Copped Out
While Murders in the Rue Morgue and the Purloined Letter were far more palatable than Piers Plowman (sorry, Mr. Strickland), I can't help but be both entranced and disappointed.
Just knowing it is a mystery story, I begin reading with the intent to figure the mystery out alongside Dupin or before Dupin does. It's exciting! It's not often that I get to read about murders or crimes, yet alone, imagine that I can solve them. Many books don't incessantly demand their reader's attention like thrillers do. Although I know figuring out the whole mystery can be impossible given the typically outrageous details that are given to us at the last second to stall the reader's discovery. Of course, what's a mystery book that's obvious to the reader within the first few pages? What would the point of reading it be, then, if the big reveal "this is who did it, this is how it happened" is immediately given?
Yet, the outrageous details sometimes feel cheap to me, like a desperate last minute curve ball to ensure that my best guess is always wrong. It's like that woman from the Macbeth-is-a-murder-mystery article perpetually yelling in the back of my mind "IT'S ALWAYS WHO YOU LEAST EXPECT". It's always who I least expect because I'm not given the full information, or someone like Dupin says "oh yeah, I just got this fistful of orange hair no one bothered to consider" or "oh yeah the letter was right on the door and they didn't care enough to inspect it". I know the twists are supposed to be exciting, but I can't help but feel like I've been copped out.
Bear in mind, the schtick of The Purloined Letter was that the answer was right there, but you have to admit that the orangutan in Murders in the Rue Morgue was a real stretch. Please, no more monkey business.
Just knowing it is a mystery story, I begin reading with the intent to figure the mystery out alongside Dupin or before Dupin does. It's exciting! It's not often that I get to read about murders or crimes, yet alone, imagine that I can solve them. Many books don't incessantly demand their reader's attention like thrillers do. Although I know figuring out the whole mystery can be impossible given the typically outrageous details that are given to us at the last second to stall the reader's discovery. Of course, what's a mystery book that's obvious to the reader within the first few pages? What would the point of reading it be, then, if the big reveal "this is who did it, this is how it happened" is immediately given?
Yet, the outrageous details sometimes feel cheap to me, like a desperate last minute curve ball to ensure that my best guess is always wrong. It's like that woman from the Macbeth-is-a-murder-mystery article perpetually yelling in the back of my mind "IT'S ALWAYS WHO YOU LEAST EXPECT". It's always who I least expect because I'm not given the full information, or someone like Dupin says "oh yeah, I just got this fistful of orange hair no one bothered to consider" or "oh yeah the letter was right on the door and they didn't care enough to inspect it". I know the twists are supposed to be exciting, but I can't help but feel like I've been copped out.
Bear in mind, the schtick of The Purloined Letter was that the answer was right there, but you have to admit that the orangutan in Murders in the Rue Morgue was a real stretch. Please, no more monkey business.
I think part of the reason for this is to show that yes, the detective is smarter than you, and no, you can't change that. These stories are designed for the detective to solve the crime in an ingenious way and for the narrator/reader to look on in awe. Unfortunately, a lot of the time this means leaving out crucial information until the big reveal or right before it. While I agree that this is less fun, it wouldn't be impressive for the detective to figure out the mystery after Average Joe the reader does.
ReplyDelete