Possibly the worst part of a bad detective story is relying on information not knowable to the reader until the big reveal at the end. I, for one, love stories that are puzzle-boxes that are solvable by the reader (in a way). Remove all familiarity to the story’s setting, as you do in sci-fi, and you now have to thread world-building alongside the mystery while not giving the whole plot away. And therein lies the temptation to toss out the puzzle-box premise and just drag the reader passively along for a ride; it sounds really hard to do. I’d give full credit to Mr. Niven: a 50% success rate sounds impressive, all things considered.
I’m glad to see that my point was so well understood! You and I are on the exact same page. I think Lary Niven did very well all things considered and I hope that the next generation of great writers will do even better.
I see what you mean.
Possibly the worst part of a bad detective story is relying on information not knowable to the reader until the big reveal at the end. I, for one, love stories that are puzzle-boxes that are solvable by the reader (in a way). Remove all familiarity to the story’s setting, as you do in sci-fi, and you now have to thread world-building alongside the mystery while not giving the whole plot away. And therein lies the temptation to toss out the puzzle-box premise and just drag the reader passively along for a ride; it sounds really hard to do. I’d give full credit to Mr. Niven: a 50% success rate sounds impressive, all things considered.
I’m glad to see that my point was so well understood! You and I are on the exact same page. I think Lary Niven did very well all things considered and I hope that the next generation of great writers will do even better.