This blog is dedicated to the genre of literature (and any other form of art) we have learned to appreciate. The one that epitomizes plot. The one that teaches that the human mind is capable of overturning the Chaoes and restoring Order. The one that never conceals a vital fact. In other words, the... The...
The who?
Is it "the crime novel" (the fact that it exists in many a guise beside novel)? Obviously, not: are we assembled here to discuss every single creation of human imagination depicting crime? Everything, from Herodotus to Voltaire and from Quentin to Chandler?
Perhaps, "the detective novel"? Still not the one. While the title is appealing, not evertything we adore features "a detective", or even "a detection" in any recognizable form. What are we to do with those books without any formal investigation going on and still upon conclusion we are hit with how fairly everything was told and led to inevitability? More importantly, have we now included those expansive specimina, the books featuring series sleuth protagonists that eschewed any hint of mystery in favour of family-saga?
Hey, here's the word: "mystery". Surely, what we are all attracted to is the "mysterious", isn't it? I claim otherwise. As so decisively put by Mr. Lechard, "mystery" is merely one way of telling about a criminal plot. "Detective novel" is another. A humdrum story of a real-looking police precinct, meticulous about realistic clues, may fascinate a lover of fair play as surely as anything Gothic & macabre. Otherwise, what would be the appeal of the inverted detective story?
John Pugmire argued once we have the word. The word is "honkaku", and it also fails. Even if we set aside the voluminous story of how this word changed its meaning with any new wind on Japanese literary landscape and limit ourselves only to how it is understood by the masters of "shinhonkaku" since Shimada-sensei - it says nothing about "fairness", about "clues", about "grandest game in the world". Basically, it boils down to being creative with setups and being creative with solutions, but, as we saw, neither is necessary - and neither is sufficient. Otherwise H.P. Lovecraft would be as a master of our genre as J.D. Carr. And please, don't offer me "GAD", as if we learned anything from the modern GAD-revival, there was much and much more behind the story of interwar literature than the puzzles we prefer, and many of the people recently rediscovered would barely fit the definition. Conversely, we surele are not going to claim that the only way to do our job is to stylicise the inter-war plot - as someone who adores the ways modern technology and modern sensibilities be used in plot I reject that explanation.
The who?
Is it "the crime novel" (the fact that it exists in many a guise beside novel)? Obviously, not: are we assembled here to discuss every single creation of human imagination depicting crime? Everything, from Herodotus to Voltaire and from Quentin to Chandler?
Perhaps, "the detective novel"? Still not the one. While the title is appealing, not evertything we adore features "a detective", or even "a detection" in any recognizable form. What are we to do with those books without any formal investigation going on and still upon conclusion we are hit with how fairly everything was told and led to inevitability? More importantly, have we now included those expansive specimina, the books featuring series sleuth protagonists that eschewed any hint of mystery in favour of family-saga?
Hey, here's the word: "mystery". Surely, what we are all attracted to is the "mysterious", isn't it? I claim otherwise. As so decisively put by Mr. Lechard, "mystery" is merely one way of telling about a criminal plot. "Detective novel" is another. A humdrum story of a real-looking police precinct, meticulous about realistic clues, may fascinate a lover of fair play as surely as anything Gothic & macabre. Otherwise, what would be the appeal of the inverted detective story?
John Pugmire argued once we have the word. The word is "honkaku", and it also fails. Even if we set aside the voluminous story of how this word changed its meaning with any new wind on Japanese literary landscape and limit ourselves only to how it is understood by the masters of "shinhonkaku" since Shimada-sensei - it says nothing about "fairness", about "clues", about "grandest game in the world". Basically, it boils down to being creative with setups and being creative with solutions, but, as we saw, neither is necessary - and neither is sufficient. Otherwise H.P. Lovecraft would be as a master of our genre as J.D. Carr. And please, don't offer me "GAD", as if we learned anything from the modern GAD-revival, there was much and much more behind the story of interwar literature than the puzzles we prefer, and many of the people recently rediscovered would barely fit the definition. Conversely, we surele are not going to claim that the only way to do our job is to stylicise the inter-war plot - as someone who adores the ways modern technology and modern sensibilities be used in plot I reject that explanation.
What we love in the literature is not about form. In fact any form suffices, from a slow police chonicle to a fast-pace thriller. Having detection or having mystery, being universal or very ethnic - these are ways to tell the story. The thing we love is the essence. Considering a story as a game of plot vs. reader where the main goal is to give the reader the ultimate satisfaction of losing the game barely inches from winning - it can be achieved in any single format. And thus, we have no name as previously the attempt was to classify the form and not the very approach to writing a book. The fandom we're in has no title. Should we invent one? Or maybe we have and it's also from Japan, but not the one you expect. Not the honkaku, "authentic fiction", not even the tantei-shousetsu, "detective fiction", abandoned some ages ago, but the cuurently accepted term, though it also started to include a lot of things not covered by intention: suiri-shousetsu. I propose: Deductive Fiction. It covers, perhaps, the definitive side of what we love about our stories: the sharp chain of deductive inferences that lead to the single truth, inevitably and explicitly.
What is your opinion? Do you perhaps believe there actually is a name, missed here? Or is there another option you would prefer? Share your thoughts!
What is your opinion? Do you perhaps believe there actually is a name, missed here? Or is there another option you would prefer? Share your thoughts!
