Mystery Criticism and “Liquid Filth”
I review a lot of mysteries, and at times I wonder if my attitude’s a bit too much like Donald Pleasance’s character Adrian Carsini from the Columbo episode “Any Old Port in a Storm.” In that episode, Carsini famously throws a fit when he tastes a bottle of port that has been allowed to overheat, causing it to develop an inferior flavor that only the most discerning palates can detect. Others can’t taste anything but a first-rate wine, but Carsini is disgusted.
Carsini refers to a wine that gives others pleasure as “liquid filth.” And it made me think about my own mystery reviewing, where books and TV shows and movies that delight other people annoy me because they’re too clichéd, or because the solution was too obvious, or the plot too cookie-cutter, or the characters too one-dimensional, or the messaging too heavy-handed, or because they’re just not original in any way.
Granted, I read and watch a lot more mysteries than most people– far more, and I think about them more than others. But does that make be more discerning, or am I just being an overcritical snob? If a flaw is only detectible by a tiny fraction of the population, is it really that bad? Is it really mediocre? Am I being overcritical towards certain perfectly enjoyable books, or are they genuinely the literary equivalent of “liquid filth?”
–Chris Chan
Chris Chan’s first novel, Sherlock’s Secretary, was released on November 3rd. His book Murder Most Grotesque: The Comedic Crime Fiction of Joyce Porter was published by Level Best Books on September 7th. His first non-fiction book, Sherlock & Irene: The Secret Truth Behind “A Scandal in Bohemia” is available for sale at Amazon.com and the MX Publishing website, as well as at Book Depository (with free worldwide shipping there). It is also available in a Kindle edition.
No comments:
Post a Comment