Readers & Writers discussion

Without getting into the particular books or authors, I have had two successive experiences recently of reading crime novels by well-known and skilled authors, both of whom were dead-set (pun intended) on providing a surprise twist on the suspects at the end.

In both cases, the desire for the surprise completely outweighed the logic of the choice. If an author wants to gobsmack the reader with an unexpected choice, at least make sure that 10 minutes of analysis will not show how improbable the choice is and how badly it fits with the personality of the character to whom you have ascribed the guilt.

That is all. Although I wonder if anyone else out there has been driven just a little bit crazy by this tendency.

Apparently Ms Christie would set up a number of possible killers but only decide in the penultimate chapter whodunit. If all possibles are given a good reason/s to be the guilty one, her choice should never be a surprise in the way you describe. The police should approach with an open mind rather than pick a guilty party and then look for incriminating evidence. Let the evidence lead them. Perhaps authors should do likewise.