Puzzles are hard. They are usually composed of a simple pattern or a familiar image/concept made more complex for entertainment. I’m not going to pretend that puzzles have a universal appeal. Sometimes a person is in the mood for one and sometimes not. Some people like certain puzzles over other kinds.

On a similar note, the sense of thrill or anticipation is something that people seek out depending on their mood and personality. This is usually found in media as opposed to objects, at least for me. I don’t usually get a sense of thrill from doing a puzzle. I may get satisfaction from a puzzle but not thrill. The only object that comes to mind that gives a sense of thrill, by its construction, is a roller coaster. But roller coasters tend to cost money every time you ride unless you’ve built your own. Another reason I like books is because I can satisfy either desire (or both simultaneously) by grabbing the right title off the shelf.

Mystery thrillers are one of my favorite genres. But even though we often combine these two elements into one story, they don’t necessarily need to be combined to achieve their desired effect. A mystery doesn’t need to be an adrenaline-pumping action sequence throughout the story, and a thriller doesn’t have to have an intricate puzzle (or the appearance of one) as part of the narrative. However, the combination of the two elements creates some of the most well-known examples of the genre. Mysteries are more exciting when there is the danger of a nearby killer threatening the main characters. Likewise, thrillers are more engaging, and thus more thrilling, when there is a puzzle that grabs and holds our attention as we read.

So for a writer, mastering both genres is a very worthy goal. However, I find that one is much more difficult than the other. I can create action-packed scenes and use dynamic language to convey speed and tension (or so I tell myself). But a purely cerebral story is a challenge. I often tell myself that as an author, or puzzle maker, would need to spend at least as much of my time obfuscating the goal as I want my audience to spend solving the problem. Perhaps this is an issue of how my brain is wired, but it often seems like a tall order. And then you are also writing to a particular audience that is very intelligent and very accomplished at solving puzzles. There is no guarantee that the amount of time you spend to create the puzzle will translate into the majority of your audience enjoying it for that amount of time.

Supposedly there are shortcuts. Mystery novels have been around for a long time, and formulas have been well-recorded and analyzed showing how mystery authors have constructed their plots and narratives to provide the audience with mental puzzles that can be solved, while also making them re-readable and enjoyable for the members of the audience that just want to enjoy a compelling story.

Anyone and therefore any author can try to write any kind of story that they want. But not everyone is capable of doing so and enjoying the process. And every writer is different. The mystery genre is one that I enjoy and would love to be better at. But it is very intimidating. It has a long tradition and there are many examples of good works and bad, even within a single author’s body of work. Perhaps a way that more experienced authors can mentally fortify themselves to experiment with a new genre is to tell a story that can feature genre elements that they have already mastered, then try to craft a story that also has elements of the genre they wish to learn. There is the danger that you end up with a story that is not a good example of either genre, but there is the chance that the author can learn something about the new genre and still tell a half-decent story.

That maybe the thing that I have to try.