One of the things writers always need to think about when they’re creating stories is motive. For crime fiction writers that usually includes the motive for a murder or series of murders. But for any fiction writer, the characters have to have some sort of believable motive for doing what they do. Otherwise they’re not realistic characters. Sometimes those motives aren’t as compelling to the reader as they are to the character but they have to be there and the reader has to believe that a given character would really be motivated in the way that the author depicts.
In some crime fiction the murderer’s motive is fairly straightforward: financial or other gain, fear and revenge are a few of those kinds of motives. In other crime fiction the motive makes sense only to the killer but in well-written crime fiction we know what that motive is. For instance, in Agatha Christie’s After the Funeral (AKA Funerals Are Fatal), wealthy patriarch Richard Abernethy dies, seemingly of natural causes. At his funeral though, his younger sister Cora Lansquenet says that she thinks her brother was murdered. At first everyone hushes her up, not wanting to believe that what she says is true. But privately everyone wonders whether she was right. When Cora herself is murdered the next day it seems clear that she was. The Abernethy family lawyer Mr. Entwhistle asks Hercule Poirot to investigate and Poirot agrees. In this novel the motive for murder wouldn’t make sense to a lot of us but it does make sense to the killer.
That’s also true of the killings in Shona MacLean’s The Redemption of Alexander Seaton. Seaton is the undermaster of the grammar school in 17th Century Banff, Scotland. One morning he is shocked to find the body of local apothecary’s assistant Patrick Davidson in his classroom. As if that’s not enough, Seaton’s good friend music master Charles Thom is accused of the murder and in fact imprisoned for it. Thom claims that he’s innocent and begs Seaton to clear his name. Seaton agrees and begins to ask questions. It’s not long before he finds that more than one person might have had a motive to kill Davidson. For one thing, it’s possible that Davidson was a papist spy who was willing to help his allies take over Protestant Scotland. There are several people in town who would consider that suspicion reason enough to murder him. And then there’s Davidson’s romantic rivalry with Thom for Marion Arbuthnott, the apothecary’s daughter. That’s a major part of the reason Thom’s suspected of the murder. There’s also the whisper that Davidson could have been involved with witchcraft. It certainly seems possible when Marion Arbuthnott, who was also rumoured to consort with witches, is murdered. When Seaton finds out who is responsible for the deaths, he learns that the motive makes perfect sense to the killer, even if it wouldn’t be a compelling motive for others.
In K.C. Constantine’s The Blank Page, Rocksburg Pennsylvania Chief of Police Mario Balzic and his team investigate the murder of Janet Pisula. Her body is discovered one day in her room at the rooming house where she lived while attending the local community college. At first there seems to be no reason for the murder. The victim was quiet, had few acquaintances, little money and seemed to know no-one’s dangerous secrets. So it’s difficult for Balzic to trace her movements and try to get to the truth about her murder. In the end though Balzic finds out something crucial about Janet Pisula and uses that to connect her with her murderer. When we discover the reason for the killing we see that to the murderer, killing her made sense even though it really doesn’t to a lot of other people.
That’s also true of the killer in Camilla Grebe and Åsa Träff’s Some Kind of Peace. In that novel, Stockholm psychologist Siri Bergman has to deal with not only her patients, some of whom are really suffering, but also her own deep sense of loss at the death of her husband Stefan. One day Bergman gets a letter that makes it clear she’s being stalked. Then she’s framed for a drink driving incident. Other frightening events happen too and before long, Bergman is convinced that someone is trying to destroy her professionally. Matters are made very much worse when the body of one of Bergman’s patients Sara Matteus is found in the water near Bergman’s home. Bergman herself is suspected of the murder and now it’s clear that someone is trying to ruin not just her practice but her life. Slowly Bergman and her friends Aina Davidson and Vijay Kumar discover who is behind Sara Matteus’ murder and the stalking and other incidents. When we learn the truth, the killer even explains why everything happened; to the killer it all does make sense. To others what the killer does is appalling.
But that is fiction. Fiction writers as I said have to explain characters’ motives. Readers want to know them. In real life it doesn’t happen that way. On Friday 20 July, a shooter opened fire in a crowded Colorado movie theatre, killing twelve people and injuring over 50 others. We don’t know, and maybe we never will, exactly why those murders happened. There will doubtless be dozens of profilers, psychologists and other experts who will give their opinions as to why it happened. There will be calls for more security, for greater gun control and for a lot of other things. The media will cover this horrible tragedy from every angle.
But that won’t change anything. And that’s perhaps the worst thing about this awful event. Twelve people are dead and nothing we say or do will bring them back. Dozens and dozens more are injured and although they may heal physically, they will have to deal with this always. We don’t even really know why the shootings happened and that makes things worse. It’s easy enough to say, “Oh, well, the shooter was a deranged person.” That may be true but it certainly doesn’t explain much to the families of the victims or to those who were injured. We can’t even give those people the admittedly sad satisfaction of knowing why it all happened.
Crime fiction writers have it easy; we’re allowed (expected even) to have everything make sense in some way. Those who have been affected by the Colorado shootings don’t get to have things make sense. Not now and maybe not ever. To the families of those who died on that awful night, my deepest condolences. To those who were injured and their families, I wish you strength and hope as you heal. I hope it’s of at least a little comfort to know that this is appalling to all of us. I wish you all peace and healing. I also wish I could give you answers.
*NOTE: The title of this post is a line from the Boomtown Rats’ I Don’t Like Mondays.
It’s funny but I’ve noticed recently that sometimes the motive isn’t completely clear in a book or it gets lost somewhere along the story. Clearly some crime writers don’t feel the need to focus too much on a motive.
I do like a Shakespearean element to my crime dramas and as Adam Dalgiesh is told by his superior, all the motives for murder came under the letter L: love, lust, lucre and loathing. And I love the line: ‘They’ll tell you, laddie, that the most dangerous emotion is hatred. Don’t believe them. The most dangerous emotion is love.’
Sarah – I love that line too! There’s a lot of truth to it. You make an interesting point too about recent crime fiction that doesn’t outline a clear motive, or where the motive is not the focus that it is in earlier crime fiction. That’s an astute observation.
Thanks too for mentioning Shakespeare – in my opinion a crime writer if ever there were one although not everyone thinks of him that way.
I thought you were going with the song from Meet the Beatles. Enjoyed the blog.
RJ – Thank you
– And that Beatles song was a strong contender. But the Boomtown Rats song was just a little closer to what I was writing about…
I thought it was the Bronski Beat song (I’m showing my 80s teenagehood!)
Sarah – LOL That’s a good song, too! Interesting isn’t it how often we see things through the eyes of our generation. Sometime I will feature a Bronski Beat song.
You knocked it out of the park once again with this latest post. You nailed every point perfectly right down to an author’s obligation to provide explanations of every character’s motives, means and mindset to do what they do. A reader can’t be expected to see a work of crime fiction clear through to the end otherwise.
Just as you said, we’ll probably never know what made that sick monster snap months ago and plan such a sickening act of complete insantiy so carefully and for so long with cold, calculating and purely evil precision.
Howard – Thank you so much for the kind words
– that really means a lot to me. And you’re really right that it isn’t fair to the reader if the author doesn’t give a solid sense of what motivates a character. It’s easier of course for me to write that than it is to do it but it should be a goal of any author I think.
We may very well never why that killer took the decision to plan and carry out such a horrible, sickening attack. For my part I can’t fathom it. And in some ways it doesn’t change anything. Knowing why won’t bring back those who were killed. But if answers could provide some peace to those left behind, I wish I had them…
What a sad tragedy that happened in Colorado and in Toronto. And you’re right, the worst part is there is no reasons behind it. None that will satisfy us.
And I think that’s why I love reading mysteries. We get that explanation, that closure. We have everything tied up in the end.
Clarissa – Tragedies like the one in Toronto and the one in Colorado are so very sad and so beyond comprehension. As you say, it’s not enough to simply say, “Well, we’re talking about a psychotic person.” That just doesn’t answer all the question.
And you’ve hit on one thing I really do like about writing mysteries – there are answers to those questions. And in the murder mysteries we read, things make a little more sense…
I wonder what it is about the social conditions (and the breakdown in the mental health system) in the U.S. that fosters the type of individual acts like the one in Aurora, Colo. In Canada, where guns are everywhere, there is not this type of violence. Who can even mention a massacre like this one taking place in Canada?
Has the mental system, due to budget cuts in the states, broken down so completely, that someone like this would go unobserved and untreated?
A scientist for whom the alleged perpetrator worked says he was not “brilliant,” at all, but a mediocre student who was not up to the work of the program he was in and dropped out. Did this precipitate his actions?
Even if he is not a “terrorist,” as some others would be labeled, he did commit an act of “terror” to the victims and to the entire society.
I hope we all know why, especially the victims and their families. They deserve to know. I hope some forensic psychiatrists find out why, what snapped. Are there social reasons? Personal reasons? Academic reasons? Is he delusional and living in a Batman world where he confuses the characters with reality?
This gives a lot of food for thought, even as to the violence depicted in the in movies, on TV, etc. How are children impacted? A friend’s young grandson is affected by violence in cartoons. Then there’s nonstop violence in all types of cultural presentations.
And the question of why here when guns are owned in many countries, and can be purchased online all over the world. What responsibility does the NRA take, which wants unfettered access to all types of weapons in every state? There’s a lot here. Hopefully, we, and mostly the families, will find out something. Of course, it won’t bring back or heal their loved ones.
Kathy – You’ve raised so many thoughtful questions about this whole terrible incident. It really is difficult to say what exactly pushes someone over the edge. You’ve outlined a lot of the factors that can affect a person (social psychological, etc.). One can look at the mental health care system, access to weapons, the pressure of the academic life, violence in the media and a lot of other factors too. It’s very hard to say which of these or which combination of them will lead to the kind of awful tragedies like the one in Colorado. And as you say, in some ways it doesn’t matter; knowing why will certainly not bring back a murdered loved one. But I think humans are by nature curious. We want to know why. If knowing why brings peace to the families involved, I hope we do find out why these terrible shootings happened. I’m not sure we ever will but I hope there are answers.
The truth is probably that there are motives, but they often turn out to be out of all proportion to the act itself. I can still recall seeing a TV documentary about mental illness. A psychopathic inmate of an American top-security asylum was telling why he had killed a fellow inmate who had tried to escape from the facility with him. It turned out that his victim had bet him that he could not kill someone if he told them beforehand. The psychopath had told him that he could, and he would. Shortly after the escape he had murdered the other man, an act that contributed to him being caught. He told the interviewer “Well, I put down a wager that I could kill him, and a bet is a bet”. Sometimes, even when we get the explanation, it doesn’t really answer anything.
Skywatcher – Now, that’s a very well-taken point. What makes perfect sense to the killer may make no sense at all to others. Your example is a clear instance of that. It’s a good reminder too that even knowing exactly what a killer’s motive is may not answer all of the questions there are. And yet a lot of people do want all of those questions answered, even if the answers don’t really make sense.
I agree with Sarah that the motive often gets obscured/forgotten in crime novels these days. I wonder if it is because there aren’t actually that many credible motives for a crime (money, revenge, rejected love, jealousy, “twisted mind”) and writers are desperate to only convey “new” things (hence many books are far too convoluted for their own good?). The motive I like the least is the “mad” protagonist who has been warped by their mother, has never married, or had a relationship…..and has chapters to him (or her) self in italics. I suppose these sorts of people would be the shooters, in crime novels that would be “inspired” by these types of real-life events such as those depicted in your post. Luckily, though, most writers seem to have enough respect for the dead not to exploit these awful incidents in this way — unless I simply have not read any books about them and am blissfully unaware.
Maxine – You have a well-taken point about motives in crime fiction. There really aren’t very many believable motives for murder and authors do feel the need to take a “fresh” approach to those motives. So plots get convoluted or novels focus on things other than the motive. The other thing that happens as you say is that the killer turns out to be a serial killer. And yes, all too often those killers have terrible backgrounds and write in italics.
I’m glad too that there’s plenty of good crime fiction out there that doesn’t exploit the victims of real-life tragedies like the one in Colorado. I often wonder about the appropriateness of made-for-television dramas that exploit those events; there’ve been some of them and I always think that’s disrespectful.
I’d like to speak up for loners like myself here. No matter what the circumstances, a killer is nearly always referred to as a loner, thus condemning all of us who enjoy being alone. I’m not a hermit (I’m married and have friends) but I spend a lot of time alone and like it. I guess I enjoy my own company and I enjoy solitary pursuits like reading and writing. My father was a loner as well, a nonviolent one. Apparently the shooter in Colorado was also a loner, but that’s too simplistic an explanation for what he carefully planned and carried out. I feel so badly for the victims and their families and friends. They will never know why, because this was a massacre of strangers. I weep for them.
Barbara – You are so right. Just because a person is a loner, or a male, or anything else, doesn’t mean that person is necessarily a murderer. There isn’t anything wrong with not having a big circle of friends. Your comment is an important reminder not to paint with too broad a brush so to speak.
And that fact is why, as you say, simply saying the shooter in Colorado was a loner isn’t enough. Neither is saying the killer “must have been deranged.” Those explanations don’t really give good answers to the question of “why,” and we may never get those answers. Such terrible sorrow, though… My heart breaks for them too.
No. It is not enough to say the killer is a “loner.” It may mean in the Colorado case that he could not relate to other people. Neighbors said he was not friendly, and that if people said hello to him, he didn’t answer them.
A scientist who oversaw his work said that he was not “brilliant,” but a “mediocre” student, who work was not very good, that he had to do something challenging and left the program. There’s a lot going on here.
I hope we, especially his family, finds out something.
Again, I saw Michael Moore on CNN last night. He said that of the 23 wealthiest country, that the U.S. has 80% of the gun violence. I’d like to know why. He again brought up Canada as a country where many guns exist. The youth also see the same movies as here and play the same
violent-themed video games. There’s very little gun violence.
On motives in mystery fiction, I rather liked that of “The Suspect” in L.R. Wright’s book. It was original, but compelling. And the motive in Indridason’s Outrage. And in the Sjowall/Wahloo books. And some investigated by Guido Brunetti are creative, but understandable.
Kathy – You’re quite right that there are some solid creative motives for murder in well-written crime fiction. Thanks for sharing those good examples.
It really is an interesting question why there is so much awful gun violence in US society when other countries permit guns and a lot of people have them, but there is less gun violence. I’m not a psychologist with a deep background in those matters so I can’t answer the question but it is a good one. I wish we did have those answers…
Yes, most of the best detectives are loners. There are lots of us about, and we are just fine as loners. (or introverts or whatever word one wishes to use). I am sure, equally, there are plenty of party addicts who could be quite dangerous……….;
Maxine – Well-said! Being an introvert/loner/”the quiet type” doesn’t mean anything but that one’s, well, a loner. Or an introvert. Or “the quiet type.” And as you say there are many, many fictional murderers (and I’m sure real ones too) who have large groups of friends. This is actually a really interesting point that you and Barbara have made. Definitely post-worthy, so thanks.
I think I focus harder on motive than almost any other part of the mystery when I’m writing. That’s because I think people want to know what makes a murderer tick–what pushes them over the edge. In the case of the completely pointless killings in CO….there’s probably not going to end up being a motive that makes any sense to rational people. And that’s frustrating. This is where fiction will be more satisfying. In mysteries, it’s so much better, I think, to have a motive that the reader can understand…even if they don’t relate to it.
Elizabeth – I agree completely! That is indeed an advantage of fiction. Even though readers may hate the fact that a character committed murder, they can understand what led up to it. In crime fiction the motive makes some kind of sense. And it’s obvious at least from my perspective that you pay a lot of attention to your characters’ motives. Their behaviour always falls out naturally from the kinds of people they are, and that includes the decision of the killer to commit murder. Real life isn’t that way though and you’re probably quite right that we will never really know what pushed that Colorado shooter over the edge. You’re also right about how frustrating that is.
Random and premeditated shootings in the US, especially in schools and universities as we have seen in recent years, make it to the front pages of most newspapers in India. People in Bombay, where I live, talk about it as if it had happened in their midst. I think, it touches all of us in some way. The Colorado shooting was truly tragic, as was the mindless killings in Norway. America has done everything in its power to prevent another 9/11. It can do as much to avoid another Colorado, starting with gun control.
Prashant – You are by no means the only one who feels that way about preventing another mass shooting. It really does hurt all of us I think when something awful like this happens. Anything that harms some of us affects us all and it means a lot that people all over the world feel a sense of loss when an awful tragedy happens here. I felt the same way about the 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai. So, so horrible…