Preamble: Philip Marlowe, the protagonist of Raymond Chandler’s ‘Red Wind’, is a sort of 20th century chivalric knight errant. Obviously, the world that Marlowe inhabits is very different from that of medieval knights, but like them, Marlowe can be said to live his life by a moral code.
Q: What is Philip Marlowe’s moral code?
Note: you are not being asked to compare moral codes, only to unearth Marlowe’s code from what he says, and what he doesn’t say, what he does and what he doesn’t do.
The text of “Red Wind” can be found here:
http://ae-lib.org.ua/texts-c/chandler__red_wind__en.htm
Note on evidence. Essay assignments are designed for you to exercise analytic skills on the text, its plot, its structures, its language. While you are being prompted by a question, your response ultimately concerns what the text actually says. In order to do this you need to pay particular attention to your use of evidence. It has been said that the secret of persuasive prose is not your conclusion, but the way you marshal your evidence. In general, for each claim that you make in your response to the text, you should have in mind a piece of evidence from the text. Obviously, you do not want to quote each piece of evidence you have in mind; that is cumbersome. It is far better to pick and chose when and what to quote, reserving quotation either for those evidences you deem the most effective, persuasive, suggestive, poetic, etc., or for those of your claims you recognize are most in need of evidence. Here it helps to think of how what you claim is going to be read by others; those of your claims that others will deem more controversial, are likely the ones most in need of defence, of evidence.
Assignment Format. You must follow the guidelines laid out in the ‘Assignment Format’ .
Note this is an unpaginated e-text. When quoting from the story, refer to the Chapter number (there are seven in total), like this:
‘Chandler sets the stage of his drama by introducing the meteorological anomaly of the red wind: “one of those hot dry Santa Anas that come down through the mountain passes and curl your hair and make your nerves jump and your skin itch”’ (Ch.1).
The question about “Red Wind” implies Marlowe lives his life by a moral code; for convenience’s sake we call it a ‘20th century chivalric code’. But, what is a moral code? A moral code is a set of strictures or rules for moral conduct and moral decisions. The Bible’s “Ten Commandments” is such a code. If one lives by the Ten Commandments, in theory each of one’s acts and decisions is guided by the principles articulated in the code. In fact, we tend to judge a person’s moral worth by two things: 1) the nature of their code, its moral coherence (a mafia code of conduct and the ‘Ten Commandments’ are two very different things) and 2) by how consistent an individual or organization is vis-à-vis their code. Do they always follow it; what exceptions do they make; how do they justify or rationalize those exceptions? Note that in this example about the Ten Commandments, moral conduct is externally motivated; you and I do not create the code, we merely follow it, or not, as the case may be.
In the story “Red Wind” there is no externally articulated moral code. This seems to pose a special difficulty for us. However, since we believe that Marlowe believes he acts in a moral way (and we think we have evidence of this), then it is a question of an internal code, a code Marlowe is aware of but never openly articulates (as most of us tend to do with our own internal codes). This is to say his code is implicit in everything he says and does. So, in order as critics to articulate his moral code we must look carefully at each of the things he says and does, always asking ourselves: ‘what is the moral principle that he believes justifies this choice, guides this behaviour, frames this speech?’
To articulate Marlowe’s internal code we must look carefully at his doings and his speech, and extract the implicit code from them – dig it up (it is buried), pull it out (it is tangled up in other things), uncover it (it is hidden). Note that to carry out this labour of extraction is to adopt a reverse methodology from the example of the Ten Commandments above. In that case we started with the code or principles given to us, and merely compared an individual’s behaviour with what the code says. In the case of Marlowe’s implicit code we work the other way round: we work backwards from Marlowe’s speaking and doing to the principles which we believe underlie, guide and frame his acts and speech as moral or immoral: thus, from acts/speech to principles.
Recall that the principal way we judge a person is by reference to 1) the moral coherence of their code (is it a good one; good for whom?) and 2) the consistency with which they apply it in their speech and behaviour.
Consider the parable of ‘The 6:45 Professor.’ The 6:45 professor is perennially, and casually, late for class, but nonetheless makes a point of articulating to his students that ‘You must be here at 6:30; the class begins at 6:30; if you are not going to make a point of being here on time, you may as well not come.’
Notice that the professor clearly articulates an internal moral code, which seems to say: ‘You’ve signed up to be here at 6:30; to be morally consistent, you must honour your commitment.’ It also seems to strongly imply: ‘This is what I, the professor, do; you must do the same: live by your word.’ However, when we remember that it is the professor’s habit to saunter into the classroom at a leisurely 6:45, devil may care, we conclude that the professor does not live up to his moral code (he is absurdly inconsistent); he does not practice what he preaches, he does not walk the talk. In making a moral judgement against the professor, we weigh both his words and his acts — and in this case we conclude his acts trump his words, that his words effectively mean nothing.
The moral of the parable is that words and deeds do not always add up, that we are not machines, that we are sometimes inconsistent; we are, after all, human. And, since the same is true of Marlowe, then as students of fiction and human nature we should not strive to turn him into a moral machine (‘See, here again he acts like a moral robot’), but rather be aware of how he struggles to follow his moral code, as we all do, in one way or another (guilt is universal, unless you are a sociopath).
It may also help to ask, ‘What is the universe that Marlowe would create through speaking or acting the way he does?’ For example, what kind of universe does Marlowe seek to create by exchanging the pearls at the end of the story? Answers to questions of this kind point to the principles of a moral code, because a moral code is a set of guidelines for an ideal world (remember the 10 commandments?). It may also be helpful to ask ‘what is the moral nature of the world in which Marlowe finds himself?’; does he agree with that world, the moral principles of that world?; or does he differ, and strive to create his own vision of how things ought to be? Other things to consider: what does he say about the lady? How well does he know himself (is he anything like the professor in the parable, i.e., ignorant in a way of wh
Preamble: Philip Marlowe, the protagonist of Raymond Chandler’s ‘Red Wind’, is a sort of 20th century chivalric knight errant. Obviously, the world that Marlowe inhabits is very different from that of medieval knights, but like them, Marlowe can be said to live his life by a moral code.
Q: What is Philip Marlowe’s moral code?
Note: you are not being asked to compare moral codes, only to unearth Marlowe’s code from what he says, and what he doesn’t say, what he does and what he doesn’t do.
The text of “Red Wind” can be found here:
http://ae-lib.org.ua/texts-c/chandler__red_wind__en.htm
Note on evidence. Essay assignments are designed for you to exercise analytic skills on the text, its plot, its structures, its language. While you are being prompted by a question, your response ultimately concerns what the text actually says. In order to do this you need to pay particular attention to your use of evidence. It has been said that the secret of persuasive prose is not your conclusion, but the way you marshal your evidence. In general, for each claim that you make in your response to the text, you should have in mind a piece of evidence from the text. Obviously, you do not want to quote each piece of evidence you have in mind; that is cumbersome. It is far better to pick and chose when and what to quote, reserving quotation either for those evidences you deem the most effective, persuasive, suggestive, poetic, etc., or for those of your claims you recognize are most in need of evidence. Here it helps to think of how what you claim is going to be read by others; those of your claims that others will deem more controversial, are likely the ones most in need of defence, of evidence.
Assignment Format. You must follow the guidelines laid out in the ‘Assignment Format’ .
Note this is an unpaginated e-text. When quoting from the story, refer to the Chapter number (there are seven in total), like this:
‘Chandler sets the stage of his drama by introducing the meteorological anomaly of the red wind: “one of those hot dry Santa Anas that come down through the mountain passes and curl your hair and make your nerves jump and your skin itch”’ (Ch.1).
The question about “Red Wind” implies Marlowe lives his life by a moral code; for convenience’s sake we call it a ‘20th century chivalric code’. But, what is a moral code? A moral code is a set of strictures or rules for moral conduct and moral decisions. The Bible’s “Ten Commandments” is such a code. If one lives by the Ten Commandments, in theory each of one’s acts and decisions is guided by the principles articulated in the code. In fact, we tend to judge a person’s moral worth by two things: 1) the nature of their code, its moral coherence (a mafia code of conduct and the ‘Ten Commandments’ are two very different things) and 2) by how consistent an individual or organization is vis-à-vis their code. Do they always follow it; what exceptions do they make; how do they justify or rationalize those exceptions? Note that in this example about the Ten Commandments, moral conduct is externally motivated; you and I do not create the code, we merely follow it, or not, as the case may be.
In the story “Red Wind” there is no externally articulated moral code. This seems to pose a special difficulty for us. However, since we believe that Marlowe believes he acts in a moral way (and we think we have evidence of this), then it is a question of an internal code, a code Marlowe is aware of but never openly articulates (as most of us tend to do with our own internal codes). This is to say his code is implicit in everything he says and does. So, in order as critics to articulate his moral code we must look carefully at each of the things he says and does, always asking ourselves: ‘what is the moral principle that he believes justifies this choice, guides this behaviour, frames this speech?’
To articulate Marlowe’s internal code we must look carefully at his doings and his speech, and extract the implicit code from them – dig it up (it is buried), pull it out (it is tangled up in other things), uncover it (it is hidden). Note that to carry out this labour of extraction is to adopt a reverse methodology from the example of the Ten Commandments above. In that case we started with the code or principles given to us, and merely compared an individual’s behaviour with what the code says. In the case of Marlowe’s implicit code we work the other way round: we work backwards from Marlowe’s speaking and doing to the principles which we believe underlie, guide and frame his acts and speech as moral or immoral: thus, from acts/speech to principles.
Recall that the principal way we judge a person is by reference to 1) the moral coherence of their code (is it a good one; good for whom?) and 2) the consistency with which they apply it in their speech and behaviour.
Consider the parable of ‘The 6:45 Professor.’ The 6:45 professor is perennially, and casually, late for class, but nonetheless makes a point of articulating to his students that ‘You must be here at 6:30; the class begins at 6:30; if you are not going to make a point of being here on time, you may as well not come.’
Notice that the professor clearly articulates an internal moral code, which seems to say: ‘You’ve signed up to be here at 6:30; to be morally consistent, you must honour your commitment.’ It also seems to strongly imply: ‘This is what I, the professor, do; you must do the same: live by your word.’ However, when we remember that it is the professor’s habit to saunter into the classroom at a leisurely 6:45, devil may care, we conclude that the professor does not live up to his moral code (he is absurdly inconsistent); he does not practice what he preaches, he does not walk the talk. In making a moral judgement against the professor, we weigh both his words and his acts — and in this case we conclude his acts trump his words, that his words effectively mean nothing.
The moral of the parable is that words and deeds do not always add up, that we are not machines, that we are sometimes inconsistent; we are, after all, human. And, since the same is true of Marlowe, then as students of fiction and human nature we should not strive to turn him into a moral machine (‘See, here again he acts like a moral robot’), but rather be aware of how he struggles to follow his moral code, as we all do, in one way or another (guilt is universal, unless you are a sociopath).
It may also help to ask, ‘What is the universe that Marlowe would create through speaking or acting the way he does?’ For example, what kind of universe does Marlowe seek to create by exchanging the pearls at the end of the story? Answers to questions of this kind point to the principles of a moral code, because a moral code is a set of guidelines for an ideal world (remember the 10 commandments?). It may also be helpful to ask ‘what is the moral nature of the world in which Marlowe finds himself?’; does he agree with that world, the moral principles of that world?; or does he differ, and strive to create his own vision of how things ought to be? Other things to consider: what does he say about the lady? How well does he know himself (is he anything like the professor in the parable, i.e., ignorant in a way of why he acts/speaks the way he does)? Why does he ask for the $500?; why does he take it (even if he gives it away)? Is he ever less than moral?
Your mission, thus, is to articulate the code as he sees it, and as you think it really is for him (these two are not necessarily the same). Finally, note it is not clear if he sees himself as a chivalric knight; the prompt merely suggests that he is like a knight, and a 20th century one at that. Remember, he is lives in a very different world and has a very different picture of the world.
y he acts/speaks the way he does)? Why does he ask for the $500?; why does he take it (even if he gives it away)? Is he ever less than moral?
Your mission, thus, is to articulate the code as he sees it, and as you think it really is for him (these two are not necessarily the same). Finally, note it is not clear if he sees himself as a chivalric knight; the prompt merely suggests that he is like a knight, and a 20th century one at that. Remember, he is lives in a very different world and has a very different picture of the world.
