A question about revealing the antagonist for a mystery

Hey guys, Im in the process of writing a mystery/psychological thriller novella and I read one this one website it says to both introduce the culprit in the beginning and at the end of the novel. I'm confused, do I reveal him/or her at the beginning or at the end of the novel?. If anyone could clarify this I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks and have a great day!

 

Based on mysteries that I have read (more traditional whodunits, mostly), you need to introduce your antagonist in the beginning along with the other supporting characters, but you don't tell the reader who the antagonist is until the end. The reader will be continually wondering which of the characters to which they have been introduced so far is really the killer.

 

Yes, this. In fact many whodunnits introduce the hidden antagonist as one of the 'good guys.' Somebody the detective knows.

 

And in some of the more diabolical ones, the main character is actually the bad guy.

 

One thing I talked about with a writing teacher once is that it is entirely possible that your reader might forget throwaway lines at the beginning of your novel, and you can use that to weave in things that are obvious later but difficult to pick up on for a first-time reader.

For instance, in my novel, the protagonist is a teenage girl whose father, unbeknownst to the girl (and the reader), is a serial killer. The father and daughter share the same last name. The father's full name, first and last, is used just once: in the very first sentence of the book! But the girl's last name isn't revealed for at least 100 pages. By that time, most everyone has let the father's name slip out of their minds, because it's never mentioned again and seems unimportant. And so the mystery to the reader is preserved.

I'm not saying you have to do this, I'm just saying that if you give away key information in subtle ways, it might not be immediately picked up on. This might be what the website was alluding to. I suppose it's something to consider!

dbesim, in their post just above mine, seems to have some really good advice too!

Best of luck!

 

Oh yes. The unreliable narrator! I read one of those a while back, and it has certainly stuck with me. Eeeekks.

 

Or if you're Columbo, reveal the antagonist and the solution to the mystery at the start.

 

There can be a problem with that approach, however, if the writer isn't careful. The reader is going to need to remember the father's last name for the shock to register later on. Otherwise the girl will reveal her name, and the connection won't register!

It's not enough to just 'mention' something that seems trivial early on. It's actually got to stick with the reader. So make sure you introduce the father's last name in a way that seems significant at the time ...for the wrong reasons, of course.

 

This is the same construction as a joke where you say "Did you ever hear the one about Johnnie's mom?"

At this point you pull out some change, or better yet ask them if they have a penny, a nickel, a dime, maybe a quarter, whatever (hope I can remember this, it's been a LOoONG time!) This is a pause to help them forget the intro. Make a big production out of it, because at all costs you want them to forget that first line, which sounds like the standard joke intro anyway, like "A guy walks into a bar..."

You then push around the coins as you name the various brothers and sisters, one is Nick (point at the nickel) one is Penny etc. Maybe a sister's name is Diamond or something. You just make it kind of confusing, the actual joke can be different every time, but it ends with the question "So who was her first son?" and point at one of the coins (not sure I have this quite right) and they'll cleverly say "Nick!" or whatever.

Then you remind them that the joke was about Johnnie's mom... Groans go up all around.

 

As I was going to St. Ives,
I met a man with seven wives.
Each wife had seven sons.
Each wife had seven sacks.
Each sack had seven cats,
Each cat had seven kittens.
Kittens, cats, sacks, and wives,
How many were there going to St. Ives?

 

I know this one. Everybody forgets to add the I from the 1st sentence. Not going to do the math though...

 

That's the wrong answer.

 

Couple things.

The point wasn't for them to remember. The girl realizes it's her father at the very end, and the reader (theoretically) realizes at the same time. The reader is supposed to forget... it's just a tantalizing secret.

Now I'm stuck trying to justify it to myself. I suppose it's just fun--for rereaders, for people who flip back and forth with surprise, to have this secret at the beginning. To me it feels like a hidden treasure. But now I'm second-guessing it. Hmm.

Now you're making me rethink the entire opening!

I guess theoretically the point was more like Xoic's joke.

Also:

Is the answer that only the man was going to St. Ives? It doesn't actually say that his wives or their possessions were going along, just that the man had them. So only the man and the narrator were actually going?

The other one I've heard is the Bus Driver riddle. "You're driving a bus. At the first stop, six people get on. At the second stop, two get off and four get on. At the third stop... [and on and on and on] What's the bus driver's name?"

And then the ones that are deliberately confusing. ("What does S-H-O-P spell? What does P-R-O-P spell? What does C-R-O-P spell? What does D-R-O-P spell? What do you do at a green light?" or some other iteration)

Getting off-topic here, so I'll shut up now... but is that the right St. Ives answer?

 

The only one you know for a fact is going to St. Ives is the narrator.

 

Yes - the clue is "As I was going" - implying the speaker meets the others coming the other way. But most people will forget that trying to keep up with the maths.