Ross MacDonald has a
considerable reputation as a mid-twentieth century mystery novelist, the
creator of the private detective Lew Archer.
His actual name was Kenneth Millar.
I’ve been reading his correspondence with Eudora Welty, which came as a
complete surprise to me. It’s an intense
and passionate correspondence, almost like the correspondence of lovers, which
McDonald and Welty never were, except perhaps on paper. They both professed a strong admiration for
one another’s work. Welty reviewed
McDonald’s novel The Underground Man (1971)
for the New York Times and praised
it. Because there are few writers I
regard as highly as I do Welty, I decided to read McDonald’s novel.
One of the most unusual
characteristics of the novel, narrated by its main character, Lew Archer, is
how invisible the narrator seems. He
describes what is happening, what he does, and why, whom he is talking to, what
they do, how events transpire, but he does it in a strangely passionless
way. He’s hardly present. His personality is never really evident. We learn a few bits of information about
him—he lives alone, for example, he was once married, he feels sympathy for
young people in the early 1970s of Southern California who have gone off the
rail because of drugs. But for the most
part he is, as the main character, completely absent. Even when a woman he is interviewing, a woman
whom he describes as “well built,” throws off her robe and offers to have sex
with him, it’s as if he isn’t there. He declines the offer. I compared him in my head with Philip Marlowe,
who’s being so thoroughly infuses the tone and narrative of Raymond Chandler’s
novels--there’s no comparison. McDonald
is more reserved and removed from his subject than Chandler is from his, but at
the cost of indifference.
The narrative revolves around
two murders, the disappearance of a young child who is probably in the company
of a teenage girl whose parents believe she is perfect but who for various
reasons turns out to be less than.
Archer methodically works his way towards finding the child and
unraveling the mystery of the murders.
There are no big surprises, no gotcha moments, one event simply follows
another. Perhaps it is the reader’s
interest that gathers momentum.
Brush fires burn in and around the setting of the novel. Archer is constantly thinking about and
alluding to them. The fires signify
something—but it’s not mystery or passion.
Maybe its evil, the sin that underlies the kidnapping of the boy and the
troubled life of the girl who is with him.
Maybe it’s his underlying assessment of the culture and the times. But the fires evoke a troubling, unsettling
atmosphere, as if at any moment they might change direction and move towards
the town and engulf everything. It’s
California as a kind of modern hell.
Another motif is suggested in
the title. The novel moves towards
uncovering the mysteries beneath the lives of its characters, unknown, hidden
information that gradually comes to light.
I didn’t really care when the
novel was over. It’s dated, I guess. So
am I.