Five knights. One theme, of interest to writers and readers alike: the rewards and challenges of a writing a mystery series...and succeeding at giving it legs. The five knights, in alphabetical order:
Carolyn Arnold
International bestselling and award-winning author, as
well as a speaker, teacher, and inspirational mentor. She has four
continuing fiction series and has
written nearly thirty books: from cozy to hard-boiled mysteries, and thrillers to
action adventures.
Claude Bouchard
USA
Today Bestselling author of the fourteen volume Vigilante
Series
as well as Nasty
in Nice,
ASYLUM
and Something's
Cooking.
Other interests include reading, playing guitar, painting, cooking,
traveling and trying to stay in reasonable shape.
Joe Clifford
He is the author of several books, including Junkie Love, Lamentation, December Boys and Give Up the Dead, as well as editor of Trouble in the Heartland: Crime Stories Inspired by the Songs of Bruce Springsteen. He lives in Oakland, CA.
Bill Kirton
University lecturer, TV presenter, wood carver, playwright, actor, director, RLF Writing Fellow, novelist. Crap at marketing or promotional work and possibly the laziest knight at the table (so says he).
Brad Strickland
Author of 80 published books, including the ones he writes under the pen name of Ken McKea. These follow Florida detective Jim Dallas, who despite being retired on disability somehow can’t help running across murders. Brad lives in Georgia with his wife Barbara and a small assortment of varmints.
1)
Why write a mystery series instead of a series of mysteries?
Is
commerce the main factor or is some other payoff at play?
ARNOLD
I love being able to torture my characters over a longer stretch of time. And I don’t like saying goodbye to them. By writing a series, at least I know when I’m wrapping up a book, I’ll be with them again soon. I also believe readers love to get attached to characters and when you’re providing them with a series, they can do so knowing there will be more books coming.
BOUCHARD
From the time I started reading and then going forward, series have always been attractive, in large part due to growing familiarity of the main characters – think ‘Cat in the Hat’, ‘Bobbsey Twins’, ‘Hardy Boys’ and ‘Tom Swift’ before even getting to adult fiction. The same holds true with writing where one can develop and build one’s principal protagonists from one adventure to the next as compared to creating new, unknown characters with each new novel. Increased comfort exists when working with ‘people’ one already knows. The commerce factor obviously comes into play as many readers also enjoy said comfort and familiarity.
CLIFFORD
Like with any venture, there are pros and cons. The biggest “pro” is, if a series takes off, you have a built-in readership. Also in the plus column, a series allows you to examine a character and world a little deeper. Think Star Wars vs., say, well, any one-off sci-fi film. Most of all publishers love a series. Less risk, established commodity, etc. The downside is: if you don't have a series as popular as Lee Child, the average series writer often sees a dip in sales with each book and finds the critical response to be harsher, despite each book getting "better." At least that has been my experience.
KIRTON
I suspect that a mystery series is the better bet. If you can create one or more characters that intrigue the reader, characters they’d like to spend time with, that’s more likely to draw them into buying more of the books in which they appear. I suppose that’s why I call my series The Jack Carston Mysteries.
On the other hand, if you find a stand-alone mystery to be gripping, you instinctively trust the author to deliver again on suspense, thrills, horror, whatever.
STRICKLAND
A series allows a deeper exploration of the characters’ personality—strengths, flaws, problems, solutions. I like the notion of a broad canvas that gives a kind of epic sweep. In the case of Jim Dallas, Jim has issues to deal with and resolve. Through all the stories arcs the tale of his smoldering anger and bottled-up desire for vengeance, which will eventually pay off. I’m approaching a kind of midpoint which will begin the overall climax of the series.
So in a sense, a series is simply a group of oversized chapters in a longer story. There is, of course, also the consideration that a writer can invite readers to climb aboard for the whole journey—so a series tends to build readership. Have to say that commercial concerns aren’t the greatest with me, though they do factor in. From the get-go, I’ve had a definite goal in mind for the Jim Dallas stories.
2) For perspective, give us a few names of your favorite
mystery series writers.
ARNOLD
I
loved David Baldacci’s Camel Club series, and have also enjoyed
some of the books in Janet Evanovich’s Stephanie Plum series.
BOUCHARD
Michael
Connelly, Robert Crais, Lee Child, Jeffery Deaver, Jonathan
Kellerman… Oh, you said a couple of names… Sorry. Anyhow, this is
just a handful of writers who have consistently produced well
developed, intricate storylines with strong, believable,
three-dimensional characters. I never read a book by any of these
authors which left me disappointed. I could mention that Child may
have pushed it a bit on occasion but, then again, we are talking Jack
Reacher.
CLIFFORD
I like what Lehane (more on him later), Sara J. Henry, Allen Eskens, and Matt Coyle are doing with their respective series. Of course there’s the granddaddy of them all: Phillip Marlowe.
KIRTON
Dalziel and Pascoe, created by the late Reg Hill, are great examples of powerful characterization and the dynamic created by a close friendship between different personalities. (Humour also helps a lot.)
I’m not sure whether Janet Evanovitch’s Stephanie Plum novels qualify as mysteries, but the characters are so memorable and so funny (especially Grandma Mazur) that I need a regular
therapeutic dose of them.
STRICKLAND
Jim Dallas owes a clear debt to Travis McGee and his creator, John D. Macdonald. I like the narrative voice in these—McGee is a principled, if “tarnished” hero (MacDonald’s own word) who teeters between wishing to resign from the over-complicated modern world with a drive to become involved with the victims of it. Similarly, Dallas pulled out of everything to lick his wounds (physical and psychological) after a traumatic encounter with organized evil, but he finds that campaigning for justice among the helpless cast-aside members of society helps him heal, and gets him ready for the challenge he knows is coming.
Another MacDonald, Ross MacDonald, is another inspiration. He took the tough-guy private-eye story to literary heights with his Lew Archer novels. I like his way with words and also his gift at plotting, which is not always on high display in this kind of story—for all his accomplishment, Raymond Chandler famously plotted by “having a guy come through the door with a gun” when things got slow. I don’t think there’s a finer, more jewel-like plot in private-eye fiction than in Ross MacDonald’s brilliant The Chill.
Both of these gentlemen give us a wry, world-weary, but game character who gives a problem his all—something I try to emulate.
3)
Now to you...What is the most distinctive thing about your
mystery
series?
ARNOLD
I
offer readers a strong female protagonist detective, a male rookie
FBI agent, and a married, murder-solving duo. In
every book I strive for procedural accuracy, and as a result have
been praised by law enforcement. This has led me to take on the brand
line POLICE PROCEDURALS RESPECTED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT.™
BOUCHARD
Likely
the most distinctive thing about my mystery series is all my main
characters are Canadian yet none of them say, “Eh,” at least not
when I’m around. Also, the members of the ‘Discreet Activities’
team are all well educated with respectable, professional backgrounds
as well as smart, witty and highly sociable yet they kill for a
living.
CLIFFORD
That they work both as standalones and part of an overarching storyline. Also I am hoping to shine a light on the grave injustice perpetuated against my father, namely that the Manafort family (yes, those Manaforts) and their greedy, gross misconduct directly led to my father’s premature death.
KIRTON
Hard
to say. Humor's essential, even (or maybe especially) in the more
gruesome cases, and I like the idea that people don’t automatically
divide into goodies and baddies. My detective has no particular
vices. He’s happily married to a wife who matches him for
wisecracks, and yet constantly finds himself thinking politically
incorrect things and chastising himself for it. I also end each book
with a little scene designed to say ‘OK, reader. The mystery was
solved and everything’s back in place – except that’s not the
way the world works – different bad things keep on happening.
STRICKLAND
I think it might be the blend of humor and detail. I get letters about how real the background is—“I ate in that restaurant!” “I know exactly where that river is!” and so on. Having Sam Lyons as a foil character gives me a chance for a lot of repartee and shaggy-dog jokes, which I love. But capturing something of the Florida milieu (changed even from the days of Travis McGee) also gives the stories a kind of flavor. Still to come are a story that takes place, partly, at a theme park (I have relatives who worked for two of the biggest ones) and one that will feature intrigue at a posh Miami hotel, secretly falling on hard times but keeping up a front. I think the details in these will ring true. I have my informants. . . .
But the truth of the background is meant to reinforce the psychological truth of the characters.
4)
Can your books be read as stand-alones or should/must
they be read in
sequence?
ARNOLD
They
can be read as stand-alones.
BOUCHARD
Each
of the thirteen installments of my Vigilante series to date is a
complete story and can therefore be read as a standalone. However, as
with most series, reading them in sequence allows for a better flow
in terms of character introduction and development. In addition, past
events are occasionally referenced or directly related to the
plotlines of later installments which also supports sequential
reading as the best option.
CLIFFORD
As stated above, both, although obviously reading in order is preferable. You simply get more.
KIRTON
Mine are conceived as stand-alones, but in the knowledge that I have a group of people I know quite well and whom I trust to be themselves.
On the other hand, my two historical mysteries are only a pair because readers asked for a sequel to the first one in order to know how a particular relationship developed. I still think each is self-contained but reading them in sequence would add to the pleasure. (Some readers have now asked for a third, so it may become a series after all.)
STRICKLAND
I have no trouble writing them so they’re stand-alones, though I think they may make more emotional sense if read as part of an extended story. That’s when you begin to make the connections and to see the character development.
5)
As a series writer, how do you handle back story from book
to
book—scatter shot or concentrated loads? How do you
contrive to
give just enough details for anchors?
ARNOLD
I’m
definitely more a “scatter shot” when it comes to backstory. I
provide just enough—and what’s needed—for the current story I’m
telling. Obviously if a tidbit about a character’s history is
irrelevant to the current plot line, I leave it out.
BOUCHARD
Concentrated
loads were used in earlier books with a gradual transition to scatter
shots as required as the series progressed. With the fourteenth
installment in the works, it becomes somewhat repetitive and
redundant to present readers with too much detail relating to ancient
history. Sufficient albeit brief data is supplied to new readers in
later books to identify characters with the assumption (and hope)
that curiosity will lead them to read past installments they’ve
missed. As an example from my current WIP, the reader learns of Chris
Barry’s financial success years earlier from a line or two of
simple dialogue.
CLIFFORD
This is the challenge with each book, and I’ve tackled this task in different ways. You want to avoid the dreaded “auto-dump.” In the latest Jay Porter novel, BROKEN GROUND, for instance, we begin at an AA meeting with Jay speaking, which allowed me to get in a lot of the back-story organically.
KIRTON
I leave it to the characters –
which sounds, but isn’t, glib. Each member of Jack Carston’s team
has distinct characteristics. Their idiosyncrasies provide the
familiarity and continuity to suggest a well-established team who are
used to and respond to one another’s behaviours. They are the back
story.
STRICKLAND
I leak a little at a time. In the current one, the one I’m writing, we’re going to find out a bit more about the rough ride that Jim had when he worked for Internal Affairs back during his police days. He hasn’t talked much about that—but let’s say that his involvement may have made him say and do a few things that he deeply regrets, that go against his character. More of this will come out as the books go on. In the end, I think a reader can jigsaw together a valid portrait of him that will seem true to life.
6)
The age thing. Hell, let’s hit it. Does your hero age/change
very
little over the course of the series (Hercule Poirot, Kinsey
Malone,
James Bond, Spenser)...or age and change
progressively (Harry Bosch)?
ARNOLD
There’s
definite growth to the characters in all my series. Detective Madison
Knight started off really rough around the edges. She’s still a
hard-nosed detective who will do whatever it takes to find justice
for murder victims, but she’s softened on a personal level. She
used to be terrified of committing herself to a romantic
relationship, but that’s a thing of the past. I think I might even
hear wedding bells in her future. But that’s still a few more books
out from—if it does happen.
Brandon
Fisher started out as a new agent with the FBI in book one. As
readers progress in the series, they are taken along the journey of
him becoming a full-fledged agent with the BAU.
The
McKinleys went from being homicide detectives for Albany PD to
amateur sleuths to private investigators. That involved a lot of
growth.
BOUCHARD
Chapter
headings in each of my books include actual dates to establish a
timeline. Book 1 was written in 1995 and set in 1996 while my last
release took place in 2016, twenty years later so, yes, my characters
have aged. Luckily, they were young enough at the start and I make
damned sure they stay in shape from one story to the next.
CLIFFORD
Each book in the Porter series is a year later, which brings us up to the current year
KIRTON
Interesting question because the next Carston story will be the last. Without me trying to impose ageing on him, he’s been changed by the experiences of the crimes he’s solved and the individuals he’s met in the process. I’ve no idea what he’ll do in retirement, but his tendency to try to make light of things and just enjoy life has been severely eroded by the ongoing evidence of man’s inhumanity to man (and especially woman).
STRICKLAND
Heh. Ellery Queen was always 35, until somewhere between books he had a growth spurt and wound up being 57. Jim is aging—the stories are set along a time line of five or six years, and he’ll reflect that in the stories.
*****
Take seven, as in seven days, to stretch and think about Part 1. Next week we'll return with the provocative conclusion. Among other things you'll learn--but no, mustn't ruin the surprise. You'll also meet a surprise guest. Arrive early for guaranteed seating.
*****
To learn more about these authors and their books, click on the
following links:
Carolyn Arnold
