Dear reader, you may recall that I’ve been grumbling about some books that I’ve started and not finished recently. Quite a few, in fact. I’ve not named them – it’s positive reviews only here (unless I optimistically stick with it) but it’s got to the point where I wonder if I’m in a minority with my quibbles.

You may be aware of the Reverend Ronald Knox’s Decalogue – a tongue-in-cheek list of ten rules that mystery writers should follow/break creatively (delete as appropriate) that some people take far too seriously. The Grandest Game In The World is, after all, just a bit of fun.

Recently, my blogging buddy Kate over at Cross Examining Crime, had a go at her version of the list – do go and take a look. Actually, probably don’t, as I might end up nicking some ideas from her. Right, so here we go with the Puzzle Doc-ologue – ten rules that will help you get a good review from me.

Rule 1: No Secret Passages

Let’s start with some locked room rules and this one is a given, especially when it’s the solution to the locked room. Working out which bit of the furniture you pull to open the secret fireplace isn’t a mystery! It’s a rubbish solution, so if you’re going to use a secret passage as a plot device, please do not reveal it as a final chapter surprise. There are some creative uses of a secret passage – Ed Hoch did a story about someone found dead in a secret passage where both doors were locked from the inside – but it shouldn’t be used as the answer.

Rule 2: The Locked Room Reason

I’ve seen a few books recently that neglect this – the reason for the killer orchestrating a murder inside a room locked from the inside. I’m really not a fan of the killer doing it to outsmart the police, to provide everyone with an alibi or simple just doing it for no reason. Take a look at nearly anything by the master of the genre, John Dickson Carr, and his bafflements have a reason, whether they occurred by accident or design.

Rule 3: It’s One Of These Three…

Or four. Or five. It takes a brave writer to narrow down the suspects to a smaller subset of the characters and then actually make one of those the killer. It takes a lazy writer to explain for the best part of the book that it must be person A, B or C when in fact it’s someone else. This isn’t how you do the least-likely suspect, it’s an excuse to spend an inordinate page count focussing on A, B and C that can end up feeling like a waste of the readers time.

Rule 4: Everyone’s There For A Reason…

In the best mysteries, everyone has something to do with the plot. In the worst, the non-guilty suspects act mysterious for no good reason and then sometimes just disappear. Every significant character ought to have something to do that ties them into the murder plot somehow and is resolved by the end of the tale.

Rule 5: …And That Reason Is Murder

If I’ve bought a murder mystery, then that’s what I’m here for. I’ve no problem with characters having to deal with life as well as the body in their library/gazebo/spaceship, but the second bit’s what I’m here for. This has been especially problematic in series books when book two comes around and the author is convinced that I’ve fallen in love with their lead characters and am desperately to know how they’ve been before anything kicks off (and often during as well). This is a particular problem when there’s a large recurring cast, as it takes forever to find out what they’ve all been up to. Oh, and just for once, will someone write a will-they-won’t-they story where they don’t?

Rule 6: Take It Seriously

I’m all in favour of a light-hearted murder mystery but death isn’t a laughing matter. I really don’t want to read about sleuths who get excited when they fall over a dead body as this will liven up their holiday. If I wanted Scooby Doo, I’d watch Scooby Doo.

Rule 7: Don’t Let The Murderer Solve It For You

The sleuth actually ought to solve the case by following those clue thingies and not by annoying the murderer into revealing themselves as they try to kill our hero. This is one preference that I’ve been banging on about for years, mainly after I started sampling some US cosy novels. Provoke your penultimate-chapter peril by the hero revealing to the killer that they know they did it, but don’t have them walk in on the killer mid-murder…

Rule 8: How Long Is A Piece Of Murder?

There aren’t many murder mysteries that need to be a long book. There are exceptions – Michael Jecks is the obvious one, because his books don’t feel padded and they are filled with incident, not navel-gazing – but generally, keep the plot moving and don’t hang around…

Rule 9: Don’t Hang Around

Don’t leave it too long before there’s something to investigate. It doesn’t have to be the murder (although that helps) but the reader needs to be thinking from the start, and not just trying to work out which character is related to which in overlong dinner party scenes.

Rule 10: Sorry, Who?

Don’t make the murderer an obscure character. I’m smarter than the average bear (and more modest too) but there are times when I’ve been flicking back to work out who the hell the character just revealed as the murderer actually was. This is not a good thing. And while we’re on obscure characters, try and give the characters distinctive names. It may be witty to name a victim’s sons Reuben, Robin, Robert and Royston, but it doesn’t help me remember which is which.

So there you go. Not so much rules as things to avoid if you want a good review from me. Hence no claims for this to be a replacement Decalogue. But over to you – do any of these chime with you? Do you have your own bugbears?