Noir? No Way!

Margaret Maron

I recently taught a seminar on mystery writing to people who were fairly unfamiliar with the genre.  To give them an overview, I drew a continuum from the lightest fluffiest cozy to the post-apocalyptic/balls-to-the-wall/slasher novels and explained that most people do not read across the whole spectrum.  Some start with Lillian Jackson Braun and end with Agatha Christie.  Some
begin with Nero Wolfe and end with Michael Connelly, while others begin with I the Jury and end with Silence of the Lambs or in an even bleaker misogynistic wasteland. I further explained that good and bad writing is to be found in all the permutations and that it's silly to say that a badly written slasher book should be taken more seriously than a beautifully written body-on-the-vicarage-rug book

So many male writers and reviewers have no hesitation in trashing traditional fair-play mysteries, romantic suspense, or what they dismissively call “cozies with cats and cooking,” that I’m sure they won’t mind if I say how very much I dislike the “boy books” they champion so vigorously—the gratuitously violent,implausible noir novels. The hero  has women lusting for him wherever he turns, and the books are so poorly plotted that whenever the story starts to drag, the author drops in an explicit sex scene or the bad guys inexplicably turn up just where the hero happens to be with no explanation of how they knew where to find him.  That's when we get the obligatory fight scene in which the hero takes kidney punches, kicks in the face, etc. etc., yet bounces back almost immediately.Even if the hero is technically “clean”, he often has a sidekick who will do all the nasty things his moral code won’t let him do (think Spenser and Hawke, or George Bush and Dick Cheney.) 

If he falls in love, she will usually be the victim or the killer so that our hero is free to lust again in his next outing.

I do not willingly read pornography that substitutes for character development.  I always find myself wondering if the writer is at heart a sniggering 12-year-old or indulging in self-gratification when he goes on and on about penises and [insert crude noir terms for a woman's sex organs] as if his protagonist is the first man ever to notice how well the male and female parts fit together.

Nor do I enjoy lovingly detailed pages of serial killers torturing and then dissecting their victims, of fingernails being pulled out, or of lit cigarettes being touched to a woman’s nipples.

Or of bombs wired to a woman’s nipples.

Or of clamps being applied to a woman’s nipples. 

In fact, if I never again have to read about painful things being done to a woman’s nipples, it would suit me just fine.

I remember having a similar discussion with one of these macho writers several years ago.  “It’s just fiction,” he said.  “Don’t get uptight about it.”

And then Tony Fennelly wrote The Glory Hole Murders  in which a penis is nailed to a bathhouse wall while it’s still attached to its owner, and howls went up from Mr. Macho and his like-minded colleagues.  “But it’s just fiction,” I told him.

He was not amused.

Do you have parameters?

 

Comments

[Harley]

Yes, yes, yes, Margaret. Thank you. I actually never thought to break down torture along gender lines, but of course you're right.

Here's what I can tolerate: the amount of torture that's shown in a James Bond movie. You know, people being fed to sharks, or paper shredders or whatever inefficient-and-by-the-way-bizarre means the weary writers can come up with.

I am just not okay with chain saws in any context, or body parts we don't discuss at the dinner table. Give me the corpse on the rug at the Vicarage any day.

[William]

I've been on a serious Ellery Queen Kick the past few months, and I'm starting to understand why I've dragged them out of the library. Murder Most Genteel is the order of the day, and the book is all about Sleuthing and Thinking and Characters. A sip of poisoned tea, a gasp, and *thud*. No convulsions, no hemorrhaging, no loss of body functions. Someone gets shot? BANG! (choke) "Yes........ yes........ I confess, I killed her for her money...." Final sigh, eyes close, case over, culprit caught. Realistic? No, but that's okay. I've had about enough realism lately.

Just finished a Highly Anticipated Thriller by a Pair of Best-Selling Authors. One of the authors I'd read previous entires in his series, and liked them, but as the series progressed so did the Gore Factor. It reached the point of Three Stooges stuff with body parts. I didn't really enjoy that, but I got what the writer was doing, and he's famous for pushing the story as far as he can (which, as a writer, is part of his job.) The other author I'd read nothing of his.

To say this one was "over the top" would be (to use Harley's 007 Analogy) saying the film version of 'You Only Live Twice' was a little silly in spots. In interviews, the authors have said they wanted to 'pull out all the stops' and 'really go for it', etc etc. As a writer, I get that, too. But this one... wow. Even *I* was disgusted with some chapters. I can't say it wasn't well done, but I can say it's gonna be a long time before I read a book by these guys again.

There's room for both genres, no question. And buying a book, any book, is such an intensely personal choice to begin with. But I'm getting more and more uncomfortable with the growing genre of 'Torture Porn' in film and books. I am NOT advocating censorship, but damn, guys (and girls), tone it down a little bit.

[Kathy Sweeney]

Parameters? I have rules that rival those of the great Leroy Jethro Gibbs.

No KidJep.
No torture of any kind - to any living thing.
No descriptive autopsy scenes.
No pyschos taunting the innocent.
No Oprah books - you know - the kind that make you think suicide might be an option. Many of these books have no likeable characters. I hate that. I get that it's poignant and angsty to have and entire cast of characters who are rat bastards - I mean, severely flawed. I just don't want to read about them. I get that in real life.

Thanks to you, Margaret, I have a new rule: no book with the words 'glory hole' anywhere.

I like funny, clever writing with great dialog and characters I care about. In other words, TLC books!

[Ramona]

This is less specific, but it bothers me when a story victim is treated without dignity. I don't mean the bad whatever that happens to them that makes them a victim--I mean when the author can't be bothered to make the victim an individual person.

I never used to notice this, then I read two books that completely changed the way I read certain books, mysteries/thrillers included. One was Alice Sebold's (she wrote The Lovely Bones) memoir, LUCKY, about being raped as a college freshman and her recovery. The other is SHATTERED, by Debra Puglisi Sharp, a woman from my own town who was abducted for five days by a rapist. Debra is now a victims' advocate. Reading what really happened to these two women, in their own words, made me look at how we write victims in an entirely new way. A lot of writers degrade their characters with disinterest as much as with torture.

Sorry for the rant and the plug for other people's books. I do not like unnecessary violence and I am against torture, including waterboarding.

[Josh]

I remember the Puglisi case, as it was here in Delaware. Out in the garden, kidnapped by some drugged, loony autoworker who happened to drive by and think she looked kidnap-and-rapable.

One of the rare stranger-abduction cases, supports my view that "sometimes your number is up."

[Josh]

But not relevant to the discussion.

I don't like explicit sex in books where I don't think it adds to the plot. (I objected before the fact to Sarah's Bubbles' sex scene(s), although she may say that they were integral to the character or character or plot development.) I like dirty stories as much as the next guy, but only where they *are* the plot, not where they are filler. Reading sex in a mainstream book feels unsavory.

[Sheila Connolly]

I have to say, "it depends." Sex/gore as filler is offensive. But if their use is relevant to the plot, it makes sense. After all, a serial rapist or a psychopathic killer is not worried about insulting his victims.

As a cozy writer, I do sometimes wonder whether cozy readers take greater offense at writers who injure a cat (heaven forbid that the cat should die) than at those who kill off three humans in a short space of time.

[Alan P.]

Like Josh, I prefer my porn to be the porn. I am far from a prude, but "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" and part two were enough for me, I don't think I need part three.

I liked Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs, but Hannibal was too far.

I read just about everything. It is not the genre, it is the characters and the writing. Maybe that explains my ever expanding TLC collection.

Oh, the action needs to be at least believable. I did recently finish a book suggested by a friend tat had a super secret, Bill Gates wealthy Ninja Assassin who also nailed every female over 18 not related to him. It was a bit far of a stretch.

[Ramona]

Stephen King got death threats when he killed off a dog in a story. Just saying, Sheila.

Josh, have you read Debra's book? I've recommended it to a lot of writers, because it takes you through the abduction, the assaults, her escape from being bound, waiting for the cops to arrive, the hospital, police interviews, the trial, etc. Plus, he'd murdered her husband, so guilt and grief. She wrote about everything, and it happened to her so it's a real glimpse into both what crime feels like to a victim, and what happens afterward.

Sorry again, Margaret, not trying to hijack the thread.

[Laura (in PA)]

Kathy, your list perfectly describes my feelings on things. I even couldn't finish the first books in CJ Box's series, because they started describing torture. It was an audiobook, not sure if that made any difference to my reaction. I was disappointed, because I've heard that those are great books, but I haven't read one since.

I have a really hard time with lots of violence, even in print. I read romances, but I don't need the sex to be acrobatic and explicit. I skip over those parts. (Heh.) I want the story, and the characters, and the relationships, and some laughs (hence Kathy's Oprah rule). And, I guess, since I read mainly mysteries, with some romance or straight fiction here and there, a happy ending.

I'll take the well-written body on the vicarage rug every time.

[Laura (in PA)]

Oh, and Sheila, what I said above notwithstanding, I'm probably one of those people who would take 3 corpses in a row without batting an eye, but would never forgive you for hurting the cat. :)

[Nancy Martin]

I have a quick gag reflex, so any kind of torture puts me off. Harley's rule about the level of torture in a Bond movie worked for me until some evil doer strapped Blond Bond, naked, to a chair and whips him. Nope. Sorry. That's waaay too much for me.

Kid jep, fem jep--not my genre. Likewise any story that picks a fat lady for skinning--an understandable hot button. (You don't want to f*ck her, so show your disgust, author, by peeling her skin off? I will join any campaign that discourages buying your book.) I am reading CROOKED LETTER, CROOKED LETTER, highly touted and very well written (I can smell the swamp!) but was on the brink of being icked out just because we're in the victim's head as he dies. Oddly enough, I kept reading because the sex scene was actually kinda sweet. I figure I'm in the hands of a writer who is an expert at toying with me. Hm.

[Harley]

Yes, Nancy, I do understand, and I did think about CASINO ROYALE when describing my Bond Standard, but I will always -- and i think Ramona will back me up on this -- stretch the envelope for Blond Bond.

I love that Kathy used "angsty" --a word we just never see enough.

[Hank Phillippi Ryan]

AH...for various reasons I won't tell you which mystery it is I tried to read, but it's all about this guy's "obsessive lust" for a teenager and his desire to "possess" her and all kinds of stuff about "the desires that must not be spoken.."

I'm like, yeah. So how 'bout let's just not speak of 'em, okay?

It drives me crazy when authors think it's okay to be relentlessly hideous and gruesome and grotesque--if you just make it clear YOU think it's
terrible and appalling.

[Elaine Viets]

I've been reading variations on this debate since critic Anthony Boucher panned Mickey Spillane's gratutious violence and defended traditional cozies. He felt there was a place for both.
I won't read gruesome books. I think "Hannibal" betrayed Harris's own characters,though I liked "Silence of the Lambs. I dislike "noir" men who punch someone they don't like (that's called assault and gets you arrested in real life. Even the so-called masters often created cardboard females. And don't get me started on boy writers who create "men in skirts" -- so-called women who never worry about whether they should have children, or other natural female preoccupations.
I do envy the boy writers' ability to be taken seriously by critics. But that doesn't stop me from giggling at their over-wrought prose.

[xena]

I've told you all before I live in a bubble. More of a Logan's Run type but with small town feeling plus you don't have a time jewel in your palm.
I dated one of Miami Springs finest in the early eighties. His idea of an entertaining movie always had the hide behind the popcorn bag reaction from me. The one where the girl was cut in half in the bathtub and then dumped in a field made me tell him if it wasn't a mindless comedy I wasn't going. And the reference of having a votive candle stuck up her "joy trail" will always bother me.
Too much bad stuff in the world. I don't want to see it or read about it.
Give me the Shakespeare violence offstage stories any day thankyouvery vicarage much.

[Laura K Curtis]

I don't read noir. I see enough depressing things in the newspapers every day. I do like thrillers, but I tend to skip the "torture porn" scenes. People can harass me all they want, but what I want is an ending where things are better than they are at the beginning -- the murder has been solved, the romantic couple is together, whatever it takes to make the situation better. I hate to read a book where everyone is miserable in the beginning and they remain miserable throughout the book. Which is why I rarely read "literary fiction."

[Karen in Ohio]

Brava, Margaret. This trend of ever-increasingly horrifying violence has completely turned me off writers like Allison Brennan and Patricia Cornwell, among others. And those are women writers, who I feel should be ashamed of themselves. You are completely on track about some male authors and their superhero-like protagonists, too. Ye gods. Enough, already. If an author can't spin an entrancing and engaging yarn without resorting to such tricks, it makes me feel as though their story wasn't enough for them. They somehow had to embellish, a la a schoolyard tale teller.

I used to read everything--I called myself an "omnivorous and voracious reader"--but now I'm much more discerning in my choices. Alan, like you, I was intensely turned off by the first volume of the Dragon Tattoo series, and never have been able to force myself to read the next one. I own it, but it's sitting there unopened. And forget the movie; there's no way I'm going to sit through that nonsense for two hours.

Elaine, "gruesome" is a good word, as is "torture porn". There's a place for real erotica, but I also tend to skip over it if it's gratuitous and smarmy, and it lessens my regard for the author when it is.

[Karen in Ohio]

Boy, I sound crabby in the above post. Sorry about that! Must have hit a hot button here. ;-)

[Margaret Maron]

When, when, WHEN am I gonna remember the security code. THis is my 3rd attempt at responding, so I may not touch all of you.

William, I always muddle EQ with Nero Wolfe, but loved both of them. Clever puzzles, cute dialog, intelligent plotting.

Kathy and Harley, I think we have similar tastes in what we can take.

Ramona, I agree with you about victim compassion. No matter how despicable, I try to show the vic before he/she becomes a corpse and to have at least one person mourn the loss. Can't always, but do it whenever I can. (And hijack away! Sounds like a worthwhile read.)

Sorry, Laura, but in one of my earlier books, cats were eaten. So far as I know, not a single cat-lover (of which I am one) wrote to object.

Thanks for your comments, those of you who, like me, can skip the explicit sex scenes . . . I mean, it's so predictable -- not that many different variations on what one can do with the various body parts and a few inches of hard flesh. I myself prefer to leave it to my readers' imagination. They seem quite willing to do the work!

Xena, move over because I'm hiding behind the popcorn, too!

Elaine, I don't have a problem with people liking harder violence or porn than I like. I DO have a problem with critics who take that end of the spectrum super seriously and treat the softer end as less important and less profound. As Carolyn Hart is fond of saying, more of us know about the minister and the choir director than drug wars and Mafiosi.

[Elaine Viets]

Amen to Carolyn's comment, Margaret. The drug wars and Mafia murders tend to be dumb and dull. Much prefer the criminal choir director and murdering minister who sat next to the "best people" at dinner.

[Nancy Pickard]

Bravo, Margaret.

I haven't read the Girl Who books, and won't now, because I first saw the three Swedish films of them. I went back to movies #2 and #3 because the young actress is so phenomenal that I couldn't *not* watch her again, but there was so much graphic torture that there's no way I will go to see the American versions OR read the books.

[Storyteller Mary]

My teacher friends used to warn me away from books and movies that would be too much for me, so I haven't seen _Silence of the Lambs_, and when an assistant principal loaned me her copy of _Angels and Demons_, my department chair sent a student to fetch it back before I even opened the cover. I miss having that backup system, so y'all please warn me . . . and keep writing for me, Book Tarts!!
Read MOre chose _Winter Bones_ one year. I wish I could erase it. I did immediately alert our librarians to warn all the the church book club groups that it just might not be their cup of tea. . . no Dragon Tattoos for me, either . . . and there was a book called Perfume that I put in the recycling bin, not wanting to be responsible for anyone else reading it.
** “But it’s just fiction,” I told him. ** perfect comeuppance!

[Nancy Pickard]

So off-topic and egotistical, but my mailbox just now cracked me up. . .it amuses me so much when Amazon or Barnes & Noble recommends my own books to me. "Nancy Pickard, here are some mysteries you might like."

Well, I hope so.

Storyteller Mary, I LOVED "Winter's Bone," the movie and then read the novel. The book is a lot tougher than the movie. But I don't think you'd love the movie. :)

[Laura (in PA)]

Karen, I, too, read the first Tattoo book, and I, too, bought the second one, and haven't read it. :)

Mary, it's nice to have that warning system. My husband does that for me with TV shows. I can't take the violent ones - I even had to walk away from Hawaii 5-0 this week - all that eye candy! - because they were beating the crap out of Steve. Same with boxing and movies about boxing - can't watch it. I do watch Justified - it's pretty violent, but it's so well done. And looking at Timothy Olyphant cures many ills.

[Karen in Ohio]

Laura, love this: "I don't need the sex to be acrobatic and explicit".

You have such a way with words.

[Alan P.]

The Casino Royale scene is almost exactly the way Flemming wrote it.

Critics and their "choices"

I largely stopped reading movie critics after the local (STL) reporter included a scene in his review of "The Blair Witch Project" that was in the press kit, but not on screen, and when Ebert decided that the long shot of the orgy in "Eyes Wide Shut" ruined the movie. Being boring as all get out ruined the movie. The two seconds of odd film didn't even ruin the orgy.

[William]

During the CASINO ROYALE 'chair scene', every man in the theatre, myself included, was hunched in their seats like Hobbits.

Just sayin'....

[Josh]

As long as we are talking about movies we walk away from, I stay as far away as possible from death penalty/execution movies.

Way too close to home for me.

(Exception: Monster's Ball, which got the execution/jail mood so right that I had flashbacks. Too bad Halle Berry isn't in my real life.)

[Tammy]

You know people who are only occasional beef-eaters? Just the occasional steak when they really feel the need for red meat? That's how I am with thrillers and lots of violence in my reading. A really good book with that content once in a while, and then I'm set for a few weeks. Otherwise, I much prefer the guarantee (as Laura K Curtis said above) that things will be better in the end than they were at the beginning. I wholeheartedly agree: the news gives us more than enough depressing, disheartening, and sad information ... I don't need more from my leisure and recuperation reading. Give me some exercise for my little gray cells instead of my gag reflex!

[gaylin in Vancouver]

I am in the middle of the road in the noir genre. Cozies are too cozy for me and I skip going to the wasteland.

I go for the details, if it adds to the book then add the details, if it doesn't glossing over is fine with me.

If I want gratuitous sex I will pick up erotica because sex is the 'point' in those books . . .

If I find myself skipping whole pages in books because I don't need the flashbacks, I just close the book and return it to the library.

I think Kathy Sweeney got it about perfect in the comments today! Oprah books, bleh.

Off topic, I had a dream last night that I was at Buffy's wedding. She had on a great dress.

[Lisa Alber]

Thank you for this post!! It brings up so much that I've been thinking about lately re: the white male writer and the resurgence of noir (that's not my imagination, is it?). I get frustrated by the double-standard that you point out: "male" stories automatically held in higher esteem than "female" stories regardless of the caliber of writing.

I know of a writer who is self-publishing the sickest serial-murderer porn, and he pumps them out. For NanoWriMo, he wrote his 50K words in about two weeks! Here's the thing: agents approached him, he's now represented, and will probably continue on with a traditional publisher. And here I am, writing crime fiction that's hopefully got a little literary merit with characters arcs and subplots, etecetera, and I'm having a helluva time progressing.

[Deb]

I'm happy to see that I'm in good company here. The older I get, the harder it is for me to read/watch anything violent, and I don't want to read graphic autopsy details, either. No torture of any kind - I don't even care if it's vigilante justice - I don't want to invite into my life pictures of people doing horrible things to other people. I still like murder mysteries (of course!) but I will NOT read the ones with gratuitous violence. Even if it is merely implied, that's enough to give me nightmares, whether it's books or movies. I long ago stopped reading newspaper accounts of violent crimes, and I will not watch/listen to TV or radio accounts of violent crimes - particularly if children are involved. Here in CT, all the media have been covering - in graphic detail - the home invasion in Cheshire that resulted in three deaths and one person badly beaten. Those are the only details that I myself know, because I have chosen NOT to follow the story. The headlines were awful enough for me. It was all over the news when it first happened, and now that poor surviving family member has had to relive everything for the trials. I can't imagine how much more horrible all of this is for HIM.

When I saw the movie "Gone Baby Gone" I had nightmares for four consecutive days. It was partly my fault, for not checking ahead of time to see how violent it was. A business colleague laughed at me when I mentioned how disturbing that movie was for me. "It's just 'make-believe'; you shouldn't be upset." Well, I was.

I used to skip over the violence in books but with some authors, it means reading only about a third of the book. So I've decided not to read books by certain authors anymore, no matter how intriguing the story line might sound. (Karen, Patricia Cornwell is one of the people I've "given up".)

Storyteller Mary, I started reading Angels and Demons, and then had to put it down. I haven't gone back to it, and I won't.

I enjoy the mysteries written by you lovely Tarts because justice is accomplished in one way or another. There may be sadness, loss, death, but there is a resolution. Like someone else said, my own life has enough drama that when I am reading a book or watching a movie, I want to experience something different, some sort of "escape". (And yeah, I very frequently crave things that are totally silly, and I'm not going to apologize to anyone for that:-)

I very rarely read literary fiction anymore because too often the stories are depressing, nothing is resolved, and the bleak lives of the characters just go on and on...

[Margaret Maron]

Deb, I think you've put your finger on my problem -- it's not enough to be told it's just fiction. I get so into every book, every movie, every TV program, that it becomes too real for me. Willing suspension of disbelief? Not only willing, but aggressively aiding and abetting.

And speaking of boy books with a horny adolescent viewpoint, check out this listing. Look at the cover, then read all the respectful quotes: http://www.amazon.com/Getting-Off-Novel-Violence-Crime/dp/0857682873/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1322078912&sr=1-8

[Gayle Carline]

I can read a wide spectrum of mystery-thrillers, from cozies to fairly graphic stuff. For me, it's about the characters. If I like and believe in the characters, I'll follow them into the Gates of Hell, or Aunt Nora's tea party. If the storyline is unusual, I'll stay with it. If the writing is clever, I'm in heaven. If the characters are too cardboard-cliche-ish, if the writing is meh, and if the story is full of gratuitous sex/violence/knitting, no thanks, I pass. My own mysteries are more character-driven. There's a little un-described leave-it-to-your-imagination sex, there are some murders (of course!) where blood does appear at the scene, but for the most part, I write toward the cozy end of the street. And I'm okay with that.

[Nancy Martin]

I found Winter's Bone very compelling---likewise True Grit, and a friend's YA noir The Girl is Murder. I wonder, though, why young readers are so drawn to the dystopian worlds, the hopeless stories, the terrible, almost insurmountable problems that drive these books. (I understand the whole vampire thing.--I think it's about sex most of the time. My editor once commented that TWilight is the perfect romance for young girls.--The man only wants to cuddle!) But the dismal themes in YA fiction makes me ache for young people, who must have deep fears about the world. Or maybe---egad--we're the one's sublimating something??

[Doc In CA]

My tastes in mystery/thriller/crime novels is, as my taste in most things, pretty broad. right now I'm alternating between the Flavia de Luce mysteries by Alan Bradley and the adventures of Isaac Bell by Clive Cussler. Since I'm stuck at home for two weeks with what may be a partially torn rotator cuff, I expect I'll breeze through both of those series, then move on to...well, who knows what.

I'm no fan of gratuitous sex or torture, but either are necesary to the story and well written, I've got no problem with them.

I can't usually read anything that involves torture to animals or kids. I'm also not into reading anything that has a far right message. Actually, I'm not crazy about far left messages, either. And as soon as a book starts pimping a particular religion, I stop reading.

And, of course, as in movies, so in books: No Bad Science!

William: No kidding about that Casino Royale chair scene. My wife said she had never seen me grimace or squirm that much.

[Karen in Ohio]

Ye gods, Margaret. Lawrence Block "writing as Jill Emerson", first off. Secondly, Walter Tango Foxtrot?

Gaylin, you made me laugh at "gratuitous knitting". Oh, yeah.

[Laura (in PA)]

Gayle said: "...and if the story is full of gratuitous sex/violence/knitting..."

HA!

Doc, I love Alan Bradley's books. I also really enjoy Charles Finch - I need to get his new one.

Sorry to hear about your shoulder.

[Deb]

Margaret, about that Amazon link: Eww!! I feel like I need to wash out my eyes!!

Gayle, your books are just fine! I don't find that I need to skip any parts (even the part with the...well, I don't want to give away that scene from your first mystery...but it didn't make me sick or anything!)

Nancy, I have a young niece who likes to have me read the books that she's been reading when I'm at their home for a visit, and then we often compare our impressions of the books with each other. I've noticed that she's more drawn to the comical than to the bleak YA novels. I'm glad, because I don't want to read the bleak ones. I've been checking out the YA sections of bookstores and libraries, and trying to remember what I read at that age. I think I was drawn more towards historical fiction (in addition to mystery, which has been a lifelong love.)

Doc, I wish you a speedy recovery!

[Joshilyn Jackson]

Here is why I LOVE Lee Child's Reacher books:

Reacher is straight up BATMAN. He takes a licken and keeps on ticken, and I LOVE the plots. BUT ALSO! The women are never victims. Reacher would never be attracted to a pasty little whiner tied to a mast goign OH NOES PIRATES----they are tough, smart chicks who rescue him right back.

LOVE those books.

[Storyteller Mary]

My friends Maria and Susan have formed a Ren. Faire act, Swords and Roses, and they can use those swords!! http://www.swordsandroses.com/
YA fiction -- a friend recommended _Little Women and Me_ -- so far, I'm loving it!

[Cathy S.]

As I've gotten older, my tolerance for violence/dark psychology/gruesome detail has gotten weaker and weaker. I used to read Jonathan Kellerman, and I just can't anymore. My limit for violence ends at Spenser (hilarious, Margaret, the Spenser/Hawk Bush/Cheney line). I tried reading Kathy Reichs' first novel because, hey forensic anthropologist, and never finished because it was too gruesome. Now I stick with Gideon Oliver. At least those guys have been dead a long time. My favorite is Nero Wolfe; Archie Goodwin is my hero, even with the occasionally annoying obsession about everyone's looks. I love Ngaio Marsh, and enjoy EQ, although those books have not aged especially well. I'm not good with the coziest of cozies (I can't seriously look at cat cozies even though I love cats), but there's lots of middle ground.

[gaylin in Vancouver]

I am with Joshilyn, I love Lee Child's Reacher books as well. He figures things out and takes care of business. And talk about no baggage!

I used to read Andrew Vachss, talk about dark. Can't read them anymore. I did like those books for one good reason, dead bad guys. I do like the bad guys getting dead.

Would Charlaine Harris' Aurora Teagarden series be considered a cozy read? I did like those books.

[Reine]

Hi Margaret,

That explains my love for your books.

I can't not read disturbing passages. I can't skip one word. So if a passage is too disturbing I stop reading it. As much as I wanted to read THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATOO, couldn't finish the first page.

Autopsy scenes don't bother me, unless they are gratuitous or endless . . . tedious . . . space-filling junk. That only makes it boring. And I can't tolerate the experientialist reader viewpoint. Uh-uh, no. The theme or the plot may be interesting, but I don't want to be in her skin.

[Sandi]

I'm late to the party, but I cannot tolerate animals being tortured or killed for shock value. Oddly enough, I loved the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, etc. (By the way, if you read the second one you MUST read the third. They're really two parts of the same book. The third is the least violent of the three, mostly legal and journalistic maneuverings.) Graphic sexual abuse disgusts me. I used to like James Patterson (back when he actually wrote his own novels), but Kiss the Girls flipped a switch for me. I just tossed a book that described a rape scene between a 40+ man and a 16 year old girl, followed by what appeared to be a justification of it. Maybe the book backed away from it later, but I wasn't going to stick around and find out. Graphic sex doesn't bother me as long as it's well written, although I tend to prefer it in erotica rather than mysteries. Do it justice or don't do it at all, I figure. I do, however, hate hate HATE stories with one dimensional domineering men and women who accept it. I literally throw those across the room. I once ripped a book in half because the characters ticked me off so much.

[Margaret Maron]

Doc, hope that rotator cuff is healing.

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! May you have a relaxing day and plenty of good books to read this weekend.

[Avis]

Kathy mostly says it for me, except I'm like Reine for forensic stuff.

Like Sandi, authors using the killing or torture of animals (or children!) for shock value especially bothers me. I KNOW it happens in real life, especially with certain kinds of mental illnessss. I still don't want to read it. I tried to read my first J.A. Jance - the blurb had mentioned a certain number of bodies, then the first chapter mentioned the woman living alone in a trailer with her same-number-of adopted dogs and cats... and I shut the book and donated it to the library unread.

I like the puzzle solving aspect of mysteries more than intense suspense (though any story needs some). So I don't read many thrillers. I do like most mysteries that don't involve torture or extreme violence if the writing is good.

Certain writing styles will make me give up on a book now. I hate "inventive" speech tags - too many, and I'll stop reading. I hate when the writer overexplains, either in the narrative or the characters' words or thoughts, especially when the same stuff is repeated multiple times. I dislike it when, in first person, there's too much internal dialog... when it's disguised explaining. I hate it when a 1st person narrator says "I decided to ... ". She's not really saying that in her own head, is she?

I hate it when I don't like any of the characters enough to care about what happens to them.

I like knitting and cats if the writing is good and the mystery is interesting. I don't mind a certain amount of graphic sex, but even though Margaret says there isn't much variation in sex, there is some... and I really only like to read about sex that's like what I like. :-) (Like Harley's Wollie and Simon on top of that department store... and NancyM's Nora and Michael in that phone booth...)

[class factotum]

I do sometimes wonder whether cozy readers take greater offense at writers who injure a cat (heaven forbid that the cat should die) than at those who kill off three humans in a short space of time.

It's rare to meet a kitten that deserves death, but don't we all know at least one person who won't be missed when he's six feet under?

[class factotum]

Well, regular HTML doesn't work here. I am quoting the first sentence in the comment above.

I won't read any more of Stephen King's books since reading "Gerald's Game" 17 years ago. I still have to banish that wrist scene - and I won't spell it out for the sake of you who have not read it but those who did read it know just what I am talking about - from my mind.

I skip the gore (and the sex scenes - they are boring) in novels and on TV. I also skip watching someone get a shot. Just the plot, please.