Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wombat]

I think most good detective stories also work because they usually end up being about  basic human relationships and interactions, there's just normally a lot of red herrings to disguise it. Or maybe I read too much Agatha Christie.

This is true, but I never thought of Agatha Christie as one of the good examples of it.

I think that the reason that mysteries are so popular nowadays is that they have to have some structure and an ending that makes some sense. Whereas modern 'serious' fiction doesn't seem to be required to have a plot at all. In a detective story you have to actually tell a story, not just throw some random stuff on the page and hope people think it's deep.  Or maybe I read too many New Yorker short stories. (And that's only one by accident every few years - still WAY too many.)

[Doc]

This is true, but I never thought of Agatha Christie as one of the good examples of it.

There's a repeated line in the Miss Marple stories about living in a small village telling you everything you'll ever need to know about people. I always took that as a pointed hint that the point of the story wasn't what happens so much as who it's happening to and their relationships.

At the risk of introducing gender politics into the discussion I think this is also why (modern) crime writers seem to be predominantly female, or at least it seemed that way last time I was in that section of a book store. When guys try to write about murders you tend to end up with thrillers instead of mysteries.

[AugustWest]

This is true, but I never thought of Agatha Christie as one of the good examples of it.

I think that the reason that mysteries are so popular nowadays is that they have to have some structure and an ending that makes some sense. Whereas modern 'serious' fiction doesn't seem to be required to have a plot at all. In a detective story you have to actually tell a story, not just throw some random stuff on the page and hope people think it's deep.  Or maybe I read too many New Yorker short stories. (And that's only one by accident every few years - still WAY too many.)

HA!

I agree totally (and I still read almost every short story in the New Yorker).  That's one of my main criticisms with modern fiction -- it's gotten so stylized that there's no there there.  It's all well and good to write prose that is beautiful and innovative -- I admire a good sentence as much as the next guy.  But if the action conveyed is so tiny or internalized as to be undetectible that just unsatisfying.  I want style and plot.  (I'm looking at you William Gibson...)

Is the Detective Story the purest form of storytelling?  No.  I'm not sure what it means to be a pure form of storytelling?  I suppose the purest form would be a first-person narrative in which the storyteller is also the narrator told in chronological order (i.e.  This happened to me, then this happened to me, then this...) Would that be more like a "Journey Story"?

In a Detective story the detective is a stand in for the reader.  The essential plot details are revealed to the reader through the detective, so that adds a level of complexity to the story.  And the contrivances discussed by which authors present some details and hide others in order to create dramatic tension, well that's another level of complexity.  So I don't think a detective story is really very "pure" at all.

Which is A-OK with me.  A good detective story is extremely satisfying to read.  A good detective story requires a good detective.  I think getting to know those characters is more than half the fun of a detective story.  It's hard to come up with a truly new plot but interesting new characters are all over the place.

Two of my favorite detectives:  Edward X. Delany and Judge Dee Jin-ji

[CortJstr]

A post in this thread reminded me, has anybody played the IF game 9:05?

[KeithHernandez]

I think the last detective story I read was in the Hardy Boys series.

[Ruta Bagas]

A post in this thread reminded me, has anybody played the IF game 9:05?

Ooh! Ooh! Me, sir!

...but I don't really have anything interesting to say about it offhand. It did what it did well, though I was disappointed by what happened if you just waited around.

[CortJstr]

Ooh! Ooh! Me, sir!

...but I don't really have anything interesting to say about it offhand. It did what it did well, though I was disappointed by what happened if you just waited around.

Without know anything about the game I just happened to do the thing that you're not supposed to think of doing your first play through. It was still really interesting, though. Just waiting never occurred to me.

[Ruta Bagas]

Yeah, I think one of the difficulties it has is that the IF audience contains a significant chunk of people who will turn everything over with a fine-tooth comb because so many works of IF demand that you do so.

I like Adam Cadre. But then I've only played this and "Photopia" so I haven't all that much basis for that.

[CortJstr]

Yeah, I think one of the difficulties it has is that the IF audience contains a significant chunk of people who will turn everything over with a fine-tooth comb because so many works of IF demand that you do so.

I like Adam Cadre. But then I've only played this and "Photopia" so I haven't all that much basis for that.

I tend to prefer games that are more straight forward. Like Emily Short's Beauty and the Beast game. Or ones like Vault that don't require think of crazy things to finish but prompt you with an AMUSING menu after the game is over.

[lprkn]

I think the last detective story I read was in the Hardy Boys series.

Umm, yeah. Same here. Detective stories haven't ever really done it for me, although I did read and immensely enjoy Mystic River. Oh, and the Dirk Gently books.

But most good stories, like JL said, have to be good at the "slow reveal."

[CortJstr]

I guess Discworld books often have detective story elements too them. Especially the Sam Vimes books. And I dig me some Discworld.

[jaydub]

Whereas modern 'serious' fiction doesn't seem to be required to have a plot at all.

Every now and then I get an inferiority complex about my pastime reading material and make an effort to read something "worthy", and invariably come to this same conclusion.  Are the English programs out there promoting this type of arch inaccessibility?  Is this James Joyce's fault? 

[theinevitable]

i like it.