Any mystery novel set in Los Angeles is going to get compared to Raymond Chandler, although Chandler was just pretty much taking Carrol John Daly and transplanting him to LA. I mention this because--historical novel, LA, private eye, noir genre--comparisons to Chandler are natural. But those are surface similarities, genre similarities. In Devil and a Blue Dress, Walter Mosely is doing many new things, things that make it well worth reading.First, if you've read any of these hard boiled detective novels, you'll probably note that the main character is pretty static--already fully formed, wise cracking, morally centered on a personal code of contact, brave and resourceful. They don't change through the course of the novel, and, if there's a series, they don't change novel to novel. They are the western gunfighter, imposing order (through force) on a threating world, only the "range" they "ride" is the mean streets of an urban setting. This is true of Carrol John Daly's Race Williams, Dashiel Hammett's Sam Spade, Chandler's Philip Marlowe, and Robert B. Parker's Spenser (my favorite mystery sereis of all time).But Easy Rawlins', Mosley's protagonist, is much more fully developed. He's a laid off aircraft worker trying to meet the mortgage on his home. He's from Houston and was part of the post-World War II migration of African Americans to to urban areas out of the South (the novel is set in 1948)--not a licensed private eye. He is also fearful--of being killed by white cops, of some of his own friends, and of the fact that, even back then, someone minding his own business could be randomly killed in South LA. But he won't let himself be dominated by his fears, refusing to cower before powerful white men who try to force him into subservience, or to black men to whom violence is a casual companion. He faces the fears and does what he thinks is best regardless--being afraid and facing that fear is perhaps more brave than the bravado one sees in other hard-boiled detectives.He is also unsure how to act. Whereas the other detective's unswerving moral code acts like a computer, spitting out the "right" answer, Easy has to think about what's going on, mull over decisions, and try and figure out what's "best." Often, there's no "good" answer, and he must choose between two bad choices and try and figure out which will do the least damage to the fewest people. Easy tries to do the right thing, but the world he lives in a far less clear cut than those of some other hard boiled detectives. He's also flawed and occassional makes mistakes, often when he's angry or tired--making him a character that more readers can relate to.He also doesn't wise crack. It would not have been plausible for Easy to talk the way Philip Marlow (Chandler's here) did, smarting off to cops, teaking gangsters, baiting everyone. The social forces exerted on black men in 1948 were far different from those on white men (as they are today). That doesn't mean Easy isn't aumusing or that there isn't snappy dialogue (but a lot of it is internal, what he's thinking rather than what he says). I mention this because the "wise cracking private eye" is an expected part of the hard boiled genre, and this aspect of Easy's character is another way that the Easy Rawlins series isn't just another Chandler knock-off.e However, violence is the thing that makes the Easy series the most unique I've read. The private eye's world is always a dark, dangerous place, but it's largely violence that the private eye seeks out. But Easy's whole world is dangerous; he fled Houston because he was implicated in a murder a friend had committed; in the Today of the novel, men with guns and knives are a daily part of life.Easy, however, doesn't carry a gun. With other private eyes, the gun is more than an accessory, it's a sidekick, a main character in the book. Race Williams always mentions his forty-four, and Spenser talks about dressing warm so his bullets won't get cold. But Easy doesn't "pack," and he only has a gun in his hand in one sequence in the novel. He also doesn't kill any one--most private eyes wind up shooting the bad buys. People get dead at the end of Devil in a Blue Dress, but it isn't easy who does the killing.It's not becuase Easy is squeamish. He's a World War II vet who saw a great deal of combat; he's haunted at night by the faces of the men he's killed. But he doesn't carry a gun and, at least in the first novel in the series, he doesn't kill anyone (this is only the first I'v read, so I can't speak beyond it).The African-American world of post-War Los Angeles. It's a mix of people from all over the country, all of whom have different reasons for having come to LA. It's a world of family men and working class people trying to get by, and of gangsters and hoods, and of white people who go into these neighborhoods for reasons that rarely benefit the people who live there.Mosleys' writing is clear, engaging, and is rich in meaning while at the same time a "Fast read." I just read Parker's most recent Spenser novel a couple of weeks ago, and it dawned on me that one of the reasons I love those books is because Spenser, Hawk, and Susan never change--they are old friends I can count on. But the fact that Easy DOES change is the reason I LIKE Devil in a Blue Dress. Looks like I've made another 'friend.'
Τελευταία,παρακολουθώ πως τόσο στην χώρα μας όσο και στο εξωτερικό τα σκανδιναβικά αστυνομικά βιβλία έχουν γίνει πολύ της μόδας.Όποιος Σουηδός-Νορβηγός-Δανός γράφει κάποιο αστυνομικό-θρίλερ,αυτομάτως σκαρφαλώνει ψηλά στην λίστα των ευπώλητων. Βέβαια δεν συμμερίζομαι αυτήν την τρέλα με τους Σκανδιναβούς συγγραφείς καθώς κάποια βιβλία τους που έπεσαν στα χέρια μου,δεν με ικανοποίησαν(μέχρι στιγμής). Έτσι,αποφάσισα να διαβάσω κάτι που πιο μακριά,ένα βιβλίο το οποίο είχε ξεχαστεί στο ράφι της βιβλιοθήκης για κάμποσο καιρό.Το βιβλίο,λοιπόν που διάβασα ονομάζεται ''Ο διάβολος με το γαλάζιο φόρεμα'' και είναι το πρωτόλειο του Γουόλτερ Μόσλυ,Αμερικανού ''απόγονου του Ρέιμοντ Τσάντλερ''.Λος Άντζελες του 1948,ο Ίζυ Ρόουλινς,ένας μαύρος βετεράνος πολέμου,χάνει την δουλειά του.Έχοντας ένα δάνειο για το σπίτι που αγόρασε και δεν θέλει να χάσει,βρίσκεται σε κατάσταση απελπισίας.Καθώς πίνει στο μπάρ ενός φίλου του, ένα λευκό λαμόγιο του συστήνεται προσφέροντας του δουλειά.Τι δουλειά;Να βρει την Δάφνη Μονέ,μια πανέμορφη κοπέλα που συναναστρέφεται με μαύρους και συχνάζει σε κακόφημα κλαμπ.Το μόνο στοιχείο του Ίζυ είναι μια φωτογραφία της κοπέλας,όμως δεν αργεί καθόλου να εντοπίσει τον διάβολο με το γαλάζιο φόρεμα.Παρά τα εμπόδια που συναντά(διεφθαρμένοι πολιτικοί,ρατσιστές αστυνομικοί που τον καταδιώκουν,κυκλώματα λαθραίων ποτών) ο Ίζυ λύνει τον γρίφο ,ανακαλύπτει την αλήθεια και κερδίζει άλλη μία μάχη που αποδεικνύεται δυσκολότερη από τον Β' παγκόσμιο που πολέμησε.Ο Μόσλυ πλάθει εξαιρετικά τους χαρακτήρες του.Ο Ίζυ,ένας αδύναμος άνθρωπος ,που ξυπνά σιγά-σιγά ,αποκτά συνείδηση και αυτοπεποίθηση,απωθεωνεται ως ο πρώτος νέγρος που φέρνει τα πάνω- κάτω στην Αμερική του 40' όχι για δόξα και υπερηφάνεια,αλλά για χρήματα και για μια πανέμορφη γυναίκα,την Δάφνη Μονέ η οποία ξεπηδά - άκρως ερωτεύσιμη- μέσα από τις σελίδες.Με το πρώτο του έργο,ο Μόσλυ μας προσφέρει μια πλήρη εικόνα της αμερικανικής κοινωνίας της δεκαετίας του 40',που παραγκωνίζει τους μαύρους πολίτες και που κυλά στην θάλασσα της διαφθοράς.Έτσι αυτόματα το βιβλίο,πέρα από τον χαρακτηρισμό- αστυνομικό, αποτελεί ταυτόχρονα ανάγνωσμα κοινωνικοπολιτικό.Τέλος καθώς το διάβαζα ,σκεφτόμουν ότι το βιβλίο αυτό ειναι απολύτως κατάλληλο για μεταφορά στην μεγάλη οθόνη.Δεν έπεσα έξω. Ο ''διάβολος με το γαλάζιο φόρεμα΄΄ γυρίστηκε ταινία το 1995 με τον Ντένζελ Γουάσινγκτον ως Ίζυ Ρόουλινς και την Τζένιφερ Μπιλς ως Δάφνη Μονέ.Ωστόσο όπως φαίνεται μάλλον πέρασε απαρατήρητη η εξίσου απολαυστική ταινία.Παρά το γεγονός,ότι ο Μόσλυ άφησε πλούσιο έργο με ήρωα τον Ρόουλινς,δεν έχει μεταφραστεί άλλο βιβλίο του στα ελληνικά.Κρίμα....http://blindalligator.blogspot.gr/201...
What do You think about Devil In A Blue Dress (2002)?
When a jobless World War II vet named Easy Rawlins is hired to find a woman, he finds himself ensnared in a web of lies and murder. Can Easy find Daphne Monet without becoming another victim? And what secrets is Daphne Monet carrying?Devil in a Blue Dress is a throwback to the pioneers of noir like Hammett, Chandler, and Cain. Only this PI is black and his case takes place in the black Los Angeles of 1948. Mosley's black LA is just as vivid as Chandler's seedy Hollywood underbelly.Easy's supporting cast is as colorful as anything Hammett or Chandler ever crafted: Frank Green, Joppy, Junior, Dupree, and the rest. DeWitt Albright is a sociopathic villain, the most frightening kind, and Easy's pal Mouse isn't much higher on the food chain.Easy is a conflicted character, not wanting to get too deep into the web of murder surrounding Daphne Monet but unable to stop himself. Mouse provides a nice contrast to Easy in that he's not conflicted in the least. As far as Bad Ass Friends go, Mouse is really high on my list. He's unhinged but likes Easy enough to follow him anywhere as long as Easy doesn't get in his way.Owing to its early noir roots, the case is suitably serpentine. Once I assumed everyone except Easy was a liar, it was one hell of a ride to the finish.The prose was good. I'd say it owed more to Hammett than Chandler. I'll be interested to see where the series goes from here considering how many of the players were dead by the end.Four out of five stars. I think I've found the series that will eat up a portion of my 2014 crime reading.
—Dan Schwent
I loved this book because it didn't pull any punches and showed the realism of racist LA in the 40's, and because it is so refreshing to have the plot center around the African American community, and an African American protagonist. This book proves that even when white men are pulling most/all of the strings, the most interesting/important story may still be what goes on in the lives of those people whose strings are being pulled.I enjoyed the observations and philosophizing from Easy Rawlins as he narrated this story. My main complaint is that as smart as Easy is supposed to be, so much of the bad things that happen to him are because of decisions he makes that he knows are bad ones but makes anyway, and so many of the solutions to these problems are based on luck. I prefer my protagonists to be a lot more intentional, but maybe that is just me.There is prodigious use of the N-word, by both Black and White characters in the book, and at times the plot explores pretty ugly and creepy territory, but if you can handle that then I would recommend this book as an enjoyable and trailblazing read.
—Michael
Raymond Chandler could probably be called the Grand Master of this style of genre fiction, his style and content leading the way for many pale imitators to follow. Walter Mosley's first Easy Rawlins book is perhaps better than any Chandler I've read.I think the true test for me is the dialogue and there were times when I was imagining Bogart as Marlowe reading the part of Easy; surely there can be no higher praise for this genre?What Mosley does better is to add the extra layers to the narrative, and I don't mean extra convoluted explanations; he has what Chandler couldn't really be expected to have, historical perspective. The fact that this book is written from the mindset of a black man seems to be something that people get caught up with. It would be wrong to dismiss the uniqueness of that in this genre but I don't think that is what makes this special, it is the quality of writing and the authors knowledge of his era.I saw the movie a while ago and didn't realise it was a book first but I don't recall any of the qualities of the book being present, which is a shame as there are plenty of these Rawlins books to produce great quality noir from.
—Tfitoby
