Here's another one that's been brewing a while:

[conuly]

Okay, Mystery Writers of the World. I know you want to have a plot twist and all sorts of surprises and really have the reader not guess whodunnit until they reveal themselves by trying to kill the hero. Got it. And I can just hear you all cackling as you decide that the way to surprise us is to make the guy with an "air-tight alibi" be the guilty party!!!!

OMG! I'm so surprised! Wow!

Or, I would have been, like, 50 years ago. But now, everybody has thought of that, and it's all become maddeningly standard. And we've also caught on to the fact that if all the evidence points to somebody, they're the one person who could not possibly have done it.

You know what would be really cool? Just this once? If maybe, just maybe, you wrote a mystery where the one with the air-tight alibi was innocent, and the one who looked guilty as sin looked that way because s/he was guilty as sin.

I don't know about you, but me? I'd be surprised.

Just think about it, 'k?

Comments

[codeman38.livejournal.com]

You'd probably enjoy The TV Tropes Wiki (http://tvtropes.org/). They love dissecting things like this. (And no, it doesn't just cover TV; that was the original intent, but it's expanded well beyond its namesake.)

Warning: it's extremely addictive.

[conuly]

I don't really want to dissect anything. I just want to complain :)

Now, should I *thank* you for giving me a link that will suck me in and destroy my life for the next... uh... 72 hours, minimum? Or should I curse your name?

[codeman38.livejournal.com]

Good question, honestly. Perhaps both. ^_^

[cumaeansibyl.livejournal.com]

Heh. When I read older mysteries, I sometimes have to poke myself a little and go "you know, that's not fair, the author practically invented this trope." My personal favorite is the "I've gathered you all here because one of you is a MURDERER" bit, which you can't really do anymore, but was fun when the masters did it (Poirot and Wolfe were particularly good at executing the "J'ACCUSE!" maneuver).

[rachelkachel]

In practically every Agatha Christie mystery, the murderer is the one who has nothing obvious to gain from the victim's death.

[invsagoth.livejournal.com]

lol, I think about that when I'm thinking of stories I want to write. I haven't written any in a while, but I think the same thing. "Well, I could do this huge plot twist... but doesn't everyone? I don't want to do that." Perhaps they should go for more characters in grey areas instead. :P

[conuly]

Yeah, there's that, too. Why does it have to be the one I least suspect (who, of course, is therefore the one I most suspect)? I want it to be the one whom, logically, I'd most suspect to begin with, even though the rules mean I don't suspect them at all, making them the one I *really* least suspect.

...

My head hurts now

[conuly]

Try doing it without twisting the plot. We'll all be taken in.

[velvetchamber.livejournal.com]

Now, I am not very familiar with the usage of the various symbols in English, but in Icelandic the / symbol generally stands for "either or", whereas ( ) means that whatever within the parenthesis is optional. That is why I read s/he as "either s or he", and not as "either she or he", as I suppose the intention is.

Do you know if both formats are accepted academically in English, or if only one is considered correct?

[conuly]

I really don't know. I know that s/he is pretty conventional, but you're still likely to run into folks who insist that only he is allowed for the generic, or that she OR he, but not "she or he" in any combination.

[threeoranges.livejournal.com]

I will accept anything as long as the author gives me some juicy red herrings which look oh-so-promising but prove to be TOTALLY BOGUS.

HOW TO DO A RED HERRING: An attractive charismatic woman in an historical mystery who comes halfway-through a case of poisoning, befriends the female detective and offers her a pot of "homemade" salve, remarking innocently in passing, "Be sure to add some to your lips, it will make them smell of roses!"

HOW NOT TO DO A RED HERRING: A man who appears to be intent on seducing the female detective, who keeps asking questions about the murder victim and trying to gain access to his private papers. Sounds like an obvious red-herring, right? NO. HE WAS THE MURDERER. AND THE FEMALE DETECTIVE WAS BLISSFULLY UNAWARE THROUGHOUT.

In the end I don't care if the murderer turns out to have the "airtight alibi" as long as the cracks in it WERE suggested earlier (which is where Christie's EVIL UNDER THE SUN scores highly). All I care about is that

1) I shouldn't be able to EASILY guess the murderer
2) The author should have made the murderer a character in his/her own right before the denouement (i.e., they shouldn't introduce a completely new character in the final chapter to announce "I DID IT!" And Laurie R. King, yes, I am looking at you.)

I love mysteries. GOOD ones. Ever read Elizabeth George's FOR THE SAKE OF ELENA?

[conuly]

Agreed, agreed, agreed.

I haven't read that one - are you recommending it, or warning me away?

[ironychan.livejournal.com]

Try Lindsay Davis. She likes to tease with "OMG, gonna do a plot twist... gonna do a plot twist... PSYCH! HA HA, THE GUY WHO LOOKED GUILTY ACTUALLY WAS!"

Her mysteries are also made a thousand times cooler by the fact that they're set in 70 AD. Not for any reason exactly, but just because she apparently thought film noir mysteries in 70 AD would be AWESOME. Which they are.

[conuly]

That sounds awesome.

[threeoranges.livejournal.com]

Reccing it! George is very variable in quality, but that one (and PLAYING FOR THE ASHES) is worth the read.

[velvetchamber.livejournal.com]

I looked it up, and apparently s/he is the American thing, and (s)he the British. I'll go with the Brits on this one.

[codeman38.livejournal.com]

You'd probably enjoy The TV Tropes Wiki (http://tvtropes.org/). They love dissecting things like this. (And no, it doesn't just cover TV; that was the original intent, but it's expanded well beyond its namesake.)

Warning: it's extremely addictive.

[conuly]

I don't really want to dissect anything. I just want to complain :)

Now, should I *thank* you for giving me a link that will suck me in and destroy my life for the next... uh... 72 hours, minimum? Or should I curse your name?

[codeman38.livejournal.com]

Good question, honestly. Perhaps both. ^_^

[cumaeansibyl.livejournal.com]

Heh. When I read older mysteries, I sometimes have to poke myself a little and go "you know, that's not fair, the author practically invented this trope." My personal favorite is the "I've gathered you all here because one of you is a MURDERER" bit, which you can't really do anymore, but was fun when the masters did it (Poirot and Wolfe were particularly good at executing the "J'ACCUSE!" maneuver).

[rachelkachel]

In practically every Agatha Christie mystery, the murderer is the one who has nothing obvious to gain from the victim's death.

[invsagoth.livejournal.com]

lol, I think about that when I'm thinking of stories I want to write. I haven't written any in a while, but I think the same thing. "Well, I could do this huge plot twist... but doesn't everyone? I don't want to do that." Perhaps they should go for more characters in grey areas instead. :P

[conuly]

Yeah, there's that, too. Why does it have to be the one I least suspect (who, of course, is therefore the one I most suspect)? I want it to be the one whom, logically, I'd most suspect to begin with, even though the rules mean I don't suspect them at all, making them the one I *really* least suspect.

...

My head hurts now

[conuly]

Try doing it without twisting the plot. We'll all be taken in.

[velvetchamber.livejournal.com]

Now, I am not very familiar with the usage of the various symbols in English, but in Icelandic the / symbol generally stands for "either or", whereas ( ) means that whatever within the parenthesis is optional. That is why I read s/he as "either s or he", and not as "either she or he", as I suppose the intention is.

Do you know if both formats are accepted academically in English, or if only one is considered correct?

[conuly]

I really don't know. I know that s/he is pretty conventional, but you're still likely to run into folks who insist that only he is allowed for the generic, or that she OR he, but not "she or he" in any combination.

[threeoranges.livejournal.com]

I will accept anything as long as the author gives me some juicy red herrings which look oh-so-promising but prove to be TOTALLY BOGUS.

HOW TO DO A RED HERRING: An attractive charismatic woman in an historical mystery who comes halfway-through a case of poisoning, befriends the female detective and offers her a pot of "homemade" salve, remarking innocently in passing, "Be sure to add some to your lips, it will make them smell of roses!"

HOW NOT TO DO A RED HERRING: A man who appears to be intent on seducing the female detective, who keeps asking questions about the murder victim and trying to gain access to his private papers. Sounds like an obvious red-herring, right? NO. HE WAS THE MURDERER. AND THE FEMALE DETECTIVE WAS BLISSFULLY UNAWARE THROUGHOUT.

In the end I don't care if the murderer turns out to have the "airtight alibi" as long as the cracks in it WERE suggested earlier (which is where Christie's EVIL UNDER THE SUN scores highly). All I care about is that

1) I shouldn't be able to EASILY guess the murderer
2) The author should have made the murderer a character in his/her own right before the denouement (i.e., they shouldn't introduce a completely new character in the final chapter to announce "I DID IT!" And Laurie R. King, yes, I am looking at you.)

I love mysteries. GOOD ones. Ever read Elizabeth George's FOR THE SAKE OF ELENA?

[conuly]

Agreed, agreed, agreed.

I haven't read that one - are you recommending it, or warning me away?

[ironychan.livejournal.com]

Try Lindsay Davis. She likes to tease with "OMG, gonna do a plot twist... gonna do a plot twist... PSYCH! HA HA, THE GUY WHO LOOKED GUILTY ACTUALLY WAS!"

Her mysteries are also made a thousand times cooler by the fact that they're set in 70 AD. Not for any reason exactly, but just because she apparently thought film noir mysteries in 70 AD would be AWESOME. Which they are.

[conuly]

That sounds awesome.

[threeoranges.livejournal.com]

Reccing it! George is very variable in quality, but that one (and PLAYING FOR THE ASHES) is worth the read.

[velvetchamber.livejournal.com]

I looked it up, and apparently s/he is the American thing, and (s)he the British. I'll go with the Brits on this one.