What About Christmas Mysteries?

Our Mystery Book Club just finished discussing A Christmas Guest by Anne Perry. A few years ago we read Tied Up in Tinsel by Roderick Alleyn. You can find a good selection of Christmas themed mysteries from Stop You're Killing Me. But the question we considered was, should our mystery reading include a "Christmas mystery" every December? I'd love to hear your comments - please add them to this post!

Some in our group said, "Yes! Great fun!" Other expressed thoughts like, "They can be boring or fluffy or overly contrived." Such were the very kinds of comments that were heard during our discussion of A Christmas Guest.

Using our group's rating sheet, members gave the book scores of: 65, 69, 72, 79, 85, 85, 85, 90, 90 - all averaging to 80.

On the one hand, Perry does a beautiful job utilizing Grandmama - Mariah Ellison, a side character from her Thomas Pitt mysteries, as the central character. Here is a bitter woman who does not live in gratitude, whose every remark to her family is caustic, who so easily imagines offenses; yet somehow we can identify with her and are drawn to her. I think that takes some artistry on the part of the author.

The story is set in Victorian England, on a marshy overlook of the English Channel. It is cold, blustery, and bleak. Grandmama has been "sent" to spend the Christmas holiday with daughter-in-law Caroline that she never liked who married Joshua, an actor (Disgusting!), upon the death of Edward, Grandmama's son. When Joshua's long lost Aunt Maude is "sent" by her sisters (who live but 5 miles away) to stay at this home, Grandmama is outraged at the "imposition." The mystery begins when Maude is found dead in bed of an apparent heart attack just a few days after she arrived.

Note: Following Perry's description of the family relationships in this book is challenging. Yet it is necessary to make sense of the plot's conclusion. It is so confusing that the book's publisher makes an apparent error in describing the relationships on the book jacket. I had to make a family relationships diagram while rereading parts of the book, in order to be sure of the facts.

Grandmama's curiosity about Maude's death motivates her to investigate. To do so, she must take a horse and buggy ride to the home of Maude's sisters, where she stays overnight. By the evening of the second day, in the midst of a confining snow storm, she meets with the family in the parlor and makes her accusation. A true "cozy."

During the process of the albeit brief investigation, Grandmama's character transforms from one of bitterness to one of freedom from bitterness. That is the Christmas "message" part of the book. But is the message contrived? Is it conceivable that such people can have such a change at that stage in their lives?

Well, that is the big question embedded in THE Christmas story, isn't it? The Christian message is that people can change. (Or "are changed" depending on your theology.) That's why Christmas is seen as a season of hope. Some of us may feel that sugarcoats reality; by extension, "Christmas mysteries" are fluffy.

So - what do you think? Please click here to leave your comment!

Image above:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tswartz/ / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Cynthia Riggs Shares Her Thoughts on Westlake

I decided to ask Cynthia Riggs about Westlake. I am delighted that she took time to respond. So first comes my letter to her, followed by her reply.
---------------------
Hi Cynthia,

I'm still puzzling over your Crimebake panel comment about Donald Westlake.

Last week, our mystery book club in Manchester-by-the-sea discussed Richard Stark's Dirty Money.

--Stark's central characters are losers
--Your book's central character is a good "guy" (apologies to Victoria)

--Stark's central character (Parker) has no appeal and seems flat, devoid of depth and feeling
--Victoria is appealing and there is plenty of depth - information about the character that creates the interest and appeal

--Stark's story has no ending; it's like the end of a chapter. It's like a puzzle piece.
--Your stories have resolution.

--While the Dortmunder series has a kind of humor, Stark's series are grim to the core with no real humor (at least to us)
--While Victoria encounters many murders, she is a good sport and there are lighter moments in the stories.

So -

At the risk of sounding really really dumb, and knowing that a fellow panel member happened to agree with the Westlake choice quite independently, still -

What exactly was it or is it about Westlake's writing that you admire?

---------------------
Dear Richard:

I'm honored that the mystery book club compares my writing with Donald Westlake's. He's one of my favorite not-exactly-mystery writers. And, of course, I like hearing that you think Victoria Trumbull is appealing, has depth, and is a good sport and a good guy.

Westlake's caper books are quite different from his Stark books, which I like, but they're not among my favorites.

Dortmunder appeals to me because I love the concept of a failed burglar concocting yet another elaborate scheme that, yet again, fails. For some reason, I find that comical. I guess reading about losers makes me feel better about my own failed ventures, and thinking that an occasional venture of mine may succeed, unlike Dortmunder's.

Westlake has remarkable control over his writing. I'm sure he intended his losers to seem flat, which they are. Much like the characters in the works of Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett. His writing boils the story down to its essence. I'd say like poetry, but that's not exactly right. Doggerel, maybe, in its kindest definition. Westlake's settings are sketchy, his dialogue is a mere suggestion of the way people talk. The plot's the thing, leaving all else to the imagination, a carefully crafted, intricately engineered structure with cartoon people moving through. His spare dialogue and the absurd situations he sets up make me laugh. I'm not amused by much of today's over-written, in-your-face humor -- Seinfeld and Janet Evanovich, for instance, treat me as if my reading comprehension is at the third grade level. Reading Westlake I sometimes feel as though I'm the only reader who's ever seen through and around and beyond what he's put on paper, and believe I've discovered new territory. I suspect that's the way his other fans feel.

I consciously imitate some of Westlake's style, and find myself laughing aloud as I write.

Thanks for writing to me.

Cynthia

www.cynthiariggs.com

Dirty Money - Grim

Eight of us met last week to discuss Dirty Money by Richard Stark (Donald Westlake) 2008.

We all agreed: Stark gave us excellent and enjoyable descriptions of setting, wrote like the professional and mature writer that he is, and provided believable dialog. But to one degree or another, we also all agreeds that we did not enjoy the book and most likely would not read another by Stark.

OK, frankly our group prefers the "good guy" type of central character. At the very least, we want someone we can like. But in Parker, we felt there was little or nothing to like. He was not a "bumbler" like Dortmunder; Parker is a self-centered, remoreseless killer. In fact, Stark keeps Parker very flat and one-dimensional. We are quite frankly puzzled by the awards that Stark has received for Parker. Perhaps "less is more"?

We thought that the side characters were more interesting; they seemed to be real people with real feelings, more multi-dimensional. This observation includes the B&B owner, the two-timing bounty-hunter woman, and the doctor trapped by his own weaknesses.

Since we had no one in our group who had read the series opener, The Hunter (1962 !), we have no way of knowing whether Stark wrote differently in that book or provided more to like about him. One or two of us thought we might check it out, but that would be primarily a matter of curiosity.

We agreed there is good pacing and enough tension to keep us moving through the book. It's just that we regretted getting to the end. For the ending has no resolution; it just stops. One of our members had read the previous book instead of Dirty Money, and she confirmed that that book also just stopped. It is as though Dirty Money is the next chapter, but "so what."

Coincidentally, as I mentioned in a previous post, Cynthia Riggs and Mark Arsenault both mentioned Westlake as a most admired writer at a New England Crimebake panel two weeks ago. Our mystery book club gave a higher average score to Riggs (for Deadly Nightshade) than we did Stark.

Obviously Parker was an enduring character that lasted throughout Westlake's long writing career. But we would love to hear from some folks that "loved" Dirty Money and tell us why!

Factors in Murdering your Murder Book Career

Can a budding mystery writer ruin his career by badmouthing his publisher? Well? What do you think?

Can a guy get fired by slamming his employer in the press?

"I'd never do that."

I didn't mean deliberately. Like writing a letter to the editor. I meant by complaining to a "friend" who tells the boss. Or by mentioning something to a reviewer "off the record."

Mark Pepper wrote two published novels in the horror/thriller genre which, he says, received excellent reviews. In two guest posts Pepper describes a series of events that he believes destroyed his relationship with his publisher and consequently damaged his chances of pursuing a career as a novelist. He also adds that there was a lot more to his decision to give up on writing novels than that one event.

Apparently Pepper's publisher failed to mail out copies of his book, Man on a Murder Cycle, to six magazines he thought would provide additional good reviews. One might see that as a misunderstanding, but Pepper vented a bit of his frustration to a "journalist" that was interviewing him for the book. Pepper admits it was a "gaff" but naively believed that his request to the journalist to consider his remarks "off the record" would be honored.

Of course, the reviewer wrote a great book review, but finished with a comment about Pepper's frustration with the publisher. This was followed by a call from the editor expressing disappointment and the swift rejection of the submission of his next book.

Of course there is no way of really knowing what prevented the publication of the third book. Were any of the following significant by themselves in ending his novelist career? Or was it some strategic combination?

• Badmouthing the publisher in public. Pepper's posts place more venom or bitterness on the journalist than on himself, but either way, the result was the same.
  
• The book submitted was in a genre no longer of interest. Pepper suggests that the Horror genre, fueled by Stephen King, had lost its steam. I do not know about that, but I suspect some would debate the point.
  
• The book submitted was in fact poorly written. Of course, we have no way of knowing that.
  
• The book's value was lost on the publisher's editor because she was so Canadian. Huh? Yes that is in Pepper's self-absorbed account.
• His agent gave up trying to find another publisher because Pepper's reputation was tarnished. Pepper claims that his agent was loyal but that they parted ways after a while.
• His agent was ineffective.
• Pepper himself gave up interest in getting the third book published. I recently heard a panel of agents (at Crimebake 2009) say that a certain percentage of their clients lose interest. In fact, Pepper identifies a variety of personal reasons for moving on to other things.

None of these speculations take away from Pepper's lesson. Take your pick:

• If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

• Don't bit the hand that feeds you (as the editor commented to him afterward).

• Don't shoot your novel in the back.

Crimebake 2009: Awesome Again!

Just returned from Crimebake, the New England mystery conference for writers and readers. Wow! What fun.

It's hard to pass on a chance to brag, so here it is. I submitted a Flash Fiction piece to the conference contest and was one of three winners! You can read my winning entry and more about the contest here.

Too many thoughts to give a coherent "report" but here are random experiences mixed with a few of the many factoids I picked up:

• An authors' panel called "T is for Traditional" was asked to share the name of the author that they most admired. Interestingly, two authors (Mark Arsenault and Cynthia Riggs) named Donald Westlake (aka Richard Stark) - the author that our Book Club is currently reading. See a subsequent comment to me from Cynthia Riggs.
  
• Criminalists (in the past) did not have the ability to make absolute ID's from hair analysis. All they could do was narrow it down. Now, DNA analysis from a hair root can be, potentially, absolute. And also - DNA from fingerprints can sometimes be more significant than the fingerprint left behind! Great presentation from Mary Kate McGilvray, former acting director of the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab.
  
• Speaking of stuff related to CSI - in real life, what is portrayed by a single crime scene technician is frequently the work of many, many specialists.
• Want to be a writer? Can you put up with 50 "rejections" before getting an acceptance - or maybe never getting an acceptance for a book. Chocolate brownies was mentioned a few times! (I can relate!) Several panels addressed this but none more bluntly than "P is for Persistance." Several spoke of turning to different projects: short stories, other novels, true crime, or just personal activities as distractions. Keeping stories in "inventory" was mentioned; often, a request for a particular type of book/story could come up several years later.
• What creates tension or fear in a book? One panel of authors totally agrees that it is not violence or blood. Among other things it is pacing. One insight - humor accentuates tension; tension accentuates humor. I have to agree with comments of one of my favorite authors (and favorite persons), Michael Palmer - it is understanding the emotion of fear, in other words, successfully conveying the experience of the character, from being in the character's shoes. A helpless character contributes to that, and no one is more helpless than a hospital patient. Dr. Palmer has a lot of insight into that and brings it out well in his medical thrillers. That's Michael Palmer on the right (with me) - below.
  

• Sue Grafton gives credit to her attendance at a Jack Canfield workshop for helping her to get onto the Best Seller list. (Just a tiny nugget from an extensive list of tidbits from her interesting luncheon speech.)
  
• Highly published short story author Stephen Rogers has managed to get 13 stories published by Women's Day. That magazine pays well at about $500 per story. On the other hand, he has had some 200 other stories published many of which pay poorly. It's too bad - short stories is a great art form in itself. I had a very enjoyable time chatting with Stephen on Friday evening as well as receiving some helpful tips on a short story manuscript.
• The best way to remove the serial number from a handgun is to use a power drill and take out the metallic ridges. Of course that wouldn't work if the imprint is inside the gun barrel. That from a ballistics expert.
• Solving a mystery-game-crime with clues scattered on 30 tables and 250+ participants must be "impossible" given that none of us solved the crime exactly! LOL - maybe it was the script?
  

Two Authors have Cameo on Castle

Castle is a light police detective show now in its second season on ABC television. The premise is that of a crime writer that has such good detecting instincts (remember Murder She Wrote?) that he has teamed up with a police detective looking for help in solving real crimes. In the pilot show (March 9, 2009) for the first season the crime writer Rick Castle is seen playing poker with, as it turns out, real mystery writers James Patterson and Stephen J. Cannell.

In the recent season opener on September 21, Castle again goes to the poker game for help, with Stephen J. Cannell again playing himself but now with writer Michael Connelly at the table.

Castle is currently playing on ABC, Monday nights at 10 pm.

You can see that September 21st show on Hulu here.

Love that Raymond Chandler

Finished my fourth Raymond Chandler novel this month. He so clearly owns the title of the father of hard-boiled mystery writers. The plotting, character, and superb description of the setting is so well done. Nothing is irrelevant.

The dialog, the turn of a phrase all set the pace for Robert Parker, Lee Child, Sara Paretsky and all the rest of the great mystery writers of the last fifty years.

Here is just one fine little quote.

Degarmo was there by the counter talking to the desk sergeant. He turned his metallic blue eyes on me and said: "How are you doing?"

"Fine."

"Like our jail?"

"I like your jail fine."

"Captain Webber wants to talk to you."

"That's fine," I said.

"Don't you know any words but fine?"

"Not right now," I said. "Not in here."

"You're limping a little," he said. "You trip over something?"

"Yeah," I said. "I tripped over a blackjack. It jumped up and bit me behind the left knee."

"That's too bad," Degarmo said blank-eyed. "Get your stuff from the property clerk."

"I've got it," I said. "It wasn't taken away from me."

"Well, that's fine," he said.

"It sure is," I said. "It's fine."

---- that's Philip Marlowe in Raymond Chandler's The Lady in the Lake