Thursday, 14 January 2010
Ahem
So I was just reading when I came across Twenty Rules for Writing Detective Stories, a list by S.S. Van Dine published in 1928.
It's here if you wish to see.
http://gaslight.mtroyal.ca/vandine.htm
I couldn't help but be delighted by this rule.
16. A detective novel should contain no long descriptive passages, no literary dallying with side-issues, no subtly worked-out character analyses, no "atmospheric" preoccupations. such matters have no vital place in a record of crime and deduction. They hold up the action and introduce issues irrelevant to the main purpose, which is to state a problem, analyze it, and bring it to a successful conclusion. To be sure, there must be a sufficient descriptiveness and character delineation to give the novel verisimilitude.
Clearly I am not the first to note overly lengthy descriptive devices as little more than distraction, wasting time and steering the reader's attention away from the lack of action!
Glad someone agrees with me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
*yawns*
ReplyDelete*looks for a dog and a saxophonist, sees neither of 'em, shrugs and leaves*
ReplyDeleteYou may call me an uncunning dog but even a dog is able to feel the emotions behind music.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the rules of writing detective stories of said S.S. Van Dine i can only partly agree on this matter.
The best detective fiction i have read so far delved alot into the innermost psyches of human beings or in this case of your story - "alien" beings...
Think of the stories of Hitchcock, Poe.... or more modern ones those of Philipp K. Dick. They are all introspective when it comes to their protagonists... And sometimes side-tracks and/or erroneous behaviour of their "heroes" makes their personalities more beliefable and realistic. Also plot twists keep up the suspense.
As i know that this little project is not a full time job of yours and you are not a professional writer i do not want to put such high standards upon your work. I just want to point out that your source is just a very rough guideline and there are alot other approaches and examples of detective fiction.
Well i haven't seen your novel as being a classic detective story as umm one of those "whodunnit?" Agathe Christie novels for instance, that are just logical puzzles spiced up with some humour or such. But if you want to see it like that, so be it - It is your story after all.
I am still reading your bits and pieces though because i am bored and curious how it might continue. But if you want to hear my humble oppinion: I have seen your storyline as much more like just following a linear bread crump chain. Imagination is the key here... Bigger schemes going on behind the curtain... The elder vampires awakening from turpor... Or some Alien vampire race crashlanded eons ago... and are now going to... O well my Fantasy is going thru with me again.
Well...what i am saying? Ah yes. First of all, despite my anomisities concerning your political views (Environmental politics) and other disagreements i am still reading your blog. So you may call me your last howling hound. I might bark but rarely bite. And lately i decided to bark not as much.
C.
Lol. Not exactly what I meant with my saxophonist/dog. I was referring simply to the lack of audience. Almost a month without a single comment. :P And Ed's musical revelations I felt was such an awesome moment. ^^
ReplyDeleteI actually thought of Hitchcock myself when reading Dine's list. Hitchcock did a series for teens called The Three Investigators which I loved as a kid, which obviously violates the rule of having only one detective! (Sherlock himself had Watson but Watson wasn't the detective except in the rare instances where his medical knowledge was superior to Holmes's. He was more the apprentice.)
I still think the idea of the list is a good set of core rules to think about, not to be deviated from lightly perhaps? It can work though. I loved "Falling Angel" by William Hjortsberg. He combined that kinda hardboiled "Phillip Marlowe" feel yet had the Devil himself as his ultimate protagonist. Fascinating stuff.
Oh and I wasn't trying to make out that Bitemarks is detectivey. It totally isn't. I just happened to come across that line in Dine's essay and found it typical of my attitude to all things I write. :P
Bitemarks to me is more present day fantasy perhaps even with mystery undertones. It's simply a world not where monsters exist, but where they are almost extinct. Think about it. If vampires were found to really exist, there would have been a cull. :) Monsters, if they did exist, would be hunted and killed off. And as we advance more and more they have fewer places to hide... (But I've said too much! :O Sssh, you didn't hear that.)
And you're right too about it not being a full time job. Bitemarks is merely practice, a way for me to force myself to write more fiction without worrying about the bigger picture (like I have to do with the epicly long In The Blood Saga) whilst at the same time providing a regular source of entertainment to stop my readers drifting away thinking I've given up!
As for your thoughts about behind the curtain. ^^ Oh my. You're more observant than I give you credit for. Twice now since I started writing this you've actually figured out what's going on. You just don't know it yet. But some clues are there and more are to come. I wonder why certain bits of information feel natural to Skarletta. And Beauclair's secret vault? Hmmm. What does a vampire need to lock away other than riches and artefacts. ;) Speculate no further! But hopefully you'll be pleased as things begin to be revealed. But first we need a glimpse of Skarletta's past and to put Ed onto her trail.
As for the views, it wasn't that I objected to. I have lots of views I don't share with other readers. I'm friends with Christians and Muslims despite not believing either religion. I'm friends with gay and lesbian people despite not being that way inclined myself. I'm friends with one person who's very anti abortion where I am pro abortion. What I objected to my dear Chesmond is the accusation of ignorance before I was even able to defend my viewpoint!
But enough of such things. We'll simply agree to disagree on that particular aspect of life.