Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion

Our January 2019 Short Story read is The Postman Always Rings Twice byJames M. Cain, 116 pages, 1934

Oh, James M. Cain. He is possibly the only author in the world whose books are universally worse than their subsequent film adaptations.

I'm not going to re-read Postman because I'm starting a new job soon, but I'm interested in seeing everyone else's reactions to it. I remember loving the premise, but ended up frustrated at the actual execution and casual sexism.

Some of his books may not be that great—Cocktail Waitress comes to mind—but I’ve always thought this one as a pretty good one.

I thought this one pretty good. It was my first experience to reading a classic noir. I thought the dialogue a tad confusing but over all pretty effective novel. Not sure I can get to it this month for a re-read but those were my impressions. And the film is pretty good too, but does change the ending some from what I remember.

Now that you mention it, yeah, the ending of the movie is pretty different. Happened to other Cain adaptations too--Double Indemnity and Mildred Pierce come to mind.

I remember liking the ending of literary!Postman more, though. Had more of suckerpunch to it.

I won't have the book for a few more weeks, but I'm really looking forward to this. I enjoyed reading Mildred Pierce, even after having seen two very different movie adaptations multiple times.

Me too Kathleen. I have seen two very different movie versions of Mildred Pierce, very different like you said. Long ago in early adulthood, I may have watched the mid-century version. And I am looking forward to reading The Mailman.

While reading I will be learning what roman noir is compared to film noir.

I be back :-)

This is one of my favorites! I'm waiting for a new copy since my old one was loaned out and never returned. :(

I loved this book! It felt modern. And yet I saw it like a 1940s noir movie in my head.

I started reading it yesterday and don't plan on rushing it, I'm reading several long novels as well.
There have been three film versions that I know of, the first was done by Italian director Luchino Visconti, titled Ossessione (1943) and is considered a landmark of neorealism, The second was with Lana Turner and John Garfield (1945), and the third had Jessica Lange and Jack Nicholson in the leads (1981). I have seen all of them and recommend them all. The '81 film had the most overt sex of course; some critics panned Mamet's screenplay.
This website has an interesting discussion of Cain's title- http://www.supersummary.com/the-postm...

I really hated the characters, hated the plot...and yet, I couldn't stop reading! I had such a hard time putting this book down! And in the end, for all my complaints, I had to give it 3 stars--because it was actually pretty good. Did anyone else have a similar experience?

The version with John Garfield—although nothing like the book—was my favorite of the movies. His vulnerability came through along with his dangerous masculinity. That’s not anything Jack Nicholson could ever do. And Lana Turner?! Excellent.

George wrote: "I started reading it yesterday and don't plan on rushing it, I'm reading several long novels as well.
There have been three film versions that I know of, the first was done by Italian director Luch..."

Thanks for sharing that George. Very interesting about the title. I thought it was more like Karma striking twice, so if you don't get your full punishment the first time, it will come back to get you another time.

I enjoyed this book. Like Emmy says, the characters are not likeable, but that's kind of the joy of it. They're like a train wreck, you can't look away. The Greek wasn't a likeable character either so you're not necessarily upset by his death. You also knew that they were going to double cross each other and it was exciting to read on to see who got the better of who.

I loved the ending because they both got their proper dose of Karma.

I remember seeing one of the film versions long ago but didn't remember the plot or much about it. I'd like to watch some of them after having read the book.

Emmy wrote: "I really hated the characters, hated the plot...and yet, I couldn't stop reading! I had such a hard time putting this book down! And in the end, for all my complaints, I had to give it 3 stars--bec..."

Yeah, I felt like Frank and Cora were pretty unlikable. I remember there is even a quote where basically Cora confirms that. Yet, I found it compelling, particularly toward the end. I think it has many staples of the noir genre being that you sometimes do not care for the lead character. Sometimes they have forgivable flaws, but in this one, not so much.

George wrote: "I started reading it yesterday and don't plan on rushing it, I'm reading several long novels as well.
There have been three film versions that I know of, the first was done by Italian director Luch..."

George, thanks for the heads up on the three films. I didn't know about the first one, the Italian version. I've seen the other two, the one with Garlfield being a classic and the one with Nicholson being an awful mess, in my opinion. Like Sue, said, I think that Garlfield plays the role so well as Frank. I felt like the 1981 version was so disjointed, and the focus was so off that it didn't even feel like the book at all.

I find that my favorite books are those with unlikable characters. My fellow bookclub members do not, and we have some lively discussions about this.

Frank Chambers, to me, is the most accessible character. I found myself rooting for him.

I actually normally don't like reading about unsympathetic characters, unless it is a very effective book otherwise. I feel like a reader needs characters to identify with or root for when reading. But in this case, as Sue says, I definitely knew that the two main characters were headed for a big fall and so was waiting for karma to get them.

PS: I've learned that besides the three film versions I mentioned there was also a French film adaptation, Le Dernier Tournant [the last curve or turning point] in 1939. So it was the first film from the book. I don't know much about it- the only actor of fame in it is French actor Michel Simon who played Nick.

George wrote: "I started reading it yesterday and don't plan on rushing it, I'm reading several long novels as well.
There have been three film versions that I know of, the first was done by Italian director Luch..."

George wrote: "I've learned that besides the three film versions I mentioned there was also a French film adaptation, Le Dernier Tournant

I need to hunt down the Italian and French versions; I'd only seen the other two up until now and liked them both.

Emmy wrote: "I really hated the characters, hated the plot...and yet, I couldn't stop reading! I had such a hard time putting this book down! And in the end, for all my complaints, I had to give it 3 stars--bec..."

My experience was the same as yours, Emmy, but that's roman noir for ya. When the genre shifted from hardboiled crime a la Maltese Falcon to criminal psychological fiction a la Strangers on a Train, likable leads became few and far between. Postman is a bit of a poster child in that regard.

At the end of the day, I prefer leads I can respect more than those I can empathize or like. I can't say I respected Frank much, but he felt like a real person on the first read. I almost wanted him to get away with murder (something I don't type too often!).

Franky, I think I identify most with the unlikable characters. It’s the likable once that piss me off.

On a whim, thought I would check out the audio version tonight, and here I am STILL listening and loving it! I am rooting for the 'bad guy', Frank, as well...I wish that Cora had more dialogue, though, as we only know what she thinks/feels via the narration of Frank, you know? Good stuff, though--- my very 1st McCain! Thank you to this group for giving me this motivation to check out this title. --Jen from Quebec :0)

I just finished! While I absolutely love Cain's prose, the characters were like nails on a chalkboard.

I wound up doing the audiobook version. It was the only copy my library had, and it was narrated by Stanley Tucci. His narration was fabulous.

Emmy wrote: "I really hated the characters, hated the plot...and yet, ..."

Somewhat. I disliked the characters. I did not like the plot to begin with, but as it developed it strange moral it grew more interesting.

What an end! The story switches from just a first person point of view to something he is writing down that maybe he hopes will influence his sentence. The narrator has all the motives in the world for being unreliable. That put all of the story in a new light.

And that already happened one time before: In the begin Frank is just a drifter. The story is told very matter-of-fact and no reason not to trust him. When being held back we hear about his extremely long line of jail sentences. Sounds like it is long even for an “average criminal” (if such exists). At that point I had to question the first part of the book: Was it really her idea to kill her husband or does he just make it look like that?

I had a bit of trouble following some of the dialogue. Who is saying what?

The title is strange. There isn’t much subtility in the book. It is all very matter of fact and direct with no hidden meanings. And then the title that is 100% hidden meaning.

There is a fascinating article here about the book by Jack Delaney "Desire, Fate and Murder: The Postman Always Rings Twice Eighty Years On" (warning: major spoilers):

https://medium.com/@jackndelaney/eigh...

As far as the title, this is an excerpt from this article:
"The inevitablity of fate is alluded to by the book’s non-sequitor title. In the preface to Double Indemnity, Cain wrote that the title comes from a conversation he had with the screenwriter, Vincent Lawrence, who spoke about the anxiety he felt when waiting for a postman to bring news about a submitted transcript. He would know when the postman arrived because he always rang twice. Lawrence described being so anxious that he would retreat to the backyard to avoid his ring. The tactic failed. Even from the backyard, if he failed to hear the first ring, he always heard the second. Always.

This conversation birthed a title that became a perfect metaphor for Frank and Cora’s situation.

“The Postman” is God, or, Fate who “delivers” punishment to Frank and Cora. Both missed the first “ring” when they got away with the initial killing. However, the postman’s second ring is inescapable; Frank is wrongly convicted of Cora’s murder, and sentenced to death. The motif of inescapable fate is also evident in the Greek’s initial escape from death, only to succumb to the second attempt on his life."

Franky wrote: "There is a fascinating article here about the book by Jack Delaney "Desire, Fate and Murder: The Postman Always Rings Twice Eighty Years On" (warning: major spoilers):

https://medium.com/@jacknde..."

Thanks for posting, that is exactly how I thought of the title!

I just finished this today. It was my first experience with James M Cain. I didn't hate the characters as much as I thought I would. They seemed more like 80% despicable than 100% despicable to me, and I think that difference made me care enough about what happened to them to keep reading.

My favorite part was when Frank and Cora realize they can't trust one another - he thinks she's going to report him for murder and she thinks he's going to run off. Even though they were repeatedly untrustworthy towards other people and seemed both to be fundamentally untrustworthy people, the "mountain" of their love made them approach their relationship from the opinion that they could trust each other. Maybe that happens a lot with criminal duos. This sort of says to me that we build ourselves through our relationships and interactions with other people - and maybe people like Frank keep moving on and starting all their relationships from scratch thinking they can rebuild themselves. And at one point when Frank is thinking about going to Nicaragua, he realizes it isn't far enough. I think that was partially him realizing he can't escape himself by reinventing himself.

This book surprised me because things happened that I didn't like and I still finished the book and didn't totally hate it. I really, really hate it when bad things happen to good people for no good reason. I get this churning, agitated feeling in my stomach and if I don't think things will resolve well in a book, I just stop reading. I didn't stop reading this one.

I really liked the Greek. I would probably enjoy reading a book in which he is the main character. He seems like a fascinating, kind, focused and totally decent guy.

The funny thing is that I didn't find myself hating Cora and Frank. I wouldn't want to be friends with them or anything, but they just seemed like a couple of lost rubes swimming in their own confusion, not much different from most people. Except their mistakes were obviously worse than most.

Cain really pulled this off--showing the inner workings of the humans behind their criminal behavior without demonizing them.

I agree, Kaila! I actually liked the Greek as well! I do think Cain did a great job with these complex characters.

I finished this today and I liked it about as much as I expected which is only somewhat. I don't care much for the novels of this era described as noir. It's a personal thing and no reflection on the quality of the writing.

Frank and Cora certainly deserve each other. Their desire for each other overrode any thought of others. I think Frank did not mean to kill Cora, but I also think one of them would have betrayed the other someday.

I read this today and thought it was okay, since this is not my favourite genre. The descriptive writing is vivid but I had trouble with the dialogue at times. I thought it was confusing as to who was saying what in one of the dialogues between Cora and Frank. I didn't like either of the two but the ending still shocked me. Maybe, just maybe, they might have changed their ways.
But then I remember the husband, who was a nice guy who didn't deserve to get murdered.

These two amoral people have no idea what love is. Cora and Frank seem to think that love is passion, lounging, enjoying. Clueless. Their cluelessness is their fatal flaw.

I know that this piece of roman noir is not a tragedy, but it seems to me that this story has two important element of tragedy sewn through it:
Fatal Flaw: Cluelessness.
Death: Some Main Characters

Thanks Franky for sharing the article. So that is the significance of the title!
So agree Jen from Quebec. I wonder what Cora would say for herself. And the Cat Lady too.

Emmy wrote: "I really hated the characters, hated the plot...and yet, I couldn't stop reading! I had such a hard time putting this book down! And in the end, for all my complaints, I had to give it 3 stars--because it was actually pretty good. Did anyone else have a similar experience?"

I felt like that too, and I think that feeling comes from what Rosemarie said: "I didn't like either of the two but the ending still shocked me. Maybe, just maybe, they might have changed their ways.
But then I remember the husband, who was a nice guy who didn't deserve to get murdered."

This was not my cup of tea, but I think it was well done.

I knew there would be a twist at the end, but I did not see that coming.

Jen from Quebec :0) wrote: "On a whim, thought I would check out the audio version tonight, and here I am STILL listening and loving it! I am rooting for the 'bad guy',.."

lol I think that's the mark of a good writer, that he can make you cheer for the bad guys.

Patty wrote: "Franky, I think I identify most with the unlikable characters. It’s the likable once that piss me off."

Yes! I couldn't agree more, Patty. :-)

Just finished. I loved this! It's my second James Cain (first was Mildred Pierce) and I want to read them all now.

At first I thought it would be just an adventure--sex and murder and stuff. But in the middle there was the sort of criminal mystery thing that was really intriguing, about how the trial was going to go. Then it worked up to a weird love story in the end.

A strange and enjoyable read! I'm looking forward to reading the links above--thanks everyone.

Kathleen wrote: "Just finished. I loved this! It's my second James Cain (first was Mildred Pierce) and I want to read them all now."

Mildred Pierce is great. The movie version with Joan Crawford is also good, though (of course) doesn't follow the book exactly.

Kathleen wrote: "Just finished. I loved this! It's my second James Cain (first was Mildred Pierce) and I want to read them all now.

At first I thought it would be just an adventure--sex and murder an..."

I've been wanting to read Mildred Pierce. I bought the book years ago and have the film too.

Regarding Mildred Pierce, besides the old movie there was also an HBO miniseries in 2011 with Kate Winslet in the title role, and that was very good also.
I'm still reading it just finished the interesting trial part.

Yes George, hope we can discuss the trial part more when everyone is done reading.

About Mildred Pierce, I loved the book and both of those movies mentioned. As I mentioned in my review, after reading the book I thought Kate Winslett really nailed Mildred's strange aloofness.

The plot in The Postman Always Rings Twice is actually better than I expected. Overall I was surprised that I liked the book as much as I did. I felt so sorry for Cora. She was a young girl that got trapped into an awful marriage, because she was too young and desperate to know any better. That poor dumb Nick was so happy and so lacking in understanding. I even liked the lawyer. I have a lawyer in my family, who I dearly love, but he really gets excited about the "game-like" aspects of cases, just like Katz did.

I felt there were good and bad parts in the writing. The characters seemed rather well developed if somewhat cliche. The plot was gripping. I found the narration style annoying. The heavy narrator speaking directly to the reader felt too strong, but it was so perfectly the film noir narrator style.

I am surprised that The Postman Always Rings Twice was banned anywhere. When you compare it to a book like As I Lay Dying by the revered Faulkner, it is no more graphic or horrible than the "respectable" book.

Lynn wrote: "I am surprised that The Postman Always Rings Twice was banned anywhere..."

Was it? Me too! Where and on what grounds? Interesting...

Michele wrote: "Lynn wrote: "I am surprised that The Postman Always Rings Twice was banned anywhere..."

Was it? Me too! Where and on what grounds? Interesting..."

It was banned in Boston and Canada according to this article https://medium.com/@jackndelaney/eigh.... I also remember noticing it last year when one of the Bingo Challenge squares was to read a book that had been banned by a government at some time. There were so many banned books to choose from, but I ended up reading All Quiet on the Western Front for my choice. All Quiet.. had been banned because the Nazis disliked its unflattering depiction of the battlefronts of WW1.

Apparently that "rip me" scene after they kill the Greek was considered pornographic in Boston.

Thank you group for nominating this read! It was my first classic noir. My reading experience was much like watching a train wreck in slow motion, horrifying yet so entertaining I couldn't put it down.

Does anyone know the meaning behind the story's title?

Anna Lynn wrote: "Does anyone know the meaning behind the story's title? ..."

Try message 10 by George

I finished this book today. I didn't love but didn't hate it either. Admittedly, I'm drawn to the dark side and this book didn't disappoint. The schemes, the characters who were only out for themselves not caring what happens to anyone else, and the twist at the end was great.

Anna Lynn wrote: "Thank you group for nominating this read! It was my first classic noir. My reading experience was much like watching a train wreck in slow motion, horrifying yet so entertaining I couldn't put it d..."

It is rather like watching a train wreck, isn't it? That's a great way to describe it. I didn't really like the characters, but I wanted to keep reading to find out what happened to them. I really enjoyed it. I watched the classic movie years ago, but don't remember it very well. I think it was different than the book though.

About halfway through it. Not a fan of the writing style, and the characters seem pretty shallow. At this point I'm guessing I won't be a James Cain fan. At least it's relatively short. I tried not to read too many of the comments since I haven't finished, but the twist at the end someone mentioned has me intrigued.