Jun / Jul 2016 Group Read Selection - The Postman Always Rings Twice by James M. Cain

[Bill]

This is the thread to discuss The Postman Always Rings Twice by James M. Cain. Walt nominated this book.

[Stephen]

James M Cain is such an underrated writer. This story is so good. Written in 1934 and still blows me away every time I read it.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Same here. I love this book.

[Jan C]

I guess I do too. I just got the audio from OverDrive. And it will apparently be the second listening for me. In addition to having read it once, too.

[Britney]

I have never read this book. I will have to check it out.

[Jody]

This is my first time reading this book, but I have heard a lot about it. How is the discussion ran?

[Tom]

The first line is one of my all-time favorites of any novel. Perfect introduction to Chambers; tells you everything you need to know about his character.

[Jody]

It is a perfect opener. It grabs your attention and right away lets you know the character. Gold.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Jody wrote: "This is my first time reading this book, but I have heard a lot about it. How is the discussion ran?"

Well, Walt is supposed to be leading this discussion, but I haven't seen him yet.

Feel free to discuss but please try to avoid spoilers.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Here we are, 11 days into the discussion and there's no discussion, and no discussion leader.

Once again I'm going to ask a) if anyone who voted for this book is actually planning to read it and b) if no, then why on earth did you vote for it?

[Jody]

I am a complete newbie, but this discussion kind of seems like a bust.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Jody wrote: "I am a complete newbie, but this discussion kind of seems like a bust."

My point exactly.

This is the second time in the space of a few months that the same thing's happened. My basic objection is that book number 3, Raven Black, seemed to be a very popular choice among this group's readers and got a lot of group buzz, but since it got outvoted, it didn't make it as a group selection. It seems highly unfair to the people who were looking forward to reading that book when there's nothing going on here.

[Jody]

That is the book I would have voted for if I would have joined earlier.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Jody wrote: "That is the book I would have voted for if I would have joined earlier."

Well, don't let this wreck anything for you ... generally the discussions are very lively.

[Natalie]

I finished this yesterday. It was a nice quick read. It reminded me of Double Indemnity (I've only seen the movie) and I just found out that both books are by the same author. I've never participated in these discussions before; are we not allowed to post spoilers at all or only towards the end of the reading period?

[Franky]

Natalie wrote: "I finished this yesterday. It was a nice quick read. It reminded me of Double Indemnity (I've only seen the movie) and I just found out that both books are by the same author. I've never participat..."

Funny how you mention Double Indemnity, as it also reminded me of the same thing. I read this one awhile back, but it was my first noir read so it will always be memorable. What I find interesting is how the circumstances bring the two--Cora, Frank-- to much lower depths. I don't think either are inherently evil, but their meeting just sort of propels their seedy plans.

I'll have to rewatch the film.

I think that spoilers are pretty much a no-no, unless they are hidden.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Thanks, Franky, re the spoilers. Definitely please use the spoiler brackets. And you're both correct -- there are certainly parallels between the two novels.

[SherryRose]

Natalie wrote: "I finished this yesterday. It was a nice quick read. It reminded me of Double Indemnity (I've only seen the movie) and I just found out that both books are by the same author. I've never participat..."

If you click on the link right above the dialogue box which says, (some html is ok) it shows you how to do the spoiler brackets. It helps me because I tend to forget the order lol.

[Renee]

I loved the book. I wonder if the roadside cafe was reminiscent of the time. Everyone is so connected now. Internet ,media and phones come to mind.

The cafe seemed to be an island. I wish I could use words better

[Paula]

I just reread this book; it's a very quick read. I was amazed at how much sympathy I had with the main characters, even though I knew story from the last time I read it (I had forgotten the details of the crime, but remembered the ending). (view spoiler)[It's a bit like a Greek tragedy: every step seems decided by fate and the main characters are unable to break free and turn the story around to a happy ending. The final tragedy was how Cora was killed just as they were finally finding happiness together (even though who knows how long they would have been able to stay together having so different goals in life). (hide spoiler)]

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

I agree, Paula. I was very sympathetic toward both of of them.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Renee wrote: "I loved the book. I wonder if the roadside cafe was reminiscent of the time. Everyone is so connected now. Internet ,media and phones come to mind.

The cafe seemed to be an island. I wish I could..."

The whole novel, to me, is (view spoiler)[ based around the road. At the beginning of the book Frank just sort of lands at the cafe with no intention of staying, sort of like a way station. And as you go,through the book, he is antsy to get moving again, while Cora is the opposite. (hide spoiler)].

[Kim]

I ordered it from a used bookstore, back in May, and it arrived... today. So I am starting it now. I know the story well, and have read Cain before, & am looking forward to reading this classic crime novel.

The upside is this book also has Mildred Pierce, Double Indemnity (Fred MacMurray was a revelation in the movie, especially to someone who had only seen him in My Three Sons and Disney family films) and Serenade. I will pass this onto my son, been introducing him to authors. Introduced him to Philip K. Dick and Cornell Woolrich just recently.

[Kim]

Started and finished this quite rapidly. Crime is not supposed to pay, and I guess guilt can be the agent of nemesis. I remember both versions of the film, John Garfield was amazing. I saw the Jack Nicholson version while in Communications School for the Navy, a friend and I drove to Boston from Newport, RI, to see it. He is always good, but I believed in him less than I did JG. He seemed too confident in some way, his manner did not match his circumstances.

It was fun to revisit the noir world of Cain.

[Franky]

Kim wrote: "Started and finished this quite rapidly. Crime is not supposed to pay, and I guess guilt can be the agent of nemesis. I remember both versions of the film, John Garfield was amazing. I saw the Jack..."

Kim, Yes, I think "crime doesn't pay" is a fitting moral to this book,now that you mention it. Just out of curiosity: did you happen to like the Nicholson version? I watched it awhile back, and couldn't stand it. Nearly turned it off several times. Maybe I shouldn't have compared it to the original classic.

[Kim]

When I saw the Nicholson version, I had been away from the story long enough that it was not so obvious to me. It was one of the first movies I saw upon completing Officer Candidate Training, and graduating to become an Ensign in the Navy. I was in the mood to be pleased, but it did not impress me all that much. He was too Jack, not enough in the character from the book. Re-reading the book brought the version with John Garfield & Lana Turner to mind, I think the earlier version caught the story best. I have never sought out the Nicholson version to watch it again, and if I am impressed with a movie, I will happily rewatch it. Sometimes people having power in Hollywood can lead to unfortunate casting.

[Franky]

Kim wrote: "When I saw the Nicholson version, I had been away from the story long enough that it was not so obvious to me. It was one of the first movies I saw upon completing Officer Candidate Training, and g..."

Yes, Kim, I think Garland really captures the essence of Frank Chambers. I just got through watching the 1946 version again, and thought it was fantastic. I think it is a case where Frank and Cora sort of "cancel each other out" with their plans.

Yeah, I think you hit it on the nail with Nicholson being Nicholson rather than the character from the book. I watched it and remember it being rather awful, so I haven't returned to see it again. And, from what I remember, they change the plot quite a bit and just make it a little over the top erotic.

[shanghao]

Read this one not too long ago and thought it was tightly written, reads like a movie roll to me.