Not His Cup of Arsenic

Otto Penzler, a well-known figure in the mystery community (he launched the Mysterious Press, which he later sold to Warner Books, and he now has his own imprint), caused a stir with a piece he wrote for the New York Daily Sun.

No fan of cozy mysteries--or, apparently, of subtlety or diplomacy, Mr. Penzler sees little value in mysteries that don't suit his taste:

Ever since 1945, Mystery Writers of America has been the preeminent professional organization in the United States for authors of mystery/crime/suspense/espionage fiction and the professionals (editors, publishers, booksellers, reviewers, agents) who feed off them.

To the public, MWA is mainly visible in late spring, when it gives out the Edgar Allan Poe Awards in a variety of categories. This is, of
course, a tricky business. Not only is it difficult to pick a "best" of
anything, but the range of books is so vast that inevitably apples will compete with kumquats for best of show. How do you decide which is better, a huge thriller by Ken Follett or a delicious confection by Alexander McCall Smith?

We all have our prejudices (yes, you too). I admit that if I were on the Best Novel committee, books with cutesy pun titles would be eliminated before I read the first page. They may be fun, they may have their charm, but they are not serious literature and don't deserve an Edgar. Which is why someone had the bright idea to create Malice Domestic, a conference devoted to fiction so lightweight that an anvil on top of it is the only way to prevent it from floating off to the great library in the sky. . .

I have to disagree. Writers and fans who attend Malice Domestic (I count myself in both camps) enjoy a wide range of crime fiction. And while Malice Domestic crime fiction does not, as a rule, have graphic sex or violence, novels that have won the Agatha, the Malice award, have also won Edgars. (Margaret Maron's The Bootlegger's Daughter comes to mind. And there are other examples.)

Traditional, yes.

Lightweight?

That's an unfair generalization.

What's your take?

Comments

[David J. Montgomery]

Otto fires off one of these broadsides every once in a while and he never fails to generate a storm of attention and publicty... which is precisely why he does it, I believe.

I do think that some of his thoughts have some truth behind them, but he goes too far in expressing them.

[Sarah]

As I recall, Otto wrote a more inflammatory version of this piece this time last year, and I'm not really certain why he's beating the drum again since it's not like his opinion has reversed, nor have people's reactions to his opinions. Obviously, he's entitled to his feelings, but I get antsy when someone who will turn around and happily stock one of these "offending" books in his shop then goes out and publicly bashes the subgenre.

Some cozies, er, traditional mysteries *are* lightweight. Others aren't. But I tend to believe that's due to what the individual writer brings to the table, not the constraints of the subgenre. And to start doing any kind of correlation between writing talent and what's written is a more treacherous path than I'd prefer to travel down.