3 ms·
> in novel-land, spy stories (and detective stories) were _always_ ‘thrillers’ I do not agree with regard to detective stories, because the thriller aspect var
by 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 agoOh, naturally, there’s a world of difference between a whodunnit and a detective thriller. I’m thinking Dashiell Hammett, not Agatha Christie.
- Archelaos 4y agoMy 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).