I started reading The Westing Game, because I’d heard good things and because I’m studying mystery structures these days. I know many people love it, but, well, we can’t all love the same things, alas. Ordinarily, when I don’t wish to finish a book, I keep that to myself. But Ellen Raskin has been dead for 42 years, so there’s not much harm I can do to a fellow writer by grumbling (and she won a Newbery medal for this book, so it’s not as if my opinion matters anyway).
If The Westing Game is a favourite of yours, please know I respect that — I’ve read essays about how brilliant its construction is, and I’m sure that’s true.
Trying to figure out precisely why I wasn’t engaged with The Westing Game helped me understand some things about myself as a reader, and perhaps also as a writer. I share in that forensic spirit, and not to dump on this beloved book. It allows me to talk about patterns that also appear in more recent books, which I’m not as eager to pick apart publicly. Also, a benefit of examining an old book is that the question of how being surrounded by AI online is affecting our writing doesn’t come into it; we can just look at prose choices without leaping into that exhausting topic.
Increasingly over the last several years, I’ve found my thoughts slipping and sliding when I read. It’s definitely an attention span problem (who among us these days) but, surprisingly, it tends to happen to me with fast-paced books written in clear, simple prose — the kind that one might think would hold a reader’s attention more easily. Perhaps, I thought, it’s just that “easy” prose doesn’t interest me. But it’s not quite that. Every so often, I’ll pick up a fast-paced book with very simple sentence structure that does grab me. Why one such book and not another? It’s frustratingly unpredictable.