Annotated Bibliography: Raymond Chandler. The Big Sleep. 1939
Compiling a bibliography on Raymond Chandler’s novel The Big Sleep has been complicated by the fact that so much of the criticism related to it does not deal with the novel directly or solely, but often indirectly or through a lens. Why? Published in 1939, The Big Sleep was Raymond Chandler’s first novel, although he had already been publishing short stories in pulp magazines, most notably The Black Mask. Publication of the novel certainly gave him a wider exposure but, for critics and public alike, Chandler was still largely unknown. Thus, the initial reactions in the form of book reviews reflect a variety of reactions of a public still not sure what The Big Sleep is all about. Time magazine’s review of the book remarked that “Detective Marlowe is plunged into a mess of murderers, thugs and psychopaths.” The Times Literary Supplement called the slang “obscure,” while The Spectator remarked that the dialogue was “very charming.” All of these reviews, seen in hindsight, sound rather hesitant and unenlightened based on the legendary status the book enjoys today. Nonetheless, it is clear that these initial reviews picked up on some of the elements of style that would help The Big Sleep become a classic. Serious critical attention to Chandler’s work, however, would not happen in earnest until the 1960s, and at that point Chandler had gone on to publish several other novels, all of which starred the private eye Philip Marlowe, who had made his debut in The Big Sleep.
Thus, when critics began to recognize The Big Sleep as a work of literary merit and examine it anew, they not only looked at The Big Sleep, but they looked at the other Chandler novels as well, such as Farewell My Lovely or The High Window, since the character of Philip Marlowe and the Southern California setting appeared in all of these. Additionally, Chandler used the character of Philip Marlowe, albeit under different names, in short stories he published prior to The Big Sleep. Critics, in effect, often treated the oeuvre of Raymond Chandler as if it were one work. Tom Woodman, for example, examines the significance of the game of chess not only in The Big Sleep, but in all of Chandler’s works. Thus the title of his article: “King’s Gambit: Playing Chess and Playing Detective in Raymond Chandler’s Work.”
The Big Sleep, however, is generally regarded as being Chandler’s best work and a seminal work in detective literature and literature in general. For these reasons, a bibliography dedicated solely to The Big Sleep is justified. I had, however, to be selective in choosing what to include in the bibliography. As a guide, I followed two criteria: First, if a work focuses exclusively or mainly on The Big Sleep, it has been included. Second, if a work does not focus mainly on The Big Sleep, but still manages to say something insightful, something that was not said in any or much of the other criticism, or says something better, then it has been included. How exactly one defines terms such as “mainly” or “insightful” or “much” can be problematic, but I have tried, as much as possible, to flesh out my reasons for including a work, especially in those instances where it may seem that a particular work could have been left out. Lawrence Clark Powell, for example, in his introduction to The Raymond Chandler Omnibus, does not talk about The Big Sleep specifically, yet his remarks concerning why Chandler was able to capture Los Angeles I found to be rather helpful in my understanding of it. An article I did not include, on the other hand, James Shokoff’s “The Feminine Ideal in the Masculine Private Eye,” mentions the Chandler novel The Long Goodbye, but not The Big Sleep. His article, moreover, although it deals with Chandler’s character Philip Marlowe, does not illuminate The Big Sleep in any substantial and novel way. The point is that, finally, this bibliography is about The Big Sleep. My only exceptions are the works I have placed under the category of “General Interest,” which are not so much works of criticism as they are resource materials that I depended on as I began to look for criticism concerning The Big Sleep. I will admit, moreover, to being guided by works of criticism oft-repeated in the literature. That is, if a particular essay was repeated often enough, even if it did not seem to deal chiefly with The Big Sleep, I was obliged to read it and decide whether or not to include it, again using my criteria noted above.
Another complicating factor in deciding what to include is the fact that The Big Sleep is often read or interpreted through the life of Raymond Chandler himself. A study in Raymond Chandler’s main protagonist Philip Marlowe, in many cases, becomes a study in Raymond Chandler. The impetus of this kind of criticism may perhaps be attributable, in large part, to Philip Durham’s 1963 book Down These Mean Streets a Man Must Go: Raymond Chandler's Knight, a work that intermingles biographical details about Chandler with discussions on his actual work. In order to understand and appreciate The Big Sleep, in other words, Durham is saying that you have to understand and appreciate Raymond Chandler, all of which brings up the problem of deciding what to study ― just the text, or the text with the author? The surrounding trappings to The Big Sleep are so numerous that I found very few pieces of criticism that deal exclusively with The Big Sleep; that is, pieces of criticism that look at the text of The Big Sleep and nothing but that text. Much of the criticism, in fact, revels in mentioning Chandler’s private life ― his reclusive nature, for example, or his marriage to an older woman ― and seem to follow Durham’s lead in the practice of using Chandler’s biographical details to shed light on his novels, including The Big Sleep. As a result, there are articles such as Hassell Simpson’s “A Butcher’s Thumb” which talks, for example, about the sexually suggestive nature of thumbs and mouths in The Big Sleep and then suggests that this may point to “deep-seated concerns” of Raymond Chandler. To be honest, I think a novel can be studied both ways(even by the same scholar); that is, it is intellectually and psychologically satisfying to study the text alone or to study it in conjunction with the author’s life. Included in this bibliography, therefore, are much criticism that draws upon the life of Raymond Chandler, but only insofar as it relates to understanding The Big Sleep or, alternatively, where The Big Sleep helps us in understanding Raymond Chandler. The value in this bibliography then, springs from the fact that I have, as far as possible, included only material that uses The Big Sleep to shed light on Chandler, or uses Chandler to shed light on The Big Sleep.
There is, moreover, the issue of comparing the novel with other works, such as the two film versions of it as well as other detective fiction novels like Dashiell Hammet’s The Maltese Falcon. There is a wealth of criticism involving both types of comparisons. To be honest, I was much more willing to look into comparisons with other novels(and I have included them in the bibliography) than I was into comparisons with the movie versions of The Big Sleep. I was curious, however, with what was being said in the critical essays concerning the films, and I was quite often pleasantly surprised with what I found. As a result, I felt compelled to list a few of the more engaging essays I came across. Megan Abbott, for example, discusses how the movie version of Philip Marlowe is a watered down version of the novel version, and she points to specific scenes in both works to illustrate her point. I found such a method to be powerful in terms of how it brought out in relief many scenes in the novel, scenes that I would not have placed such a significance on otherwise. I discovered, by reading such essays, that the transference of a novel into the different medium of film helps to draw our attention to areas in the novel that we might otherwise overlook. I have included those essays that shed significant light on the novel.
As I pored over the scholarly material on The Big Sleep, certain categories began to present themselves, and some of these have already been alluded to above. There are articles, for example, that deal chiefly with the chivalric aspect of the novel, comparing and contrasting the character of Philip Marlowe with the mythic Arthurian knight. There is, therefore, a category devoted to those essays that compare The Big Sleep to an Arthurian romance. Likewise, much criticism is devoted to the use of language in The Big Sleep, focusing on such specific elements as the use of similes. There is, then, a category devoted to language. And there are other categories that developed as my research proceeded. I must admit, however, that this business of categorizing always makes me squirm a bit. At its best it is a vital tool for finding and understanding information but, at its worst, it is downright misleading. I have, for example, listed Pico Iyer’s article “The Mystery of Influence” under the heading of “Use of Language,” but, to be honest, I could have placed it under the heading of “General Works of Criticism” or even “History of Detective Genre.” The deciding factor in this particular case was the fact that Iyer did what few other critics have, and that was to mention how Chandler often uses similes to juxtapose worlds(rich vs. poor, for example). And, he made a good argument for it and opened my eyes to that particular use of language in the novel. Iyer’s article, however, mentions other aspects of The Big Sleep, but I felt that these other aspects were taken up equally well if not better in other sources. Other scholars looking at his work might well disagree. William Marling, furthermore, does a very good job in examining The Big Sleep from several different angles, and so I placed his book under “General Works of Criticism,” a category which denotes my thought that the book deals equally well with at least two different categories of research(a fact my annotation will elaborate on), or simply deals with a subject not deserving of its own category simply because of the paucity of critical research in that area.
There it is. Serious students of The Big Sleep, I trust, will recognize that information has an unwieldy interconnectedness to it and so not read the categories too rigidly. At the same time, the different categories of scholarship I have provided will hopefully underscore the many layers and complexity of this wonderful novel.
Thus, when critics began to recognize The Big Sleep as a work of literary merit and examine it anew, they not only looked at The Big Sleep, but they looked at the other Chandler novels as well, such as Farewell My Lovely or The High Window, since the character of Philip Marlowe and the Southern California setting appeared in all of these. Additionally, Chandler used the character of Philip Marlowe, albeit under different names, in short stories he published prior to The Big Sleep. Critics, in effect, often treated the oeuvre of Raymond Chandler as if it were one work. Tom Woodman, for example, examines the significance of the game of chess not only in The Big Sleep, but in all of Chandler’s works. Thus the title of his article: “King’s Gambit: Playing Chess and Playing Detective in Raymond Chandler’s Work.”
The Big Sleep, however, is generally regarded as being Chandler’s best work and a seminal work in detective literature and literature in general. For these reasons, a bibliography dedicated solely to The Big Sleep is justified. I had, however, to be selective in choosing what to include in the bibliography. As a guide, I followed two criteria: First, if a work focuses exclusively or mainly on The Big Sleep, it has been included. Second, if a work does not focus mainly on The Big Sleep, but still manages to say something insightful, something that was not said in any or much of the other criticism, or says something better, then it has been included. How exactly one defines terms such as “mainly” or “insightful” or “much” can be problematic, but I have tried, as much as possible, to flesh out my reasons for including a work, especially in those instances where it may seem that a particular work could have been left out. Lawrence Clark Powell, for example, in his introduction to The Raymond Chandler Omnibus, does not talk about The Big Sleep specifically, yet his remarks concerning why Chandler was able to capture Los Angeles I found to be rather helpful in my understanding of it. An article I did not include, on the other hand, James Shokoff’s “The Feminine Ideal in the Masculine Private Eye,” mentions the Chandler novel The Long Goodbye, but not The Big Sleep. His article, moreover, although it deals with Chandler’s character Philip Marlowe, does not illuminate The Big Sleep in any substantial and novel way. The point is that, finally, this bibliography is about The Big Sleep. My only exceptions are the works I have placed under the category of “General Interest,” which are not so much works of criticism as they are resource materials that I depended on as I began to look for criticism concerning The Big Sleep. I will admit, moreover, to being guided by works of criticism oft-repeated in the literature. That is, if a particular essay was repeated often enough, even if it did not seem to deal chiefly with The Big Sleep, I was obliged to read it and decide whether or not to include it, again using my criteria noted above.
Another complicating factor in deciding what to include is the fact that The Big Sleep is often read or interpreted through the life of Raymond Chandler himself. A study in Raymond Chandler’s main protagonist Philip Marlowe, in many cases, becomes a study in Raymond Chandler. The impetus of this kind of criticism may perhaps be attributable, in large part, to Philip Durham’s 1963 book Down These Mean Streets a Man Must Go: Raymond Chandler's Knight, a work that intermingles biographical details about Chandler with discussions on his actual work. In order to understand and appreciate The Big Sleep, in other words, Durham is saying that you have to understand and appreciate Raymond Chandler, all of which brings up the problem of deciding what to study ― just the text, or the text with the author? The surrounding trappings to The Big Sleep are so numerous that I found very few pieces of criticism that deal exclusively with The Big Sleep; that is, pieces of criticism that look at the text of The Big Sleep and nothing but that text. Much of the criticism, in fact, revels in mentioning Chandler’s private life ― his reclusive nature, for example, or his marriage to an older woman ― and seem to follow Durham’s lead in the practice of using Chandler’s biographical details to shed light on his novels, including The Big Sleep. As a result, there are articles such as Hassell Simpson’s “A Butcher’s Thumb” which talks, for example, about the sexually suggestive nature of thumbs and mouths in The Big Sleep and then suggests that this may point to “deep-seated concerns” of Raymond Chandler. To be honest, I think a novel can be studied both ways(even by the same scholar); that is, it is intellectually and psychologically satisfying to study the text alone or to study it in conjunction with the author’s life. Included in this bibliography, therefore, are much criticism that draws upon the life of Raymond Chandler, but only insofar as it relates to understanding The Big Sleep or, alternatively, where The Big Sleep helps us in understanding Raymond Chandler. The value in this bibliography then, springs from the fact that I have, as far as possible, included only material that uses The Big Sleep to shed light on Chandler, or uses Chandler to shed light on The Big Sleep.
There is, moreover, the issue of comparing the novel with other works, such as the two film versions of it as well as other detective fiction novels like Dashiell Hammet’s The Maltese Falcon. There is a wealth of criticism involving both types of comparisons. To be honest, I was much more willing to look into comparisons with other novels(and I have included them in the bibliography) than I was into comparisons with the movie versions of The Big Sleep. I was curious, however, with what was being said in the critical essays concerning the films, and I was quite often pleasantly surprised with what I found. As a result, I felt compelled to list a few of the more engaging essays I came across. Megan Abbott, for example, discusses how the movie version of Philip Marlowe is a watered down version of the novel version, and she points to specific scenes in both works to illustrate her point. I found such a method to be powerful in terms of how it brought out in relief many scenes in the novel, scenes that I would not have placed such a significance on otherwise. I discovered, by reading such essays, that the transference of a novel into the different medium of film helps to draw our attention to areas in the novel that we might otherwise overlook. I have included those essays that shed significant light on the novel.
As I pored over the scholarly material on The Big Sleep, certain categories began to present themselves, and some of these have already been alluded to above. There are articles, for example, that deal chiefly with the chivalric aspect of the novel, comparing and contrasting the character of Philip Marlowe with the mythic Arthurian knight. There is, therefore, a category devoted to those essays that compare The Big Sleep to an Arthurian romance. Likewise, much criticism is devoted to the use of language in The Big Sleep, focusing on such specific elements as the use of similes. There is, then, a category devoted to language. And there are other categories that developed as my research proceeded. I must admit, however, that this business of categorizing always makes me squirm a bit. At its best it is a vital tool for finding and understanding information but, at its worst, it is downright misleading. I have, for example, listed Pico Iyer’s article “The Mystery of Influence” under the heading of “Use of Language,” but, to be honest, I could have placed it under the heading of “General Works of Criticism” or even “History of Detective Genre.” The deciding factor in this particular case was the fact that Iyer did what few other critics have, and that was to mention how Chandler often uses similes to juxtapose worlds(rich vs. poor, for example). And, he made a good argument for it and opened my eyes to that particular use of language in the novel. Iyer’s article, however, mentions other aspects of The Big Sleep, but I felt that these other aspects were taken up equally well if not better in other sources. Other scholars looking at his work might well disagree. William Marling, furthermore, does a very good job in examining The Big Sleep from several different angles, and so I placed his book under “General Works of Criticism,” a category which denotes my thought that the book deals equally well with at least two different categories of research(a fact my annotation will elaborate on), or simply deals with a subject not deserving of its own category simply because of the paucity of critical research in that area.
There it is. Serious students of The Big Sleep, I trust, will recognize that information has an unwieldy interconnectedness to it and so not read the categories too rigidly. At the same time, the different categories of scholarship I have provided will hopefully underscore the many layers and complexity of this wonderful novel.