Stieg Larsson's Salander Merits Good Character Reference

Like anyone else reading this blog, I've read some mysteries more than once. But if the point of a mystery is for the reader to solve it before the author gives the solution away, why read a mystery more than once?

We all know a great mystery needs excitement--conflict and strife, much at stake, and all taking place in a vividly protrayed location at breakneck speed. But that's not enough, or not enough to make a good mystery great.

Elizabeth George, the creator of arisotocratic Detective Inspector Thomas Lynley and New Scotland Yard's answer to Georgy Girl, Barbara Havers, says in Writing Away, "[I]f you don't understand that story is character and not just idea, you will not be able to breathe life into even the most intriguing flash of inspriration."

Let's face it--unlike a literary work, a mystery has neither the time nor excuse for intriguing phrases or arresting imagery (puns intended). Too much of these will distract the reader and slow the pace down. Devices like riveting plot and unusual setting are therefore all the more important. But without well-developed characters, you may as well read about a murder in the newspaper and save yourself the cost of a book.

Not any old character will do. For me, a good character has to do with recognition--I come upon someone in a story whom, because of his annoying humming at the end of each sentence or her rapacious finger licking while she eats, I'm certain I've met before. Or maybe a character says something that I've always felt inutuitively but have never quite put into words. These tidbits of character bring satisfaction and even comfort because they close a loop, or at least allow for circling back, on my own life story.

That satisfaction and comfort could get boring, unless the character does something totally unexpected, yet somehow still within character. For example, think of Harriet Vane, Lord Peter Wimsey's love interest. Wimsey has both wealth and position, and has saved Harriet's life in Dorothy L. Sayers' Strong Poison. Despite all this, and the fact that Harriet loves him, she rejects his proposals of marriage. Her actions are perfectly in keeping with her character, but surprising just the same.

Here's another example. Didn't you cheer every time Lisbeth Salander appeared on the page in Stieg Larrson's best-selling trilogy? While we may not all know a ninety-pound genius-waif whose body is covered in tattoos, we probably know someone brilliant and joltingly anti-social, like Salander. But even more than recognizing her peculiar traits, we're surprised, if not staggered, by her act of revenge against Bjurman, her guardian slash rapist (pun intended). And it wasn't the mere violence of the revenge that gripped us, but the uncompromising justice Salander dares to mete out, all perfectly consistent with her morality.

If my formula for a good character in a mystery is recognizable traits, coupled with surprising actions, I'm interested in others' comments on what makes for a good character in a mystery.