#outsider detective

[malcolmschmitz]

#i wonder what your take on Jack Reacher is = @dorotheian

Great question! I normally wouldn't answer it, because I only know Reacher through osmosis- you'll notice, Columbo shows up nowhere in this post? - but I want to use it to touch on something I didn't mention. The Insider/Outsider Detective Framework really only applies to detectives who are working in the mystery genre.

You can have stories with a mystery or a crime in them- stories that even have a detective!- that aren't mysteries. A clear-cut example is Practical Magic- there's a detective character who's trying to solve a crime that the protagonist committed. But he's not the protagonist; he's, ultimately, the love interest. The story's main question isn't "who dunnit" or "how catchem", it's "can Sally defend her sister" and "will they or won't they".

Thrillers can be mysteries, but they don't have to be (and often aren't). I should probably mention that I don't like crime thrillers all that much; I like my mysteries cozy, my detectives under the age of 18 or over the age of 50, and my victims as Pillars Of The Community (who everyone loathes). So if I say anything too bone-thuddingly ignorant about thrillers, forgive me; I mostly know their tropes as examples of what not to do while writing mystery.

The boundary between crime thriller and mystery is... permeable, to say the least, but the key difference is that thrillers are about suspense, whereas mysteries are about solutions. The point of a thriller is to put Blorbo in a tense, suspenseful situation and push him to his limits; the point of a mystery is to give Blorbo a complicated, messy situation and watch him untangle it. This means that you can get away with some things in a thriller that you could never get away with in a proper mystery, and vice versa.

For example, in a mystery, it's good form to signpost all the characters that are going to be relevant fairly early in the story-- you don't have to show every character in the first act, but if you're going to bring someone new in in Act 3, you should have at least let us know they exist before then. In a thriller? Heck, you can add a whole new villain in the penultimate chapter, if it'd raise the stakes in an interesting way.

On the flip side, in a mystery, you can have an entire chapter near the end of the book where the detective sits in a diner and eats pie while Stumped. In a thriller? Good lord, no, that kills the pacing dead.

So like... Jack Reacher, like a lot of thriller protagonists, exists in a quantum state of superposition between Insider Detective and Outsider Detective. because he is whichever ratchets up the suspense at any given time. Is it tenser and more thrilling for no one to believe the weird drifter and have him get thrown into jail for a crime he didn't commit? Then Jack's an Outsider Detective.

Is it tenser and more thrilling for one of Jack's old military buddies to give him a problem to solve? Then Jack's an Insider Detective. Is it tenser and more thrilling for Jack to unroot a conspiracy in the military? Outsider Detective.

A lot of cowboy action hero types are like this across genres. (You see it a lot in superhero comics and stories based off them. Is Batman an Insider or an Outsider Detective? Depends on who's writing him this week and what the story demands.) I don't like protagonists who are written this way, because I prefer it when the protagonist's place in the world is a little more consistent- but that'd be my answer wrt Reacher. Is he an Insider or an Outsider detective? What is the sound of one hand clapping?

The Insider and Outsider Detectives

So there's a lot of discourse about detectives floating around, ever since 2020 shifted a lot of people's Views on the police. Everyone likes a good mystery story, but no one seems to know what to make of a detective protagonist- especially if they're a cop. And everyone who cares about this kind of thing likes to argue over whether detective stories hold up the existing order or subvert it. Are they inherently copaganda? Are they subversive commentary on the uselessness of the police?

I think they can be both. And I think there's a framework we can use to look at individual detectives, and their stories, that illuminates the space between "a show like LAPD straight-up exists to make the cops look good" and "Boy Detective is a gender to me, actually".

So. You can sort most detectives in fiction into two boxes, based on their role in society: the Insider Detective and the Outsider Detective.

The Insider Detective is a part of the society they're investigating in, and has access to at least some of the levers of power in that society. They can throw money at their problems, or call in reinforcements, and if they contact the authorities, those authorities will take them seriously. Even the people they're investigating usually treat them with respect. They're a nice normal person in a nice normal world, thank you very much; they're not particularly eccentric. You could describe them as "sensible". And crime is a threat to that normal world. It's an intrusion that they have to fight off. An Insider Detective solving a crime is restoring the way things ought to be.

Some clear-cut examples of Insider Detectives are the Hardy Boys (and their father Fenton), Soichiro "Light's Dad" Yagami, or Father Brown. Many police procedural detectives are Insider Detectives, though not all.

The Outsider Detective, in contrast, is not a part of the society they're investigating in. They're often a marginalized person- they're neurodivergent, or elderly, or foreign, or a woman in a historical setting, or a child. They don't have access to any of the levers of power in their world- the authorities may not believe them (and might harass them), the people they're investigating think they're a joke (and can often wave them off), and they're unlikely to have access to things like "a forensics lab". The Outsider Detective is not respectable, and not welcome here- and yet they persist and solve the crime anyway. A lot of the time, when an Outsider Detective solves a crime, it's less "restoring the world to its rightful state" and more "exposing the rot in the normal world, and forcing it to change."

Some clear-cut examples of Outsider Detectives are Dirk Gently, Philip Marlowe, Sammy Keyes, or Mello from Death Note.

Now, here's the catch: these aren't immutable categories, and they are almost never clear-cut. The same detective can be an Insider Detective in one setting and an Outsider Detective in another. A good writer will know this, and will balance the two to say something about power and society.

Tumblr's second-favourite detective Benoit Blanc is a great example of this. Theoretically, Mr. Blanc should be an Insider Detective- he's a world-famous detective, he collaborates with the police, he's odd but respectable. But because of the circumstances he's in- investigating the ultra-rich, who live in their own horrid little bubbles- he comes off as the Outsider Detective, exposing the rot and helping everyone get what they deserve. And that's deliberate. There is no world where a nice, slightly eccentric, mildly fruity, fairly privileged guy like Benoit Blanc should be an outsider. But the turbo-rich live in such an insular world, full of so much contempt for anyone who isn't Them, that even Benoit Blanc gets left out in the cold. It's a scathing political statement, if you think about it.

But even a writer who isn't trying to Say Something About The World will still often veer between making their detective an Insider Detective and an Outsider Detective, because you can tell different kinds of stories within those frameworks. Jessica Fletcher from Murder She Wrote is a really good example of this-- she's a respectable older lady, whose runaway success as a mystery novelist gives her access to some social cachet. Key word: some.

Within her hometown of Cabot Cove, Fletcher is an Insider Detective. She's good friends with the local sheriff, she's incredibly familiar with the town's social dynamics, she can call in a favour from basically anyone... but she's still a little old lady. The second she leaves town, she might run into someone who likes her books... but she's just as likely to run into a police officer who thinks she's crazy or a perp who thinks she's an easy target. She has the incredibly tenuous social power that belongs to a little old lady that everyone likes- and when that's gone, she's incredibly vulnerable.

This is also why a lot of Sherlock Holmes adaptations tend to be so... divisive. Holmes is all things to all people, and depending on which stories you choose to focus on, you can get a very different detective. If you focus on the stories where Holmes collaborates with the police, on the stories with that very special kind of Victorian racism, or the stories where Holmes is fighting Moriarty, you've got an Insider Detective. If you focus on the stories where Holmes is consulting for a Nice Young Lady, on the stories where Holmes' neurodivergence is most prominent, or on his addictions, you've got an Outsider Detective.

Finally, a lot of buddy detective stories have an Insider Detective and an Outsider Detective sharing the spotlight. Think Scully and Mulder, or Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde. This lets the writer play with both pieces of the thematic puzzle at the same time, without sacrificing the consistency of their detective's character.

Back to my original point: if you like detective fiction, you probably like one kind of story better than the other. I know I personally really prefer Outsider Detective Stories to Insider Detective Stories- and while I can enjoy a good Insider Detective (I'd argue that Brother Cadfael, my beloved, is one most of the time), I seek out detectives who don't quite fit into the world they live in more often than not.

And if that's the vibe you're looking for... you're not going to run into a lot of police stories. It's absolutely possible to make a story where a cop (or, even better, an FBI agent) is an Outsider Detective-- Nick Angel from Hot Fuzz was originally going to be one of my 'clear-cut examples' until I remembered that he is, in fact, legally a cop! But a cop who's an Outsider Detective is going to be spending a lot of time butting heads with local law enforcement, to the point where he doesn't particularly feel like one. He's probably going to get fired at some point, and even if his badge gets reinstated, he's going to struggle with his place in the world. And a lot of Outsider Detective stories where the detective is a cop or an FBI agent are intensely political, and not in a conservative way- they have Things To Say about small towns, clannishness, and the injustice that can happen when a Pillar Of The Community does something wrong and everyone looks the other way. (Think Twin Peaks or The Wicker Man.)

Does this mean Insider Detective Stories are Bad Copaganda and Outsider Detective Stories are Good Revolutionary Stories? No. If you take one thing away from this post, please make it that these categories are morally neutral. There are Outsider Detective stories about cops who are Outsiders because they really, really want an excuse to shoot people. There are Insider Detective stories about little old people who are trying to keep misapplied justice from hurting the kids in their community. Neither of these types of stories are good or bad on their own. They're different kinds of storytelling framework and they serve different purposes.

But, if you find yourself really gravitating to certain kinds of mysteries and really put off by other kinds, and you're trying to express why, this might be a framework that's useful for you. If your gender is Boy Detective, but you absolutely loathe cop stories? This might be why.

(PS: @anim-ttrpgs was posting about their game Eureka again, and that got me to make this post- thank them if you're happy to finally see it. Eureka is designed as an Outsider Detective simulator, and so the rules actively forbid you from playing as a cop- they're trying to make it so that you have limited resources and have to rely on your own competence. It's a fantastic looking game and I can't recommend it enough.)

(PPS: I'm probably going to come back to this once I finish Psycho-Pass with my partner, because they said I'd probably have Thoughts.)

(PPPS: Encyclopedia Brown is an Insider Detective, and that's why no one likes him. This is my most controversial detective take.)

[fantasticgothicpeachsludge]

Bernard: i lied. i don’t like sex. put your clothes back on babe and watch my power point presentation about What The Fuck Is Going On Between Batman And Twoface

Tim: …

[thehammyyammy]

[dotswithbrainrot]

They are the light-

In eachothers darkest moments.

[danandfuckingjonlmao]

cute first date idea: you escape hell and bring me a lantern and i ask you questions about being a ghost and then you read to me as i slowly die of hypothermia and internal bleeding i sustained from getting hatecrimed 💕

[timethehobo]

Another what-if pair up. They’d look so cute enjoying tea together. And have intellectual conversations probably.

[livinginadumpster]

The way Dead Boy Detectives handles queerness and labeling of sexuality is honestly so refreshing. The way it's handled makes is very obvious that it's not the kind of media in which characters are assumed straight until proven otherwise; the characters' sexualities are left undefined because the focus isn't on specific labels, it's on the relationships between characters.

As the show goes on, it becomes abundantly clear that the characters' sexualities are a non-factor. Sure, Jenny dates women, but a label is never put on that. Same with Edwin - he is clearly interested in men, but not once in the show is he labeled as gay. It's not necessary in either case; labeling these characters wouldn't add anything to their stories or character arcs. The show is completely relaxed about labels because they're almost never a part of or even relevant to the plot.

And so, in a show that is so utterly unconcerned with labels, it would also be exceeding strange to impose the label of "straight" on any character. Characters like Charles and Crystal, who clearly demonstrate attraction to the opposite gender, don't come across as strictly heterosexual, they come across as people experiencing human emotions. And a character like Niko, who never expresses romantic attraction to anyone, really can't be assumed heterosexual either, because it simply wouldn't be in line with what we know about her.

Heterosexuality never comes across as the default in this universe. It never seemed as if the writers automatically assumed any character, no matter how background, to be straight. Queerness is explored not as a defiance of the norm but as just another way of loving someone. In a world where being queer is always viewed as alternate or deviant, and where coming out is a lifelong process that begins again every time you meet someone new because you're always assumed cishet, this kind of complete abolishment of heteronormativity is a breath of fresh air. Seeing queerness handled in such a casual way onscreen honestly feels a little bit revolutionary.

[read-write-thrive]

One of Charles’s mates had an older brother who was vvv into the ska punk scene and Charles can’t stop thinking about him it !! he ends up hanging out at this mate’s house more (better than at home for sure) and he about loses his cool when said older brother offers him some of his old tapes (one of his mates makes exactly one joke about mixtapes before Charles stops listening to the tapes around other people) the style is harder to incorporate with school uniforms and strict oversight at home, but with the end of cricket season in autumn and the beginning of wearing hoods and hats to “keep warm” he just about manages the slightly different hair and the earring — the eyeliner gets saved for special occasions when there’s no chance for getting caught (by his father, teachers, or some of his less cool friends)

it takes Crystal asking him about how he even got into the genre/culture (especially when it was on the decline by 1989) for him to realise it was a crush on the older brother that started it all

[emryses]

watching the dead boys (yk, as one does) and i'm at ep 4 where monty is returning edwin's book to him (valley of the dolls) which he explicitly!! refers to as edwin's copy. but we obviously have not seen edwin carrying this book on him, which can only mean one of two things. 1) edwin had to ask charles to get the book out of the bag of tricks or 2) edwin had to ask charles to go to the office to find the book for him, all just so monty could borrow it. both are frankly hilarious to me when thinking of charles' general distaste for all things monty. boy was probably grinding his teeth together like "yeah mate :) anything for you :)" <- actively withering inside.

[ao3-anonymous]

Fastest Growing Fandoms on AO3 This Week (07/29/2024)

Every week I pull data on how many fics are in each fandom and compare to the previous week, then calculate the percentage increase to determine fastest growing fandoms.  Since this naturally skews towards smaller fandoms, I have included the same data filtered to Over 1k, 5k, & 10k fics.

Overall:

Over 1,000 Fics:

Over 5,000 Fics:

Over 10,000 Fics:

Source: AO3 Fandom Dashboard

[sonseulsoleil]

my hot take about Charles' sexuality is that he is somewhere on the aromantic spectrum--perhaps demiromantic--but allosexual (bisexual) and so he doesn't realize it.

he recognizes his (sexual) attraction to girls/women and reads it romantically, because well. he's from the 80s. he doesn't have the split attraction model. he thinks Crystal is "fit" so he must want to date her--and eventually his feelings for her do become more than just thinking she's hot.

but on the flipside, it's much easier for him to write off his attraction to men because sure, he'll recognize when a guy is attractive, but that doesn't mean he wants to date the guy. there's no romantic interest there. it's an objective thing. objectively, Edwin has a nice sharp jawline, and pretty green eyes.

and sure, he loves Edwin more than he's ever loved anyone, but that's platonic. right? and sure, he's not sure he's ever been in love, or what that even means, but he knows he's liked girls. and he's never really examined that, never had a reason to.

until Edwin confesses. until he realizes just how blurred the lines between platonic and romantic really are.

[pixelatedraindrops]

Something different and self indulgent??

Happy Eevee Day~ 11/20 🤎🩶

I do get a kick out of naming my eevee after cute & short kodaka game protag characters ✨

[jinchaeji]

I don't think people realize how much learning Edwin had to do after escaping Hell

the whole ass 2nd World War and Vietnam War

lots of fucking countries gained independence or lost it during that time

UK decolonialisation (I know this is basically the same as the last one but I need to make it very clear. Colonies were a thing during his alive-time. Britain had lots of colonies)

He got out in the middle of the fucking COLD WAR

every discovery made during that time (including a motherfucking nuclear weapon)

Stonewall riots!!!

The classic Doctor Who was released

Hobbit and Lord Of The Rings were published

(if I forgot something please let me know)

Like, this diva escaped from Hell and probably got his whole knowledge debunked and he had to relearn everything

And then the disintergration USSR and he has another 15 countries to learn

[panaceatthedisco]

Five minutes into watching dead boy detectives with my mom and she asked if Charles and Edwin are dating

[hayaku14]

kaito buying every ticket to every soccer game available just to see that excited look on shinichi's face

[protecticarus]

you wouldn’t last an hour in the asylum where they raised me