I'm currently reading Kathryn Harkup's 'A Is For Arsenic: The Poisons of Agatha Christie'. In it she mentions that in 1928, Knox (1888-1957) wrote a set of ten rules that crime writers were expected to adhere to in spirit of fairness to the reader.

Knox's Detective Story Decalogue:

1. The criminal must be mentioned in the early part of the story, but must not be anyone whose thoughts the reader has been allowed to know.
2. All supernatural or preternatural agencies are ruled out as a matter of course.
3. Not more than one secret room or passage is allowable.
4. No hitherto undiscovered poisons may be used, nor any appliance which will need a long scientific explanation at the end.
5. No Chinaman must figure in the story. (Note: This is a reference to the common use of heavily stereotyped Asian characters in detective fiction of the time.)
6. No accident must ever help the detective, nor must he ever have an unaccountable intuition which proves to be right.
7. The detective himself must not commit the crime.
8. The detective is bound to declare any clues which he may discover.
9. The "sidekick" of the detective, the Watson, must not conceal from the reader any thoughts which pass through his mind: his intelligence must be slightly, but very slightly, below that of the average reader.
10. Twin brothers, and doubles generally, must not appear unless we have been duly prepared for them

I copied these from the Wiki entry to save typing but Harkup's wording is more or less the same.

I'd love to have a chat among this forum about these rules. Are there books within the quest that adhere to these? Ones that subvert these rules? Are there other books by authors from the quest that resonate with these roles? Which rules do we see most flouted? Which feel most significant for keeping things fair to the reader? What do you think of the list generally? Are there books from our wider reading that these rules bring to mind and could they be additions to the quest or books for future informal read-alongs? Really... Any comments/thoughts/ramblings welcome! I don't think I'd heard of them before so I was really interested to bring them to the group, so to speak, and get other people's thoughts!

Hello Bookaholics!

How is everyone doing???

Here is your question of the day:

Where is your favourite place to read?

I personally love reading anywhere, but I always feel comfiest either on my bed, or on the couch in my living room ❤️

This is my first time reading Discworld in order from book one, and I'm currently halfway through Wyrd sisters. But is what happened in Equal rites irrelevant? I've now read one book set in Unseen University and one book with Granny Weatherwax and I feel it shoud have been refferenced by now? Any thoughs are welcomed with thanks😊

I keep thinking I have a system for my reading life.

Like I’m in control. Like there’s a plan. Like my TBR is something I can actually manage instead of something quietly plotting against me.

But at this point, I think I’ve been demoted from “reader” to “queue manager with unstable feelings.”

Because here’s what’s happening right now:

I just started the final book in a trilogy, which should mean focus, emotional endurance, and a respectful amount of suffering in a controlled direction. And I have 3 library holds that all decided to show up at the same time, plus a book club read. 😩

I’m in full blown

And the funny part is I still act like I’m going to “get through the list” someday, but the list is not stable. It multiplies. It shifts. It regenerates when I’m not looking. It’s like magic.

The real issue is that I have too many books that all feel slightly urgent at the same time. Like everything is saying “read me next” with varying levels of emotional manipulation. Stop being pick me’s damn it!!

So I guess I’m wondering: does anyone actually solve the queue problem… or do we all just live here now, constantly negotiating with ourselves while three different stories are open in our brains at once?

Commiserate with me on my favorite problem to have!!