|
|
Tom Clancy.
He's a bit of a joke among us highbrow literary types. Why? Not because he
fails factually, because I would never know the difference if he did. But
his styling of writing? For your dear editor, it's not my thing. I read a
sentence once from The Hunt for Red October and just about fell out
my seat, giggling at the alleged "syntax." So many dashes, like a bad email,
as though the comma simply didn't exist. But what do I know? "Good" writing
may have nothing to do with telling a crazy story. And the man sells a lot
of books. Computer games. Movies. I admit, I must be missing something. Maybe
that thing is a penis.
So thriller fiction is what Clancy's
doing, and given his empire, he must be the best at it. Or at least, the most
successful. The genre depends on plot and action more than the characters
who advance it, so the characters may be two-dimensional vehicles but what's
most important is the fulfillment of the story at a fast pace. The genre gets
around its unknowable characters through a dependence on the series, each
book the next chapter in a conspiracy, a story, or a the very active and dangerous
life of a leading man. At some point the story or the character, whether or
not you ever really know him, becomes clear enough through his actions that
you absolutely have to know what happens next.
It's an interesting enterprise.
I think thriller writers give a lot of credit to their readers, allowing them
to make a character into the person who they think he is - who they want him
to be. With questions about the character, the reader can feel the pain of
the action as though it is happening directly to him. And this is where the
suspense comes in. Where there is the tangible minutiae of weaponry and conspiracy
there is the question of where it's going, how bad it's going to get, and
how the day will be saved. Thriller writers are masters of leaving you hanging
for all this. They have a knack for bringing all the tiny details together
while a reader can so closely feel the relief when the problem is at last
solved.
The editor again refers to Wikipedia
for some historical information on this genre, as there is no university
English course that bothers with this stuff, which, like a lot of writing
that's skipped, could be a mistake. Based solely on suspense and adventure,
we can look to the work of Edgar Allan Poe and Robert Louis Stevenson
as a beginning. You do sure as hell wonder what's going on in "The Tell-Tale
Heart," or just how Robinson Crusoe is going to make it. Then, the early
twentieth-century phenomenon of the dime novel and pulp fiction magazines
helped popularize this and other genres, such as horror and Westerns.
Your editor believes that although I may have no use for the writing,
dime novels and pulp magazines helped bring literacy for everyone in America
and the world. This, my friends, is a public good.
To be more modern about it, Wiki
notes that the modern thriller was brought forth to us by an author named
Edgar Wallace. He wrote in the 20s and 30s, post-war but Depression-heavy,
bringing relief to the weary through fast action and dashing characters. There
are probably those for whom Wallace's work was a bit of a savior, a dream
of something that couldn't be had then. This type of writing, as fantastic
as it was, probably helped a lot of people through their troubles.
Next Wiki notes the invention
of the spy thriller by Ian Fleming, of 007 fame, in the 1950s. Unlike many
thriller writers, though, Fleming took some time to develop James Bond, making
him as appealing as the action he advanced. Alistair MacLean helped out then,
too, writing the same fast-paced, action novels Fleming made popular. And
the movies didn't hurt. Personally, I can't believe Pierce Brosnan's getting
fired. That's nuts.
Robert Ludlum came along next,
satisfying not critics but a whole lot of readers. Not to be ignored by Hollywood
his books made their way to the screen as well, which makes your editor wonder
if they are not so much a much a novel but a script treatment.
I guess that depends. Plenty of
thriller writers do not enjoy the same celluloid fame as a Ludlum or a Clancy,
with the exception of Robin Cook and Michael Chrichton. Clive Cussler, James
Patterson and John Sandford, among others, continue on with their work, pushing
out book after book of improbable stuff written in a the way that keeps a
lot of people up all night, turning the pages faster than a spy in a car chase.
I've done what I can here but
I am certain I'm missing plenty. So please, dear thriller readers, enlighten
us with what you know. -ed. |
|
