What kind of reader are you?

I am finding out a lot about myself as a reader since I began to keep a journal of everything I read. I started this after Zoe Sharp's husband, Andy, asked me how many books I read in a year. A lot was my first answer. Then I narrowed it to probably 150. I was pretty close, although I'm about 15 off the pace so far to reach 150 by December 31. It has, however, identified one reader habit I was not completely aware of. I read large blocks of the same author. In other words I tend to read in clumps. So far this year, I've had a Patricia Highsmith clump, a Ruth Rendell clump, and a Marcia Talley clump. Last year it was Donna Andrews and Kent Krueger. If I discover an author I haven't read before, I read everything I can about them and by them.

David, on the other hand, actively dislikes clump reading. He thinks it magnifies any verbal tics and strategies the author may have. This ruins the books for him. So he tends to read in a very one from column A, two from B, etc. kind of way.

Series books for me become a nice long 19th century novel if read one after the other. I became absolutely enamored with Inspector Wexford while reading the Ruth Rendell books. I'm completely fine with the fact that time is a bit fiddly in the books, and that Wexford should have retired a long time ago. Beginning in the sixties and working into the next century, Wexford remains a constant in the police force. The books are not about the crimes. I forget sometimes which crimes go with which book. The books are about this policeman and his family and his job. And I care about his eating right to maintain his weight.

The books have moved from relatively standard mysteries with twists to twisty mysteries involving some kind of social issue. Simisola asks Wexford and the reader to examine their attitudes toward race. Wexford comes out of this poorly after misidentifying a murder victim who happens to be African. He knows he wouldn't have made the assumptions he did if the victim had been white. It makes a nice change to have the detective examining himself over social attitudes instead of personal relationships. And adds some real depth.

Creating a hero with depth is unusual, but not difficult. The reader is absolutely expected to like the hero. Rendell has set herself a challenge with the character of Mike Burden. He's Wexford's second in command and in most attitudes, his opposite. But he is so fully realized that you like him, too, even when you disagree with him. He does not ever examine himself because he is always sure he is right.

My reading, then, is usually done in clumps and almost always involves character-driven books. I don't care about plots because I generally figure them out. I figured out From Doon with Death the first Inspector Wexford book. If you haven't read that one, I'll just say it proves I never take anything at face value. And that's the only way to consistently figure out mystery books.

And as a postscript because I'm so excited and can't wait, Peter Robinson's new book, Bad Boy is out today. I put a note about it on my bulletin board so I don't forget. Woo Hoo.