Colonel Mustard in the library with the lead pipe. And the rope. And the wrench.

We read a lot of books in our Day Job away from Grinwout's. And a lot of them are mysteries and thrillers. And here's one trend that we've seen for the last few years: books don't have an ending anymore. They have multiple endings. You think you've found out what was going on, and then the writer pulls a fast one, and presents a totally different explanation of what was going on. And some writers, still not satisfied, pull yet another fast one, and provide yet another totally different explanation.

It's exhausting. And it doesn't always work, either.

I like the way Agatha Christie used to handle this. You read the book and thought you had figured it out and that you had outsmarted her, that you were on to her tricks, but in fact, her real trick was luring you into thinking you had outsmarted her, and when it came out, the solution was something totally different. You always metaphorically patted her on the back for getting away with it. Again.

Author Sandra Parshall writes a piece for Poisoned Pen Press called The End, where she discusses modern-day endings, and how writers have to deal with them. She talks about different things than the serial twists that bother me, and she makes some good points about how the ending has to hold up, or the whole book is a failure. She's right. If a mystery book doesn't end well, the whole enterprise goes down the tubes...