Strangers on a Train

I am quite fond of Patricia Highsmith's writing, having, like so many others, been introduced to her through her Ripley series. I am thrilled that Norton decided to republished most of her lesser-known novels and stories, many of which I have read already, the others of which top my reading to-do list. The greatest problem with this edition is the annoying presence of frequent typos and less frequent grammatical errors. I found myself having to go back to figure out the meaning of a sentence to discover one of the words was obviously incorrect. I understand that the publishers were probably rushing to get this edition on the market so that they could capitalize from The Talented Mr. Ripley's box-office sucess; nevertheless, the sloppiness distracts from the enjoyment experienced in reading Highsmith's other works.With that said, Strangers on a Train lives up to its reputation as a significant first effort by Highsmith. Those familiar with her work will recognize the beginnings of themes she continues to explore throughout her life. Primarily, this work presents a sympathetic murderer-- like Ripley-- a person who, the reader believes has to murder. Like Flannery O'Connor, Highsmith has an uncanny ability to place us in the minds of characters who face circumstances that seemingly force them to do unthinkable things. She follows with guilt-- or lack thereof-- that confronts characters based on the strength of their conscience. It reminds us that often the worst decisions are made at times when the choice seemed rational under the circumstances.I have yet to view Hitchcock's take on this novel. It is, undoubtedly, immensely difficult to portray a story that takes place mostly inside the characters minds on the big screen. For that reason alone, those who have seen the movie should consider reading this book.

I’ve never seen the movie and I’m glad because this book is so devilishly, maddeningly, twistedly clever. That ending sent chills down my spine. I don’t think I really liked any of the characters and I don’t know that we’re meant to but we do get a look at what guilt can do to a person’s mind. Brrrrr.

The character Bruno may be one of the most vivid I’ve read. He sticks with and to you in a way that mimic his effect on Guy. It’s disgusting and fascinating at once. The beauty of this writing is the mundane descriptions of the macabre. It’s an amazing debut note from a native born Texan under 30 that should have catapulted her to more fame than it did, but the Eisenhower era had no idea what to do with a voice as brilliant as Ms Highsmith.

This is a 1950 classic book on which Alfred Hitchcock based his movie. The premise is well-known. Two men meet on a train, strike up a conversation, and end up committing murders for each other. I had to keep telling myself that the book was written in 1950 and not today, as the investigation was very dated. The writing is a bit slow-paced. I read this book because it was featured in a recent cozy mystery that I read, FATAL FIRST EDITION. Reading it has not led me to other books by this author. I did watch the movie, which was vastly different from the book. Aren't they always?

Like John in The Scapegoat by Daphne du Maurier, Guy Haines comes across as a weak character. The tension in Strangers wanes on occasion and the ending could have been more dramatic. The premise, though, is brilliant—as is its execution, the portrayal of Bruno, and many of the descriptions, such as the fairground setting. Guy’s profession as an architect is skillfully worked into the book. In fact, it’s through his work that one gets a real sense of his character. Amazing that Patricia Highsmith was only 29 when she wrote this. Note: Many typos in this edition.