Saturday 30 January 2016

PATRICIA HIGHSMITH - STRANGERS ON A TRAIN (1950)


Synopsis/blurb……..

The psychologists would call it folie a deux...

'Bruno slammed his palms together. 'Hey! Cheeses, what an idea! I kill your wife and you kill my father! We meet on a train, see, and nobody knows we know each other! Perfect alibis! Catch?''

From this moment, almost against his conscious will, Guy Haines is trapped in a nightmare of shared guilt and an insidious merging of personalities.

“Miss Highsmith…is a writer who has created a world of her own – a world claustrophobic and irrational which we enter each time with a sense of personal danger” – Graham Greene

A 1950 book for Rich Westwood’s Past Offences – Crimes of the Century meme and after an aborted reading attempt of Highsmith’s The Talented Mr Ripley some years ago – my first proper read of the author. (Check out other crime fans 1950 books here.)

I did have a look at the book initially – 250-odd pages and think, okay – biff, bang, bosh – two days reading job done. Well Pat from Texas soon put pay to that notion. I read it from the 13th until the 23rd at an average of 25 pages a day. Each time I put the book down, I felt absolutely exhausted.

Tough writing, tough to read, she forces you to pay attention and concentrate on every word. Maybe I‘m usually a lazy reader and I only skim-read, I don’t know.

Enjoyed? No, more like endured.

Plot – amazing premise – two strangers meet on a train and kill for each other. No motive – the perfect crime.
Pace – pedestrian, leaden-footed.

Characters – Charles Bruno – slightly more interesting than Guy Haines. There’s an air of manic unpredictability about him. He seems to oscillate between wanting to either screw his mother or Guy Haines or maybe both at the same time – which would have made for a slightly more interesting book. Guy Haines – the somewhat unwilling participant in our scheme – idealistic and weak. I kind of wished he had missed that train and then I could have been spared all that followed.

I’m fairly sure Highsmith and psychological suspense and drama is not my thing, but I suppose I’ll have to try another from her to confirm. I previously thought when discarding Ripley, it was a case of right book, but the wrong time - it may well be there is no right time. 


Overall - not great - though the ending was a wee bit better than what had come before, albeit somewhat predictable. I was a bit unconvinced at Markham’s capacity to assist our dogged detective Gerard in unmasking Guy. He seemed too slow-witted for such duplicity.  

A generous 3 from 5


Bought second hand several years ago, possibly after suffering some kind of concussion which temporarily relieved me of my senses.   

16 comments:

  1. I'm really sorry to hear this disappointed you, Col. Admittedly, no book or author is for everyone. Still, I was rather hoping you'd like this. Well, you gave Highsmith two honest tries...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Margot, I've read a lot worse, but in truth I don't think she or this particular sub-genre is my cup of tea! I'm more drawn by faster-paced books.

      Delete
  2. I do want to read this book and then watch the movie again. It will be interesting to see how our opinions compare. But I am more interested in trying The Talented Mr. Ripley.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I haven't seen the film - it can't be as slow as this! It'll be a while before I pick up another one of her books I think, if ever.

      Delete
  3. Oh dear... Ah, well, we can't like all writers out there! I just can't get on with Donna Tartt for instance, profoundly disliked Stieg Larsson etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I feel like I'm the kid pointing out the emperor's new clothes....
      Not tried Donna Tartt - I'll look her up! :-)

      Delete
  4. Col, I recently saw Hitchcock's film version of this book. I found the plot rather silly with some obvious loopholes. Perhaps, her book will redeem the story in my eyes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm probably the reverse - I reckon I will enjoy the film more. Though I'd be interested in watching it, I won't make efforts to seek it out.

      Delete
  5. Thanks for such an honest review. I compliment you on your persistence in sticking with it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cheers Elgin, I'm not hurrying to her next that's for sure!

      Delete
  6. It's fascinating to see/read different perspectives. I thought the story raced pretty quickly but you say her pacing was leaden-paced and pedestrian. As you know I've read five of her books - FIVE - and will continue to read her. I think her work is quite interesting and fascinating look at the darkness inside of people. I think this genre may totally not be your thing which is fine. I'm glad you read it and finished it. Hopefully the Ripley book will be better for you but I have a feeling that it won't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Keishon, I think you might have to read her for me. I'm glad someone gets her. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

      Delete
  7. I'm not a Highsmith fan, but I did quite like this one when I re-read it a while back to do a guestpost on Past Offences. But she'll never be my favourite author. Do you have any other books by her in the tubs? Throw them out! Get rid! Accept that you don't want to read more of her...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A Ripley omnibus which has 4 of the 5 books. Two that I did a two-fer post on recently and I can remember seeing TWO FACES OF JANUARY a few weeks ago when I was sorting out an as yet un-logged tub.......so 7 at a minimum, maybe more.

      Not getting rid just yet - I can't throw books away - too much Catholic guilt embedded in my psyche - what a waste!

      Delete