Pop.1280 by Jim Thompson

Pop. 1280 by Jim Thompson. 1964.

‘Oh, Nick! There’s just no one like you!’ ‘Well, I should hope not,’ I said. ‘The world’d be in a heck of a mess if there was.’

As a reader, I also hope there’s no one like Nick but I know it’s an illusion. Nick Corey is the sheriff of Pottsville, Potts County, somewhere in the Deep South of the USA (Oklahoma?). He’s a slacker, the kind of sheriff who eats like a pig (I bought a bite of lunch […] just a few sandwiches and some pie and potato chips and peanuts and cookies and sody-pop), puts his hat on his face, his feet on his desk and takes a nap after his giant meal. He carefully avoids arresting anybody. When a problem occurs, he always manages to come when the worse is over, makes a lot of noise to show he’s there but stays away from the battle field.

Nick is married to Myra and his fiend of a brother-in-law lives with them. Myra trapped him into marriage, pretending that he raped her. Myra has a murky relationship with her brother who skulks around in the streets at night, playing the peeping tom and staring at women through the windows. Let’s face it, Myra and Nick hate each other. We have a first glimpse at Nick’s twisted mind when he talks about his affair with Rose. She pretends to be Myra’s best friend to get around Nick but she loathes her and Nick knows it. He also perfectly knows that Rose’s husband Tom beats her and it never occurs to him he could enforce the law and do something about it.  

At the moment, Nick has too major problems:

1) The two pimps who pay him commissions in return for his turning a blind eye to their illegal business start to scoff at him.

2) The next sheriff election is coming soon and for the first time, he feels he could loose his position. And what else could he do? As he admits to himself:

All I’d ever done was sheriffin’. It was all I could do. Which was just another way of saying that all I could do was nothing. And if I wasn’t sheriff, I wouldn’t have nothing or be nothing.

At lost about what to do, he decides to pay a visit to his friend and mentor Ken, sheriff in another county. He values Ken’s recommendations and here is how he suggests treating the pimps problem:

‘So I’ll tell you what to do about them pimps. The next time they even look like they’re goin’ to sass you, you just kick ’em in the balls as hard as you can.’ ‘Huh?’ I said. ‘But – but don’t it hurt awful bad?’ ‘Pshaw, ’course it don’t hurt. Not if you’re wearin’ a good pair o’ boots without no holes in ’em.’ ‘That’s right,’ Buck said. ‘You just be sure you ain’t got any toes stickin’ out and it won’t hurt you a-tall.’ ‘I mean, wouldn’t it hurt the pimps?’ I said. ‘Me, I don’t think I could stand even an easy kick in the balls.’ ‘Why, shorely, shorely it would hurt ’em,’ Ken nodded. ‘How else you goin’ to make ’em behave if you don’t hurt ’em bad?’

Great consultant, that Ken, right? But Ken humiliates Nick and on the train home, he meets his former fiancée Amy. Now he knows how to deal with the pimps and starts wishing he could get rid of Myra and Rose.

Nick’s evil instincts remain in rather good check until this trip. It will take the pin of the grenade he has in his head and spread death and desolation in Pottsville. Step by step he will take any action necessary to achieve his goals: take revenge of Ken, get rid of Myra, secure his re-election, treat the problem of the pimps, break-up with Rose, re-conquer Amy. But for Nick, the end justifies the means. And cold blood murder IS an acceptable mean as long as it serves his interests.

What I loved was myself, and I was willing to do anything I god-dang had to to go on lying and cheating and drinking whiskey and screwing women and going to church on Sunday with all the other respectable people.

Nick is dangerous and crazy. Dangerously crazy or crazily dangerous, it depends on how you see it. He plays the dummy so that his adversary underestimates him. His spoken speech is full of grammar mistakes but his mental voice is perfectly correct. I thought it was a good device to point out Nick’s duplicity.

I nodded at the paper he was reading. ‘What do you think about them Bullshevicks?’ I said. ‘You reckon they’ll ever overthrow the Czar?’

Only Amy seems to know him well. She notices:

‘About your grammar, possibly. You’re no ignoramus, Nick. Why do you talk like one?’

She’s the only one he still respects and she acts like a moral guide. She tells the difference between right and wrong, partly guesses what he’s been doing and threatens to turn him down if he doesn’t come back on the right path. 

Nick is intelligent. He has a chilling gift to grasp the motivation of his speaker. It made me think of selling techniques. Sales reps are taught to identify the motivation of a client in order to adapt their speech and improve their selling efficiency. The main motivations are security, pride, novelty, comfort, money and sympathy. Nick is an artist at manipulating people. He does know how to play on the right motivation to get what he wants from someone.  

I wouldn’t want to be one of the 1280 souls living in Pottsville. The picture isn’t very attractive: the inhabitants are racist (they still doubt that black people have a soul), violent (they beat their wives and children) and ignorant. In comparison, Nick seems tolerant sometimes, especially when it comes to coloured people. They seem to deserve their lazy and screwy sheriff. And after all, don’t they vote for him? Jim Thompson’s vision of humanity is of the blackest black. The events follow from one awful thing to the other at such a pace that it becomes black comedy sometimes.  

That wasn’t easy for me to read, with all the slang and words like prezackly, Kee-rect!, Natcherly or Shorely. I still try to figure out what the French word for “God-dang” is. Given the context and the use, my guess would be putain but I’m not sure. The French title is 1275 âmes, I wonder why the 1280 from the English title became 1275. Because of 5 murders?

Anyway, I really enjoyed it and will read another Jim Thompson. It will be the The Killer Inside Me, which came in the post last week. I owe this discovery to Guy’s Noir Fest. He reviewed Pop. 1280 here and reading his review is highly recommended.

About Coup de Torchon, by Tavernier, the film version of Pop. 1280.

After reading the book, I decided to rent its film version, Coup de Torchon (1981), a French film by Bertrand Tavernier. Tavernier transposed the setting in the French colonies in Africa, in 1938. If Tavernier wanted to give a French context to the film, I think it was a good choice. He was able to keep several crucial elements of the story: the awful treatment of black people, the absolute power of the policeman/sheriff on the city, the small town far from big cities, the corruption, the atmosphere of poverty of means and mind. He couldn’t have given back the atmosphere of a small town in the middle of nowhere, self-sufficient in Métropole. France is too centralised a country to film this in Métropole.

Here is the cast, with French first names: Philippe Noiret (Nick-Lucien), Stéphane Audran (Myra-Huguette), Isabelle Huppert (Rose), Eddy Mitchell (Nono-Lennie). The choice of actors can be discussed. I’m not sure that Philippe Noiret was the best actor to play Nick. He lacks the glint of madness needed for the part. Maybe Depardieu would have been better?

The scenario is well-written. Exact sentences of the novel can be heard in the dialogues but it’s too polite, except for Rose. Lucien speaks too well; he doesn’t make as many grammar mistakes as Nick. I’ve read the book in English; so I can’t tell how it’s been translated into French. But in my experience, French translators fail to give back the accents included in Anglophone books.

What lacked in the film is the vision the reader has of Nick’s mind. I wrote the book review before watching the film. Like I said before, Jim Thompson created two different voices for Nick (thoughts and speech) and I thought it very efficient. I think it even more efficient after watching the film, as I missed the vision of Nick’s duplicity. Perhaps a voiceover would have been useful.

One word about the music: a sort of circus music came again and again at crucial moments, enforcing the idea of a black comedy.

All in all, I think it’s a good film and but it’s not as black as Thompson’s novel.

  1. July 21, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    The chnage of title for the French version is hilarious. I find it interesting that Tavernier chose to locate it in Africa. I’m not sure what to think of the book as a whole. I first read Guy’s review (haven’t commenetd yet) and now yours. Nick is quite a character, is he likebale despite his being dangerously crazy or crazily dangerous (it is quite different, I agree).

    Like

    • July 21, 2011 at 12:08 pm

      Really I don’t understand why they changed the number.
      Nick has good sides and a moderate way to cope with problems sometimes. He’s a negociator who can also be a manipulator. When his own safety is at stake, he becomes violent.

      Like

  2. July 21, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    As I read my copy I thought of you and all the re-wording in the book.

    I was told that Coup de Torchon was unrecognisable as the book, but I found the film an excellent translation of the story. And I agree–the transposition to the colonies was a brilliant idea. I’m a Tavernier fan btw.

    The third quote you used was one of my favourites. I had a difficult time narrowing down the quotes I selected. I laughed at the way Ken told Nick to kick the pimps in the balls and then Nick asked if it would hurt–then both men took that question to have a different meaning. Loved this book. Nick is a hell of a character.

    Like

    • July 21, 2011 at 4:10 pm

      I thought this quote was fantastic and it’s so typical of the book. And of course, the beginning with the wooden toilets just under his windows was more than funny.
      Jim Thompson is really cinematographic, I could imagine the place, the sheriff in the old town, the heat.

      I was impressed by the manipulation Nick could put in place, especially when he started rumours about his competitor for the sheriff election. Of course you think Nick is a real bastard for acting that way but in the end, the others who spread the rumour are worse than him.

      Like

      • July 21, 2011 at 8:05 pm

        I knew someone who excelled at spreading rumours just by denying them (as Nick does).

        Like

        • July 21, 2011 at 9:43 pm

          I’m sure there are many people out there who excel in doing this.

          Like

  3. July 21, 2011 at 8:57 pm

    I liked this book a lot too, and I thought the vicious social satire it has was a nice change-up for Thompson. The social critique is always, you could say, implicit in noir, but here it is out front, with a lot of tall-tale crazy humor too. I put it up at the top of the list too.

    I commented elsewhere on Guy’s page about the movie – I just didn’t like it so much. Good, but if I hadn’t read the book, don’t know if I would be interested, and it definitely lost a lot. But then, an adaptation is not a faithful rendering, or need not be. I suspect that the outlandish aspect of the novel either did not interest or totally escaped the filmmaker.

    My 2-cents: http://iamyouasheisme.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/hells-high-sheriff/

    Like

    • July 21, 2011 at 9:47 pm

      Hi, thanks for visiting.
      That was my first Thompson, so I can’t compare.
      The film didn’t show how nasty Nick/Lucien is. I think it’s a good adaptation though. Transferring the setting in the African colonies was very clever. I’ve read the book in English and seen the film in French and could still hear Thompson’s prose somewhere. However, Nick’s accent is very hard to translater and that’s why Lucien doesn’t sound as twisted as Nick.

      Like

  4. July 21, 2011 at 9:00 pm

    I liked this book a lot too, and I thought the vicious social satire it has was a nice change-up for Thompson. The social critique is always, you could say, implicit in noir, but here it is out front, with a lot of tall-tale crazy humor too. I put it up at the top of the list too.

    I commented elsewhere on Guy’s page about the movie – I just didn’t like it so much. Good, but if I hadn’t read the book, don’t know if I would be interested, and it definitely lost a lot. But then, an adaptation is not a faithful rendering, or need not be. I suspect that the outlandish aspect of the novel either did not interest or totally escaped the filmmaker.

    My 2-cents: http://iamyouasheisme.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/hells-high-sheriff/

    P.S. I suspect a title like Pop. 1280 would be meaningless to a Francophone audience, while it has a lot of resonance with Americans, especially any who know the west. I can’t think of an English idiom to translate the French – “Wiped Clean?”

    Like

    • July 21, 2011 at 9:51 pm

      Sorry, I didn’t understand the PS. What does Pop.1280 mean or refer to?
      It’s been translated into French as “1275 âmes”. “Ames” is a way to talk about the number of inhabitants in a city. I don’t know if the number is down by 5 units because of the murders or because in Thompson’s book someone says black people don’t have a soul. (which is, as you know because your French is good, the English word for “âme”)

      Like

      • July 22, 2011 at 1:23 am

        Pop. 1280 just means “population: 1280” as in the 1275 âmes in French.

        Like

        • July 22, 2011 at 8:14 am

          Yes, that’s what I thought. After Lichanos’s comment, I thought there was a double meaning I hadn’t seen.

          Like

  5. July 22, 2011 at 1:18 am

    I haven’t read the book yet (it’s been collecting dust on a shelf for a couple of years now), Emma, but I really enjoyed the Tavernier movie based on it. Even reviewed it for a reading/viewing challenge a while back! Thompson was an interesting character in real life apparently, and though I’m not sure how his books would hold up for me today, I have fond memories of two or three of them that I read in the late ’80s or early ’90s plus equally fond memories of several good movie adaptations of his works (especially The Grifters). P.S. You’re aware that “God-dang” is just a slightly nicer substitute for “goddamn,” right? I wasn’t sure about this from your post. Most of the other words you singled out are just phonetic spellings of regional pronunciation or “lower class” American dialect and the like.

    Like

    • July 22, 2011 at 8:14 am

      Have a look at Guy’s blog, there’s a lot of interesting stuff about Jim Thompson there.
      If you had asked me, I wouldn’t have told you that god-dang was for goddamn but I felt it. You’re used to reading in another language, you know what I mean. You understand words and concepts and sometimes it’s even hard to put the right word in your own language on it.
      Don’t worry, I didn’t try to look for the words I mentioned into the dictionary. I reconciled the spelling with the sound but it slowed my reading. However, it would have been the same in French. I used to have a girl-friend who made so many spelling and grammar mistakes that I had to read her letters aloud to understand what she meant.

      Like

  6. July 22, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    Regarding the title – it’s easy to translate Pop. 1280 into French, and 1280 (1275) âme is just fine. What I meant is that in American culture, the tiny, one-horse town, the town with one traffic light, the almost-ghost town, is a fixture of pop culture, especially in the west. So the title has a distinct set of connotations: dismissive, decrepit, hick-town, etc. Like the jokes about signs on the road – “Entering Nowheresville” and five hundred feet later, “Leaving Nowheresville.”

    The feel of it has to do with the tiny, insignificant towns being plopped down in a lot of empty space. I know there are tiny towns in France, but you don’t have so much empty space over there! Not like Texas!

    Like

    • July 22, 2011 at 2:55 pm

      Actually, the American culture is so massively imported here that I got the allusion of Nowhereville just fine. 🙂 That’s exactly how I imagined Pottsville.
      You’re right, we don’t have that in France, and probably not in Western Europe. That’s why I thought Tavernier was clever to transpose the setting in Africa.

      Like

      • July 22, 2011 at 5:45 pm

        When translating a novel to the screen, for me, I want either A) a very faithful adaptation
        B) a creative interpretation.

        Tavernier’s film was the latter. He took the essence of Pop 1280 and made it uniquely his own.

        Like

  7. July 22, 2011 at 5:55 pm

    Yes, I agree with Guy, it was a clever move.

    Like

  8. leroyhunter
    July 22, 2011 at 10:15 pm

    I was sceptical about the film version but Emma’s thoughts and the comments here have changed my mind. I have a long list of Tavernier I want to see.

    By chance I was watching Melville’s Le Doulos last night, and, while scrutinising the credits in my anorak-fashion, I noticed: Publicité – Bertrand Tavernier. Gotta start somewhere!

    Like

    • July 23, 2011 at 7:42 pm

      Tell me what you think about it when you watch it

      Like

  9. September 12, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    Either this or The Killer Inside me will be my next Thompson, still not sure which. Lovely review and this does sound just tremendous. As you say, they voted for him, they have the sherrif that they deserve. If he’s a monster that says nothing good about them.

    Nobody it seems does disturbed like Thompson.

    Like

    • September 12, 2011 at 3:41 pm

      Honestly, The Killer Inside Me beats Pop. 1280 on the disturbed scale. As I wrote in my review, the film is used in a psychiatric hospital near here, to train the nurses…

      I’ll read another one, probably A Hell of a Woman, now that I’ve seen it’s been made into a film by Alain Corneau.

      Like

  1. July 21, 2011 at 3:06 pm
  2. July 30, 2011 at 8:19 am
  3. August 22, 2011 at 10:52 pm
  4. September 6, 2011 at 9:00 am

I love to hear your thoughts, thanks for commenting. Comments in French are welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: