For No Mere Mortal Can Resist the Evil of the Thriller*

An exchange of emails and an interesting comment exchange (Thanks, Jan!) have got me to thinking about thrillers. What is it about the thriller that is so appealing? It’s not only the fact that well-written thrillers have solid plots and interesting characters. All well-written crime fiction has those elements. So what do thrillers have that makes them so popular with so many people? There are a lot of possible answers to this question; I’ll just offer a few thoughts.

I think one appeal of the thriller has to do with adrenaline – thanks, Jan, for this inspiration. That “adrenaline rush” can be awfully addictive. It’s the reason people go bungee-jumping and zip-lining. It’s part of the reason people are avid followers of their favourite sport. And a well-written thriller arguably gives readers the same kind of “rush.” For instance, in Scott Turow’s Presumed Innocent, Kindle County deputy prosecutor Rožat “Rusty” Sabich is assigned to investigate the murder of one of his colleagues Carolyn Polhemus. Sabich begins work on the case, but doesn’t tell his boss Raymond Horgan that he has a very personal interest in this case: Sabich was involved with Polhemus until a few months before she was murdered. When Horgan discovers Sabich’s secret he removes his deputy from the case. Soon afterwards evidence begins to suggest that Sabich himself is the killer. In fact, there’s enough evidence to arrest him and bring him to trial. Sabich engages Alejandro “Sandy” Stern to defend him and together, the two rush to find out who killed Polhemus and framed Sabich. There is a real sense of urgency in this novel and that’s part of what provides the “adrenaline rush.” Sabich’s freedom is at stake and even though he claims he’s not guilty, there’s not much at first to support him. And then too there’s the fact that, for reasons I won’t go into (no spoilers here!) you could call Sabich an unreliable narrator. Is he really innocent? That question also adds to the suspense and therefore the adrenaline level, as you might say, in this story.

There’s a similar sense of danger and urgency (although expressed in a different way) in Roger Smith’s work. In Dust Devils for instance, Cape Town former journalist Robert Dell, his wife Rosie and their two children are ambushed one day while they’re on the road. Dell survives but his wife and children don’t. As if his loss isn’t enough, Dell is suspected of the murder and is soon imprisoned. Dell is innocent and that’s what he tells the police, but they don’t believe him and it’s soon clear that he’s being framed for the murders. Right away there’s a sense of danger as Dell is taken to prison with every assumption that he’ll be found guilty in a perfunctory trial. Then unexpectedly, his father Bobby Goodbread finds a way to rescue his son. The two leave Cape Town and begin to search for the person who really is responsible for the murders of Dell’s wife and children. But the killer, a powerful Zulu named Inja Mazibuko, is hand-in-glove with the minister of justice. So he and his allies are a force to be reckoned with. There is real danger from Mazibuko and those he commands, and not only for Dell and Goodbread. Two other major characters in this novel, a former minor bureaucrat Disaster Zondi, and Mazibuko’s bride-to-be Sonto, also risk everything as they too, go up against Mazibuko. That peril adds to the “adrenaline rush” in this novel.

It’s not just the adrenaline rush that makes thrillers so popular. Readers want to be engaged in the stories they read, and the action in a lot of thrillers, and the pace of that action, keep many readers absorbed. For instance, there’s a great deal of action in James Craig’s Never Apologise, Never Explain. That’s in part the story of the murder of Agatha Mills, a seemingly inoffensive older-middle-aged woman who lived quietly with her husband Henry not far from the British Museum. At first, Inspector John Carlyle and his assistant Joe Szyskowski believe that Henry Mills killed his wife; after all, a spouse usually makes a very likely murder suspect. But Mills claims he’s innocent and in fact, he says that his wife had made political enemies and that they are responsible for her murder. Soon enough, Carlyle gets very strong evidence that Mills was right. So now, Carlyle has to deal with diplomatic protocol, international killers and more as he searches for the killer. In the meantime, an acquaintance Amelia Jacobs asks Carlyle to help her employer Sam Laidlaw. Sam’s worried because her son Jake’s father, local gangster Michael Hagger, has been threatening to take the boy and might very well carry out his threat. If that happens, Jake could be in real danger. Carlyle agrees to talk to Hagger but by the time he gets to it it’s too late; Jake and Hagger have disappeared. Events in this novel move quickly as Carlyle tries desperately to find Jake before something awful happens to the boy if it hasn’t already.

There’s plenty of swift action too in Lindy Cameron’s Redback. In that novel, we meet Team Redback, a group of Australian crack retrieval specialists led by Bryn Gideon. When a group of rebels on the Pacific Island of Laui invades the Pacific Tourism and Enviro-Trade Conference and takes the delegates hostage, Gideon and her team are called in to rescue the conferees. Not long afterwards, the team learns of other terror incidents in different parts of the world. There’s train sabotage in France, a murder in Japan and one in London, and an explosion at a U.S. military base. Gradually, journalist Scott Dreher begins to put the pieces together and discovers that the connection among these incidents is a shadowy terrorist group that’s using a war simulation video game to recruit and train new members. When Team Redback discovers this the hunt is on for the terrorists and their leaders and as they go up against each other, a lot happens and it happens fairly quickly. That kind of pacing and timing often keeps readers turning and clicking pages.

Another aspect of thrillers that appeals to readers is the sense of suspense – of not knowing what’s coming next. Of course, all well-written crime fiction has some sense of suspense to it but in thrillers, the suspense is often particularly emphasised. For instance, in Thomas Harris’ Red Dragon, we meet FBI profiler Will Graham, who is persuaded to come out of retirement to help catch a serial killer nicknamed the Tooth Fairy. Graham begins his investigation of some of the crime scenes where the Tooth Fairy has struck and realises that he is going to need help to catch this killer. His help will come in the person of brilliant but psychopathic serial killer Hannibal Lecter, whom Graham himself caught a few years earlier. Real suspense builds as Graham faces off against Lecter – no mean feat – and later against The Tooth Fairy. The reader does not know at first exactly how much Lecter will help Graham, nor at what price. We also don’t know how and when The Tooth Fairy will be caught. Harris uses the buildup of tension and suspense very effectively in this novel.

There’s quite a lot of psychological suspense in much of Ruth Rendell’s work too. For instance, in her psychological thriller 13 Steps Down, we meet exercise equipment repairer Mix Cellini. Cellini takes a flat in a house owned by Gwendolyn Chawcer, who was the victim of a tyrannical father and has never really had a life of her own. Cellini himself is not exactly mentally completely sound; he’s got several phobias and insecurities. He and Chawcer don’t get on well, but they do establish a business relationship that works well enough. Then Cellini meets and becomes obsessed with beautiful model Merissa Nasha in the course of his work. He also learns about the life of notorious serial killer Dr. Richard Christie and becomes fascinated with it. These two obsessions lead to tragedy and there is a great deal of suspense as Cellini’s obsessions grow and Chawcer’s house and its history add to that buildup of tension and suspense.

There are other elements too that draw readers to well-written thrillers. If you’re a fan of thrillers, what is it that draws you to them? If you write thrillers, what is it that appeals to you about writing them?

 

 

 

*NOTE: The title of this post is a line from Michael Jackson’s Thriller. Oh, now, come on! Did I have a choice? ;-)

About these ads

26 Comments

Filed under James Craig, Lindy Cameron, Roger Smith, Ruth Rendell, Scott Turow, Thomas Harris

26 Responses to For No Mere Mortal Can Resist the Evil of the Thriller*

  1. For me it’s not just the rush/excitement that reading a great thriller brings, but the connection with characters that I care about. I want that emotional connection, so that when they are in danger I feel their fear. When heartbroken, I cry with and for them. And I celebrate their successes and joys as well. Without that connection, without LIKING (or in some cases hating) a character, the story falls flat. *shrug* I’m an avid reader of thrillers, by the way, and my debut thriller launches this fall–so I hope I got it right (er, write!).

    • Amy – I like your play on words :-) – nicely done. And you’ve a well-taken point too. When one’s reading a thriller, where the characters really are in grave danger, one can connect because of that urgency. As you say, one might hate a character or love a character, but if one’s not neutral then one’s going to care when the danger gets serious. That’s precisely the reason in my opinion that thrillers need to have well-developed characters; I very much like Deon Meyer’s work, for example, for that reason. Yes, there’s action, perils, violence and so on, but Meyer doesn’t forget to create realistic characters. And I wish you all the very best with your release.

      • Thanks Margot. I totally agree about the well-defined characters who are changed by living through the story (for good or ill). People the reader wants to root for are the best–the blood and guts, shoot-’em-up action gets wearing after a while. After all, even Superman has to care about Lois Lane and dodge the kryptonite risks or readers would know he always wins and why should they invest the time or emotion to read?

        Great discussion. I’ll visit the blog again!

        • Amy – I like your Superman example! I’m so glad you’re enjoying the discussion too, and I very much appreciate your terrific contribution to it. You’re quite right that too much focus on the action and not enough on the characters grates on the nerves after a while. It gets boring, too.

  2. Thrillers and mysteries almost always end neatly, with loose ends tied up, and justice prevailing. I like the nice tidy endings.

    • Harvee – Nice, tidy endings can be very satisfying can’t they? Sometimes it’s good to get the feeling that the “bad guys” will “get theirs” and the “good guys” will win out.

  3. Skywatcher

    There is a strong element in the thriller of vicariously enjoying breaking out of dull routine and putting one’s life on the line. We can enjoy hardship and deprivation without having to actually experience either. Nearly all of Dennis Wheatley’s Duc de Richleau novels start with the main characters enjoying a beautiful dinner, along with fine wines and cigars. By the time we get a few chapters in we know that they will be on the run from various bad guys, but we remember that those luxuries are waiting for them at home. How they return to the status quo is part of what keeps us reading a certain sort of thriller.

    • Skywatcher – That’s a very well-taken point. When we read thrillers, we can safely experience what’s like to be in real danger, to escape from that danger and so on. Part of the appeal of thrillers is that they take us out of our routines.

  4. Margot: I am reading less thrillers than I used to read. I do not relish cartoon level credibility. I found Christopher Reichs’ book Rules of Betrayal on a possible missing nuclear device defied belief. I also dislike the current trend to fill the book with bodies. The Gray Man by Mark Greaney was a good story but the body count was incredible. If there were more thrillers like Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth I would be reading thrillers more often. I roared through the book.

    • Bill – Oh, I could not agree with you more! Thrillers with cartoon-like characters and no connection with reality don’t hold my attention very well. Now Day of the Jackal is another story altogether and it’s a thriller I’d recommend strongly. I’m glad you mentioned it. Interesting point too about the high body count in lots of today’s thrillers. It’s very unsuccessful disguise for a lack of plot and solid suspense in my opinion.

  5. I enjoy thrillers for a combination of all these elements – the adrenaline rush, the suspense and the engaging action. If I feel out of breath when I put a thriller down, then I know the author has done an excellent job of placing me in the story. Another great post Margot.

    Mason
    Thoughts in Progress

    • Mason – Why, thank you :-) – I’m glad you enjoyed it. And I know what you mean about a well-written thriller, too. If a thriller author has done her or his job, then the reader should put down the book with no idea of how much time has passed. When the author creates solid and interesting characters, a strong sense of suspense and believable action and plot, the result can be one of those memorable reading experiences.

  6. kathy d.

    Good post. I enjoy some thrillers, not all, not those with body counts right and left, strewn along the road. To me it shows a lack of creative thinking and/or good writing and an attitude of (by publisher or writer): Let’s just kill off more people, brutally and via different methods. Let’s just substitute more dead bodies for some real hard work thinking, plotting, filling in characters and writing good stuff.
    A favorite thriller of mine is Nemesis by Jo Nesbo. Good plotting, fascinating characters (especially the Roma gangster), intrigues, twists and turns, but no unnecessary deaths — and some heft to the story. It’s a page-turner, but does not speak to the lowest common denominator. There are even a few social issues added, like the mistreatment of Roma people in Norway. It’s a thinking person’s roller-coaster ride.
    And I’d also say that Deon Meyer’s 13 Hours is a not putdownable thriller, too. And it’s well-done. And some fo Linwood Barclay’s thrillers are fun.
    A lot is expected of writers to write a good thriller. Sadly, many succumb to forumlas. This doesn’t have to be done, but I think publishers and booksellers often skew what a writer wants to do in a pulp fiction direction — written quickly, lots of dead bodies, brutality against women and the “good” guy gets the “bad” guy in the end, perhaps even shoots him.
    Ho, hum, boring!
    It’s possible to write good ones.

    • Kathy – I agree with you that writing a high-quality thriller isn’t easy. As you say, there’s a lot of temptation to go for a very high body count, or a particularly brutal killer, or some other formulaic device. But it is possible, as authors such as Deon Meyer and Jo Nesbø have shown us, to write a really high-quality thriller with strong characters. In novels such as Nemesis the plot doesn’t depend on how many people and how horrible their deaths are. It depends on a solid story that keeps the reader’s interest.And when that happens, a thriller can indeed be enjoyable.

  7. I agree with Bill. Rarely does anyone write thrillers like Frederick Forsyth, Robert Ludlum, Jack Higgins, Craig Thomas, Robin Cook, Ken Follett, Alistair MacLean or John Le Carré. Tom Clancy is good but he has glamourised the thriller. I like thrillers because of their sheer pace and the excitement and entertainment they generate. MacLean wrote some very realistic thrillers as evident from the blockbusters — “The Guns of Navarone,” “Ice Station Zebra” and “Where Eagles Dare.” Very realistic, too.

    • Prashant – You’ve mentioned some very fine thriller authors. And you’ve got a very well-taken point that one element of a good thriller is that the characters and stories are realistic. If the story stretches credibility too far or is too “slick” and glamourous, it loses appeal.

  8. I suppose it depends to some extent on how you define a thriller. I like suspense in a novel, and few do that better than Karin Altvegen, but I’d only call one of her books a “thriller” in terms of an exciting, action-filled plot. I am not sure I see Red Dragon/Manhunter as a “thriller” either, or Presumed Innocent – at least not in their entirety, as neither was an action book, & I think of “thrillers” as being of the James Bond or “24″ school.

    Like Bill, I read fewer of these novels these days, in which I think character and realism can take third & fourth places behind action and excitement. I also like books that aren’t predicatable, & many thrillers these days are very predictable with their themes of terrorism, single heroes preventing some disaster, etc.

    • Oh, and the conspiracies, forgot those ;-)

    • Maxine – You know, you’ve touched on something that made this post a bit of a challenge to write: how exactly does one define a thriller? And different people define thriller differently. If it’s just action then you’re quite right that Presumed Innocent and Read Dragon aren’t really thrillers. If it’s suspense then they are, but then, a lot of crime fiction is suspenseful. So yes absolutely; the way one defines thriller has a lot to do with one’s feelings about the sub-genre. Thanks too for mentioning Karin Altvegen. I always appreciate your contributions because you think of excellent examples that I miss out.
       
      You’re right too that many of today’s thrillers can get formulaic and it starts when there is less focus on the characters and a solid interesting plot and more on action. When that happens everything can get extremely predictable.

  9. Skywatcher

    The movies have had a very real influence on literary thrillers. Something like ROGUE MALE by Geoffrey Household has a brilliant central idea (man tries to assassinate Hitler, fails, and is hunted across pre-war Europe) but the story that follows is realistic and plausible. The hero is human, fallible and constantly in danger. Household was possibly influenced by the more human heroes of people like John Buchan, but modern writers can seem more in thrall of the film thrillers, where the hero is frequently capable of superhuman feats. The original James Bond is no Superman. More than one of the books ends with him in hospital, recovering from his injuries.

    • Skywatcher – Now, that’s an excellent point! Films have definitely had an effect on the kinds of thrillers that are written today and on the way the stories and characters are portrayed. Thanks too for mentioning HOusehold’s work. I’ll confess I’ve not read Rogue Male, but the plot sounds as though it’s a realistic story with a human protagonist.

  10. I guess because I write crime fiction/thrillers, I try to have those three elements in them. I love the thrill of reading them; I have no problem finishing a book in a day or two. I really want to check out Rendall’s book too.

    • Clarissa – Oh, I was hoping you’d comment, because I know you write thrillers. And I think you include all three elements effectively – not an easy task! I hope you’ll get the chance to read 13 Steps Down. Rendell is really so talented and this one is a standalone, so the reader doesn’t need to make a commitment, if you want to call it that, to a series.

  11. Ooh, this made me think. I wonder if there is an appeal to different aspects of our mind. Thriller appeal to the instinctual, primal side while mysteries appeal to the deliberative, cerebral side. There are a few books that straddle the mystery-thriller genre and do it well. I’d add Dennis Lehane to that mix though I have only read Shutter Island so far. It had elements of both though at the end I guess it was rightly a thriller with a twist.

    • Peter – Now that’s a very intriguing possibility – that different aspects of our brains are extra-engaged depending on which sub-genre we read. I’m not a neurobiologist but your idea makes some sense. And with Lehane’s and some other authors whose work straddles that line as you say, perhaps several parts of our brains are engaged at once. Really intriguing!

What's your view? I'd love to hear it.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s