Does Outdated Technology Spoil a Story?

[Martyn]

Barbara wrote: "...my quibble is not so much with characters who won't use the latest gizmos but with those who refuse to have a cell phone altogether. Then when the technology-averse detective (or other main character) gets some vital clue or gets caught in a dangerous situation ...he/she can't communicate right away."

My protagonist is a freelance assassin who knows how easy it is to track cell phones and, especially, smartphones, so she carries them disassembled and only assembles one of her many pre-paid anonymous 'burner' phones when she needs to make a call.
To receive 'calls' she carries an old-fashioned pager, which is not only more dependable (receives messages in underground concrete parking garages, etcetera), doesn't need to be switched off in tech situations (airplanes, hospitals), but also cannot be tracked like a cell phone. Pagers don't give out the location of the wearer.
So, sometimes, from a position of covert operations, old technology clearly beats new technology.

[Martyn]

Dennis wrote: "...might look dumb, but I believe that is the recommended way to hold a flashlight when holding a gun.
http://www.iwillnotbeavictim.com/flas..."

Interesting link. And yes, AFAIK, most Glocks have a rail under the barrel for a tactical light. I expect other brands to also have ways to fix tactical lights to the guns.

So, it's not 'stupid' it's 'law enforcement training'. The idea of holding the flashlight in line with your muzzle is to be able to shoot immediately what it illuminates, but it can also draw fire.

And I think it's smarter than Clarice Starling entering the dark lair of a serial killer without a flashlight...

[Dennis]

Martyn wrote: "Dennis wrote: "...might look dumb, but I believe that is the recommended way to hold a flashlight when holding a gun.
http://www.iwillnotbeavictim.com/flas..."

Interesting link. ..."

Another link which shows flashlight in close and also away from body. I think the main point that TV shows fail to follow is one doesn't leave the flashlight on, just when absolutely needed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb1QMq...

[Martyn]

Dennis wrote: "Another link which shows flashlight in close and also away from body. I think the main point that TV shows fail to follow is one doesn't leave the flashlight on, just when absolutely needed."

Well, if you read the text under the photos in the first link, they also say that there's always a time and place for intermittent use of a flashlight.

And TV shows are not the best source for information anyway.

[Dennis]

Martyn wrote: "Dennis wrote: "Another link which shows flashlight in close and also away from body. I think the main point that TV shows fail to follow is one doesn't leave the flashlight on, just when absolutely..."

LOL I hope it didn't sound like I was defending TV shows for proper techniques. :) I was just pointing out that holding a flashlight next to the gun is not as stupid as it seems. It's a little tough shooting a gun when you have you other arm fully extended to the side.

Also wouldn't make for good TV if the protagonist kept flashing the light on and off. :)

[Barbara]

Martyn wrote: "Barbara wrote: "...my quibble is not so much with characters who won't use the latest gizmos but with those who refuse to have a cell phone altogether. Then when the technology-averse detective (or..."

Good point Martyn. For spy situations, cell phones maybe aren't the best idea. But for regular old detectives.....I think they should carry them. ;)

[R.]

Okay Folks. Not sure if I was supposed to use reply on last person or comment but…

Here is my two cents on flashlights:

Have we forgotten that if you have a choice, you may want to retain your night vision by keeping the lights off? Possibly let the other guy or gal use a light and then you can get a fix on them.

But I can tell you from actual experience of looking for an intruder in my home, I didn’t use a flashlight as I knew the turf and they did not.

And the reason low-tech works so well is less to fail. Remember Murphy's law-What can go wrong will go wrong.

R Felini
author of Chicago Style
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...

[Martyn]

Barbara wrote: "Good point Martyn. For spy situations, cell phones maybe aren't the best idea. But for regular old detectives.....I think they should carry them. ;)"

Well, it could be a plot point that unsecured hands-free cell phone bases in cars can be eavesdropped easily, so you cannot only listen in to the phone, but also through the mike in the hands-free kit listen to all the conversations in the car. That's something your detective could either use or fall victim to.

[Pam]

It doesn't bother me if the story is set in the 70's or 80's when the technology wasn't what it is now. Sue Grafton is a case in point - but there have been times i found myself wishing that the story was taking place in the here and now. There can be so much more added to the story and plot with all the advances of the 21st century.

[Pamela]

The reason the tv shows such as CSI have people using flashlights rather than turning on the house lights is that the director is using the flashlight as a rather heavy-handed and unimaginative way to 1) draw the audience's attention to specific items/areas and 2) to create a sense of suspense. Once you look at it that way it becomes beyond annoying. And while on the subject of annoying, exactly who are they trying to fool when they have actors wearing full head helmets with lights that illuminate nothing more than the actor's face?

[Rapidio]

Pamela wrote: "The reason the tv shows such as CSI have people using flashlights rather than turning on the house lights is that the director is using the flashlight as a rather heavy-handed and unimaginative way..."

Oh, I hate that,all these guys running around in the dark. My wife watches these shows and I always ask her, "why don't they turn on the damn lights?"

[Martyn]

Rapidio wrote: "Oh, I hate that,all these guys running around in the dark. My wife watches these shows and I always ask her, "why don't they turn on the damn lights?"

There are some good reasons why a crime scene investigator might use a flashlight instead of flip a switch and turn on the lights, for instance:

- the lights can be booby-trapped to explode when they receive electric current,
- the space can be filled with toxic/volatile fumes that might explode if electric current is added to the mix,
- using a flashlight helps dividing a crime scene when 'walking the grid', a methodical search system where a complete view would be distracting.

Of course, if any of this valid reasons are a concern, they should be addressed in the show...

[Pamela]

Rapidio wrote: "Oh, I hate that,all these guys running around in the dark. My wife watches these shows and I always ask her, "why don't they turn on the damn lights?"


Yeah, nothing sucks worse than being jerked around by a jerk of a director. :) One of the reasons I don't watch CSI any more--the other reason being that we haven't had a tv service (cable or satellite) for years. The shows we like, we either Netflix the dvds or buy them if we really like it. Not being tied to the tv is really amazing! There is so much to do and time to do it in if you can break away from that screen

[Georgia]

Only if the story relies too much on the tech. I'm reading a 1994 book by Ridley Pearson in which much of the plot was the use
of cell phones and ATMs. It spoiled it for me and now
I'm skimming thru to see if the guilty ones are apprehended. Of course they will be.

[Rapidio]

Martyn wrote: "Rapidio wrote: "Oh, I hate that,all these guys running around in the dark. My wife watches these shows and I always ask her, "why don't they turn on the damn lights?"

There are some good reasons w..."

You watch too much TV. First of all--these are supposed to be crime scene investigators---no where close to being 1st responders, to whom most of your concerns would be valid.

Which brings me to my biggest gripe about these shows. What on earth are CSI's doing running around with guns chasing suspects. CSI personnel are technicians and scientists not SWAT teams. Good grief.

[K.A.]

None of them ever seem to have any body armor handy, either. I admit, it does ruin the bustline.

[Susan]

Iain wrote: "I read a Dick Francis novel fairly recently - the title escapes me - which was centred round some computer tapes. Tapes. It was written in the early 80s and, as a geek, I actually rather liked it..."

I think you might mean Twice Shy.

[L.L.]

I just came across something rather clever that pertains to updating novels when publishing them as ebooks.

I read Going Nowhere Fast, the first Joe and Dottie Loudermilk mystery by Gar Anthony Haywood, published in 1992 or thereabouts. I enjoyed it, so I purchased the Kindle version of the second one, Bad News Travels Fast, published in '94.

The opening of Bad News Travels Fast consists of some brief paragraphs in italics, told by Dottie, the first person narrator of the series. The first couple of paragraphs explain the back story -- how Joe and Dottie retired, sold their home, purchased a motor home, and set out to fulfill their dream of seeing the US--and staying away from their five adult children. The next paragraphs explain the setting of the story, not the physical setting but the time setting. Amusingly written, it explains that the story takes place back when pay phones were the only way to call home when you were on the road, when people looked things up at a library instead of online, and when "wireless" wasn't a word anyone knew.

I think the first couple of paragraphs explaining why Joe and Dottie are on the road all the time must be an intro in the print book, which made it unnecessary for an explanation to be worked into the story. And then the author added the information about when the story's taking place for the Kindle version, as a way to let readers know right from the start why no one has a cell phone or knows what Twitter is. I think it's a great idea. The readers aren't going to be confused when no one seems to have a cell phone and the original story remains intact.

I'm actually considering writing something similar and using it as a preface for the Z. Smith and the Charlie and Lizbet books. I'm not sure it's necessary, though, since the amazon page gives the pub. date of the print books so people should be aware that the setting is several years ago.

[Pamela]

Don't you find it more than a bit sad that the book has to explain that things weren't always as they are now, that there were no cell phones, no internet, no twitter?

[Pamela]

The thing that will make me stop reading in heartbeat is any type of prochronism. And yes, this bothers me so much that I regularly find myself looking things up. (I obviously have no life.) Equally annoying is when a story is recently written but set several years or decades in the past, and the author has a character imagine how interesting or handy it would be to have some piece of technology that doesn't yet exist. An example would be a character in a story set in the 1940s thinking how handy it would be to have a phone you could carry in your pocket. (Actually came across this in a very badly written yet for some reason very popular book.)

[L.L.]

Pamela wrote: "Don't you find it more than a bit sad that the book has to explain that things weren't always as they are now, that there were no cell phones, no internet, no twitter?"

I do, in a way. No one needs an explanation at the beginning of Louis L'Amour's books or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's books to let them know that there are no phones at all.

[Gary]

Pamela wrote: "The thing that will make me stop reading in heartbeat is any type of prochronism. And yes, this bothers me so much that I regularly find myself looking things up. (I obviously have no life.) Equall..."

I think this is a very interesting subject. There seem to be several classes of errors (or the appearance of errors) which are present in books of which prochronism is one (I had to look it up). In the Qiu Xiaolong Detective Chen Series the author has set the books in the early 1990s but with mobile phones. The Cultural Revolution is very significant in the first six books and if they they were set much later (the first book was published in 2000) the characters would be too old. I believe the author has added mobile phones to make the stories easier to tell the way he wanted to. Historical events like this recede quickly into the past and seem to create problems for authors of series where they are important.

[Autumn]

I am in my early 30's, and I grew up reading the original Nancy Drew. The technology, cars, lifestyle was from 50's/60's and it never bothered me that they talked about things from the past. Actually, I always thought it was pretty awesome and wished I was there. I have since read some mysteries from the 80's/early 90's and more than anything I crack up at the newest and greatest technology at that time. It is like a little snapshot of history. I love it!

[Susan]

In my current work-in-progress I have at least one character who lives off the grid. So...no electricity, phones, computer, etc.

I write a regional mystery series that's set in my own locale, and there are actually still many people around here who don't have typical tech things, living close to people who have just about every gadget imaginable. Plus there are large areas within the region that have no cell phone service--something our Search & Rescue teams wish hikers would remember and tell somebody where they're going!