Mystery Writing

Greetings from Madison, WI. My trip here was interesting. On the flight from  LA  to Chicago, the woman next to me fell asleep, put her head on my shoulder, and snuggled my arm for an hour. I was afraid to move for fear she’d wake up and be mortified. She eventually moved aside and rested against the window.  I’m sure she had no idea what she’d done. But still, it was  weird.

I had a great time on my panel today with Steve Cannell, Robert Ward, Raymond Benson and Donald Bain. The panelists provided lots of laughs, some good anecdotes, and even some sage writing advice.  I spent time chatting with Ken Bruen, Reed Coleman, Jim Winter, Jim Born, Robin Burcell, Lee Lofland, Declan Hughes, Lee Child, Allan Guthrie, Gary Phillips, Bob Levinson, Zoe Sharp, Stephen Booth, Patricia Smiley, Parnell Hall, Duane S (can’t spell his name so why try?), and many, many others before retiring to my hotel room to work on MONK #4, which is due so soon I am getting stomach cramps just thinking about it.

Tomorrow, I have lunch with my publisher and then it’s the Shamus Awards dinner.

The International Thriller Writers, of which I am a proud member, have adopted the Killer Year, a group of  15 first-time authors with new mysteries & thrillers coming out in 2007.  What does this mean? A lot:

We’re also getting one of our stars to review each of the debuts and we’ll be
publishing them in the ITW Thriller Reader’s Newsletter.  And an ITW author has
volunteered to mentor each of the fifteen members of the Class of 2007 through
their baptism by fire into the publishing world.

Lee Child, Jeff
Deaver, Tess Gerritsen, Gayle Lynds, David Morrell, Jim Rollins, Anne Frasier,
Douglas Clegg, Duane Swierczynski, Cornelia Read, Harley Jane Kozak, Allison
Brennan, Ken Bruen and Joe R. Lansdale have all signed on. (Each
Killer Year author requested their mentors, that’s why we didn’t put out a
general call.)

In addition, ITW will sponsor a Killer Year breakfast at
ThrillerFest ’07 where each of the debut novelists will be presented by his or
her mentor to readers, reviewers and the press.

Isn’t that terrific? I hope the ITW can find deserving authors every year for similar "star" treatment. The ITW is doing some amazingly creative and beneficial stuff for their members  — this is just one of many examples. 

Tomorrow I’m heading off to Madison, WI and Bouchercon 2006, the world mystery convention, where I will be moderating a panel with Stephen J. Cannell, Robert Ward, Donald Bain and Raymond Benson. That’s also where I’ll find out if I’ve won the Shamus  for THE MAN WITH THE IRON-ON BADGE… though I think there’s little chance of that up against the likes of Connelly, Crais and Mosley. I’ll be gone until Monday, but I’ll try to send in a few reports from the convention floor.

As you probably know by now, I am a big fan of Daniel Woodrell. Sarah Weinman pointed me to this interesting interview with Woodrell, who makes the surprising announcement that he plans to take a few years off to concentrate on writing short stories.

For now, Woodrell plans another novel, and then a shift of formats:

"I promised my wife I’m going to take two years or three years
and just write short stories. I really like it when I do find an
occasion to do one. But I respect the form enough to realize to really
get any good at it you’re going to have to focus on it consistently for
a little while. Part of it is I don’t put the same level of expectation
on myself with short stories so I relax and they might could be just as
good. But I’m not pressuring myself. Whereas with novels, I really feel
required…I’m one of these types, I’d hate to publish one that I
thought wasn’t in the league with the one before, that’s all."

I write hard-boiled mysteries and I write cozies. I read hard-boiled mysteries and I read cozies. There’s a lot to like and dislike in both genres. That said, the more I think about Otto’s latest tirade, the angrier I get. Not so much at him, but at my fellow mystery writers, who are so afraid of speaking out against Otto Penzler that he feels empowered to keep embarrassing mystery writers everywhere with his ignorance.  Here are just some of the incredibly stupid things Otto Penzler has said about cozies and those who write them:

"They may be fun, they may have their charm, but they are not
serious literature and don’t deserve an Edgar." 

"[Malice Domestic] honors books written in the mode of Agatha Christie,
loosely defined as those that contain no explicit sex, excessive gore,
or gratuitous violence. Unstated, but clearly of equal importance, is
that they must contain not a scintilla of style, originality, or depth.
They must have the texture and nuance of an infomercial, lacking only
its philosophical power."

"Cozies are not serious
literature. They don’t deserve to win. Men take [writing] more
seriously as art. Men labor over a book to make it literature. "

"I think noir writers are writing the very best books they know how to write.  I don’t
think [cozy writers] are writers who are stretching. I don’t think they’re
trying to write anything of enduring quality. I think they’re writing
to sell books, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but you don’t have
to take it seriously as literature, and I don’t."

This guy is the mystery equivalent of a drunken Mel Gibson, spewing his hateful and ignorant shit, and yet, inexplicably, he’s still treated like some kind of royalty in our field.  Nobody but cozy writers have dared to criticize him.  Why? Cowardice.

It’s time mystery writers stopped bowing and cowering in front of him simply because he established the Mysterious Bookshop and the Mysterious Press.  Face facts, people. He’s a sexist, narrowminded neanderthal…who embarrasses himself and, even worse, our profession every time he spews his offensive, sexist crap. With our silence, we imply that we and the Mystery Writers of America endorse his sexism and hatred.   

How far does this guy have to go before mystery writers finally get the guts to say, loudly and publicly, that Otto Penzler doesn’t speak for mystery writers, the MWA, or the mainstream of our profession. We do not share his sexism or his absurdly narrow view of what constitutes mystery writing.

Otto Penzler is at it again — trashing women who write "cozy" mysteries. 

A lot of people got really
angry with me when I wrote a harsh criticism of the books nominated for
Agatha awards at the Malice Domestic convention, which is devoted to
"traditional" (i.e. cozy) mysteries. I was so upset I had offended
anyone that, gee, I couldn’t sleep for I don’t know how long.

When it came time to review the six nominees for the 2006 awards
banquet, I kept looking at them but just didn’t have the stomach for
it. In, how can I say it, "conversations" with two of the women I wrote
about last time, their position is that their books should be taken
seriously.

[…] I missed the part
where anyone said she wanted to create original and believable
characters, give them words to say in a manner that a reader will
encounter for the first time, provide a rich emotional framework in
which they can deal with their passions and seek redemption, all in a
carefully plotted story that will clutch a reader by the lapels and not
let go until the denouement.

Seeing what apparently motivates so many writers of cozy mysteries,
I guess I’ll skip the Malice Domestic nominees this year. Maybe I’m
becoming cynical.

So, basically, what he’s saying is that, in his narrow view, "cozy" writers have no desire to create rich, interesting characters or tell compelling, thoughtful entertaining stories. And he knows this because a) the stories are non-violent and b) let’s face it, they are mostly written by women. No wonder they’re shit, right? Everybody knows that the only good mystery is a violent, blood-soaked epic written by a man, preferably one who smokes, drinks, and farts a lot in public.

Basically, Otto seems to believe that if a mystery isn’t written by a rugged man in a 12-step program (and his protagonist isn’t in one, too) then the novel is cozy garbage that’s not worth any attention or respect.   It’s certainly not worth an Edgar.

I’ve got news for Otto — I’ve read many "hardboiled" and "gritty" mysteries where the characters were one-note cliches, the plots were dull, and the pacing was listless (some of those have even been Edgar nominees). On the other hand, I’ve also read "cozies" that were filled with rich characters, clever plots, and genuine momentum.

I love hard-boiled fiction — but for him to shrug off an entire, hugely popular genre of mystery fiction (one that’s predominently written by women) simply because the stories aren’t blood-soaked, relentlessly bleak and filled with morose, self-loathing characters is ridiculous, narrow-minded and, let’s be honest here, embarrassingly ignorant.

Otto isn’t doing himself, or the mystery field, any favors when he comes out of his cave to trash "cozies" and the women who write them. We get the point, Otto. There is only one kind of mystery novel that’s worth a damn, and unless women are willing to get tough, they should stay in the kitchen and leave the writing to us menfolk.

Let’s repeal their right to vote, too.