Conventions of genre

Recently, an interesting debate took place on a mystery writer's forum I belong to. It concerned the sub-genre known as hardboiled mysteries.

Hardboiled is somewhat difficult to describe, but it definitely has a "dark" feel to it. John D. McDonald was hardboiled, as was early master Raymond Chandler.

Their characters are to mystery fiction what Robert E. Howard's Conan is to fantasy fiction.

The thing about it is, Conan was truly an original. Yet over the years, there have been a million Conan clones come down the pike to the point that the sword and sorcery sub-genre is sometimes looked down upon. Same with hardboiled -- I definitely saw it in the conversation we had in the forum.

Let us look at Raymond Chandler's creation Phillip Marlowe. When you think of him, you immediately think "private eye." Here's a description of Marlowe: The private eye is a pessimistic and cynical observer of a corrupt society, yet the enduring appeal of Marlowe and other hardboiled detectives lies in their tarnished idealism. Underneath the wisecracking, hard drinking, tough private eye, Marlowe is quietly contemplative and philosophical. He enjoys chess and poetry. While he is not afraid to risk physical harm, he does not dish out violence merely to settle scores.

The thing is...in the 1920s, that was quite an original character and what Chandler did was simply amazing. Today, there have been thousands of books filled with cheap Marlowe clones written.

I have read some of these and they are a let down.

Yet, there are those out there who've taken the hardboiled themes (crime, violence and sex) in general, and the private eye story (which is not necessarily hardboiled) to a whole new level.

Sue Grafton's Kinsey Milhone, Harlan Coben's Myron Bolitar and Robert Crais' Elvis Cole all are private eyes. Their books certainly touch upon the hardboiled subjects of crime, violence and sex in an unflinching and sometimes graphic manner, yet the characters bring such originality to the table they are a pleasure to read.

The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkein put epic fantasy on the map, and a slew of cheap knock-offs ensued. But then in the 1980s, amid the trash, a man named Terry Brooks came along with a series of "Shanara" books. Wow. They were original, amazing and definitely epic fantasy.

My point is there is still plenty of room for originality and creativity, even in the sub-sub-genres of fiction that deal with the most basist of emotions and ideas.

I believe my crime fiction is largely hardboiled, but that is where my stories need to be. I deal in themes of violence, of moral ambiguity and moral "gray areas." It seems this style of fiction best serves me and my stories at the moment.