Richard Stark doesn't give much a description of what Parker looks like. He's a big guy with gnarled tree trunks for hands. This description is given in just about all of the early novels. It's probably safe to think of Parker as looking sort of like a Lee Marvin type, and since he has probably most famously portrayed Parker, maybe this is what some readers use as their mental image:Some people might like to think of him as a raving wife-beating anti-semite:Parker has also been portrayed as an African American in The Split:Or as an older balding white man:Or as this guy:And then there is Jean-Luc Godard's take on Parker, one which doesn't jive well with the text itself, but in my opinion is the most attractive of the bunch:Leave it to the French to portray a sociopath thief as a beautiful woman who is sort of the postergirl of sexy intellectual 1968 French radical chic. Godard borrowed (stole if you are of the opinion of Donald Westlake AKA Richard Stark) heavily from this novel to make his movie Made in the U.S.A. Westlake prevented this film from ever being shown in the United States, and it wasn't until after his death that it finally premiered in America, and has since been released by Criterion. The book and the movie work together in an interesting way, the technicolor stylization of Godard contrasting with the bleak middle America setting of the novel. Having seen the movie first, and only about a month or so ago, just before I decided I'd read all of the Parker novels I couldn't help seeing some of Godard's bastardizations in the book. It definitely created a different reading experience than if I had read the novel first. It made me think about how each of us has a totally different reading experience from one another for any book we read, and reminded me how much memory in my case colors and shapes the way I picture the world a novel is taking place in. I think it would be interesting, although ultimately boring to anyone besides the reader (or at least in my case) to know where people imagine the stories they are reading to take place, how they picture the characters. In my case there are a handful of places and houses from my past that reoccur and work as the setting for most of the books I read (in this case it would be one of my grandmother's houses, which worked out nicely for how the book developed, her basement had just the right features that would be needed in the story, something I had no idea about when I unconsciously started to think of the action taking place there). I'm not sure what triggers between the text and my memories are necessarily at work when this happens, and how much I probably ignore actual description and just jam the setting into some place familiar. I imagine other people do this too, but I have no proof. This has been a very un-Parker like review. To rectify the situation tonight when I get back from watching grown men beat the shit out of each other I'm going to just sit with the lights off and stare at nothing, an activity that Parker seems to genuinely enjoy.
I guess a "jugger" is a guy that breaks into safes, and Joe Sheer was one of the best, was being the operative word. Now he's come down with a bad case of dead and Parker's concerned, not because Sheer was his golf buddy or anything, but he was one of the few people with a direct connection to Parker and Parker's got a sweet little cover identity set up. He doesn't want anyone nosing around Sheer's death to blow it. Throw in an aging crook who looks like he failed an audition for The Monkees and a greedy small-town cop looking for a big payoff and you've got yourself another great Parker read.The Parker novels are consistently excellent books (at least for me so far) and there's basically nothing to say about the writing that I haven't said before. The writing is sharp as a tack and is a welcome respite from today's bloated five-hundred page thrillers.There are a couple of interesting things that I've noticed about this one. For one, there's no big heist in The Jugger. Parker's just out to preserve his cover identity, but I find that an interesting analog to Donald Westlake's own "cover identity," Richard Stark. Also, we get a little glimpse into Parker's philosophy of life: …a man never apologized for what cards he'd been dealt; what did Joe Sheer think all of a sudden at age seventy, he was the captain of his fate? A man was what the world decided he would be, and where the world decided he would be, and in the condition the world had chosen for him. If the world decided to deal Joe a bad hand this time, it wasn't up to him to apologize for not having better cards.It's an interesting look into the fatalistic worldview of Parker, whom John Banville in the introduction describes as "the perfection of that existential man whose earliest models we met in Nietzsche and Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky." Parker's a symbol of Sisyphean revolt, making no apologies for the cards he's been dealt because he's always got another one up his sleeve.
What do You think about The Jugger (1965)?
The Jugger had a different feel compared with the previous Parker novels which isn't a bad thing. Parker finds himself in a gumshoe role rather than an arch-criminal mastermind. Investigating a mystery fits Parker surprisingly well but not quite as good as being a heist-man. Parker 's opposition is a hick cop from Smalltown Nebraska reminiscent of the sheriff from the Roger Moore Bond films. This bumbling oaf ultimately proves to be an interesting obstacle for Parker as he looks into the circumstances of a friend's death. With a satisfying ending, this entry isn't the best but it is far superior than The Mourner and just as good as The Man With The Getaway Face.
—Piker7977
After the juggernaut of a heist in The Score, Parker is basically back on track. Which means that it's time for the author to throw another curve at our favorite self-employed entrepreneur. It would have been hard to follow such a major heist with a more outlandish heist, so this book moves into noir territory. By pushing Parker into this situation, we get a chance to view his methods and personal code in another light. Donald Westlake had an amazing ability to craft a story. Unfortunately, crafting a good story is great for the reader, but means that Parker has to constantly draw on his abilities to overcome the reversals of fortune that make a story more interesting. Straight up success is dull. [This is the right moment to mention that we named our new cat Parker. The other cat is names Charlie (often Charles), so people think we are jazz fans. However, the link with the jazz musician was as much coincidence as Charles being the first name of Parker's cover. Not as many people will grasp the Parker/Charles Willis link, so I like that one even more.]
—Hans
Parker is the main character making simple decisions his world. We all live in an environment of choices, but Westlake's character has a very black-and-white view of the world, made monochromatic by the code of being outside of the law.I was properly shocked by the callous disregard for life Parker displays to protect his identity. Greed blinds one character, duty another, and inexperience proves to be the biggest liability in this Richard Stark novel. I really liked this one.On to the next one! :)
—Yves
