(no subject)

[jack]

Do you ever read a book you enjoyed, only to realise half way through, that you remember a lot of the build-up but have completely forgotten whodunnit?

Of course, that's partly due to me reading some books relishingly and some books slap-dashly.

But I think it's an indicator, of the sort I was searching for before, that a book has a wonderfully conceived set-up, but the actual resolution at best appears retro-fitted.

I was thinking of this in terms of Umberto Eco, where the plots are often sufficiently obscured by the language you might have some justification for remembering the cool bits rather than the underlying plot. Although for name of the rose, I sometimes get a bit of the middle muddled (not much) but follow the underlying causes (except for the first time I read it).

But quite normal mysteries often have me thinking "huh". Which I think is basically an indication that it might be a good book, but breaks all those rules for mystery writing rochvelleth and I were listing.

That a good mystery has a moment where all those clues fall into place. And a subtle mystery might have clues you only spot the second time of reading. But a non-mystery has supposed clues that are completely indistinguishable from background and red-herrings, and you remember the book if it's interesting, but never do experience an "aha" moment, just an "oh, right" moment. And "aha" moments are good and memorable. But "oh, right" moments are just an excuse to stop writing.

Comments

[simont]

Off the top of my head, the situation in which I can most easily remember doing this is in the kind of story where they "reveal" that person A dunnit, and then at the last moment they whip off the tablecloth and it turns out that actually it was person B all along but for some daft reason even the detective had an interest in making people think it was A. In that situation I find I remember it was A, but forget the twist at the end.

It could perfectly well be that the reason I find A more memorable was because the evidence explained A better than it did B, so that the latter was a nasty retrofitted bodge as you suggest...

[pizza.maircrosoft.com (from livejournal.com)]

That sounds like every Agatha Christie ever....

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't be surprised. I can't remember if I've read any or not.