Writing the Mystery - Who Really Creates the Plot?
This morning I went out for a long run. I started out (as always) through the Cedarwood Cemetery on King Street. Before thinking about this short essay, I was distracted by a sign. In the cemetery, there is a sign that reads: “No Marker Will be Set Without Prior Notification of the City of Hertford.” What on God’s green earth spawned such a sign? Did someone really break in and try to bury someone? Of course, you’ll find the answer in the next Cletus J. Diggs Old Mill, NC story…which is now perking…but I’d love to know if the sign was placed in response to an actual incident…
Anyway, the mystery. I’ve been lost, as I mentioned, in the world of one of my characters, Lucian, who is an artist of sorts, but a villain by nature. I have talked a lot in recent days about characterization and characters, but for some reason this mornings musings turned to plot.
I have always been taught that writing a mystery is a plot-driven art form. I have never found a good argument against this, and today is no exception. Of all the forms of the novel, the mystery is most bound to the fictional element of plot.
But whose plot? That’s what bugged me this morning, and I wanted to talk it out by putting it here for others to ponder. The sort of crime that makes its way into the pure mystery novel is - in itself - plotted by the villain of the story. That, to my mind, is how you create a perfect mystery. First you create your villain. Then you drop into that character’s mind and thoughts and you work your way through how he would commit the particular crime you have in mind. Sometimes you may even find along the way that he or she has motivations and goals you didn’t foresee - and sometimes the original perfect crime you envision shows its imperfection in its own plotting.
If you start with your crime and work backward, you can create a good, solid string of events and clues that will make for a good story, but I believe that in the end you will find yourself trying to hammer your villain in like a round peg in a square hole and smash something. If you are going to plan the crime, you should be the villain, it only makes sense.
Where does that leave the writer? It leaves the writer as a co-conspirator, and detective. You have to be able to forget what you know and drop into the mind of the reader and the detective - or the good guy, whoever he may be - so that you can picture the means of discovery. The delicate task is meshing the villain’s plot and action with that of the perfect foil character - someone who’s natural proclivities will lead them down the trail to the solution without getting there too quickly, and without appearing to have “inside information”.
This is why most mysteries aren’t perfect. Either the villain is forced into some action or mistake that allows his plan to fail, but that he probably would not really be a party to if you listened to him, or the detective / hero changes from genius to moron and back again at the whim of the plot so as not to disturb the puzzle pieces. So here’s the thing…your villain writes the plot. Your protagonist (in a standard mystery your hero) unravels that plot and matches wits with your villain. It’s not you - it’s them, and you have to be able to not only drop into both of their minds and mannerisms, but to create something believable and memorable from the mix.
And that, ladies and gentlefolk, is why writing a mystery is - while plot based and structured - infinitely more difficult to do well than other forms of fiction. Again, I suppose, it has all come back to characters - true characters who act and react to the world you create for them in a rational and believable manner. It’s about being true to what you create and consistent in what you present. It’s the difference between hack work and memorable fiction.
For now, enough.
Onward!
DNW
07/18/08, 6:30 PM |
I believe there are two kinds of crime/mystery … the one motivated by a desire to be the criminal, and the one motivated by the desire to stop him. Day of the Jackal would be a good example of the former.
Although it creates some problems for the “perfect” mystery, you *can* work backward from a baffling crime, finding clues to solve it.
07/18/08, 8:02 PM |
I think you sidestepped my point. If you try to work your criminal into the crime, which is what will happen if you work backwards, your criminal will probably never be a fully realized character. Without playing it from start to finish in your mind, and seeing it as your character should and would see it, it’s difficult if not impossible to make the same decisions he or she would make, and if you make the actions fit the plot, your character will step OUT of character, and readers will notice.
The desire to stop the criminal is the motivation of the detective, or hero, but you have to be very careful - the same way - to have this character act as he or she WOULD act…and you can’t conveniently have them overlook something that, once you reach it in the story, you see would be obvious…because it is jarring, and it knocks your reader out of the flow of the story - particularly if they associate themselves with that hero and can clearly see he’s being a bonehead in a way they don’t believe he WOULD be.
Thanks for stopping in … it’s always more fun with discussion.
DNW
07/19/08, 1:24 AM |
I think crimes that are planned out step by step by criminal masterminds are probably pretty rare. Mostly, people who aren’t all evil just screw up and respond badly and then keep screwing up until all their options for redemption run out of their reach.
There’s a lot of enjoyable fiction out there that follows time honored formula for mystery, but it’s more like it’s popular because it’s familiar - and many people like to experience variations on the familiar.
Some mysteries are almost more like poetry, in that the ability to tell the story in limited structure and form is the art.
The really cool stuff, to me, is more like the real life mysteries that are born from un-plotted acts of passion, greed or desperation and drive the characters onward from there. (No Country For Old Men, for example.) The mystery is in the reactions of the characters and the choices they make, and the random intervention of fate in their lives.
So, who’s plot, you asked? To me the plot comes from the intervening action in the character’s lives, and as you said, their responses *in character*.
But I believe the characters are all real and tell us writers what to write, so, there you go.
Pamila
07/19/08, 10:19 AM |
It actually sounds as if you and I are in agreement, but coming at it differently. My major beef is with the very formulaic mysteries that bend characters to the plot…
I agree it comes back to the characters, and I didn’t mean to imply that the villain must plot out his crime before the book begins…he plots as he goes. I meant only that his decisions and actions have to remain true to the character, and if it means the story goes a different direction, you have to follow - the same goes for whoever is chasing him.
Thanks for dropping by!
David