In Defense of the Slow-Burn Crime Story
Why slow-burn crime fiction offers deeper, more lasting impact.
Lately, “slow burn” has been tossed around as a criticism—particularly of crime fiction—and I find that baffling. While I understand that in some cases it's being misused as a synonym for “unenergetic” writing, for me, a slow-burn narrative isn’t a drawback; it’s a mark of storytelling mastery.
So what exactly do we mean by “slow burn”? From my perspective, it’s when a writer takes time to build emotional tension—often layered, nuanced, and charged—before introducing physical or action-driven tension. You feel a low, insistent thrum of dread before those emotions are translated into action. In crime fiction, that action is often violent—either physically, emotionally, or a bit of both. That emotional groundwork prepares the reader and makes the eventual eruption more meaningful. In a well-crafted slow burn, violence doesn’t come out of nowhere—or exist merely to motivate the plot. It has emotional roots. In real life, violence doesn’t just drop from the sky. It builds. It simmers.
When done right, a slow burn uses foreshadowing, subtext, and layered interiority to trace the origin point of violence, paradoxically demystifying it while deepening its mystery.
When fiction skips over that emotional accumulation, violence can feel jarring or hollow. But when done right, a slow burn uses foreshadowing, subtext, and layered interiority to trace the origin point of violence, paradoxically demystifying it while deepening its mystery. It’s not spectacle; it’s consequence. It’s shocking only insofar as we understand how it’s the result of many small, familiar actions—how mundane wounds, ignored or repeated, quietly accrue until they culminate in something truly horrific.
Patricia Highsmith was a master of the form. Take The Talented Mr. Ripley. The novel begins with emotional longing and anxiety—Tom Ripley’s need to belong, to be seen, to escape the smallness of his life. That ache simmers beneath the surface as he ingratiates himself into a world not meant for him. When he’s sent to Italy to retrieve the wealthy and charming Dickie Greenleaf, Tom’s infatuation grows toxic, fueled by envy and a desperate hunger for identity. The violence, when it comes, is shocking but inevitable; in fact, to enter the world he covets, Tom must eliminate its current occupant, Dickie. And even then, it doesn’t resolve tension—it escalates it. The dread only grows as Tom tries to keep control of his crumbling façade. That’s the magic of the slow burn: the combustion doesn’t end the story; it reshapes it.
A more contemporary example—and one close to my heart—is my friend KT Nguyen’s You Know What You Did, a taut psychological suspense that just won the Agatha Award for Best First Novel. The novel follows Annie “Anh Le” Shaw, a Vietnamese American woman whose seemingly stable life begins to fracture after the sudden death of her mother, a Vietnam War refugee. As Annie’s long-dormant obsessive-compulsive disorder resurfaces, the narrative begins to blur the line between internal struggle and external threat. When she becomes the focus of a missing person investigation—and wakes up next to a dead body with no memory of how she got there—the question isn’t just what happened, but whether she can trust her own mind. Nguyen builds suspense not through mechanical plot twists or contrived shocks, but through a steady unraveling of emotional and psychological certainty. In this novel, the dread creeps in slowly, almost imperceptibly.
Some writers can pull off a shocking event early in a book—say, the body on the first page—by circling back to reveal how things got that way. That too can be a form of slow burn, where the combustible moment is dangled as a teaser and the narrative smolders its way toward emotional clarity. Donna Tartt’s The Secret History is a perfect example. It opens with a confession to murder, but the true drama lies in the slow, meticulous unraveling of how and why it happened. The novel follows a group of elite classics students at a small Vermont college who fall under the spell of their enigmatic professor—and each other. As the story unfolds, we see how their intellectual vanity and moral detachment create a perfect storm for violence. We’re not just racing to the next death—we’re steeped in guilt, narcissism, arrogance, and self-justification. Tartt offers not just a whydunit, but a profound psychological excavation.
I’m not saying fast-paced novels with action up front can’t be great—they absolutely can. But when a book leaps from shock to shock without emotional scaffolding, I check out. A relentless tempo can flatten character and meaning into just noise. I don’t need a novel to explode every five pages. I want to be drawn in by emotional dynamics that feel fresh and unsettling—stories that pry open some unexamined corner of human psychology or find new ways to explore old wounds.
That said, slow-burn stories do need to combust by the end.
The recent BBC adaptation of Agatha Christie’s Towards Zero is a cautionary tale. The original novel is a master class in slow-burn suspense. Christie had a gift for taking genre conventions, honing them to perfection, then flipping them on their heads. (If you don’t believe me, read Death on the Nile and then Endless Night. The shape of the cleverly concealed love triangle remains, but the perspective—and therefore the meaning—completely shifts.)
In Towards Zero, Christie constructs a plot that doesn’t begin with the central murder, unlike many of her other mysteries, such as A Murder Is Announced or The Mirror Crack’d from Side to Side, where a killing kicks off a domino effect of consequences. Instead, she slowly guides the reader toward what she called “point zero”—not the first act of violence, but the intended crime all prior events are engineered to make possible. A group of characters gathers at a seaside home, their personal tensions simmering: jealousies, rivalries, secrets. (Spoiler Alert) What seems like a spontaneous killing is, in fact, part of a larger plan to frame an innocent person. Secondary victims are used as tools—stepping stones toward the ultimate goal: to let the state commit the murder through execution. It’s a masterstroke of slow-burn storytelling. The buried psychological architecture is precise, and at its center is a Ripley-esque figure who manipulates with charm and cold detachment. In the adaptation, this character was softened—perhaps to invite empathy—but in doing so, the core menace vanished. Sometimes, a psychopath is just a psychopath. Without that unnerving presence, the slow burn fizzled.
Ultimately, slow-burn fiction asks more of both writer and reader. As Roland Barthes might say, it’s more “writerly” in its design, meaning the reader must actively participate in the meaning-making process the writer sets in motion. It requires trust, patience, and psychological acuity. It rewards close reading. It asks us to linger in ambiguity, to pay attention to subtle cues, to invest in character and subtext. And when the payoff comes, it’s not just satisfying—it’s unforgettable.
So yes, I’m here to defend the slow burn. Not as a trend. Not as a niche. But as a timeless and essential way to tell a powerful story.
What about you? I’d love to hear your favorite slow-burn mysteries—books that took their time and paid off in unforgettable ways. Drop them in the comments.
Queer Crime, Two Ways: Preorder the Anthology I Edited (Crime Ink: Iconic) & Hear My Novel (Hall of Mirrors) in a Stunning New Audiobook
Preorder Crime Ink: Iconic—a bold queer crime fiction anthology reclaiming space in a genre that’s too often excluded us. 20+ authors. Sharp stories. No more erasure—only presence.
Hall of Mirrors is now on audiobook! I’m so proud of this production, brought to life by incredible performances from Sion Dayson, Ray Ford, and Shea Taylor. I hope you’ll listen!
