The Ticking Clock

[Gerald So]

Today is Robert B. Parker's 75th birthday. Parker's output shows no signs of slowing; however, I believe I've hit on the most crucial element missing from his recent books. Many have made the point that Parker no longer writes mysteries. His culprits are revealed fairly early, and you know his heroes will succeed in the end. The lack of mystery doesn't concern me as much as the lack of urgency.

Parker's protags conveniently get as much time as they need to solve a case. In recent books, Spenser and Hawk have been shot almost to death, but have taken a year off to recover and picked up the trail. I think this is because Parker needed time to see where the plot was going. Because he no longer plans ahead or revises, he can't take full advantage of a classic suspense-building technique--the ticking clock. Parker's books, though physically shorter, read needlessly longer.

Time pressure is a basic component of reality, and the lack of it has relegated Parker's once thought-provoking books to escapist beach reads. What self-respecting professional couldn't complete all his tasks given unlimited time?

Have you read any authors who've unfortunately thrown the clock out the window?

[I. J. Parker]

I don't read Robert B. Parker any longer so cannot comment on him. My reaction to revealing the mystery too early would be that ultimately the test is whether you read the whole book with pleasure or not. I take it you don't because the suspense isn't there.
I find many books these days that protract the last third (after a dynamic early two thirds) to the point where I find myself skimming just to finish and move on to another book. It's usually padding or artificial delay that produces this reaction. Not sure what is behind it. We don't get paid by the word. There has been some talk that editors want longer books. I think you suggest age of the author, or the series. Who knows?

J.K.Rowling has gradually increased the size of her books, and so has Elizabeth George. For me, neither has improved on earlier works. And that doesn't mean I object to long book. I just don't like wading through patently uninteresting stuff to get to the solution.

[Gerald So]

My reaction to revealing the mystery too early would be that ultimately the test is whether you read the whole book with pleasure or not. I take it you don't because the suspense isn't there.

It's not a lack of suspense so much as a lack of direction, a lack of momentum due to the fact Parker is figuring it out as he goes, and once he's figured it out he doesn't go back and smooth out the pacing.

[I. J. Parker]

It is always possible that the established best sellers with deadlines get a bit casual.

[Gerald So]

When I first started they struck me as humourous, tough, credible......after so many, Spencer just seemed predictable and a bit one-dimensional.

I think Spenser's code of behavior is what makes him one-dimensional and predictable. I've come to prefer characters who show more humanity, more potential for change over time. I agree about the lack of freshness, too, I would think a lot of writers are tempted to deliver more of the same instead of something new. Parker, wrote Spenser almost exclusively from 1973 to 1997.