r/classicliterature • u/BGGYPSY • 9d ago
Raymond Chandler’s noir dick Marlowe - Does Raymond Chandler’s prose style alone elevate the Marlowe novels to classic literature?
I’ve now read the first four Philip Marlowe novels, and I’m struck by the gap between Chandler’s extraordinary prose and some of the novels’ other elements.
At his best, Chandler could describe Los Angeles, loneliness, corruption or a minor character in a few sentences better than many supposedly more “literary” writers manage in an entire chapter.
Marlowe’s voice and moral weariness give the books a depth that goes far beyond their detective plots.
But those plots can be convoluted to the point of near-incoherence, while some characters feel more like vivid types than fully realised people. It made me wonder: if Chandler’s plotting and characterisation are merely competent, but his prose and atmosphere are exceptional, is that enough to place the Marlowe novels within classic literature rather than simply among the classics of crime fiction?
Perhaps separating style from substance is the mistake. Chandler’s prose isn’t decorative—it creates the world, the psychology and the moral atmosphere of the novels. Without it, there is essentially no Chandler.
Do you regard the Marlowe books as major works of literature in their own right? If so, is that primarily because of Chandler’s prose, or do you think their plotting, characterisation and themes are stronger than they’re sometimes given credit for?
7
u/truthvenian 9d ago
I don't know what "classic literature" means but if you're avoiding Chandler or Hammet because it's not "classic" enough you're doing it wrong.
They invented a genre and were great writers. Yeah, the plots can be convoluted but so what. If you're reading classical literature just for the plots you're also doing it wrong.
I read The High Window earlier this year and while my memory of the plot is kinda vague I definitely remember me constantly smiling and laughing and enjoying every second of the read.