A problem with... crime / thrillers

[Polka Dot Rock]

After Andy's and Kell's threads on fantasy, horror and the classics, I was really curious to see if anyone else one the forum has a 'problem' with the crime and / or thriller genres?

 

They are clearly very popular genres amongst many members (as well as the book buying public!), and I just thought I was the 'odd one out' as it were. But then I remembered that when I mentioned my not being a fan in passing, there were a couple of interesting responses, which I now quote below:

 

I can understand why people can have problems with fantasy writing. I think that's more common than my problem which is - I don't like thrillers or crime! And I don't know why! It's not a 'snobbery' thing at all, it's just that I'll read them but I don't enjoy them (unless it's Kate Atkinson, for some reason, who I enjoy HUGELY).

 

...I don't choose thrillers or crime except Kate Atkinson!! And I used to read PD James eons ago - things have to be 'believable' for me

 

I'm squeamish about crime novels (though am too enjoying Kate Atkinson) - for some reason I could never read a grisly crime novel (although I would watch the equivilant in film) - I think it's because reading is too close to the subject.

 

(H&D and Judy: I hope you don't mind me quoting you!! )

 

So perhaps I'm not in the minority after all!

 

But I still don't really know why crime and thrillers don't 'do' anything for me: I've had some bad reading experiences such as The DaVinci Code and Restless by William Boyd, but then I really enjoyed Agatha Christie's Miss Marple: The Mirror Crack'd. Yet I didn't feel the need to read anymore. However, I did hugely enjoy Kate Atkinson's One Good Turn and will definitely read more of her crime fiction.

 

Perhaps I crime and thrillers don't provide me with some magic component that makes me want to read on. Or perhaps many can be too similar? (I'm not one for reading books by the same author in a row or even on similar issues/themes on after another).

 

Also have a feeling that TV drama puts me off as there is so much of it on! And I get terribly bored (and I suppose it doesn't help that many are adapted very loosely from books).

 

If you don't like crime and/or thrillers, what is it for you that switches you off?

 

If you do, what am I missing?

[Kell]

I have a problem with formulaic crime/thrillers - unfortunately, there seem to be a lot of them out there, as a writer finds something that works once and then hangs on for dear life.

 

The other things that gets me is the fine line between it being too easy to figure out whodunnit and it being impossible to work out. I like to have a chance of working things out for myself, but I don't want it to be too obvious or I feel like the writer is being condescending.

[angerball]

I don't have a problem with Crime/Thrillers, provided they are well written. I find them to be quite easy reads (as long as there aren't too many improbable plot twists), as well as being entertaining.

[Polka Dot Rock]

Those are really good points, Kell. And it also reminds me that there is a lot resting on the conclusion of crime / thrillers - I don't want to disappointed!!

[Nici]

I love crime and thrillers! I think that Martina Cole writes excellent crime books and is probably my favourite crime writer.

[Maureen]

I love a good Thriller - however I don't like reading the same story over and over again - or else it would not be entertaining at all - rather like watching re-runs for the 4th time!

[Icecream]

I think Michelle has hit the nail on the head with her predictability thread. When I was a child I used to absolutely love crime, but adult crime feels far too predictable so I don't read it.

[wrathofkublakhan]

I can certainly agree with the "formula" part of the writing - I think it is inherent with these sub-genres. Mystery novels, westerns, romance all have certain expectations (it seems to me).

 

If, by saying crime/thriller we are talking about the mystery genre; I think the hook is almost always how eccentric the sleuth is in the books. Hercule, Marple, Sherlock, Nero Wolfe all had quirks that we enjoyed just as much as the mystery - I'd go so far as to say the mystery itself becomes secondary.

 

This gets taken to the extreme in television - Monk, for example or even Columbo.

 

The only real thriller that I think have read have been spy thrillers - James Bond or Jason Bourne, page turners full of peril. They're fun, yet exhausting!

[Freewheeling Andy]

I think other people have covered why I don't really go for these kinds of books. The formula is a problem - the "dead body - investigation - red herring - solution - unmask villain" line means that you often pretty much know where the book is going, and the interest then rests solely on whether you can work out whodunnit.

 

Clearly, this is a gross characterisation, but there's something fundamental in crime novels that means they inevitably follow something like that form.

 

The other thing, I think, that winds me up, is the repeating of characters. The fact that it's another "Cycling Detective" novel starring "DCI Andy", who has all his usual traits of being obsessed by food and being terribly lazy, begins to feel like I'm watching an episode of 'Allo 'Allo and just saying "I shall say zis only once" is viewed as funny. The familiarity that some people like is something that drags, for me.

[Polka Dot Rock]

The other thing, I think, that winds me up, is the repeating of characters.

 

Yes, that often puts me off both crime novels and TV crime drama!! Sometimes it's so awfully cliched... Some of the funniest things I read are the letters Radio Times readers send in, parodying quite a few of the current TV series.

 

Kate Atkinson uses Jackson Brodie who does seem to have classic fictional detective traits, such as having disasterous relationships with women, a troubled family background, being a 'maverick', liking a drink etc. But in One Good Turn, he just seems to unwillingly stumble onto things, much to his dismay! The reader is always ware of what's going on, whereas Jackson really isn't! We put the pieces together for him, in a sense. And that turns a potential cliche on its head

 

(I haven't read Case Histories yet, but is Jackson handled in similar manner there?)

 

Oh, and he is also just one of many characters that the reader follows!

[LiamCostas]

Crime/thrillers I've found to be one of the worst of the popular genres for rehashing tired tropes. The other genre I read a fair bit of is historical fiction, and I think the thing that saves authors in this genre from retreading the same tale is that they're basically having to follow historical fact to some degree...and quite often the real stories from history are far more 'inventive' than the stuff authors can come up with.

 

Thriller writers though, do seem to be incredibly lazy these days (without naming any names) fowllowing a sort paint-by-numbers template for most of their stories, it's rare that you can't see the big twist at the end coming.

[Ruth]

I have a problem with formulaic crime/thrillers - unfortunately, there seem to be a lot of them out there, as a writer finds something that works once and then hangs on for dear life.

 

The other things that gets me is the fine line between it being too easy to figure out whodunnit and it being impossible to work out. I like to have a chance of working things out for myself, but I don't want it to be too obvious or I feel like the writer is being condescending.

 

I agree on both points. I have read a few books where I have figured out whodunnit when I am only about 1/3 of the way through. It's quite disappointing when that happens. On the other hand, I have also read a couple, where the perpetrator was someone who wasn't in the book at all until the very end, when they where revealed to be the one 'whodunnit'.

[Ben Mines]

A detective novel is a more intellectual experience and therefore there is less poetry and less emotion. What compensates for that, and drives the narrative, is or should be a well-crafted plot. For those who enjoy it, it has the same kind of appeal as an intricate puzzle.

[jenmck]

As one who has been published with a small press in the "mystery" category and is aiming for an agent with romantic suspense, I can tell you it's tough to make it WITHOUT the formula.

 

Here's a fabulous example.

 

Steve Hockensmith is one of my favorite authors. He writes mysteries set in the Old American West. They're different. They're not graphic or feature serial killers or anything like that. He writes very unique, kind of funny mysteries.

 

And he isn't well known.

 

Why? Because the public seems to want the "same ole same ole".

I totally disagree with that but I can't buy enough of Steve's books to prove them wrong. LOL.

 

There's GOOD stuff out there that isn't like everything else. They just don't make Oprah's reading list.

 

This year, I made a decision to buy a book for everyone on my list. Preferably a book by a lesser known author.

[beef]

hmm, you say "crime/thriller" but to me the types of books everyone is mentioning are more "who dunnit" books. To me a crime book would be something like Homicide or The Godfather. Maybe you should look out some books that don't revolve around a policeman/woman catching a criminal? you may find them more enjoyable.

[Iagegu]

I do enjoy crime fiction but I totally agree with you on Restless. I wondered why I had bothered reading it when I got to the end. It was really a book that I had to push myself to finish.