I’m not sure if I should be proud of it, but I just realized I don’t have one serial killer in my novels.  About half my books are in the mystery/suspense/thriller genre, and many of the sci-fi books have nods to that genre–for example, are Soldiers of God and No Amber Waves of Grain mystery, thriller, or sci-fi?  Readers can worry about the genre labels; I just write the story.  But it’s interesting in a self-analytic sort of way that I write a lot of crime fiction yet have no serial killers.

The first chapter of Soldiers of God reads like there’s a serial killer on the loose.  That’s intentional and about as close as I came to having one.  You might argue that Mary Jo’s John Hinckley-like pursuer in Silicon Slummin’…and Just Gettin’ By is a serial killer, but he’s not; he’s just out for revenge because she jilted him (remember that Hinckley had a thing for Jodie Foster?).  Continuing my self-analysis—I don’t think I could go to any psychologist or psychiatrist to ask why I don’t have characters who are serial killers—let me ruminate here about some potential reasons I have for avoiding them as characters.

Serial killers are ubiquitous in fiction.  From Mr. Hyde and Jack the Ripper to Hannibal Lecter and beyond, mysteries, suspense and horror stories, thrillers, and police procedurals have featured these mad villains.  I’d wager that the number of serial killers in fiction far outnumber the real ones, at least those of the latter who have been brought to justice.  I’ve read a few Father Brown mysteries, for example, and some involve serial killers—so this is really old stuff.  Freud should have written a treatise on our preoccupation with them.  The fictional universe contains too many serial killers, so I don’t need to add mine.

Are stories about serial killers just avoiding other issues?  A typical story about a serial killer is about a psycho who murders in some particularly gross and gruesome manner, maybe taunts the authorities, and matches wits with somebody from law enforcement.  Yawn.  The only Tess Gerritsen novel I’ve read was about a serial killer—it turned me off from the rest of her catalog.  I don’t know how many of Sue Grafton’s alphabet novels involve a serial killer, but I’ll pass, thank you.  Somehow, this is a “safe topic,” though.  Everyone agrees that a serial killer is bad and some hero should match wits with him (or her) and bring the perp to justice.  Yawn.  But is this attraction because many readers don’t want to be bothered with or confront the other ills of society: the illegal gun trade, child porn and sexual exploitation, spousal abuse, hidden government agendas, the abuses of capitalism, pollution and global warming, the drug trade, and so forth?  I prefer stories that make me think; I often write stories with complex themes intertwined in the plots for that reason.

Have Hollywood’s Halloween horror flicks jaded me?  Not directly.  Weirdos wielding chainsaws and others in hockey masks are a peculiar and almost comedic part of pop culture now, but I can’t say I’ve seen any of those movies.  Even most X-Files episodes were pretty formulaic, especially those in the main story arc.  Yawn.  Maybe Freddy Krueger was good for one movie, but how much can happen on that damn Elm Street?  I don’t want my characters to be caricatures.  Most serial killers in film are the latter.  Most fictional ones are too.  Real life isn’t black and white.  I like my villains to be complex, gray individuals who have good and bad elements in their psyches.  Those following my Vladimir Kalinin, for example, might have been surprised when they read No Amber Waves of Grain—he’s not just a sociopathic monster and has a human side to him.

Does shock value really have an audience?  It seems that authors writing about serial killers go out of their way to make them worse than everyone else’s.  Writers try to maximize the shock value.  But does shock value really interest readers who are exposed to reports about ISIS beheadings, murderous criminals, killer airbags, Wall Street sociopaths, and so forth in the news they read every day.  I know people who won’t read or listen to news reports for that reason; these people probably read romance novels and ignore any shocking criminal gore.  On the other hand, I suppose some people look for it because they have some vicarious necessity to see blood and guts, maybe because their lives are so boring.  Books aren’t great for satisfying the latter need—video games and cable TV are much better.

Is there only one serial killer story?  I think so.  I already outlined it above.  Here’s the short version: some psycho kills his first, decides he likes it, and keeps on going until stopped.  All done; end of story.  Sure, a skilled writer can take that basic serial killer story thread and polish it into a good novel.  Cops, lawyers, and distraught relatives of victims maybe seeking revenge make prime protagonists, for example, and there can be an infinite variety of them, each with his personal baggage that affects all those around them.  The social dynamics becomes the story, not apprehending the serial killer.  Yawn.  For me, those social dynamics are much more interesting when there are meaty themes intertwined in the plot that go beyond the simple story of a wicked killer.

Are serial killers entertaining?  Only if they’re comedic caricatures.  Otherwise, mental deficiencies directed at killing and maiming are pretty blasé.  (If you’ve had one in your family, I bet you don’t find the story entertaining at all.)  I want my sociopaths and psychos to have more complex evil agendas than those of a serial killer: greed, lust for power, religious hatred, desire to overthrow the government, and so forth.  Sure, the simpleton serial killers exist, even in real life, but they’re not interesting for me as characters in fiction.  Father Brown pretty much covered them all.  Why do we keep writing more?

So, that’s it for now—my self-analysis is done.  Your opinions, of course, might be different.  You won’t like my books then.  That’s fair.  There’s something in this reading universe for every taste.  We can’t find that variety in any other form of entertainment.

In elibris libertas…. 

This entry was posted on Thursday, November 19th, 2015 at 4:00 am and is filed under Writing. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.