Theme Parks vs. Amusement Parks

by Toni L.P. Kelner

 

My family and I recently took a trip to Orlando to spend time trudging around in the hot sun, standing in lines, and paying too much for food and drink. In other words, we went to the parks: Disney's Magic Kingdom, Epcot, and Hollywood Studios; and Universal's Islands of Adventure (mostly to see Harry Potter's Wizarding World). We had a terrific time in all the parks, but we saw a definite difference to the design of the parks. And it occurred to me that the two designs are pretty good analogs to two different kinds of mysteries. Some mysteries are theme parks and some are amusement parks.

To me, a theme park is a place where the rides, the restaurants, the shops, the overall decor all relates to the theme of the park, or the area of the park. Look at Tomorrowland and Adventureland in the Magic Kindgdom.

Even the trash cans in the two lands are different!

And while theme parks can have thrill rides--I'm still shivering over the Tower of Terror at Hollywood Studios--that's not the aim. The rides are great, but in some ways they are secondary to the goal of transporting you to a new world. (A whole new world, a thrilling place...  Yeah, I've been listening to a lot of Disney music.) Disney is particularly adept at this, but both the Wizarding World of Harry Potter and Suess Landing show that Universal gets the idea, too.

Then there are amusement parks, filled with things to do but not necessarily transporting you anywhere. My particular favorite is Canobie Lake Park in Salem, NH. They do sort of divide the park up into "lands" but there's no real theme because it's not really their aim. Don't get me wrong, the decorations have plenty of charm and the place is meticulously maintained, and it is lots of fun.

They've also been adding new state-of-the-art thrill rides like crazy over the past few years, because the rides are a big part of their appeal. Okay, they don't appeal to me that much--I'm more of a carousel person--but lots of people love those things. 

So other than using a theme park or an amusement park as a setting (which I did in "Haunted Dave's Haunted Amusement Park"), what do parks have to do with mysteries? Here's my theory.

Some mysteries try to create a new world, a theme as it were. So in the theme park category I put historical mysteries, fantasy/mystery crossovers (including the Harry Potter books), mysteries with exotic settings, and mysteries so thoroughly set in a real place that they could not possibly happen elsewhere. 

Other mysteries are all about the thrill or the "ride," but not where it takes place. In the amusement park category, I put thrillers (duh!), mysteries set in archetypal small towns or cities, and any mystery where the puzzle is paramount. 

Bear in mind that neither category is exclusive--Disney is all about the theme, but they have plenty of thrills. I did mention Tower of Terror, didn't I? And Canobie has one or two particularly nicely themed areas. So there are historical thrillers and themed puzzle novels. Still, you can usually tell which kind of park an author was designing.

I should probably point out here that I love amusement parks and theme parks, and both kinds of mysteries, too. But what about you? When you pick out a book, do you prefer an amusement park or a theme park? Where do you want to spend your reading vacation?

 

PS - Any tax people out there? Do you suppose writing this blog about the parks means I can write off the trip? Or am I still mentally in Fantasyland?

Comments

[Laura DiSilverio]

Very apt analogy. I love it! I'm off to read a theme park . . . I mean a Laurie King mystery.

[Kelly Saderholm]

Love this analogy!

I'm a theme park person myself, I prefer atmosphere over thrills. I know as a reader, I will read books that at a little thin on plot, if the atmosphere and characters are really great

[Elaine Viets]

Count me as a theme park reader, Toni. Loved your pictures. I can't wait to see the Seuss Landing when I'm in Orlando next February.