some really great homoerotically-charged scenes between Ripley and his future victim, globetrotting badboy Dickie Greenleaf, without anything explicitly sexual being said or done; combined with all the cat-and-mouse stuff that happens concerning the ensuing crimes themselves, you can see why so many thousands of authors in the decades since have gone on to copy things from Highsmith in their own crime novels, or copy things from people who copied things from Highsmith.
But alas, that's why my interest dropped so suddenly after the second novel, and why I say that the other two books of the trilogy are essentially interchangeable; because it was by then 20 years later in Highsmith's career, a point when crime fiction really had taken off and become its own booming little industry, and Highsmith was already starting to look at the Ripley character in terms of a franchise-friendly little cash cow. The Ripley of both Under Ground and Game (and presumably the two after those as well) is a fatter, slower, more complacent middle-age Ripley, who mostly now masterminds white-collar crimes as to maintain his provincial middle-class antique-laden lifestyle in a medieval village in France, now in a happy if not passionless marriage and no longer under any particular pressure to have a sexual preference at all. Each book, then, concerns yet another special time where Ripley is called out of this environment, to go on some crazy violence-filled escapade just like from his troubled youth, in many cases with someone else altogether now being the one doing most of the running around and stabbing and garrotting and the like.
Bleh. Skip the ensuing franchise, I say, and simply read the original instead, the strongest argument there is for Ripley to be considered part of the Canon. Oh, and do make sure to see the '99 movie adaptation as well, a truly excellent one that on top of everything else just happened to be directed by Anthony Minghella (The English Patient).
Is it a classic? No
The CCLaP 100: In which I attempt over the next two years to read a hundred so-called "classic" novels for the first time, then write reports on whether or not I think they deserve the label
This week: "The Ripley Trilogy," by Patricia Highsmith (1955-1972)
Review #5 of this essay series
The story in a nutshell:
Known collectively as the "Ripley Trilogy," these three small novels by Patricia Highsmith tell the ongoing tale of one Tom Ripley, one of the more fascinating characters in the entirety of 20th-century literature. (And note, by the way, that Highsmith would go on to pen even two more books about Ripley after this original trilogy; the five-book series is now known by its fans as the "Ripliad.") Charming sociopath, vicious murderer, with a hyper-specific set of ethics that make sense only to him, Ripley and his exploits virtually defined the burgeoning "crime fiction" genre at its beginning, and helped define many of its standards right when it was just starting to become the marketplace juggernaut it still is in America and elsewhere.
That said, I think most will agree that the original 1955 novel that started them all, The Talented Mr Ripley, is far and away the best of the entire series: a look at the young Ripley in his mid-twenties, heading to Europe for the first time, and the experiences that would turn him for good from a "harmless" sociopathic con-artist into the cold-blooded killer he is in the other four books. It's a great little story, in fact, that I won't get into detail concerning so as to not ruin it for you; a story that very clearly defines many of the aspects we now take so much for granted in crime fiction, wrapped in an ingeniously dark plot regarding resort-hopping in Europe with the jet-set during the aesthetic height of the Modernist era. In contrast, then, both Ripley Under Ground and Ripley's Game (set in the same 1970s when they were written) find Ripley himself at a softer middle-age, ensconced in small-town bourgeoisie French life and leaving the "action" part of the crime plots mostly up to others now.
The argument for it being a classic:
As you can probably guess, fans of the Ripley stories claim that they virtually defined the crime genre that now accounts for more book sales in the US than any other type of book that exists; as such, they argue, the books should rightly be considered classics, despite their relatively young age and genre status. And for sure, a different group of activists would argue, the original '55 Talented Mr Ripley was also one of the first mainstream American novels to tackle the issue of homosexuality in a complex and multifaceted way; indeed, Highsmith was known for this subject throughout the length of her career, as well as being a public and practicing bisexual in her real life. It's a stretch for now, even her fans concede, to consider these in the same breath as Great Expectations and the like; the main argument comes from her most diehard fans, frankly, and I think is more about trying to establish how the future and posterity are going to look at the series.
The argument against:
"Really? Crime books from the 1970s? Included in the classical canon of all Western Civilization? Seriously?" I think that's pretty much the main argument against these being a classic, summed up in a smartass nutshell -- that they are simply too new, concern too niche a subject, and in the end are simply not written well-enough to be seriously considered classics, or at least for now. As is the case with a lot of books on the CCLaP 100 list, in fact, even its critics I think would agree that the Ripley books are at least well-written, and still very entertaining to just sit down and read; a strong argument can be made, though, that these books shouldn't nearly be considered by society at large as "books to read before you die."
My verdict:
I have to confess, I ended up with this whole screwed-up story behind trying to read these: I got through the first, The Talented Mr Ripley, fairly quickly and straight-forwardly (mostly because of already being a big fan of the 1999 movie version starring Matt Damon, Jude Law, Cate Blanchett and a whole lot more cool famous people), but then accidentally read the third book (Ripley's Game) instead of the second (Ripley Under Ground), and didn't really like it so never bothered to read the third (er, second...ugh). But ultimately it doesn't matter, like I said, because it's the first book that really stands out here; I want to make that clear, in fact, that The Talented Mr Ripley is still quite the engripping little yarn, both the book and movie form, despite me not willing to endorse it as a "classic." Ultimately Highsmith does something incredibly smart here in this first story, as far as exploring such dark topics as sociopathy and bisexuality in an age where you could get in real trouble for talking about such stuff too explicitly; she instead turns the subjects inward towards Ripley himself, and shows how it is certain core parts of his personality that manifest such easily-labeled behaviors afterwards, not vice-versa.
In the first novel, in fact, it's hard to definitively state that Ripley has a sexual orientation at all; it's more that he's simply obsessed with the idea of pleasing the people around him at all times, this desperate yearning inside of him to make sure that everyone else is having a good time, in any way that he can provide that. In effect it provides for some really great homoerotically-charged scenes between Ripley and his future victim, globetrotting badboy Dickie Greenleaf, without anything explicitly sexual being said or done; combined with all the cat-and-mouse stuff that happens concerning the ensuing crimes themselves, you can see why so many thousands of authors in the decades since have gone on to copy things from Highsmith in their own crime novels, or copy things from people who copied things from Highsmith.
But alas, that's why my interest dropped so suddenly after the second novel, and why I say that the other two books of the trilogy are essentially interchangeable; because it was by then 20 years later in Highsmith's career, a point when crime fiction really had taken off and become its own booming little industry, and Highsmith was already starting to look at the Ripley character in terms of a franchise-friendly little cash cow. The Ripley of both Under Ground and Game (and presumably the two after those as well) is a fatter, slower, more complacent middle-age Ripley, who mostly now masterminds white-collar crimes as to maintain his provincial middle-class antique-laden lifestyle in a medieval village in France, now in a happy if not passionless marriage and no longer under any particular pressure to have a sexual preference at all. Each book, then, concerns yet another special time where Ripley is called out of this environment, to go on some crazy violence-filled escapade just like from his troubled youth, in many cases with someone else altogether now being the one doing most of the running around and stabbing and garrotting and the like.
Bleh. Skip the ensuing franchise, I say, and simply read the original instead, the strongest argument there is for Ripley to be considered part of the Canon. Oh, and do make sure to see the '99 movie adaptation as well, a truly excellent one that on top of everything else just happened to be directed by Anthony Minghella (The English Patient).
Is it a classic? No
January 22, 2021
Ja hade jag inte magkatarr innan jag började läsa den här boken så har jag det med säkerhet nu. För HERREGUD VAD UTSÄTTER DU MIG FÖR MR RIPLEY
I första boken reser Tom Ripley ner till Italien för att försöka övertala den rike överklassonen Dickie Greenleaf att återvända hem till USA. Väl där slås han av tanken att han kanske kan ta över Dickies identitet... men då måste han först röja Dickie ur vägen.
Det är på samma gång överlagt mord som det är tillfället som gör Ripley till mördare. Det finns hela tiden logiska förklaringar, i hans huvud, vad gäller alla mord (för ja det blir en del genom de tre böckerna): alla utom det första. För när Tom Ripley slår ihjäl Dickie Greenleaf gör han det till stor del för att han känner maktlöshet. Han känner sig bortvald, avundsjuk och utanför i den relation Dickie har till Marge, och istället för att låta sin stolthet skadas känns det mer självklart för honom att helt enkelt röja Dickie ur vägen. Ska han själv inte få ha Dickie, ska ingen få det. Och i och med det numera klassiska mordet i båten, är Ripleys bana igång.
Eftersom han väljer att ta sig an en identitet är det mycket som måste klaffa. Men Ripley GILLAR svårigheterna det för med sig. För honom blir det en lek, ett spel. Han börjar prata som Dickie. Skriva som Dickie. Föra sig som Dickie. Han börjar måla tavlor som Dickie. Han blir helt enkelt en mer fullkomlig karaktär av att ta sig an Dickie: Dickie fortsätter leva i Tom! Det är här magkatarren börjar göra sig påmind. För hur mycket han än imiterar Dickie så känner ju självklart Dickies kompisar igen sin vän, och undrar var han har tagit vägen när Tom kommer tillbaka ensam. Båten där mordet utförts spolas fram på kusten och helt plötsligt söker polisen efter honom. En av Dickies närmaste vänner lyckas spåra upp Tom i Rom (i tron att han är Dickie) och kommer på Toms dubbelspel. Vad Ripley gör då? Tar livet av honom, förstås. Och med två mord på nacken börjar det brinna lite i knutarna för Thomas Ripley... och det är bara första boken.
I andra boken har Ripley bosatt sig på landsbygden, där han trivs bra med sin fru och sin hushållerska. Ändå är det som att han söker sig till skumma affärer, och han gillar verkligen att vara "hjärnan" i gänget som får bestämma och styra och ställa. Han börjar handla med förfalskade tavlor och intar själv rollen som konstnären Derwatt, som inte synts till på många år. Men när en konstkännare börjar ana misstankar om Derwatt och dennes målningar, bjuder Ripley ut honom till sin franska herrgård.. och helt plötsligt är konstkännaren försvunnen. Och Ripley har en död man i sin vinkällare. Och så är vi igång igen! Magkatarren är tillbaka, pulsen höjs, man HEJAR såklart på Ripley samtidigt som det är så förbannat pinsamt om han skulle bli påkommen. Pinsamt för att han snärjer in sig i så många lögner, iklär sig roller och skapar sin egen verklighet på ett sånt sätt att när illusionen faller, faller den hårt. Slutet på bok två var dock av det sämre slaget, den lämnade mig otillfredsställd och med många tankar: hur kan polisen INTE ha tagit fast eller iallafall haft honom som huvudvittne efter det han gjorde med Bernard? Vad hände ens i slutet?
Därför var jag inte jättetaggad på att hoppa på bok 3 i samlingen. Jag kände mig lite trött på Ripley och på hur han hela tiden kommer undan, ibland lite väl lättvindigt i och med slutet på andra boken. Perfekt nog var det som att Patricia Highsmith FÖRSTÅTT att hennes läsare skulle känna så, och därför skrivit bok tre på ett lite annorlunda sätt. Här får vi nämligen istället följa Jonathan Trevanny, som lider av en obotlig blodsjukdom och hankar sig fram i sin butik för att försörja sin familj. Tredje boken heter Ripley's Game i originaltitel och JA exakt, det är verkligen Ripleys spelplan som målas upp här. För när Ripley får frågan om han vet någon som kan tänkas utföra brottsliga handlingar i utbyte mot stora summor pengar, börjar han fundera. Han vill inte utföra brotten själv, han behöver inte pengarna, men han kan inte låta bli att försöka lösa problemet. Han ser Jonathan Trevanny som en potentiell intressent, men inser att han måste mjukas upp lite först. Så Ripley börjar sprida ett rykte... och ju mer han spelar på strängarna, ju mer han manipulerar och styr sina schackpjäser, desto mer går det som han har tänkt. Iallafall nästan. Självklart kan han inte hålla sig helt borta och till sist är han mitt i smeten bland maffian, torpedmord och brandbomber. I denna sista del i samlingen spelas verkligen alla Ripleys kort ut och det är en ordentlig resa vi får följa med på.
Den första boken är helt klart bäst i serien. Här har Ripley fortfarande inte riktigt hittat sig själv, han är ganska osäker och därför blir vi som läsare också mer oroliga för hans skull. Jag älskar dock att det är två böcker till, där Ripley formas mer och mer och blir mer säker och där jag som läsare också blir mer säker på vad han är kapabel till och slipper oroa mig så mycket (även om insatserna också höjs när riskerna blir större!). Nej men jag älskar att få växa med Ripley, att lära känna hans charmiga och egendomliga karaktär genom böckerma. Han är som en iskall blandning av Patrick Bateman, Coreleanus Snow, Dexter och Sherlock Holmes, men han har också känslor. Bara att han drivs mer av.. inte logik, men, det vackra? Tanken på perfektion? Gud han är svår att definiera. Ripley vet hur han vill ha det, vissa saker stör hans världsbild, han går ofta på känsla snarare än förnuft och han kan både ömma för och känna känslor för andra även om de aldrig är så djupa att han inte kan avsluta relationerna för att rädda sig själv. Jag älskar att han är så komplex. Och ändå så.. rationell. Han finner inte äckel i att gå ut och gräva upp ett tre dagar gammalt lik för att det måste förflyttas. Har han räknat ut att det måste göras, så gör han det. Däremot känner han irritation i och med grävandet för att hans dyra tröja smutsas ner.
Ripleys och Heloises relation är också spännande. Jag var helt säker på att Ripley var homosexuell efter första boken, och det är han kanske, men han älskar verkligen Heloise, och hon honom. Tyckte om hur Highsmith beskriver deras förtroende för varandra, och i att man inte tar alla fighter utan låter vissa saker bero. Om deras förhållande ska fungera vet hon att Heloise att hon inte bör fråga för mycket, och han vet vad hon behöver höra eller när hon behöver få information för att det inte ska kännas som att han gör saker bakom hennes rygg.
Ahmen ni hör ju jag kan prata hur länge som helst om the Talented Mr Ripley. Han var otrolig. Jag är glad att det finns två böcker till om honom så jag kan få dyka in i hans intellekt några gånger till, för det var spännande och kul. Men just nu klarar inte mina nerver av det. Jag lämnar honom för ett tag framöver men absolut inte för alltid.
I första boken reser Tom Ripley ner till Italien för att försöka övertala den rike överklassonen Dickie Greenleaf att återvända hem till USA. Väl där slås han av tanken att han kanske kan ta över Dickies identitet... men då måste han först röja Dickie ur vägen.
Det är på samma gång överlagt mord som det är tillfället som gör Ripley till mördare. Det finns hela tiden logiska förklaringar, i hans huvud, vad gäller alla mord (för ja det blir en del genom de tre böckerna): alla utom det första. För när Tom Ripley slår ihjäl Dickie Greenleaf gör han det till stor del för att han känner maktlöshet. Han känner sig bortvald, avundsjuk och utanför i den relation Dickie har till Marge, och istället för att låta sin stolthet skadas känns det mer självklart för honom att helt enkelt röja Dickie ur vägen. Ska han själv inte få ha Dickie, ska ingen få det. Och i och med det numera klassiska mordet i båten, är Ripleys bana igång.
Eftersom han väljer att ta sig an en identitet är det mycket som måste klaffa. Men Ripley GILLAR svårigheterna det för med sig. För honom blir det en lek, ett spel. Han börjar prata som Dickie. Skriva som Dickie. Föra sig som Dickie. Han börjar måla tavlor som Dickie. Han blir helt enkelt en mer fullkomlig karaktär av att ta sig an Dickie: Dickie fortsätter leva i Tom! Det är här magkatarren börjar göra sig påmind. För hur mycket han än imiterar Dickie så känner ju självklart Dickies kompisar igen sin vän, och undrar var han har tagit vägen när Tom kommer tillbaka ensam. Båten där mordet utförts spolas fram på kusten och helt plötsligt söker polisen efter honom. En av Dickies närmaste vänner lyckas spåra upp Tom i Rom (i tron att han är Dickie) och kommer på Toms dubbelspel. Vad Ripley gör då? Tar livet av honom, förstås. Och med två mord på nacken börjar det brinna lite i knutarna för Thomas Ripley... och det är bara första boken.
I andra boken har Ripley bosatt sig på landsbygden, där han trivs bra med sin fru och sin hushållerska. Ändå är det som att han söker sig till skumma affärer, och han gillar verkligen att vara "hjärnan" i gänget som får bestämma och styra och ställa. Han börjar handla med förfalskade tavlor och intar själv rollen som konstnären Derwatt, som inte synts till på många år. Men när en konstkännare börjar ana misstankar om Derwatt och dennes målningar, bjuder Ripley ut honom till sin franska herrgård.. och helt plötsligt är konstkännaren försvunnen. Och Ripley har en död man i sin vinkällare. Och så är vi igång igen! Magkatarren är tillbaka, pulsen höjs, man HEJAR såklart på Ripley samtidigt som det är så förbannat pinsamt om han skulle bli påkommen. Pinsamt för att han snärjer in sig i så många lögner, iklär sig roller och skapar sin egen verklighet på ett sånt sätt att när illusionen faller, faller den hårt. Slutet på bok två var dock av det sämre slaget, den lämnade mig otillfredsställd och med många tankar: hur kan polisen INTE ha tagit fast eller iallafall haft honom som huvudvittne efter det han gjorde med Bernard? Vad hände ens i slutet?
Därför var jag inte jättetaggad på att hoppa på bok 3 i samlingen. Jag kände mig lite trött på Ripley och på hur han hela tiden kommer undan, ibland lite väl lättvindigt i och med slutet på andra boken. Perfekt nog var det som att Patricia Highsmith FÖRSTÅTT att hennes läsare skulle känna så, och därför skrivit bok tre på ett lite annorlunda sätt. Här får vi nämligen istället följa Jonathan Trevanny, som lider av en obotlig blodsjukdom och hankar sig fram i sin butik för att försörja sin familj. Tredje boken heter Ripley's Game i originaltitel och JA exakt, det är verkligen Ripleys spelplan som målas upp här. För när Ripley får frågan om han vet någon som kan tänkas utföra brottsliga handlingar i utbyte mot stora summor pengar, börjar han fundera. Han vill inte utföra brotten själv, han behöver inte pengarna, men han kan inte låta bli att försöka lösa problemet. Han ser Jonathan Trevanny som en potentiell intressent, men inser att han måste mjukas upp lite först. Så Ripley börjar sprida ett rykte... och ju mer han spelar på strängarna, ju mer han manipulerar och styr sina schackpjäser, desto mer går det som han har tänkt. Iallafall nästan. Självklart kan han inte hålla sig helt borta och till sist är han mitt i smeten bland maffian, torpedmord och brandbomber. I denna sista del i samlingen spelas verkligen alla Ripleys kort ut och det är en ordentlig resa vi får följa med på.
Den första boken är helt klart bäst i serien. Här har Ripley fortfarande inte riktigt hittat sig själv, han är ganska osäker och därför blir vi som läsare också mer oroliga för hans skull. Jag älskar dock att det är två böcker till, där Ripley formas mer och mer och blir mer säker och där jag som läsare också blir mer säker på vad han är kapabel till och slipper oroa mig så mycket (även om insatserna också höjs när riskerna blir större!). Nej men jag älskar att få växa med Ripley, att lära känna hans charmiga och egendomliga karaktär genom böckerma. Han är som en iskall blandning av Patrick Bateman, Coreleanus Snow, Dexter och Sherlock Holmes, men han har också känslor. Bara att han drivs mer av.. inte logik, men, det vackra? Tanken på perfektion? Gud han är svår att definiera. Ripley vet hur han vill ha det, vissa saker stör hans världsbild, han går ofta på känsla snarare än förnuft och han kan både ömma för och känna känslor för andra även om de aldrig är så djupa att han inte kan avsluta relationerna för att rädda sig själv. Jag älskar att han är så komplex. Och ändå så.. rationell. Han finner inte äckel i att gå ut och gräva upp ett tre dagar gammalt lik för att det måste förflyttas. Har han räknat ut att det måste göras, så gör han det. Däremot känner han irritation i och med grävandet för att hans dyra tröja smutsas ner.
Ripleys och Heloises relation är också spännande. Jag var helt säker på att Ripley var homosexuell efter första boken, och det är han kanske, men han älskar verkligen Heloise, och hon honom. Tyckte om hur Highsmith beskriver deras förtroende för varandra, och i att man inte tar alla fighter utan låter vissa saker bero. Om deras förhållande ska fungera vet hon att Heloise att hon inte bör fråga för mycket, och han vet vad hon behöver höra eller när hon behöver få information för att det inte ska kännas som att han gör saker bakom hennes rygg.
Ahmen ni hör ju jag kan prata hur länge som helst om the Talented Mr Ripley. Han var otrolig. Jag är glad att det finns två böcker till om honom så jag kan få dyka in i hans intellekt några gånger till, för det var spännande och kul. Men just nu klarar inte mina nerver av det. Jag lämnar honom för ett tag framöver men absolut inte för alltid.
June 20, 2024
A most unusual rags to riches story. Tom Ripley is sent to Italy to bring home Richard "Dickie" Greenleaf by Dickie's wealthy father to run the family business. Tom barely knows Dickie, but accepts the fortunate mission.
He indeed finds him, but instead of bringing him home ends up murdering him and assuming his identity, including taking Dickies monthly trust check, as well as his clothes, jewelry, etc. In an effort to stay hidden, he finds he must murder a second individual who accidentally stumbles into Tom's subversion. Dickie's girlfriend is naively strung along, not ever knowing the fate of her beloved. Dickie never liked her that way anyhow!
Tom doesn't have much of a moral quandary about any of this, for he enjoys the lifestyle that it is affording him. Despite Dickie's father eventually coming over to Europe to investigate the whereabouts and happenstance of Dickie's disappearance, Tom manages to dodge the hapless police, dupe the father, and escape to Greece without ever actually being a suspect. Tom ends up forging some checks, and eventually a Last Will and Testament that provides him with an endless stream of income and wealth and permits his dream world to flourish, possibly forever.
The novel is fun and cleaver. Maybe you have seen the movie with Matt Damon. There are several followup novels in this Everyman Edition, and I am deciding if I want to read them or not. Probably will.
He indeed finds him, but instead of bringing him home ends up murdering him and assuming his identity, including taking Dickies monthly trust check, as well as his clothes, jewelry, etc. In an effort to stay hidden, he finds he must murder a second individual who accidentally stumbles into Tom's subversion. Dickie's girlfriend is naively strung along, not ever knowing the fate of her beloved. Dickie never liked her that way anyhow!
Tom doesn't have much of a moral quandary about any of this, for he enjoys the lifestyle that it is affording him. Despite Dickie's father eventually coming over to Europe to investigate the whereabouts and happenstance of Dickie's disappearance, Tom manages to dodge the hapless police, dupe the father, and escape to Greece without ever actually being a suspect. Tom ends up forging some checks, and eventually a Last Will and Testament that provides him with an endless stream of income and wealth and permits his dream world to flourish, possibly forever.
The novel is fun and cleaver. Maybe you have seen the movie with Matt Damon. There are several followup novels in this Everyman Edition, and I am deciding if I want to read them or not. Probably will.
November 18, 2021
I found the writing a little flat and matter of fact, and somehow, despite there being 3 books, you never really feel you get to know Ripley. Ripley is never sinister or creepy, but almost bland, with a psychopathic bent that allows him to kill people without remorse.
The talented Mr Ripley is probably the best developed story, Ripley underground a little dull (maybe I took too long to read it ), and I found Ripley's game to be more enjoyable because of the varied perspective. It's indicated that Ripley's wife is aware of his dark deeds (or at least definitely suspects), and perhaps enjoys the frisson of excitement produced by marrying someone like that; it would have been an interesting addition if the author had explored that avenue.
The talented Mr Ripley is probably the best developed story, Ripley underground a little dull (maybe I took too long to read it ), and I found Ripley's game to be more enjoyable because of the varied perspective. It's indicated that Ripley's wife is aware of his dark deeds (or at least definitely suspects), and perhaps enjoys the frisson of excitement produced by marrying someone like that; it would have been an interesting addition if the author had explored that avenue.
December 14, 2021
Three incredible Ripley's stories. There are two more written by Highsmith. Graham Greene said of her to be a poet of apprehension. Her clear and rhythmic prose, an intensive narrative and complex plots puts her on par with the greatest crime fiction writers. Highly entertaining.
July 31, 2024
I read this a long time ago, and although I very rarely re-read a book I did want to after watching the Ripley series with Andrew Scott that was on recently. It was well worth it and I now need to get books 5 & 6. Gripping stuff.
April 2, 2021
The Talented Mr. Ripley: The apprenticeship of a psychopath
Patricia Highsmith’s 1955 novel, ‘The Talented Mr. Ripley’ begins with a premise reminiscent of Henry James’ ‘The Ambassadors’. In fact, James’ novel is referenced to make sure we get the point. A wealthy shipping magnate has been referred to Tom Ripley, a friend of his son, Dickie Greenleaf. They meet in a bar and Mr. Greenleaf has a proposition for Tom. Dickie has been in Europe for over two years and shows no inclination to return home to work in the family business. Two years has been long enough to sow his wild oats but it is time to assume responsibility as the heir to the business. Also, Dickie’s mother is seriously ill and it would be nice if Dickie returned to see her again.
With the offer of money and a trip to Europe that Tom might never be able to afford on his own income, Tom journeys to Mongibello in Italy. While James’ middle aged hero Lambert Strether failed in his task to bring Chad Newsome home, becoming entranced by the Old World charm of Paris, and seized his opportunity to soak up some experience before he got any older, Tom Ripley has a more sardonic aim, although it doesn’t appear in his mind fully formed from the beginning.
Initially, Dickie Greenleaf is a bit put off by the awkward and aggressive Tom but he gets won over by Tom’s unequivocal interest in this narcissist. The two of them spend more time together and take a few short trips together. Dickie’s girlfriend Marge grows alarmed at the all-consuming attention that Tom seems to demand of Dickie and suspects Tom of being gay. Dickie wonders if that’s true but accepts Tom’s denial and assures Tom that he, Dickie, is not as infatuated with Marge as she is with him. She might consider marrying him but the feeling is definitely not mutual.
When Dickie finds Tom in his room wearing his clothes and rings and looking in the mirror imitating Dickie’s mannerisms, he thinks this relationship has gone far enough. Dickie also has another friend, Freddie Miles, who sees Tom for the leech that he is and tells Dickie that he thinks so, contributing to Dickie’s decision to let Tom down gently.
Tom senses this but has become so covetous of Dickie’s money and lifestyle that he doesn’t want to lose it. When Dickie agrees to go on a farewell trip to San Remo with Tom and rent a boat, Tom decides that he will kill Dickie. The fact that Highsmith ultimately wrote five novels about Tom Ripley proves that Tom not only gets away with the crimes he commits in this novel as well as the additional crimes he commits in its sequels.
Although the narration is third person, we are firmly lodged within Tom’s point of view and see that at no point does he suffer any pangs of moral conscience regarding any murders he actually commits or just contemplates committing. He smashes Dickie’s head in with an oar and weighs the body down and hides the boat after securing Dickie’s passport and jewelry and goes back to Dickie’s apartment in Rome. When Freddie comes calling on Dickie and finds Tom there and confronts him with the truth, Tom smashes his head with an ashtray, carries his body to Freddie’s car, pretending that Freddie is drunk, and leaves the car on the road with Freddie’s body, creating the impression that he has been robbed.
Meanwhile, Tom has been quite adept at forging Dickie’s signature. As Dickie always typed his letters, Tom writes letters from Dickie to Marge, indicating that he doesn’t want to see her again. Tom assumes Dickie’s identity by lightening his hair and wearing his clothes. The passport photo is smudged enough to not be obviously a different person. The rumor starts up with the presence of “Dickie” and the absence of Tom that Tom is missing and possibly murdered.
Cutting himself off from the rest of humanity does not come without some sacrifice:
“But he was lonely. It was not like the sensation in Paris of being alone yet not alone. He had imagined himself acquiring a bright new circle of friends with whom he would start a new life with new attitudes, standards, and habits that would be far better and clearer than those he had had all his life. Now he realized that it couldn’t be. He would have to keep a distance from people, always. He might acquire the different standards and habits, but he could never acquire the circle of friends—not unless he went to Istanbul or Ceylon, and what was the use of acquiring the kind of people he would meet in those places? He was alone, and it was a lonely game he was playing. The friends he might make were most of the danger, of course. If he had to drift about the world entirely alone, so much the better: there was that much less chance that he would be found out. That was one cheerful aspect of it, anyway, and he felt better having thought of it.”
When his pretense at Dickie proves to be too risky, he moves to Venice and resumes his own identity, reluctantly. He is not happy having to return to his own identity:
“This was the end of Dickie Greenleaf, he knew. He hated becoming Thomas Ripley again, hated being nobody, hated putting on his old set of habits again, and feeling that people looked down on him and were bored with him unless he put on an act for them like a clown, feeling incompetent and incapable of doing anything with himself except entertaining people for minutes at a time.”
He indulges in one last gesture of subterfuge as Dickie Greenleaf, typing a last will and testament from Dickie, leaving all of his possessions and financial holdings to Tom. He still has to deal with the concerns of Marge, Mr. Greenleaf, and the American detective that Greenleaf has hired after becoming fed up with the Italian investigators. Tom lets Marge sleep in his bedroom and he sleeps on a sofa while the last of the investigation is conducted. Marge finds Dickie’s rings in one of Tom’s drawers and almost arrives at the truth. Tom considers the possibility that he might have to kill her as well but thinks to say that giving up his rings increases the likelihood that Dickie killed himself.
When the will surfaces Tom wonders if the Greenleaf’s will accept its authenticity but to his relief Mr. Greenleaf concurs with Marge that the will proves that Dickie really did kill himself and informs Tom that the legal motions will be filed to get Dickie’s assets transferred to Tom. This will provide the lifestyle to which Tom will become accustomed in the subsequent books in the series.
Highsmith’s decision to write a series of books in which the protagonist is a psychopath has been influential in more contemporary series featuring antiheroes such as Hannibal Lecter, Tony Soprano, and Walter White. By placing the reader in the shoes of a morally reprehensible character she forces the reader to be complicit in catching Tom Ripley in the middle of the act and actually rooting for him to get away with it. While I have no problem with her thematic aims for Ripley’s continued success I can’t help but feel that there are looming holes in the plot of ‘Mr. Ripley’. How likely is it that Dickie’s body is never found? Could some clever investigators never connect the dots and arrive at a theory that actually turns out to be the truth? I haven’t read any further in Highsmith’s Ripley series but I can only conclude that for Tom Ripley to continue his life of crime he will need to be extremely lucky to be always surrounded by inept investigators and fortuitous circumstances.
Patricia Highsmith’s 1955 novel, ‘The Talented Mr. Ripley’ begins with a premise reminiscent of Henry James’ ‘The Ambassadors’. In fact, James’ novel is referenced to make sure we get the point. A wealthy shipping magnate has been referred to Tom Ripley, a friend of his son, Dickie Greenleaf. They meet in a bar and Mr. Greenleaf has a proposition for Tom. Dickie has been in Europe for over two years and shows no inclination to return home to work in the family business. Two years has been long enough to sow his wild oats but it is time to assume responsibility as the heir to the business. Also, Dickie’s mother is seriously ill and it would be nice if Dickie returned to see her again.
With the offer of money and a trip to Europe that Tom might never be able to afford on his own income, Tom journeys to Mongibello in Italy. While James’ middle aged hero Lambert Strether failed in his task to bring Chad Newsome home, becoming entranced by the Old World charm of Paris, and seized his opportunity to soak up some experience before he got any older, Tom Ripley has a more sardonic aim, although it doesn’t appear in his mind fully formed from the beginning.
Initially, Dickie Greenleaf is a bit put off by the awkward and aggressive Tom but he gets won over by Tom’s unequivocal interest in this narcissist. The two of them spend more time together and take a few short trips together. Dickie’s girlfriend Marge grows alarmed at the all-consuming attention that Tom seems to demand of Dickie and suspects Tom of being gay. Dickie wonders if that’s true but accepts Tom’s denial and assures Tom that he, Dickie, is not as infatuated with Marge as she is with him. She might consider marrying him but the feeling is definitely not mutual.
When Dickie finds Tom in his room wearing his clothes and rings and looking in the mirror imitating Dickie’s mannerisms, he thinks this relationship has gone far enough. Dickie also has another friend, Freddie Miles, who sees Tom for the leech that he is and tells Dickie that he thinks so, contributing to Dickie’s decision to let Tom down gently.
Tom senses this but has become so covetous of Dickie’s money and lifestyle that he doesn’t want to lose it. When Dickie agrees to go on a farewell trip to San Remo with Tom and rent a boat, Tom decides that he will kill Dickie. The fact that Highsmith ultimately wrote five novels about Tom Ripley proves that Tom not only gets away with the crimes he commits in this novel as well as the additional crimes he commits in its sequels.
Although the narration is third person, we are firmly lodged within Tom’s point of view and see that at no point does he suffer any pangs of moral conscience regarding any murders he actually commits or just contemplates committing. He smashes Dickie’s head in with an oar and weighs the body down and hides the boat after securing Dickie’s passport and jewelry and goes back to Dickie’s apartment in Rome. When Freddie comes calling on Dickie and finds Tom there and confronts him with the truth, Tom smashes his head with an ashtray, carries his body to Freddie’s car, pretending that Freddie is drunk, and leaves the car on the road with Freddie’s body, creating the impression that he has been robbed.
Meanwhile, Tom has been quite adept at forging Dickie’s signature. As Dickie always typed his letters, Tom writes letters from Dickie to Marge, indicating that he doesn’t want to see her again. Tom assumes Dickie’s identity by lightening his hair and wearing his clothes. The passport photo is smudged enough to not be obviously a different person. The rumor starts up with the presence of “Dickie” and the absence of Tom that Tom is missing and possibly murdered.
Cutting himself off from the rest of humanity does not come without some sacrifice:
“But he was lonely. It was not like the sensation in Paris of being alone yet not alone. He had imagined himself acquiring a bright new circle of friends with whom he would start a new life with new attitudes, standards, and habits that would be far better and clearer than those he had had all his life. Now he realized that it couldn’t be. He would have to keep a distance from people, always. He might acquire the different standards and habits, but he could never acquire the circle of friends—not unless he went to Istanbul or Ceylon, and what was the use of acquiring the kind of people he would meet in those places? He was alone, and it was a lonely game he was playing. The friends he might make were most of the danger, of course. If he had to drift about the world entirely alone, so much the better: there was that much less chance that he would be found out. That was one cheerful aspect of it, anyway, and he felt better having thought of it.”
When his pretense at Dickie proves to be too risky, he moves to Venice and resumes his own identity, reluctantly. He is not happy having to return to his own identity:
“This was the end of Dickie Greenleaf, he knew. He hated becoming Thomas Ripley again, hated being nobody, hated putting on his old set of habits again, and feeling that people looked down on him and were bored with him unless he put on an act for them like a clown, feeling incompetent and incapable of doing anything with himself except entertaining people for minutes at a time.”
He indulges in one last gesture of subterfuge as Dickie Greenleaf, typing a last will and testament from Dickie, leaving all of his possessions and financial holdings to Tom. He still has to deal with the concerns of Marge, Mr. Greenleaf, and the American detective that Greenleaf has hired after becoming fed up with the Italian investigators. Tom lets Marge sleep in his bedroom and he sleeps on a sofa while the last of the investigation is conducted. Marge finds Dickie’s rings in one of Tom’s drawers and almost arrives at the truth. Tom considers the possibility that he might have to kill her as well but thinks to say that giving up his rings increases the likelihood that Dickie killed himself.
When the will surfaces Tom wonders if the Greenleaf’s will accept its authenticity but to his relief Mr. Greenleaf concurs with Marge that the will proves that Dickie really did kill himself and informs Tom that the legal motions will be filed to get Dickie’s assets transferred to Tom. This will provide the lifestyle to which Tom will become accustomed in the subsequent books in the series.
Highsmith’s decision to write a series of books in which the protagonist is a psychopath has been influential in more contemporary series featuring antiheroes such as Hannibal Lecter, Tony Soprano, and Walter White. By placing the reader in the shoes of a morally reprehensible character she forces the reader to be complicit in catching Tom Ripley in the middle of the act and actually rooting for him to get away with it. While I have no problem with her thematic aims for Ripley’s continued success I can’t help but feel that there are looming holes in the plot of ‘Mr. Ripley’. How likely is it that Dickie’s body is never found? Could some clever investigators never connect the dots and arrive at a theory that actually turns out to be the truth? I haven’t read any further in Highsmith’s Ripley series but I can only conclude that for Tom Ripley to continue his life of crime he will need to be extremely lucky to be always surrounded by inept investigators and fortuitous circumstances.
June 6, 2016
Today I finished Ripley’s Game, the third book in Patricia Highsmith’s Tom Ripley series. It all started a few summers ago when I found The Talented Mr Ripley in a thrift store. It was engrossing, one of the most suspenseful novels I had ever read. Then I read a great book called Nom De Plume, which had a chapter about Highsmith writing “The Price Of Salt” under a pseudonym. It also piqued my interest in Highsmith’s life outside of her writing. I’ve talked about the snails thing right?
She once went to a party with a head of lettuce and a hundred snails in her purse. She said they were her date for the evening.
I am understandably a little bit obsessed. Her personal life was fascinating. Her novels suck you in and you can’t put it down, even when its dark and there has been a cougar attack in your neighborhood and you should be paying attention to walking home safely but you can’t put the book down.
Although the long con that is the subject of book two, Ripley Underground inst nearly as intense as Tom ‘single white female-ing’ Dickie Greenleaf, Highsmith is still able to achieve a heart racing climax. All the while maintaining the measured, level tone of Tom Ripley. I like that she writes suspense with out chaos. Yes Ripley’s rages lead to murders, but he is always so calm before and after. The murders he commits are like a strike of lightning like the reverse eye of a storm.
Ripley’s Game returns to a darker, more violent con. After being insulted by a poor man with Lukemia at a party Ripley decides that his revenge will be to convince this man to kill some folks. Which he does cause he needs the money and there is a whole mafia thing, and a bomb. I’m trying not to spoil too much here… Just read it. All of them.
She once went to a party with a head of lettuce and a hundred snails in her purse. She said they were her date for the evening.
I am understandably a little bit obsessed. Her personal life was fascinating. Her novels suck you in and you can’t put it down, even when its dark and there has been a cougar attack in your neighborhood and you should be paying attention to walking home safely but you can’t put the book down.
Although the long con that is the subject of book two, Ripley Underground inst nearly as intense as Tom ‘single white female-ing’ Dickie Greenleaf, Highsmith is still able to achieve a heart racing climax. All the while maintaining the measured, level tone of Tom Ripley. I like that she writes suspense with out chaos. Yes Ripley’s rages lead to murders, but he is always so calm before and after. The murders he commits are like a strike of lightning like the reverse eye of a storm.
Ripley’s Game returns to a darker, more violent con. After being insulted by a poor man with Lukemia at a party Ripley decides that his revenge will be to convince this man to kill some folks. Which he does cause he needs the money and there is a whole mafia thing, and a bomb. I’m trying not to spoil too much here… Just read it. All of them.
May 21, 2015
I feel so ignorant. I was watching Wenders’ “The American Friend” back in January – I had seen it before once in the 70s, when it first came out (back then I was not familiar with the films of Samuel Fuller nor did I know the name Nicholas Ray -- both who appear in the film) – and when I saw somewhere in the credits “based on the book ‘Ripley’s Game’ by Patricia Highsmith” I remembered the movie with John Malkovich and I did not connect these two films as partaking of the same story or same protagonist – the calm and collected and somewhat philosophic killer portrayed by Malkovich appeared to share none of the DNA of the “pre-Blue Velvet” Dennis Hopper. And then, when I found out it was same Ripley as the pathetic closet case in the film “The Talented Mr. Ripley” (I’ve never been good with names) which I also found out that the same novel (The Talented Mr. Ripley) was adapted into a 1960 French film “Purple Noon” (thank God for the Criterion Collection on Hulu Plus), but did not share the same characterization of “Mr. Ripley” as the 1999 American movie, I decided to investigate the roots of the seemingly disparate Thomas Ripleys. And when I read the books, I visualized a different Ripley than all of the above.
(BTW: “The American Friend” was based on both “Ripley’s Game” and “Ripley Underground” ).
(BTW: “The American Friend” was based on both “Ripley’s Game” and “Ripley Underground” ).
November 4, 2022
The Talented Mr. Ripley
What if you had the talent to imitate people, to mimic their voices, gestures, even their appearance? And what if you could forge their signatures? The only thing that could hold you back from replacing a person and assuming his life would be your sense of morality. What if you had no such sense? That is Tom Ripley. This story seems impossible, but Highsmith’s talent is to have the reader suspend his disbelief. The only flaw I could not accept was that a murder scene: a small, scuttled boat, would have blood remaining on its floor after days in the sea.
Ripley Under Ground
Due to his character’s lack of morality, Ripley is involved in bogus artwork. This leads him to murder again and impersonating an artist. Despite the book’s unbelievable occurrences, I simply suspended my skepticism and enjoyed the easy read.
Ripley’s Game
Ripley sets up a dying man to become an assassin. Extraordinary immorality rationalized by the sick mind of Ripley. He pulls off another one.
What if you had the talent to imitate people, to mimic their voices, gestures, even their appearance? And what if you could forge their signatures? The only thing that could hold you back from replacing a person and assuming his life would be your sense of morality. What if you had no such sense? That is Tom Ripley. This story seems impossible, but Highsmith’s talent is to have the reader suspend his disbelief. The only flaw I could not accept was that a murder scene: a small, scuttled boat, would have blood remaining on its floor after days in the sea.
Ripley Under Ground
Due to his character’s lack of morality, Ripley is involved in bogus artwork. This leads him to murder again and impersonating an artist. Despite the book’s unbelievable occurrences, I simply suspended my skepticism and enjoyed the easy read.
Ripley’s Game
Ripley sets up a dying man to become an assassin. Extraordinary immorality rationalized by the sick mind of Ripley. He pulls off another one.
March 31, 2019
The first three novels in the "Ripliad," with each good, but slightly less so than the one that precedes it. The Talented Mr. Ripley is the first, most famous, and best. Having avoided the nineties movie, I only knew a rough idea of the plot, and found it very exciting. Ripley Under Ground involves art forgery and some Peter Sellers-level disguise trickery; it's fun, if implausible. Ripley's Game finds our anti-hero helping his old cohort Reeves Minot off some Mafia guys by using a man (a casual acquaintance of Ripley's who was mildly rude to him at a party), who is dying of leukemia, as their anonymous hit man. Further implausible shenanigans follow.
I have heard that the last two in the series continue to diminish in quality, but I'm still looking forward to reading them.
I have heard that the last two in the series continue to diminish in quality, but I'm still looking forward to reading them.
June 16, 2011
I had seen the film many years ago and really enjoyed it, but I preferred the book. Tom Ripley is a sociopath. While the things he does, the crimes he commits, are beyond my comprehension, I did understand some of his frustrations. I enjoyed the style the author used, I loved being in the head of Tom, to understand the way he thought. I found the angle of his sexuality to be almost a red herring- to me his motivations seemed to be money and prestige, although it did contribute to his self-loathing and desire to be someone else. This is just a terrific read and a page turner that will make you surprised that you are rooting for Tom to get away with it all.
December 20, 2007
All of these books are so good and creepy. Ripley is unable to connect with society--you hear his voice as a narrator having to struggle with every moment--is it appropriate to order a drink, etc. He tries to function somewhat normally, but since his first interests are his own, has no problem with murder to get what he wants. Also, he's totally closeted (even to himself) and hates himself for it.
There is a lot going on in these well-written quirky murder mysteries told from the bad-guy's point of view.
There is a lot going on in these well-written quirky murder mysteries told from the bad-guy's point of view.
September 18, 2014
just finished reading book 3, ripley's game. i enjoyed it. i can't believe there are 2 more books about him, though i expect like this third book, the rest may have others as the principal(?) character.
i have to mention that this is a library book. when i saw it in the library, i was surprised that there were other ripley books. after seeing this book, i wanted very much to read it. the cover was appealing and the book has its own bookmark sewn into the binding. kind of a cool looking book.
i have to mention that this is a library book. when i saw it in the library, i was surprised that there were other ripley books. after seeing this book, i wanted very much to read it. the cover was appealing and the book has its own bookmark sewn into the binding. kind of a cool looking book.
January 2, 2015
Read "The Talented Mr. Ripley" only. I look forward to returning to the series. P. Highsmith is unrivalled; how does she do it? The ratty mundanity, the worldly glamour, and of course, Tom Ripley, that incredibly sympathetic psychopath. Amazing.
April 4, 2024
Still have to read Ripley's Game
July 22, 2014
I have reviewed all three novels individually on their respective title listings, but I will say I loved all three, making this one of the best omnibus editions produced.
May 31, 2021
I read two of the novels and then abandoned the third. See Progress chart for comments on The Talented Mr. Ripley.
March 5, 2019
I found in Highsmith’s The Blunderer a sensibility similar to what I found in Jim Thompson’s trio of books: Pop. 128, The Killer Inside Me, and The Getaway. This trio of Ripley novels is a bit different than I had expected, as the out and out sociopathology of the character is not as starkly represented in Highsmith’s style as it had been in The Blunderer, nor was it as astringent as with Thompson, though the affinity with that author still held.
Unlike the protagonist in The Blunderer, Ripley is very, very lucky. While the eponymous blunderer is entirely innocent of any crime (other than imagining it), he is very unlucky, and when the death of someone close to him occurs, everyone thinks the worst of him, and friends falls away and he ends dying in a grisly manner. Ripley, on the other hand, is proximate to a multitude of deaths, and while he is able to skirt prosecution with animated subterfuges, there remains a lingering doubt in those around him. Had he been Highsmith’s more plodding blunderer, he’d have never survived even Dickie’s murder…
These books appeared in 1955, 1970, and 1974, respectively, and the character and situations mature. The Talented Mr. Ripley is a bildungsroman, the birth of a genteel sociopath; Ripley Underground shows him in full married, bourgeois comfort, willing, however to soil his hands to save himself and others involved in his illegal schemes; and in Ripley’s Game, a faint ennui and irritation prompts Ripley to endanger another man, then come to that man’s aid, with very dubious results.
Ripley is not at heart a man of action, but is mostly a self-centered, sexless aesthete; while his murders are relatively spontaneous, they are seen at the moment as the most expedient means to a desired end. Much of the drama in the novels has to do with his efforts thereafter to elude detection, which has him maneuvering, sometimes frantically on a razor-thin line. What makes the amorality intriguing is the banality of his desires and existence. Highsmith keeps her prose tepid and almost mundane, better to highlight the "unthinkable" actions that Ripley is willing to undertake. We readers, like The Blunderer's protagonist, can only dream of such daring possibilities in our own lives...
Unlike the protagonist in The Blunderer, Ripley is very, very lucky. While the eponymous blunderer is entirely innocent of any crime (other than imagining it), he is very unlucky, and when the death of someone close to him occurs, everyone thinks the worst of him, and friends falls away and he ends dying in a grisly manner. Ripley, on the other hand, is proximate to a multitude of deaths, and while he is able to skirt prosecution with animated subterfuges, there remains a lingering doubt in those around him. Had he been Highsmith’s more plodding blunderer, he’d have never survived even Dickie’s murder…
These books appeared in 1955, 1970, and 1974, respectively, and the character and situations mature. The Talented Mr. Ripley is a bildungsroman, the birth of a genteel sociopath; Ripley Underground shows him in full married, bourgeois comfort, willing, however to soil his hands to save himself and others involved in his illegal schemes; and in Ripley’s Game, a faint ennui and irritation prompts Ripley to endanger another man, then come to that man’s aid, with very dubious results.
Ripley is not at heart a man of action, but is mostly a self-centered, sexless aesthete; while his murders are relatively spontaneous, they are seen at the moment as the most expedient means to a desired end. Much of the drama in the novels has to do with his efforts thereafter to elude detection, which has him maneuvering, sometimes frantically on a razor-thin line. What makes the amorality intriguing is the banality of his desires and existence. Highsmith keeps her prose tepid and almost mundane, better to highlight the "unthinkable" actions that Ripley is willing to undertake. We readers, like The Blunderer's protagonist, can only dream of such daring possibilities in our own lives...
October 6, 2025
I'm waffling between 3.5 and 4 stars on this one.
Tom Ripley: sociopath. You might think I omitted intentional murderer. That's the strange thing about Tom Ripley. When Tom kills someone, Highsmith is asking us to believe it was a crime of passion, or self-defense. I think most readers will find themselves seduced by Tom Ripley as most of the supporting characters in these three books are. In the first book it is suggested Tom had a less than perfect youth and that he is entitled to the better things in life. Don't all of us want more than we've been shown? You could also argue he is a vain and selfish opportunist. But, on the other hand you could simply marvel at his three dimensional thinking, his way of predicting future events, and his uncanny ability to read people. All of these talents you would find quite admirable in a person when there isn't a body count. Tom Ripley may not even reach the level of anti-hero, but you will probably love his complexity.
Highsmith's writing style is easy and without pretense. It is entertaining and not difficult reading. Not a lot of 25 cent words, but you may find it helpful to keep Google Translate on hand. I find it interesting how many of Ms. Highsmith's novels have been adapted to film. The Talented Mr. Ripley, Carol (from The Price of Salt), Strangers on a Train (the Hitchcock classic). Highsmith's novels are the kind you could imagine any regular commuter might read on the train.
I think my favorite of the three was The Talented Mr. Ripley. The reason being is that I have two adaptations to lean on. The movie of the same name with Matt Damon, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Jude Law, soaked in the colors and hues of mid 20th century Italy. Great movie by director Minghella (English Patient) and the music is beautiful. More recently, there was a black-and-white limited series released by Netflix called Ripley. I found this adaptation more faithful to the book. Don't let the lack of color scare you. Each and every scene is a carefully constructed noirish work of art.
I know there are more Ripley novels but I may decide to stop tailed Tom Ripley for now, as familiarity may breed contempt or boredom. There are many more in the Highsmith catalogue to explore.
Tom Ripley: sociopath. You might think I omitted intentional murderer. That's the strange thing about Tom Ripley. When Tom kills someone, Highsmith is asking us to believe it was a crime of passion, or self-defense. I think most readers will find themselves seduced by Tom Ripley as most of the supporting characters in these three books are. In the first book it is suggested Tom had a less than perfect youth and that he is entitled to the better things in life. Don't all of us want more than we've been shown? You could also argue he is a vain and selfish opportunist. But, on the other hand you could simply marvel at his three dimensional thinking, his way of predicting future events, and his uncanny ability to read people. All of these talents you would find quite admirable in a person when there isn't a body count. Tom Ripley may not even reach the level of anti-hero, but you will probably love his complexity.
Highsmith's writing style is easy and without pretense. It is entertaining and not difficult reading. Not a lot of 25 cent words, but you may find it helpful to keep Google Translate on hand. I find it interesting how many of Ms. Highsmith's novels have been adapted to film. The Talented Mr. Ripley, Carol (from The Price of Salt), Strangers on a Train (the Hitchcock classic). Highsmith's novels are the kind you could imagine any regular commuter might read on the train.
I think my favorite of the three was The Talented Mr. Ripley. The reason being is that I have two adaptations to lean on. The movie of the same name with Matt Damon, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Jude Law, soaked in the colors and hues of mid 20th century Italy. Great movie by director Minghella (English Patient) and the music is beautiful. More recently, there was a black-and-white limited series released by Netflix called Ripley. I found this adaptation more faithful to the book. Don't let the lack of color scare you. Each and every scene is a carefully constructed noirish work of art.
I know there are more Ripley novels but I may decide to stop tailed Tom Ripley for now, as familiarity may breed contempt or boredom. There are many more in the Highsmith catalogue to explore.
October 26, 2020
The Five Ripley Novels by Patricia Highsmith
The Talented Mr.Ripley
Ripley Underground
Ripley’s Game
The Boy Who Followed Ripley
Ripley Under Water
When I was a teenager, I half-heartedly learned French in school. The truth is that in my insular 1960’s world, France may have existed, but it was, to my mind, some kind of theme-park where the real world didn’t happen. The non-English-speaking world rarely appeared on television and was only as Paris-1970real as a novel. Then, in 1975, I went there and it exploded in my face. I’ve never gotten over it. A romantic dream come true.
That’s what I like about the Ripley novel’s. Either Highsmith had the same experience with Western Europe generally or she saw into my heart; I think the former. She herself moved to the Europe of my dreamy 1960’s-70’s and lived and eventually she died there. Most importantly, her amazing psychopathic Tom Ripley had my experience. He is a wannabe European, mesmerised by acting European, gobbling up language and culture at every turn, floating effortlessly between France, Germany, West-Berlin and Italy.
This is not Scandinavian gore. Ripley is not evil; he’s just self-obsessed. He’s self-educated and many readers, I think, find him sympathetic and care what happens to him. Highsmith’s style is to record all the banale details of his day, while revealing his thoughts and doubts, letting the tension that you know is there build until something happens. When it does, he doesn’t have a plan, he just muddles through. It could be me (minus the psychopathic tendencies of course, he-he).
Of course I can now see the warts in Europe too but the truth is: I’d rather not. I quite yearn for the feelings which that early explosion of discovery afforded me and reading Ripley quite stirs them up. It’s like a bit of time-travel back to a period when we were less sophisticated and working very hard at becoming so. Vive les années 70!!
I’ve read the entire series three times now and there’ll be a fourth time in a few years.
The Talented Mr.Ripley
Ripley Underground
Ripley’s Game
The Boy Who Followed Ripley
Ripley Under Water
When I was a teenager, I half-heartedly learned French in school. The truth is that in my insular 1960’s world, France may have existed, but it was, to my mind, some kind of theme-park where the real world didn’t happen. The non-English-speaking world rarely appeared on television and was only as Paris-1970real as a novel. Then, in 1975, I went there and it exploded in my face. I’ve never gotten over it. A romantic dream come true.
That’s what I like about the Ripley novel’s. Either Highsmith had the same experience with Western Europe generally or she saw into my heart; I think the former. She herself moved to the Europe of my dreamy 1960’s-70’s and lived and eventually she died there. Most importantly, her amazing psychopathic Tom Ripley had my experience. He is a wannabe European, mesmerised by acting European, gobbling up language and culture at every turn, floating effortlessly between France, Germany, West-Berlin and Italy.
This is not Scandinavian gore. Ripley is not evil; he’s just self-obsessed. He’s self-educated and many readers, I think, find him sympathetic and care what happens to him. Highsmith’s style is to record all the banale details of his day, while revealing his thoughts and doubts, letting the tension that you know is there build until something happens. When it does, he doesn’t have a plan, he just muddles through. It could be me (minus the psychopathic tendencies of course, he-he).
Of course I can now see the warts in Europe too but the truth is: I’d rather not. I quite yearn for the feelings which that early explosion of discovery afforded me and reading Ripley quite stirs them up. It’s like a bit of time-travel back to a period when we were less sophisticated and working very hard at becoming so. Vive les années 70!!
I’ve read the entire series three times now and there’ll be a fourth time in a few years.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 142 reviews