# What you look for most in a thriller?



## Scribejohn (Jul 2, 2011)

The last few years there has been an increased focus on pace-driven thrillers. 

But is that what mainly attracts you and holds your interest, or do you prefer thrillers which are more character driven and detailed? Or is plot your bag: a keen-edged plot will be the most important factor for you? Or is it a careful balance of all three you like to see - well sketched characters and strong multi-layered plot, but not at the expense of pace. 

And, having given what you feel makes the ideal thriller, who (for you) are the best exponents of blending the elements you like: Harlan Coben, Greg Isles, Daniel Silva, John Grisham, Michael Connelly, David Baldacci, Janet Evanovich, Dan Brown, Linwood Barclay...?


----------



## Fredster (Apr 11, 2011)

Personally, I'm a big fan of plot and pace. I love books that have a slow start, then ramp into high gear until the end. No matter what anyone says about Dan Brown's writing, he's really good at the hooks that make you say, "just one more chapter before I turn off the light," and to me, that's what it's all about.

I love Harlan Coben's work and have read all his books, but I'm starting to feel like they have a similar theme. Notably, "some event from protagonist's past has resulted in an upheaval in his life today, plus an unexpected twist at the end."

Other good plotters / pacers include Michael Crichton (I hate that we won't be seeing more from him), Douglas Preston, Lincoln Child, and Dean Koontz.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Character driven plots and a single POV.  I'm not big on the flashes into the psycho mind.


----------



## B Regan Asher (Jun 14, 2011)

Like with so many things, I think a good novel needs balance: a careful blend of characters, plot and pace.  But I must admit that I am most often grabbed by a particular story type:  the rise of an underdog.  I think that's why I enjoy John Grisham's novels.  The "justice" system gives him tons of underdog material.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

I love a tightly-written plot that, ideally, slowly ratchets up the tension.  I also like compelling, three-dimensional characters, but that is true for any novel.


----------



## Nick Wastnage (Jun 16, 2011)

If you want a different type of thriller that's strong on three-dimensional characters; about choices, family values, loyalty and,ultimately violent redemption, try George Pelecanos. His books will burn into your brain.


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

Pace alone is nothing much. I read everything that Michael Connelly, John Connolly, Harlan Coben and Lee Child put on paper because they're so complicated and excellent with breathtaking suspense that comes a lot from caring so much about the characters. But my ideal thrillers lean more toward an almost or literally paranormal sense of evil or madness, which I find in Mo Hayder, Thomas Harris (before _Hannibal_, when everything fell apart!), Shirley Jackson, Daphne DuMaurier, and Barbara Vine. I also love Nicci French for her/his psychological twistedness, and Roger Ellory for plot and poetry.

Your _Ascension Day_ is being really good, John - I started it yesterday.


----------



## Dr. Laurence Brown (Jun 23, 2011)

While I enjoy a paced plot, I'm a bigger fan of character development. If the characters aren't real then the plot isn't going to hold my attention either.


----------



## mrockzzz (Jun 29, 2011)

Personally i feel there is no movie which you can really call it a HORROR movie...Still waiting for a movie which can Pee me Off .. lolz


----------



## Scribejohn (Jul 2, 2011)

Alexandra Sokoloff said:


> Pace alone is nothing much. I read everything that Michael Connelly, John Connolly, Harlan Coben and Lee Child put on paper because they're so complicated and excellent with breathtaking suspense that comes a lot from caring so much about the characters. But my ideal thrillers lean more toward an almost or literally paranormal sense of evil or madness, which I find in Mo Hayder, Thomas Harris (before _Hannibal_, when everything fell apart!), Shirley Jackson, Daphne DuMaurier, and Barbara Vine. I also love Nicci French for her/his psychological twistedness, and Roger Ellory for plot and poetry.
> 
> Your _Ascension Day_ is being really good, John - I started it yesterday.


Hi Alexandra. I hope you like it. We share much of that list - Coben, Connelly (both of them), Lee Child, early Thomas Harris. But I've always rated Peter Blauner highly (think he's underrated), as he's one of the best at sketching characters with sharp angles. Tom Rob Smith's Child 44 the other years was great, Shadow of the Wind a perfect literary thriller, and Lehane when he's on form takes some beating.


----------



## LeonardDHilleyII (May 23, 2011)

Strong characters, riveting pace, and things that make you go, "Ah-ha!"  Didn't see it coming.


----------



## JeffMariotte (Jun 4, 2011)

I have to second (or third) Connelly and Connolly, Pelecanos and Lehane and their spiritual brother Richard Price, early Thomas Harris, when he cared, and Peter Blauner. Good to see him in this discussion. Newton Thornburgh, when he was healthy, was terrific, as was Thomas Gifford--both underappreciated today, sadly. And James Lee Burke outwrites just about everyone on the planet.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Technically some of the authors being mentioned aren't thriller writers, they're suspense writers.  The difference:
In a thriller the stakes are high-- very high.  If the protagonist fails, something really bad on a large scale happens.
In a suspense the stakes are the characters--their fate.  If the protagonist fails, something bad happens to the characters, but the rest of the world chugs on as usual.
It's not a rule and not a big deal, but the focus is different.


----------



## MarionSipe (May 13, 2011)

I think that balance is important.  The plot has to have some bearing on the character, and not just the "stakes" if everything goes wrong.  I like a plot that touches the characters in some way, whether it brings up the past or relates to their life in ways they haven't fully realized or acknowledged.  I also like a story that challenges the character, and if the plot isn't good, it can't do those things effectively.

That said, if your characters really hook me, I'll put up with a lot!


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

With the thriller/suspense distinction, I'm more for the thriller. Altho I want a fast-paced plot with lots of suspense and details. For characters, if they are well-written, then I enjoy them and get into them. If they are not, then I end up trying to blot out their annoying personal lives where they've made lots of poor decisions! LOL  And if they are just basic and bland, fine...as long at the story is well told and the plot good.

I like Grisham and Deaver, Ridley Pearson, and I recommend Nevada Barr if people havent read her.


----------



## silenceiseverything (Oct 8, 2010)

While I agree that pace alone can't sustain a story, for me to keep reading a mystery/thriller of an author I have no previous experience with, I need to be drawn in throughout the first 100 pages.  Once I'm already drawn in, I need to have something with intriguing characters to keep my interest up.  However, for me, there is nothing worse than a slow-going thriller.


----------



## Nick Wastnage (Jun 16, 2011)

I guess I agree with most of the recent comments. But leaving the technical issue to one side, surely the answer is in the word thriller. If the we're thrilled by the characters, the plot, the suspense and the dialogue and we keep turning the pages until we finish, that surely qualifies as a thriller.


----------



## Steven Slavick (May 15, 2011)

I expect a good plot with any thriller, because the word "thrill" is in thriller, which necessitates that there must be twists and turns. But if the author creates a good character and maintains a good pace, sometimes even a more mundane plot could still be a good thriller. I feel that Harlan Coben is the best thriller writer in fiction today because he creates real/believeable characters and his pace is ramped up. Robert Crais, while still giving believeable heroes, creates just as many twists with a heavier plot and an even quicker pace than Coben. Jeffery Deaver is also fantastic at creating twists and his pace is non-stop. Likewise, he usually creates some pretty good characters. Thomas Perry is an underrated thriller writer. He creates some vibrant characters, but his pacing is a bit slower, but this only adds to the depth of his plotting because he'll throw in a twist you wouldn't have foreseen.

_--- edited... no self-promotion outside the Book Bazaar forum. please read our Forum Decorum thread._


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

So Bob, are you saying that a book that has the death or rape of a child - for example - as stakes, rather than a nuclear explosion - for example -  isn't technically a thriller?


----------



## JeffMariotte (Jun 4, 2011)

I think that definition of the difference between "thriller" and "suspense" is pretty arbitrary, and certainly not hewn to in the publishing business. I was a contributor to the International Thriller Writers' book _Thrillers: 100 Must Reads_ (and this is not self-promotion--I don't know if it's available as an e-book, but my contribution [and everybody else's] was donated, so we're not making any money from it, and there were no such guidelines presented to us for that effort. The book discusses all sorts of thrillers, with stakes ranging from the very deeply personal, to earth-shattering.


----------



## Tess St John (Feb 1, 2011)

The surprises!!!!


----------



## Scribejohn (Jul 2, 2011)

Tess St John said:


> The surprises!!!!


We would hope you mean the twists and turns rather than 'I'm surprised how bad it was' LOL. Or (hopefully) good.


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

Jeff, I agree, I've never heard of any guidelines to that effect, either.  That's why I'd like to know where Bob got the definition.

Personally I think Nick and Steven are exactly right - "thriller" is a big umbrella for a whole lot of subgenres with the key element being "thrills". That can (and I think should!) encompass thrills of terror, thrills of sexual chemistry, thrills of action, thrills of suspense - and any author can choose to emphasize different colors of that thrill spectrum.

Okay, mixing some analogies, there, but the coffee hasn't kicked in yet.

I think it's really useful for authors to be aware of what KIND of thrill they're trying to evoke in their reader or audience.
And stakes - well, it seems to me stakes are always completely in the hands of the author. If we care about the outcome desperately, either for one person or the world, that's high stakes, and that's high suspense AND high thrills, too.


----------



## ChrisHoward (May 14, 2010)

I'd say over the last few years I've become less demanding about pace and more into character, setting. I love thrillers, and not just spies and conspiracies, set outside the US--Japan, Australia, India, South America.

Chris


----------



## TiffanyLovering (Jul 1, 2011)

When I read a thriller I like vivid descriptions that help you really feel the tension of the book.  These are the types of books that I want to know exactly what the characters are seeing in detail so I can really picture it and be right there with them.


----------



## Nick Wastnage (Jun 16, 2011)

I guess after reading the comments since the one I wrote yesterday I stick by what I said, a thrill is a thrill and the surprising and more brain boring it is, the better. But let's not get too hung up on the semantics. A book should be judged by it's entertainment value.


----------



## WFMeyer (Apr 14, 2011)

A fast paced, character driven story with ever increasing suspense that doesn't let go. Keep me turning those pages...


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

I love all the conspiracy theory stuff - decoding the bible, end of the world prophecies type of thing. And I adore Matthew Riley. Utterly preposterous plots, implausible action scenes and impossible scenarios. But God can the man write. He breaks all the rules - little diagrams, maps, exclamation marks all over the place, but it doesn't seem to matter because somehow it all *works*.

Fredster's book here was pretty good too...


----------



## mmcdan13 (Jul 6, 2011)

Above all, I love well drawn characters. I want to care. I read around 90 books a year, and it's very rare that 2 months later I could tell you everything about a character in one of those books. But the drug of it all is when I do. 20 years from now I'll still remember Johnny Merrimon from John Hart's _The Last Child._ I'll remember Paul Ott and Silas '32' Jones in Tom Franklin's _Crooked Letter, Crooked Letter._ Some of the series heroes like Harry Bosch, Alex McKnight, Elvis Cole/Joe Pike...they're like old friends at this point. That's what I'm hooked on.

Pacing and plot come into play as well, as a sloppy book with a poorly executed plot can't have characters you care about.


----------



## JeffMariotte (Jun 4, 2011)

Alexandra Sokoloff said:


> I think it's really useful for authors to be aware of what KIND of thrill they're trying to evoke in their reader or audience.
> And stakes - well, it seems to me stakes are always completely in the hands of the author. If we care about the outcome desperately, either for one person or the world, that's high stakes, and that's high suspense AND high thrills, too.


Definitely. At its heart, a thriller is one of those books that (like porn, horror, and comedy) is defined by the effect it's meant to have on the reader (vs. something like a western, a historical, a space opera, that is defined more by its setting/subject matter). If a thriller doesn't doesn't make the reader's heart race and hands turn the pages (or thumb the "next" arrow) quickly, it's not doing its job.


----------



## Harry Shannon (Jul 30, 2010)

What Jeff said. By definition, characters we can relate to are thrust into a pulse-pounding situation that makes the novel difficult to put down.


----------



## tim290280 (Jan 11, 2011)

DebBennett said:


> I love all the conspiracy theory stuff - decoding the bible, end of the world prophecies type of thing. And I adore Matthew Riley. Utterly preposterous plots, implausible action scenes and impossible scenarios. But God can the man write. He breaks all the rules - little diagrams, maps, exclamation marks all over the place, but it doesn't seem to matter because somehow it all *works*.
> 
> Fredster's book here was pretty good too...


He broke every rule in publishing too.

I'm a big Reilly fan. Not long till the next Scarecrow novel now!!

Andy McDermott hasn't been mentioned, he is similar to Reilly. Andy McNab's earlier stuff is pretty good. I'm not sitting in front of my bookshelf or Kindle so I can't name any others that haven't already been mentioned.

What I generally look for in a thriller is pace and adventure. It needs the plot and the characters to carry it along, otherwise it feels empty (I've given up on Crichton's Timeline and Baldacci's The Whole Truth because of this). I also like the idea of the protagonist with the "take on the world and win" attitude, whether that be just stubbornness borne out of being right or just because it is right.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Scribejohn said:


> What you look for most in a thriller?


Same thing I look for most in every book: A left-over twenty dollar bill that was used as a bookmark by the previous reader.

But seriously, I look for a book that I don't want to put down, and I'm looking forward to getting back to.


----------



## JenniferBecton (Oct 21, 2010)

I love thrillers, but I am not a fan of uber-criminal characters that often inhabit them. Evil is scary, yes, and I want to worry about my protagonist, but I am sick of reading about geniuses who are superhuman in their evil. These superhuman bad guys make the protagonist look even more powerful when they defeat them, but gosh, there are other character types out there. I'd like to see them now and then.


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

> I love thrillers, but I am not a fan of uber-criminal characters that often inhabit them.


Jennifer, totally agree! Personally I am sick to death of the "poetic" or "artistic" serial killer, artfully arranging corpses or playing mind games with the detective. Writers like Mo Hayder and Michael Connelly capture evil in all its banality. One real killing or the threat of it is terrifying enough if the author is committed to the detective and the potential victims.


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

> thumb the "next" arrow


That has a ring to it, Jeff!


----------



## JeffMariotte (Jun 4, 2011)

JenniferBecton said:


> Evil is scary, yes, and I want to worry about my protagonist, but I am sick of reading about geniuses who are superhuman in their evil.


I recently wrote a nonfiction book about all the criminals mentioned in the first 5 seasons of the TV series Criminal Minds (an officially licensed tie-in to the show), and the criminals who were not mentioned but whose crimes inspired the episodes. Having done a ton of research into real killers and predators, I can unequivocally say that most real criminals are dumber than dirt. In many cases their parentage was so awful that even if their mental capacities weren't lacking, they still wouldn't have had a chance at a real life. Nobody wants to read about intellectually and morally defective morons all the time, either, but that's a much more realistic portrayal.


----------



## Evelyn Collier (Jul 7, 2011)

The type of thriller I enjoy most are those set in WW2 with secret agents trying to outwit the Gestapo. Often these are based on real life men and women, which makes them even more thrilling.

I can't help but have admiration for these people who were incredibly brave in facing terrible dangers, not jet from the Gestapo but also from the citizens of the occupied countries who were forced to collaborate.


----------



## Scribejohn (Jul 2, 2011)

TiffanyLovering said:


> When I read a thriller I like vivid descriptions that help you really feel the tension of the book. These are the types of books that I want to know exactly what the characters are seeing in detail so I can really picture it and be right there with them.


I agree. It's very important to get the reader 'into the moment', so they are actually right alongside the main characters as events unfold.

I suppose part of that comes under the 'show don't tell' umbrella.


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

I was eyeing that book of of yours, Jeff.  I've done a lot of that research myself, all the usual, Douglas, Ressler, Dietz, McCrary. And to me the reality is much more horrific than the ways serial killer writers (and shows like Criminal Minds) try to embellish it.


----------



## JenniferBecton (Oct 21, 2010)

Alexandra Sokoloff said:


> Personally I am sick to death of the "poetic" or "artistic" serial killer, artfully arranging corpses or playing mind games with the detective.


I'm so glad I'm not the only one! I've always thought that a stupid, desperate criminal was just as scary as an evil genius. Stupid is unpredictable; an evil genius at least functions based on some kind of logic.



JeffMariotte said:


> I recently wrote a nonfiction book about all the criminals mentioned in the first 5 seasons of the TV series Criminal Minds (an officially licensed tie-in to the show), and the criminals who were not mentioned but whose crimes inspired the episodes. Having done a ton of research into real killers and predators, I can unequivocally say that most real criminals are dumber than dirt. In many cases their parentage was so awful that even if their mental capacities weren't lacking, they still wouldn't have had a chance at a real life. Nobody wants to read about intellectually and morally defective morons all the time, either, but that's a much more realistic portrayal.


That is really interesting, Jeff. I'm going to have to look up your book. All the police officers I've spoken with concur. Criminals aren't the brightest cut of the population, but I agree. I don't want to read ONLY about morons. But on the other hand, like I said above, stupid can be just as scary because it's largely unpredictable.


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

> Stupid is unpredictable; an evil genius at least functions based on some kind of logic.


Yes, Jennifer, exactly!!! I could deal with logic, I can't fathom stupid. It's simply terrifying.


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

Fredster said:


> I love Harlan Coben's work and have read all his books, but I'm starting to feel like they have a similar theme. Notably, "some event from protagonist's past has resulted in an upheaval in his life today, plus an unexpected twist at the end."


I feel exactly the same way about Harlan Coben's work and stopped reading him b/c it got too samey for me. I like thrillers that start fast with plenty of action. I don't enjoy a long build up. I don't have a favorite and actually read more indie author work than "big" names.


----------



## JeffMariotte (Jun 4, 2011)

One of the things that really disturbed me when doing research for the book (and I talk briefly about it in the intro) is the way their paths have crossed with mine over the years, with me totally unaware of it at the time. For instance, a girl I went to high school with was a "girlfriend," and then a probable victim, of John Brennan Crutchley, the "Vampire Rapist." But Crutchley was never charged with any murders, so we'll never know for sure. The first apartment my wife (Alexandra, you know Maryelizabeth) and I moved into in San Diego was a second-floor unit in the complex at which Cleophus Prince took his first victim (in a second-floor unit), and we had a rented garage at the complex across the street where Prince found his second. Which was also where one of the 9/11 terrorists lived for a while.

And so on.

The really disturbing part is that I doubt that I'm in any way unique--I just happen to have spent a concentrated period of time studying up on dozens and dozens of killers, so I found out about those connections. I'm sure most people never do, and are perfectly happy in their ignorance.


----------



## ajbarnett (Apr 11, 2011)

Characters. Without characters you empathize with, the plot is nothing.


----------



## libbyfh (Feb 11, 2010)

My introduction to the genre was Le Carre, Ludlum, Deighton, Gifford, etc. And I still love a good espionage thriller. 

But over the years, I've broadened my tastes so that a thriller to me is a book I simply can't put down. I have to finish it. That night. In fact, that love of suspense,  of staying up way too late at night, is what started me writing. 

Oh, and Alex, your book at the school over Thanksgiving (can't remember the title... sorry) was masterful!


----------



## NS (Jul 8, 2011)

I love psychological thrillers, so character, character, character. I will read almost anything well written about psychopaths. Maniacs, if the story goes from their POV. King is my favorite because he goes as deep in human mind as Dostoevsky did.


----------



## barbara elsborg (Oct 13, 2010)

Characters for me - I can cope with slow starts etc but I really need a main character to link with. I like Harlan Coben but the last two I bought were early works and weren't so good. I love Mo Hayder and Karin Slaughter. I've read all of Nikki French's books - some brilliant, others not so brilliant but I like the psychological angle and always feel the pair manage to make the ordinary - extraordinary.
I don't like the cult type thrillers - Da Vinci type books. I used to like Greg Iles and David Baldacci but I've not read any of theirs for ages. I like Joseph Garber too. I like to balance stand alone titles with series!
But for me - Mark Billingham is my favorite.

I think the debate about thriller-suspense is interesting. I suppose I thought I'd written a suspense story - I somehow feel thrillers are faster moving and as was said earlier, involve  more encompassing themes but since I read anything.....


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

Thanks, Libby (it's_ The Harrowing_)! I think that's about as good a definition as it gets - not being able to put the book down. Especially at night.

Barbara, I love Nicci French, too. I've read them all at least twice. Except _Secret Smile_ - which I found so excruciating I don't know if I could take it again. What's your favorite? I lean toward_ Land of the Living._


----------



## barbara elsborg (Oct 13, 2010)

@Alexandra - Killing me Softly - I really liked. I do think they're so good at creepy guys!! I was less keen on -What to do when someone dies -


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

Barbara, that's what was killing me about Secret Smile - the feeling of being trapped by that creep forever and feeling so powerless about it.  Softly was one of the best 9 1/2 Weeks style psychological thrillers I've ever read. TERRIBLE movie of it, what a waste!


----------



## Harry Shannon (Jul 30, 2010)

I'm a sucker for a troubled man doing his best against unseen forces. Having said that, some of my favorite thrillers manage to surprise me completely by developing our knowledge of the protagonist as the plot moves along. I'm very tired of serial killer novels. Heck, no one has ever beaten the younger Thomas Harris at that game. What I don't care for are protagonists who seem invincible. First, I don't believe them and second where's the risk, the challange? James Bond was the last one to get me to read more than one novel of that stripe.


----------



## Scribejohn (Jul 2, 2011)

Alexandra Sokoloff said:


> Barbara, that's what was killing me about Secret Smile - the feeling of being trapped by that creep forever and feeling so powerless about it. Softly was one of the best 9 1/2 Weeks style psychological thrillers I've ever read. TERRIBLE movie of it, what a waste!


I actually met Nicki French at a Penguin party in London a few years back. They're in fact a writing couple, both former journalists, and indeed often write alternate scenes - rather than one do most of the writing and the other most of the editing. Almost a writing version of: 'You do the shopping while I clean up the house.'

Their 'Killing me Softly' was one of my favourites, about a love affair with on the edge (with a mountain climber)... couldn't resist the pun


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

John, that's why I think French does psychological thrillers so very well - they get the relentless creepiness of male psychopaths and the terror of being the female prey - so there's no taint of exploitation about what they write.


----------



## kchughez (Jun 29, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> Technically some of the authors being mentioned aren't thriller writers, they're suspense writers. The difference:
> In a thriller the stakes are high-- very high. If the protagonist fails, something really bad on a large scale happens.
> In a suspense the stakes are the characters--their fate. If the protagonist fails, something bad happens to the characters, but the rest of the world chugs on as usual.
> It's not a rule and not a big deal, but the focus is different.


 Hi Bob, thanks for sharing that. I didn't know. Can a mystery be classified as either a thriller or suspense?

~KC


----------



## kchughez (Jun 29, 2011)

mmcdan13 said:


> Above all, I love well drawn characters. I want to care. I read around 90 books a year, and it's very rare that 2 months later I could tell you everything about a character in one of those books. But the drug of it all is when I do. 20 years from now I'll still remember Johnny Merrimon from John Hart's _The Last Child._ I'll remember Paul Ott and Silas '32' Jones in Tom Franklin's _Crooked Letter, Crooked Letter._ Some of the series heroes like Harry Bosch, Alex McKnight, Elvis Cole/Joe Pike...they're like old friends at this point. That's what I'm hooked on.
> 
> Pacing and plot come into play as well, as a sloppy book with a poorly executed plot can't have characters you care about.


Mmcdan, very welll said. And I, too know Harry Bosch very well. I see his house in my mind as I type. I'm gonna' check out those you mentioned, right now!


----------



## Douglas Dorow (Jun 21, 2011)

I enjoy a balance of plot and characters development.  The pace needs to keep moving to keep me turning the pages and I need to be invested in the characters as well so I care.


----------



## WriterCTaylor (Jul 11, 2011)

Dr. Laurence Brown said:


> While I enjoy a paced plot, I'm a bigger fan of character development. If the characters aren't real then the plot isn't going to hold my attention either.


I agree. If the characters aren't believable to me, I can't focus on the story. I recently read a book where I found the main character to be so unbelievable, I started to get annoyed while reading.


----------



## tsharp (Jul 14, 2011)

I've been wondering this question myself recently. I have novel that I am endlessly editing and I've noticed that for the first 100 pages or so it reads like a romance - boy meets girl etc, then for the rest of the novel it becomes more like a thriller (murder/violence/gangsters). This is all well and good, apart from it poses a real problem in terms of promoting and genre.

The first part would appeal to female readers, as it's primarilly about a developing relationship, but might alienate the male readers looking for the action, whereas the second part is faster paced and more physical, the point where I might lose the female reader's interest. (I understand this might be a massive generalisation, but hey... )

I'll continue to edit and cross/burn that bridge when I get to it...


----------



## B Regan Asher (Jun 14, 2011)

You might also take a different point of view, tsharp.  Your novel may just be something that appeals to a particular audience composed of males and females alike.  I don't think you should worry too much about slotting yourself into a particular genre.  There are lots of authors and books that fit neatly into the current marketing slots.  Who knows ... maybe yours will start a new genre: thrillmance?


----------



## Alexandra Sokoloff (Sep 21, 2009)

TSharp, you're right that you should write the book first, but when you're ready to market I find it always helps to make a list of successful books who have crossed the same genres and see how those books are marketed.


----------



## Randy Kadish (Feb 24, 2010)

Character! By than I mean a good person who is like a fish out of water - not used to being confronted by evil.

Randy


----------



## tsharp (Jul 14, 2011)

Thanks guys.

I'm always getting ahead of myself. Just write the damn thing...


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

Despite the fact that I'm female (I'm looking at YOU, tsharp ), I prefer my thrillers to be pacey and plot-driven. Lots of action. And I like them to be stand-alones, not series. Everyone gets just one chance to save the world; don't be greedy. I'll save the complicated characters and relationships for the other genres I read. Easier to choose a book to match my mood that way ...


----------



## B Regan Asher (Jun 14, 2011)

That's a good point Phoenix.  Even though we think female readers like "relationships" and male readers like "action/violence' it ain't always so.


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

While I prefer character and slow build up to lots of fast paced action, the most important aspect for a thriller\suspense novel for me is the Standalone status.  Not a book in series that can be read out of order, but completely standalone.  I simply do not read books in a series.  

The main thing in a book is character.   If the plot in book #1 has had no effect  on the characters in book #2 than it's not going to have an effect on me.   Why bother?  Trilogies like James Ellroy's Underworld Books are fine, but reading them out of order isn't possible because events from Book #1 lead into #2 and conclude in #3.  If you think about it, they make one long story.  That's the only way to do it, at least for me.


----------



## Scribejohn (Jul 2, 2011)

tsharp said:


> I've been wondering this question myself recently. I have novel that I am endlessly editing and I've noticed that for the first 100 pages or so it reads like a romance - boy meets girl etc, then for the rest of the novel it becomes more like a thriller (murder/violence/gangsters). This is all well and good, apart from it poses a real problem in terms of promoting and genre.
> 
> The first part would appeal to female readers, as it's primarilly about a developing relationship, but might alienate the male readers looking for the action, whereas the second part is faster paced and more physical, the point where I might lose the female reader's interest. (I understand this might be a massive generalisation, but hey... )
> 
> I'll continue to edit and cross/burn that bridge when I get to it...


There is nothing wrong with that. I had one book, Past Imperfect, which started off as a murder mystery, involved a love story midway through and even had elements of para-psychology/paranormal involved.

Donna Tartt's Secret History blends a campus life story with elements of the study of Greek Tragedy and then what effect that has on a murder committed. The key question is always the same: does it work overall?

What you might find works is that if you find your novel changes gear and you have some dramatic events later - transpose a snippet of one of those early on (in flashback)... then as you go into the more sedate romance, readers are thinking: how on earth doe we get from this to those later events?? It keeps them turning the pages in wonder and expectation (and possibly with more interest as a result).


----------



## Jon Olson (Dec 10, 2010)

Dr. Laurence Brown said:


> While I enjoy a paced plot, I'm a bigger fan of character development. If the characters aren't real then the plot isn't going to hold my attention either.


This is me, too. That's why, for me, Elmore Leonard usually works, though he's weak on plot, and Dan Brown, with his tight plots and paperboard characters, doesn't. For me, social tension is just as compelling as running and shooting.


----------



## mattlynn (Jun 10, 2011)

I'd say writing, character, plot and pace, in that order. A lot of people underestimate the quality of writing in the genre. 

- Matt Lynn


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

B Regan Asher said:


> That's a good point Phoenix. Even though we think female readers like "relationships" and male readers like "action/violence' it ain't always so.


Agreed, I'm very action and outdoors-oriented.

When it comes to movies, I love action movies and most of my girlfriends wont go with me :-(


----------



## Scribejohn (Jul 2, 2011)

9MMare said:


> Agreed, I'm very action and outdoors-oriented.
> 
> When it comes to movies, I love action movies and most of my girlfriends wont go with me :-(


I had an early reader I trusted, a 22 year old female political graduate, and she preferred the gritty side of my novels rather than any love-story relationship side (she told me she found herself chuckling at the scenes with a mean-edged hit man in one book), and look how many female readers lap up Harlan Coben or Thomas Harris.

Maybe they find books like Bravo-2-Zero or Delta Force novels a turn-off, simply because they see war as totally pointless. They have a point.


----------



## Robert Bidinotto (Mar 3, 2011)

I cut my teeth as a young reader on thrillers by Alistair MacLean, Donald Hamilton, Desmond Bagley, and Mickey Spillane. Strong hero, devious plotting, nonstop action, page-turning suspense. My tastes haven't changed essentially. Today I love the writing of Lee Child, Vince Flynn, Brad Thor, Mark Greaney, and Nelson DeMille (to name a few). All have memorable, admirable heroes, serpentine plots, lots of action, rapid-fire pacing, and tightly wound suspense.

Ideally, though, I prefer the plot to be built upon a combination of external threats and internal conflicts, so that the stakes are far more complicated and interwoven. This makes the suspense at once existential and psychological. I especially love it when the climax and resolution of the story depend upon the simultaneous, integrated confrontation and defeat of the external threat BY overcoming some inner conflict or difficulty.

In this regard, I think of many Robert Crais stories, Stephen Hunter's first three Bob Lee Swagger novels, Daniel Silva's Gabriel Allon series, and individual tales such as Alex Berenson's _The Faithful Spy_, Dick Francis's _Nerve_, Jack Higgins's A_ Prayer for the Dying_, and Gayle Lynds's _The Last Spymaster_. These are rich, complex, multi-layered tales that have all the virtues of traditional action thrillers, but also extraordinary psychological depth. They are models of the kind of writing I aspire to.


----------



## Larry Marshall (Jan 2, 2011)

My enjoyment is all about character(s).  And my biggest turnoff in thrillers is an antagonist that is a crazed serial killer.  

Cheers --- Larry


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

Scribejohn said:


> I had an early reader I trusted, a 22 year old female political graduate, and she preferred the gritty side of my novels rather than any love-story relationship side (she told me she found herself chuckling at the scenes with a mean-edged hit man in one book), and look how many female readers lap up Harlan Coben or Thomas Harris.
> 
> Maybe they find books like Bravo-2-Zero or Delta Force novels a turn-off, simply because they see war as totally pointless. They have a point.


Love Thomas Harris, never read Coben. Used to read Clive Cussler and Tom Clancy...Cussler got ridiculously misogynistic and Clancy got too techie. Read some of the End War series recently and yeah....war is pretty pointless.

I like my action (movies, books) with loads of action and dont mind gore...but love black humor in them too)


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

9MMare said:


> Love Thomas Harris, never read Coben.


I looked and couldnt find any Coben for Kindle for less than $7.99 so he's not happening. I have too many other things to read.

Not to mention I downloaded a Michael Connelly for $.99 which seems like a good way for an author to encourage new readers. Of course, not all of them need to do that (Conelly doesnt seem to need to either).


----------



## Seanathin23 (Jul 24, 2011)

I feel that if the plot is dull I'll eventualy put it down since I pick up a thriller to blow though at night. On the flip side if all the charators suck I stop caring, and then the stakes in the plot mean nothing no matter how high they are. 

Its all a blancing act, but in the end what I look for the most is the hope that the plot doesn't spin so far out of control trying to have cliff hangers that the endding gets rediculus and unsatisfying.


----------



## dltanner99 (Sep 9, 2010)

I enjoy books that try to solve a historical mystery. At the same time, I don't like it to be one contrived (doesn't exist) or solved with the use of an artifact as fictional as the aspect of the event it is trying to explain. I like the involvement of ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances, rather than those that have intellectual or physical superiority. Indiana Jones works because of his dogged persistence, but not every hero has to look or act like him. The every man comes to mind, and beyond that, whatever puts him in the line of fire makes or breaks the story.


----------



## Scribejohn (Jul 2, 2011)

WriterCTaylor said:


> I agree. If the characters aren't believable to me, I can't focus on the story. I recently read a book where I found the main character to be so unbelievable, I started to get annoyed while reading.


I agree. If the character's don't sit well or your don't like them, it's like spending time in the company of someone you find irritating. But it can happen with plot elements and key details too. I recall in Dan Brown's Angels and Demons, he had a scene where a high altitude prototype aircraft hit turbulence. Any Concord or high-altitude fighter pilot could have told him that simply does NOT happen: over 50,000 feet, there's nothing but still air.


----------



## Kathy Bennett (Jun 15, 2011)

I'm looking for characters to care about, a fast pace, and enough twists to keep me guessing.


----------



## Nick Wastnage (Jun 16, 2011)

I guess everything I care about; plot, pace, characters, scariness has been said but I would like to add that a unique, intellectual story line is a plus for me.


----------



## Bellagirl (Jul 23, 2011)

I'm definitely seconding that intellectual plotline. That's a bonus point!
I love fully-fleshed out characters in thrillers. I already anticipate a strong plot-line, so my expectation rests with the characters. The other thing is, for me a thriller HAS to be realistic and believable, even if the subject is completely far-fetched, know what I mean? I have to accept the premise of each scene building upon itself, or it's a flop.


----------



## Tara Maya (Nov 4, 2010)

Bellagirl said:


> I'm definitely seconding that intellectual plotline. That's a bonus point!
> I love fully-fleshed out characters in thrillers. I already anticipate a strong plot-line, so my expectation rests with the characters. The other thing is, for me a thriller HAS to be realistic and believable, even if the subject is completely far-fetched, know what I mean? I have to accept the premise of each scene building upon itself, or it's a flop.


I agreed. If a thriller doesn't do the work to suspend my disbelief, it just turns into comedy. It loses me. I don't really read thrillers for the characters, but I do need to connect to them. I prefer them to err on the side of heroic than jerk. The other thing that can draw me is to characters who are unexpected. Not just the usual bad guys and good guys from Central Casting but unusual yet convincing people.


----------



## B Regan Asher (Jun 14, 2011)

Like any good novel, a thriller needs all the elements: good plot(s), interesting characters and good writing.  A thriller also needs a decent pace and something thrilling.  

Of course Bellagirl is correct when she says that "a thriller HAS to be realistic and believable, even if the subject is completely far-fetched".


----------



## Joseph DiFrancesco (Aug 1, 2011)

I, myself, look for a main character I can relate to and lose myself in.  Once that's established, I'm living his/her life.  Their conflicts become mine.  I celebrate their rewards, and mourn their losses.  Plot and story direction are important as well, but need not be too thick if I have fallen into the main player.  I guess it's the characters that draw me in, and the story, along with its satisfying resolution, that I take away at the end.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Over the last few years "Thrillers" have become a very wide catchall genre that has become a blur.  For me a good story should have a well developed main character and plots which keep keep me guessing what will happen and keep me nearly on the edge of my seat.  Early on, many authors telegraph what will happen and that disappoints me.  Also, I like a degree of plausibility and accuracy in the story and I hate stupid stories unless I am feeling especially stupid that day.  

Sometimes I like a historical thriller and like the research which the author put into the story, but sometimes not.  I'm probably a picky reader.


----------



## Patrick Reinken (Aug 4, 2011)

B Regan Asher said:


> Like any good novel, a thriller needs all the elements: good plot(s), interesting characters and good writing. A thriller also needs a decent pace and something thrilling.
> 
> Of course Bellagirl is correct when she says that "a thriller HAS to be realistic and believable, even if the subject is completely far-fetched".


Agreed! So many have already identified key things that can be so vital to a good thriller, and I have to say that, in general, I'm content if one or two of those aspects stand out. If the characters are great or the plot is believable and compelling or the writing is so good it makes me jealous or the action set pieces both make me see it in my read and make me _want_ to see it on a screen, then it's a book I'll usually like well enough to finish it. There has be something - some draw that keeps me turning those pages - and it can be any of these things.

Beyond that, I have to say the most important is the most general - the writing _must_ be solid. It doesn't have to be the Pulitzer Prize winner, of course, but if I read a few paragraphs and it feels like I'm suddenly working at reading, then that is an absolute killer.


----------



## B Regan Asher (Jun 14, 2011)

You're right Patrick.  Nothing is worse than working at reading.  After all, it's not work ... even if it's a book with a serious message, it's supposed to be recreation.


----------



## Nick Wastnage (Jun 16, 2011)

A compelling, thought provoking event on the first page that is is the beginning of a page turning story, containing all the elements mentioned in this interesting thread.


----------



## Riven Owler (Jul 9, 2011)

I feel like ever since the movie The Sixth Sense, it has been cool to have a surprise ending, but the problem is that now I expect the surprise ending.  So characters are much more important to me...I want to be interested in them.


----------

