ŷ������

How is Spade different than other famous literary detectives such as Sherlock Holmes �� both as a person and as a detective? If he doesn’t use a magnifying glass and hunt for clues, how does he work? Is Spade any good at being a detective? If so, what skills does he have? Or does he simply leave things to chance? How does the context in which he works differ from that in which we find Holmes and other “genteel�� detectives?

I loved this book. Spade was great. I'm a fan of Philip Marlowe. As much of a jerk as Marlowe is, Spade may have him beat. He's having an affair with his partner's wife. He treats her like dirt. He plans to dump his partner. So he's like Marlowe but he's even dirtier.
I like how he and Marlowe both seem to operate on hunches and they make snap judgments. Neither seems to be very cautious. I don't know how good of a detective he is but he makes it work.
And I don't see any similarities with the quiet, thoughtful gentleman that is Sherlock.

I agree, after reading Sherlock Holmes recently, I see no similarities. I am only halfway through The Maltese Falcon but I am not finding many redeeming qualities in Spade so far. But he is kind of fun to hate. (o: I see him as having an opportunistic style vs the deductive reasoning that genious Sherlock demonstrated. I am thoroughly enjoying the book. Can't put my finger on what makes it different from other crime novels I have read yet but I am working on it.

I really like this character. Spade is a self indulgent womanizer who doesn't pretend he is a smarter good guy. I bumbled right along with him as he gathered information. He summed his success up very well when he disclosed the theory of the fall guy. He is a character who sees everything as opportunities. it appears that his experience on the streets gives him insights into people and behavior more then with obscure facts. He brought about his victory by playing the people against each other. He conned the con men.

I started today and I like the characterization of Sam Spade, also the city and the charm of those years. I think that Sam Spade is on another plane respect Sherlock Holmes. Holmes is more intuitive, a more brilliant mind. Spade is rude, with a kind of code, but its not leal or correct, not a good boy, see his relation with 'Iva Archer'. He make what need, but he remember me an hound dog,don't stop till the end of the investigation and I think this will be a very good book.

Spade is not a "nice guy" and if not for Effie Perine, a moral compass, I think he would always be looking out for number 1.

I found the dialogue in the book to be unbelievable..and some of the situations too. I can accept that in Sherlock Holmes which has a tongue-in-cheek element. But, here, Hammett is presenting the story as hyper-realistic and it just misses the mark. The plot was interesting and I suspect that is why the movie is popular (I've never seen it.) And, as for Spade... too much of an egotist for my tastes.

Hi Ed, It took time for me to get used to the dialogue and I agree that Sam Spade is pretty obnoxious. I am attaching a link about hard boiled fiction here that may be of interest. While it may not appeal to everyone, The Maltese Falcon is a classic example of the hard boiled genre. Dashiell Hammett is credited with introducing this style of detective story writing. Beth

Thanks Beth.

I don't like Spade. But I think because he has criminal qualities, he makes a great literary detective. He knows how to think like a criminal.

Fariba wrote: "I don't like Spade. But I think because he has criminal qualities, he makes a great literary detective. He knows how to think like a criminal."

Interesting thing you said. The figure of private investigator seem to be more close to "bad guy" that to a policeman. So, Spade is the man that always falls to his feet and plays with the bad guys by their rules. This is part of his charm.

I think Marlowe could take Spade. I think Marlowe could outdrink, outrun and out-suffer Spade. But Spade is smarter, can see through the tricks and not get taken in like Marlowe does. Not even hot dames can trick him. : )

Andrew wrote: "Spade is the man that always falls to his feet and plays with the bad guys by their rules. This is part of his charm."

Well said. That really does describe Sam Spade.

I haven't quite finished the book, but I don't think Spade is so bad...and although I haven't read many detective novels (hardly any, actually), I think Spade knows what he is doing. He is incredibly thorough when searching rooms, is exceptional at hiding what he does know, and ballsy as hell when in a tense situation. While he is far from being a great literary figure, I think he is a successful detective so long as he benefits from the case.

I’ve just started reading this, in these first few chapters Spade comes across as being streetwise, tough and ultra cool. I can't comment how similar or different Spade is to Sherlock Holmes (as I haven't read it), but I'd say in these chapters Spade has enough skills to be a good detective.

I like Spade. He sees people and situations for what they actually are, and he's smart in the way Holmes is in that his intuition and competence allows him to ignore the distractions that morals and emotions can be. He's also a bit like Bond (he's even got a Miss Moneypenny) in that he's a loner in a world that is actually very dangerous. A great book; thanks for choosing it this month.

The way he operates is fascinating. It is like he tries to stay one step ahead of the people he is investigating and plays the game their way which catches them off guard. I really enjoyed this book too. It's been fun reading everyone's comments and impressions about Sam Spade, a unique, influencial character in the hard-boiled genre.

Beth wrote: "Hi Ed, It took time for me to get used to the dialogue and I agree that Sam Spade is pretty obnoxious. I am attaching a link about hard boiled fiction here that may be of interest. While it may ..."

Thanks, Beth, for the terminology in the website. I didn't realize that it had a bonafide place in the American literary culture especially since Sam Spade is nothing like his detective predecessors. Sam Spade, the character, is a reference point of noir detective series; I'm thinking of Guy Noir on NPR's Garrison Keilor show. Perhaps the noir detective is the same as the hard-boiled detective. (?)

I haven't read any of the comments yet because I only just started reading the book, unfortunately! Busy month! I'm three chapters in and I'm kind of disappointed, I gotta say. I really expected to love it and I'm finding I don't. Hard-boiled is a genre of my generation and I expected it to be smooth and suave - even though I fully expected the detective(s) to be morally bankrupt but I find that the writing seems forced somehow. I don't know that I have ever read books about any of the famous "hard-boiled" detectives - maybe I've been spoiled by movie versions. I know this doesn't answer any questions re: this topic - just wanted to weigh in before the end of the month. Where did June go???

Sam Spade is a slimeball. We're not made to like him from the very start where he is introduced as being like the devil.

I read a lot of crime fiction so this type of character is the rule, not the exception from my point of view. His antics are right in line with my perception of a detective. Ultimately he's out for number one, and money always talks.

Samantha wrote: "Sam Spade is a slimeball. We're not made to like him from the very start where he is introduced as being like the devil.

I agree and having finished the book, I think he is true to his slimeball self to the end. Others seem to give him a pass because he "does the right thing" by his partner at the end. He did the right thing because he would have gone to jail if he hadn't done what he did. It had nothing to do with his moral conscience or the right thing. She even asked him if it would have been different if there had been more money involved and he indirectly indicated that it probably would have. Furthermore, the book supposedly took place over a six day period - what is all this talk about loving one another? I took all of his talk about waiting for her to be sarcasm.

I can't agree that all detectives are morally bankrupt; Ellery Queen is an example refined gentleman detective, as is Hercule Poirot, but by and large, the hard boiled, pulp detectives are all of the same template. Doesn't make the book any less enjoyable for me - it was a fun read.

I guess solving crime in big cities leaves a detective callous and unsympathetic. They see horrid stuff daily and end up looking out for number 1 as a survival mechanism. They may be a shell of what they once we're before the job got to them. I am thinking this makes a hard boiled detective different from those in other genres.