Hammett and Chandler birds of two vastly different feat

[MASCARO at HUMnet.UCLA.EDU]

Don't want to get into another wrangle about comparing things, but want to say that a 
close reading of the MALTESE FALCON. at least, shows it to be a pretty sophisticated 
novel, not just the ur-dick tough guy yarn.  Spade, that *blonde Satan*--and someone 
(was it Paul M.?),. recently mentioned his V-like face--is a fair ironist himself.  Not to 
mention the pynch-like atmosphere of the quest.  A-and it turns out, pynchesquely,
there--is no-- Falcon.  (BTW, someone also mentioned the bird as MacGuffin.  Interesting 
idea, but ultimately I think it's more than that, or at least, the fact of its absence is more 
than that--it [i.e. the absence] is the stuff dreams are made  of.) 
 Agreed Hammett deliberately tries to write *unartsy* fiction, but IMO there is real art, not 
only in MF but also GLASS KEY and RED HARVEST.  I'm sure other more 
knowledgeable Hammett fans will pick up your gauntlet happily.  Actually, Chandler's 
*sophistication* is often annoying (though I've read him less) and seems larded on for 
trite effect.  Your comment, Adam, that it's often tongue in cheek is useful here.  I'll look 
at him w/ that in mind in the future.

john m
**********************************
Adam T. wrote:
>
>One should not simply lump Hammett and Chandler together as detective-story
>authors.  Hammett is, as far as I can tell, pretty much what he's
>advertised as.  Sam Spade is a private dick filled with low cunning and
>knuckles.  On the other hand, Marlowe is an intellectual.  Chandler's books
>are amazingly overwritten, and it's quite intentional that Marlowe went to
>college before becoming a private investigator.  Just recall the
>conversations on Eliot with the chauffeur in _The Big Sleep_.  Chandler has
>a self-conscious irony about him that Hammett, as I recall (I've read
>Chandler much more recently), lacks.