Mysterious Matters: Mystery Publishing Demystified

Fiction is Not Reality

An ongoing discussion among novelists in general (not just mystery writers) seems to be "How do I make my characters real?  How do I make my book realistic?"

These are good questions, but they miss the basic point that genre fiction is not reality.  It is an escape from reality and therefore requires an intense suspension of disbelief.  The better question, I think, is "How do I make my highly improbable fiction seem only moderately improbable?"

Why is our genre inherently unrealistic?  Consider:

• Most of us get up in the morning, go to work, and come home exhausted. We don't have the time, money, or energy to devote to investigating crimes.
• Most of us have never been even remotely connected to a single murder, much less find ourselves involved in murders on an annual basis.
• Most of us do not find the police, the prosecutor, and the FBI and CIA to be willing participants when we decide to stick our noses into their business. And we rarely see things the police have missed, rarely become involved with them romantically and/or physically, and rarely deliver the perpetrator of a foul deed to them (and then only after the perp has confessed to, and perhaps attempted to kill, us).

The list could go on, but you get my point.

For me, "reality" (or an acceptable level of suspension of disbelief) in fiction means a few things:

• Getting basic facts straight--for example, not getting basic details of geography, landmarks, or history wrong. But I personally have no issue with setting a book in a real city (for example, New Orleans) and making up a bunch of street names.
• Making sure characters behave in a way that does not fly in the face of common sense or basic human psychology. I'm totally fine with naive people getting in over their heads (without which, of course, there'd be no Gothic genre), but fiction becomes stupidity when supposedly smart characters do dumb things solely to keep a plot moving. The author has stretched reality too far when I consider a character a presumptive nominee for a Darwin Award.
• Respecting the laws of physics, gravity, the human anatomy, and human limitations. When characters are shot 25 times and keep going, or when a character chases a car on foot and manages to catch it, I have left the world of mystery and moved into science fiction.

And other fictional conventions, while totally unrealistic, don't bother me in the least--they are, in fact, the elements of good escapist fun:

• I don't mind a cast of supporting characters that are almost as or more fun than the protagonist. Nobody on earth has a hilarious mother, brilliant father, best friend who happens to be the chief of police, sister with an eidetic memory, brother who's a drag racing superstar, and college roommate who decided to become a stripper. But this is the type of cast I love spending time with. Much, much more fun than a whiny mother, uncommunicative father, boring sister, TV-addicted brother, and codependent best friend who's obsessed with her children.
• So you've decided to make up your own city, one that resembles San Francisco, or Paris, or New York? By all means, have at it. That's what fiction is--you're allowed to make places up. Interestingly, the unwritten rules imply that you may create your city, but not your own state or country.
• In many books, the characters never get dressed, go grocery shopping, take a shower, spend endless hours watching TV, or paying bills. They're too busy with their unique hobby or profession, such as detecting forgeries in 19th century stamps or finding hints in ancient maps regarding the location of an ancient treasure with infinite value. And that's all to the good. My own life is highly boring--I don't need to see it replicated in a mystery tale.

A writer whom I admire for his ability to combine a completely fictional world with one based on a semblance of reality is Alexander McCall Smith.  Now, if we think about this rationally, it is simply impossible that Botswana is that perfect and unspoiled.  (To my mind, any place without a lot of air conditioning is imperfect.)   Smith does a remarkable job of creating the fictional world of Mma Ramotswe, who's a bit of a Don Quijote character, staking out her claims for the "traditional Botswana ways" amid a changing world.  She lives life according to a clearly stated moral code, but she's not perfect (as evidenced by her issues with Mma Makutsi).  And Mma Ramotswe's Botswana isn't everyone's Botswana--let's not forget that there is crime there, and spousal abuse (of which Precious herself was a victim), and HIV/AIDS (from which Mma Makutsi's brother died).  Plus, Mma Ramotswe is a member of the Botswana upper class, having a very nice inheritance from her late father that allows her to purchase and maintain the house on Zebra Drive.  Smith doesn't dwell on any of the harsh realities of Botswanan life, but places them in the background against a fictional foreground of detective work and delightful family life.  It's an intoxicating brew because Smith has a unique formula for making it all work. 

Backstory: Boon or Bane?

What is the role of backstory in a mystery novel?

I suppose it depends on how you define backstory.  In one sense, it's essential.  In the traditional murder mystery, the death happens early in the narrative, so the rest of the book is in essence an inquiry into the past, into those events that led up to the killing.  The reasons or motives for the murder may lie in the recent or distant past.  (For a superb example of a motive from long ago, see Stanley Ellin's Very Old Money.)  While looking for the murderer today, the sleuth must uncover the victim's past, as well as the stories and secrets of the suspects.

But there's another way of looking at backstory, too--it's the protagonist's life history, how s/he got to where s/he is today.  All adult mystery novels start in medias res, which means that the protagonist (often a first-person narrator) is an adult with a past.  Many writers use backstory to give psychological depth to the main character and/or to make the plot more credible or believable.  This is the proper use of backstory--provided that it is doled out little by little throughout the book.  A protagonist should not be an open book (pardon the pun) from page 1.  There has to be a little bit of mystery about him, about what makes him tick and why.  By the end of the book, we should know the full story (or at least much of it, given the need for series characters to develop and grow over a series of books).

This is why I get frustrated by manuscripts (and published books) that feel the need to tell me the protagonist's entire history in the first 50 pages.  This doesn't work for a lot of reasons.  First, a mystery is not an autobiography.  A strong lead character is essential, of course.  But people read mystery fiction for stories and plots as much as for character, and beginning a book with extensive backstory delays your main story.  Second, extensive backstory kills any momentum the narrative may have built up, destroying the suspense.  Think about it this way:  When you meet someone at a cocktail party, don't you run for your life when he starts to tell you his entire life story?  You're concerned with the here and now, not with the name of his first-grade teacher.  The more you get to know him, the more interested you are in hearing more about him--as long as he has not bored you silly.  That's when bits and pieces of the past become more intriguing.

I think there are a lot of dividing lines between those who will have their manuscripts published, and those who will not.  The ability to handle backstory properly is close to the top of my list.  When I get extensive backstory beginning on page 10 of a manuscript, the odds are very strong that the book won't make the cut.  For an interesting look at backstory being done well, try Louise Ure's The Fault Tree, which features a blind narrator who lost her sight as an adult.  The book does have a few problems, but the handling of the backstory is flawless.

A Question of Character

This has been a heavy week for rejections.  I've had to turn down four manuscripts that started very promisingly but didn't come together.

All of them had good, solid plots that drew me in.  All were well-written, with a good sense of pacing.  And all came to me as the first in a proposed series, with plans for future books sketched out.

But if I had to point to one problem they all shared - and which ultimately led to their rejection - it was the problem of character. 

Book A, a first-person narrative, had an engaging and likable narrator.  But the narrator's relationships were all run-of-the-mill and somewhat stereotypical: controlling mother, macho boyfriend.  Take-away point for writers: A good narrator isn't enough.  You have to have at least one or two compelling secondary characters.

Book B, also a first-person narrative, had a superbly drawn narrator with a unique voice.  But every other character sounded exactly the same.  None were more than sketches of people, and they served only one purpose: to give the narrator the information she sought.  Take-away point:  People/characters shouldn't exist merely as the source of clues or information.  Not every character has to be fully rounded, but sketchily drawn characters with a terrific narrator creates a strong congnitive dissonance in readers: Why is such a deep, well-drawn protagonist surrounded by stick figures?

Book C had alternating viewpoints and a terrific "grand concept."  The pasts of the characters are hinted at in an intriguing way--and the book ends without exploring any of these people's backgrounds, dreams, or frustrations.  Nor do any of the characters have any relationship beyond the world of work.  Take-away point:  An intriguing mystery novel treats its characters like tabloid superstars.  Readers want to know all the dirt behind their facades and what makes them tick.  A plot by itself isn't enough, unless you're writing a thriller like The Da Vinci Code. 

Book D featured a couple of well-drawn secondary characters.  Both were "types," but with some interesting twists, and their appearances were always welcome.  But our narrator was too milquetoast, a "nice" person whose emotions are flat, especially in the face of some trying circumstances.  Take-away point: If you don't have a strong narrator, with a strong personality and some inner conflicts that need to be addressed, you don't have a publishable manuscript. 

Desert Island Diary

BBC Radio has a long-running program(me) called "Desert Island Discs," in which guests talk about the musical pieces they'd bring with them if they knew they'd be stranded on a desert(ed) island. They're also allowed to bring one book, with the assumption that the island is already home to the Bible and the collected works of Shakespeare.  Perhaps the assumption is based on the idea that Robinson Crusoe managed to bring Shakespeare and the Bible with him...and has left them to new strandees for posterity?

This is a fun idea to extend to books, proper--in our case, the great works of mystery and suspense.  Which five would I bring?  I admit that I'd choose large, weighty, long tomes--as I would really have nothing but time, which would allow for long, leisurely reads.  Herewith my five:

1. Umberto Econ, THE NAME OF THE ROSE, and

2. Adele G. Haft, Jane G. White, and Robert J. White, THE KEY TO THE NAME OF THE ROSE

This is murder mystery, philosophical treatise, history lesson, and primer on Medieval life all in one book.  The narrator is the Watson-like Adso of Elk, who helps the Holmes-like William of Baskerville solve a murder set in a 14th century Italian monastery.  The clues here aren't simple red herrings--they are embedded in philosophy, history, and politics.  Every page of the book is fascinating, but it is not easy reading.  I've read it several times and have blipped over things due to laziness.  On a desert island, I'd have the time to savor every page, and the companion volume (as necessary to a deep reading as to one of the many companions to Ulysses) would help me on each and every page. 

3. Iain Pears, AN INSTANCE OF THE FINGERPOST

Normally I'm not a huge fan of historical mysteries.  They're not something I choose to publish--probably because I feel so incompetent in the field.  This is not to blame others for my shortcomings, but I had terrible history teachers in secondary school, and equally horrible professors in university.  They made the learning of history excruciating, which is why I have long steered clear of it.  But, like The Name of the Rose, An Instance of the Fingerpost is a rich lesson in history as well as a rumination on the definition and nature of the word "truth."  The year is 1663 at Oxford, and a professor is found dead.  The tale is then told from four different points of view, all fascinating, including at least one unreliable narrator.  This, too, is a big book that rewards a close reading, but it's more accessible than the Eco book, and a companion volume isn't strictly necessary to understand what's being said and done.

4. Joyce Carol Oates, MYSTERIES OF WINTERTHURN

This is one of my favorite Oates books.  Sadly, it never did seem to find an audience.  While most of Oates' oeuvre is still in print, this one isn't.  I don't understand why.  The book contains three Gothic mystery tales set in New York of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.  Our hero/detective is the enigmatic Xavier Kilgarvan.  How can anyone not love a book that begins thus?  "It is frequently observed by our self-righteous critics that we amateur "collectors" of Murder are antiquarians at heart: unapologetically to the right in matters political, moral, and religious; possessed of a near-insatiable passion for authenticity, down to the most minute, revealing, and lurid detail: impatient with the new (whether it be new and untried modes of murder, or new and untried modes of mystery), and enamored of the old." As always, Oates' prose in serpentine and incantatory--I often find myself re-reading entire paragraphs for the sheer joy of it.  On a desert island, I'd be able to spend days on a chapter and not feel guilty about it.  And I always find new and interesting things each time I reread.  UPDATE 7/7/08: A reader wrote in to say that this book is back in print.  Best news of the week. 

5. Agatha Christie, AND THEN THERE WERE NONE

I've blogged about this one before.  No desert island collection would be complete without one of the Master's books.  Given its setting, and my lonely existence on the island, And Then There Were None seems like the perfect choice.  Perhaps it wouldn't be wise to bring such a creepy, suspenseful, scary tale to a place where I'm all alone and fighting for existence, but I'd have time to savor once again Dame Agatha's supreme craftsmanship.  Come to think of it, many years ago one of the book clubs did an Agatha Christie omnibus called Masterpieces of Murder, which included not only And Then There Were None, but also The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, Witness for the Prosecution, and Death on the Nile.  So, even though that might be cheating, that's the tome I'd take, if it were available!

**********************************

ON ANOTHER NOTE: My thanks to everyone who responded to the forum question I'd asked in my last post. The occasional email telling me off for wanting to publish books that will be commercially successful notwithstanding, I am appreciative of the many comments.  I'm sorry I won't be able to respond individually, but I do hope to address some in future posting over the next few weeks (months?).  As an industry I think we need to do a better job of talking with readers, librarians, and book buyers, and this was a very enlightening experience for me.  I hope readers will continue to feel free to post their honest responses to any forum questions in the future.

ABOUT QUERIES: I've had several people send manuscript queries here.  Since I have chosen to remain an anonymous blogger, accepting queries through this medium would pose several difficulties.  I'll say this, though: All of the writers' guides do list our house as one that accepts direct queries from authors, so if you go that route, and your book fits the guidelines of what we publish and are looking for, your query will most likely make its way to me (or one of my colleagues) at some point.