What would have happened if Tiger Woods had lived 60 years earlier? Lionel "Train" Walk scrapes by as a caddie in 1950's southern California country club. He has a natural athletic ability for the game and a keen sense of observation. He is clearly very intelligent. His part of the story is written with a slight Ebonics twinge which is weird given that the narrative is third person. Miller Packard, an independently wealthy, athletic, war hero, who kind of works for the police is a risk taker and champion of the underdog. He is tough but sensitive. He also has a keen sense of observation, but as an obvious mouthpiece for the author he's not entirely believable. Nora Still, a trophy wife and susan (no caps, no last name) a photographer who exists off her husband's pest control fortune together give the feminine perspective. Nora becomes the love interest for Packard and some of the story is told from her perspective. susan exploits Train. Does Dexter have a problem with women? Fate (or Dexter) pulls these characters together. Hijinks ensue.
his was a freebie from the YMCA's take one/leave one table. I picked it up because I liked the cover image and the back page blurb that talks about a black golf prodigy in the early 50's, who drew the attention of a gambler who takes him to high-stakes matches around the country. I thought of Tin Cup, and the Hustler and other sports gambling/down on his luck kid makes good stories, and this intriqued me.But it really wasn't that at all and on balance, that's a good thing. Its really an LA Noir story that brings together a cast of characters that are all flawed. It shows how those flaws affect them and each other and how they interact. Yes, there is golf and the main character is a prodigy, but there's also crime and violence and issues of race in post-WWII Los Angeles. A really interesting story that I'm glad I picked up. I had never heard of Pete Dexter, until after bringing this book home. He won the National Book Award for Paris Trout, which I've heard of, but never read. Have to put that on my WL.S: 1/11/14 F: 1/27/14 (17 Days)
What do You think about Train (2003)?
Briefly: What is Pete Dexter's problem? His writing is strong and original and each of the three books I've read by him start out with a bang. Only Paris Trout was able to sustain the momentum, but just barely. Train just nosedives in a wreck of pat-on-the-back writing. Does Dexter not need to get paid? Does he just want to amuse himself by seeing his writing in print? Also, what's with the sexual fetishes that pop in his novels? The first seventy-five pages were great; the rest: not so much. Time to talk to the special operative to get the scoop on some literary gold!
—Eric
When I met Pete Dexter, he was a columnist for the Philly Daily News. I had read his early novels and happened upon him at an early Mike Tyson fight in Atlantic City. I told him how impressed I was with his novels, and he was very gracious, taking the time to talk to me and explain his background and his love for Philly. While Train has nothing to do with Philly or boxing or anything that we discussed, I still believe it is one of his best efforts. His characters are full and revealing, while his plot makes sense and has none of the quirky twists and turns that sometimes are used by less talented novelists. I recommend any of Pete's books highly.
—Roger
Simultaneously very dark and semi-sweet. This is a view of the deeply ingrained and bewildering racism of 1953, and a picture of how love and pain always go hand-in-hand. The violence is cold, brutal and astonishingly described. The language shifts with each change of perspective making the characters accessible and intimate, and characters as smart and talented and simple and memorable as Train don't come along often. I don't even like golf, but was quite smitten with the sport when Train was swinging his 9-iron. Loved how the caddies talked about their totes.
—Nancy
