My (pen-)name is Lawrence Ong. I am a mystery fan and amateur mystery writer. And I am The Encluesiast.
“What does it mean to be an encluesiast?”, you might ask. I will quote myself:
“Encluesiasts do prize the solution [to a mystery] itself. (Who doesn’t like a clever one?) But they attach far greater importance to how the solution has been signaled all along. They live for those little tidbits of pivotal information slipped into otherwise innocent paragraphs, like covert operatives trying to blend in with a crowd—the hints that cause you to smite your forehead with self-reproach when they hoodwink you, but pump you full of pride when you spot them before the detective does.”
This blog is thus a series of deep dives into precisely those “signals” that I refer to in that paragraph. It is devoted to detailed analyses of the clueing, plot construction, and general mechanics of “fair-play” mysteries. These are defined as works in which the author has provided concrete clues that allow a reader to correctly figure out the solution.
I will analyze only two types of books: (1) those that either are fair-play or advertise themselves as fair-play; (2) locked room or “impossible crime” mysteries that lend themselves to similar forms of puzzle-solving. In addition to analyzing books, I will also review selected movies, TV episodes, and (possibly) video games.
Although I have a great fondness for obtaining and reading out-of-print books, I will restrict myself to reviewing only those works that are in-print and reasonably priced. This is because these analyses are never spoiler-free. They are meant to appeal to people who have actually read the books themselves and therefore I focus on books that are easily available to potential readers of this blog.
In addition to writing about books that have consistently remained in print since their publication, I will also focus on reviewing (a) reprints and (b) fair-play mysteries written by contemporary authors. In both cases, this is because I think that serious mystery fans devoted to the aesthetics of fair play owe it to publishers of reprints and authors of new works to financially support them, to keep this kind of book alive. I am pleased to do my small part in encouraging people to buy and read these books. Some of my analyses of works by dead authors may include criticism. However, in general, I will not analyze a work by a living author unless my assessment is primarily positive.
I will not devote any single-work analyses to works that John Goddard covered in either of his two books on Agatha Christie’s Golden Age. Readers interested in those novels are strongly encouraged to read his books. I may, however, write some thematic posts on connections among her novels.
One of the things I hate about many mystery blogs is their tendency to write a post ostensibly on one book that contains a spoiler for another book. Each of my analyses focuses on one work or set of works, which is identified at the top of the analysis. However, many of them contain references to other works, which are encrypted in ROT 13, and labeled according to a system I have devised to guard against unexpectedly spoiling books the reader was not aware would be discussed.
If you’re unsure whether this blog is the kind of thing you’d like, I recommend obtaining a copy of John Dickson Carr’s short story “The House in Goblin Wood” (published under the pseudonym Carter Dickson), reading it, and then reading my blog post on it from Ellery Queen Mystery Magazine’s blog Something Is Going to Happen. It gives some of the flavor of what posts on this blog will be like.
The Encluesiast 