For those of you who wrote asking about Thriller Guy's condition after eye surgery, thanks, TG is fine and will undergo surgery on the other eye tomorrow. The following blog was typed using only two fingers and one eye. The things TG does for his loyal readers...
Mrs. Thriller Guy, (MTG) TG’s
wife, often complains that TG spends too much time discussing the finer points
of the writer’s life and the technical aspects of novel writing. “Too much
inside baseball,” she says. Well, these are the things that TG finds interesting,
so those of you who have wondered in here looking for sex tips or cat pictures you’ll
have to go elsewhere. At least today. But come back later, who knows when TG
will slip in a little pornography to up his stats.
TG recently reviewed a
thriller, which will remain unnamed because of legal reasons, and was
disappointed in both the writing and the fact that he never really engaged with
the story. It might not always sound like it in this blog, but TG starts every
book with the hope that it will be good or better than good. This one wasn’t. A
big flaw in the novel was the conflicted villain, who ricocheted between
feeling simply misunderstood and being flat out insane, but the real problem
was the author’s incessant attempt to scientifically explain what was
essentially an unexplainable science plot. The villain had built a machine that
enabled him to not only see into the future in 24-hour increments, but at the
same time the same machine could be used to cause earthquakes and tsunamis. It
seems to TG that one superpower would have been hard enough to sell, but no,
various characters yammered on for pages and pages about how all this was scientifically
feasible (though readers with even the slightest scientific knowledge would
know that it was not) until TG wanted to throw the author into his time machine
where he would be sucked down into a miniature, captive black hole. This got TG
thinking about the phrase, “suspension of disbelief.”
TG’s area of criticism,
book-wise, is the contemporary thriller. To read these books, one must have a
very high tolerance for believing the unbelievable. Heroes get shot, sometimes
multiple times, and are quickly patched up and back out on the street. CSI-type
lab results are available to detectives within minutes rather than days or
weeks. Secret anti-terrorism units headed by the president of the US sanction
killings and approve improbable missions with great regularity, ditto government
agencies that have the technology to listen in on the phone calls of everyone
on the planet. Oops, no need to suspend disbelief for that last one. In other
words, many of the hallowed tropes of thriller fiction must automatically come
under the suspension of disbelief blanket. TG accepts this as part of the reader/writer
deal. So what happened in the aforementioned novel where the villain unleashed his
oh-so-versatile time travel machine?
(Side Bar: TG’s
alter ego, Allen Appel, writes time travel stories. Years ago his editor/writer
pal Bhob gave him some excellent advice, which TG has noted on this blog
before, “Never try to explain the unexplainable.” Appel has hewn to this advice
through five of the Pastmaster
novels. He is now writing the sixth, in which he is flying in the face of this
dictum. TG is reserving judgment on whether this tactic will work until the
novel is done. It may be a mistake; it may work. We’ll see.)
Wikipedia has an excellent
article on the subject of suspension of disbelief. In this article, they
discuss the common definitions and explanations. It turns out that the phrase
was coined in “1817 by the poet and aesthetic philosopher Samuel Taylor
Coleridge, who suggested that if a writer could infuse a ‘human interest
and a semblance of truth’ into a fantastic tale, the reader would suspend
judgment concerning the implausibility of the narrative.”
As time passed, the phrase
began to take a slightly different meaning, so that by the 20th
century it was agreed that it was incumbent on the reader (or someone who was watching a movie or a play or video
game) to be the one to suspend his or her disbelief before even starting the
book; you show up ready to believe whatever the writer is dishing out. So, to
ask the question again, why wasn’t TG able to swallow what this particular
author was serving up with his time-travel machine? The answer was/is, because
he, the author, wasn’t a good enough writer to convince, maybe enthrall is a better word, TG into
believing in the fictional world he was crafting. This is a return to Coleridge’s
notion that in the earlier understanding of the idea it is incumbent on the writer to make the trick work. This was expanded
in an essay that J. R. R. Tolkien wrote in 1939, where he was defending the
writing of fairy stories. It’s a long essay and pretty dense in places, but TG
found it enlightening. Here’s the crux of Tolkien’s argument, at least for our
purposes:
"Children
are capable, of course, of literary belief, when the story-maker's art is good
enough to produce it. That state of mind has been called "willing
suspension of disbelief." But this does not seem to me a good description
of what happens. What really happens is that the story-maker proves a
successful "sub-creator." He makes a Secondary World which your mind
can enter. Inside it, what he relates is "true": it accords with the
laws of that world. You therefore believe it, while you are, as it were,
inside. The moment disbelief arises, the spell is broken; the magic, or rather
art, has failed. You are then out in the Primary World again, looking at the
little abortive Secondary World from outside. If you are obliged, by kindliness
or circumstance, to stay, then disbelief must be suspended (or stifled),
otherwise listening and looking would become intolerable. But this suspension
of disbelief is a substitute for the genuine thing, a subterfuge we use when
condescending to games or make-believe, or when trying ... to find what virtue
we can in the work of an art that has for us failed."
So
for TG, the writer whose book he was reading for review failed at creating his
Secondary World. And this wasn’t just because his time machine didn’t adhere to
the rules of physics, or that the rules of some of the other tropes of fiction
were broken, but because the guy simply wasn’t a good enough writer to pull off
the trick of writing a successful novel. His villain was inconsistent and
unbelievable, some of the other main characters were, again, inconsistent,
switching sides back and forth just to create a false illusion of twists and
turns, his back story rambled on to little effect, many details of the story
were glossed over in unbelievable ways when a little extra work could have made
them palatable, his basic structure was often garbled, jumping back and forth
between various characters in yet again an attempt to gin up some excitement.
And yet, the book was published by a major publisher, where, presumably editors
worked at editing books, editors who could have pointed out many of the
mistakes the author was making, but who didn’t. Mistakes that could have been
easily fixed. And why didn’t they? That’s a topic for a whole ‘nuther blog, one
that TG will get to someday when he can convince an editor to come clean on why
publishers seem content to publish books that are deeply flawed by mistakes
that could have been fixed.
And
TG hastens to add, this was not the worst book he has read in the last year. It
just happened to have been the one that brought the phrase suspension of
disbelief to mind. So what’s the takeaway here?
Don’t
expect the reader to do the heavy lifting when it comes to buying whatever
premise you’ve based your novel on. It’s the writer’s job to create a world
wherein all things are logical and consistent.
It’s
not enough to explain the more difficult, high concept aspects of the plot, you
need to pay attention to everything else as well. Because if you do, you will
have gone a great distance in getting the reader to believe what you want him
to believe, what he must believe if the novel is going to be successful.
One
good way to do it is to ask your beta readers to tell you if you have succeeded
or failed in doing this. And then be man or woman enough to take comments that
are given and work on those aspects of the work that they refer to.
Remember
one of TG’s dictums: When a reader tells a writer that something strikes him as
being wrong, that does not mean the reader is correct. What it does mean
is that some aspect of what has been commented on needs work. It needs to be “fixed”
so that it fits and works successfully within the Secondary World of the novel.
It’s
not enough to have a great concept, a shiny machine, a sexy, superhuman hero
and an arch villain of incomparable evilness, you need to craft an entire world
where all of these aspects can thrive, and be believed. Within that Secondary World.
The
secret? If you’ve created your world so it is consist and, more importantly, interesting,
readers will believe anything. Yup, anything. So put your time in on every
aspect of your novel. Don’t try to convince us that the machine will
work, show us that the machine works.
“I once saw a
so-called “children's pantomime,” the straight story of Puss-in-Boots, with
even the metamorphosis of the ogre into a mouse. Had this been mechanically
successful it would either have terrified the spectators or else have been just
a turn of high-class conjuring. As it was, though done with some ingenuity of
lighting, disbelief had not so much to be suspended as hanged, drawn, and
quartered.”
TG knows exactly
how Tolkien felt.
But forget the
books where you have to hang, draw and quarter disbelief. TG suggests we
remember the great ones, where the unbelievable is perfectly believable, where
the Secondary World becomes the Primary World, at least while you’re reading
them.
Or writing them.