How to use this Page

Pre-eminent among writers of mystery stories is, in my opinion, Dorothy L. Sayers. She is ingenious, witty, original - and scientific too, including themes like the fourth dimension, electroplating, and the acoustics of bells in some of her best stories. She is also the inventor of the voice-activated lock, which her hero Lord Wimsey deploys in the 1928 short story 'The Adventurous Exploit of the Cave of Ali Baba'.

The post The trick of the lock: Dorothy L. Sayers and the invention of the voice print appeared first on OUPblog.

Humpty Dumpty Jr: Hardboiled Detective: The Case of the Fiendish Flapjack Flop by Nate Evans, Paul Hindman and Vince Evans.

This is the first in a new series of chapter books published by Sourcebooks. Humpty Dumpty Jr: Hardboiled Detective is a mystery-detective series that is pun-filled and silly. Here's how the first book starts off: "Once upon a crime: There was a detective. Me. Humpty Dumpty Jr., Hardboiled Detective. I'm a good egg who always cracks the case. One morning, sitting at my desk, I watched the sun rise out my grimy window. Dawn light played peek-a-boothrough the tall skyscrapers of the gritty city. My city. New Yolk City. A crazy, dangerous, beautiful town." In this book, Humpty Dumpty is on the case of a missing baker--Patty from Pat-a-Cake Bakery has been kidnapped. Can this egg solve the case in time? He just might if he teams up with a down-on-his-luck boy named Rat.

As an adult, I found the humor to be of the groaner variety. (Just consider the closing words: "You definitely crack me up, kid. And, in my case, that could be fatal. Case closed.") But these books aren't written for adults. They're written for kids. And there is an age where corny-groan-worthy humor reigns supreme. And that's something to keep in mind. Do I think there are kids out there who would like this book? I think so. I really do. And I do think this book and series will fill a need.

© Becky Laney of Young Readers

(it is a fair bet that most of these stories have a bad guy and a good guy, and a crime and a gun)

Not to belabor the point… as I’m ready to move on.  But a few people commented, and a few people emailed, and complained that they don’t feel “genre” is formulaic.

And while I essentially agree with them that my definition came across as simplified and  overly negative, (because, basically, I’m a snob) I’m going to fight for my assertion of genre as formulaic.  Of formula as the defining characteristic of what might be called “genre” writing.

As opposed to readership.

I think formula=genre works pretty well as a definition. But I want to explain a little what I mean by “formula”.  I don’t really mean that no good writing is formulaic.  I don’t mean that all genre writing is bad. Or that a formula means the writing can’t also be creative and new.   I just mean that books from a like “genre” will share elements of plot, craft, set-up, resolution, etc.  That’s what I mean by formula.

That books in a particular genre share some kind of lowest common denominator in their actual storyline.  The Once and Future King and Pat the Bunny do not share an LCD I can think of.

There are romances that will be categorized as such, but also be shelved with “literary” books.  Same for fantasy, detective fiction, etc.  But some of the conventions are still there.

All romance novels are not the same, but you can pretty much bet that genre/romance will have someone who starts out alone and ends up with a lover.  Or someone who starts out with the wrong lover, and finds true love. Most will also have some kissing, and the love will, at turns, appear to be thwarted.  Do you know of a “genre” romance novel with NO romance?

All detective fiction is not the same, but most detective novels begin with a crime of some sort, an unsolved situation. And by book’s end, a clever (though complicated or flawed) character will have figured out the answer.  Whether it’s an old pulp magazine, or The Yiddish Policemen’s Union, on some level, it makes use of a series of plot conventions.  Readers have some idea of what they’re getting.

That’s all I really meant.

And think about this– the less a book is plot-driven, the less the formula will make the book identical to other books.  I think when a book jumps from “genre” classifications into “literary” classifications, what is happening is that the author is leaving some of the plot/genre conventions intact, but focusing less on plot and more on other elements of craft.

I find myself thinking about fantasy, and that fantasy is perhaps, by definition, less of a genre. I recently read Merlin’s Dragon, and while I didn’t like it much, it’s NOT a book I’d call genre at all.  It has, like, no human characters.  It’s just about a little dragon creature looking for animals like himself.  Weird.

If that’s fantasy, than I have no clue what the fantasy conventions are.  Dragons?  That’s dumb.

But I’ve read my share of mysteries, and my share of romances, and I’m sorry, y’all… they do, by and large, follow a recipe.