Too Much Detail?

The mystery writer Allen Eskins spoke to the Minnesota Mystery Night* gathering a couple of days ago. In the question session, Eskins was asked:  When you write, do you think about the reader? Eskins said no, and his answer got me thinking.

I had never really analyzed my own process this way. On introspection, I realized I do not think much about the reader when I draft. I have the story in a rough outline; mainly, I live in the characters’ minds. Since my novels are to some degree techno-thrillers, though, I do think about the reader during rewrite. I need to put in just enough technical detail to convince readers that they can trust that the technology part is believable. After several years of help from fine critique groups, I know not to fulfill my inner temptation to show how astoundingly clever/knowledgeable I am and bore readers to death with detail. Then, of course, I run headlong into the question of how much is enough. Techies will want more detail; readers more interested in character arc will want less.

Two books I’ve read recently crystallized the issue for me. The first, The Rose Code, by Kate Quinn, is literary fiction traveling as a mystery. Marvelous writing, three strong female protagonists who work in various capacities at Bletchley Park, the WWII English code-breaking facility. You’ll want to read it. Quinn has every reason not to tell the reader how the people at Bletchley broke the Enigma cyphers because Bletchley was famously compartmentalized. The three protagonists each knew only part of the process. Yet the brief description Quinn gives of the actual code breaking was too little for me. (Here’s my Goodreads review.)

The second book will remain unnamed. It’s one I reviewed prior to publication. The central idea dealt with biotechnology. At one point, the text discussed “recumbent” DNA technology. (One hopes the author meant “recombinant.”) Of course, “recumbent” is a dictionary word; a dumb spell checker would find it perfectly acceptable. There were other hints that the writer hadn’t had the book copy edited, but even given that it might just be a typo, “recumbent” destroyed the author’s credibility with respect to the mostly unstated biological/pharmacological processes that were central to the plot. For me, at least.

My takeaways: 1) write to abandon in the first draft; consider what’s necessary in the second. 2) Get your work copy edited.

* Minnesota Mystery Night is produced by Midwest Mystery Works, a group of five of us who write mysteries and thrillers. If you’re in the Twin Cities, it’s on the third Monday of each month. You can get advance notice through my newsletter or on the MMW Facebook page.

The Genre Conundrum

Bouchercon, the international mystery writers convention, has just finished a four-day run in Minneapolis. Very interesting, panels on 80+ topics. I attended several, including one on techno-thrillers. Yet again, the genre I live in has shifted.

Ten years ago, my fiction genre was thriller. My stories checked the traditional boxes: Large, maybe world-spanning problem, typically discovered by an individual, usually a non-professional. Fast paced story in which reader knows both the protagonist’s and the antagonist’s thoughts and the question is not so much Whodunit? (as in Mystery) as it is Who will prevail? (as in Suspense).

Gone Girl had been published, and someone in marketing at Gillian Flynn’s publisher had slapped Thriller on the cover despite the lack of almost anything thrilleresque about the book. But it is a good book, and it sold. So over the following decade, many books became thrillers and the definition of thriller collapsed to “fast-paced.”

I watched that happen and adjusted my queries to be “thriller/suspense.” The addition of Suspense recognized that my thrillers had characters with wants, needs, fears.

There is so much writing about technology now that thriller has grown whiskers (aka sub-genres). I think I learned at Bouchercon that my first book, Fatal Score, and all my other manuscripts except Skins and Bone are techno-thrillers.

If my friend Carl Brookins reads this, he will take the opportunity to peel a layer or two of my skin off next time we meet at the critique group Crème de la Crime. “Rogers, how the hell many times do I have to tell you, genre doesn’t matter. Readers don’t give a damn about genre. Totally unnecessary.” Of course, Carl is a many times published mystery writer, so he can ignore genre. I can’t ignore genre, because the query letters I send hoping to snare an agent or publisher demand that the genre be named. So what used to be a comfortable definition is now a crap shoot. Next letter … maybe thriller/suspense? Techno-thriller? Crypto-techno-thriller?  Damn.