noir read of the month #5: Strangers on a Train, by Patricia Highsmith

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

As I said, I don't mind that you don't share my opinion. That's not what I look for in a book discussion.

[IShita]

I don't like it either but I do enjoy taking in different POVs.

[Arlene]

I agree Ishita, it is the simplicity of the events of this book that were not in Ripley. All of a sudden the detective puts everything together and happens upon Guy, well how did he put it together how did he find Guy? I think I would have like a little more story.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Chapter 34.

[IShita]

Comes out of the blue and what's more is that it hits right on spot! The plot had so much more scope. A shame.
Do you plan to read Ripley #2 anytime soon?

[Arlene]

I enjoy a difference of opinion in a discussion, it helps me to see another side.

Ishita, I plan to read all of the Ripley's books, how about you?

[IShita]

Me too. When do you plan to read the next in series?

[Franky]

Sorry, a little late to finishing this one. But, I did catch up and read the discussion posts. I'm at chapter 41, so hopefully I'll be finished by tomorrow.

Great insight and comments.

I did think that at some points in this novel things were a little too simplistically handled, so I do agree with Ishita. This was Highsmith's first novel, right? Maybe she grew more into her craft.

Yet, once the "deeds" are committed, there is a good deal of complexity inside these character's (Guy, Bruno) heads. At first I wasn't really sold on how Guy acted and responded to events, but then when we start to see his duplicity and the inner workings of his mind, things get a little more believable.

As far as the film. I'm watching it again currently. I remember it being great up until the ending, which sort of soured everything. Guy is this book is nothing like Guy in the novel.

Anyhow, will try to finish soon, and report back.

[Arlene]

I like your review, I think Guy in the movie makes more sense than Guy in the book.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Franky wrote: "Sorry, a little late to finishing this one. But, I did catch up and read the discussion posts. I'm at chapter 41, so hopefully I'll be finished by tomorrow.

Great insight and comments.

I did th..."


I am curious. Exactly which "things" were handled simplistically?

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Arlene wrote: "I like your review, I think Guy in the movie makes more sense than Guy in the book."

They're not even the same people. And to me, Guy in the book makes tons of sense if you really examine his character closely. I spent days with this novel -- I feel like I know him.

[Arlene]

Nancy, I think my issue with Guy in the book is that he seems to have no back bone, and Guy in the movie did. I found this to be a very interesting book, it made me think and wonder Guy's motivation.

[Franky]

Nancy, I think it was just the way that things are just so out in the open, as opposed to The Talented Mr. Ripley, for example. For instance, Bruno says up front about the possibility of murders on the train, and Guy jut seems to handle it so matter of factly, in a ho-hum manner, and fails to really take any action. Also, Guy's downward spiral happens so quickly, it was hard to buy at first. I guess simplistically isn't really the word I was looking for, but maybe awkwardly.

[IShita]

When I say simplistically I refer to the events such as when Bruno found out Mariam. I mean, he goes to my the town, speculates on it being a "sl*t" girl (which wasn't mentioned exactly but he just assumed it to be like that since she cheated on Guy) he sees standing outside a country house going out with her friends. And the next thing you know? Boom- she's Mariam! Next up, he formulates a plan on how to kill her and boom- plays out to the T. The inspector somehow (not mentioned how!?) puts it together, and bam- he hits right on spot with Bruno!

I mean, what, was it that simple? I mean, she speculated the first girl he saw to be Mariam and there she was! I was expecting a twist such as she might be the wrong Mariam but no- it was she.

True, her characters are perfectly crafted. I agree and never was opposed to that. But the only problem with this book is the simplicity of events that occur. How simply they happen to be.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Well, actually, he has her name as Miriam Joyce, so when he looks up Joyce in the phone book, he saw that three out of seven were at the same address. Simplistic, maybe, but it makes sense to me. He says he'll wait half an hour -- then the assumption is (to me) that he'll go to another address. So, if you'll recollect, he sees a red-haired woman, and logically assumes, since he knows Miriam has red hair, that it's her.

Then, also logically, he follows the car they're all in to the amusement park, where he's still not sure until someone said her name.

in the long run, though, for me, events are secondary to what's in Guy and Bruno's heads. The questions that stem from Highsmith's book run far deeper than any issues with plot expectations.

[Franky]

Nancy wrote: "Well, actually, he has her name as Miriam Joyce, so when he looks up Joyce in the phone book, he saw that three out of seven were at the same address. Simplistic, maybe, but it makes sense to me. H..."

Agree with you about what's going on in the character's heads, especially Guy. Gives the characters another level of complexity, and that is what sells this book for me and makes it compelling and interesting. To me, once the deeds are committed, then things really get going and become far more complex than I first had thought.

Am I the only one who had the scene from Throw Mama From the Train running through their head while reading this book? This one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEDqe...

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

Franky wrote: "Gives the characters another level of complexity, and that is what sells this book for me and makes it compelling and interesting. To me, once the deeds are committed, then things really get going and become far more complex than I first had thought. ..."

Exactly.

I did think of Danny deVito! How did you know? LOL

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

The "what's going on in the characters' heads" is why I read crime, and especially noir. They get to a point where you have to try to get underneath the action to see why they act the way they do.

[IShita]

I agree, Nancy. But how could he be sure none of the other Miriam's had red hair? That's logic too. And if you remember, before following her, he was almost a cent percent sure it was her. That's a little presumptuous.

As far as the complexities of the character's minds go, I am right there with ya. The simplicity of the book irked me but what did redeem this book was the psychological aspects of it. Bruno is one of my all time favorite characters for that sole purpose. Guy is another fascinating character. It's amazing how clearly you can form two distinct images of them both!

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

"But how could he be sure none of the other Miriam's had red hair? That's logic too. And if you remember, before following her, he was almost a cent percent sure it was her. That's a little presumptuous."

I would never have thought to ask that question, actually, re the red hair.

About the rest: it's all there in Chapter 12.

[IShita]

It's rare but plausible!

[Barbara]

I wanted to jump into the book and shout at Haines to "get that nutcase out of your life" but of course that would have spoiled the plot. I enjoyed the book.

[Nancy, Co-Moderator]

That is of course, one of the bigger questions this book poses -- re the nature of the relationship between Bruno and Guy. Guilt? Something else? The book states at some point that they were like brothers (sorry, I'm commenting while packing suitcases and waiting for laundry so I don't have the book right here).

[Franky]

Barbara wrote: "I wanted to jump into the book and shout at Haines to "get that nutcase out of your life" but of course that would have spoiled the plot. I enjoyed the book."

My opinion of Guy changed from the beginning of the book to the end. At first, I was saying the exact same thing about him. Like, "get rid of this creep and get your life back together." Thought there was no way Guy would do what he did. But then, there was sort of a shift where we see Guy have another side where is capable because of his fragile state of mind...

I really thought this novel excels in the second half...where we see the two character's paths cross, and there is the conflicts and internal struggle for Guy...ultimately ended up really liking this one.

Nancy, good point about this relationship between Bruno and Guy. At some point, Guy seems to accept Bruno as "who he is" in some respects. Still, they are vastly different, polar opposites in how emotionally respond to their crimes. Fascinating.

[Arlene]

Franky I really like your review.