Could You Love A New Chicago Detective Story?

In these late pandemic days— I hope these are late days— I have been preparing for another run at a Chicago detective story. My Chicago was a city of riots: the Martin Luther King riots and 1968 Democratic Convention. A corrupt, racist, and vibrant city run by a political machine.

I’ve been writing and rewriting the same book about Chicago for a decade, learning, and trying the patience of the kind people who have read my earlier attempts.

I’m on about the tenth draft, I quit counting years ago, and this version feels better than any of the previous. I’ve lost control. The book has begun to speak in its own voice. I understand that is a good sign, but it is unnerving to sit down at a keyboard and have the text dictate my thoughts.

My Chicago

“My Chicago was a city of riots: the Martin Luther King riots and 1968 Democratic Convention. A corrupt, racist, and vibrant city run by a political machine.”

I took the train to Chicago to go to college on scholarship in the fall of 1967. It was a little cheaper than flying.

When I lived in Chicago, I was unconsciously ambivalent. One part of me was delighted. Every day, something was new. I was shocked by fellow students who were better grounded in or quicker to grasp the mathematics and theory of chemistry and physics and astounded by the insight offered by deeper and more rigorous analysis. And I startled myself with outbursts in history and humanities classes that got me praise and admiration.

But I was also deeply troubled. On the South Side, I talked on the street with black kids who had, only a few years before, lived in the rural south where their lives were like my grandfather’s Waschke Road, lacking electricity and plumbing, and more primitive than the modestly mechanized dairy farm I grew up on. We shared calluses and scars from shovels, hoes, and manure forks. I was shocked, and, I regret to say, ashamed, to realize, that in some ways my life on Waschke Road was closer to the South Side streets than the affluent middle and upper class lives of my classmates at the university. I hid this. From my classmates and myself.

But the world of my black neighbors was also far different from mine. I had come to the city as a privileged participant in the meritocracy that would give me what I thought was a bright future. The neighborhood blacks looked at the university as a source of janitorial and housekeeping jobs, not learning and advancement. They had no voice in why they were on the South Side. They arrived because their parents had heard about work in the steel mills. They had no choice but to quickly learn to navigate the dangerous streets of Woodlawn and Englewood.

“…unlike my black neighbors, I looked ahead to the luxuries of a privileged life.”

I learned to ride the Illinois Central commuter train to the Loop, shop at Marshall Fields and Carson Pirie Scott, venture into Alfred Dunhill’s on upper Michigan for pipe tobacco and a look at pipes I could not possibly afford, but, unlike my black neighbors, I looked ahead to the luxuries of a privileged life.

Why I have written a Chicago detective story

“I set out to grill a fillet seasoned with salt and pepper. I ended up with a complex and high-spirited shrimp and andouille jambalaya infused with mouldering corruption.”

When I started, I sat down to write a story that I would like to read. That goal still holds, but retirement, three books on computing, a national scene filled with tumultuous bombast and unrest, and the inward wrench of pandemic lockdowns have all had their impact. I set out to grill a fillet seasoned with salt and pepper. I ended up with a complex and high-spirited shrimp and andouille jambalaya infused with mouldering corruption.

After 71 years of eating and breathing regularly, I ought to have myself down as tight as ring shank nails, but I have learned that good writing is about who you might become and only partial revelation of who you are and what you see in the people around you. Both revelation and aspiration are helpful. In each draft, the story became both closer to and more distant from life. Both directions, in some perverse way, are improvements. Eventually, the book became itself rather than me.

I always wanted to write stories, although I didn’t think about a Chicago detective story until I was older. The baby boom stretched our rural school that had neither space nor funds for pre-school or kindergarten. Before first grade, I followed along with my mother as she read stories to me and my little sister. A little picture dictionary was all I needed to teach myself reading before I ever saw a school room. When I entered first grade, no one told the teacher that I already read books at home and when I tried to tell her, I was shushed. She had other concerns.

“I got the idea that becoming a writer was a dream, but not a possibility because writers started as ordinary kids with friends, not outsiders wandering the side lines.”

I had far better books to read at home than the bizarre Dick and Jane readers at school. Suburban Dick, Jane, Mother, Father, Spot, Puff, and Baby Sally could have been watercolors beamed from outer space, except Martians or Venusians would have been more interesting.

Consequently, I don’t remember engaging much during my first few years at school. I didn’t need attention and lived in a distant realm; I don’t know what my teachers thought of me. Other kids avoided me, and I didn’t try to join them. I was not unhappy, and I got used to being a lone outsider. I got the idea that becoming a writer was a dream, but not a possibility because writers started as ordinary kids with friends, not outsiders wandering the side lines.

By the time I got to high school, I was thoroughly immersed in the sciences, like most boys in the 1960s.

In Chicago, I switched majors from mathematics to Chinese classical history, for reasons still unclear to me. Before the big switch, I took a class in what was then called Information Science and learned the rudiments of computer programming. Changing majors elevated me from an average student to graduating with honors and a fat fellowship to continue Chinese studies in Chicago.

While in graduate school, I began to read Rex Stout, because my PhD advisor told me I should read and emulate Stout to clarify of my writing style.

Writing this Chicago detective story

Fast forward, fifty years. I have read nearly everything Rex Stout ever wrote, some pieces many times. I deserted from a career as a professor of the Chinese classics and completed an apprenticeship in carpentry. Later, I enrolled in classes that lead to a degree in computer science and a 30 year career in software development, just when the digital revolution stood up and began to kick its legs.

An opportunity for early retirement popped up and I still wanted to write stories, more specifically, I wanted to write mysteries like Rex Stout’s. And I wanted to write a Chicago detective story. I was still an outsider, I had learned to cook so I could stay in the kitchen instead of mingling, learned to seize positions that gave me set roles that did not require much social interaction.

So I asked myself: why not try? I still doubted that an outsider with esoteric tastes and training could write a Chicago detective story that would appeal to much of anyone, but I was game, and when I start something, I fight to the bitter end, and that accounts for the last decade of struggle. Not that I’ve won, but I have accomplished something I am proud of.

Publishing

The Chicago detective story will have a new title, which I have not yet chosen, and will be offered for sale here on Vine Maple Farm. I’ve tried to find a traditional publisher, and I that might be possible, but becoming a publisher will be an interesting and instructive project for me and my twin grandsons, who voted for the first time last November. Christopher, the technical brother, is building the sales page. His more literary twin, Matt, is working on marketing. I plan to publish a free chapter or two here, and I intend to write more about why I think it is worth reading.

Outrageous: How To Sharpen a Kitchen Knife

Outrageous. I am outraged by well-intended advice. Twice.

outrageous-lenticular-sunrise
Outrageous lenticular clouds over Mount Baker at sunrise.

Yesterday I read a well meaning but outrageous bit of advice on blogging: have a theme and stick to it. None of this some nostalgia, some book discussion, some social commentary stuff. Choose a theme and stick to it. Anyone who knows me well, knows I wander all over the map. I never stick to routines for long. If you are as old as I am, you might remember a plastic surgeon back in the 1960’s who claimed all you had to do was repeat something 20 times and it became a habit. What rot! If I do the same thing 20 times in a row, it’s time for a change.

Good advice, this sticking to theme. I’m sure many readers want blogs to be predictable, but for me, no thanks. I’m not following it. Can’t follow it. I can’t even stick to bad habits. Hence, this post.

This weekend, I read an item in the New York Times, Improve Your Life With These Tiny Chores. Very sensible. Wash your sheets, throw out expired prescription opioids, unclog your sink. Yeah. Sure. Fine. I do these things whenever I am forced to. Who doesn’t?

One outrageous task sent me into low earth spitting orbit: sharpen your knives.

I know something about sharpening. I got my first jack knife from my grandpa when I six. And my first sharpening stone. The NYT article mentioned that a sharp knife is safer than a dull one. My left hand is covered with scars from dull knives that skipped off of the piece of wood I was whittling on and into my hand. These are old scars. I’ve learned to sharpen knives.

Dull knives are dangerous

The article starts with a modern nod to the counter-intuitive danger of dull knives. Good start, I said to myself, glancing at my scarred hand.

The rest was drivel

The rest of the item was drivel. It suggests sharpening knives once a year. Once a year? Piffle. Sharpen your knives the instant they loose their bite. It depends on the knife and how you use it.

How I do it

I sharpen my knives every time I use them, once or twice a day for my chef’s knife. Treat your knives with the care they deserve. Sharp edges are delicate and fragile. Don’t throw a good knife in the dishwasher to get rattled around, dented, and nicked.

After I use a knife, I clean it, and sharpen it on a steel, a dozen or more strokes on each side of the edge. Sharpening on a steel removes little or no material from the blade. Instead, it reshapes the metal into a sharp edge. A steel can’t get rid of a nick in an edge or remove a blunt spot, but it will return an undamaged edge to keen slicing form. The duller the edge, the less effective the steel.

You can’t reshape forever. Eventually, you have to grind the edge, which might amount to once a year, although once every few months is more realistic for knives you use daily.

You must be judicious in grinding, which removes metal from the edge. Grind too often and your knife disappears or morphs into an unusable shape. But if you don’t grind often enough, you have a dull and dangerous knife.

Trial and error

I won’t get into tools, angles, and techniques here. My best advice reflects my experience. Trial and error, grasshopper. Trial and error. There are many techniques and they all work, but not necessarily for you.

The blunter the angle of a blade, the less keen the edge, but the longer it stays sharp when cutting is tough. My perfect edge is not your perfect edge, but when an edge is not perfect, sharpen it. Use the steel often, a grinding stone only when needed. Power grinders are fast, but require expensive guides or great skill. Hard stainless steel blades are bears to sharpen, but stay sharp longer. Good carbon steel requires frequent maintenance, but with proper attention, it cuts like a dream. I have a cheap Chinese cleaver that looks like a mess, but cuts cleaner than its much more expensive German stainless brethren.

As an aside, most kitchens have too many knives. Learn to use and treat a few good knives well. Give an impoverished homicidal maniac a break and send the clutter to goodwill. Your life will be better. Ask Marie Kondo.

Marlowe in Troubled Times

Last week, I read Raymond Chandler’s fourth novel, The Lady in the Lake. Like most places now, Ferndale schools had closed, the library doors were locked, businesses had shut down, public gatherings were cancelled. Health department notices were pleading that we all to stay home, wash our hands, and stop touching our faces, which felt feeble in the face of death counts that cry out for revenge, not social nicety.

Government tests for the disease were failing and supplies like face masks and ventilators were running low with little hope of replenishment. The cage of frustration and rage snapped shut, and I fought despair. Hoping for diversion, I reached out for a worn book on my Chandler shelf. I began to read The Lady.

The diversion succeeded, but I also found insight and solace from an old novel I have read many times.

Background

Chandler was born in Chicago. His Irish mother had a sister in Plattsmouth, south of Omaha, Nebraska. The Chandler family lived there in the summers. Chandler’s construction engineer father was an alcoholic who traveled often and eventually did not return, abandoning his wife and twelve-year-old child. Chandler’s mother returned them to Britain, and, with the grudging help of relatives, enrolled the boy in Dulwich College, a London Public School that delivered a classic Edwardian education to the likes of Chandler, P.G. Wodehouse, and C.S. Forester, who each went on to please the ears of twentieth century popular literature readers.

Rather than go on to university, Chandler took the civil service examination. He placed near the top of six hundred candidates and entered the civil service. To the consternation of his grandmother and uncles who had paid for Chandler’s schooling, he left the service after less than a year to become a newspaper reporter and freelance essayist and poet. He failed at that for five years, then gave it up. He borrowed five hundred pounds, at interest, from a reluctant and stingy uncle, then embarked for Los Angeles. There, he took an assortment of temporary jobs, studied bookkeeping in night school, and eventually became an accountant at a creamery.

When World War I broke out, Chandler, a British subject, went north to Vancouver, Canada and enlisted in the Canadian infantry. When the war ended, he returned to the U. S. and was swept up in the Los Angeles oil boom. He became an oil executive. He met Cissy Pascal, a married woman and artist’s model eighteen years his senior.

Soon after, Chandler and Cissy began an affair and she quickly divorced her husband. Chandler paid for Cissy’s board, apartment, and wardrobe for several years. When his mother died, he married Cissy, worshiping her while pursuing younger women until she died in 1954. Chandler mentioned in his letters that Cissy preferred to do her housekeeping without the constraint of clothing.

In 1932, Chandler was fired for drunkenness, absenteeism, and affairs with his secretaries. He returned to his first career, writing. To learn his craft, he studied Erle Stanley Gardner’s stories and novels, outlining Gardner’s works, writing his own version, and comparing his versions with Gardner’s. Pulp magazines like Black Mask, where the hardboiled detective story was born and evolved, began to accept his work. In 1939, Chandler published his first novel, The Big Sleep.

The Lady in the Lake was written between 1938 and 1943. These dates are key to understanding of the novel. The U.S. was late in entering World War II. Canada, for whom Chandler had served in WW I, declared war on Germany in 1939 along with Britain. The bombing of London began in 1940. The house Chandler lived in with his mother, aunt, and grandmother while attending Dulwich was destroyed in the bombing.

By the time the U. S. declared war in late 1941, Chandler must have been frantic. In 1943, when The Lady in the Lake was published, Hitler and Japan were still expanding their territory. D-Day and the Normandy invasion was two years away. Men were being drafted; women labored at war time jobs in ways they never had before. WACs, WAVEs, and Rosy the Riveter were ascendant.

In retrospect, Americans think of World War II as a heroic upswell of patriotism, but that is in nostalgic hindsight. A number of popular figures like Charles Lindberg and Henry Ford, favored Hitler’s Germany, not the British and French losers.

The vote in congress for hostilities against Germany was unanimous, but until the Germans openly declared war on us, unanimity was uncertain. Congress did not move on Hitler until, provoked by our declaration of war on Japan after Pearl Harbor, Germany declared war on the U.S. After we entered the conflict, the country remained awash in uncertainty over events and changes to come, much like we are caught today in the COVID-19 pandemic. The fear of the future did not dissipate until success became clear after D-Day in 1944.

In the midst of this turmoil, Chandler wrote The Lady in the Lake.

Plot

The hardboiled detective novel differed in many ways from the products of the “Golden Age of Mysteries.” The Golden Age authors— Dorothy Sayers, Agatha Christie, Josephine Tey, to name a few— wrote novels that were more genteel than hardboiled. American detectives were often down-and-out, frequently loners, and seldom polished gentlemen like Sayers’ Lord Peter Wimsey or Christie’s Hercule Poirot. But that was not the only difference.

Golden Age plots are dramatized puzzles and tests of wit. The best are well-dramatized and while reading them, we feel much more than the simple challenge of out-witting the detective, but at the core of these plots, they are puzzles. Catch the criminal, solve the puzzle, and end the chaos; that is the story. Skip unmasking the criminal and the story is gone.

Contrast this to the death of the chauffeur in Chandler’s The Big Sleep. Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall starred in the movie directed by Howard Hawkes, which is one of the best hardboiled detective movies ever made. But while preparing the screenplay, the writers could not figure out who killed the chauffeur. They called Chandler. He didn’t know, he never cared. So much for the well-wrought puzzle.

Chandler’s plots are studies in motivation and psychology, not puzzles. The Lady in the Lake has four murders, two murderers, and one accidental death. Each murder and death leads to the next as corruption and violence surges to its final end. Private detective Marlowe protects his client from the mayhem. He has no time or energy for puzzles.

When I read The Lady in the Lake last week, I was struck by something I had noticed before, but not understood: the role of the impending war in the plot.

The war intrudes and sets the atmosphere in the first paragraph of the novel:

The Treloar Building was, and is, on Olive Street, near Sixth, on the west side. The sidewalk in front of it had been built of black and white rubber blocks. They were taking them up now to give to the government, and a hatless pale man with a face like a building superintendent was watching the work and looking as if it was breaking his heart.

When I read this, I thought of a restaurant on Main Street in Ferndale where I live. It closed this week. My wife and I went there often, meeting with friends and enjoying memorable meals. We wonder if it will open again. When the war was over, rubber block sidewalks were never restored, as the hatless pale man feared.

Subtle effects of the overseas conflict appear throughout The Lady in the Lake. Service is poor because a clerk has been drafted. Resort crowds, reminiscent of current reports from the beaches of Fort Lauderdale, are nervous, frantic. They may never return to this pleasure spot again. The reader is uneasy, uncertain, threatened by something outside the plot that is never given a concrete form, but looms nevertheless.

The war is also present at the end of the book.

Here are the final four paragraphs of the novel that describe a fugitive racing over a dam above Los Angeles, a dam under military surveillance and control, guarding against sabotage that endangered Los Angeles.

“Guy didn’t stop for the sentry,” the sergeant said, and there was bitterness in his voice. “Damn near knocked him off the road. The sentry in the middle of the of the bridge had to jump fast to get missed. The one at this end had enough. He called the guy to halt. Guy kept going.”

The sergeant chewed his gum and looked down into the canyon.

“Orders are to shoot in a case like that,” he said. “The sentry shot.” He pointed to the grooves in the shoulder at the edge of the drop. “This is where he went off.”

A hundred feet down the canyon a small coupe was smashed against the side of a huge granite boulder. It was almost upside down, leaning a little. There were three men down there. They had moved the car enough to lift something out.

Something that had been a man.

This reminds me of a Yukio Mishima novel that ends when the protagonist knowingly drinks poison placed in his tea cup by a disciple. Inevitable, unavoidable, and bitter.

Without army sentries guarding the dam, the fugitive would have escaped. The story leaves no doubt of the fugitive’s guilt, but the war forced unseeing and brutal justice. Orders were executed without knowledge or empathy. We fear this rough justice. Today, doctors must soon decide who will get a life-saving ventilator and who will die gasping for air. In Marlowe’s time, it was the sentry’s trigger.

Yet, in The Lady in the Lake, Marlowe and Chandler faced and endured the war, protecting the innocent and facing the corrupt.

The guilty suffered and Marlowe’s integrity and resolve protected his client, which is the ultimate redeeming message from The Lady.