Monday, June 25, 2007
Attention all writers
Do I need to solve all murders that occur in my novel in an meaningful way? What if I am just throwing it out there and it doesn't actually figure into the eventual ending? I mean, I can come up withy a tepid solution but I hate to spend a lot of time in being clever if it doesn't actually matter. What is your preference as a reader or writer?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
I have a preference for the right answer. If tying up all loose ends is a stretch, leave some dangling. If leaving loose ends makes the book feel frayed (or like the lead in to a sequel--which is not at all the same thing as the first volume of a series), then tie them off. Don't you love "it depends" answers?
To be a little more specific (after leaping to a couple conclusions), it sounds like your extra murders are more setting or character arc than plot. If that's the case, make sure they're somehow deprecated so they don't feel like red herrings (unless you want red herrings...but in that case, the herrings probably need a solid alternate explanation).
Thanks, Megan. I think I can tie them up but maybe not in the way, the reader might initially expect.
They are in there to heighten tension and reveal character. You are very right. But after getting past them, I wondered if a reader (if there ever is one) might find it annoying if they turned out to fairly routine stuff.
I don't think you need to resolve everything, personally, but bear in mind I read a lot of British fiction. It really depends on how things are done. Publishers often require authors such as Rankin to write an extra chapter for the US versions to give more closure to the case. It's a different mindset, so I guess it comes down to knowing your audience and the publishers you'll be submitting work to. I suspect most will want loose ends tied up.
My feeling is that enough cases in real life go unsolved, so it's OK to leave them that way in fiction... unless they're the main event. That would be a gyp.
Plus an unsolved murder sets up a great arc for a sequel or even a series, if you were so inclined. Wasn't it a character in Homicide: Life on the Street who had an unsolved hanging over his head for much of the first season, or the whole series?
I don't mind ambiguity either. I think I won't bother about it for now. Thanks guys.
As I was waiting for others to chime in before suggesting, if it was good enough for Raymond Chandler...it might just fly for any of us...
Of course, the fact he could write pretty well may have helped.
Micheal Connelly and Ed McBain both left several murders open ended over the course of their series and solved them in later books. I don't think people mind if several of the murders have a mundane solution as long as the murder at the core of the book is resolved in a meaningful way.
Nah. Hell, Chandler didn't even know who killed the chauffeur in The Big Sleep.
I think it depends on how much importance that death has to the story. As long as the main threads are handled, some of the smaller loose ones can dangle. Think of them as reader bait for the next one.
After reading all of the astute answers to the question of solving all murders (written by folks who know a heck of a lot more than I do about the genre), it occurs to me that you can really do what feels right, Patti. The story is yours and you have good instincts--I don't think you can go wrong if you follow them (and then you'll just delete a chapter for the British crowd).
This is the amazing thing about writing. Suddenly an interesting solution occured to me. Where does that magic come from? Are we working on it in our subconscious all the time? I'm not saying it's that clever of a solution but it does have a certain closure for this section.
I'm glad you found a solution. Readers might not mind ambiguity, but I've found that editors do.
It might not please anyone else, but it sure pleases me-- for the moment at least. Oh, for the wonder of google.
After I thought about this for a while, I decided that your reader are different from the mass audience. A lot of the people who watch The Sopranos, for example, don't respond well to ambiguity or lack of a resolution.
It's a lot more difficult resolving a series that went on for seven years to everyone's satisfaction. Did we want to see them blown away, in jail, on the run. I think there would be very different answers. I was happy with the end; it allowed me to create my own ending.
In my case, I have a sort of resolution for the end. It's just these damned murders along the way.
Post a Comment