I was reading a novel by one of my favorite authors when I came across a feature that always leaves me in dismay.
The book was written from the POV (point of view) of several
characters, but in all cases, a close third person POV, where the reader is
privy to the character’s thoughts and emotions.
Near the end, the POV character has a sudden realization.
“…suddenly she was inside Lizzie’s head, seeing the world through her eyes. She
knew precisely what the young woman was planning.”
The character goes to a location where she knows she will
find Lizzie, and proceeds to follow her.
And the chapter ends.
The reader is left hanging, knowing that the character has
had this terrific insight, but is left in the dark as to what the insight was.
I was disappointed.
Many authors go to great lengths to set out all the clues,
sprinkling red herrings throughout the story. Some avid readers love the
challenge of trying to figure out the solution to the mystery. While I may take a stab at it, I don’t put a
lot of thought and energy into the process, and I’m never disappointed if I’m
wrong. I do enjoy surprise endings, even if they aren’t a surprise to more
insightful readers.
I also like to read psychological thrillers, like those
written by the late Margaret Yorke, where often there is no question concerning
who is guilty, and no expectation that the reader will do anything but read in
fascination. It’s like watching a proverbial train wreck. Knowing what will
happen, but unable to look away.
Not all crime novels are “who dunnits,” covering all the
relevant facts before the solution is presented.
I’m not disappointed in how those stories are presented.
Nor am I upset with crime videos that spring surprises on
the viewer. My default videos are Midsomer Murders and Columbo, both of which
often have “reveals” at the ending which no viewer could possibly have
determined. In those cases, the POV is always a distant third person POV, and
any insight the viewer may have into the internal workings of the characters
are through observation, not through being admitted to the character’s thoughts
and feelings.
So why was I disappointed in the book I was reading? It’s
because I felt cheated. If, as a reader, I am aware of a character’s thoughts,
either in a first person POV or a close third, I don’t want the character to
withhold vital information. If the character knows it, I, as the reader, should
find out about it.
Do you feel cheated when a character has relevant knowledge
that he or she selectively doesn’t share?
I do feel disappointed in the situation you describe, KM, but there is a close cousin where I don't. When the character realizes she/he had all the facts (which the reader also had) but had not pulled all the information together correctly -- I'm fine with them not telling me, because I, too, have not put it all together. Or maybe I think I have and I'm waiting to find out if I'm right.
ReplyDeleteUrgh - I agree, Kathleen, it is frustrating when the POV character makes a discovery and doesn't share. I'm watching Midsomer Murders and I've begun to skip around in the episodes as I am finding it frustrating that DCI Barnaby will often hand his detective something and not reveal what it is that's so important to the viewer. I want to yell, "Play fair" at the screen. The trick works in one respect. I keep watching to find out what the secret is, and I keep reading to find out the same thing - but with books, the time investment is greater so I may not purchase subsequent books by the writer in the same series.
ReplyDeleteI understand that, Jim, and I'm not as frustrated by the "all these facts led to only one conclusion," because, as you say, the reader also has the facts. Besides, I never try that hard to figure out the solution. This doesn't strike me as the slap in the face the way actually withholding info is.
ReplyDeleteKait, I watch Midsomer Murders and I know what you mean, although I feel much less engaged with a video than with a book, and I can't say that bothers me.
Good points, Kathleen. Interesting discussion.
ReplyDeleteHead hopping drives me nuts -- which is exactly what you're describing -- but I've also felt cheated by what I'd call "lying clues." There's a UK author I've read for years. Multiple books, beach read mysteries, so I don't expect a lot. But in this one book the big deal is that this one woman could not have been the murderer as she had bad arthritis and couldn't pull a trigger. And then, at the end, she goes, 'Ah ha! I don't have arthritis, and I was able to shoot so and so." And I'm like...WHAT? Would she not have had gnarly hands? And even if she didn't there should have been some clue, i.e. she was able to pour the tea with no problem. Last book I read by him. I can suspend my disbelief with the best of them, but don't cheat on me!
ReplyDeleteCheating in a story, either in book or film, that's really going low. Boo!
ReplyDeleteAs one who likes to figure out the whodunit as I read along, I'm particularly irked when a writer cheats and turns everything on its head. I have no complaints if the clues were there and I misinterpreted them.
ReplyDeleteI'm one of those readers that looks for clues and feel challenged to solve the mystery. As a result, I read analytically. As a result, I am very careful about planting clues, but so obscurely that I hope the reader won't see them.
ReplyDeleteMargaret, I do find it interesting, and like to hear what other people think.
ReplyDeleteJudy, I've read a few books like that, with something (or someone) popping out of the woodwork, and I won't read another book by that author, either.
I agree, Molly.
Debra, you're so right. Missing or misinterpreting clues is very different from being deceived or having information left out.
Grace, you do a great job of that. I have to confess I don't try all that hard to figure things out, but I find your books to be very satisfying.
Agree completely. This whole "unreliable narrator" kick drives me crazy. And some of those books are extremely popular. Spoiler alert, like The Silent Patient. It's not a twist if the close POV is keeping something from the reader. Just my opinion, but apparently shared here!
ReplyDeleteTammy, some "unreliable narrator" stories strike me as acceptable, even clever. The one that comes to mind is The Education of Little Tree (I know; it was revealed as a literary hoax, but that doesn't change it from being a charming story.) The reader could quite easily tell when the narrator was being "unreliable"--he was not trying to deceive anyone, but presented the situation as he (the character) saw it.
ReplyDeleteIn video, The Sixth Sense comes to mind. Once again, an unreliable narrator, here one who does not realize that he is deceiving himself as well as the viewer until close to the very end.