Like most writers who've been at it for a while, I've gravitated toward certain kinds of stories. I wander off the path pretty regularly--any route you follow too often gets old--but I find that most of my stories these days involve (1) mystery/suspense, (2) a Southern setting, (3) a protagonist who's a regular, average person, (4) a handful of named characters (no more than four or five), (5) either a murder or a robbery, (6) a third-person POV, and (7) a plot with at least a couple of twists.
If you consider two of my latest published stories, you'd find all these elements, but you'd have to look at both to find them all. Each story veers some distance away from my norm, and that's something I didn't even realize or think about while it was being written. I only noticed it later.
Here's what I mean.
My latest story in Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine went on sale a few weeks ago--"Heading West" appears in their May/June 2025 issue. In some ways, that story fits right into my comfort zone: mystery /crime, robbery, less than half a dozen named characters, third-person viewpoint, several plot reversals, etc. But in other ways I varied the template a bit. For one thing, this story is set in the Old West, which I have done often in the past but rarely at AHMM. Out of my 28 stories there, two have been Westerns.
NOTE 1: A quick word about writing in the Western genre. I've often heard writers say they like to do mystery stories because those always contain a crime. Why's that important? Because a crime story means conflict is already there--it's built right in--and we all know that conflict makes for a good story (usually the more the better). I think the same can be said of Westerns. Almost every Western story I can think of, except maybe Old Yeller, contains gunfights and violence of some shape or another, so . . . well, you see my point.
This story also contains some conflict that goes behind human vs. human. Much of the agony in "Heading West" is human vs. nature. Not only the rough environment, but the gradual buildup and arrival of a powerful tornado. (Living where I do, I know a bit about tornadoes, and the one in this story scores a 10 on the Wizard-of-Oz scale.) When you mix a terrible storm with a band of crazed outlaws who want to kill your protagonists, that makes things tough for the home team. It also makes things fun for the writer. If you happen to read the story, I hope you'll have half as good a time as I did, writing it.
The other recent publication I wanted to mention is my story "Redwood Creek" in Michael Bracken's anthology Sleuths Just Wanna Have Fun: Private Eyes in the Materialistic Eighties (Down & Out Books). It appeared about the same time as my new AHMM story did, and features 13 other stories, each of them based on something memorable from that decade. I picked (naturally) "Movies of the '80s," so I dutifully made sure the early clues to the identity of the villain came directly from the movies that won Oscars for Best Picture, Best Actor, etc., during those ten years. Putting together a plot puzzle based on Academy Awards trivia turned out to be great fun.
Some of the things (besides the 1980s theme) that made this story a bit different from most of my creations were that it was a PI story (I don't write a great many of those); it featured 16 named characters, which is a lot for a 5100-word story; its crime was a dognapping; and it was written in first person. As for POV, I've actually found myself writing more first-person stories than I once did, especially if there's a detective working a case that I want him/her to solve along with the reader.
I also made sure my private eye was far different from the Spenser/Mannix/Spade/Marlowe stereotype. Here's an early paragraph from the story:
My name, by the way, is Ryan Grant, and I'm a retired private investigator. I was not, however, a movies-and-novels kind of PI. No downtown office with a bourbon bottle in the desk drawer for me, no pebbled-glass window in the door, no ceiling fan, no overflowing ashtray. I didn't even smoke. For twenty years I worked out of an office that was once the guest bedroom in our home while my college-professor wife earned most of our income. I was a liberated man.
NOTE 2: Another different--and, to me, special--thing about this particular anthology is that all the other contributors are friends that I've met in person or via Zoom. That doesn't happen often, and makes me look forward even more to reading all their stories.
How about the rest of you? Do you find yourself leaning toward the same kinds of stories, the more you write? Do you find yourself breaking the mold now and then? When you do, how much do you vary your settings, plots, POVs, characters, etc.? Do you ever hop from one genre to the other, or mix them up? How often? Has that been successful? Let me know, in the comments section below.
As for me, several more "unusual" shorts are coming up later in May--but, hey, that's a different story.
See you then.
I write the genre that fits the story idea. Most of my fiction is sci-fi, fantasy, and crime. However, a few years ago, I had a literary story published. I have another literary ms presently looking for love in the slush piles.
ReplyDeleteThat makes sense, Mike. I've even mixed SF and crime, and also fantasy and crime. But I probably should've added, when I mentioned my "usual" things that I put in a story, that I usually *don't* include otherworldly elements. Sometimes I do, but usually not--and I suspect that's because several of the markets I like to submit to (EQMM, Black Cat Mystery Magazine, The Strand, etc.) don't often publish stories with woo-woo elements. And yep, I've written (and sold) some "literary" stories also--but not nearly as many.
DeleteI wish you the best in finding a home for your latest one! Thanks as always.
I've wandered into a certain corner of the crime story, as well. An amateur or accidental sleuth who often happens to be a marginalized individual, psychological dysfunction in victim or killer, small group of characters, artsy setting, justice prevails. I didn't plan it that way, but that's obviously my comfort zone, so I'm sticking to it.
ReplyDeleteSounds reasonable to me. Whatever works, right?
DeleteMy comfort zone gets more comfortable the older I get. Thanks for dropping in!
As for my most recent stories? While I wrote almost a dozen with the same lengths and, I experimented with the same type of characters in shorter stories and in different genres. Although one involved completely different characters in a completely. Even when it got rejected, editors wanted to see more material based on the strengths it did have.
ReplyDeleteJustin, anytime the editors say they want to see more, give 'em more. That's encouraging. Keep at it!
DeleteHey John, while my desire is to focus on fantasy, I find my genres are all over the place. Which makes it a tricky spot for me (and likely many writers). I want to write in genre X, but the muses are enticing me to write in genres A, B, C, etc. I just finished a horror story clocking in ~7500 words (large for me), and given that my writing occupies sadly only a small portion of my day, it took months to create it. I'm happy with the result, but the back of my brain is saying, aren't you writing in the wrong genre? And now there's a Sherlock Holmes pastiche calling to be written... --Dan
ReplyDeleteDan, the one sure way to never be bored with writing is to write in lots of different genres. And man, you gotta follow those muses--they usually know best.
DeleteBear in mind, I think the only kind of fiction writing that Sherlock Holmes Mystery Magazine is currently looking for are Holmes pastiches. Remember them when you get to point of submitting that one.
Thanks for the thoughts--stay in touch!
Because my Rick Peters stories have been reasonably successful, when I have a new idea for a story I automatically think "How can my friend Rick fit in?" Even if it's not a mystery I tend to write in first person, and that first person's name will inevitably be Rick Peters!!
ReplyDeleteHey, Floyd, if you've found something that works, stick with it. I seem to lean toward third-person generally, but almost all my detective stories are first-person, and I'll admit those are a lot of fun to write. Continued good luck to both you and Rick!
DeleteKeep writing them, John!
ReplyDeleteBob, I don't think I could stop if I tried. You know the feeling . . .
DeleteJohn, for me, turning to short stories vs mysteries was my way of breaking the mold. My original comfort zone was classic amateur-sleuth whodunits (well, not so classic in the execution, since it's me we're talking about. But short stories let me take a dive into a lot of strange waters—literally, with my shapeshifting fatale serial killer on the boardwalk and the boat my clever young protagonist heaved her bad uncle out of while everyone else was watching whales. Sixteenth century Istanbul and Roman Britain. The Hamptons on the classy side of the highway. (In real life, I summer on the distinctly unclassy side.) But the character I never expected to get into the head of (and vice versa) was the nasty male serial killer who drives from state to state in his white pickup truck charming and killing naive young girls. I always swore I'd never go there. Only I was so mad at those damn country songs and the Cinderellas hanging out the wash who think he's Prince Charming because they keep hearing that fairy tale on the radio.
ReplyDeleteLiz, I've always loved your zany characters--and the historical ones too. (Especially the Mendoza family.) As for your truck-driving serial killer, sounds as if you found a good source of motivation, there. Too much country music can put anybody in a murderous mood--and this a Southern redneck speaking.
DeleteBy the way, remind me not to go whale-watching with you.
I like that word "zany," John, though I've never thought of my characters that way. I was just thinking, though, that my stories never fit the common framework of "ordinary people who find themselves in extraordinary situations." I never envision my characters as "ordinary people." "Interesting people" is as plain as it gets. Resourceful, clever, empathic or snarky, sometimes both—and then we go to the survivors and the ones with a bit of magic.
DeleteI've heard "zany" described as "unconventional," Liz, so I think it does apply, here. (Let's face it, you're pretty zany your ownself, and so am I.) As for your description of your stories, I once heard Stephen King say literary stories are about extraordinary people doing ordinary things and genre fiction is about ordinary people doing extraordinary things. Maybe yours falls somewhere in between (?). Whatever it is, keep doing it the way you're doing it--that seems to work!
DeleteGenerally, John, the character tells me the genre...I give him or her a line and let it go from there. Generally, a crime but often humor thrown in. I've got a few characters that hang around, nip at my ankles, to remind me it's his/her turn to come out of the box, so I accommodate. Most often, at least in the last few years, I'll write for a requested theme and, that alone dictates who and why, the genre of the story.
ReplyDeleteAnn, I agree that writing for these themed anthologies has dictated a LOT about what kind of stories I write and how I write them--and doing that can be a lot of fun. What I admit I've never done (though I admire you for being able to) is start with a character and build a story from that. Instead I almost always start with a plot and then create whatever characters are needed to make that plot work. Funny how all of us seem to use a different process to come up with the same thing.
DeleteThank you for stopping in at SleuthSayers!
John, great topic. I've surprised myself by writing stories I never expected to write. I have a ghost story without ghosts that will appear in print later this year. Just this week, I sent out a ghost story that does have ghosts. One can walk through doors. The other cannot. Last year, a short story featuring the main character of the novel I'm writing appeared in print. I just learned a second short story featuring the same character will be out towards the end of the year. The novel and the two stories are nothing alike. At least I don't think they're alike. I see more similarities in the themes running through my stories rather than technique. Of course, a reader might disagree with me.
ReplyDeletePaula
Paula, sounds like you have this well in hand. I'd like to read the ghost story without ghosts--that could be a mystery in itself. And I think you're smart to have some short stories tied to your novel--at least I've heard that's a good thing to do.
DeleteThank you as always for your insights!
John, you won't be surprised to hear that in my novels, I play to my strengths (humour, fair-play mystery plotting.) It's in my short stories that I experiment. They are even wackier than my novels at times, or dark noir - but something I don't think I could maintain over the course of 75,000 words. Isn't lovely to have such freedom in short stories? I adore it.
ReplyDeleteNot surprised a bit. I read Nelson DeMille's John Corey novels mainly because of the humor, and that's what I've enjoyed about yours also. (Don't stop writing them that way!) As for the shorts, yes, experimenting is easier, though I like the humor in those as well. I've said before that it's that freedom that's one of the reasons I love writing short. (I've written lots of short stories that have NO humor--but they're not nearly as much fun to write.)
DeleteThank you, Melodie, for this.
John, I have a stack of digest magazines I haven't read yet! I will get to your stories! As for variety, I've been sloughing off on writing a lot of full-length stuff but I have a thing right now for kind of late-19th-Century-style, without being windy or racist. Haven't done a mystery in a while and I have one in MS form that got stuffed in a crate with some notes when I moved some extra stuff into the house. Gotta get into that! (Geez, I talk a lot!) Wonderful column, as usual!
ReplyDelete