
Assuming one wished, for argument’s sake, to reboot Raymond Chandler’s private eye character Philip Marlowe in a modern setting, there is, of course, some precedent – in the movies. James Garner played him in updated form in 1969. Elliot Gould in 1973. And Robert Mitchum in 1978. But each movie did its best to retain the style of the original books and the essential personality of the main character.
Why would anyone wish to reinvent Marlowe as a slightly naïve young detective in the 2020s, with a suspended cop for a father?
The Philip Marlowe of Joe Ide’s The Goodbye Coast is not a former investigator for the district attorney’s office, but a failed cop. His father, Emmet, is a decorated police detective who went into a tailspin after the death of his wife. Now he’s been suspended and is fighting the bottle, but doesn’t hesitate to wave his badge and strap on his gun when his son needs a hand.
Marlowe gets a referral to a job for a fading female Hollywood star, who wants him to find her missing stepdaughter, who disappeared after the murder of her ex-husband, a has-been director. Marlowe suspects his client’s motives aren’t as advertsied, and he’s soon investigating the ex-husband’s murder, which seems to involve Armenian gangsters. He finds the girl, who does not want to go home, so he stashes her with his dad, who finds himself bickering with her but also growing fond of her.
There is also a subplot about Ren, an Englishwoman who wants Marlowe to help her find her son, kidnapped by his noncustodial father. Marlowe begins to fall in love with her.
It’s a reasonable plot, if a little complex (and believe me, it gets a lot more intricate than this short synopsis suggests). So what’s wrong with the book?
First of all, it’s written in the third person, multiple viewpoints. THAT IS NOT HOW A MARLOWE STORY WORKS. One of the main pleasures we seek in these stories is the “face to face” encounter with Chandler’s meditative, intelligent, compassionate/cynical, mildly erudite detective. Joe Ide removes that pleasure, replacing it with graceless, rambling description.
We love the stories for Chandler’s spare, evocative, quotable prose, like, “He looked about as inconspicuous as a tarantula on a slice of angel food.” Author Ide isn’t capable of that kind of writing. He gives us lines like, “He smelled like a flower show run over by a truck.” What does that even mean?
Chandler was also great at creating vivid characters. Ide’s characters might be described as vivid, I suppose, but only in terms of incoherence. They act like they have multiple personality disorder, taking bizarre and violent action purely (it seems) to advance the plot. I was tempted (though I know nothing of the author) to wonder if he’s autistic and just doesn’t know how normal people think and act.
Ide’s Marlowe is also weepy and apologetic when he makes a mistake – something the real Marlowe was never guilty of.
If The Goodbye Coast had been offered as a stand-alone, with a main character with some other name, I might or might not have finished it and given it a review. It wouldn’t have been a very good review.
But shove this at me with a tag marked “Philip Marlowe” tied to it, and I feel seriously shortchanged.
I do not recommend The Goodbye Coast.


