Has Sunday night TV become quietly subversive?

To glance at the schedules you may not think so. Period drama still dominates ITV’s prime time slots and the BBC gives us The Antiques Roadshow and a crime thriller at 9pm. So far so predictable.

But look closer and you will observe two prime time dramas that break the mould in their own way. The brilliant Undercover, airing its second episode last night, boasts two black lead characters and a successful black family at the heart of its narrative. For a BBC drama, this is groundbreaking stuff. Not to mention the excellent, original plot line that exposes in the most unapologetic and blistering manner the endemic racism of the Metropolitan Police of the 1990s.

Over on ITV at the same time is the second series of Home Fires, another favourite of mine. It seems like pretty harmless period fare to the idle observer, but Home Fires has a predominantly female cast. There’s no male lead in sight. It is the Second World War from the female perspective. Although not as hard-hitting as Undercover, in its own quiet way, it is equally as subversive.

What is also unusual, are two prime schedule dramas; one a thriller and the other about war, which do not include a parade of violence, torture or shocking stunts to keep viewers coming back for more. Both shows rely on strong writing and powerful performances by their cast instead. This is also subversive in its own way, violent drama for thrills having become the mainstream in recent years.

However this revolution has occurred in Sunday night telly, long may it continue. As viewers we want original, human stories, we like to be made to think and reasses our ideas about the world. We don’t object to lead characters being black, Asian or female. It’s the programme makers and commissioning editors who are frightened of that. Make this type of drama part of the mainstream, then no one will say it is subversive to produce top quality, representative and honest drama in the future.

Can you have a great mystery novel without ‘blood’ and ‘guts’?

I certainly think so, although recently I’ve found it more difficult to find them. The real masters of the genre have never used graphic violence to ‘spice up’ their plots. Agatha Christie, P.D James, Ruth Rendell (writing also as Barbara Vine), Josephine Tey, Dorothy L Sayers and new writers on the block like Ruth Ware and Sophie Hannah can create genuine chills through their suspenseful prose, interwoven with just the hint of the worst crimes that mankind (and womankind) are capable of. These great writers avoid stomach churning descriptions of blood and guts, relying instead on very clever storytelling and well observed characterisation.

Now that we expect a certain amount of gore in our T.V dramas and mystery fiction, is it possible to write a top novel in the crime field without it? Or will we now need to create a whole new genre of fiction for this type of narrative, something that isn’t as potentially twee or as dismissive as the umbrella term, cosy mystery? It’s a large field and I hope there’s room for everyone’s tastes within it- I certainly enjoy a good ‘serial-killer chiller’ myself, but my favourites are those books that tease me along with a labyrinthine plot and a final conclusion that actually seems plausible to me because I feel that I understand the motives of the main characters. I don’t like an ending that just parachutes in from nowhere and makes me feel dissatisfied and cheated, a kind of ‘deus ex machina’. Any suggestions on great writers; new and old who manage to achieve this would be gratefully received.