3 ms·

Not sure I agree with this taxonomy. Remember, the genre ‘thriller’ has a different meaning when applied to written fiction, as opposed to movies. As Eddie Izz

Not sure I agree with this taxonomy. Remember, the genre ‘thriller’ has a different meaning when applied to written fiction, as opposed to movies. As Eddie Izzard once memorably pointed out, you get a lot of car chases in movies; very few car chases in books though. So in movies we see ‘action’ emerge as a distinct genre, with ‘thriller’ left for more Hitchcockian psychological excitement (and then Michael Jackson comes along and confuses everyone by writing a song about horror movies and calling it ‘Thriller’). But meanwhile in novel-land, spy stories (and detective stories) were always ‘thrillers’ - although maybe that does conjure more Len Deighton or Le Carré than Fleming… Still, from ‘thrillers’ we also get ‘techno thrillers’ which in some ways also build off Bond-like action elements. I suppose there is the other pulp-ish fiction category of ‘adventure’, which you could also shelve Bond under, alongside war stories and explorers and space captains.

Archelaos 4y ago
> in novel-land, spy stories (and detective stories) were _always_ ‘thrillers’ I do not agree with regard to detective stories, because the thriller aspect varies a lot from story to story. There are many examples where the focus is primarily on the who-done-it aspect: the detective arrives at a crime scene and demonstrates his superior ability of deduction.
- jameshart 4y ago
  Oh, naturally, there’s a world of difference between a whodunnit and a detective thriller. I’m thinking Dashiell Hammett, not Agatha Christie.
  - Archelaos 4y ago
    My remark was targeting the "always" with regard to detective stories. Of course, I would have no objections if you only claim that detective thrillers are always thrillers. A more interesting question is what narrative principles are at work when a detective thrillers leans more towards the "whodunnit" side in contrast to when it leans more towards the thriller side of the spectrum. For example, a classic narrative strategy of the "whodunnit" story is further murders during an ongoing investigation, with the victim being the respective current prime suspect. This thriller element increases the urgency of the investigation (thriller aspect) and it at the same time is meant to impress and confront the reader with the challange that the hitherto closest explanation of the murders needs to be replaced by something more sophisticated ("whodunnit" aspect).
parenthesis 4y ago
(The song 'Thriller' was written by Rod Temperton, by the way.)
- pahbloo 4y ago
  I had to look at your comment history to see if you always comment in parentheses.
thaumasiotes 4y ago
> As Eddie Izzard once memorably pointed out, you get a lot of car chases in movies; very few car chases in books though. > So in movies we see ‘action’ emerge as a distinct genre, with ‘thriller’ left for more Hitchcockian psychological excitement I would say that e.g. The Da Vinci Code is written with pacing that would make me characterize it as a "thriller". There's no psychological excitement going on there. I don't think it's true that you don't see car chases, or their equivalent, in books.
- jameshart 4y ago
  Well no, the Da Vinci Code can not be accused of embodying any form of excitement - psychological or otherwise. And are you characterizing the multi chapter long taxi ride of exposition from the Da Vinci code as a car chase?
- bitwize 4y ago
  The Da Vinci Code actually has car chases in it. You can practically see the action movie that was playing in Dan Brown's head. It's a profoundly idiotic movie, and if anything Hollywood probably improved on it, but still. Brown's style is cinematic, or at least cinematic-aspirant.
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    It's a profoundly idiotic book. But the pacing achieves its goals. You're not bored while you're reading it. What people get out of reading The Da Vinci Code, or other books in that style, is the same thing they get out of watching thriller movies. So I think it makes sense to call the book a thriller. > Brown's style is cinematic, or at least cinematic-aspirant. This is an interesting comment. I didn't get that vibe from Dan Brown. But Brandon Sanderson's Steelheart struck me, while I was reading it, as an effort to put a movie into book form. I was completely unsurprised to later learn he'd shopped out the movie rights.

Archelaos 4y ago

> in novel-land, spy stories (and detective stories) were _always_ ‘thrillers’ I do not agree with regard to detective stories, because the thriller aspect varies a lot from story to story. There are many examples where the focus is primarily on the who-done-it aspect: the detective arrives at a crime scene and demonstrates his superior ability of deduction.

jameshart 4y ago
Oh, naturally, there’s a world of difference between a whodunnit and a detective thriller. I’m thinking Dashiell Hammett, not Agatha Christie.
- Archelaos 4y ago
  My remark was targeting the "always" with regard to detective stories. Of course, I would have no objections if you only claim that detective thrillers are always thrillers. A more interesting question is what narrative principles are at work when a detective thrillers leans more towards the "whodunnit" side in contrast to when it leans more towards the thriller side of the spectrum. For example, a classic narrative strategy of the "whodunnit" story is further murders during an ongoing investigation, with the victim being the respective current prime suspect. This thriller element increases the urgency of the investigation (thriller aspect) and it at the same time is meant to impress and confront the reader with the challange that the hitherto closest explanation of the murders needs to be replaced by something more sophisticated ("whodunnit" aspect).

parenthesis 4y ago

(The song 'Thriller' was written by Rod Temperton, by the way.)

pahbloo 4y ago
I had to look at your comment history to see if you always comment in parentheses.

thaumasiotes 4y ago

> As Eddie Izzard once memorably pointed out, you get a lot of car chases in movies; very few car chases in books though. > So in movies we see ‘action’ emerge as a distinct genre, with ‘thriller’ left for more Hitchcockian psychological excitement I would say that e.g. The Da Vinci Code is written with pacing that would make me characterize it as a "thriller". There's no psychological excitement going on there. I don't think it's true that you don't see car chases, or their equivalent, in books.

jameshart 4y ago
Well no, the Da Vinci Code can not be accused of embodying any form of excitement - psychological or otherwise. And are you characterizing the multi chapter long taxi ride of exposition from the Da Vinci code as a car chase?
bitwize 4y ago
The Da Vinci Code actually has car chases in it. You can practically see the action movie that was playing in Dan Brown's head. It's a profoundly idiotic movie, and if anything Hollywood probably improved on it, but still. Brown's style is cinematic, or at least cinematic-aspirant.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  It's a profoundly idiotic book. But the pacing achieves its goals. You're not bored while you're reading it. What people get out of reading The Da Vinci Code, or other books in that style, is the same thing they get out of watching thriller movies. So I think it makes sense to call the book a thriller. > Brown's style is cinematic, or at least cinematic-aspirant. This is an interesting comment. I didn't get that vibe from Dan Brown. But Brandon Sanderson's Steelheart struck me, while I was reading it, as an effort to put a movie into book form. I was completely unsurprised to later learn he'd shopped out the movie rights.