by
Bobbi A. Chukran
Last
week, while re-arranging my book hoard, I came across Patricia Highsmith's
book, PLOTTING AND WRITING SUSPENSE FICTION. Then a member of my
Sisters-in-Crime group mentioned it, so I decided to re-read it.
Last time I
read the book, it didn't "resonate" with me but I decided to give it
another try. It's a short volume and easy to get through in a Sunday evening
when there isn't much else on PBS besides the Boisterous Boy's Bell Choir from
Belgravia or some such.
Patricia
Highsmith was a suspense author from Ft. Worth, Texas (my birth town) who wrote THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY and STRANGERS ON A TRAIN, her
debut novel that was adapted by Alfred Hitchcock into one of my favorite
movies.
Ms.
Highsmith admitted that the book is NOT a "how-to write" but a series
of things she learned throughout her career. Throughout my re-reading of the
book, I learned things about my own writing and had a few mini-epiphanies that
will definitely change the way I think about my work.
1.
I learned that "who-dunnits" might not be the best thing for me to
write.
Ms. Highsmith admitted that she was "not an
inventor of puzzles" and that the "mystery who-dunnit" story was
"definitely not my forte." She goes on to say that her worst book (A
GAME FOR THE LIVING) was of that type.
This
made me think about the types of stories I'm writing. I've been reading lots of
cozies and traditional locked room (puzzle) mysteries, and increasingly I have
to admit that they aren't my favorite, either. I've actually been trying to write some and
have that unsettled "queasy" feeling that comes when I go off
track.
Turns
out, my favorite short stories I've written have not been the traditional
"who-dunnits,"—they've been SUSPENSE. Even my literary short stories
have an element of suspense in them (see "Sadie and the Museum Lady" --
free to read on The Dead Mule). My first
mystery novel, LONE STAR DEATH is a sort of hybrid of suspense and traditional
who-dunnit. I'm not sure why I never noticed this before.
The
stories I like to read the most aren't traditional "who-dunnits" or
cozies. Or should I call them "dozies"? Just kidding, sort of.
The ones I like the most are the
more suspenseful types with lots of action and little twists at the end. Stories like you might
have seen on the Alfred Hitchcock TV show, or The Twilight Zone. So if I don't
like those other types, why write them? Good question!
2.
I learned that it's OK not to like all of my characters.
I recently admitted to some writer friends that
I don't like many of my characters, and I wondered why this
was so. In
her book, Highsmith also talked a lot about liking characters and the
importance of the reader caring about them. Her amoral, warped characters are
actually sympathetic. Highsmith
invented characters like Tom Ripley, a con man who became a rich
sociopath. Her admiration for the character came through as she talked about
him. And, according to Highsmith, it's valid for the author to
actually like characters like these—even the bad ones--but we don't have to in order to write a good story.
After
reading that, I realized that I DO like some of mine, but I was thinking about
my protagonist when I should have been looking in the other direction. I DO
like my villains and those like the poor luckless slob in "Dead Dames
Don't Wear Diamonds," published recently in THE ANTHOLOGY OF COZY-NOIR
(Darkhouse Books).
Now,
I need to figure what it is about the characters I DO like and about the ones I
do NOT like. Maybe I can apply some of that knowledge to new characters to make them more sympathetic to my readers.
3. I learned that my main recurring theme seems
to be REVENGE and that's OK.
Ms. Highsmith claims that every author has a
"theme" that will eventually emerge and that they should pay
attention to it. Her theme, she said, was the relationship between people (especially
men) and those sometimes life-changing or threatening encounters. This is
certainly illustrated in her first novel, STRANGERS ON A TRAIN.
Knowing
a theme is useful for an author because it helps with plotting and coming up
with ideas for new stories. Sure enough, when I flipped through my files, I
found that six stories have "revenge" as the theme. Instead of
cringing and feeling like I'm a bad person, I'm running with it.
4. I learned where that "really sour
feeling about the whole project" comes from.
I've been calling it that "queasy
feeling" and am glad to know that it's not just me and it's not the
stomach flu. The feeling that a story is "forced, self-conscious and
utterly without life" comes about when an author doesn't identify with her
character and isn't feeling the emotions of the character. Now that I know
where it comes from, perhaps I can pay more attention to it and take steps to
alleviate it. Without Pepto-Bismol.
5. I learned that authors have always struggled
with some of the same things.
Ms. Highsmith stated, "I have scarcely a
morning that doesn't bring something in the post that could be called
psychically disturbing" and brings about "anguish and muted screams."
She mentioned taxes, not being able to go on four hours' sleep any more like we
used to and the feeling that "the aim of society is to put us all out of
business." She ends the book with this advice: "…remember that
artists have existed and persisted, like the snail and the coelacanth and other
unchanging forms of organic life, since long before governments were dreamed
of."
Good
to know. And to remember.
-----
About
the Author
Bobbi
A. Chukran writes short tales of mystery & suspense from "Nameless,
Texas" featuring mirth & murder, holidays & homicide.
A
complete list of Bobbi's stories and books can be found here:
