What I Learned About Writing from Reading Louise Penny’s Mysteries
As a kidlit writer, I don’t only read books for kids or teens, of course. Among novels written for adults, the genre I read most is mystery. It’s my go-to for entertainment.
While I love finding a new-to-me series to sink into, I’m picky about committing.
A narrator with a sense of humor attracts me first. For example, Craig Johnson’s Sheriff Walt Longmire amuses me (the TV series based on Johnson’s work is decent too) whereas C. J. Box’s game warden Joe Pickett is a bit dry for my taste. (Both series are set in contemporary Wyoming.)
Maybe it’s like dating. Not everyone can be funny, I guess.
Another detective character that struck me as dry the first time I tried reading him was Louise Penny’s Armand Gamache, the chief homicide detective in Quebec.
Several years ago a well-read friend recommended the series. I plucked a random one off the library shelf. Maybe I was in a bad mood, maybe I wasn’t ready for it. Whatever the reason, Gamache didn’t speak to me, so I returned him to the library after maybe 30 pages.
Last year, however, I read and enjoyed Penny’s political thriller, State of Terror, a collaboration with Hilary Rodham Clinton. With so many female characters in leading roles, it offered a nice change of pace from typical political thrillers.
So I decided to try Penny’s mystery series again. This time, I started as close to the beginning of it as I could, given what was available at my library. I like to read a series in the order it was published whenever possible.
The first one I read was A Rule Against Murder, the fourth in the series. Although I was initially annoyed by the head hopping in the omniscient narration, I was otherwise engaged by her gentle humor and lovely style. I think she aims for, and achieves, more literary writing than many mystery writers.
So I continued with the series throughout the year, reading mostly in order, and sometimes two back-to-back.
Two major discoveries came out of reading the entire series so close together:
Using an omniscient narrator provided her with a much larger canvas for her stories. It inspired me to try omniscient narration with my own mystery for middle grade readers. This contrasts with many MG mysteries being published now, which are often in first person. Maybe I’m making a mistake, but so far the omniscient narration feels right.
I finally understood the value of subplots and how they work.
Although I started the series with book 4, I was able to backtrack and read the first three in order. The Cruelest Month is the third in the series. This one resolved an ongoing subplot from an earlier book and tied in beautifully to the theme at the heart of the novel.
It was while reading this book that it finally clicked in my head how subplots can work together to reflect a book’s theme or point in different ways. I don’t know that I would have noticed that I had not read the books so close together.
Another thing I noticed from reading the rest of her series throughout the year is that Penny tries different approaches. She doesn’t use a formula and write the same thing over and over.
At least one of her Gamache mysteries felt more like a thriller because there was so much action in it. Others are much quieter, and gentler—even though there’s at least one murder in each.
What surprised me most is how Penny’s work has essentially become my mentor texts for the middle grade mystery I’m drafting now. Reading her whole series has helped me think about how I’d like to craft a mystery series that’s as rich and sustaining as hers—but for kid readers.
What are some authors or novels that are influencing your work? Let me know. I’m always looking for good books to read. bookcoach@micheleregenold.com