This week, I finished reading The Burning by Jane Casey, the first in her Maeve Kerrigan series of detective novels. Reading time's at a bit of a premium at the moment, so the novel spent almost a month keeping me company in my ten or so minutes of reading right before bed each night. The short review is that I really liked both the main character, Maeve, and Casey's prose style, and can see myself reading the rest of the novels in the series. The long review is that the novel got me thinking about genre, the difficulty of leaving one's Writer Hat on the shelf while reading, and the importance of authorial intent - which is often unavailable or overlooked.
I picked up the book in the first place because it was described as being "perfect for fans of Tana French." It's nothing like a Tana French novel, save that its protagonist is a detective. That's not a mark against the book at all, but I think one of the big pitfalls of the constant, obsessive need to compare books to other books when marketing them. Books can be similar in some ways - sometimes even tiny ways - and wildly dissimilar in others. The Burning is a police procedural, like Tana French's Dublin Murder Squad series, yes. And both series are told in first person. But while Casey's novel is largely driven by the outward action of the investigation, French's work is dominated by a deeply-psychological self-reflection that feels Gothic and dare I say horror-driven. Slow-building dread and a melancholy atmosphere that feels dense and theatric in places. Whereas The Burning drums along at a very commercial police procedural pace, its settings nicely-wrought and plenty detailed, but without that macabre touch of old-school Romanticism that makes French's work feel like a Classic dressed in modern clothes. Casey's writing felt more like mine, so it was very comfy to slip into.
My problem with genre labels and comparisons has always been their inability to touch on the intricacies of books that make them special and distinct from one another. I say this while fully aware that, by the end of The Burning, I'd fallen victim to genre expectation. There were several moments in the book in which I thought hm, I'd have written that differently. Unfortunately, all writers are guilty of this. Here, the storytelling decisions that stood out to me the most were ones that made the story less suspenseful, and led to some anticlimactic reveals. There was even a moment when I started suspecting the love interest of being the murderer, and then asked myself if that had been an intentional mislead, or if I was just being paranoid.
Then I realized I was judging it by strict genre standards: I was reducing the story's value to nothing but the reveal, and that, I think, is a terrible disservice to not only mystery novels, but all novels. I don't know the author personally, haven't spoken with her, and haven't sought out her blog, if she has one - I would in the version of my life where I decide to become a book blogger rather than wasting all this time on writing - but based on the title, and the ultimate and, as mentioned, anticlimactic reveal at the novel's end, the "whodunnit" isn't really the story here. The story is about human nature, human coldness; the way humans can burn reputations, and relationships, and lives in pursuit of what they feel they're owed. Sometimes, the beauty of a mystery isn't the solve itself, but the emotional journey of the character - and therefore reader - in the process of finding the truth. I think genre expectations lead us to believe that a mystery is only as valuable as its twist, its unpredictability...but any character-driven story bears a certain unalienable amount of predictability, because a well-fleshed character enables us to predict their actions. How often are books condemned or elevated to superstar status based on superficial genre check boxes alone? It's a sad thought.
This is one of the reasons I like to blog as I write. I debrief each book, and perhaps go into too much detail about what I wanted to achieve with each scene. Mostly I do this because genre-boxing and unfair comparisons exist, and I want to offer readers some context, and in some cases some warning, about what to expect with one of my reads. I think putting my aims in writing can sometimes help put the whole novel into perspective. I've heard it said that a well-written novel needs no outside explanation, that it should stand on its own merit. But that mentality assumes that all readers think the same way, and read prose with the same slant. Because I know that isn't true, I always like to offer that bit of insight for anyone who wants to check out the blog and learn more about the BTS process.
Overall, The Burning is an entertaining read, featuring a likeable MC, detailed but highly readable prose, and enough danger to keep you engaged. Much like real detective work, the mystery isn't a riddle wrapped in enigma; no need to call Sherlock Holmes, but solidly engaging.
My current reads are:
In The Woods by Tana French (reread)
Bound by Julie Embelton
The Game of Kings by Dorothy Dunnett (reread)
The Man of Property by John Galsworthy
No comments:
Post a Comment