Mystery Structure – Clued In Mystery

In today’s episode, Brook and Sarah discuss how a mystery is typically structured and what happens when a mystery takes a different approach.

Discussed and mentioned

His & Hers (2025) Netflix-based on the book (2020) by Alice Feeney

Murder, She Wrote (1984-1996) CBS

Related episodes

Reverse Mysteries (released February 24, 2026)

For more information

Instagram: @cluedinmystery
Contact us: hello@cluedinmystery.com
Music: Signs To Nowhere by Shane Ivers – www.silvermansound.com
Sign up for our newsletter: https://cluedinmystery.com/clued-in-chronicle/
Order Life or Delft by Brook and Sarah

Transcript

This transcript is generated by a computer and there may be some mis-spellings and strange punctuation. We try to catch these before posting, but some things slip through.

Sarah	Welcome to Clued in Mystery. I’m Sarah.
Brook	And I’m Brook and we both love mystery.
Sarah	Hi, Brook.
Brook	Hi, Sarah. It’s so great to be recording with you again today.
Sarah	Yes, I’m looking forward to our conversation about mystery structure.
Brook	Absolutely. So as mystery readers, we love following clues, weighing suspects, and trying to stay one step ahead of the sleuth, whether they’re an amateur or a seasoned detective. We await that moment when everything comes together in a way that feels both surprising and inevitable. But that sense of satisfaction doesn’t happen by accident.
Brook	Authors rely on a tried-and-true structure to make these stories work. Now, every genre has a structure, whether it’s romance, horror, action-adventure. But mystery, maybe more than others, depends on an underlying framework.
Brook	And when a story is working well, the framework stays invisible. We aren’t even consciously thinking about the structure or what sometimes is negatively called the mystery formula.
Brook	Even so, when a story doesn’t follow the structure or breaks from it in an unexpected way, it really stands out to us.
Brook	And sometimes that leads to something fresh and memorable, but other times it leaves us feeling unsatisfied or even kind of put off.
Brook	And Sarah, I think you and I really started thinking about the idea of structure when we covered inverted mysteries. Because in that episode, we talked about a style of story that reveals the culprit right from the beginning and then shifts the story to whether that villain can elude capture by the detective or a sleuth.
Brook	And it really inspired us to think more about the ways mysteries are told. So today we’re going to take a closer look at the idea of story structure in mysteries and maybe talk about the things that we think are okay to bend or what we just think you can’t change in order to keep it a satisfying story.
Brook	So really briefly, because we’re going to probably define story beats and talk about these much more deeply. But if you’re not an author and you’re not thinking about a story in this way, I’ll just kind of outline that what we’re referring to as these beats are a crime is committed, an investigation takes, begins, it takes place, ah the sleuth has a misstep or a few missteps, then there’s some sort of realization that flips everything on its head. And finally, this resolution and a feeling of justice. And as I said, there is a lot more to each of those steps and room to play. But that’s going to be the fun part of you and me, Sarah, breaking down and talking about where the adjustments can and can’t be made.
Brook	So I thought a great place to start would be with that notion that we hear often, which is like mysteries are just formulaic and they just always follow the same pattern. And and so it’s seen as a criticism. um And kind of let’s kind of break that down a little bit.
Sarah	Well, I I think that’s a ah great question to start with, Brook, because, you know, we’ve talked before about like, what is the appeal of mystery? And it’s that resolution at the end, right? um And that appeal, you get to that resolution because you hit all of those steps that you talked about, right? And so, if you didn’t get there, if as a reader or a viewer, you’re not kind of led down this path, it’s not going to be a satisfying resolution. And I think that’s kind of what we were talking about in the inverted mystery, how catch’em episode, where, you know, I think we talked about a couple of things.
Sarah	Those are kind of hard to come by because they’re they’re hard to write, I think. um And sometimes they’re just not as satisfying, right? Because you’re not taken on that journey.
Brook	Exactly. Right. Well, and I think it’s a little unfair when I hear that. Of course, you know, we’re biased because this is our favorite type of story. But as I said in the intro, every single type of genre fiction follows some sort of, whether you want to call it a pattern or a formula, ah there’s a very definite formula to romance fiction, for instance, or, uh, you know, action adventure, horror movies. So to just call out mystery, I think is a little unfair because every genre has that. And they’re all kind of based on that, um, hero’s journey.
Brook	They’re, they’re tweaked and kind of massaged because of what the genre expectation is. But this is a way that stories have been told for you know centuries because it’s exactly what you said. It feels very satisfying to us as you know kind of as humans to go through that journey with the main character.
Sarah	You know, you think about television series, for example, Murder, She Wrote. And there’s a definite structure to those stories. Like you said, the crime occurs, the investigation begins.
Sarah	You’re introduced to the to the various suspects and each of them has a potential motive. And then Jessica Fletcher weeds out which one it is. And in some series, it’s more pronounced where the sleuth interviews the various suspects and is heading down one path and then takes a ah hard turn because it actually ends up being the least expected of the suspects.
Sarah	And, you know, you see, you can take almost any kind of, um certainly cozy series would follow that kind of path, right? um And I think as viewers or readers, we know that. That’s what we expect. That’s what we want,
Brook	Exactly. Exactly. There’s a, there is a comfort in knowing what to expect and knowing that at the end, you know, justice will prevail and good will will prevail. And yeah, I think it’s a i think it’s a comfort, not a limitation.
Sarah	I like that way of of thinking about it, Brook.
Brook	There’s also this ah need for, you said, if the beats or stages of the story aren’t followed. It’s not as satisfying. So I was thinking of this as it’s sort of like a roller coaster ah where, you know, tension, tension, tension builds, and then you have kind of a release. And then once again, you climb and there’s release. And a roller coaster that just went flat is not going to be very much fun.
Brook	Plus, you can’t do either one forever. You can’t just like build tension to infinity or or have thrills. I’ve read those stories where it’s just like one action moment after another.
Brook	And it that would be an example of a roller coaster that just constantly goes down, right? But what we crave and what we enjoy in a story is kind of that ebb and that flow. And if you follow the story structure, ah that’s exactly what is built into it.
Sarah	Well, and and I think that structure is necessary to make sense of the story. Right? It would be a very short story if it was there was a crime committed, the detective walks in the room and says it was you.
Brook	Yes.
Sarah	Right?
Brook	It’s no fun.
Sarah	You need that process of, you know, who could it be? And maybe this is where the criticism for something like cozy is that it can feel a little too formulaic, right? You’ve got the um angry neighbor. You’ve got the long lost relative.
Sarah	You’ve got the, [Brook: estranged spouse] estranged strange spouse, all of whom could have been the villain.
Sarah	You know, if if there’s not enough variation in the types of characters, that’s when I think a series doesn’t work particularly well, right? But if you’ve got all of these different, you know, settings, if you’ve got all of these different kinds of suspects, then that, I think, makes that formula work.
Brook	Mm-hmm. Exactly. Yeah. And I think that some of those puzzle pieces can get moved around. I mentioned that you know there’s usually some missteps. And another way to think about that is the red herrings ah because the sleuth follows the wrong path for a while. And it doesn’t just have to be interview, interview, interview, red herring.
Brook	You can move those puzzle pieces around, especially in the middle of the story. and keep that interest as you said so that it’s not just a cookie cutter way of telling the mystery story. And I think that that works better for me because I will I will accept that if if an author tells the story in the exact same manner maybe there are different characters but then that can get a little tedious it’s like oh I this is exactly how she put together her last mystery yeah that’s that’s not very much fun.
Sarah	Yeah, if there’s always three suspects, one is from, yeah you know, work, one is from the friend relationship, and one is from the family relationship, then, you know, yeah, that does get a little bit tiresome.
Brook	Yeah. And I’ve seen ah advice where make them all lie the first time and then you go back and you interview them again and then the second time. And it’s like, okay, you can do that once in a while. But if every single one of your stories does that, then ah it it kind of takes the fun out of it.
Sarah	Brook do you think that that structure that you were talking about at the beginning, the different beats, is that the same whether we’re talking about a cozy with an amateur sleuth, something that is maybe a little grittier with a police detective, you know a procedural, um and a domestic thriller, for example? Do you think that that those are the same?
Brook	I think that broadly they are the same, but the situation changes a little bit in a thriller because all of those things still happen, but I feel like we as the readers or the viewers, kind of become the one experiencing it. We see that there’s been a crime. We start to put things together in the story. Mentally, we take some wrong turns, right? we We start thinking, oh, it’s the husband or whatever, right? As as we’re experiencing the story. um And then things start to clear up for us because a new piece of evidence is presented in the story. And then in the end, we have our own sense of resolution. Most of the time there isn’t a sleuth in those stories, but we become the stand-in sleuth, I guess.
Sarah	Yeah, I think that’s right. We are um we are along with that main character doing that investigation. What about when stories are told from multiple points of view?
Brook	Yeah, it gets tricky, doesn’t it? um Again, I think it creates that experience for us as a reader or a viewer. But ah see, that’s where I feel like it’s hard to say that mysteries are always the same, because that’s an example of a way an author took the framework and then played with it enough that we still get the same sense of satisfaction that but it’s most definitely not a cookie cutter story because they’ve introduced some other points of view or maybe a second timeline. And those are some really fantastic ways to play with the structure.
Sarah	Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. And then I guess another way to play with the structure is, like you mentioned, a dual timeline, right? So, you’ve got whatever’s happening in present day, and then you get fed information about something that happened in the past and see how that influences what’s happening now. Yeah.
Sarah	So that way, or where there are, you know, two parallel stories that at some point converge…
Brook	Yeah.
Sarah	…taking place years or or decades apart from each other.
Brook	Yeah. I mean, i I think about your series, Sarah, and that’s what’s happening. And I think one great thing that stories like that do is drive the, it drive at least it me, it drives me to keep reading because ah you’re finding out what’s happening in one timeline, but then you’re really anxious to get back to, to the other time in your book in particular, it’s a time period. So, it’s a very good driver for a reader, I think. But then again, that convergence at the end, not only are you getting the solution to the crime, but you’re also seeing how everything fit in with these two different timelines. And when that’s done really well, it’s it’s like doubly satisfying then.
Sarah	So I can think of examples where that maybe doesn’t work, right? Either for too long as a reader, you’re questioning, why are we reading about what happened 25 years ago? What does none of these characters are the same. This has nothing to do with the main story. And then it’s only kind of pulled together at the last minute. That is not particularly satisfying.
Brook	No, that is a great demonstration of what I think is my biggest pet peeve. Maybe the thing and in ah mystery structure that I can’t deal with is timing.
Brook	Like, I think you can break a lot of rules for me to still enjoy the story. Like, I think I enjoy how catch ‘ems much more than you, but the timing just really bothers me. One recent example is, uh, a new show. It’s a limited series on Netflix, His and Hers. And it’s a small town murder mystery.
Brook	And I was quite engaged throughout, but the ending didn’t land for me. ah We’re given what feels like the full resolution. So you’ve made it through the entire process. You’ve you’ve had the inevitable surprise.
Brook	And then the epilogue reopens with this major twist. And I think once you put the bow on it with the resolution, you can’t then reopen it. And that just really did not sit with me. I think the twist was good.
Brook	I just think that the timing of it was all wrong so that you could have still made the storyline work. I don’t know if I’m describing that well enough, but ah timing is so important.
Sarah	Yeah. So I haven’t seen it. And if i remember, it’s based on, is it based on a book by Alice Feeney?
Brook	Yes.
Sarah	Yeah, so, and I haven’t read the book, so I don’t know where that twist happens in the book. And it would be really interesting to see if they’ve made an adjustment for the screen adaptation than from what she originally intended. ah But yeah, that’s ah that’s a great example. I think another example of where the timing is really important is if the bad guy is introduced at the very end, right?
Brook	Absolutely.
Sarah	If you’ve seen the sleuth rule out all of these potential suspects, and then it turns out to be a character that is only introduced at the very end, right? Like that doesn’t, that doesn’t really work either.
Brook	Exactly. Yeah.
Sarah	And we are kind of skirting around talking about some of the the rules of mystery, um which I think we’ll do in another episode. But it all goes together, right? the the The way that you introduce the mystery, the way you introduce the suspects, the way you reach the resolution, um there is a sequence that that needs to happen for that to work.
Brook	Yeah, great point. the The rules of mystery, which I can’t wait to talk with you about, Sarah, and traditional story structure that we’re talking about today have to go hand in hand. And that’s, I think, what makes just the most satisfying mystery stories.
Sarah	Well, Brook, thank you. I think this was such an interesting conversation to just talk about structure a little bit more deeply.
Brook	Yes, thanks, Sarah. This was great. And listeners, we do have a question of the week for you. What’s a story you’ve read or watched that didn’t work for you because it strayed too much from the traditional mystery structure?
Brook	We’d love to hear your thoughts. Send us an email or come find us on Instagram and Facebook. But until next time, thank you for joining us on Clued in Mystery. I’m Brook.
Sarah	And I’m Sarah, and we both love mystery.