Who Walk in Darkness

by Chandler Brossard

Novelist and playwright Chandler Brossard's first published novel was Who Walk in Darkness, one of the most accomplished and most intriguing works of proto-Beat literature. Published by New Directions in 1952, this "hipster" novel is essential reading for Beat aficionados and anyone interested in American writing of the 1950s. Writing in the Village Voice, Richard Nason called the book "a handy index to the argot and obsessions of the early '50s, with its concern with pot, sexual and political identity, and the emergence of racial polarity."

One evilly attractive character in the book, Henry Porter, who leads a clique of slackers and aspiring literati, was strongly suggestive of Anatole Broyard, the well-known New York Times book reviewer and essayist, and thereby created one of the most famous literary imbroglios of that era. The narrator, Blake Williams, and his friends can be found traipsing from prizefights to Harlem dance halls to Greenwich Village haunts, drinking, carousing and working as little as possible. As pertinent today as when it was written, Who Walk in Darkness is a powerful novel of the urban counter-culture of New York from one of the twentieth century's most innovative and iconoclastic writers.

Genres: Fiction, Classics

Mass Market Paperback

First published January 1, 1952

About the author

Chandler Brossard was an American novelist, writer, editor, and teacher. He wrote or edited a total of 17 books. With a challenging style and outsider characters, Brossard had limited critical success in the United States. His novels were more appreciated in France and Great Britain.

His early works have been described as "landmarks of the postwar American novel."

Reviews

[Joseph · Rating 5 out of 5]

‘"What's in the envelope?" I asked him.
He opened the Manila envelope and took out a small book.
"It's a novel by Raymond Queneau. I just bought it for my model, Margaret."
"Why are you keeping it in that?"
"To keep it clean."
There was nothing I could say to that. There was nothing wrong I guess with wanting to keep a book clean. I had never thought of carrying a book in a Manila envelope. I don't know who else it would have occurred to but Porter.’


“I looked over the shelves to select three or four books I could sell. It seemed funny to me. I had never thought of their paying off in just this way. What a laugh. I was glad now that I had put all that money in books when I had it. It was a new way of looking at literature. Not how good is the book going to be. How much can you get for it when you have read it. That is the point. You had to think of these things.”


‘“God, what a rat race," he said. "There must be some way for a man to make a living and not be disgusted with himself. There must be."
"What about bricklayers?"
"Nope. I don't think that's the answer. The bricklayers hate themselves because they're not making enough money and because they think they work too hard."
"Why don't you become a gentleman farmer then?"
"I've thought of that," he said, coming forward now in the swivel chair. "But that wouldn't work, either. After a while I would start spending all my time trying to think up some way of working less and making more money."’

‘“Why do people always have to talk about writing at parties? It ruins them.”’

[Marco Bermudez · Rating 5 out of 5]

This has been referred to as the prototype to Beat literature, and while I do see the influence, the smoky aimlessness of the narrative and the Hemingway-like frankness of the prose were pretty influential on Kerouac and early Burroughs--I can't help but feel like throwing it in with the Beats is doing a disservice. This book was censored because it ruffled some feathers in the literary world, taking shots at writers bigger than Brossard, and (at the time) gratuitous sex scenes and race and sexuality politics that were seen as too racy for an America immediately coming after the war.

In fact, I think this novel shares much more similarities to the post-war French existentialist writers like Camus, Sartre, and de Beauvoir. A disaffected young man unable to feel anything in a cold, dark world full of cold, dark people. The difference with Brossard and this novel is that it seems to give us a sense of hope that things can get better, that people can change and find the thing that makes us happy, even with it's sudden and ambiguous ending.

[Larry · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not much of a plot in this book. I think the author was primarily
relying on shock appeal, but it's not that shocking in 2012.

[Lori · Rating 2 out of 5]

Who Walk in Darkness was published in 1952 as a shocking exposé on the dissolute lives of bored hipsters in New York City who spend all their time drinking, getting high, having premarital sex, patronizing integrated nightclubs, and occasionally encountering "queer" people. In short, an incredibly tame read by 2020 standards - he couldn't even spell out the word "fucking." The existentialism Brossard tried to portray doesn't register anymore either. I suppose these people were empty and aimless because they weren't getting married, going to church, and moving to the new suburbs like you were supposed to in this period. Today they just come across as regular folks hanging out. If anything, the window into postwar NYC is nostalgic and even kind of romantic. Imagine chilling in Greenwich Village with the early Beats, smoking the reefer, and taking in some live jazz.

[China · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this solely because it's been said that character Henry Porter was based on Anatole Broyard, and so this book became an addition to my list of books that would feed my fascination with him. I can understand why Broyard wouldn't have liked this book, if it was in fact about him and not a fictional character named Henry Porter (although the reasoning should have more to do with how much of an ass Brossard portrays Porter to be, and not the fact that the book reveals him as "a passed Negro." As it goes, apparently Broyard would not allow the book to be published unless the detail was changed, and while I have the original version, the book was changed for a time so that Porter became an "illegitimate child" rather than a "passed Negro.").

It's of a solid late '50s writing style, concisely written and well done at that, but its plot is predictable - the relationships among characters as well as the apparent fate of a more minor character - and the ending is a bit dissatisfying as well as abrupt. But I do love the modern writing style, how nothing here is overwritten, there are no fluffy descriptions. Emotions are thoughtfully expressed and very realistic. Recommended on the whole.

[michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

somewhere between hemingway's the sun also rises and john clellon holmes' go. also with particular disdains for weed and italians. the boxing was fun though.

[Stephen Bird · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the introduction by Steven Moore, this work is referred to as "America's first existential novel", due to its stripped down, Camus-esque narrative (which according to Susan Sontag, [via Sartre:] in her essay "On Style", can be described as "impersonal, expository, lucid, flat"). This novel is a film noir of James Dean and Natalie Wood and their small circle of friends, now in their late 20's, minus any Cinemascope sensationalism. Written by a contemporary of the Beatniks, it depicts the lives of this Greenwich Village group (vaguely-sketched characters who are writers of one type or another) during 1 month in the spring/summer of 1948. They attend a wild party with jazz musicians whose guests are smoking "charge" (the party ends with a rumble); a boxing event at Madison Square Garden; and are treated to dinner at an uptown restaurant by a gangster friend of one of the dames. Grace undergoes a covert abortion--her boyfriend Henry Porter is an arrogant, ambitious writer who "passes for white" (supposedly his character is based upon that of Anatole Broyard, a critic who years after this era relished trashing William S. Burroughs' books in the New York Times). Harry Lees has a pad on Cape Cod, where the group spend a weekend, but he's having an identity crisis. Harry thinks he might be gay--he was too "sissy" to make it into the Army and is subsequently guilt-ridden. The entire novel is conveyed to us by the groups's "voice of reason", Blake Williams. This paperback version is referred to on the cover as "the classic underground novel in its suppressed original version". Not to diminish its merits--but there would be nothing polemical about it now. The book ends abruptly in a way that contrasts with all the preceding flatness--the author left me wanting more. And of course I was attracted to the romantic notion of living in New York City in a time when the streets were full of hoods and television was still in its infancy. The Big Apple was so much simpler then-or probably not. I will close by saying: this assortment of artists/bohemians--they were so lucky. If only they had known.

[Michelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was considered by many as the first Beat novel and is an underground classic.

Set in the 1950s you follow the day to day life of Blake and his friends as he takes you to restaurants, bars, music gigs, and live fight events across New York City.

The writing style is simple and easy to follow, almost like you're reading someone's diary in it's simplicity and straight forward descriptions of exactly what they're doing, eating, drinking, saying.

I liked the rawness and honesty from the writer and the other characters involved in Blake's life. One of the characters Henry is meant to be based on Anatole Broyard a well known New York Times book reviewer and essayist.

I found the places Blake and his friends ventured to and the descriptions of life in New York City really interesting, from the dive bars to a sleepy sea side town.

For it's time this book was one of the most controversial novels of mid century America. But for this year 2015 it is quite a tame read.

I recommend this book to beat novel enthusiasts and fans of Ham On Rye by Charles Bukowski.

Reviewing for NetGalley - All opinions are my own

[Frank · Rating 2 out of 5]

I mainly read this because one of the major characters, Harry Lees, is supposed to be based on William Gaddis (as Henry Porter is supposed to be based on Anatole Broyard). That part of it was interesting, as was the picture it paints of life in The Village in the 40s and early 50sBut the story is rather silly, the concern with whether the Porter character is a black guy trying to pass for white gets tiring (since it's entirely unclear to me what the author is trying to say by harping on that), and the ending was stupidly maudlin and saccharine. As a novel, this book now has documentary value only, IMHO.

[Jeff Russo · Rating 2 out of 5]

I stumbled upon this while looking for something else in the "Br-" section, and recognized the name of the author, and that this book was yet another of the alleged first "beat" novels.

I could not resist the incredibly lurid cover of the 1952 paperback and picked it up.

Well, it was not the most interesting book. Not much happened. In fact, the text only faintly resembles the blurb on the back of the book.

[Kurt Reichenbaugh · Rating 5 out of 5]

My favorite "beat" novel. Laconic delivery, Jazz, pot and boxing. Worth looking for since, I believe, it's out of print.

[Ash · Rating 4 out of 5]

Amazing, haunting. I knew the Author slightly.