Jeff Lander (jeffl@darwin3d.com)
Mon, 02 Aug 1999 18:27:00 -0700
I will answer the first question. In my opinion, they mostly
self-contained so that it doesn't matter which one is read in
what order. There are not too many internal references to
other stories so it is not hard to follow the
progression.
The exception may be Playback (not to be confused with the
Payback thing). It has a little bit at the end that is refers
to a previous case but it is not integral to the story too
much. As it is the last novel (at least last all Chandler) it
makes sense to read last.
I would also recommend reading the novels before the short
stories just because some of them were lifted to use parts in
the novels. I found it more interesting to read the novels
first as they were the most polished. Then go back and read
the short stories and you can appreciate how it all came
together. This may be just me.
I also have the very interesting "Killer in the Rain" which
contains other early shorts that were spun into the novels.
Interesting to see how he worked.
I don't know if there is a chronology on the web but I have
it roughed out if you want to read them in "order" that
way.
Jeff
At 02:48 PM 7/29/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Hi all,
>First, a very basic question: Are Chandler's Marlowe
novels meant to be read
>in any particular order? The ones I've read so far
seem pretty
>self-contained, but if they're chronological at all
I'd prefer to read them
>that way.
-- # To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to majordomo@icomm.ca. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon 02 Aug 1999 - 21:27:43 EDT