Where do you go next when your last book had half a dozen victims?

As writers, we always want to improve our craft. We want our next book to be better than the last. We owe it to our readers, and we owe it to ourselves.

But as in so much of life, there can be a perception that better means bigger.
So, to repeat the question, where do you go next, when your last book had half a dozen victims? Do you kill seven this time? Eight?
Clearly that would soon get ridiculous. Lee Child's Jack Reacher series numbers over twenty entries, and whilst Reacher can be a one-man wrecking crew at times, the body count is rarely that high!

Over the course of my DCI Warren Jones series, I have resisted the urge to try and make the next story "bigger". In fact I have deliberately switched between "big" stories and "smaller" stories.
But what does that mean? First of all, it has nothing to do with wordcount. Each of my full-length novels is the same length, plus or minus about 10%.

Rather, I define a story as Big or Small based on the impact that the central murder or murders have on wider society.

Murder invariably has an impact beyond the immediate victim. Like throwing a stone into a pond, the ripples extend to effect the all those around them. Friends, family and loved ones of the deceased are affected, for good or bad. The same can be said for the killer - murder is not an act to be undertaken lightly, and the consequences of a life sentence can also be felt by those associated with them. And, whilst every death is a catastrophe in its own way, some leave a bigger impression on society than others.

Yet a Small story should be no less compelling than a Big story. A meaty thriller with a serial killer who kills multiple victims is by definition a Big Story. That story is composed of many individual tragedies and the ripples can be felt far and wide. A Small story allows for greater study of an individual tragedy. The ripples might not travel as far, but the author can spend more time with those affected. The investigation at the heart of the novel can still be as complex and twisty, but there is no need for a escalating body count to satisfy readers.

I like to write a mix of stories whose impact is either big or small. The first in the Warren Jones series, The Last Straw, concerns the murder of a university professor. And whilst we meet an ever-widening pool of suspects, with multiple motives, the ripples are largely contained within that pool. On the other hand, book 2, No Smoke Without Fire, is about a serial rapist and murderer. There are multiple victims. Each is its own tragedy, and we spend time with their loved ones, but there is understandably a wider effect on the wider community. Who will be next? Should those in the surrounding area be concerned about their own and loved one's safety?

The ripples can be felt in other ways. The central murder in The Common Enemy is that of a far-right extremist. The consequences here would seem to be contained to his loved ones (and whilst he was a deeply unpleasant character, few people travel through life without at least someone who cares for them and will miss them). However, Middlesbury is a powder keg of racial tension at this time, and the death of this one man has the potential to spill over into far greater conflict, so I would class this as a Big story.

The latest two entries in the series, Out of Sight, and this summer's Time To Kill are an example of each type of story. Out of Sight deals with the killing of a lonely man with a secret life. He's ostracised by his family, but as we find out, he still had many who cared for him, however the ripples are largely contained within his circle. Time To Kill has Warren and his team uncover unexpected links between seemingly unrelated deaths. Once it becomes apparent that anyone could be next, the ripples are more akin to those caused by throwing a large rock into a pond, rather than a pebble.

The take home message here, is that a better story doesn't have to be a Bigger story. It isn't necessary to raise the body count or even raise the stakes to keep a series improving. A small intimate study of a single death can be just as good as a wide-ranging investigation into a bloodbath. The next book in a series can still be better than the previous without needing to throw a larger stone into the pond.

What are your thoughts? Do you feel that once an author has "gone large" they need to continue with those Big books whose ripples extend far and wide, or can they dial it back in the next book and focus on a single death that is important to those in the victim's immediate circle but of limited concern to the rest of the society?

As always, feel free to share your thoughts her or on social media.

Until next time,
best wishes,
Paul.

For this week's #TuesdayTip, I am thrilled to invite Jason Monaghan back to share his "Plot Spider" method for writing a second draft. Jason previously shared his "Filleted Fish" method for a first draft, so if you haven't done so already, I recommend having a read of that as well.

Jason is an author and archaeologist, now back working in his native Yorkshire after many travels. His career has taken unexpected twists including becoming a bank director, anti-money laundering specialist, shipwreck archaeologist and museum director. All of which creates plenty of inspiration for his thrillers, of which the latest is Blackshirt Masquerade published by the Historia imprint of Level Best books. He has also written the Jeffrey Flint archaeological thriller series available from Lume Books and is an active member of the Crime Writers Association.

Jason's Tip
My very spare ‘filleted fish’ first draft will be around 40,000 words, and when I’m convinced that I have a whole potential novel I draw what I call my ‘plot spider’. This used to be on paper, but I now employ a wipe board to mark up with characters, organisations and incidents connected with coloured lines. While this information may already be in my head it is a well- known design principle that presenting a plan graphically engages different parts of the mind, feeding creativity.
In the centre will be whatever is at the core of the novel, so in the case of Blackshirt Masquerade it is the British Union of Fascists in a big black circle. I link my hero and the other characters to the central circle and each other. More organisations are added around the edges: MI5, Special Branch, the Communist Party and so on.
Annotations will be added to the links, such as ‘girlfriend’, ‘witness’, or ‘kills’. Major incidents are drawn in red starbursts, linking to affected people. During this process, it becomes clear where gaps in the logic of the plot need to be filled. How did those people meet? Who is this character really working for? How does he unmask the villains? Key clues are also flagged, with links to who discovers them and how. In my Jeffrey Flint books the plots were constructed like an onion, with concealing layers that needed to be stripped away one by one.
After only an hour or two I have a messy piece of modern art and grubby hands. I take a snap on my phone for reference.
I often draw a second diagram as a villains-eye view. It shows the underlying plot, the one the reader doesn’t see and my heroes will only uncover piece by piece. This cross-checks the logic of the bad guys, what they hope to gain and how they respond as the heroes draw closer.
Thrillers generally have several threads to the plot which are gradually twisted together or are revealed to be red herrings. A sub-plot such as a romance or personal crisis of a lead character may need its own resolution. I use the wipe board again to make a plot list, colour coded for each strand, making sure each has its genesis and resolution – or is deliberately left hanging for the sequel. This points up plot lines that are undernourished and where more clues or twists are needed. Each thread is written onto a calendar so they can ultimately converge in a logical manner, and in a historical thriller also march in step with actual events.
Finally I’m ready to write Draft 2, aiming for 70,000 words or so in which the plot, sub-plots, clues and resolution are all there. It’s still not fit to show anyone, but at least I can start talking about ‘my next book’.
(c) Jason Monaghan 2022

You can learn more about Jason by visiting his website and Facebook page or following him on Twitter @Jasonthriller or Instagram @docmonaghan.

What do you think of Jason's "Plot Spider" method, or his "Filleted Fish" method?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.

​Until next time, best wishes,
Paul
Are you a writer with a tip to share? If so, please feel free to contact me here, or via email/social media. 👇

Today's warm-up exercise is another favourite of writing classes; telling the same story from two different perspectives.
As with all of these exercises, you might have an idea for a scene already, but if you are struggling for inspiration, why not use an image as a prompt? Ideally, you want a scene with two different people in it.
This website automatically delivers random images.
https://writingexercises.co.uk/random-image-generator.php
Alternatively, you can just go to Google Images and type "2 people on a park bench".
Look at the two people.

• First of all, ask yourself who they are.
• Do they already know each other - if so, what is their relationship?
• What is the conversation about?
• Perhaps there is no conversation - in which case are they thinking about the other person, or are they both in their own world?

One approach would be to imagine a conversation between them. The dialogue is the same in each version of the scene, but the emotions and feeling may be different. What about their inner monologue?
For example, imagine a man and woman sitting next to each other. Is one attracted to the other? Is the other person flattered by the attention or put off?
The aim of this exercise, in addition to hopefully breaking you out of your writer's block, is to practise  empathising with different characters. To accessing their inner monologue and feelings, and to then try it from a different point of view.
Remember the rules:

• Set yourself a time limit.
• Write without stopping, editing or overthinking.
• Write whatever comes to mind and don't worry if it doesn't make sense.
• It doesn't matter if it has nothing to do with the scene that you are stuck on.

Do you have any ideas for busting writer's block? If so, share them below or on social media.


Until next time, happy writing.
Paul

For this week's #TuesdayTip, I am thrilled to invite Jason Monaghan to share his "Filleted Fish" method for writing a first draft.  Stay tuned for a later tip, when he will be sharing his "Plot Spider" method for writing a second draft.

Jason is an author and archaeologist, now back working in his native Yorkshire after many travels. His career has taken unexpected twists including becoming a bank director, anti-money laundering specialist, shipwreck archaeologist and museum director. All of which creates plenty of inspiration for his thrillers, of which the latest is Blackshirt Masquerade published by the Historia imprint of Level Best books. He has also written the Jeffrey Flint archaeological thriller series available from Lume Books and is an active member of the Crime Writers Association.

Jason's Tip
Writers’ approaches to creating their first draft are classically discussed as ‘pantsers’ who write beginning to end and ‘plotters’ who map it all out before they begin. My approach is something in between, with the first draft resembling one of those filleted fish that a cartoon cat finds in a bin. It has a head, a tail, a backbone and a few ribs.
A plot comes to me as if I’m remembering a movie that I saw many years ago. There’s a shooting, but a man is running towards it; why? Who was the target and why did the shooter miss? It’s something to do with Blackshirt fascists and spies. Ideas start to build as I daydream in the shower or doing the washing up, and pretty soon I begin to write. In parallel I’ll commence background research for the historical period, geographic locations and technical detail. Facts will be dropped in as I find them, correcting the text if necessary.
I write the opening chapters pantser-style, knowing that the first pages will probably be replaced or heavily reworked as it is critical that the opening grabs both publisher and readers. This is the ‘head’, and the developing plot becomes the backbone. I’ll write the key action scenes, major character moments and big twists that become the ribs of the story. The first draft comes out as a stream of consciousness, jumping from one scene to another, not necessarily in sequence. It’s deliberately spare, with dialogue just using ‘he said/she said’ and omitting most of the animation, the setting down of teacups or anxiously glancing out of the window. That will come in later drafts once I’m certain I need that scene and it is worthwhile proceeding to polish it.
This methodology works for me, but it’s not the most efficient way to write. It came about due to time pressures of fitting writing around a day job, family commitments and academic research. Also, my thrillers don’t follow the linear sequence of crime to clue to suspect to resolution as employed in a classic police procedural. Several plot threads wind in and out before becoming tied together in the climax, and a fair amount of re-arranging of the ‘ribs’ will be needed in later drafts.
The filleted fish needs a tail, so I’ll write the ending fairly early as I need to know where the story is going. Loose ends need to be tied up, villains identified, and seeds planted for a sequel. I aim to have about 40,000 words in the first draft if the final target is 90-100k. The lead characters are all there, as is the main plot, and it has a beginning, middle and end. It’s not something I’d want anyone else to read, but I have a story. 
(c) Jason Monaghan 2022

You can learn more about Jason by visiting his website and Facebook page or following him on Twitter @Jasonthriller or Instagram @docmonaghan.

What do you think of Jason's "Filleted Fish" method?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Stay tuned for Jason's second post in a few weeks time and stop by next week, when I celebrate 100 Tuesday Tips by launching a new feature ...

Are you a writer with a tip to share? If so, please feel free to contact me here, or via email/social media. 👇

One of the pitfalls of writing without a plan, and going where the story leads you, is that sometimes you write yourself into a corner.
Nothing feels worse, fifty-thousand words into a novel, to find that a decision that seemed like a brilliant plot twist twenty-thousand words earlier, has rendered the fantastic idea you've been building towards unworkable.
The gut-churning feeling that your awesome story might need to be completely re-tooled or even scrapped, and the feeling that finally, this will be the book where your wing-and-a-prayer method might finally let you down, can lead to sleepless nights and a crippling attack of imposter syndrome.
Yet it happens to the best of us, and although it may feel like the end-of-the-world, it usually isn't.
Sure there are plenty of horror stories of people scrapping their work in progress. Of writers filled with professional shame as they email their agent or publisher to break the news that the manuscript they'd confidently promised three months ago will not be delivered on time. Of publishers having to push back publication dates.

But what you don't hear about is those writers that overcome the hurdle. Who have a sudden flash of inspiration that fixes everything and leads to the best book of their career. We tend not to talk about it. Perhaps we should? Perhaps we shouldn't be embarrassed to brag about it?

In fact, I would go as far to say that writing yourself into a corner can be a good thing!
Yes, you read that correctly! Because we writers are fighters. When our backs are against the wall, we come out swinging. Solving that insurmountable problem forces us to be more creative.

So how can we solve the unsolvable, and salvage months of work? Here are a couple of suggestions. Think of them more as a basic principle, rather than a concrete suggestion.

Shoot Someone.
There is a quote, widely attributed to Raymond Chandler, "When stumped, have a man come through a door with a gun."
There are questions over whether this was advice, or just a description of how he used to work when writing pulp fiction.
But, it can solve a problem. If you are heading down an alley with a dead-end, then shake things up. Add a big twist, like a man with a gun. Coincidences are frowned upon in crime fiction - yet sometimes they do happen. So why not acknowledge that your investigator has been chasing a spurious lead and give them another victim or a clue that makes them realise they were on the wrong track? A need to reset and start again. Do it right and your error becomes a twist that your readers never saw coming, because you had no idea it was going to happen either!
Change The Culprit.
Even pantsers who start with little in the way of a plan often know who did it. But with no clear route  plotted, it's all too easy to end up in that corner, with thousands of words that no longer lead anywhere. It's rather like setting out on a road trip knowing roughly which direction your final destination is in, but missing the correct exit on the motorway and having to either double-back or take a tortuous route cross-country on poorly-lit, narrow backroads.
So ask yourself, how wedded are you to that culprit? Again, done correctly, your misstep becomes a fantastic twist that takes everyone by surprise.
Bring In A New Character.
Sometimes the problem is a result of having eliminated too many suspects too early on. In which case changing the culprit (as above) can change the game. Alternately, perhaps invent a new character. Introduce them early in the story as a potential suspect and shift some of the spade work you've done eliminating another character onto their shoulders.
For example, imagine you have two brothers, both suspects (but ultimately innocent), one of whom you want to be in the running until the last couple of chapters. You've been busy setting up the reasons why they will ultimately be eliminated, and suddenly, with a hundred pages to go, neither of them are viable suspects anymore, meaning that the real culprit is now too obvious! You could go back and remove all that deduction. Or they could have a third brother. Then two brothers are eliminated, but the third one is still a plausible suspect.
The caveat. One of the informal rules in crime writing is that the culprit should be introduced early in the book. To give your readers a fighting chance, this new character must at least be mentioned in the first few chapters. Suddenly introduce them after the half-way point, and the chances are your readers will feel cheated.
It Was All A Dream.
Just kidding, that's a really bad idea.

How do you write yourself back out of that corner?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time,
Paul

Sometimes, overcoming writer's block is about getting started. It's about building a head of steam, so that you are ready to take a run at the day's goals. I've written previously about writing prompts. Beloved of creative writing classes, they are a great way of warming up.
The rules are straightforward.

• Set yourself a time limit.
• Write without stopping, editing or overthinking.
• Write whatever comes to mind and don't worry if it doesn't make sense.
• It doesn't matter if it has nothing to do with the scene that you are stuck on.

This exercise involves choosing three words, then writing whatever comes to mind - the goal is to write something which incorporates all three words.
Again, the brilliant website Writing Exercises has a tool that can help.
https://writingexercises.co.uk/random-words-exercises.php
This generates eight words. The original tool suggests that you incorporate all eight. I am going to suggest using just the first three, to keep to a short time limit, but it's up to you.
Again, this is a free write exercise, so it's all about the writing, not the content. It doesn't matter if the end result is gibberish, it's about unlocking potential.
Once you've finished your piece, resist the urge to pat yourself on the back and go for a coffee - open your manuscript and start work. Fingers crossed, that creative spark will have set the wheel's in motion.
Do you have any suggestions for overcoming writer's block?
As always, feel free to share your thoughts in the comments or on social media.
Happy writing!
Paul

Today's Guest Blogger is the Michigan-based writer and artist, C.A. Michaels
Writing since 2010, she writes all genres except horror and focuses primarily on epic fantasy.
She is currently writing two series, one focusing on the Demon-Vampire Hunter (and axe tossing champion) Samantha Marie Peterson and the Pathfinders series The Elysian Gods.
​
​C.A. Michaels' Writing Tips
First, there is always room for improvement and to read. Reading will help improve yourself.

On the topic of world-building, she says "I usually start with one world and the character. Even if Earth is involved. But I do like all that to be evolved over a series." When choosing names for her characters, she says the names "just come to me". In her fantasy, she has some easy names to say, like Seth and Karri, then there are some like Jutari. 
(c) C.A. Michaels 2022
You can find out more about C.A. Michaels by visiting her website or following her on Twitter @DRCAMichaels or Instagram @Digital_reverence.

Buy From Amazon.
​Buy From Bookshop.org to support independent sellers.

This week's #TuesdayTip is a book review.
Unlike my previous look at Stephen King's much-lauded autobiography/writing manual On Writing, this is not billed as a must-read for writers.
Yet I still feel it belongs here.
For those not sure what it's about, Lee Child is the pen name of James D. Grant, the phenomenally successful best-selling author of the Jack Reacher series of thrillers. The first novel in the series has just been successfully adapted into a terrific series for Amazon, with two more series confirmed.
The much-derided Tom Cruise films (derided because the protagonist Reacher is 6'5" and 250lb, and Cruise very much isn't) were serviceable adaptations, but the most important thing is that a star like Tom Cruise was desperate to star in them.
That's how big this franchise is.
The book is not a list of dos and don'ts. There aren't detailed articles about grammar or structure or the writing craft. However, it is the very candid biography of one of the most successful thriller writers in the world, and woven amongst a fascinating life story, is a telling of how he did it.
Will others use this as a manual to mimic Lee Child? Of course, many already do. But through a combination of timing, luck (good and bad) and his own unique personality, nobody else has come close to creating Jack Reacher or replicating Child's success. And I suspect nobody will.
So why read it?
Buried within this book are Child's thoughts about writing. It doesn't matter if you think his prose is wonderful or recoil with horror at the thought of trying to average 4-5 words per sentence. It's an interesting perspective and a valuable insight.
It's a very good biography. James Grant was brought up in the fifties, in an urban landscape that has largely disappeared or changed beyond recognition. Similarly, he worked at Granada TV during a golden age of television, doing a job that has largely disappeared or changed beyond recognition. In that sense, it is a form of social history.
He started writing at the end of the nineties, before eBooks. He admits that he probably wouldn't have done as well if he started out today. The professional writing landscape today, especially for those starting out, is almost unrecognisable. Again, this charts a fascinating era of history.
His childhood, and his complicated relationship with his parents, has shaped the man he is today and his writing. Dr Heather Martin is a literary expert and she uses this to derive insight from his interviews, his books and his friends. It's not cod psychoanalysis by any stretch, but she paints a complex picture.
He is phenomenally well-read. He had a classical education, and it is clear that his exceptional memory allowed him to absorb and internalise much of that writing. Martin is able to draw parallels between what he has read and what he writes, and it's clear that she regards his writing as worthy of study as any so-called literary fiction. Given the high-praise that he has received from some of the most lauded writers of the modern era, anyone who thinks that Jack Reacher novels are trashy airport reads is mistaken (the secret to Child's success of course, is that he's also managed to corner the airport market, with a staggering number of his books being sold at Heathrow and Gatwick).
The book is very honest. It's clear that Martin finds him a charming and likeable man. I've met him a couple of times, and he is a very pleasant person to spend time with (I am no longer tongue-tied!). However, she isn't afraid to delve deeply. In some ways Lee Child is almost as fictional as his creation Jack Reacher. She takes care to differentiate between James (Jim) Grant, a family man with strong political views and an openly-shared love of his wife of forty-plus years and their daughter, and Lee Child, the mythical writing behemoth. Twenty-five years of being interviewed has meant that story-teller Lee Child has perhaps exaggerated some of the tales of his upbringing. His recollections of events might not be entirely accurate... Martin tracked down school friends, work colleagues, neighbours, and even school teachers. Some of the stories were confirmed, others were openly derided. But it doesn't matter, because at the end of the day, Lee Child is a story-teller.
It brings the story up-to-date. The book was published around the time that Child announced his impending retirement. It details why he decided to do it, the reaction of his publishers, and the decision to hand over the reins to younger brother Andrew Grant, who would now adopt the pseudonym Andrew Child. The paperback version even includes a brief addendum to include his experiences during the pandemic.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it's a damn good read! Ian Rankin describes it thus 'As gripping as one of Lee Child's own bestsellers'. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I'm not a big reader of biographies, but this was a real page-turner.

So whilst this is technically a #TuesdayTip, it is also a #RecommendedRead.
What are your thoughts on the phenomenon that is Lee Child/Jack Reacher?
Have you read The Reacher Guy?
As always feel free to comment here or in the comments.
Best wishes,
Paul

For this week's tip, I'm delighted to welcome Keith Dixon.
Keith has written two series of crime novels – one featuring Sam Dyke, a private detective working in the north of England and another featuring Paul Storey, an ex-police marksman now living in Coventry and occasionally getting involved in bad stuff. He's currently embarked on a third series set in a fictional southern England resort.

Keith's Writing Tip

• Guidance to writers of fiction often includes the instruction: “When writing dialogue, avoid call and response.”

 What this means is that you should avoid having a character ask a question and another answer it directly, like this:
 
“Did you finish that report I asked you for?”
“Yes, I typed it up last night,” Joe said.
“What conclusions did you come to?”
“That the victim probably knew his attacker and let him into the house.”

This is all well and good, and gives the reader information they might need. But it’s dull!
​
My tip is to remember that everyone in a scene has their own motivation and goal – another instruction writers are often given – and so answering a direct question with a straightforward answer might not satisfy their need to express themselves fully. So before writing the ‘obvious’ response, the factual reply, take a beat to consider the situation from the other person’s perspective and empathise with them …
 
“Did you finish that report I asked you for?”
“You never told me why it was so urgent. What’s the rush?”
“When I want to tell you why I do things, I’ll consider it … before deciding not to. All right?”
“I think you take me for granted.”
“I’m your boss, I’m allowed.”
“So it seems,” Joe said. “If you’re interested, I think the victim knew his attacker and let him in.”
 
The failure to answer a direct question leads to a brief exploration of the second character’s own feelings about being used by the first. This could have been intimated at through the narrator editorialising, but is more effective and direct when seen in the dialogue.
 
So before you write that next line, pause, and empathise with the character!
(c) Keith Dixon 2022

In a long and unstructured career, Keith has taught English and American Literature, been an advertising copywriter, a business psychologist and an online learning creator. He's currently living in France where he writes crime novels and wonders whether he should give up trying to play the guitar.

You can find out more about Keith and his writing by visiting his website or his Facebook page or by following him on Twitter (@keithyd6) and Instagram (@theidlewriter).

One of the weirder debates I got sucked into on a Facebook book group was about the necessity of prologues.
One poster stridently announced that they always skipped the prologue, as it never contained anything useful.
I was gobsmacked.
In pretty much all of my books, the opening murder takes place in the prologue. Some would argue that's fairly useful. Most other participants shared my view, but the original poster would not be moved in their opinion.
To this day, I can't decide if the person was a troll, or just as mad as a box of frogs.
Some members of the group claimed they disliked books with a prologue, even to the point that they will avoid reading them.
"Just start at chapter one!" they implore.
Suggestions that if it really offends them that much, they could just mentally renumber the chapters so that the prologue is called chapter one, fell on deaf ears.
The thing is, in my DCI Warren Jones books at least, the prologue isn't chapter one. My novels are, for the most part, set out in a linear fashion. I divide the story into sections, typically headed with a date. So for the initial murder to take place on an as yet undisclosed date, it needs to exist outside that structure. The prologue deliberately doesn't have a date attached, so that if I wish, I can tease with an opening scene that may not be referenced again until well into the book. In my sixth book, A Price To Pay, the prologue has a woman running through a darkened forest being shot at and chased by dogs. The scene ends before we find out what happens to her.
The story then progresses to chapter one, where DCI Warren Jones is called to a murder in a massage parlour. As the book unfolds, readers will be wondering about that woman, looking for hints at what her fate is ,or the role that she will eventually play.
I'd suggest that skipping the prologue because of some irrational prejudice is going to seriously impact your understanding of what's going on and rob you of that anticipation.

Lee Child, creator of the phenomenally successful Jack Reacher series, said at a literary festival that one of the reasons he made Reacher a drifter was to avoid the constraints of a traditional police procedural. Specifically he mentioned how a typical police procedural would start with the detective being called to the crime scene and the case unfolding from there.
It was a valid observation. Any police procedural that wishes to be realistic has an inherent structure. A Reacher novel can start from any point. In The Killing Floor, Reacher steps off a bus in a Georgia town, orders pie in a diner, and is promptly arrested. The Enemy opens with a heart attack, One Shot with a man carrying a rifle driving to a car park.
And that is the other reason why I always have a prologue. Each of my books starts differently. A Price To Pay has the woman in the woods. Forgive Me Father has two teenagers breaking into the grounds of a ruined abbey. The first in the series, The Last Straw, has the blood-soaked discovery of a body, the second, No Smoke Without Fire, starts with somebody released from prison.
Of course I strive to make chapter one original each time as well, but with one or two exceptions it usually starts after the discovery of a victim, when Warren is called to the scene.

But That's Not The End.
One of the distinctive - and sometimes derided - features of Golden Age crime is the big final reveal. Agatha Christie's Poirot novels are (in)famous for their closing 'library scene' (or similar), where all of the suspects are called together and Poirot goes through their motives one at a time, before discarding them. Eventually, whoever is left, is unmasked as the killer. It's an effective and enjoyable device, not least because he ties up all the loose ends.
But of course it isn't really appropriate or realistic for most stories. Gathering all the suspects together can feel contrived, and the tension of the reveal aside, isn't especially dramatic. And attempting to wrap up everything in a neat bow can rob the final denouement of its momentum, as you seek to explain exactly what the final clue was that led to the killer.
But skipping that explanation isn't a good idea. Your readers have earned the right to know exactly how the case was solved and perhaps even the motives behind the crime. Some readers like to 'play along', and will want to see if their thoughts mirrored the detectives. Simply having the killer presented, followed by The End, would be unsatisfying and frustrating.
So that's where the epilogue comes in. The problem is that it can feel like an after thought. You need a way of getting across what you want to explain without it feeling like a list of bullet points. My own device is to have Warren debriefed by Assistant Chief Constable Naseem. He is openly collecting details of interesting cases for his future memoirs. It is usually a chat in his office a few days after the conclusion of the investigation. It has evolved over the years, with it becoming more philosophical in tone. I sometimes use it as way to foreshadow what may happen in future novels in the series (Out of Sight ends on a teaser about Warren's future).

Most books have some sort of epilogue, but it may not be marked as such. It could just be the wrapping up at the end of the final chapter. I label mine epilogue simply because I like the symmetry of a book starting with a prologue and ending with an epilogue.

What are your thoughts on prologues and epilogues? Are they important to a book or a distraction? Do you use any particular devices?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
All the best, Paul.
Epilogue:
Are you a writer with a tip to share? I love having guest bloggers. Feel free to contact me via the email or social media links.