A little while back, I got an interesting question from Patti. Rather than rephrase it, I’m going to just quote some of Patti’s letter:

What types of cozies do you and your cozy-mystery loving friends like the best: Thought provoking? Darker? Lighter? Silly? Nothing but humor? A mixture of humor, seriousness, dark and character warmth?

I like a mixture of everything but find that lately I’m turned off by cozies that are way, way, way too silly or ones where the protagonist is too stupid to live. I can take a little bit of the too stupid to live thing, but sometimes it’s way out of control. Silliness with little to no depth of character bugs me! I kind of wish we had more gothic-like (Victoria Holt-ish!) cozies that give the reader a feel for time and place and characterization, but still move at a great pace.

For my own response, I’ll say that I do appreciate both comedic and dramatic elements as long as they are done well. I try to see the best in all the books I read, and there are plenty of great Cozies that lean strongly toward one end of the spectrum or the other! That said, all of the authors that I consider my particular favorites tend to mix lighter and more serious elements in various amounts >>> after all, it is hard to portray something as serious as murder in a purely comedic light, but it is also hard to hold a reader’s attention for a long period of time without a bit of a lighter element to relax the mood a bit as well.

So I guess I would have to say that I prefer a balance. A good example of this would be Agatha Christie‘s Poirot mysteries. While Christie deals with the actual crime in a very serious manner, there are always interesting, comedic elements that are thrown into her novels.  At the same time, I love Anne George‘s Southern Sisters series, and those are pretty funny all the way through.

So,

What types of cozies do you… like the best: Thought provoking? Darker? Lighter? Silly? Nothing but humor? A mixture of humor, seriousness, dark and character warmth?

Please post a comment below. Thank you!

A while ago, the following question was asked by Margaret StashEmpress as part of a longer comment:

Am I the only one that’s getting a bit tired of seeing so many new series (instead of continuations of favorite old series?) I think at this point a new series has to have a REALLY unique “hook” that grabs me before I’m interested enough to try it (the upcoming Kensington Palace Chef series is one whose premise “grabs” me).

-Margaret StashEmpress

It feels like this has been a more regular occurrence lately than it was in years gone by, so I’ve had some time to think about it more frequently, and thought I’d ask what everyone thinks.

Sometimes there just isn’t any alternative to starting a new series, and that’s understandable. For example, when an author is discontinued by their publisher, they don’t generally have the option to continue writing the same series under a different publisher or as a self-published author as the publisher has significant rights to the series. So they don’t get a choice on whether they want to start over again as it were – if they want to continue writing, they need to come up with a new series.

However, there are other times when it seems like an author just wants to start something new. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing – if classic authors just stuck with the one series they began with, we wouldn’t have many of the classic sleuths they came up with in their later writings! There’s also the issue that some series just get old with time – that sometimes there are only so many stories that can be told about a given cast before books begin to feel very “same-ey”. The unfortunate side effect is that series that we already love can feel side-tracked, ignored in favor of the new favorites.

So, what do you prefer? New series and fresh starts? Or the continuation of tried and true favorites?