My Favorite Mystery Genre Series

I read mysteries (historical, true crime, cozies) for fun. I like smart heroines, good research, plots that surprise me, realistic characters, and detailed settings. Here are some of my favorite authors and/or mystery series. I recommend ALL of these. :) 

Historical or set in the past because they're older books: 

 1. Pretty much anything Sherlock Holmes. OK, well, you can skip A Study in Scarlet because the plot structure stinks and Conan Doyle really screwed up geography and history. But The Sign of Four is fabulous, and nothing matches Hound of the Baskervilles. And, of course, the short stories are wonderful. If you only know Sherlock Holmes from movies or TV, it's time you picked up the originals.

 2. Anything by Agatha Christie. I particularly like Sleeping Murder, The Seven Dials Mystery, Murder on the Orient Express, and Mrs. McGuinty's Dead. 

 3. The Maisie Dobbs series by Jacqueline Winspear. These are set beginning in post-WWI England, and they are fabulous. Maisie is my favorite kind of female protagonist: smart and able to rescue herself. The research behind these books is meticulous as well. My favorite of the series is An Incomplete Revenge -- but don't start there; you need to read them in order.

 4. Not quite as good as the Maisie Dobbs series but still very good is Tasha Alexander's Lady Emily series. These have fine plots in various European locations and are well-researched, but Alexander is often forgetful about minor details from past books and has real trouble creating believable children or teen characters. Also, Lady Emily's husband is rather a male Mary Sue; he's just too perfect to be credible, and he almost comes off as a joke. 

5. An excellent self-published series of historical mysteries comes from M. Louisa Locke, who is a historican and sets her books in turn-of-the-century San Francisco. Each one focuses on a real scandal/social problem/political issue of the time and shows careful research. I know that many self-published books are sub-par, but these are not. In fact, they are far better than many books published by the big names of publishing. 

 6. Alan Bradley's Flavia DeLuce series. This is set beginning in 1950 in a fictional village in England. They are funny and tightly-plotted. Plus, they appeal to many ages, as Flavia is a pre-teen genius who has no trouble concocting a poison or looking at a corpse, yet who still believes in Father Christmas. 

7. The Veronica Speedwell mysteries by DeAnna Raybourn. These are very much action-aventure stories as well and aren't quite meant to be realistic, but the plots are great and the characterization is superb -- no Mary Sues or cardboard characters here! 

8. The Art Oveson series by Andrew Hunt. There are, sadly, only three of these. Oveson is a cop in Salt Lake City during the depression, and these feel very real. Occasionally, Hunt makes a historical blunder (he has Oveson's pregnant wife teaching school in one book, and I know that female teachers were fired if they were married -- so that a man could have their job -- in SLC at the time, and he also can't remember what subject the wife teaches from book to book), but overall, they're gritty and gripping. I do wish there were more of them.

 9. The Three Investigators series. These are MG novels, but they are far superior to Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew. Set in the early 1960s in a fictional suburb of Los Angeles, these tales are great for young readers and still good for adults who don't mind MG. Jupiter Jones is a realistic character: fat, very smart, from a non-traditional family (raised by his aunt and uncle), and determined. The main problem with these is that they are out-of-print and can be hard to find. It took me several months to track down copies of all the volumees when I decided to buy the whole series. 

 10. The Charles Lennox series by Charles Finch. The plots of these are good, but Finch is a bit sexist and into benevolent patriarchy, sooooo.... they're not my favorites. They are set in the mid-Victorian era, mostly in London. 

11. Also good but not fabulous for the same patriarchal reasons are the Tony Hillerman books about various cops on the Navajo Reservation in Utah/Arizona. Set in the 1990s, these are a wonderful introduction to Navajo culture and life. 

Cozy: 

 1. Paige Shelton's cozies. They're light, they're fluffy, but they're good. Some cozies --- and I read a LOT of cozies -- are just so very....nothing. But Shelton's feature excellent characterization and good plotting. I like her Dangerous Type series the best, but her Farmers' Market and Southern Cooking Class mysteries are good, too. And she's just started a new series, set in Alaska, that is less cozy and more true crime. 

 2. Also straddling the border of cozy and crime is The Bishop's Wife series by Mette Ivie Harrison. Harrison tackles BIG issues of Mormonism from an insider's POV: polygamy, homosexuality, women's equality, transpeople, etc. while penning tight mysteries. These are good. Really good. 

 Crime: 

1. Ian Rankin is hands-down my favorite crime writer. Technically, his genre is Tartan Noir, but the reader need not have been to Scotland to understand the books. I own an entire shelf of his books: all but the last two of the Rebus series and several of the others as well. There's a reason why Rankin is so well-liked in the City of Literature; he's just that good. 

There you go. These are my favorites. If you're in the market for a good mystery, you might give one of these series or authors a try.

Whitewashing The Past: The Renaming Of Negro Bill Canyon

Near Moab, Utah, there is a popular hiking canyon currently named Negro Bill Canyon.  The name used to be one that is now extremely offensive (it also start with "N."  I think you can figure it out.), but it was changed to "Negro" back when "negro" was a polite and correct term for a person of African-American heritage.  Clearly, there are several problems with the name "Negro Bill Canyon."  One is that no one uses the term "negro" much now, and it sounds borderline offensive.  Also, the man in question was most certainly never called "Negro Bill" by anyone while he was alive, so it's sort of silly to name the canyon that.
The media is covering both of those reasons when they discuss the possibility of renaming the canyon yet again.
From the Salt Lake Tribune today we have this:

Amid Confederate flag scrutiny, Utah reconsiders controversial canyon name

By LINDSAY WHITEHURST The Associated Press

The renewed national scrutiny of the Confederate flag has officials again considering changing the name of Utah's Negro Bill Canyon, a title that is offensive to some but a point of historical pride for the state's largest NAACP chapter.

Grand County Councilwoman Mary McGann said the name of the picturesque canyon in southern Utah is outdated at best.

"We should evolve," she said Wednesday.

She is planning to ask the council to recommend a name change to the U.S. Board of Geographic Names as soon as Aug. 4.

The Moab canyon is named for William Granstaff, a black cowboy who ran cattle there in the 1870s. Landmarks named for white historical figures are not generally prefaced by race, McGann said, and the canyon should bear his last name instead.

*******

Naturally, there are some opposing views.  Jeanetta Williams of the NAACP of Salt Lake City does not like the idea of losing the part of the name which identifies William Granstaff (or possibly Grandstaff, as some claim the name was spelled that way) as Black.
Granted, this is also a good point in the argument about whether or not to change the name to Granstaff or Grandstaff Canyon.

Now, my point in this post is not whether or not the name should be changed.  My point is that everyone in the media is whitewashing William -- not by shedding a racial identifier, but by ignoring history.

Let me clarify something here: the Shafer family was among the first settlers of Moab, Utah.  And my grandfather, John Lloyd "Sog" Shafer, is quite famous there, having The Shafer Trail, Shafer Canyon, Shafer Basin, and Shafer Trail Overlook named after him.  (The Shafer Trail is one of the most famous Jeep/mountain biking trails in the US, possibly in the world.  People come from all over the place to try the thing.  My mother says they'll never know how scary it can really be, though, as they'll never have the chance to ride down it with my grandfather driving his pick up truck, pointing out cattle grazing grounds along the way and paying zero attention to the hairpin curves.)  My father is his longest-surviving child.  Dad's memory is good and sharp, and he remembers the local Moab history of Bill.
According to Dad, Bill was not, as the Tribune puts it, someone who "ran cattle."  Bill was a cattle rustler and a bootlegger who hid up the canyon to stay away from authorities.  Another man also had his stolen cattle up the canyon as well, but the other guy ran from the authorities first, leaving Bill as the main person living up the canyon.
Bill Gran(d)staff was Moab's own local outlaw, and all the locals knew he lived up that canyon, so eventually it came to be called by the name they had for the owner, "N--- Bill."  At the time, the name was sort of a mildly affectionate tribute to their own outlaw.  (Please note: it's extremely unlikely that Bill called himself by that racial epithet, but it is how he was referred to by locals from Moab at the time.  I'm not condoning that name; I'm merely explaining.)
So, to me, the problem with what's in the news is not that people are trying to whitewash William Gran(d)staff's skin color; the problem is that people are whitewashing the past.  The canyon was named for an outlaw.  That shouldn't be left out when people talk about Bill.  (He was apparently quite successful at what he did, also, but he eventually ran when authorities caught up with him.)  He was what he was: African-American, clever, successful, and an outlaw, a bit like Robert Leroy Parker.  (Parker is better known as Butch Cassidy, and nobody ever whitewashes his history.)
Personally, I think the canyon might be renamed Outlaw Canyon to reflect both men who were there, as well as avoid racial problems.  (However, I do think changing "Negro" to "Black" and thus having "Black Bill Canyon" has a certain piratical ring to it.  :) )
But whatever is done about the name of the canyon, the media needs to be truthful about the past.  Stop pretending Bill was something other than what he was.  It is not racist to admit he was a colorful character for more reasons than his skin tone.

On The Naming Of Fictional High Schools....

The name of your junior high is okay, they said.  But your high schools' names are boring.
Really, they said.  Central High and North High?  Come on.  How lame.

But I named it North High because Salt Lake City has East High and West High and once had a South High, but there never was a North High, I said.  That way I'm sure it's not a real school.

It's still boring, they said.  Name a high school after some famous Utahn.
\________________________________

Fine.  So, the most famous Utahn of all time is Brigham Young.  But nobody in their right mind would name a public high school after such a religious (and rather controversial) figure.
Then there's Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television.  But there are already elementary schools named after him.
Really, I wanted an original name, a name that hasn't really ever been used.
And finally I hit upon the perfect one!  Thus, the school where Pepper's father teaches in Becoming Brigid is Robert L. Parker High School, named in honor of Robert Leroy Parker, who is arguably the most famous Utahn ever -- after Brigham Young.

What do you mean you've never heard of him?  I bet you have.
And I can guarantee there are no real schools named after him in the state.

There.  I hope they're happy now.
*smirks*

Freak Shows

A few days ago this news article on yahoo caught my eye.  It contains photos and bits of an article on a county fair held in 1938.  Several things caught my eye: the fashions, the style of commercial art used in the advertising, the idea that safety was mostly the patrons' concern rather than the hosts'.
But one thing that really stood out was how people with inborn differences -- sometimes right out birth defects -- were used for entertainment.  One photo has a Little Person shown as a hawker for a booth boldly advertising the showing of a nude hermaphrodite.  Another has a man who seem to have some arm deformity and a lot of body hair posing as if he were an animal while spectators gawk at him.  Yet another shows a man whose internal organs seem to be malformed showing off his unusual physique for those willing to pay.
My first thought was, "Well, I guess those were some of the best jobs these people could get in a society that discriminated so openly."
My second thought was, "Wow.  It's a good thing that times have changed and we no longer feel it's socially acceptable to use folks with birth defects or similar misfortunes as mere forms of entertainment, to be gawked and and whispered about."
Then today I saw this yahoo news article, and I realized that not much has changed at all.  We're still using folks with birth defects as forms of entertainment -- possibly because these still might be the best jobs open to certain folks who don't fit society's requirements for "normal."  Sad.

And then I heard about this, and I realized society has truly sunk even lower than what I was bewailing in the 1938 situations.