Scan barcode
geisttull's review against another edition
2.0
got more than half way through and it was torture. i thought it would be fun to read an old pulp novel, but i did not care about any of the characters. this is the last novel of James M.Cain, author of the postman always rings twice. think i'm done with pulp.
goodwhinge's review against another edition
4.0
she marries men for their money, but considering they’re all pretty rancid they kinda deserve it
stevem0214's review against another edition
4.0
Good book. I've never read James M. Cain before. He also wrote "The Postman Always Rings Twice" and "Double Indemnity" among many others. I've got to give these well known books a try too!
laura_devouring_books_crumpets's review against another edition
5.0
Really good book couldn't put it down bittersweet ending but not bad
dee9401's review against another edition
2.0
When some people talk derisively about pulp novels or hardboiled crime fiction of the early to mid 20th century, this book is an example of why their opinions shouldn't always be disregarded. I really wanted to like this book, a posthumously edited and published book from one of the trinity of hardboiled fiction: James M. Cain. He, along with Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler, propelled this genre to great heights during their creative careers. I really like some of Chandler's books (e.g. The Long Goodbye and The Big Sleep) but others just seem weak or two-dimensional. I never could get into Hammett. Cain falls squarely into the "don't really like" category. I guess I like hardboiled fiction when it also explores the larger social situation the story is set in. To simply create a salacious or subversive story isn't enough, for me. We need to explore why it's "naughty" and who we are critiquing and why.
Cain is an expert at prose, moving the reader effortlessly from the first page to the end. But the plot is weak and the characters are cardboard cutouts, laking depth and never asking the reader to like or hate them. There's plenty of room for social commentary on working mothers, alcoholism, manufactured ideas and ideals of social stature, and so forth, but the author chooses to not delve into any of it.
Part of the problem is that this book was pulled together from a slew of both finished and partial manuscript versions, along with handwritten notes and comments from the author. All of these save one were not dated, so the progression of Cain's thoughts can only be assumed. The editor, Charles Ardai, seems to say that his selecting a section from one manuscript, a chapter from another, a name of a character from a third, etc. is just what editors do with their living authors. He notes that his "editee" is deceased but claims that isn't much of an impediment.
This is all described in an afterword to the book, where Ardai also defends Cain's oeuvre with an almost nonsensical form of logic. If Cain was hated, it was because he was so good. If you thought he was bad, you missed the point. Things along those lines. He seems to claim that the ultimate vindication of this writer is that some of his books were made into movies that turned out to be successful. I wonder if the Afterword was left off, if I'd come away a little less disappointed with the book. Having a lifelong fan edit an unfinished book and then praise the effort seems a little much.
Cain is an expert at prose, moving the reader effortlessly from the first page to the end. But the plot is weak and the characters are cardboard cutouts, laking depth and never asking the reader to like or hate them. There's plenty of room for social commentary on working mothers, alcoholism, manufactured ideas and ideals of social stature, and so forth, but the author chooses to not delve into any of it.
Part of the problem is that this book was pulled together from a slew of both finished and partial manuscript versions, along with handwritten notes and comments from the author. All of these save one were not dated, so the progression of Cain's thoughts can only be assumed. The editor, Charles Ardai, seems to say that his selecting a section from one manuscript, a chapter from another, a name of a character from a third, etc. is just what editors do with their living authors. He notes that his "editee" is deceased but claims that isn't much of an impediment.
This is all described in an afterword to the book, where Ardai also defends Cain's oeuvre with an almost nonsensical form of logic. If Cain was hated, it was because he was so good. If you thought he was bad, you missed the point. Things along those lines. He seems to claim that the ultimate vindication of this writer is that some of his books were made into movies that turned out to be successful. I wonder if the Afterword was left off, if I'd come away a little less disappointed with the book. Having a lifelong fan edit an unfinished book and then praise the effort seems a little much.
lgpiper's review against another edition
4.0
Apparently, this is a "lost novel" by Cain, which was only unearthed, edited, and published some 35 years after his death. I'd read some Cain previously, and very much loved Mildred Pierce. While, The Postman Always Rings Twice was ok, it wasn't all that special. I've yet to find Double Indemnity on kindle in a local library (now I have, and it's on hold). Anyway, I got this book thanks to my new library card with the Woburn Public Library, and it was great. Up there with Mildred Pierce, I think.
So, we have a young woman, Joan Medford, relating her experiences in the few years after her abusive husband, Ron, killed himself by driving into a bridge abutment (I think it was that, something hard anyway). Ron was a chronic drunk and an abusive husband and father. He routinely beat up Joan and their son, Tad, who was 3-years old at the time of the telling.
It seems that Ron's sister, Ethyl and her husband Jack, covet Joan's son, Tad. Ethyl had a medical problem and is sterile. Ethyl and Jack take Tad off with them, because Joan must find a job to support herself and Tad. But Ethyl also wants to make the caretaking of Tad permanent, so begins a whispering campaign to the police that Joan slipped something into Ron's last drink, implying that Ron was actually murdered.
One of the two cops investigating the case is desperate to pin the murder on Joan, the other gives her a tip as to how to find a job. He suggests she head down to the Garden of Roses and ask Bianca, the proprietress, for a job. Bianca starts to make Joan a waitress, but Liz, in the bar sees that Joan would be a hit in the bar. In the bar, they wear skimpy clothes, showing lots of leg and cleavage, and the better the leg and cleavage, the better the tips. Joan has the most amazing set of gams in creation, or something like that. She becomes an instant hit, and both Liz and she prosper.
Well, she makes the acquaintance of Walter K. White III, a widower, who is richer than Midas and who takes rather a shine to Joan. He wants to do something "nice" for Joan. She also meets Tom Barclay, who is so handsome that he gets her motor running, so to speak. But Walter has money, and that money would be a great help in getting Tad away from Ethyl. Tom has animal magnetism, but little money. Something like that.
Well, all kinds of things happen, many not so good, but Joan is smart, able to withstand hardship, and a rather interesting character. Then too, those legs! So, if you're into noir fiction at all, this stuff is nectar. If like my spouse, you like cozy "mysteries", with cutesy titles, little reality, and it's mostly tea, muffins, and village greens, then this might not be your cup of tea, so to speak.
So, we have a young woman, Joan Medford, relating her experiences in the few years after her abusive husband, Ron, killed himself by driving into a bridge abutment (I think it was that, something hard anyway). Ron was a chronic drunk and an abusive husband and father. He routinely beat up Joan and their son, Tad, who was 3-years old at the time of the telling.
It seems that Ron's sister, Ethyl and her husband Jack, covet Joan's son, Tad. Ethyl had a medical problem and is sterile. Ethyl and Jack take Tad off with them, because Joan must find a job to support herself and Tad. But Ethyl also wants to make the caretaking of Tad permanent, so begins a whispering campaign to the police that Joan slipped something into Ron's last drink, implying that Ron was actually murdered.
One of the two cops investigating the case is desperate to pin the murder on Joan, the other gives her a tip as to how to find a job. He suggests she head down to the Garden of Roses and ask Bianca, the proprietress, for a job. Bianca starts to make Joan a waitress, but Liz, in the bar sees that Joan would be a hit in the bar. In the bar, they wear skimpy clothes, showing lots of leg and cleavage, and the better the leg and cleavage, the better the tips. Joan has the most amazing set of gams in creation, or something like that. She becomes an instant hit, and both Liz and she prosper.
Well, she makes the acquaintance of Walter K. White III, a widower, who is richer than Midas and who takes rather a shine to Joan. He wants to do something "nice" for Joan. She also meets Tom Barclay, who is so handsome that he gets her motor running, so to speak. But Walter has money, and that money would be a great help in getting Tad away from Ethyl. Tom has animal magnetism, but little money. Something like that.
Well, all kinds of things happen, many not so good, but Joan is smart, able to withstand hardship, and a rather interesting character. Then too, those legs! So, if you're into noir fiction at all, this stuff is nectar. If like my spouse, you like cozy "mysteries", with cutesy titles, little reality, and it's mostly tea, muffins, and village greens, then this might not be your cup of tea, so to speak.
twilliamson's review against another edition
2.0
There's something to be said for Hard Case Crime's mission to revive the pulpy noir genre, and to its dedication for reviving the work of many pulp and noir writers of old. They seem to focus in on all the right details, looking for just the right writers and right illustrators for each of their books, and the results are often very entertaining. I wish I could say that The Cocktail Waitress, the "lost novel" of James M. Cain, is one of those books that results in an entertaining read, but I admit I really wasn't impressed by the book on any particular level.
Part of the novel's problem is that it really isn't much of a novel at all. It might have the appearance of a novel, thanks to its very competent editor, but the finished product falls short of much of the standard set by Cain's earlier works. Given that the book is really an attempt at suturing together a number of fragmentary manuscripts attempting to come together as one of Cain's taught thrillers, it's easy to see what went wrong with the book; it just doesn't have any one unifying mission, and thus feels plodding, tired, and underdeveloped. It's certainly provocative all over, but rarely does it seem to transcend the schlocky luridness that is the common denominator of most of Hard Case Crime's catalogue.
Honestly, the book's not that bad, and read carefully is certainly more countercultural and challenging than it first appears; nevertheless, I don't feel that the book has nearly the coherence of Cain's earlier work, and seems to dip more into fantasy than it does challenge any status quo.
Perhaps the moral of The Cocktail Waitress is that posthumous publishing can often feel cheap, robbing an author of the nuance and electricity that would come with the precision of their own polish. Resurrecting the dead for a final hurrah just doesn't carry the same weight.
Part of the novel's problem is that it really isn't much of a novel at all. It might have the appearance of a novel, thanks to its very competent editor, but the finished product falls short of much of the standard set by Cain's earlier works. Given that the book is really an attempt at suturing together a number of fragmentary manuscripts attempting to come together as one of Cain's taught thrillers, it's easy to see what went wrong with the book; it just doesn't have any one unifying mission, and thus feels plodding, tired, and underdeveloped. It's certainly provocative all over, but rarely does it seem to transcend the schlocky luridness that is the common denominator of most of Hard Case Crime's catalogue.
Honestly, the book's not that bad, and read carefully is certainly more countercultural and challenging than it first appears; nevertheless, I don't feel that the book has nearly the coherence of Cain's earlier work, and seems to dip more into fantasy than it does challenge any status quo.
Perhaps the moral of The Cocktail Waitress is that posthumous publishing can often feel cheap, robbing an author of the nuance and electricity that would come with the precision of their own polish. Resurrecting the dead for a final hurrah just doesn't carry the same weight.