March 2022 Group Read: The Postman Always Rings Twice, by James M. Cain

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Discussion space for The Postman Always Rings Twice, my own nomination for the March group read. Chime in, but put any spoilers you have in the accompanying spoiler thread. Looking forward to this!

[Dan]

Looking forward to re-reading this classic.

[Russell]

I loved this book when I read it six years ago. Here's the first sentence of my review (no spoilers). This classic noir novel deserves its place in history. Told in the first person by a drifter who falls for the beautiful young wife of a Greek diner owner, it has more twists and turns than the road to Malibu, a road that plays a critical role in the story.

[Dan]

Russell wrote: "I loved this book when I read it six years ago. Here's the first sentence of my review (no spoilers). This classic noir novel deserves its place in history. Told in the first person by a drifter wh..." Spot on!

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

I'll be starting it later this evening. I know it's short, but I am in no way tempted to read it quickly.

[Bob]

I haven't posted any updates on this book, yet, but I'm about 25% of the way through it. I didn't care for it initially, due to the main characters of the drifter and the Greek's wife, but I'm enjoying it more.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Bob wrote: "I haven't posted any updates on this book, yet, but I'm about 25% of the way through it. I didn't care for it initially, due to the main characters of the drifter and the Greek's wife, but I'm enjo..."

I understand that, at least about the drifter (Frank), and at least at the beginning. I've been wondering if he meant he wanted to kiss the wife or smack her in the face when he said her lips "stuck out in a way that made me want to mash them in for her." But as always, the beginning of any story doesn't exactly provide clarity.

[Randy]

I took that as kissing her.

I read this 35 years or so ago. I'd forgotten the rawness of the opening, and yet there's a bit of subtlety in how Cain lets Frank paint himself with his words and ways. Cora and Nick, too, for that matter.

I also wonder how many younger readers know what a "wind wing" is. It's a feature that faded out in the early '60s.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

No idea what a wind wing is. Had to look it up.

[Randy]

The first two cars I remember my folks having had wind wings. I suspect they were a product of a generation that smoked heavily and didn't want to open the bigger windows but also didn't want to be driving a six-cylinder fog bank.

[Tone]

Randy wrote: "I took that as kissing her.

I read this 35 years or so ago. I'd forgotten the rawness of the opening, and yet there's a bit of subtlety in how Cain lets Frank paint himself with his words and way..."

You're right, Randy. I had to consult my Merriam-Webster to find out what a "wind wing" was.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

fun factoid: Cain's original title for this novel was Bar-B-Que. Probably a good thing his publisher wasn't having any of it.

[Courtney]

I enjoyed this one, listened to the audiobook. I can see how it was controversial back when it came out. I loved how twisty it was. I’d love to watch all the film versions. I just looked and the older one from the 40s is free on the tcm app.

[Randy]

The old one is good. Though Lana Turner isn't quite how Cain describes Cora, she gives off the right vibe.

[Lisa]

I do like the Jack Nicholson Jessica Lange version too. Starting the book tonight.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

What I'm experiencing with this book is this: I read it eons ago and now it's an entirely new book since I'd forgotten pretty much everything outside the main plot and the ending (which is unforgettable no matter how long ago I've read it). This time around I'm finding a lot of focus on "the road."

[Randy]

I've been thinking about how many stories are variations on this, starting with Double Indemnity, another Cain novel (novella?) but set in a somewhat higher tax bracket, as is the movie Body Heat, while Red Rock West is more or less in the same tax bracket, and if I'm remembering it correctly, Blue Velvet is Postman on LSD.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Randy wrote: "I've been thinking about how many stories are variations on this, starting with Double Indemnity, another Cain novel (novella?) but set in a somewhat higher tax bracket, as is the movi..."

I just recently read his book The Embezzler, and at first it seemed as though it would play out a little like Double Indemnity but then changed. Unlike that book or this one, there was no insurance policy, but it starts out with a woman who gets her bank manager boss to eventually fall in with her in an embezzling scheme her husband had concocted, with a sort of twist. But you could certainly see echoes of Double Indemnity, written three years before The Embezzler.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Saw the 1946 film last night; tonight it's Jack Nicholson.

[Lisa]

Nancy wrote: "Saw the 1946 film last night; tonight it's Jack Nicholson."

Nice! Let us know what you think of both. I started the book last night. It really jumps right to the action. The dialogue is unusual - so spare and gritty.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Lisa wrote: "Nancy wrote: "Saw the 1946 film last night; tonight it's Jack Nicholson."

Nice! Let us know what you think of both. I started the book last night. It really jumps right to the action. The dialogue..."

"It really jumps right to the action" ... that it does, most certainly. I love the opening line, too.

[Lisa]

Nancy, how did you like the movies?

[Franky]

One of my first exposures to noir years ago, I really enjoyed this one. If I can find my copy, I'll try to chime in this month. As far as film adaptations, I loved the 1946 classic version with John Garfield and Lana Turner, but hated the Jack Nicholson version.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Lisa wrote: "Nancy, how did you like the movies?"

We've had interruption after interruption lately (arrgghh!) -- so no Nicholson version yet, but for sure today's the day.

I have to tell you this -- my husband watched the Lana Turner version with me and all he said was (at the end) "what postman?" So I think I'll be doing the other film by myself.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Franky wrote: "One of my first exposures to noir years ago, I really enjoyed this one. If I can find my copy, I'll try to chime in this month. As far as film adaptations, I loved the 1946 classic version with Joh..."

Oh good (that you'll maybe join in). There's so much more to this book than actually meets the eye.

[Lisa]

Nancy wrote: "Lisa wrote: "Nancy, how did you like the movies?"

We've had interruption after interruption lately (arrgghh!) -- so no Nicholson version yet, but for sure today's the day.

I have to tell you thi..."

LOL, that's funny. Although I'll bet he's far from the only person who has asked that question ;)

I finished yesterday. I did like it quite a bit, but got a little mired in some of the legal explanations. Most of the book has such spare, direct dialogue and descriptions, but I found myself getting lost in the (view spoiler)[lengthy explanation of the insurance policies and agents, and how these events led to them getting off the hook. (hide spoiler)] Then I just felt like an idiot for being unable to follow it lol.

[Bruce]

I started this too, on audio, read by Stanley Tucci.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Bruce wrote: "I started this too, on audio, read by Stanley Tucci."

Stanley Tucci in my head is associated with this show we watched a couple of months back called Murder One. He's probably a great narrator.

[Bruce]

He’s not the first person who comes to mind for reading it, but he’s excellent at narrating pulp/noir books. He probably doesn’t come to mind because of the films I’ve mostly seen him in.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

I watched the 1981 version of the film with Jack Nicholson yesterday (alone, as planned). I think I prefer the original.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

so, we're ten days in ... can we start talking about the actual book?

[Randy]

That ending is almost too poetic justice. It's kind of a gut punch.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Randy wrote: "That ending is almost too poetic justice. It's kind of a gut punch."

oh shoot. I put my book down somewhere and now I have to find it. Rats.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

this could be a while

[Randy]

:)

[Lisa]

Nancy wrote: "so, we're ten days in ... can we start talking about the actual book?"

Fine by me; I'm finished. We could use spoiler tags.

[Franky]

Randy wrote: "That ending is almost too poetic justice. It's kind of a gut punch."

I agree Randy with that statement.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Finally found my book. Yay.
The ending was right for the story ... and given that they never really explained the title, even more appropriate.

[Lisa]

Frank and Cora's relationship was strange and fascinating; they are fully aware that they have both sold each other out, and would betray the other at any time to save themselves, yet they are absolutely compelled toward each other. They each accept their own horrid natures and accept it in each other, as well. The postman rang twice when those two were created, as well.

[Randy]

I don't disagree with it being right, just that it's even more brutal than you'd expect, and very near too perfect for what's come before.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Randy wrote: "I don't disagree with it being right, just that it's even more brutal than you'd expect, and very near too perfect for what's come before."

I didn't think it was too brutal, but the talk about prayers and being together with Cora where ever she may be didn't seem too in tune with Frank's behavior to that point. And sorry to bring up the movies again, but I think that was my issue with the 1946 film (which added even more religionspeak), whereas in the 1981 film none of that was brought in, making it a better ending even than the novel.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Lisa wrote: "Frank and Cora's relationship was strange and fascinating; they are fully aware that they have both sold each other out, and would betray the other at any time to save themselves, yet they are abso..."

They really did sort of know each other for who they were, didn't they?

[Randy]

I think I found it brutal because Cain somehow pulls you into seeing everything from their perspective, you begin to feel some empathy for them and even wonder if it could all turn out good for them, and then it's like the hand of God dropping anvils on their heads.

We often talk about couples who were made for each other. The other side of that coin I guess would be Cora and Frank, not only made for each other but dangerous to bystanders and especially for themselves. (This relationship will self-destruct in 5 seconds, to paraphrase an otherwise unrelated tv series.)

[Randy]

Randy wrote: "I think I found it brutal because Cain somehow pulls you into seeing everything from their perspective, you begin to feel some empathy for them and even wonder if it could all turn out good for the..."

To expand on that -- (view spoiler)[the joy/hope of parenthood, which they seem to tentatively feel, completely destroyed by the fear and panic of miscarriage is brutal, and maybe even more so for a couple who are already prey to guilt, aware of the toxic seed of their hope and suspect of any happiness that might come their way. (hide spoiler)]

[Karen]

Randy wrote: "Randy wrote: "I think I found it brutal because Cain somehow pulls you into seeing everything from their perspective, you begin to feel some empathy for them and even wonder if it could all turn ou..."
Can I just say that Frank and Cora would have been horrible parents!!! Frank especially, ran on raw emotion. He could never control himself in the interest of a long term benefit. Cora fell in with him.

[Randy]

Agreed, but they were both too young, too selfish and too desperate to know better.

Frank and Cora are appalling young people, but over the course of the novel I think most readers will develop, probably with reluctance, some kind of empathy for them. If Frank is shiftless, he's also a product of a society that largely wanted you to be a cog in the work world during the worst economy of the 20th century, so work was tough to get even if you were inclined to do so. Without work, he had nothing on an intellectual or practical level to fall back on, and so he roams from city to city, joining tens of thousands of others looking for something and maybe not really knowing what.

Cora is even younger and maybe in a worse position, a young woman in a society that doesn't value young women, and does very little to promote them beyond, hey, maybe you're pretty enough for the movies and if not, maybe you should marry someone rich while you still have your looks.

It's not hard to extrapolate from what they tell about themselves back stories that explain the trajectory of their lives, how each is floundering in her/his own way, their unpreparedness for a relationship even as their desperation and need pushes them together. Their attraction is toxic, but it produces more fire and heat than they've had, an excitement they can't give up. Among other things, Cain seems to be examining how love can be toxic when the people involved are undeveloped emotionally, intellectually and morally. And in spite of that, I still feel for them.

[Bruce]

I agree. It’s still hard.

I think part of what’s good and complex about this is that Cain wrote three characters you can feel empathy for. The victim was a kind person, but one can understand the circumstances of the killers as well. In many cases, the author will contrast the killer(s) and victim(s) by having one be kind, and the other cruel, or at least unlikable.

[Emma]

Randy wrote: "I've been thinking about how many stories are variations on this, starting with Double Indemnity, another Cain novel (novella?) but set in a somewhat higher tax bracket, as is the movi..."

I just finished reading it, and yes I thought it was interesting finding some similar themes and ambiance with Double Indemnity. I haven't read any other book yet by this author, but it seems I could now recognize his voice, also through the dialogs

[Emma]

Nancy wrote: "Finally found my book. Yay.
The ending was right for the story ... and given that they never really explained the title, even more appropriate."

When I finished the book yesterday, my first reaction was, why this title? And then I thought more about it, and I realized it gave it a deeper dimension, almost something metaphysical - about fate. You may escape the consequences of what you did once, but not the second time. So when fate knocks rings your bell for the second time, you won't escape.
And as I write this, I also realize the postman rings twice for the Greek s well: he survives the first time, but not the second!
That's at least how I interpret the title.
I find it cool to have grittiness with a deeper meaning.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Sorry to have missed the weekend posts ... minor family emergency, all finished now.