Two or three things I know
about David Goodis
By Tony
Williams
Professor/Area Head of
Film Studies,
Department of English,
Southern Illinois University at Carbondale,
Carbondale, Il. 62901-4503
My
first introduction to David Goodis came indirectly from
viewing Francois Truffaut’s 1960 adaptation of Down There,
Shoot the Piano Player. At the time I had never read any
Goodis and tended to focus my interest on one of the
exciting films of the French New Wave directed by a former
Cahiers du Cinema critic who had already attracted world
attention with his earlier The 400 Blows (1959). Then
Charles Aznavour’s character seemed to reflect the aura of
Left Bank pessimistic nihilism and it was not until much
later that I began reading Goodis. It soon became clear
that Truffaut was too gentle a director for Goodis as he
was for Cornell Woolrich with his adaptation of Waltz into
Darkness, Mississippi Mermaid (1969). What links both
Goodis and Woolrich is their opposition to the masculinity
inherent in the school of “hard boiled fiction” represented
by James M. Cain, Dashiell Hammett, and Mickey Spillane.
Although these tough guy writers often depict situations
where the hero intermittently loses control, their male
characters eventually regain control. The worlds of Goodis
and Woolrich are completely different. Theirs is an
environment where perverse dimensions of masochism, rather
than sadism, dominate their various heroes. It is almost as
if both authors protest against a prevalent male “order of
things” in their respective societies and depict scenarios
where characters are ruled by deep psychological
motivations and environmental circumstances over which they
have no control. In many ways, this often represents the
real state of affairs in contemporary society.
To designate both Goodis and Woolrich as representing a
“soft-boiled” school of fiction opposed to its
“hard-boiled” counterpoint may initially appear flippant.
But if we see both authors as inheriting the tradition of
French literary naturalism begun by Emile Zola in the
nineteenth century and developed by his American cousins in
the twentieth, then the importance of this tradition
becomes apparent. In his Film Noir: The Dark Side of the
Screen, Foster Hirsch identifies the links between
naturalism and film noir. It is David Goodis who
particularly identifies the psychological flaws in his
various characters that often stem from a combination of
family and environmental factors that Zola documents in his
Rougon-Macquart series of novels. Like Woolrich, Goodis
emphasizes a masochistic dimension in his fiction that is
not entirely defined by personal weakness but rather
represents an incoherent protest against patriarchal power
structures that also involves women as well as men damning
both victims and victimizers. Goodis’s characters become
trapped by dominant psychological and societal universes
that attempt to sap the inner core of their being. But at
the end characters remain true to themselves although they
may have returned full circle. Even recognizing the
impossibility of the false ideology of the American Dream
is enough for these damned souls.
The optimistic conclusions of Dark Passage (1946) and Night
Squad (1961) may represent traps for the unwary reader.
Vincent Parry may never prove his innocence in the first
novel but there is no guarantee that he will not be pulled
off the bus after the final chapter, arrested, and sent to
the execution chamber. Corey Bradford may achieve a victory
in the latter work. But another claustrophobic chain of
circumstances may later confront him as it will to Paul
Ballard in Of Missing Persons (1950). The fiction is often
surrealistic in tone as seen by predominant references to
the nightmarish colors of green and orange. To modify
Josh’s closing words in Sam Peckinpah’s The Ballad of Cable
Hogue (1970), “Read Goodis but I suggest you do not read
him lightly.”