What do you think?
Rate this book
Lew Archer #13
Black Money
When Lew Archer is hired to get the goods on the suspiciously suave Frenchman who's run off with his client's girlfriend, it looks like a simple case of alienated affections. Things look different when the mysterious foreigner turns out to be connected to a seven-year-old suicide and a mountain of gambling debts. Black Money is Ross Macdonald at his finest.
238 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1966
118 people are currently reading
1273 people want to read
About the author
Ross Macdonald
158 books809 followersRoss Macdonald is the pseudonym of the American-Canadian writer of crime fiction Kenneth Millar. He is best known for his series of hardboiled novels set in southern California and featuring private detective Lew Archer.
Millar was born in Los Gatos, California, and raised in his parents' native Kitchener, Ontario, Canada, where he started college. When his father abandoned his family unexpectedly, Macdonald lived with his mother and various relatives, moving several times by his sixteenth year. The prominence of broken homes and domestic problems in his fiction has its roots in his youth.
In Canada, he met and married Margaret Sturm (Margaret Millar)in 1938. They had a daughter, Linda, who died in 1970.
He began his career writing stories for pulp magazines. Millar attended the University of Michigan, where he earned a Phi Beta Kappa key and a Ph.D. in literature. While doing graduate study, he completed his first novel, The Dark Tunnel, in 1944. At this time, he wrote under the name John Macdonald, in order to avoid confusion with his wife, who was achieving her own success writing as Margaret Millar. He then changed briefly to John Ross Macdonald before settling on Ross Macdonald, in order to avoid mixups with contemporary John D. MacDonald. After serving at sea as a naval communications officer from 1944 to 1946, he returned to Michigan, where he obtained his Ph.D. degree.
Macdonald's popular detective Lew Archer derives his name from Sam Spade's partner, Miles Archer, and from Lew Wallace, author of Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ. Macdonald first introduced the tough but humane private eye in the 1946 short story Find the Woman. A full-length novel, The Moving Target, followed in 1949. This novel (the first in a series of eighteen) would become the basis for the 1966 Paul Newman film Harper. In the early 1950s, he returned to California, settling for some thirty years in Santa Barbara, the area where most of his books were set. The very successful Lew Archer series, including bestsellers The Goodbye Look, The Underground Man, and Sleeping Beauty, concluded with The Blue Hammer in 1976.
Macdonald died of Alzheimer's disease in Santa Barbara, California.
Macdonald is the primary heir to Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler as the master of American hardboiled mysteries. His writing built on the pithy style of his predecessors by adding psychological depth and insights into the motivations of his characters. Macdonald's plots were complicated, and often turned on Archer's unearthing family secrets of his clients and of the criminals who victimized them. Lost or wayward sons and daughters were a theme common to many of the novels. Macdonald deftly combined the two sides of the mystery genre, the "whodunit" and the psychological thriller. Even his regular readers seldom saw a Macdonald denouement coming.
Millar was born in Los Gatos, California, and raised in his parents' native Kitchener, Ontario, Canada, where he started college. When his father abandoned his family unexpectedly, Macdonald lived with his mother and various relatives, moving several times by his sixteenth year. The prominence of broken homes and domestic problems in his fiction has its roots in his youth.
In Canada, he met and married Margaret Sturm (Margaret Millar)in 1938. They had a daughter, Linda, who died in 1970.
He began his career writing stories for pulp magazines. Millar attended the University of Michigan, where he earned a Phi Beta Kappa key and a Ph.D. in literature. While doing graduate study, he completed his first novel, The Dark Tunnel, in 1944. At this time, he wrote under the name John Macdonald, in order to avoid confusion with his wife, who was achieving her own success writing as Margaret Millar. He then changed briefly to John Ross Macdonald before settling on Ross Macdonald, in order to avoid mixups with contemporary John D. MacDonald. After serving at sea as a naval communications officer from 1944 to 1946, he returned to Michigan, where he obtained his Ph.D. degree.
Macdonald's popular detective Lew Archer derives his name from Sam Spade's partner, Miles Archer, and from Lew Wallace, author of Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ. Macdonald first introduced the tough but humane private eye in the 1946 short story Find the Woman. A full-length novel, The Moving Target, followed in 1949. This novel (the first in a series of eighteen) would become the basis for the 1966 Paul Newman film Harper. In the early 1950s, he returned to California, settling for some thirty years in Santa Barbara, the area where most of his books were set. The very successful Lew Archer series, including bestsellers The Goodbye Look, The Underground Man, and Sleeping Beauty, concluded with The Blue Hammer in 1976.
Macdonald died of Alzheimer's disease in Santa Barbara, California.
Macdonald is the primary heir to Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler as the master of American hardboiled mysteries. His writing built on the pithy style of his predecessors by adding psychological depth and insights into the motivations of his characters. Macdonald's plots were complicated, and often turned on Archer's unearthing family secrets of his clients and of the criminals who victimized them. Lost or wayward sons and daughters were a theme common to many of the novels. Macdonald deftly combined the two sides of the mystery genre, the "whodunit" and the psychological thriller. Even his regular readers seldom saw a Macdonald denouement coming.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 238 reviews
May 16, 2019
A young girl from a good background becomes involved with a mysterious Frenchman at the country club, and her ex-fiancee hires Lew Archer to discover if the Frenchman is an impostor. Soon the Frenchman seems to be connected to an earlier death labeled as a suicide, and then the bodies begin to pile up. As usual, Archer must discover what happened in the past in order to understand the evil which continues to ruin the lives of the young here and now.
I like this book very much, but it finally disappointed me because I did not believe the murderer to be capable of these crimes. As usual, though, Macdonald's plot is well planned, the clues and motives fairly presented, and the revelation prepared for.
Still, it is an interesting novel. I particularly liked the character of the "Frenchman" Morel, a Gatsby-like figure chasing a distinctly West Coast version of the American Dream.
May 4, 2022
Rating: 3* of five
2022 UPDATE is the same as the 2018 UPDATE, ie still no news and nothing is not good news now. Plus the Coens are, as of 2022, working separately...I think we can call this dead. Not entirely sure that's a bad thing because six years after this re-read, the sexism sounds so much worse and is pretty much baked in to the skeleton of the story.
An antique now, a re-read launched because Ethan and Joel Coen are set to write a screen adaptation. I seem to be alone in this, but I liked their film Hail Caesar!.
The novel's dated as heck. Lew Archer's no patch on Travis McGee in the sexism arena, but it's still jarring to 21st century-tuned ears. It's barely noticeable by the standards that the fiftyish Lew would know.
I admit that I flinched a bit at this. It was a different time indeed.
Macdonald's takedowns of consumerism and vapidity in US culture still ring true, and his damn-close-to-magical-realism coincidences are, for all the strain they put on one's credulity, a huge heap of fun to read. I hope the film's for real and not a victim of the recently sold-off Random House Studios' paltry output curse. (The less you do, the less anyone lets you do.) Since this Lew-Archer-franchise idea has been in play since 2011, it's a sad reality that a year having passed with no news indicates stalled development again. C'mon Fremantle Media! You know how to get movies made! Hop to it!
2022 UPDATE is the same as the 2018 UPDATE, ie still no news and nothing is not good news now. Plus the Coens are, as of 2022, working separately...I think we can call this dead. Not entirely sure that's a bad thing because six years after this re-read, the sexism sounds so much worse and is pretty much baked in to the skeleton of the story.
An antique now, a re-read launched because Ethan and Joel Coen are set to write a screen adaptation. I seem to be alone in this, but I liked their film Hail Caesar!.
The novel's dated as heck. Lew Archer's no patch on Travis McGee in the sexism arena, but it's still jarring to 21st century-tuned ears. It's barely noticeable by the standards that the fiftyish Lew would know.
The easy ones were nearly always trouble: frigid or nympho, schizy or commercial or alcoholic, sometimes all five at once.
I admit that I flinched a bit at this. It was a different time indeed.
Macdonald's takedowns of consumerism and vapidity in US culture still ring true, and his damn-close-to-magical-realism coincidences are, for all the strain they put on one's credulity, a huge heap of fun to read. I hope the film's for real and not a victim of the recently sold-off Random House Studios' paltry output curse. (The less you do, the less anyone lets you do.) Since this Lew-Archer-franchise idea has been in play since 2011, it's a sad reality that a year having passed with no news indicates stalled development again. C'mon Fremantle Media! You know how to get movies made! Hop to it!
July 2, 2020
"Give my regards to your wife." -- Lew Archer, private eye
"She'll be glad to have them. She's quite an admirer of yours." -- 'Taps' Tappinger, college professor
"That's because she doesn't know me very well." -- Archer
I had high hopes for Black Money - the thirteenth novel from the series featuring Ross MacDonald's So-Cal private investigator Lew Archer - after enjoying The Chill about a month ago. Additionally, there's been a rumor floating around for a few years now that Joel and Ethan Coen are considering a movie version of this book. Although silver-screen legend Paul Newman is not around anymore (he positively nailed the portrayal of the re-named Archer character twice back in the 60's and 70's) I think the brotherly producer / director duo could do a really interesting period piece adaptation.
However . . . I found Black Money - the title is taken from the explanation by Archer " . . . in Vegas, the money [casinos] hold back . . . it runs into the millions, and it's used to finance about half of the illegal enterprises in the country, from [the Mafia] on down" - to be a little too slow-burn of a story, with some of the character arcs (like the self-proclaimed 'French political refugee' huckster) not living up to their potential. Much like the aforementioned The Chill Archer is again working a case in a sunny beach community / college town just south of L.A., but this one involves mostly upper crust-types and a mix of the usual murders, suicides, and those misguided folks who will do anything for love and/or money (or both). So it wasn't a bad book, but I found it to be a little underwhelming.
"She'll be glad to have them. She's quite an admirer of yours." -- 'Taps' Tappinger, college professor
"That's because she doesn't know me very well." -- Archer
I had high hopes for Black Money - the thirteenth novel from the series featuring Ross MacDonald's So-Cal private investigator Lew Archer - after enjoying The Chill about a month ago. Additionally, there's been a rumor floating around for a few years now that Joel and Ethan Coen are considering a movie version of this book. Although silver-screen legend Paul Newman is not around anymore (he positively nailed the portrayal of the re-named Archer character twice back in the 60's and 70's) I think the brotherly producer / director duo could do a really interesting period piece adaptation.
However . . . I found Black Money - the title is taken from the explanation by Archer " . . . in Vegas, the money [casinos] hold back . . . it runs into the millions, and it's used to finance about half of the illegal enterprises in the country, from [the Mafia] on down" - to be a little too slow-burn of a story, with some of the character arcs (like the self-proclaimed 'French political refugee' huckster) not living up to their potential. Much like the aforementioned The Chill Archer is again working a case in a sunny beach community / college town just south of L.A., but this one involves mostly upper crust-types and a mix of the usual murders, suicides, and those misguided folks who will do anything for love and/or money (or both). So it wasn't a bad book, but I found it to be a little underwhelming.
August 25, 2023
From 1966
I can see why I gave this just four stars when I read it nine years ago. As opposed to the five stars I usually give the books of the great Ross Macdonald. I mean it is good, the mystery is terrific, but it doesn't come together or feel centered. It is definitely one of the lesser books in the Lew Archer series.
I do not remember it from reading it nine years ago. This is normal for me.
02/2014
A typically satisfying Ross Macdonald mystery.
I can see why I gave this just four stars when I read it nine years ago. As opposed to the five stars I usually give the books of the great Ross Macdonald. I mean it is good, the mystery is terrific, but it doesn't come together or feel centered. It is definitely one of the lesser books in the Lew Archer series.
I do not remember it from reading it nine years ago. This is normal for me.
02/2014
A typically satisfying Ross Macdonald mystery.
June 1, 2023
'Black Money' precedes 'The Instant Enemy' in the Lew Archer series. They are positioned at #13 & #14 and, so far, are the only Archer series entries I've read.
If I confess to a preference for 'TIE', that has mostly to do with its labyrinthine nature. ... Actually, no; it's not that simple. 'TIE' seems to have labyrinths inside labyrinths. Its wheels-within-wheels plot just about drove me nutty. ... So, naturally, I loved it. It kept me on the tips of my toes.
'Black Money' is not nearly as ambitious; the rather linear storyline is more like a game of hopscotch: you follow along, on one foot or two, forward in order to go backward. It's certainly gripping-enough; it's just more standard in its P.I. style.
Because 'TIE' is much more preoccupied with complications, it has less time for crackling dialogue (though it has a respectable amount). So 'BM' takes the lead when it comes to snappy repartee. A number of the characters seem just as jaded as Archer is.
Other readers will feel differently - many may not mind where the story ultimately leads - but I did feel a bit less engaged as the conclusion came into view. The specifics, for some reason, began to feel protracted; more drawn-out than I might have liked. (I didn't feel that way at all during the end of 'TIE'.)
But one thing I did particularly appreciate in 'BM' is the way Macdonald takes a major character and subverts expectations for that person, causing us to re-think the person's actual importance in the story: a clever element of surprise (always a plus).
As well, a whole big chunk of the book serves up the author's Chandler-esque slant towards oddly elegiac expression. (I'll be back, Mr. M!)
If I confess to a preference for 'TIE', that has mostly to do with its labyrinthine nature. ... Actually, no; it's not that simple. 'TIE' seems to have labyrinths inside labyrinths. Its wheels-within-wheels plot just about drove me nutty. ... So, naturally, I loved it. It kept me on the tips of my toes.
'Black Money' is not nearly as ambitious; the rather linear storyline is more like a game of hopscotch: you follow along, on one foot or two, forward in order to go backward. It's certainly gripping-enough; it's just more standard in its P.I. style.
Because 'TIE' is much more preoccupied with complications, it has less time for crackling dialogue (though it has a respectable amount). So 'BM' takes the lead when it comes to snappy repartee. A number of the characters seem just as jaded as Archer is.
Other readers will feel differently - many may not mind where the story ultimately leads - but I did feel a bit less engaged as the conclusion came into view. The specifics, for some reason, began to feel protracted; more drawn-out than I might have liked. (I didn't feel that way at all during the end of 'TIE'.)
But one thing I did particularly appreciate in 'BM' is the way Macdonald takes a major character and subverts expectations for that person, causing us to re-think the person's actual importance in the story: a clever element of surprise (always a plus).
As well, a whole big chunk of the book serves up the author's Chandler-esque slant towards oddly elegiac expression. (I'll be back, Mr. M!)
March 23, 2016
Apparently this is going to be The Coen Brothers next movie. Personally I think there are more visually arresting MacDonald novels to adapt. ‘Sleeping Beauty’ opens with an oil spill on the Californian coast (and I believe I wrote in my review that it was crying out for someone to step into Paul Newman’s shoes as Archer, properly named this time); while ‘The Underground Man’ takes place almost entirely in and around the smoke and flame of a forest fire. Can you honestly think of a more dramatic backdrop for a murder mystery? Having said all that, I am still amazingly excited. In ‘Blood Simple’, ‘Miller’s Crossing’ and even ‘The Big Lebowski’ The Coens have demonstrated their brilliance with the hard-boiled genre, and there are no better hands to guide MacDonald to the screen for the first time in over forty years. It doesn’t matter that I’d have picked a different book, I’ll still be first in line.
"I recognised him instantly. He looked like money about three generations removed from its source. Though he couldn't have been out of his twenties, his face was puffy and apologetic, the face of a middle-aged boy. Under his carefully tailored Ivy League suit he wore a layer of fat like early penetrable armour."
The quality of writing in Ross Macdonald's detective novels is outstanding. Throughout his tales of the rotting underside of supposedly respectable California, there are lines which leap out as poetry, lines where MacDonald captures a moment so precisely and sparingly it takes one’s breath away, There is no fat on a Ross Macdonald novel. He is constantly praised for the psychological depth he introduced into the hard-boiled yarn, but what people frequently miss is the restrained simplicity with which he brings these psychological insights to the fore. Macdonald is dealing with complex emotions, but doesn't make them unintelligibly complex. This is in effect psychology for beginners, but psychology for beginners written by a master wordsmith. He is taking those deep motivations and painful truths which drive human beings on and making them pithy and simple to understand. Macdonald is an expert at relating the dark and complex in a way which is clear and beautiful. Of course in this morally dubious world where murder is always just around the corner, it helps that we have the slightly unknowable character of Lew Archer as our guide. Yes, we understand little about his life, but we know what we need to know. He is a shop-worn private eye of the old school, who realises that the sands of what is right and wrong are always shifting beneath him. He wants to be the knight in shining armour and is always disappointed that the world around him isn't as honourable as he. He is the good man who will seek out wrong, though he will not just condemn, but try to understand. He is our guide through murder and treachery, he is our moral compass, but he is a compass who understands that North-East is sometimes as good as North.
Here Archer is hired by a jilted fiancé to find out all he can about the ex-lover's new man. What follows is a case of private tennis clubs, gangsters (and molls), colleges and illegal immigrants. Throughout MacDonald shows his mastery of the form, having tense scene follow tense scene, so that each character is dubious and a possible suspect. It means that even before the big reveal, every man or woman Archer encounters has their own guilt or guilt by association, their own motivations driving them forward. ‘Black Money’ isn't perfect, containing as it does at least two women whose main characteristic is that they are profoundly cursed by their own beauty, but it is still a brilliantly written work by a true master of the genre.
"I recognised him instantly. He looked like money about three generations removed from its source. Though he couldn't have been out of his twenties, his face was puffy and apologetic, the face of a middle-aged boy. Under his carefully tailored Ivy League suit he wore a layer of fat like early penetrable armour."
The quality of writing in Ross Macdonald's detective novels is outstanding. Throughout his tales of the rotting underside of supposedly respectable California, there are lines which leap out as poetry, lines where MacDonald captures a moment so precisely and sparingly it takes one’s breath away, There is no fat on a Ross Macdonald novel. He is constantly praised for the psychological depth he introduced into the hard-boiled yarn, but what people frequently miss is the restrained simplicity with which he brings these psychological insights to the fore. Macdonald is dealing with complex emotions, but doesn't make them unintelligibly complex. This is in effect psychology for beginners, but psychology for beginners written by a master wordsmith. He is taking those deep motivations and painful truths which drive human beings on and making them pithy and simple to understand. Macdonald is an expert at relating the dark and complex in a way which is clear and beautiful. Of course in this morally dubious world where murder is always just around the corner, it helps that we have the slightly unknowable character of Lew Archer as our guide. Yes, we understand little about his life, but we know what we need to know. He is a shop-worn private eye of the old school, who realises that the sands of what is right and wrong are always shifting beneath him. He wants to be the knight in shining armour and is always disappointed that the world around him isn't as honourable as he. He is the good man who will seek out wrong, though he will not just condemn, but try to understand. He is our guide through murder and treachery, he is our moral compass, but he is a compass who understands that North-East is sometimes as good as North.
Here Archer is hired by a jilted fiancé to find out all he can about the ex-lover's new man. What follows is a case of private tennis clubs, gangsters (and molls), colleges and illegal immigrants. Throughout MacDonald shows his mastery of the form, having tense scene follow tense scene, so that each character is dubious and a possible suspect. It means that even before the big reveal, every man or woman Archer encounters has their own guilt or guilt by association, their own motivations driving them forward. ‘Black Money’ isn't perfect, containing as it does at least two women whose main characteristic is that they are profoundly cursed by their own beauty, but it is still a brilliantly written work by a true master of the genre.
August 17, 2020
There isn't one line of dialogue to quote from this entry.
This is an excellent mystery novel but it doesn't require Lew Archer's presence.
In fact it doesn't require a detective. This is a stand-alone, first rate mystery novel where the writer performs a bit of dishonest sleight-of-hand to disguise the actual murderer.
So many red-herrings here, the book smells like a dented can of tuna.
Loved this but if you're after a superb Lew Archer entry -skip this.
If you want an excellent murder mystery, maybe start with this.
Maybe.
October 8, 2011
After reading three Lew Archer novels in a row and in order of writing, I can honestly say that I hope to do it again. It was a very interesting exercise as I wrote in one of my last two reviews. Kenneth Millar (pen name Ross Macdonald) was a virtuoso. "The Chill", "The Far Side of the Dollar" and "Black Money" are all intricate, character-driven, detective stories, but except for the constancy of Archer, each couldn't be more different. Sure the author re-used themes, but he did so with great care to avoid a rut that would make his books stale and his sales dry up. I haven't been disappointed, yet.
Each of these three books was written in the mid-sixties by which time Mr. Macdonald had found his "style" and had established Archer's key traits and behavior. I've seen "The Chill" ranked as one of his absolute best novels and I don't dispute that. It has great characters, great action and a plot that kept the reader surprised (described on the cover as the most intricate in an American detective story ever.) I gave it a 4-4.5 rating. But here's the thing: I think I like "Black Money" better. Now, I haven't gone looking for other review or rankings, so maybe that's not such a surprising statement. All I can do is describe why I think this book is a great read.
The story starts off slowly; it's a mundane investigation to discover who and what a wealthy foreigner is. Why do we care? He's stolen away the girl that a young man has been infatuated with for years. A simple tale: they grow up together as neighbors and the boy wants to marry the girl next door. Simple, that is until the author begins to type. Archer uncovers a web of intrigue, money, sex, and personal entanglements that stretch back decades. In the end, the resolution is simple: no one is what they seem, the wealth is illicit, and the boy probably won't get the girl given the final act. So, there you have it a simple start, a simple end and no loose ends to speak of. What could be simpler?
All facetiousness aside, this is some of the best plotting and writing that I have ever read. I can't say for certain that the plot in "Black Money" is any more complex and convoluted as that in "The Chill" or "The Far Side of the Dollar" but the story resonated with me more than "The Chill". I think that the scope here is bigger: small town intrigue amongst "the betters", illegal gambling profits, international money-laundering and banking, and a roster of conflicted characters to act it all out. The "Frenchman" is one of Macdonald's most interesting vilians. He's a self-created man who gets embroiled in the story because of his own human failings. Although working for and as a criminal, he's got it made, except for one small obsession which begins our tale and is his and many others undoing.
Coupled with the roller-coaster of plot and character motivations is the usual sharp and inventive prose. It doesn't take much to uncover a particularly good passage. Literally one can flip open a page or two and find something worth quoting. For example, I opened up to page 86 and found this:
"I left him rooting enthusiastically among the dusty cartons on his shelves, and drove back into the foothills. This was the direction the wind was coming from. It rushed down the canyons like a hot torrent, and roared in the brush around the Bagshaw house. I had to brace myself against it when I got out of the car."
Or try this passage from page 38:
"He lived in the adjoining harbor city, in a rather rundown tract whose one obvious advantage was a view of the ocean. The sun, heavy and red, was almost down on the horizon now. It's image floated like spilled fire on the water."
I have no idea how long he lingered over each book (although the seem to have come out about one per year). Did such images come naturally to him, or did he begin with something more mundane and return to edit in these lyric or lush descriptions? I'd like to believe that he thought in these technicolor and tactile "3D" ways and simply chose the best words to tell the reader what he saw and felt.
Although I don't recall quoting any dialogue, I must confess that is only because these descriptive passages are so alluring. The dialogue is what I would call "appropriate". Rather than long speeches, we get the give and take of a detective pursuing information with those around him and those he seeks out. The actual sentences tend to be short, with only a few strung together even in the longer expositions. The bulk of the information comes from the perspective of Archer as narrator. There we see what the character says and how Archer responds to it.
An example of a longer interview is on page 57:
"Where was Martel born, Mr. Stoll?"
"I have asked myself that question. He claims to be Parisian, Mrs. Bagshaw tells me. But from what little I heard of it, his French is not Paris French. It is too provincial, too formal. Perhaps it is Canadian, or South American. I don't know. I am not a linguisitic scientist."
"You're the next thing to it," I said encouragingly. "So you think he might be Canadian or South American?"
"That's just a guess. I'm not really familiar with Canadian or South American French. But I am quite sure Martel is not Parisian."
I thanked Stoll. He bowed me out.
Even without knowing the rest of the scene and their earlier conversation, one can see how Macdonald adds depth to the dialogue when needed, but does it in a similar way as he did when describing the approach of sunset.
If you are a fan of detective fiction, this book and every other Archer story is a rare treat. If you are just a lover of good writing, then I urge you to read these books. You won't be disappointed. This book easily deserves a "4.5".
Each of these three books was written in the mid-sixties by which time Mr. Macdonald had found his "style" and had established Archer's key traits and behavior. I've seen "The Chill" ranked as one of his absolute best novels and I don't dispute that. It has great characters, great action and a plot that kept the reader surprised (described on the cover as the most intricate in an American detective story ever.) I gave it a 4-4.5 rating. But here's the thing: I think I like "Black Money" better. Now, I haven't gone looking for other review or rankings, so maybe that's not such a surprising statement. All I can do is describe why I think this book is a great read.
The story starts off slowly; it's a mundane investigation to discover who and what a wealthy foreigner is. Why do we care? He's stolen away the girl that a young man has been infatuated with for years. A simple tale: they grow up together as neighbors and the boy wants to marry the girl next door. Simple, that is until the author begins to type. Archer uncovers a web of intrigue, money, sex, and personal entanglements that stretch back decades. In the end, the resolution is simple: no one is what they seem, the wealth is illicit, and the boy probably won't get the girl given the final act. So, there you have it a simple start, a simple end and no loose ends to speak of. What could be simpler?
All facetiousness aside, this is some of the best plotting and writing that I have ever read. I can't say for certain that the plot in "Black Money" is any more complex and convoluted as that in "The Chill" or "The Far Side of the Dollar" but the story resonated with me more than "The Chill". I think that the scope here is bigger: small town intrigue amongst "the betters", illegal gambling profits, international money-laundering and banking, and a roster of conflicted characters to act it all out. The "Frenchman" is one of Macdonald's most interesting vilians. He's a self-created man who gets embroiled in the story because of his own human failings. Although working for and as a criminal, he's got it made, except for one small obsession which begins our tale and is his and many others undoing.
Coupled with the roller-coaster of plot and character motivations is the usual sharp and inventive prose. It doesn't take much to uncover a particularly good passage. Literally one can flip open a page or two and find something worth quoting. For example, I opened up to page 86 and found this:
"I left him rooting enthusiastically among the dusty cartons on his shelves, and drove back into the foothills. This was the direction the wind was coming from. It rushed down the canyons like a hot torrent, and roared in the brush around the Bagshaw house. I had to brace myself against it when I got out of the car."
Or try this passage from page 38:
"He lived in the adjoining harbor city, in a rather rundown tract whose one obvious advantage was a view of the ocean. The sun, heavy and red, was almost down on the horizon now. It's image floated like spilled fire on the water."
I have no idea how long he lingered over each book (although the seem to have come out about one per year). Did such images come naturally to him, or did he begin with something more mundane and return to edit in these lyric or lush descriptions? I'd like to believe that he thought in these technicolor and tactile "3D" ways and simply chose the best words to tell the reader what he saw and felt.
Although I don't recall quoting any dialogue, I must confess that is only because these descriptive passages are so alluring. The dialogue is what I would call "appropriate". Rather than long speeches, we get the give and take of a detective pursuing information with those around him and those he seeks out. The actual sentences tend to be short, with only a few strung together even in the longer expositions. The bulk of the information comes from the perspective of Archer as narrator. There we see what the character says and how Archer responds to it.
An example of a longer interview is on page 57:
"Where was Martel born, Mr. Stoll?"
"I have asked myself that question. He claims to be Parisian, Mrs. Bagshaw tells me. But from what little I heard of it, his French is not Paris French. It is too provincial, too formal. Perhaps it is Canadian, or South American. I don't know. I am not a linguisitic scientist."
"You're the next thing to it," I said encouragingly. "So you think he might be Canadian or South American?"
"That's just a guess. I'm not really familiar with Canadian or South American French. But I am quite sure Martel is not Parisian."
I thanked Stoll. He bowed me out.
Even without knowing the rest of the scene and their earlier conversation, one can see how Macdonald adds depth to the dialogue when needed, but does it in a similar way as he did when describing the approach of sunset.
If you are a fan of detective fiction, this book and every other Archer story is a rare treat. If you are just a lover of good writing, then I urge you to read these books. You won't be disappointed. This book easily deserves a "4.5".
June 28, 2015
When I read The Chill, I thought that was Macdonald at his "peak". I was wrong.
If you've come this far in the series (#13), you're likely already a fan of Lew Archer/Ross Macdonald. Even so, I had always felt that he couldn't *quite* reach the level of Chandler - there was always something dated or a touch cheesy here and there -- in the language, in one of the characters, a false note in the dialogue somewhere... minor, but nonetheless a genuine tarnish.
Black Money was published in 1966 -- in other words, in the modern world. It is no longer sitting in or at the poolside of the 50's. It is a book taut and rich, both in its writing and in its plotting -- it is virtually flawless -- and its study of character shows no false tracks that I could discern.
His conscious and deliberate use of peripeteia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripeteia), moreover, masterfully handled as always, show *formally* what one already grasps intuitively, that the human condition is, in Millar's eyes, often an utter and wasteful tragedy...
"Life was short and sweet, I thought, sweet and short." And yet people ruin it with their obsessions and stupidities.
This one is simply a gem. Read it.
If you've come this far in the series (#13), you're likely already a fan of Lew Archer/Ross Macdonald. Even so, I had always felt that he couldn't *quite* reach the level of Chandler - there was always something dated or a touch cheesy here and there -- in the language, in one of the characters, a false note in the dialogue somewhere... minor, but nonetheless a genuine tarnish.
Black Money was published in 1966 -- in other words, in the modern world. It is no longer sitting in or at the poolside of the 50's. It is a book taut and rich, both in its writing and in its plotting -- it is virtually flawless -- and its study of character shows no false tracks that I could discern.
His conscious and deliberate use of peripeteia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripeteia), moreover, masterfully handled as always, show *formally* what one already grasps intuitively, that the human condition is, in Millar's eyes, often an utter and wasteful tragedy...
"Life was short and sweet, I thought, sweet and short." And yet people ruin it with their obsessions and stupidities.
This one is simply a gem. Read it.
November 16, 2010
America might be the perfect place to re-invent yourself and win the hand of that princess on the hill, but sooner or later your past will inevitably return and claim its due. Mid-60's Lew Archer investigates a phony Frenchman, a suicide, murder, a possible kidnapping and blackmail among the country-club set in Southern California.
March 29, 2022
So many wonderful lines in this novel. The writing elevates this to a five star read for me.
July 13, 2019
COUNTDOWN: Mid-20th Century North American Crime
BOOK 103 (of 250)
HOOK - 3 stars: >>>"I'd been hearing about the Tennis Club for years, but I'd never been inside of it. Its courts and bungalows, its swimming pool and cabanas and pavilions, were disposed around a cove of the Pacific a few miles south of the L.A. County border. Just parking my Ford in the asphalt lot beside the tennis courts made me feel like less of a dropout from the affluent society."<<< are the opening lines.
A good opening and I can relate. I often park my Ford among the Bentleys and Lamborghinis at about any parking lot in Boca Raton. And in Boca, even the Target parking lots are landscaped to almost garden-level loveliness. (And not just a Ford, but a 10-year-old one that really needs a wash.)
PACE - 3: In one of this author's previous work, "The Chill", the pace is unrelenting and brilliant, like a roller coaster heading in only one direction: downward. Here, Macdonald keeps us in the world of academia (as in "The Chill"), but also inside the world of the very, very rich and the very, very fake. Although the pace is fine, it's no "Chill" thrill ride. (Does "Mr. Freeze" at Six Flags Texas come to mind-or have they changed the name of that amusement ride to name of the newest superhero villain?)
PLOT - 4: The rich but rather overweight and boring Peter Jamieson wants his beloved Ginny back (Peter and Ginny grew up together in the ultra-swank suburb called Montevista and its pools and clubs and tennis courts and have become engaged). But Ginny has been entranced by a nouveau riche man on the scene: Francis Martel. Peter hires P.I. Lew Archer first to bring Ginny back, and once Peter realizes that's probably not going to happen, he simply wants Ginny away from 'that man'. But who, exactly, is Francis Martel? That's the basic storyline: Martel's past. But when embassies become involved, and everyone seems in some way connected to Washington D.C, the red herrings kick into high gear. Kickbacks? Money Laundering? Lies, lies, and more lies?
CAST - 4: As each level of Martel's identity is peeled back, he becomes more and more interesting. He might be a poor boy who has studied hard and worked hard. Archer, it seems, faces the least number of violent situations directed at him in this outing than in any other book. But this is the world of Academia, and the pen (and the story of the past) is more powerful than the sword: Plato and Descartes and Sartre are discussed and/or quoted, Joyce's epiphanies are here, as is Augustine's Civitas Dei. Kitty, a high school beauty who, 6 years later, is still a beauty at the pool, gives her story to Archer as "her late movie story." Archer comments on the 'stagy' photos taken of club members by the club photographer. Yes, all the world of Montevista is a stage, and there is indeed a play being acted out: no one is a safe and secure as they appear. They have secrets that will kill them if revealed. Kitty's second husband, Harry Hendricks, poses as a detective, and Archer quickly notices he lacks any detective skills. The club Lifegaurd, Stanley (yea, a lifegaurd named Stanley!) is big and blond and muscular and tends to the private cabana occupants. (I found it fascinating that here, there are 2 levels of cabanas, I've never scene that before...but I've never been to these kinds of clubs.) Red herrings abound: why, exactly, does Martel suddenly decide to give his ultra-expensive cabana furnishings to Stanley, even though Martel isn't vacating the cabana? And why is Mrs. Fablon (widowed 6 years ago by a man who committed suicide-maybe) shaken when Archer asks Mrs. Fablon if Martel is some kind of missing Dauphin? And why all the ties back to Washington D.C.? French professors run amuck, embassies become involved, and the cast becomes global.
ATMOSPHERE - 3: As I said, this story is on an epic scale involving multiple countries. Are there spies? At one point, a lovely young thing says to Archer, "My first name is Audrey.,.what's your first name, Mr. Arch." The answer is a beauty, and one that I don't think the author has used thus far: "Fallen", says Lew. Mansions and bungalows, tennis courts and locker rooms, French quotes floating over everything. Macdonald is an artist and his paintbrush is very busy. Once Archer has met and talked with Stanley, the lifegaurd, Archer reflects: "The boy was driving me crazy. (Archer and most of the ladies...and some of the guys...) The trouble was that there were thousands of him (true, it's L.A. and the young and muscular have tilted to the west), neo-primitives who didn't seem to belong in the modern world. But it came to me with a jolt that maybe they were better adapted to it than I was. They could live like happy savages on the beach while computers (imagine, this is 1965) and computer-jockeys did most of the work and made all the decisions." BUT (a big one) Macdonald had taken us into the world of academia in his book published previous to this one (The Chill) and I couldn't shake the feeling that some of these ruminations were left over from that excellent novel, perhaps some of the subplots, perhaps some of this book was from the floor of the editing room of "The Chill".
SUMMARY: 3.4. This is good Ross Macdonald. But not among my favorites.
BOOK 103 (of 250)
HOOK - 3 stars: >>>"I'd been hearing about the Tennis Club for years, but I'd never been inside of it. Its courts and bungalows, its swimming pool and cabanas and pavilions, were disposed around a cove of the Pacific a few miles south of the L.A. County border. Just parking my Ford in the asphalt lot beside the tennis courts made me feel like less of a dropout from the affluent society."<<< are the opening lines.
A good opening and I can relate. I often park my Ford among the Bentleys and Lamborghinis at about any parking lot in Boca Raton. And in Boca, even the Target parking lots are landscaped to almost garden-level loveliness. (And not just a Ford, but a 10-year-old one that really needs a wash.)
PACE - 3: In one of this author's previous work, "The Chill", the pace is unrelenting and brilliant, like a roller coaster heading in only one direction: downward. Here, Macdonald keeps us in the world of academia (as in "The Chill"), but also inside the world of the very, very rich and the very, very fake. Although the pace is fine, it's no "Chill" thrill ride. (Does "Mr. Freeze" at Six Flags Texas come to mind-or have they changed the name of that amusement ride to name of the newest superhero villain?)
PLOT - 4: The rich but rather overweight and boring Peter Jamieson wants his beloved Ginny back (Peter and Ginny grew up together in the ultra-swank suburb called Montevista and its pools and clubs and tennis courts and have become engaged). But Ginny has been entranced by a nouveau riche man on the scene: Francis Martel. Peter hires P.I. Lew Archer first to bring Ginny back, and once Peter realizes that's probably not going to happen, he simply wants Ginny away from 'that man'. But who, exactly, is Francis Martel? That's the basic storyline: Martel's past. But when embassies become involved, and everyone seems in some way connected to Washington D.C, the red herrings kick into high gear. Kickbacks? Money Laundering? Lies, lies, and more lies?
CAST - 4: As each level of Martel's identity is peeled back, he becomes more and more interesting. He might be a poor boy who has studied hard and worked hard. Archer, it seems, faces the least number of violent situations directed at him in this outing than in any other book. But this is the world of Academia, and the pen (and the story of the past) is more powerful than the sword: Plato and Descartes and Sartre are discussed and/or quoted, Joyce's epiphanies are here, as is Augustine's Civitas Dei. Kitty, a high school beauty who, 6 years later, is still a beauty at the pool, gives her story to Archer as "her late movie story." Archer comments on the 'stagy' photos taken of club members by the club photographer. Yes, all the world of Montevista is a stage, and there is indeed a play being acted out: no one is a safe and secure as they appear. They have secrets that will kill them if revealed. Kitty's second husband, Harry Hendricks, poses as a detective, and Archer quickly notices he lacks any detective skills. The club Lifegaurd, Stanley (yea, a lifegaurd named Stanley!) is big and blond and muscular and tends to the private cabana occupants. (I found it fascinating that here, there are 2 levels of cabanas, I've never scene that before...but I've never been to these kinds of clubs.) Red herrings abound: why, exactly, does Martel suddenly decide to give his ultra-expensive cabana furnishings to Stanley, even though Martel isn't vacating the cabana? And why is Mrs. Fablon (widowed 6 years ago by a man who committed suicide-maybe) shaken when Archer asks Mrs. Fablon if Martel is some kind of missing Dauphin? And why all the ties back to Washington D.C.? French professors run amuck, embassies become involved, and the cast becomes global.
ATMOSPHERE - 3: As I said, this story is on an epic scale involving multiple countries. Are there spies? At one point, a lovely young thing says to Archer, "My first name is Audrey.,.what's your first name, Mr. Arch." The answer is a beauty, and one that I don't think the author has used thus far: "Fallen", says Lew. Mansions and bungalows, tennis courts and locker rooms, French quotes floating over everything. Macdonald is an artist and his paintbrush is very busy. Once Archer has met and talked with Stanley, the lifegaurd, Archer reflects: "The boy was driving me crazy. (Archer and most of the ladies...and some of the guys...) The trouble was that there were thousands of him (true, it's L.A. and the young and muscular have tilted to the west), neo-primitives who didn't seem to belong in the modern world. But it came to me with a jolt that maybe they were better adapted to it than I was. They could live like happy savages on the beach while computers (imagine, this is 1965) and computer-jockeys did most of the work and made all the decisions." BUT (a big one) Macdonald had taken us into the world of academia in his book published previous to this one (The Chill) and I couldn't shake the feeling that some of these ruminations were left over from that excellent novel, perhaps some of the subplots, perhaps some of this book was from the floor of the editing room of "The Chill".
SUMMARY: 3.4. This is good Ross Macdonald. But not among my favorites.
December 2, 2024
Black Money falls on the tail end of the Lew Archer series about a world-weary private eye based out of Los Angeles. Here, Archer meets his prospective client at the famous Tennis Club, which he had been hearing about for years, but had never been inside. When Archer sees his prospective client by the snack bar, he recognizes him instinctively. “He looked like money about three generations removed from its source.” He goes on to describe Peter Jamieson as a man in his early twenties, but with a puffy and apologetic face of a middle-aged boy and a layer of fat like easily penetrable armor. “He had the kind of soft brown eyes which are often short sighted.” As Archer describes Peter, he is a soft beta male who cannot seem to manage his own affairs without help. Here, Peter tells Archer that a Frenchman Francis Martel has stolen his girl and he wants Archer to get her back for him and, if Archer can’t get her to come back to him, at least get her to not ruin her life by marrying this man. Peter tells Archer that Ginny Fablon gave him back his engagement ring and then went away for the weekend with Martel and now Peter has made an occupation of watching Martel’s house to see if Ginny comes back with Martel.
There is nothing about this “case” which is appealing to an old hand like Archer. Indeed, it seems like a waste of his time to even come all the way south to Montevista, a made up town which could have been La Jolla with all the old money floating around. Archer narrates that it is a residential community adjacent to and symbiotic to the harbor city of Pacific Point and is sort of a village, but only in the way that Montevistans play at being simple villagers the way the couriers of Versailles play at being peasants. Later, Archer comes across Peter gnawing on a carcasss of a half-demolished turkey, his face swollen tight and mottled, like a sausage. Archer feels like getting out of there and sending him back the balance of his money. But, Archer relates, he “always had trouble walking out on bad luck.”
Ginny’s mother asks Archer to make his investigations quietly and without spoiling matters for Ginny. She explains that the thing she has with Francis Martel is very bright and shining, and very new, and she doesn’t want Archer tarnishing it. The thing is, though, being warned off a case almost always causes Archer to get more curious, particularly when Peter’s father tells Archer about the Fablons and how, when Ginny was only sixteen or seventeen, Roy Fablon walked into the ocean with his clothes on one night and they found the body ten days later, scarcely identifiable.
Archer slowly but surely, journeying between the tennis club and the bright mansions above it gets a sense that not all might be right about Martel and that Ginny did not know what she had gotten herself into, but that it all connected somehow to her father’s demise seven years earlier.
On the way, though, he makes quite a few interesting observations about life such as the fact that the lifeguard who he speaks to is a bit of a neo-primitive who did not seem to belong in the modern world, but maybe these neo-primitives were better adapted than he was. “They could live like happy savages on the beach while computers and computer-jockeys did most of the work and made all the decisions.”
Not all is paradise in Montevista and Archer quickly realizes that talking to Kitty Hendricks, who he says was not always in the chips. He tells her he could tell by her voice, the way she moves her body in little conspicuous ways as if she were treading water. Watching her, his woman who had once come from the wrong side of the tracks, he sees her like a nocturnal animal and gets a red flash about how two people and a set of circumstances might collaborate in an unpredictable murder.
Throughout this novel, Archer is the consummate judge of human character. He explains that a professor’s young wife, making a play for Archer, was rough, but “they get that way, sometimes, when they marry too young and trap themselves in a kitchen and wake up ten years later wondering where the world is.” He explains: “The easy ones are nearly always trouble: frigid or nympho, schizy or commercial or alcoholic, sometimes all five at once. Their nicely wrapped gifts of themselves often turned out to be homemade bombs, or fudge with arsenic in it.”
But, in the end, Black Money, is about the secret money skimmed off the top. It’s about how the pretty pictures of the rich and well-heeled hide how empty and tragic their lives are. How so many are greedily searching for something more, not satisfied with what they have got. And, the men and women slopping around at the bottom of the barrel in run-down apartments and cars that are out of gas did not get there by accident. Sometimes it is pure greed and compulsion that makes a man gamble away everything he has got, including his wife.
Archer does not necessarily know the secret to a happy life. He tells people his angle is that likes people and tries to be of some service. He is not sure if it adds up to a life, but it “makes life possible, anyway.”
There is nothing about this “case” which is appealing to an old hand like Archer. Indeed, it seems like a waste of his time to even come all the way south to Montevista, a made up town which could have been La Jolla with all the old money floating around. Archer narrates that it is a residential community adjacent to and symbiotic to the harbor city of Pacific Point and is sort of a village, but only in the way that Montevistans play at being simple villagers the way the couriers of Versailles play at being peasants. Later, Archer comes across Peter gnawing on a carcasss of a half-demolished turkey, his face swollen tight and mottled, like a sausage. Archer feels like getting out of there and sending him back the balance of his money. But, Archer relates, he “always had trouble walking out on bad luck.”
Ginny’s mother asks Archer to make his investigations quietly and without spoiling matters for Ginny. She explains that the thing she has with Francis Martel is very bright and shining, and very new, and she doesn’t want Archer tarnishing it. The thing is, though, being warned off a case almost always causes Archer to get more curious, particularly when Peter’s father tells Archer about the Fablons and how, when Ginny was only sixteen or seventeen, Roy Fablon walked into the ocean with his clothes on one night and they found the body ten days later, scarcely identifiable.
Archer slowly but surely, journeying between the tennis club and the bright mansions above it gets a sense that not all might be right about Martel and that Ginny did not know what she had gotten herself into, but that it all connected somehow to her father’s demise seven years earlier.
On the way, though, he makes quite a few interesting observations about life such as the fact that the lifeguard who he speaks to is a bit of a neo-primitive who did not seem to belong in the modern world, but maybe these neo-primitives were better adapted than he was. “They could live like happy savages on the beach while computers and computer-jockeys did most of the work and made all the decisions.”
Not all is paradise in Montevista and Archer quickly realizes that talking to Kitty Hendricks, who he says was not always in the chips. He tells her he could tell by her voice, the way she moves her body in little conspicuous ways as if she were treading water. Watching her, his woman who had once come from the wrong side of the tracks, he sees her like a nocturnal animal and gets a red flash about how two people and a set of circumstances might collaborate in an unpredictable murder.
Throughout this novel, Archer is the consummate judge of human character. He explains that a professor’s young wife, making a play for Archer, was rough, but “they get that way, sometimes, when they marry too young and trap themselves in a kitchen and wake up ten years later wondering where the world is.” He explains: “The easy ones are nearly always trouble: frigid or nympho, schizy or commercial or alcoholic, sometimes all five at once. Their nicely wrapped gifts of themselves often turned out to be homemade bombs, or fudge with arsenic in it.”
But, in the end, Black Money, is about the secret money skimmed off the top. It’s about how the pretty pictures of the rich and well-heeled hide how empty and tragic their lives are. How so many are greedily searching for something more, not satisfied with what they have got. And, the men and women slopping around at the bottom of the barrel in run-down apartments and cars that are out of gas did not get there by accident. Sometimes it is pure greed and compulsion that makes a man gamble away everything he has got, including his wife.
Archer does not necessarily know the secret to a happy life. He tells people his angle is that likes people and tries to be of some service. He is not sure if it adds up to a life, but it “makes life possible, anyway.”
May 31, 2021
The Demon Lover
The title of Ross MacDonald's 1966 novel, "Black Money" refers to money skimmed off the top from gambling winnings in Las Vegas and elsewhere to avoid reporting the gains to the Internal Revenue Service. Illicit black money and many other crimes are central to the novel which is narrated by Macdonald's redoubtable detective, Lew Archer, and is a late work in his Lew Archer series.
The story begins simply enough when a man in his 20s of wealthy background, Peter Jameson, hires Archer to investigate an apparent wealthy young Frenchman, Martel, who has stolen the affections of Peter's fiancee and long time sweetheart, Ginnie. The story gradually cascades into a series of shady dealings extending seven years into the past and ultimately resulting in three murders as Archer uncovers a web of lust and greed.
The story has a strong sense of place. It is largely set in a wealthy tennis club just south of Los Angeles. Archer brings to light the secret lives of many of the long-term patrons of this seemingly placid, well-to-do club. Several members of the club were involved with vicious Las Vegas gamblers and have become heavily in their debt. The story also has a setting in academia, particularly in the teaching of French. The story of the rich and their difficulties is juxtaposed against some poor individuals in the community. And there is an international element to the story as well.
The setting, characterizations, and language of Macdonald's novel are as important as the tangled mystery and make the book more than a clever who-done-it. There is a strong feeling of wasted lives in the book with little in the way of redemption. Macdonald tells a story of human frailty and greed. The novel shows the strong influence of Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby".
This was my first novel by Ross Macdonald and I hope to read more. The Library of America has published three volumes of Macdonald's novels, and "Black Money" is included in the third and final volume. To accompany the release of the volume, the LOA published an online essay by Tom Nolan, "Gatsby as noir: the genesis of Ross Macdonald's Black Money." The essay helped me in my reading. It showed the painstaking care Macdonald took with the novel which was his own favorite among his books. Nolan also developed useful background for the places in the novel which, until its late stages, had the title of this review as its working title. I enjoyed this book and learned as well from the comments of my fellow online reviewers.
Robin Friedman
The title of Ross MacDonald's 1966 novel, "Black Money" refers to money skimmed off the top from gambling winnings in Las Vegas and elsewhere to avoid reporting the gains to the Internal Revenue Service. Illicit black money and many other crimes are central to the novel which is narrated by Macdonald's redoubtable detective, Lew Archer, and is a late work in his Lew Archer series.
The story begins simply enough when a man in his 20s of wealthy background, Peter Jameson, hires Archer to investigate an apparent wealthy young Frenchman, Martel, who has stolen the affections of Peter's fiancee and long time sweetheart, Ginnie. The story gradually cascades into a series of shady dealings extending seven years into the past and ultimately resulting in three murders as Archer uncovers a web of lust and greed.
The story has a strong sense of place. It is largely set in a wealthy tennis club just south of Los Angeles. Archer brings to light the secret lives of many of the long-term patrons of this seemingly placid, well-to-do club. Several members of the club were involved with vicious Las Vegas gamblers and have become heavily in their debt. The story also has a setting in academia, particularly in the teaching of French. The story of the rich and their difficulties is juxtaposed against some poor individuals in the community. And there is an international element to the story as well.
The setting, characterizations, and language of Macdonald's novel are as important as the tangled mystery and make the book more than a clever who-done-it. There is a strong feeling of wasted lives in the book with little in the way of redemption. Macdonald tells a story of human frailty and greed. The novel shows the strong influence of Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby".
This was my first novel by Ross Macdonald and I hope to read more. The Library of America has published three volumes of Macdonald's novels, and "Black Money" is included in the third and final volume. To accompany the release of the volume, the LOA published an online essay by Tom Nolan, "Gatsby as noir: the genesis of Ross Macdonald's Black Money." The essay helped me in my reading. It showed the painstaking care Macdonald took with the novel which was his own favorite among his books. Nolan also developed useful background for the places in the novel which, until its late stages, had the title of this review as its working title. I enjoyed this book and learned as well from the comments of my fellow online reviewers.
Robin Friedman
April 1, 2017
A debonair Frenchman that appears out of nowhere and sweeps a young socialite off her feet, her gluttonous fiancé who’s convinced this bride thief is a fake, a collection of the bored and rich who linger anemically about a decadent sports club, a lumbering gangster with delusions of propriety, a dreamy college professor with a book he can’t finish and a sharp-tongued wife he can’t please, a dead gambler and the heap of money he owes a Las Vegas Casino called the Scorpion Club, and hundreds of tasty similes to tie the whole mystery together—all in a day’s work for Lew Archer, the roving moral consciousness who navigates each of Ross Macdonald’s superior private eye mysteries.
January 11, 2012
This is an excellent entry in Ross Macdonald's series of novels about private eye Lew Archer. This one has elements of Macdonald's recurrent theme of dark family secrets, but it spreads its concerns a little broader than that. Archer is hired to find out the truth about a man who has swept a wealthy young woman off her feet. As always with Macdonald, guilt and the fear of shame play a heavy role in matters. Macdonald isn't as colorful a writer, generally, as his two colleagues atop the heap of private eye fiction, Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett, but he never fails to tell a compelling story. This is a good one.
June 25, 2020
“[Black Money] seems to me to be the broadest expression of whatever sensibility I have, that I’ve written in a single book. . . . Sensibility is something I value, and I’m not always good at conveying it. But I felt the book came off, in a kind of original way, and had quite an original plot, despite its broad comparability to Gatsby.”
Ross Macdonald
Ross Macdonald
May 2, 2020
Ross MacDonald was a master at unraveling the twisted and intermingled minds of the southern California upper crust. Lew Archer would manage to reveal the killer by constant prying and making deductions from what he learned. Nothing was ever as it appeared. He was a terrific writer and this audiobook was spectacularly narrated, as always, by Jonathan Marosz.
July 28, 2016
Ross Macdonald believed that "Black Money" was his best book. While I don't necessarily agree, I can definitely understand where he is coming from. "Black Money" is Macdonald's version of "The Great Gatsby." It's all about unfulfilled dreams, hopes, and promises.
It all starts with a young man who hires Lew Archer to investigate a young man who he suspects of not being who he claims to be. From there it snowballs into a tale of murder, lust, and heartbreak. Macdonald strips away a lot of his sentimentality in this and keeps the characters pain right near the surface and the story is all the richer for it. Archer himself seems particularly lonely and directionless without his case to solve. I really like that Macdonald has continued to age Archer and the story with the changing times. This came out in 1966 and you can really feel the changing times start to effect and alienate Archer. I look forward to seeing how this series progresses with it's narrative, character, and tone.
Quotable Quotes:
"What you do to others you do to yourself. It's the converse of the golden rule."
"The orchestra was playing again, and through the archway I could see people dancing in the adjoining room. Most of the tunes, and most of the dancers, had been new in the twenties and thirties. Together they gave the impression of a party that had been going on too long, till the music and the dancers were worn as thin as the husks of insects after spiders had eaten them."
"The lobby of the hotel was the mouth of a tourist trap which had lost its bite. There were scuff-marks on the furniture, dust on the philodendrons. The bellhop wore an old blue uniform which looked as if he had fought through the Civil War in it."
"She pouted and frowned a little with her thin painted-on eyebrows. She didn't frown very hard because that gave girls wrinkles and besides I might kill her and she didn't want to die with a frown on her lovely face."
"Still holding on to my hand she rose and towed me out onto the dance floor. Round and round we went, with her hair slipping down into both our eyes and her breasts jouncing against me like the special organs of her enthusiasm."
"Clearly she had troubles, and a wise man I knew in Chicago had said once and for all: 'Never sleep with anyone whose troubles are worse than your own.'"
It all starts with a young man who hires Lew Archer to investigate a young man who he suspects of not being who he claims to be. From there it snowballs into a tale of murder, lust, and heartbreak. Macdonald strips away a lot of his sentimentality in this and keeps the characters pain right near the surface and the story is all the richer for it. Archer himself seems particularly lonely and directionless without his case to solve. I really like that Macdonald has continued to age Archer and the story with the changing times. This came out in 1966 and you can really feel the changing times start to effect and alienate Archer. I look forward to seeing how this series progresses with it's narrative, character, and tone.
Quotable Quotes:
"What you do to others you do to yourself. It's the converse of the golden rule."
"The orchestra was playing again, and through the archway I could see people dancing in the adjoining room. Most of the tunes, and most of the dancers, had been new in the twenties and thirties. Together they gave the impression of a party that had been going on too long, till the music and the dancers were worn as thin as the husks of insects after spiders had eaten them."
"The lobby of the hotel was the mouth of a tourist trap which had lost its bite. There were scuff-marks on the furniture, dust on the philodendrons. The bellhop wore an old blue uniform which looked as if he had fought through the Civil War in it."
"She pouted and frowned a little with her thin painted-on eyebrows. She didn't frown very hard because that gave girls wrinkles and besides I might kill her and she didn't want to die with a frown on her lovely face."
"Still holding on to my hand she rose and towed me out onto the dance floor. Round and round we went, with her hair slipping down into both our eyes and her breasts jouncing against me like the special organs of her enthusiasm."
"Clearly she had troubles, and a wise man I knew in Chicago had said once and for all: 'Never sleep with anyone whose troubles are worse than your own.'"
February 13, 2022
I might have mentioned it, but I really love a good noir.
And DAMN this one was good. What begins as a very simple story (and a simple job for Archer) turns out to be (as usual) a much more complex one. A mystery is on top of mystery, no character is who they seem to be, people are dying left and right and the roots of the mystery reach out deep into the past.
The characters are definitely the strongest part of this book: well-written, distinct from one another and ALL of them wonderfully dysfunctional. The ending hits hard as well, though some threads could have used more of a resolution - but that's noir for you.
A very good one. I WANT to take another Ross Macdonald right away... but I won't. I will take another book before that, just so the Macdonalds I have, last longer.
And DAMN this one was good. What begins as a very simple story (and a simple job for Archer) turns out to be (as usual) a much more complex one. A mystery is on top of mystery, no character is who they seem to be, people are dying left and right and the roots of the mystery reach out deep into the past.
The characters are definitely the strongest part of this book: well-written, distinct from one another and ALL of them wonderfully dysfunctional. The ending hits hard as well, though some threads could have used more of a resolution - but that's noir for you.
A very good one. I WANT to take another Ross Macdonald right away... but I won't. I will take another book before that, just so the Macdonalds I have, last longer.
January 5, 2013
I feel like I have read a bunch of Ross Macdonald and never like his books but for some stupid reason I keep forcing myself to try. I bought this book because it had a hip, silly, massively appealing cover, but I find the characters extremely boring and the writing style kind of terrible and I'm just going to quit on it right now and that's that.
Yeah I know tons of people think Ross MacDonald is the greatest thing since hard boiled eggs. It seems like I might be one of them, but I tried and I'm not, which I'll do my best to remember the next time I come across one of his books.
Yeah I know tons of people think Ross MacDonald is the greatest thing since hard boiled eggs. It seems like I might be one of them, but I tried and I'm not, which I'll do my best to remember the next time I come across one of his books.
May 27, 2019
Entering the autumn of my life, I understand what I need to do in order to be a role model for my daughter. If I model respectful speech (and curb my flippant and colorful vocabulary around her), kindness, a solid work ethic, healthy eating and exercise habits, positive and constructive leisure activities, resilience in the face of trouble, acknowledgement of privilege and gratitude for the good things we enjoy, community involvement, a sense of humor, and the ability to acknowledge when I screw up, apologize and attempt to do better, then I am satisfied that I am making an honest job of it.
On the flip side, I struggle, at this moment in time, to find role models for myself. The elders of my youth are gone. It is a new world now and I realize that I must take up the mantle and be the leader (a role that ill suits me.) I believe that we never outgrow our need for role models -- those who came before us who leave us a road map for negotiating the more difficult aspects of life. Looking at the landscape of leadership in my nation, I am loathe to find what I seek.
Unsurprisingly, I have found a type of mentoring in the pages of books. I spent the last couple weeks (including my birthday) re-visiting Ross McDonald's noir detective, Lew Archer. The last time I read McDonald, I was in my twenties and very romanced by the style and mid 20th century cynical sophistication of the genre. This time around I noted something new. -- Reading Black Money made me realize that this sort of character linked me to a role model to whom I could relate.
McDonald's (a nom de plume for real life author Kenneth Millar) Southern California is populated with weary souls leading dingy lives (even among the well heeled.) These characters have few illusions left. Almost all of them carry secrets and present facades which barely conceal the potential for petty ugliness underneath. To make the story, at least one of them always commits a crime. And it becomes Lew Archer's job to sort through the trash and find the pieces that bring him to the truth. In this way, noir detectives tend to be straight up flat foots. There are no paranormal or science fiction flourishes. The writing style is punchy and spare in contrast to the more literary type of gumshoe we encounter in other sub-sets of the crime fiction universe. Archer inserts himself into the victim's circle, identifies his suspects, questions them in an effort to trip them up, and follows the leads where they take him. He encounters few heroes.
In Black Money, Archer is asked to 'save' beautiful socialite, Ginny Fablon, from the clutches of a foreign lover, Francis Martel, who is almost certainly a fortune seeker, attempting to soil the blueblood Ginny and take her money in the bargain. This is the version of events, at least, which is presented to Lew Archer by the client who hires him: doughy milquetoast Peter Jamieson. Jamieson is, of course, madly in love with Ginny. He pleads with Archer, "And I'm not talking out of jealousy. Even if I can't have her, I want to protect her." -- Jamieson throws further shade onto the reputation of his rival for Ginny's affection: "I'm serious, Mr. Archer. This man is apparently wanted by the police. He claims to be a Frenchman, a French aristocrat no less, but nobody really knows who he is or where he comes from. He may not even be Caucasian." (Revealing Mr. Jamieson to be just the sort of mid 20th century country clubber who would wield whiteness as a cudgel in a fight almost immediately.)
Archer agrees to talk to Ginny's family and associates and begins to doggedly chip away at the veneer of respectability they drape over themselves to varying degrees of success. In his travels he encounters another snoop, the rather feckless Harry Hendricks, 'amateur dick' who is casing Martel for 'associates' of his own. Hendricks and his ex, Kitty, factor into the web and represent two more potential suspects on the make, tied to organized crime and potentially dangerous when cornered.
Ginny's family consists of her mother, Marietta, and her deceased father, Roy, whose questionable suicide hangs like a shadow. Roy's death has put financial strain on the Fablon family, but to what degree? In an attempt to determine the veracity of Martel's claim of being a French national, Archer enlists the aid of Ginny's former French instructor, Professor Tappinger. Acher quickly discerns that "Taps" is married to a high strung younger wife and obviously is not thriving financially on his non tenured teaching track. Throw in a few more unsavory characters from the tennis club -- the nexus of the path which has thrown most of the primary players in this sordid drama together, and Archer delineates his stable of crooks and liars. Murders happen. Archer's quest heats up.
On the road to truth Archer reels people in with casual confidence and sardonic wit. Never a hot head, he knows when to edge away and refrain from needless provocation. Of his first hostile encounter with Harry Hendricks, Archer thinks, presciently, "It was the kind of situation I liked to avoid, or terminate quickly. As the century wore on -- I could feel it wearing on --angry pointless encounters like this one tended more and more to erupt in violence." (Note, this story was written in 1965.)
Lew Archer wastes little time on sentiment but does not lack sensitivity. This is the hallmark of the noir hero. He views the world without illusion and takes the flawed people he encounters for who they are. If he is lonely, he does not deny it. He also chooses not to dwell upon it. He knows what he has seen and how this world has changed him. His job requires that he examine how life has often corrupted the people he meets. Most of his life is a routine pursuit of inconvenient and unattractive facts, punctuated by the occasional burst of fear or excitement and, perhaps, the satisfaction of clearing the name of an innocent party or pinning the blame where it belongs.
The noir detective is not in the full color of youth. His stoicism demands that he has seen more of life and come to terms with it. His strength is in his experience and his ability to keep people and their issues at arms length. Yet the charm of the genre is that the noir detective always retains his humanity. He calls it a job, but becomes invested in the dignity of the victim. He believes in justice but refrains from revenge. Under Ross McDonald's especially fluent pen, Lew Archer finds just enough beauty in life. He investigates his sad sacks and losers and crooks with appropriate restraint and even a tinge of affection. Noir fiction takes us on endless treks through asphalt allies, industrial no man's land and achingly sad and monotonous suburban tracts. When done correctly, however, noir will also linger, for just a moment, in front of the wild flower that has, despite the odds, worked its way through the cracks. Therein lies the redemption. Something beautiful is made more so because it is all too rare.
Lew Archer and his fellows (Philip Marlowe, Sam Spade etc) model some lessons in adulthood which were conceived by our sturdier and far more modest forebears. This genre was birthed in the mid 20th century by people whose life experience encompassed two world wars and a global depression. Unlike their 'accentuate the positive!' peers in musical theater, the noir writers accepted their world for what it was -- often hostile, ugly and cheap. But unlike the truly dystopian, they created reluctant heroes who made a habit of getting up each day and doing their bit -- doing their bit without the blinders of false optimism or uncontrolled rage. And in so doing, they appeal to me in the same way that the faded but ethical-at-their core mid life characters of Rod Serling tug at my heart. Our world is currently in crisis. We seem to be falling apart on a global scale. So many villains seem to be winning. So many people are threatened and hurting. Now may be a perfect moment to recall the quiet and imperfect strength of noir detectives and apply some of their qualities to our own fractured and dark era.
On the flip side, I struggle, at this moment in time, to find role models for myself. The elders of my youth are gone. It is a new world now and I realize that I must take up the mantle and be the leader (a role that ill suits me.) I believe that we never outgrow our need for role models -- those who came before us who leave us a road map for negotiating the more difficult aspects of life. Looking at the landscape of leadership in my nation, I am loathe to find what I seek.
Unsurprisingly, I have found a type of mentoring in the pages of books. I spent the last couple weeks (including my birthday) re-visiting Ross McDonald's noir detective, Lew Archer. The last time I read McDonald, I was in my twenties and very romanced by the style and mid 20th century cynical sophistication of the genre. This time around I noted something new. -- Reading Black Money made me realize that this sort of character linked me to a role model to whom I could relate.
McDonald's (a nom de plume for real life author Kenneth Millar) Southern California is populated with weary souls leading dingy lives (even among the well heeled.) These characters have few illusions left. Almost all of them carry secrets and present facades which barely conceal the potential for petty ugliness underneath. To make the story, at least one of them always commits a crime. And it becomes Lew Archer's job to sort through the trash and find the pieces that bring him to the truth. In this way, noir detectives tend to be straight up flat foots. There are no paranormal or science fiction flourishes. The writing style is punchy and spare in contrast to the more literary type of gumshoe we encounter in other sub-sets of the crime fiction universe. Archer inserts himself into the victim's circle, identifies his suspects, questions them in an effort to trip them up, and follows the leads where they take him. He encounters few heroes.
In Black Money, Archer is asked to 'save' beautiful socialite, Ginny Fablon, from the clutches of a foreign lover, Francis Martel, who is almost certainly a fortune seeker, attempting to soil the blueblood Ginny and take her money in the bargain. This is the version of events, at least, which is presented to Lew Archer by the client who hires him: doughy milquetoast Peter Jamieson. Jamieson is, of course, madly in love with Ginny. He pleads with Archer, "And I'm not talking out of jealousy. Even if I can't have her, I want to protect her." -- Jamieson throws further shade onto the reputation of his rival for Ginny's affection: "I'm serious, Mr. Archer. This man is apparently wanted by the police. He claims to be a Frenchman, a French aristocrat no less, but nobody really knows who he is or where he comes from. He may not even be Caucasian." (Revealing Mr. Jamieson to be just the sort of mid 20th century country clubber who would wield whiteness as a cudgel in a fight almost immediately.)
Archer agrees to talk to Ginny's family and associates and begins to doggedly chip away at the veneer of respectability they drape over themselves to varying degrees of success. In his travels he encounters another snoop, the rather feckless Harry Hendricks, 'amateur dick' who is casing Martel for 'associates' of his own. Hendricks and his ex, Kitty, factor into the web and represent two more potential suspects on the make, tied to organized crime and potentially dangerous when cornered.
Ginny's family consists of her mother, Marietta, and her deceased father, Roy, whose questionable suicide hangs like a shadow. Roy's death has put financial strain on the Fablon family, but to what degree? In an attempt to determine the veracity of Martel's claim of being a French national, Archer enlists the aid of Ginny's former French instructor, Professor Tappinger. Acher quickly discerns that "Taps" is married to a high strung younger wife and obviously is not thriving financially on his non tenured teaching track. Throw in a few more unsavory characters from the tennis club -- the nexus of the path which has thrown most of the primary players in this sordid drama together, and Archer delineates his stable of crooks and liars. Murders happen. Archer's quest heats up.
On the road to truth Archer reels people in with casual confidence and sardonic wit. Never a hot head, he knows when to edge away and refrain from needless provocation. Of his first hostile encounter with Harry Hendricks, Archer thinks, presciently, "It was the kind of situation I liked to avoid, or terminate quickly. As the century wore on -- I could feel it wearing on --angry pointless encounters like this one tended more and more to erupt in violence." (Note, this story was written in 1965.)
Lew Archer wastes little time on sentiment but does not lack sensitivity. This is the hallmark of the noir hero. He views the world without illusion and takes the flawed people he encounters for who they are. If he is lonely, he does not deny it. He also chooses not to dwell upon it. He knows what he has seen and how this world has changed him. His job requires that he examine how life has often corrupted the people he meets. Most of his life is a routine pursuit of inconvenient and unattractive facts, punctuated by the occasional burst of fear or excitement and, perhaps, the satisfaction of clearing the name of an innocent party or pinning the blame where it belongs.
The noir detective is not in the full color of youth. His stoicism demands that he has seen more of life and come to terms with it. His strength is in his experience and his ability to keep people and their issues at arms length. Yet the charm of the genre is that the noir detective always retains his humanity. He calls it a job, but becomes invested in the dignity of the victim. He believes in justice but refrains from revenge. Under Ross McDonald's especially fluent pen, Lew Archer finds just enough beauty in life. He investigates his sad sacks and losers and crooks with appropriate restraint and even a tinge of affection. Noir fiction takes us on endless treks through asphalt allies, industrial no man's land and achingly sad and monotonous suburban tracts. When done correctly, however, noir will also linger, for just a moment, in front of the wild flower that has, despite the odds, worked its way through the cracks. Therein lies the redemption. Something beautiful is made more so because it is all too rare.
Lew Archer and his fellows (Philip Marlowe, Sam Spade etc) model some lessons in adulthood which were conceived by our sturdier and far more modest forebears. This genre was birthed in the mid 20th century by people whose life experience encompassed two world wars and a global depression. Unlike their 'accentuate the positive!' peers in musical theater, the noir writers accepted their world for what it was -- often hostile, ugly and cheap. But unlike the truly dystopian, they created reluctant heroes who made a habit of getting up each day and doing their bit -- doing their bit without the blinders of false optimism or uncontrolled rage. And in so doing, they appeal to me in the same way that the faded but ethical-at-their core mid life characters of Rod Serling tug at my heart. Our world is currently in crisis. We seem to be falling apart on a global scale. So many villains seem to be winning. So many people are threatened and hurting. Now may be a perfect moment to recall the quiet and imperfect strength of noir detectives and apply some of their qualities to our own fractured and dark era.
July 28, 2022
I have read my fair share of American noir, from Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett to James M. Cain and—Ross Macdonald. I read somewhere that Macdonald more or less wrote the same book over and over, but that he did it well. Having read three books in his Lew Archer series, I can say that there is truth in that statement (with strong emphasis on the 'he did it well' part). Macdonald, at least in his later work, is not only operating as an heir to Chandler but has established a strong individual style—both in plot, character and prose. His prose is subtle, beautiful and somewhat melancholic; the dialogue is quick and finely crafted, even funny at times. But what draws me most to his books, apart from the prose, is the world he has conjured up—of mid-century California, of family secrets and slow, generational decay that always ends up seeing the light of day somehow. There is something about books that hide great literature inside detective fiction. Chandler and Macdonald both wrote about the human condition, the corruption and helplessness of man in a bleak world, but they did it through different lenses.
June 6, 2024
Ok ok, it’s was a good book!!
The ending kinda sucks though, yeah it’s solved but why so fast? Like calm down 😭
4,5⭐️
Ginny my love, you deserve everything that happened to you 🫶🏻🎀
The ending kinda sucks though, yeah it’s solved but why so fast? Like calm down 😭
4,5⭐️
Ginny my love, you deserve everything that happened to you 🫶🏻🎀
August 16, 2017
One of the better books in the Lew Archer series!
November 14, 2015
Like others, I assume, I picked this one up because I saw that the Coen's were writing a screenplay of it, and maybe direct it. If so, it's kind of an odd one for them, in that there's not a lot of action necessarily, and the story is somewhat convoluted (maybe not the right word), and as is often the case with Macdonald, reaches into the past quite a bit.
Fat rich college kid Peter hires Archer to prevent the girl he's in love with from marrying someone he doesn't trust, and who he thinks will not be good for her. This leads Archer into quite a tangled web, eventually involving the supposed suicide of the girl's father, seven years in the past, and the mysterious background of the man she wants to marry. Things play out much differently than you suppose they will as you follow it, as is Macdonald's way. He's really very good at portraying his characters, and though Archer seems like he would be cynical, he professes at one point in this book to "love people." But this is a hard crew to love, though Archer is attracted to one of the most broken characters in the novel, and also to one who is doing a good job of making her way in the world. A pretty engrossing novel, and I am looking forward to seeing what the Coens will do with it.
It's to Macdonald's credit that when he's describing his characters and Archer's attitude towards them, he doesn't get cynical. He portrays them the way they are, and though some are pretty despicable, Archer and Macdonald understand their motives and portray them well.
Fat rich college kid Peter hires Archer to prevent the girl he's in love with from marrying someone he doesn't trust, and who he thinks will not be good for her. This leads Archer into quite a tangled web, eventually involving the supposed suicide of the girl's father, seven years in the past, and the mysterious background of the man she wants to marry. Things play out much differently than you suppose they will as you follow it, as is Macdonald's way. He's really very good at portraying his characters, and though Archer seems like he would be cynical, he professes at one point in this book to "love people." But this is a hard crew to love, though Archer is attracted to one of the most broken characters in the novel, and also to one who is doing a good job of making her way in the world. A pretty engrossing novel, and I am looking forward to seeing what the Coens will do with it.
It's to Macdonald's credit that when he's describing his characters and Archer's attitude towards them, he doesn't get cynical. He portrays them the way they are, and though some are pretty despicable, Archer and Macdonald understand their motives and portray them well.
Read
August 5, 2011My first Ross Macdonald book. A top-notch detective story with an elaborate plot, hard-boiled protagonist, and all the elements of great crime fiction. In Lew Archer, Macdonald creates a funnel for the audience to peer into the lives of the inhabitants of high-class, 1960's Southern California with an objective eye, while Raymond Chandler's Philip Marlowe is more subjective, loading the prose up with his own viewpoints and opinions of the other characters. Archer views everything just the way the audience does, without any assumed knowledge of the personalities or personas of the people he deals with. It is easy, however, to get lost in this book with the barrage of new characters being introduced roughly every fifteen or twenty pages, same with Chandler, but it all ties together to form a brilliantly crafted, twist-filled story that is actually plausible. While I tend to prefer the romanticism of Chandler, Macdonald proves that he belongs among the greatest authors of hard-boiled crime fiction.
March 2, 2017
Ich mag ja die Figur des Privatdetektives Lew Archer, der Mann ist kein Schwätzer, sondern schreitet zur Tat, beziehungsweise zur Befragung, ganz direkt, hier und da ein wenig überlegen, nicht unfreundlich, aber auch nicht gerade kameradschaftlich, immer stringent und irgendwie eine Autoritätsperson. Erinnert mich immer ein wenig an Don Draper, die Hauptfigur aus der TV-Serie "Mad Men". Nur das Lew Archer weniger trinkt. Und die Frauengeschichten vermutlich eher zwischen seinen Romanauftritten erledigt. Ansonsten dominiert in "Schwarzgeld" der Zeitgeist, die 60er Jahre in Kalifornien zwischen der konservativen älteren Generation und der nach Freiheit strebenden jüngeren Generation, das ist hier der Unterton der Geschichte, die sich im wesentlichen um Reichtum und Armut dreht, moralisch wie monetär.
August 1, 2018
It's been years since I read this, and I found Ross Macdonald's prose as captivating as ever this time around.
The story concerns a case in which Lew Archer is hired to investigate a mysterious, possibly French/possibly not man who's making a play for the client's love interest.
But, of course, things aren't as simple as they're presented to Archer, up front.
This book is just one of many that shows how Macdonald took the Raymond Chandler approach to writing and not only made it his own, but elevated it!
The story concerns a case in which Lew Archer is hired to investigate a mysterious, possibly French/possibly not man who's making a play for the client's love interest.
But, of course, things aren't as simple as they're presented to Archer, up front.
This book is just one of many that shows how Macdonald took the Raymond Chandler approach to writing and not only made it his own, but elevated it!
September 12, 2023
if you like this review, i now have website: www.michaelkamakana.com
.??? 2000s: dreams of social mobility / transcendence in USA of 1950's
.??? 2000s: dreams of social mobility / transcendence in USA of 1950's
Displaying 1 - 30 of 238 reviews