AI and the Purple Wage

by Eve Fisher

This is an update of a blog post I wrote 11 years ago:  There have been some changes.  For one thing, guess who was worried about AI back then?

“With artificial intelligence we are summoning the demon. In all those stories where there’s the guy with the pentagram and the holy water, it’s like – yeah, he’s sure he can control the demon. Doesn’t work out." Elon Musk

Now I can sort of understand why. The general premise for decades has been that some day the computers/robots will take over, and run us, with only two possible scenarios:

Great - Robots and computers will do everything for us, and we will live a life of luxury (according to the late great Frederick Pohl, too much so), comfort and security thanks to Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics that protect mankind from the revolt of the machines.

Bad - Everything by Philip K. Dick, and, of course, "The Matrix". Which it will be depends upon the mood of the times. Currently, we're not a particularly optimistic species, so the common response is, "We're doomed! We're doomed!" (Unless you're a tech bro, and then it cannot happen soon enough.)

 

Maybe. Maybe not. 

But what concerns me about the takeover of AI isn't that they use my stasis body as a heat source while providing my mind innumerable alternative reality jaunts to keep me a content and unquestioning host organism. Or even AIs killing us all. For one thing, logically, they'd do it quickly - only humans are sadists. And cats. 

What concerns me is the simple matter of a paycheck so that we can eat, drink, pay the rent, the utilities, and occasionally buy a pair of new shoes. 

Of course, the main reason we have computers and robots is to do our work for us. Anything boring, repetitive, heavy, dangerous, etc. - eventually, we'll make a machine to do it. Calculators mean I don't have to add up the columns of figures for which they used to hire Nicholas Nickleby. Payloaders mean we don't need an army of physical laborers hoisting earth. Tractors, etc., mean that today's Pa Ingalls doesn't need to muscle his way through the sod with horse and plow. Computers mean I don't have to write everything out long-hand, or type it over and over again until it's perfect. It's great.

On the other hand, modern technology has eliminated and is eliminating a whole ton of jobs. Typesetters; typists; clerks; gas station attendants; innumerable factory workers; graphic designers; paralegals; most farm hands; most farmers; bank tellers; airline check-in agents; retail clerks; accountants; actuaries; travel agents; most reporters, etc. Soon there will be far fewer surgeons, teachers, and other high-level jobs as robots take over. And in the fast food industry, the robots are coming to flip those burgers and make those fries.

The point is that, as we use technology to do 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90% of the work, we will also unemploy a significant number of people. There will still be jobs, at all levels - just infinitely less of them. Perhaps only a handful, here and there. Which leaves the elephant in the room: what do you do about the people?

Yes, everyone talks about retraining. See a typical chirpy article on "The Future of Work" . BUT, I've always had two basic questions:

(1) There is a significant number of people who can't be retrained. Some will be too old, some will be too set, and some - frankly - whose mental ability to learn complex problem-solving skills is extremely limited. I run into some of them at the pen. (In case you don't know it, prisons are the modern housing facility for many of the mentally disabled, as well as the mentally ill.) These are the people who are never considered in future planning talks, the ones that are ignored by all economists and pundits, but shouldn't be. As I once said about a former student who was caught stealing, "Well, how else is he going to make a living?"

(2) If you have 250 people in a town, and there are only 100 actual jobs (and it's  often fewer than that), it doesn't matter how much retraining you do. There are still 150 people without work because there are no jobs. Urbanize that. Nationalize that. Globalize that.

In Philip Jose Farmer's "Riders of the Purple Wage", he posited a society in which they coped with the problem of almost complete unemployment by giving everyone a salary just for being born. It's enough to keep them housed and fed and hooked up to the Fido, a combination cable TV/videophone, along with a little wet-ware called a fornixator (you translate it). To get anything else, you have to prove your exceptionality, but most people are happily occupied without it. For those who aren't, well, there are wildlife reserves where they can go off and be weird - but they have to give up the purple wage.

It's a successful society, in its own way - and perhaps the only logical one. Because the truth is, sooner or later, in a society where technology is doing 90% of the work, there will have to be a "purple wage".  

That, or
(1) society comes up with innumerable "make work" jobs, like picking oakum in the workhouse. (Personally, I foresee a lot of crime.)

That, or
(2) the unemployed masses will be pounding at the armored enclaves of the fabulously wealthy. (As I said, I foresee a lot of crime.)

That, or
(3) a whole lot of people are going to have to die (more Soylent Green for all!), leaving just enough to run the machines, and do the few jobs that still cannot be done by machines, while the fabulously wealthy (there is always a group of fabulously wealthy) enjoy their unending leisure. 

That, or
(4) The Matrix. (But how will we be able to tell?)

Anyway, here's the question: As we pursue technological advancements, can we let go of the Capitalist Work Ethic? Let go of the idea that we are what we do? Must people work or starve, even if there's plenty of everything except jobs? Can we tolerate, support, even design a society where the norm for everyone (instead of just the wealthy) is "the leisured class"?    

Now, you may think the last question is nonsense. For one thing, we've been promised endless leisure for a century now, and most people are still working their butts off. On the other hand, we do have more leisure than almost any other society in history. This began with the industrial revolution, and one of the most interesting things about reading "Consuming Passions" by Judith Flanders is watching the development of ways for the working classes to spend their new-found leisure. Hey - they finally had all of Saturday afternoon and Sundays off! Thanks to advertising, sports, vacations, theater, and literature were turned into major industries. Drinking had always been a favorite activity. And, instantly, the pundits, poets, philosophers, and religious thinkers started decrying the horrible waste of human time and energy on trivia. And talking about the nobility of hard work, piety, thrift, self-denial and sobriety: for the lower classes only, of course.

We have pretty much the same discussion going on today: most pundits, techbros, and the wealthy agree that if you don't have a paying job, you're worthless. Unless you're wealthy enough not to. And the idea that someone who's unemployed has a television, a cell phone, and computer games for the kids - well, they're obviously spending too much money on all the wrong stuff. Not to mention, if they have such things, they can't be "really" poor.  

NOTE 1: In many states and cities, they give simple cell phones to the homeless, for a variety of reasons. (Contact from parole officers, call-backs on jobs, etc.)

NOTE 2: I'm always amazed at and offended by the people who check out other people's grocery carts and then post, outraged, if someone who's on food stamps buys candy or other luxury items. (See this article for the alternative view: People on Food Stamps Make Better Grocery Choices.) God forbid the poor eat something other than gruel...  Meanwhile, no one bats an eye when a billionaire launches rockets into space just for s**ts and giggles...  

Basically, I'm leisured, you're lazy, and they're useless.

Anyway, today we've got smart phones, social media, computer games, streaming of almost any film, video, documentary ever made, and innumerable other ways to waste what time we have (on the job or off) in the modern equivalent of Fidos and fornixators. And it seems like the list is going to expand at algorithmic rate. 

Meanwhile, the list of available jobs is decreasing, at least geometrically, every time we turn around. IF we get to where technology performs most of the work, and IF we get to where we have a regular unemployment of 30, 40, 50, 60, 70 percent, can we change our thinking from "unemployed" to "leisured"? Can we develop a new idea of what people "should" do? Of what people are "supposed" to do? 

Well, according to the techbros and their favorite pundits, Nick Land and Curtis Yarvin... we the people are really running out of usefulness.  

Many in Silicon Valley are starting to believe that superintelligence is on the horizon and approaching fast. If A.I. takeover is inevitable, then maybe resistance is futile. What if, instead of trying to stop it, you joined it? ... “Increasingly, there are only two basic human types populating this planet,” Land wrote in 2013. “There are autistic nerds, who alone are capable of participating effectively in the advanced technological processes that characterize the emerging economy, and there is everybody else. For everybody else, this situation is uncomfortable.” ...  The A.I. revolution wasn’t just about creating new software. This was “holy, holy, holy capitalism”: the final “breakout” of capital-“I,” nonhuman intelligence from the fetters of democratic containment.  “My prediction is that A.I. will persuade you that technology eating the universe is more beautiful,” [Land] said.  (New Yorker)

Dreams like this are why, while real-world infrastructure is rotting from lack of funding, A.I. build-up accounted, as of 2025, for almost forty per cent of U.S. G.D.P. growth. 

BUT - it seems to be a bubble. That 40% is built on unproven dreams of utility and access:

• The "Infrastructure Trap": Tech companies and startups are investing hundreds of billions into data centers and GPUs. If organic demand from everyday users and businesses doesn't skyrocket to cover these costs, companies could be stuck with enormous, unprofitable capacity.
• Mismatched Revenues: Many organizations are finding that the time and cost required to integrate and clean up AI-generated work outpaces the actual productivity gains or direct revenue.
• Circular Financing: Much of the revenue AI companies make is reinvested right back into infrastructure or startups, creating an echo chamber that artificially inflates the perceived value of the ecosystem.  See the chart below.  (The Atlantic)

Looks like there's a good chance that people might be needed again after all...

The Unintended Benefits of Reading Nonfiction, Pt. Deux

Last time around I talked about nonfiction books that had helped make me a better writer, influenced my style, made me think, etc. And when I asked some writer friends about nonfiction that influenced their own writing. 

Several of my friends wrote about writing craft books that helped them, and I posted examples of both in my last blog post which you can find here.

This go-round I'm back with more examples of both types of recommendations. I hope you find something interesting and useful here.

*    *    *

Writer, Editor, Publisher & Communication Guru David Schlosser had quite a bit to say on the subject: 

If I had only one book, it would be The Science of Storytelling by Will Storr. For all the chatter and 
conventional wisdom we hear about "narrative" and how humans are genetically wired to respond to stories more than facts, this book explains the actual mechanisms of action:

If I had more than one book, it would be two series of three books that I often tell colleagues, "If you read these books, you will learn everything you need to know about being a professional communicator of any kind - from PR and marketing to writing novels."

Series One

The Science of Storytelling by Will Storr explains how stories affect humans at a cellular level:

Into the Woods: A Five Act Journey Into Story by John Yorke explains how patterns of storytelling affect the audience and, IMHO, the right approach to what conventional wisdom frequently and inaccurately refers to as "the three-act structure."

Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of Screenwriting by Robert McKee translates Storr's and Yorke's strategic insights into tactics that put storytelling meat on structural bones. For all the good sport made of McKee's formulaic approach, this book is a classic for a reason.

Series Two

Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman explains through research and study findings the cognitive
biases created by the human affinity for telling stories. Kahneman explains Storr's sources of the evolutionary biology that tunes humans to ignore facts and follow emotions.

Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert B. Cialdini is the refence bible for anyone and everyone in the industry of motivating people to action. Cialdini wrote this book as a manual for people to resist the strategies and tactics of snake-oil salesmen and related hucksters. No consumer advocate ever sought his advice, but now he's among the highest-paid speakers at sales conferences around the world.

Alchemy: The Surprising Power of Ideas That Don't Make Sense by Rory Sutherland explains how and why irrationality is the path to success in storytelling. This book is a breezy, entertaining flight over the terrain mapped by Kahneman and Cialdini.

*    *    *

Edgar-Nominated Author Sam Wiebe was much more succinct:

(Literary Critic Harold) Bloom is a great choice! 

(For obvious reasons, I quite agree! - again see my last post here.)

Book: Adventures in the Screen Trade by William Goldman

Why: Goldman's no-bullshit discussion of the film industry and his screenwriting projects is funny and fascinating. 

*    *    *

Mary Higgins Clark Award-Winning Author Lina Chern had a great pick: 

Book: In Cold Blood by Truman Capote

Why: We forget sometimes that this book is nonfiction, because the story it tells is so impeccably told. It’s a stunning reminder that all life has the potential to be art, in the hands of the right storyteller.

*    *    *

Horror Writer Scotti Andrews picked one of the most acclaimed nonfiction authors of the past two decades:

I don't read a lot of nonfiction but I have read Jon Krakauer and really appreciate how he weaves facts into a storytelling arc. Especially Under the Banner of Heaven and Three Cups of Deceit.

*    *    *

Agatha Award-Winning Author Kate B. Jackson cited a classic of the writing craft genre: 

Book: The Emotional Craft of Fiction: How to Write the Story Beneath the Surface by Donald Maass

So the reason I like Donald Maass' book is he takes an interesting approach to having an emotional impact. He talks a lot of how each reader is bringing their own stuff to what they read. How you don't necessarily want to the reader to take the journey with your character but you want to provide space for them to take their own journey. 

He also talks about how your character's experience doesn't usually translate to the reader unless you give opportunities for the reader to have their own experiences. 

Show don't tell but also don't try to control what you want someone to feel. 

*    *    *

And that's it for now. Hope you saw something that inspired you or at least made you think!

See you in two weeks!

Literary Influences: Nelson Algren

I'm delighted Tom Milani is joining us today to talk about literary influences. Here's more from Tom:

Literary Influences: Nelson Algren

by Tom Milani

Tom Milani

I first read about Nelson Algren in an editorial in the old Washington Star shortly after his death on May 9, 1981. The editorial included a quote by Hemmingway on the power of Algren’s writing: “Mr. Algren can hit with both hands and move around, and he will kill you if you are not awfully careful.” [1] It ended by noting that Algren had died alone. I wanted to know more.

I was in college at the time, and one of my English professors picked up a used hardback copy of The Man with the Golden Arm for me at Second Story Books in Georgetown (I think it cost $3). Hemmingway’s endorsement suggested lean, muscular prose. But Algren had produced something entirely different.

Frankie Machine, the novel’s protagonist, a card dealer, sometime drummer, and morphine addict, is one of the underclass, barely getting by. Algren doesn’t portray Frankie and his friends as noble because they are poor, but he expounds at length on what their poverty means in a capitalistic society:

The great, secret and special American guilt of owning nothing, nothing at all, in the one land where ownership and virtue are one. Guilt that lay crouched behind every billboard which gave each man his commandments; for each man here had failed the billboards all down the line. No Ford in this one’s future nor ever any place all his own. … With his own eyes he had seen the truer Americans mount the broad stone stairways to success surely and swiftly and unaided by others; he was always the one left alone, it seemed at last… [2]

I read those lines over forty years ago and am still struck by how Algren dignified his subjects by writing about them lyrically. For him, the poor weren’t props, stand-ins for the evils of capitalism; instead, they were characters in their own right, for better or worse. And Algren didn’t shy away from the worse—he’d experienced his share of poverty and had been in jail for a petty crime—his descriptions not the product of a fervid imagination but rather lived experience.

The Man with the Golden Arm was Algren’s most famous work, winning him the first National Book Award, but Never Come Morning, published five years earlier, in 1942, put him on the literary map. The cover of my Avon paperback edition is pure pulp: Two sneering young men on a stairwell look down at a teenage girl sitting on a box spring; between them a muscular young man tries unsuccessfully to stare down the boys. The cover screams: TEEN-AGE TRAGEDY! The Great Novel of JUVENILE DELINQUENCY. The story is tragic, but that tragedy is the result of characters who can’t escape their circumstances: 

The world of Never Come Morning is a finely rendered, gray-hued, fatalistic place populated by angry, hungry young people whose lives are governed by rules that are clear, though impossible to abide by. Not one of them is innocent. They prey foremost upon each other, but also upon the wider world, and they acknowledge responsibility for their actions and pay for them. The reader might empathize with or fear them, but they are above pity, victimhood, or stereotype. [3]

Years later, H.E.F. Donohue asked Algren why he’d written the books he’d written. Algren answered that he’d “tried to catch the emotional ebb and flow and something of the fear and terror and the dangers and the kind of life that multitudes of people have been forced into with no recognition that such a world existed.” [4]

Algren wrote other books, both fiction and nonfiction, and for a while was famous. 

But The Devil’s Stocking, his novel about Rubin “Hurricane” Carter, was first published in Germany and not with an American publisher until after his death.

I’ve written at CrimeReads about how James M. Cain was my gateway drug into writing crime fiction, but I think Algren’s empathy for his characters and his ability to dignify them with lyrical prose were foundational in my development as a writer.

Who were your literary influences, and what did you take from them? Please let me know in the comments.

Notes:

[1] Bettina Drew, Nelson Algren: A Life on the Wild Side (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1989), p. 210.

[2] Nelson Algren, The Man With the Golden Arm (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1949), p. 17.

[3] Colin Asher, “But Never a Lovely So Real,” The Believer 95 (June 1, 2013), https://www.thebeliever.net/but-never-a-lovely-so-real/.

[4] H.E.F. Donohue, Conversations with Nelson Algren (New York: Berkley Publishing Corporation, 1964), p. 86.

***

Tom Milani’s (www.tommilani.com) short fiction has appeared in several anthologies and online. His stories have been shortlisted twice for a Derringer, and “Barstow,” which originally appeared in Mickey Finn: 21st Century Noir vol. 5, was an honorable mention for The Best American Mystery and Suspense 2025. “Mill Mountain,” which originally appeared in Black Cat Weekly, was selected for The Best Mystery Stories of the Year 2026. “A Sign of the Times,” which initially appeared in Sleuths Just Wanna Have Fun, was selected for The Best Mystery Stories of the Year 2026. Places That Are Gone, his debut novel, will be reissued by Open Road Media this fall.

The Second Time Around

 

I came to a crucial decision recently. The second draft of a story is my favorite.

I go through a lot of drafts.  I agree with Gore Vidal who said "I have nothing to say, only to add."  The novella I plan to send to a magazine this month is on its eleventh draft. But Numero Dos is my darling.

The first draft, well, that's hard work.  Sometimes the words flow like a waterfall but on other days it feels like pushing a marble uphill with your nose. Just trying to get something down on paper.

But the second draft, ah... 

You see, it's the first time I actually get to read my story.  It exists from beginning to end.  I see it with all its gifts and flaws.  I usually find pieces that need to move to different parts of the story, and realize that whole paragraphs or even scenes didn't make it from my teeming brain to the computer screen.  This is the part of writing I like best.

After that each draft shifts more from the building process to the polishing process.  There is a danger, of course, in polishing too much, to the point where you lose the excitement that you started the story with. 

To be honest, if there were more markets available for my stories I would probably do fewer drafts.  Hey, I can only send so many stories per year to the three or four pro mags.  

But also, being honest, on that eleventh draft I still find a few improvements to make...

Con Me!

Attending crime fiction conferences and conventions is often part of the writing life and can sometimes play a role in propelling a writing career forward. So, the decision to attend or not attend them is important, and it’s important to understand the difference between them and to be prepared for some of the things that make a conference or convention more or less successful.

Michael and Temple,
dressed for the
Malice Domestic awards banquet

Each conference and convention has a different vibe, and, if you are a writer, the vibe you feel may depend on where you are in your writing career, whether you are at a craft-based event (a conference) or a fan-based event (a convention), how appropriate the facilities are for the event, and how the event is organized.

FAN-BASED CONVENTIONS

At fan-based conventions, the superstars may be fêted, make presentations, and participate in panels. Their time off stage may be spent with agents, editors, and publishers, and fans will seek them out for autographs, conversation, and occasional fawning.

A mid-career writer will participate in a panel or two, might meet with an agent, editor or publisher, and may have a fan or two seek them out.

An early-career writer—someone with a single book from a small press or a few published short stories—will be lucky to snag a seat on a panel and will likely be among the fans seeking autographs and conversations with the superstars and mid-career writers.

A beginning writer—a writer who has yet to see publication in any form—is unlikely to participate in any panels or presentations unless they have specialized knowledge to share (medical examiners discussing autopsies, for example). Beginning writers attending a convention are, essentially, fans.

CRAFT-BASED CONFERENCES

The vibe is different at craft-based conferences. Everyone in attendance is there to teach others how be better writers or is there to learn how to be better writers. The implied student-teacher relationships reduce the differences between writers and increases the interactions between writers at all levels, especially at smaller conferences.

These are excellent opportunities to improve one’s writing skills and make connections with agents, editors, publishers, and other writers.

COMBINATION EVENTS

Some conventions offer writer-centric sessions in addition to fan-centric sessions. Even so, because the fan experience takes priority, opportunities for writers to improve their craft are limited.

At a conference with multiple sessions on craft and business, a new or beginning writer may spend much time attending sessions and learning. A superstar writer may present one or more sessions and will engage with numerous new and beginning writers interested in learning at the feet of the masters. A mid-career writer straddles the mid-point between the two ends of the spectrum. They may have little interest in attending the presentations, not because they think they know it all, but because chances are they’ve heard it all. At the same time, they have the potential for engaging conversations with writers at all levels of experience.

FACILITIES

Facilities play a significant role in how writers experience a conference or convention. If the meeting rooms are too large for the audience, if the rooms are a significant distance from restaurants and bars, if the hallways are too wide, and if it is easy to be anywhere but at the event (for example, returning to one’s room or leaving the hotel to sightsee), opportunities to meet and interact with other participants is minimized. This puts shy and socially awkward writers at a disadvantage.

ORGANIZATION

An event with one or two presentation tracks keeps attendees confined to a small area, potentially increasing interaction among attendees. While a large event with multiple tracks has attendees frequently shifting from room to room, which increases opportunities for impromptu hallway meetings, a large event spread over multiple rooms and multiple tracks decreases the odds of unplanned meetings with specific people.

VALUE

Few writers have the time and money to attend multiple conferences and conventions each year. So, how might writers make decisions about where to spend their time and money?

If the goal is to sell one’s books or to meet and interact with fans and/or potential fans, a convention is likely the best use of time and money.

If the goal is to share knowledge or to gain knowledge about the business and craft of writing, a conference is likely the best choice.

There are conventions that try to appeal to the entirely of the mystery reading and writing community, such as Bouchercon, and others that appeal to specific subgenres, such as Malice Domestic and ThrillerFest.

There are conferences that try to cover the entirety of crime writing, and others that concentrate on novel writing or short story writing, such as ShortCon.

There are both conferences and conventions that appeal to writers in specific geographic regions, attended primarily by local fans and/or writers.

COST

And then there is the cost—not just the registration fee, but hotel, travel, and meals, as well as time away from family and the day job.

Some of us earn enough from our writing to pay for the (tax-deductible!) expenses of attending conferences and conventions, but most of us do not, and the choice between attending Bouchercon and taking the family to Disneyland is a real-world dilemma.

Attending mystery conferences and conventions can have a significant impact on one’s writing career. Attending might mean meeting an agent, editor, or publisher you later work with. Equally important, attending will put you in an environment that—unlike your day job and daily life—surrounds you with people who do what you do, read what you read, and enjoy what you enjoy. That alone may motivate you and inspire you.

VALUE

So how do you determine the cost/benefit ratio when applied to your writing career?

Attending conferences and conventions has led to numerous opportunities I would never otherwise have had. I’ve created and/or pitched anthologies at Bouchercon and SleuthFest; I’ve co-authored stories with writers I met at Bouchercon and Malice Domestic; I’ve co-edited anthologies with writers I met at Bouchercon and Malice Domestic. I’ve worked in various other ways with editors, writers, and publishers I’ve met at these and other conferences and conventions.

And though I highly value these opportunities, I must be honest: The cost of attending these events is greater than the dollar value of all the projects that have come my way because of my attendance.

Ultimately, writers must weigh the costs vs benefits themselves to determine if and which conferences and conventions they should attend, if they attend at all.

So, how about you? What opportunities have you had that you likely would not have had if you had not attended conferences and conventions? What factors do you include in your personal cost/benefit analysis when considering future attendance at such events? And what makes a conference or convention more enjoyable or less enjoyable?

Just one more click for the road

      For an infomaniac like me, access to the Internet is a little like an alcoholic getting a free, all-you-can-drink pass at the local bar.  Only good on weekends and during happy hour.  I’ve mostly found this to be a good thing, since I’ve been hoovering up random bits of haphazard knowledge, facts, commentary (some benighted) and all the other flotsam and jetsam floating around the cultural soup since I learned how to read.

      As you know, however, the online world makes all this lubriciously easy, which can easily result in addiction (not that I wasn’t hooked already.)  Worse, a lot of very serious people are now warning that this spew of digital effluent is rotting our brains, destroying social bonds and reducing our ability to concentrate down to a few nanoseconds.  Naturally, I don't think any of this applies to me, since I am far too disciplined and self-possessed, utterly immune to cyberspace con jobs.  You're not gonna get me, buddy.

      Though I wonder.  Somehow early on I developed my own version of speed reading, swallowing up whole chucks of material at a time.  My wife challenged me over comprehension, and after I proved my case, I think she’d sign an affidavit stating that I can, in fact, retain a lot in a short amount of time.  When information only existed on the printed page, this might have been a helpful trick, but with the speed and profusion of digital content, perhaps I’ve let the cart get too far in front of the horse.

      I used to spend all Sunday reading at least three print newspapers cover-to-cover.  Now I can travel the same terrain, plus a bunch of blogs, emails and message chats, a few magazines and a number of newsletters, some of which you might find a little obscure (Construction Physics anyone?) before dragging my ass out of bed to start the day.

      This is not Deep Reading.  More like skipping stones across a still pond.  To be fair to myself, I usually down shift when stumbling onto something I really want to learn about and try to stay attentive long enough to actually absorb the information.  I’ll also give deference to the excellent writers out there, which are plentiful despite what you might hear, since style can be just as enriching as content.

      There’s no doubt that having such abundance of information is a real service to fiction writing.  I actually enjoy clicking off into Wikipedia to fill in some detail, or fact check as I go.  As a research tool, the Internet is a Ferrari compared to the horse and buggy approach we used in the past.  (Though as a rule of thumb, I trust but verify.) Three point corroboration is a reliable standard, though sometimes I’ll let it go at two.) 

      But does all this vast abundance make one a better writer?  I honestly don’t know.  I suspect not, since the best writers I can identify accomplished the task way before Steve Jobs got that digital twinkle in his eye.  More likely, it’s given some very good writers a chance to crank out a lot more work in a shorter time.  It’s given them a far bigger universe to examine and draw from.  It’s made the pursuit less lonely, since with a single click they can connect with their true friends and colleagues, find a little encouragement or respite before diving back in again.   Though perhaps this ease of communications has created more distractions than benefits, more excuses to avoid rather than compose.  And worst of all, a degradation of their ability to concentrate on their own private, quiet thoughts, from whence derives their actual brilliance. 

     Nevertheless, whatever the pros and cons, this is the world in which we’re living.  There’s no going back. The only thing a person can do is make the best use of the situation.

      Try to extract the benefits without being corrupted by all the destructive clamor.

Z particles†

I’ve been following often humorous interactions between Gen Z members versus Gen X and occasionally (great)grandparents, the Boomers. Most of the jabs and jibes have been light-hearted, not overly unkind, although teachers and parents have begun to worry about Gen Zs finding their way in the world.

In the midst of these philosophical and practical concerns, I’ve become a more personal observer of the scene. Although I’ve witnessed essentials in the following vignettes, they represents a melding of characters, a Gen X composite rather than any one person. Further, no animals were harmed in the making of this scene. With that in mind…

Gen Z v Dad

“Hey, dude, I need…”

“The pronunciation is ‘dad’ not ‘dude’.”

“Whatever. I need…”

“Need is not the same as want. Neither do you need nor do you want. Consider the lilies of the field…”

“What? Lilies? What does that even mean? Dad, lemme have $6k.”

“Neither do they toil… You need $6000 maybe for heart surgery?”

“New rig for my gaming career. It’s fire. A professional needs professional gear. I’m getting my butt kicked on my old system.”

“Last year’s model, right? As I recall, it ran $2200.”

“Exacto. My cheapass loadout can’t compete, no cap.”

“Son, what did I teach you about work?”

“You told me never ever work a day in my life.”

“My full statement was, ‘Find a job you love, you’ll never ever work a day in your life.’”

“Job? Job? Please shoot me.”

“A good job brings income and food and shelter. How much guap has your gaming earned?”

“You can’t calculate petty capitalist concepts. This is my career.”

“What about your bank account?”

“Bruh! That thing you set up when I was twelve? Nobody uses banks anymore. It’s all Venmo, Kurv, Apple Cash app. Listen man, slide me a new card without a loser $500 limit like before.”

“That very limit allowed the family to eat that month.”

“Never mind. I’ll hit up Mom.”

“Good luck with that.”

Gen Z v Mom

“Mom…”

“No.”

“I haven’t asked anything yet.”

“No, my child.”

“Mom, give me a chance.”

“You asked your father? What did he say?”

“Uh… He said ask you.”

“Are your clothes still strewn on the floor?”

“Mommm. I can’t excel in a socialist society when swamped with minor issues like laundry. Anyway…”

“Hard working boys smell pretty bad without fresh clothes, no matter who they’re going out with.”

“What? Listen, I need six thou…”

“Isn’t that a lot to spend on a date? Are you matching on Boo?”

“Eww. Mom, I’m not dating. At all. It’s for…”

“Susan Deprez says her daughter thinks you’re cute. Clueless but cute.”

“No, the money’s…”

“And Eboni Browne’s been phoning a lot. Who are you inviting to the dance?”

“Ugh. I have no time for primitive mating rituals.”

“Well, if you like boys…”

“Seriously? C’mon, I’m into major gaming.”

“Oh, before I forget, the comic book store posted a hiring notice. You could sell Superman, deal Deadpool, push Punisher, hawk the Hulk, market Marvel.”

“No way. Labor is for losers. Look…”

“So about the primitive rite of washing clothes, rendering lye, wading into the stream, scrubbing musty shirts with stones. Son, feed the washing machine and you’ll finish in time for dinner. Now, out of my kitchen. Shoo! Move along, my child. Hustle. Consider the lilies of the field…”

---

^† Z particles | zēˈpärdəkəls |
noun, from physics
An uncharged elementary particle considered to transmit weak interaction between other elementary particles.

It's Still a Mystery

At a signing in a bookstore years ago, a lady (a.k.a. potential buyer) stopped at my table, picked up one of my books, pointed to the word STORIES on the cover, and asked me, "How many?"

"Forty," I said.

"Are all of them mysteries?"

"Well – they're all crime stories."

Which, thank goodness, turned out to be what she considered a satisfactory answer. But I realized later that I could have just said– and been truthful in saying– "Yes, they're all mysteries." Why? According to most of the editors I know, certainly those of the bigger mystery magazines and the best-of-the-year mystery anthologies, any story that contains a crime can be labeled a mystery. Which makes sense. After all, both Columbo and Poker Face are considered mystery series even though not a single episode involves a whodunit, and crime novels like The Talented Mr. Ripley, Mr. Mercedes, Get Shorty, A Simple Plan, The Day of the Jackal, etc., are always found in the "mystery" section of the bookstore even though they're not traditional mysteries. I re-read Elmore Leonard's Out of Sight recently, which reminded me that Leonard, who was named Grand Master by Mystery Writers of America, once said – and I'm paraphrasing – that he had never in his life written anything in which the identity of the villain was concealed until the end.

My point is, we who write crime stories, whether they involve a murder or not and whether they're whodunits or not (most of mine are howcatchems or howtheygotawaywithits) can safely call ourselves mystery writers.

Now, having said that … the mystery genre has a number of subgenres:

Cozy

These stories usually feature a protagonist who has no professional experience but is drawn into the plot by chance. The setting is limited – a bakery, an antique store, a coffeeshop, a small town, etc. – and there's no graphic violence, sex, strong language, or controversial topics. The murder, robbery, or whatever crime it is, takes place off-screen, the title is punny and/or catchy, and the tales are often "series" stories or novels featuring recurring characters. I've had almost 150 of those lighthearted mysteries (mine are probably more "amateur sleuth" than "cozy") published in Woman's World magazine.

Example (novel): The Murder at the Vicarage by Agatha Christie

Hard-boiled

These gritty stores feature tough but good-hearted detectives with a strong personal code of honor and justice, who happily bend the rules and reject authority while fighting to do the right thing in a corrupt system. This subgenre is sometimes combined with the noir or PI subgenres and – unlike cozies – usually include plenty of violence, sex, and profanity.

Example: LA Confidential by James Ellroy

Police Procedurals

The protagonists here are official law enforcement folks who investigate a case and use technology, legal procedures, and forensic evidence to track down criminals. These stories are sometimes whodunits and – like hard-boiled stories – feature violence, drugs, street language, etc. They focus more on the investigation than on the criminal, and creating them usually requires a familiarity with, or a great deal of research into, the daily workings of a police department. A possible hint, here: In the procedural short stories I've written, I've attempted to hide my ignorance by setting them in fictional cities, since fictional cities have fictional police departments whose rules might differ a bit from the real world.

Example: The Black Echo by Michael Connelly

Locked-room Mysteries

These feature "impossible" crimes committed in an enclosed space with no obvious solution. Sometimes they're murder mysteries, but they might also be robberies in which there's apparently no way the robber could accomplish the theft. The fun for the reader is in the puzzle, in trying to figure it all out before the big "reveal" at the end.

Example: The Three Coffins/The Hollow Man by John Dickson Carr

Private Eye

The protagonist here is a professional private investigator, not a police detective, though he or she is often an ex-cop or ex-military. This subgenre frequently overlaps with noir and hard-boiled. I've written a few of these, beginning in 2020, in response to a submission call by Michael Bracken for a special PI issue of Black Cat Mystery Magazine. I was fortunate (and amazed) to later have that story win the 2021 Shamus Award (thanks, Michael!), and it introduced me to a new and fun kind of mystery writing. Not that it matters, but my favorite PI writer is probably the late Robert B. Parker, author of the Spenser novels.

Example: The Maltese Falcon by Dashiell Hammett

Noir

Noir stories and novels have protagonists who are usually deeply flawed in some way, and easily manipulated. I've heard it said that a noir story just means a dumb guy's smart girlfriend talks him into committing a crime, and that's probably a pretty good description. I've said myself that it's any crime story that includes a dark room crisscrossed with the shadows of Venetian blinds. (If you've seen those movies, you know what I mean.) I also like neo-noir, as in the movie Body Heat.

Example: Double Indemnity by James M. Cain

Caper

Caper stories are usually told from the POV of the crooks, and describe the planning and execution of a crime, like a kidnapping or a bank heist. I've written lots of these, and I love 'em. Sometimes the bad guys win, sometimes the good guys, and little attention is given to the solution to the crime. My story that was included in the recent SMFS anthology of Derringer-winners was sort of a humorous caper story, and I can tell you they're great fun to write.

Example: The Hot Rock by Donald Westlake

Traditional

Traditional mysteries feature a crime committed in a closed setting by an unknown antagonist, several possible suspects, and a detective (either police or private) who figures out and reveals the identity of the villain. I've heard these described as fair-play mysteries because enough clues are provided for the reader to try to identify the villain before the protagonist does.

Example: The Hound of the Baskervilles by Arthur Conan Doyle

Mystery/Thriller

I've seen this listed as a subgenre but I think it's also sort of a catch-all to describe suspenseful mysteries that don't fit easily into other categories. They're crime stories with more action and tension and anticipation than some mysteries offer, and they also have faster-moving plots with lots of twists and reversals. In fact, this kind of story is mostly what I write: tales of ordinary folks, not necessarily cops or PIs, who wind up in dire situations and have to find/fight/shoot their way out.

Example: Gone Girl, Gillian Flynn

Paranormal

Paranormal mysteries involve otherworldly or supernatural elements. My favorites of these – as a lifetime Twilight Zone fan I have written many of these stories – often feature some kind of time travel or fantasy/telepathy/magic element. An interesting point: If a crime is involved, there are usually a few mystery magazines and mystery anthologies around that might be receptive to them, and – like humor or caper stories – they're truly fun to write.

Example: The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson

Historical

Historical mysteries are generally set at least fifty years in the past. That of course includes the fascinating (to me) years of gangsters, prohibition, organized crime, etc., in the mid-20th Century, an era which has served as the backdrop for many of my stories. (It also includes the Old West – I've written a lot of Westerns, some of them featuring a San Francisco-based private detective – but for some reason I don't think most editors consider Westerns to be historical fiction; the Western is a genre of its own.) One thing I've heard about historical fiction that I consider interesting: Historical mysteries must be written by authors who are not contemporaries of the time in which the stories are set. In other words, the Sherlock Homes stories are not considered to be historical fiction because they're set during the time in which they were written.

Example: The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco

As mentioned earlier, there can be considerable overlap between these subgenres: the dividing lines get blurry pretty fast. Also, there are more subgenres that I didn't list because they're self-explanatory: courtroom, mystery/romance, humorous, whodunits, solve-it-yourself mysteries, etc.

My questions for you are:

If you're a mystery/crime writer, what kinds of subgenres do you write? Which give you the greatest pleasure to write? – have you specialized in those? Which do you like most when it comes to your reading? Have you intentionally mixed any of these subgenres? Can you think of others I've missed? Which do you think are the easiest to write, and the easiest to sell to an editor/publisher?

One final hint. If you've written a mainstream story that you can't seem to sell, insert a crime someplace within it and send it to one of the remaining mystery magazines, or a crime anthology. I've done that, and it works. Well, sometimes it works.   

Mr. Steely Dan

 A while back, I wrote about Quantum Criminals, a book describing the recurring characters, or rather archetypes, in the music of Steely Dan. Hmm... I think we're overdue for a new pair of anthologies built around the Dan. Crimson Gate, take a memo...

Lately, I'm reading The Nightfly by Peter Jones, his biography of Donald Fagen. And once again, the "character" of Steely Dan emerges. Only he's directly identified this time as both Fagen and partner, the late Walter Becker. "Mr. Steely Dan" is a frequent name for the unnamed narrator in Fagen and Becker's tunes. He's the survivor of an apocalypse in "King of the World" and a ghost in "Deacon Blues" and a man with a midlife crisis trying to pick up a a couple of young women in "Babylon Sisters."

Who is Mr. Steely Dan?  Like all Steely Dan characters, he's a loser, one of the ramblers and gamblers that inhabit the band's catalog. Sometimes, he's in a bad relationship with a woman, sometimes an other woman, sometimes a woman whose betraying him. Mr. Steely Dan is looking for the next score. Perhaps most disturbing, yet usually unsuccessfully, Mr. Steely Dan likes young girls. Not Lolita young, though Becker and Fagen were fans of Nabakov. 

But when it appears in their lyrics, Mr. Steely Dan becomes that most noir of all characters, one who has almost no self-awareness. One might say what about the duo behind Steely Dan? Having just read Fagen's biography, Fagen and Becker had long-term relationships with either someone they knew from Bard College (despite never going back to their old school) or fellow musicians or artists. Post #metoo, they likely would have toned down that aspect a bit, but even with so many of the lyrics being autobiographical ("Ricki Don't Lose My Number" anyone?), they were still works of fiction. I seriously doubt George Lucas considered choking an underling or wanted to slice Francis Ford Coppola with a sword, laser or otherwise. Neither do I believe Donald Fagen was showing films in the den like Mr. LaPage.

All About the Atmosphere

We read and we write mysteries here at SleuthSayers (as well as other genres) for a variety of reasons, for the skill, the plots, the dialog, the puzzle, but sometimes what we're really interested in is the atmosphere. That fits our mood. Some of my favorites:

Maigret (Georges Simenon) - Paris; places like the Gai Moulon or the Liberty Bar, where no one who isn't a criminal or a policeman should dream of going; Mme. Maigret with her excellent cuisine; the team, detectives Lucas, Janvier, Lapointe, and Torrence; Maigret's pipe, his taste for beer and cognac, his intuition, and his occasional mercy to criminals...  Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful...

NOTE:  The 1960s British series Maigret, starring Rupert Davies, is available on YouTube. "Davies' portrayal won two of the highest accolades: his versions were dubbed into French and played across the Channel; and Simenon himself said of Davies "At last, I have found the perfect Maigret!" (LINK)

Nero Wolfe (Rex Stout) - The household, of course.  The voice of Archie Goodwin, the strict schedule, the orchids upstairs, the gourmet meals of Fritz (although I must confess I have the Nero Wolfe Cookbook, and I didn't like most of the recipes.  I fear they're better on the page than off it. I for one do not want apricot preserves in my omelet.).  Also the supporting team, especially Saul Panzer and Fred Durkin. Orrie Cather can stuff himself. 

Bernie Gunther (Philip Kerr) - Dark, atmospheric, scary, but... depending on the day and the mood...

Mma Ramotswe (Andrew McCall Smith) - It's the rhythm of the voice, the feel of the heat of the day, the smell of cows, the preciousness of rain, the customs, the courtesies, the myths, the secrets, the witchcraft, the traditions.  And the supporting team, her secretary and later assistant Mma Makutsi, her husband Mr JLB Matekoni, Mma Silvia Potokwani of the orphan farm, her stepchildren Motholeli and Puso, and Gabarone, Botswana itself.  As it says at the end of the first book, 

Africa Africa Africa Africa Africa

Africa Africa Africa Africa

Africa Africa Africa

Africa Africa

Africa

Spenser (Robert Parker) - To be honest, mostly for Hawk and the banter between the two of them. What drives me crazy is Susan and her perpetual wonder at the Hawk/Spenser friendship and total trust. Honey, I have girlfriends who if one of us called the other in the middle of the night, would drop everything to help, no matter what, and bring anything / everything needed, whether it's money, a bottle, a shovel or all three and more...  Why Parker wrote a woman who apparently has no women friends I don't know.

Dame Frevisse (Margaret Frazer) - First of all, it's the real Middle Ages.  Second, I really like Dame Frevisse, who is prickly, dedicated, and knows her stuff. She also sometimes gets fed up with her fellow sisters, and who wouldn't get fed up with Dame Alys? Related to Chaucer, her cousin is Alice Chaucer, Duchess of Suffolk, which gives Dame Frevisse her access to the nobility, and often gets her mixed up in their problems, mysteries, and murders. And, as I've said many a time, the motive in The Servant's Tale - well, I only wish I'd thought of it first.

Cadfael (Ellis Peters) - My second favorite medieval religious.  My favorite of the books is An Excellent Mystery.  

Brunetti (Donna Leon) - Venice. Venice. Venice. Venice. Venice.  I went to Venice and I fell in love with it the way a teenager falls in love with that sexy guy who is the LAST person she should ever be with and yes, she knows it, but she can't stop, can't stop, she's in madly, deeply, hopelessly, recklessly...  Brunetti gives me access from afar, full of its scents and sounds, especially the water lapping everywhere...  

Venice, by Eve Fisher:

Miss Marple (Agatha Christie) – I love her. Period. I hope to be her in my increasing old age, only with more profanity and sarcasm. 

Sherlock Holmes (Conan Doyle) – Straight back to my childhood.  

And thank you, Janice Law, for the amazing Francis Bacon series!  

• Fires of London (2012)
• The Prisoner of the Riviera (2013)
• Moon Over Tangier (2014)
• Nights in Berlin (2016)
• Afternoons in Paris (2017)
• Mornings in London (2017)

Somedays, there's just nothing like a seedy, louche adventurer with a nanny and a lot of bad habits to get you through the day...

Other notes:

Marion Halcome (Wilkie Collins, The Woman in White), who is the real sleuth, the real heroine. And she's up against Count Fosco, an Italian of uncertain past, huge girth, strong personality, and incredibly dangerous. "This in two words: He looks like a man who could tame anything. If he had married a tigress, instead of a woman, he would have tamed the tigress. If he had married me, I should have made his cigarettes, as his wife does—I should have held my tongue when he looked at me, as she holds hers." (Don't worry, he never manages to tame Marion. In fact, he falls in love with her, but that doesn't stop him from being excessively dangerous.) Plus I love the different voices that Collins uses to tell the tale, such as the most useless person ever to take fictional breath, Frederick Fairlie:  

"It is the grand misfortune of my life that nobody will let me alone.  Why—I ask everybody—why worry me? Nobody answers that question, and nobody lets me alone. Relatives, friends, and strangers all combine to annoy me. What have I done? I ask myself, I ask my servant, Louis, fifty times a day—what have I done? Neither of us can tell. Most extraordinary!"

I consider this the best of Collins, and I have reread it many times, with great pleasure.  

Also, thank you, Elizabeth Zelvin for clueing me in to Abbi Waxman's One Death at a Time!  The most truly Hollywood novel I've ever read.  (Let's face facts, Chandler romanticized L.A. even if it was a dark romanticism.)  

Which reminds me, I also want to see Lodge 49 again.