This is the original 1961 edition of the novel reprinted in 2018 as Understudy for Death by Hard Case Crime, which they heavily marketed as his long lThis is the original 1961 edition of the novel reprinted in 2018 as Understudy for Death by Hard Case Crime, which they heavily marketed as his long lost novel. Perhaps the most interesting thing about the novel is that both publishers misrepresented the novel. In 1961 Newsstand library pushed the sleaze and sex angle. In 2018 Hard Case pushed the crime angle. The book is neither sleaze nor crime. The two books that immediately came to mind for comparison were Miss Lonelyhearts by Nathanael West and Revolutionay Road by Richard Yates. What we have here is a cynical journalist with a bad case of existential dread amidst his comfy suburban life. Your basic literary novel, which is how it would have been marketed if it had been published by one of the mainstream publishing houses instead of a sleaze publisher. So the first task in approaching this novel is to set aside both the sleaze and crime expectations. The question is will Richard Hudson get his head and heart in sync enough to keep his marriage and his life from imploding? Has its flaws, but is well-written, and actually quite good in its proper context. Willeford wrote a fascinating mix of novels that is worth deeper literary study....more
The first chapter is a cracker, more start at the end, rather than in the middle of the action. The writing is a bit uneven after that. Some beautifulThe first chapter is a cracker, more start at the end, rather than in the middle of the action. The writing is a bit uneven after that. Some beautiful set pieces interspersed with some going through the motion scenes where the descriptions and dialog could have been streamlined without loss. So Willeford at both his best and his worst.
Note that the book description is totally wrong: Maria has no interest in Hollywood, it is never even mentioned. She is on vacation in Miami with a girlfriend and is "seduced" by a rich guy with a big yacht who also happens to be blackmailing young woman like her into becoming high-priced escorts. How that plays out, and what the (other) protagonist - the young college student working as an elevator operator for his summer job - does about what happens to Maria is the story....more
Originally published in 1961 as Understudy for Love by Newsstand Library, which marketed it as a sleaze novel. Perhaps the most interesting thing abouOriginally published in 1961 as Understudy for Love by Newsstand Library, which marketed it as a sleaze novel. Perhaps the most interesting thing about the novel is that both publishers misrepresented the novel. In 1961 Newsstand library pushed the sleaze and sex angle. In 2018 Hard Case pushed the crime angle. The book is neither sleaze nor crime. The two books that immediately came to mind for comparison were Miss Lonelyhearts by Nathanael West and Revolutionay Road by Richard Yates. What we have here is a cynical journalist with a bad case of existential dread amidst his comfy suburban life. Your basic literary novel, which is how it would have been marketed if it had been published by one of the mainstream publishing houses instead of a sleaze publisher. So the first task in approaching this novel is to set aside both the sleaze and crime expectations. The question is will Richard Hudson get his head and heart in sync enough to keep his marriage and his life from imploding? Has its flaws, but is well-written, and actually quite good in its proper context. Willeford wrote a fascinating mix of novels that is worth deeper literary study....more
Tough to place, rate, and describe this one, but what first comes to mind is a suggested alternate title: "Portrait of the Artist as a Cad." Russell HTough to place, rate, and describe this one, but what first comes to mind is a suggested alternate title: "Portrait of the Artist as a Cad." Russell Haxby, our used car salesman narrator, likes to spend his quiet hours rewriting paragraphs from Joyce's Ulysses with the goal of dumbing it down for the simple people. His real artistry, however, is the miserable way he treats everyone he has contact with. What Willeford accomplished here is a brilliant character portrait as we follow along in the life of Haxby and make our own judgement about what kind of character he is.
This really isn't a crime or noir novel even though Haxby does plenty of conning. Willeford plays with the expectation that something big, some escalation of crime, is coming as the novel progresses, but in the end Haxby is just a heel, a cad, a scummy used car salesman, and a miserable excuse for a human being.
I think if you are expecting the typical crime/noir treatment you will be disappointed.
On the other hand, if it is read on its own terms, as a character portrait, I think it becomes an impressive bit of writing. Willeford truly lets Haxby hang himself with his own words and actions. And it is an exciting page turner as the portrait develops, driven by the what-is-this-jerk-going-to-do-next? energia of the narrative....more
Wow. Just jaw hanging open, wow. Willeford's description of the wrist slitting suicide attempts must be one of the purest expressions of literary decaWow. Just jaw hanging open, wow. Willeford's description of the wrist slitting suicide attempts must be one of the purest expressions of literary decadence this side of Yukio Mishima's description of seppuku in his story "Patriotism." And that is just one of the many surprises in this novel that was originally published as a pulp in 1955, but one has to wonder if the publisher had any idea what they were publishing. Despite the in your face downward spiral of despair, depression, and alcoholism that is the main focus, Willeford delivers a fully realized literary novel whose moments of caring are a blinding light against the unrelenting darkness portrayed. To read this novel from the perspective of "it is a noir, a pulp novel" would, I think, completely miss the point. And, although I'm not sure on this, it is hard to imagine that the audience reading all those other noir pulps in 1955 would even get through Pick-up. Yes, you eventually get to a crime and it's aftermath, but the unrelenting early focus is depression and drinking and the path to suicide. Willeford's counterpoints to that focus, however, are crushingly brilliant. Wish I'd read this in grad school days; could essay the hell out of this book!
The little trick at the end - that's an essay, too. Don't want to spoil anything for those who haven't read the book yet. But some thoughts. My first thought was why would Willeford do that? Making a point, right? Look at how Jordan is treated throughout. Most books of this era are full of epithets. So, striking. There are a couple of clues, for those who want to go back and look. Towards the end of the interview with the doctor at the first hospital. And also carefully reread the dialogue with the old stenographer. Overall, though, the ending did not make me reconsider the whole book, and I don't think that is supported by the text. What it does do is make, in the most simple and elegant way, a gigantic point that probably could not be made in any other way. I mean, there have been whole novels written trying to do just that. Makes me curious how it came about. Part of the intent all along? Or added at the end in response to something?
Not Willeford's first published novel - it was published in 1961 under a pseudonym - but a 1952 manuscript suggests it may have been the first novel hNot Willeford's first published novel - it was published in 1961 under a pseudonym - but a 1952 manuscript suggests it may have been the first novel he wrote. The plotting is something else; a back and forth prize fight. Just as one character gets the upper hand, blamo! And now another character is driving things. So an excellent, high-energy, constantly shifting story line about a kidnapping and the hunt for the kidnappers. Where this book got a bit annoying for me was with the also constantly shifting first-person narrators. Seems a pretty common narrative device for the 1950s and early 1960s pulps. Guess at the pace these books were being cranked out the authors needed to mix things up to keep it interesting. It's a pretty crappy narrative strategy even when done well and an even worse strategy when done poorly. Third-person omniscient can do it all, and by using free-indirect discourse the language can be made to sound like the characters, and the dialogue can always be in each character's voice, so, first-person multiple? Not the way to go. Willeford here also narrates some of the characters with semi-literate quasi-dialect language, and that is just bad and annoying. So a good plot ruined by poorly executed shifting first-person narratives. Oh, and the cover is completely misleading - she doesn't use the whip, her father does. Big-time party foul!...more
This is a fast-paced archetypal noir. Reads more like a treatment for screenplay and I'm surprised this one was never made into a movie, because it haThis is a fast-paced archetypal noir. Reads more like a treatment for screenplay and I'm surprised this one was never made into a movie, because it has all the classic 1950s noir elements. The opening scene, though, with the girl with the water pistol and her schoolgirl skirt flipped up as she's bent over the private eye's desk asking him to spank her, well, that is surely unique to the noir canon!...more
Loading...
