Reading the Detectives discussion
General chat
>
Should crime writers stick to the rules?
Jill wrote: "I totally agree, Betsy but I was just curious if readers thought that the certainty of forensics took away the author's ability to come up with a complex puzzle and an interesting detective..........."Great question. It certainly detracts from the mystique of the detective, like Sherlock Holmes recognizing cigar ash -- nowadays they would send it to the lab and it would come back as a so-and-such cigar from lot number XXX sold to Blackwild's Tobacco Shop in March, 2015. Boring!
I can see your point, but a good author would hopefully find ways to make the scientific approach more interesting that just a straightforward telling. Since the GA stories were fiction, the authors could manipulate the findings to make their cases more intriguing.
We have more of the sub-genre of police procedural in modern mysteries and there are some darned good authors out there that keep it interesting. Not as many of the amateur detectives as before or at least I don't think so. So the approach has to be different and forensics is part of the story. It is just something I am always arguing to myself about.
Cozies seem to be the focus of amateurs detectives now, but frankly I have given up on those.
Mod
Betsy wrote: "Cozies seem to be the focus of amateurs detectives now, but frankly I have given up on those."Many of today's cozy mysteries are too fluffy and light for my taste. The book covers are too cute and soft and the mysteries themselves go down like cotton candy -- all fluff and not much substance. I much prefer the flavor of the cozy mysteries from the Golden Age where the mysteries were like a full-course meal--appetizing and left you mostly satisfied.
I'm glad you mentioned the cutesy covers on many cozies. They look like something out of a marshmallow comic book. Am not sure why many publishers have gone to that style.What books would you say are GA cozies?
Betsy wrote: "I'm glad you mentioned the cutesy covers on many cozies. They look like something out of a marshmallow comic book. Am not sure why many publishers have gone to that style.What books would you say..."
I like to write mysteries and if I ever had a book published, I would not want the publishers to put up a cutesy, cotton-candy cover.
Well for one, Agatha Christie's Miss Marple books are considered "cozies". I hate to use the word "cozies" because murder is anything but cozy but I know why they use it but I think the term is wrong for any of Christie's books.
I'm not sure why they use 'cozy' in connection with Agatha Christie, however, maybe that is because of the modern cozies. Could you tell me what the thinking is on that score? Thanks.
Mod
I feel this is often a mis-representation of what GA fiction is. Christie certainly had quite violent deaths (Mrs McGinty for one) and Sayers dealt with topical themes, such as the death penalty. As we have said before, British crime fiction went along different lines than the more 'hard boiled' US version, mostly as, after WWI, readers were uncomfortable with too much obvious violence and had had enough blood. However, crosswords were madly popular and so crime novels took on board that puzzle element and shut the door firmly on too much violence.
I think I understand about the connection now, but American cozies are so 'different' (and not always in a good way) that it is almost impossible to equate them.
Mod
Betsy wrote: "I think I understand about the connection now, but American cozies are so 'different' (and not always in a good way) that it is almost impossible to equate them."Well, they certainly can't write cozies the way the British do. I think they are much better. There might be an cozy written by an American that is good but that is like finding a diamond in the rough in my opinion.
LovesMysteries wrote: "Betsy wrote: "I think I understand about the connection now, but American cozies are so 'different' (and not always in a good way) that it is almost impossible to equate them."Well, they certainl..."
American writers do attempt to write cozies set in England/UK, usually making up false biographies to try to garner some of that reputation of 'British' writers, but their tone is usually wrong. Cozies set in America would be a different matter.
Mod
Susan wrote: "I agree that many American authors who try to write mysteries set in the UK get things wrong that grate with readers (and vice versa, I am sure), then complain when you point out that a 'sidewalk' ..."If the main character is an American in the UK then I could tolerate them using the wrong words for things. (Possibly ;) )
What really annoys me is when they have no idea of the geography and wildlife native to the UK. Distances between places are all wrong and they continually meet what can only be creatures that have escaped from a zoo.
Mod
Susan wrote: "Yes, or historical novels where people behave in ways which would be totally inappropriate. I am glad I am not the only one annoyed by such inaccuracies, Jay-me! It makes me feel I am not just being overly grumpy at times :) ..."No not overly grumpy at all :)
I recently read a book and was so annoyed by parts of it that I highlighted them and wrote comments. I suppose I could have collected all the notes and emailed the author, but I couldn't be bothered.
It did make me feel better though. ;)
I think you should have sent them to the author--handling it in a nice way, not accusatory. The auhor MIGHT have appreciated the information before writing another book. Although I suspect they would just ignore you as one author did with my suggestions. ;-)It always amazes me that every author who rates their own books on GR, always gives them 5 stars. Are they that desperate to have one 5-star rating?
I did write to one author, because I was so annoyed, mainly by her 'bio' claims of being Cambridge educated etc, when she didn't seem to know anything about the UK political system, and where she had a Private Detective 'call in' Scotland Yard to a suspicious death, before the local police had even visited the scene. And the Scotland Yard detective responded!I have had no reply.
Rosina wrote: "I did write to one author, because I was so annoyed, mainly by her 'bio' claims of being Cambridge educated etc, when she didn't seem to know anything about the UK political system, and where she h..."Perhaps it was Cambridge, USA.
Like Paris, Texas
Jay-me (Janet) wrote: "Rosina wrote: "I did write to one author, because I was so annoyed, mainly by her 'bio' claims of being Cambridge educated etc, when she didn't seem to know anything about the UK political system, ..."Cambridge-educated, British-born, a 'lawyer' in Lincoln's Inn Fields ...
And wrote: “Posie remembered how, years before, at the age of twenty-one, Alaric had decided he would become a politician, and had caused a huge scandal by giving up his aristocratic title in order to do so.” In about 1910, when the last but one PM was the third Marquess of Salisbury ...
What is really depressing is how many reviews gush about the writer really conveying the time and place, and the wonderful details ...
Rosina wrote: "LovesMysteries wrote: "Betsy wrote: "I think I understand about the connection now, but American cozies are so 'different' (and not always in a good way) that it is almost impossible to equate them..."I love to write cozies set in Britain and I most certainly don't want to get the tone wrong. And that's what worries me as someone who likes to write these type of stories.I think an American can write an authentic cozy set in Britain, with the right tone and flavor and have the English setting come alive. It may take more work than a native Brit but it's not impossible.
Rosina, how do Americans get the tone wrong?
Susan wrote: "I agree that many American authors who try to write mysteries set in the UK get things wrong that grate with readers (and vice versa, I am sure), then complain when you point out that a 'sidewalk' is a pavement, a 'cookie' is a biscuit, etc. etc. I think if you set a series in a country not your own, you need to get the details correct.I agree, an American author definitely needs to get the details correct. And like I said in a previous post, it may take more work than native Brit writers, but it's possible for an American to write authentic English cozy mysteries, having the setting and characters come alive. Once the manuscript is accepted by the publisher and the copyediting stage approaches, the copyeditor needs to make sure that all the details are correct, and go through that story with a fine toothcomb. The writer can edit that page as many times as he/she can but it needs a fresh pair of eyes to confirm that everything is right. If not, the copyeditor needs to point it out and correct it or have the writer do it.
I'm violently allergic to anachronisms. One "okay" in an 18th century (or medieval!) novel can be enough to make me DNF a book - and, if it's not on my Kindle, possibly throw it against the wall. I'll never understand why someone insists on setting a book in a specific time or place and then can't be bothered to do the research to use the setting properly.
I tend to agree with you about anachronisms, but if the story is a good one, I tend to be forgiving to some extent. That's when I would mention the mistakes in a review, hoping that the author would take note.
Tracey wrote: "I'm violently allergic to anachronisms. One "okay" in an 18th century (or medieval!) novel can be enough to make me DNF a book - and, if it's not on my Kindle, possibly throw it against the wall. I..."Or why they insist on peopling the book with the aristocracy, without finding out how titles, and courtesy titles work. You can spend most of your life in England, now or in the past, without needing to write about Lord John Brown, or Sir Smith.
Mod
I definitely agree these kinds of things annoy me more if I'm not enjoying the book - if I'm loving the story in general, I'm inclined not to worry so much, although an anachronism can still jar.
My daughter used to work in publishing, and she says sometimes American words in a book set in Britain may be down to the publisher rather than the author, if it's an edition mainly aimed at readers in the US. I don't know if this also happens the other way round.
I've also come across this in audio books - I listened to one where the reader was a Brit with an accent like Prince Philip, reading a book set in Britain, but gave about six words an American pronunciation every time they occurred - very odd.
Mod
Judy wrote: "My daughter used to work in publishing, and she says sometimes American words in a book set in Britain may be down to the publisher rather than the author, if it's an edition mainly aimed at readers in the US. I don't know if this also happens the other way round."If I had a book published that was set in Britain, I rather use the words and spelling (if not the spelling than words are enough) that the Brits used, authentically portraying the English setting. In this regard, I wish publishers would think about the reader's experience and giving them the most authentic experience possible. If the story doesn't give off the tone of a story set in Britain and the time period it's set in, then the correct words and spelling doesn't matter.
LovesMysteries wrote: "Rosina, how do Americans get the tone wrong? It's a cumulative effect, rather than a single item or word choice - although cookies, pancakes (other than on Shrove Tuesday), and a general attraction to American rather than British cultural items does add to it. But I do think that there are differences which I can't analyse between the rhythms of American English and British English.
If you are going to write cozies (or mysteries set in England) you will probably not get it totally right. But provided you don't pretend that you are English born, bred and educated, and don't go on about how you based the scene of your mystery on the perfectly cute village you live in in idyllic Gloucestershire you will be cut some slack!
For example: Set in a tiny village in the Cotswolds, where a new fellow has just moved in "That slime from the city came in and scooped it up for nothing." "So he's from the city?"There is something obviously pejorative about the use of 'city', but the question wouldn't be 'So he's from the city?' but 'Which city are you talking about? Bath? Oxford? Birmingham? Gloucester? Bristol? Hereford? Edinburgh? London?' (I assume we're meant to think London, but that might just be my English attitude to 'city' used as an insult!) But it really doesn't work in England, where several cities may be within an hour's drive.
I am much more tolerant of the 'incorrect' (for whatever reason) use of words in fiction than incorrect facts in non-fiction. As I said before, the enjoyment of a novel is most important to me. Of course, I'd like them to be perfect in grammar, manner of speaking, and spelling, but I'd hate to miss 'a little gem' because of a few wrongly-used words.
I agree with you Betsy. If the plot is good I can forgive the "incorrect"
Was I mistaken? I was under the impression that the phrase "the city" referred to the financial sector of London. So where I have read that a character was from the city I assumed that he was from finance or possibly government in London. I did not assume that London was the only city in England.
I was reading something that was kind of cozy using my city of Chicago and the author had three references to Sheridan Road spelled in as many ways within as many pages. I wasn't that crazy about the book to begin with. I read no further. Thank goodness I didn't pay anything for it. And I haven't picked up the author since.
Learn how to spell primary street names and stick with one spelling. Otherwise, why not use simpler to spell names, like Western or Broadway?
Jan C wrote: "Was I mistaken? I was under the impression that the phrase "the city" referred to the financial sector of London. So where I have read that a character was from the city I assumed that he was from ..."That would be 'the City' And mainly in the sense 'he works in the City (and lives in a nice converted manor house in the Home Counties). That is indeed shorthand for either an extremely rich banker, or someone engaged in dubious financial practices, not yet rumbled, but likely to lead to scandal and bankrupcy.
If you mean 'in the Government'or in Parliament, you'd say Westminster, not the City (although Westminster is also a city, I don't think I've ever heard it called the city, or the City, and I worked in it for thirty odd years. Working for the Government used to be shortened to Whitehall, though Government Offices are a bit more spread out these days.
An uncapitalised city would just be the nearest one. "That slime from the city' does not sound as if it means 'That greedy bastard banker from the City'
Mod
Susan wrote: "Another annoyance is talking about walking in 'blocks'. If only anyone had actually given any thought about laying out London, rather than letting it grow organically! I went for a meeting yesterda..."I thought an alley was a "close".
Two countries (maybe Canada, too) divided by a single language.
Jay-me (Janet) wrote: "If the main character is an American in the UK then I could tolerate them using the wrong words for things. (Possibly ;) )What really annoys me is when they have no idea of the geography and wildlife native to the UK. Distances between places are all wrong and they continually meet what can only be creatures that have escaped from a zoo.
I wonder, how you would find out the distances between places in England if you're writing a period piece, say in the 1930's or 40's?
LovesMysteries wrote: "Jay-me (Janet) wrote: "If the main character is an American in the UK then I could tolerate them using the wrong words for things. (Possibly ;) )What really annoys me is when they have no idea of ..."
I would think you would look for an atlas from that period. Libraries generally keep them.
Mod
I love this conversation since I am a lover of British mystery. Lately, I gave up on one pretty quickly when the American author said the "Thames River",
Mod
It it difficult but when I saw that error, it is one that most people know....or at least an author should know. I was afraid to see what else might be in store, since I figured the author hadn't done much research to make that simple mistake. I usually try to overlook many of the spellings, etc. but for some reason that one just stood out like a sore thumb.
English authors make these mistakes though about England. Even ones who in live in London make mistakes about London. I read a non mystery book set partly in Mile End (East London) and it seemed the author had never been there despite living in London. I lived there for seven years so know that area blindfolded. It's zone two of the tube and its laziness really for the author not going there but writing things such as "the escalators were not working at Mile End so she took the stairs.". There are no escalators at the tube at Mile End, never have been and I suspect never will be without a complete redesign of the station. It was an unnecessary sentence anyway but lazy and enough to make you think, hmmmmm have you ever been to London?I work in politics and law and it is ridiculous how many times British born people get things wrong, particularly our court system. Just Google it oh lazy people who don't research, Wikipedia will tell you the answer in about two seconds.
Jan C wrote: "I thought an alley was a "close".."An alley is a narrow passage between buildings, not open to general traffic, but usually open at both ends and serving as a shortcut for pedestrians and cyclists between two more important roads.. Called a 'ginnel' up north.
A close is - well, it depends whether you're in Scotland or England, and from the sound of it, Canadian usage has come to you from Scotland, where it's the private entryway, sometimes gated, into a group of buildings. Quite often extending to the poor tenement housing that would be accessed by it.
In England (Southern England?) a close is a short road that does not have an exit, but is mainly used for cul de sacs on a suburban estate, where the houses are smart and benefit from not having traffic zooming past. Thus the cachet of living in a close depends on whether you're talking Kent or Edinburgh.
Jill wrote: "I love this conversation since I am a lover of British mystery. Lately, I gave up on one pretty quickly when the American author said the "Thames River","It is something I note with interest - in Great Britain, River always precedes the name, no matter how large or small the stream is, or is dropped completely (which is probably more usual). The River Thames, or the Thames, the River Tyne , the Clyde. In America, River always (?) comes after the name - the Mississippi River, the Hudson River.
As you say, getting it wrong is a sure sign that the writer is not familiar with British usage.
Rosina wrote: "Jan C wrote: "I thought an alley was a "close".."An alley is a narrow passage between buildings, not open to general traffic, but usually open at both ends and serving as a shortcut for pedestria..."
This is something we (at least in Chicago) would call a "gangway". It may have other names in other parts of the US.
Mod
Reading the Detectives
Books mentioned in this topic
The Spy Who Couldn't Spell: A Dyslexic Traitor, an Unbreakable Code, and the FBI's Hunt for America's Stolen Secrets (other topics)MURDER MYSTERIES - S.S. Van Dine Edition: 12 Detective Novels in One Volume (Illustrated): Philo Vance Solves Golden Age Crimes in Twenties New York (other topics)
The Moving Toyshop (other topics)
The Golden Age of Murder (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Tana French (other topics)Val McDermid (other topics)
S.S. Van Dine (other topics)
Ronald Knox (other topics)
Unfortunately, that does require that the writer is meticulously careful elsewhere, or the 'clue' becomes lost in all the inaccuracies. I remember a Ngaio Marsh where the identity of the criminal was revealed because he used an Australian rather than an American word. But modern cosies set in a historic England are spattered with Americanisms that weren't being used in those days, and alleged members of the aristocracy who can't even remember what their own titles are. I spent ages suspected the detective as being a con man, because his 'title' and his claim to hold a peerage didn't match, and he spoke of the Reverend Merriwether, rather than the Reverend Mr Merriwether.)