Do You See Dead People?

“The detective isn’t your main character, and neither is your villain. The main character is the corpse. The detective’s job is to seek justice for the corpse. It’s the corpse’s story, first and foremost.” — Ross Macdonald

By PJ Parrish

Has crime fiction gotten…more humane?

That’s the question posed by mystery writer Matthew Sullivan. The author of Midnight at the Bright Ideas Bookstore Sullivan wrote an essay a while back asking us to consider the place empathy, especially for the victims, has in modern crime fiction. To make his point, he traces how readers’ tastes in crime fiction have changed drastically from Poe through Parker to Penny. Writes Sullivan:

From “colorless” characters whose main duty was to serve the plot to well-developed human beings with rich inner lives, this shift in the way we see victims compels readers to empathize—to be emotionally invested in the page, and to experience these lost lives in full.

This is a subject near and dear to my heart. As I’ve written before in two posts (here and here), I believe readers want fully fleshed out victims, characters they can connect with — even if they are dead. Maybe especially if they are already dead when the story begins. But I didn’t realize how much empathy has changed in crime fiction over the years until I read Sullivan’s take. He gives examples of this with comments on how audiences react to the victims. Some highlights:

  1. The Murders in the Rue Morgue. Edgar Allen Poe. 1841. Recluse women dead by strangulation, straight-edge razor, blunt trauma. The role that the victim will occupy for much of the next 180 years: that of a distant, “colorless” human, whose loss is not to be felt by the reader—for that would ruin all the fun. Readers’ emotional response: Conveniently cold. And the genre begins…
  2. The Maltese Falcon. Dashiell Hammett. 1929. Miles Archer shot right through the pump with a Webley .38 revolver. When Sam Spade learns that his partner has been murdered, Sam slips right into the first two stages of grieving: lighting a smoke and cracking his knuckles. Readers’ emotional response: Rest in peace, chump! You shoulda seen it comin’.
  3. And Then There Were None. Agatha Christie. 1939. Anthony Marston poisoned (of course). There’s a good reason why Christie has 2 billion books in print, but with victims that are often scoundrels, and often under-developed, it’s little wonder that readers rarely weep over the body in the library. Readers’ emotional response: Deeply amused, thoroughly puzzled, but definitely not losing any sleep.
  4. The Talented Mr. Ripley. Patricia Highsmith. 1955. Antihero weasel Tom Ripley bludgeons Dickie to death in row boat then steals his identity. Readers’ emotional response: Downright ashamed of ourselves, especially as Ripley comforts the distraught parents of the young man he killed. Psychological suspense at its—worst?
  5. Twin Peaks. David Lynch 1989. Laura Palmer stabbed and abandoned on a beach wrapped in plastic leads the viewer into a hall of mirrors but the theme comes through clearly, just as it does in many contemporary mysteries — the ripple effects of crime. From high school hallways to booths at the diner, everyone is impacted by the shockwave of Laura’s death. Viewers’ emotional response: One of most popular series ever televised, viewers were glued—not just to the loss of Laura’s cryptic life, but also to the Log Lady, the backwards-talk, the lounge music, the strobe-lit dances, the red velvet and zig-zag floors, and the coffee-and-pie fueled onslaught of ironic Americana. 
  6. Over Tumbled Graves. Jess Walter. 2001. Walter’s jaw-dropping debut humanizes the characters by using multiple points-of-view, including those of sex-workers, criminals, and of course, philosophical detectives. Unlike a lot of serial killer stories, Walter nods toward the banality of the killer’s life and shifts our emotional investment instead toward the lives of the victims, and the messy circumstances that often steered their situations. Readers’ emotional response: empathy for these victims is through the roof. The loss of their lives is a human loss, even on the page. By now, a flipside has clearly emerged in the genre: empathy like this kind of hurts. Some of us may begin to wonder whether we’re reading for entertainment and escape, or to think and to feel—or all of the above?
  7. Razorblade Tears. S.A. Cosby. 2021. With a level of violence that would make Poe proud, the protags, hellbent on revenge, embark on a quest that entangles them with motorcycle gangs, elitist politicians, and underworld thugs. More important than the raw battles that ensue are the undercurrents of loss these men feel, and the ways they try to change, despite their age, to accept their sons for who they were. Readers’ emotional response: By turns heartbreaking and propulsive, this is another one that conjures our empathy. If these scarred men can grow into acceptance, anyone can.

Sullivan’s point is worth debating. He thinks that today’s crime readers don’t want to be merely entertained. They want to empathize with characters, especially the victims. As a reader, I dislike books wherein the victims are cardboard corpses exploited as plot propellers. As a writer, I work extra hard to bring the dead back to life in readers’ imaginations.

One of my favorite critics was Robert Ebert. He had a great line in his review of Stealing Home, a schmaltzy movie wherein Mark Harmon plays a washed-up baseball player who learns that his childhood sweetheart, Jodie Foster, has committed suicide so he returns to his hometown to fulfill her final wish by taking care of her ashes — and we are treated to flashbacks about their young love. Ebert wrote:

Why has she killed herself? The movie does not supply that sensible question with an answer, and so I will supply one: She killed herself so that she could be cremated and her ashes could be used as a prop in this movie.

Ouch. Two lessons for you: Don’t let your dead person become a prop. Don’t use flashbacks in a feeble attempt to resurrect said prop.

Maybe a definition of “empathy” is useful here, because as I understand it, it’s not exactly the same as sympathy. Sympathy is when you understand someone else’s suffering and feel sorrow or pity for what they are facing. Empathy goes deeper. It’s when you draw upon your own life to relate to another person’s experience or hardship. Example: “I recently lost my spouse so I know what it feels like to feel that deep sorrow and grief.”

This is why empathy in fiction is so powerful and why today’s readers crave it. They want to feel an emotional connection to characters. Even the unlikeable ones. Readers may not like what your character does, but it’s important that you make them understand why they are doing it. This is especially true if you’re working with an anti-hero or morally flexible protag. (think Tony Soprano, Walter White or Harlan Coben’s sociopath vigilante Win Lockwood).

But building empathy for a dead character takes some doing. A big mistake many writers make is assuming that just because a character is dead, readers will automatically feel empathy for them. And often, this manifests itself via the attitude of the protagonist. For me, one of the most irritating tropes in crime fiction is the hyper-masculine dude who plows through the case unscathed and uncaring.

If your protag isn’t feeling anything for the victim, how do you expect your readers to?

So how do you create empathy for your victims? How do you avoid creating cardboard corpses? Treat them like any living character and put flesh on the narrative bones. Some methods I’ve found useful that might work for you:

  • Details matter. If you’re wont to create dossiers, make one for your victim. You may not use all the details but it helps you visualize, in your imagination (and thus the reader’s) what kind of person they were. Diaries, journals, photographs, yearbooks, a Facebook page — all are rich fodder. Be careful you don’t make your victim a saint. Make them human.
  • What did your victim want? Vonnegut said it might be only a glass of water, but everyone wants something. What your victim wanted might have been what got them killed. You need to know this.
  • Connect them to your suspect(s). The most interesting crimes are not random; they are plotted out with purpose and precision. Why did your antagonist choose the victim he did? What details of the victim’s life affected their fate? How did their lives intersect?
  • Use other characters. The protag can interview family or friends. Maybe there’s a memorial service for a dead teenager where attendees reminisce. One of the most powerful examples of this is a short story by Tim O’Brien called The Things They Carried. Lieutenant Jimmy Cross, the leader of a platoon of soldiers in Vietnam, carries physical reminders of Martha, the object of his unrequited love. Thoughts of Martha distract Cross leading to a death in the squad. Guilty over his friend’s death and heartbroken, Cross destroys all reminders of Martha so he can focus on the mission. But the theme is that people tell stories about the dead to keep their memory alive. We can’t keep them physically alive in this world, but by remembering them and creating stories about them, we give them another shot at life. You can read the story here.
  • Revisit a victim’s physical world. I use this often in my Louis Kincaid books, because Louis feels a strong connection to the dead person when he physically enters their temporal world, be it the bedroom of a teenager girl or the last place they were alive. Culling through a victim’s possessions can be incredibly evocative and emotional, as any of us who has ever had to sort through a relative’s things after a funeral knows.

Let’s give the last word on this to Laura Lippman, in an excerpt from an essay she wrote for the Library of Congress Magazine:

Doesn’t everyone have empathy for victims? I don’t think so. Sympathy, sure. Sympathy is easy. But empathy, true empathy, requires imagining how another person feels. It’s the essential lesson of “To Kill a Mockingbird”; Atticus Finch is constantly exhorting his children to try to see the world from someone else’s perspective.

That novel’s penultimate scene takes place on the porch of the neighborhood weirdo, the reclusive Boo Radley. For years, Atticus’ children have made fun of him, trafficked in gossip about him. But in the end, Boo saves them, quite literally. Scout, who tells the story, stands on Boo’s porch and sees the world as he saw it. “He was real nice,” she tells her father. “Most people are, Scout, when you finally see them,” Atticus says.

 

This entry was posted in Writing by PJ Parrish. Bookmark the permalink.

About PJ Parrish

PJ Parrish is the New York Times and USAToday bestseller author of the Louis Kincaid thrillers. Her books have won the Shamus, Anthony, International Thriller Award and been nominated for the Edgar. Visit her at PJParrish.com

21 thoughts on “Do You See Dead People?

  1. Interesting to see the techniques of mainstream, even literary, fiction employed in crime and detective stories – because that’s what it’s all about: empathy. Letting the reader LIVE other lives by how you write them, how you show the world from a character’s pov.

    My ‘trunk’ series, which I may go back to when I finish the trilogy in progress, was a detective story told from the pov of a young Mexican American woman married to a Phd grad student – stuck waiting for him to graduate so she can get on with her graduate work, getting a job on his campus (she’s ex MP – it helped her become a citizen) and being there when they try very hard to sweep a murder under the academic rug as an accident. Building that empathy, and being able to see things both from the American side and from the immigrant side, is probably why I WILL go back. To let a reader live Thea’s complicated life.

    • That always makes for an interesting character arc — someone who walks in two world (immigrant/American in your case). This is why, when we began our Louis Kincaid series, we made him biracial. It was a very conscious decision, born of my sister’s experiences with her biracial grandchildren. It always made for a rich vein to mine emotionally.

  2. Great post & one I will refer back to. The mystery I am muddling through right now has my head swimming with lots of things as it is drafted but one of the areas that has been on my mind is how the victim comes across (dies in chapter 1). Subconsciously, I have been thinking about the level of empathy he achieves, but this post gives me more clarity and makes me realize I haven’t hit that mark yet. I need to round him out more. I don’t want him to be a cookie cutter victim (kind of like the “Red Shirts” of Star Trek who die and are forgotten, bless their hearts. 😎

  3. Definitely chewable stuff here, Kris. And applicable to my WIP, so thanks!

    Connelly is such a master at what you describe. Bosch’s connection with the forgotten ones, the cold cases, the victims who have no one…except him. There’s a beautiful passage in my favorite Bosch, Lost Light, where he looks upon the body of a young woman whose hands are in a strange position:

    They looked like hands from a Renaissance painting, like the hands of the damned reaching heavenward for forgiveness. In my life I have worked almost a thousand homicides and no positioning of a fallen body ever gave me such pause….But every case is a battle in a war that never ends. Believe me, you need something to carry with you every time you go into the fight. Something to hold on to, an edge that drives you or pulls you. And it was her hands that did it for me. I could not forget her hands. I believe they were reaching to me. I still do.

    • Wow, gorgeous writing there. Details like this — the “mere” positioning of a body not only humanize the dead (and create sympathy for her) but also make the hero come alive even more. I didn’t quote it in this post but as Connelly has said (paraphrasing Wambaugh, I believe): It’s not how the detective works the case, it’s how the case works the detective.

  4. Thanks so much for the holiday gift of this post, Kris.

    Before I read your post this a.m., I wrote a new scene in my WIP from the victim’s POV. It was a liberating revelation that has the potential to tie lots of loose ends together but needs further work. Now, after reading your post, I’m going to go over the new scene again. Many of your thoughts will be incorporated.

    Merry Christmas to you and your family and thanks for the great lessons you’ve shared for many years at TKZ.

  5. Thanks for a very helpful post, Kris.

    Your list of “So how do you create empathy for your victims” is excellent. I’ve printed it out to keep next to my writing chair.

    I believe all humans crave connection. If we can add that connection through empathy in our books, it can only improve the book’s chance of success.

    Thanks! And wishing you a joyous holiday season.

  6. Thank you for this terrific post on empathy for the victim in mysteries, Kris. Important insights and some very helpful tips, along with examples showing both lack of empathy and empathy for the victims.

    I write cozies, which of course often feature the nasty, unloved victim. The focus is on the “fun and games” of the murder investigation and learning who did it and why. That said, being able to reveal something about the victim that gives the reader at least a bit of empathy for them can be a powerful thing in a cozy, even as the tone is generally light or at least, lighter than other mystery sub-genres.

    Thanks for all your insightful posts here at KZB. Hope you and your family have a wonderful holiday season.

  7. “Doesn’t everyone have empathy for victims? I don’t think so.”

    I’ve seen instances in which a writer just sweetly assumed that victimhood automatically equated with sympathy-evocation. This constitutes a blind-spot for the writer. Yes, there are people (the writer evidently being one) who gush over victims, per se, but they are in the minority. It takes something to make readers relate to the victim–a save-the-cat moment, an instance of the victim doing or having done a kindness or displaying virtue. Getting bopped on the head with the candlestick in the billiard room will not suffice.

    • Re candlestick in billiard room. That’s why I found Matthew Sullivan’s take on empathy historically so interesting. I hadn’t really thought of it in that context before, that this point in crime fiction is something we writers have evolved to.

  8. Wonderful and thought-provoking post, Kris! I don’t recall seeing this perspective before, but you have opened my eyes.

    In my WIP, a man is searching for the truth about his young sister’s death decades before. I introduce the young victim through a couple of flashback scenes in her POV and with other characters’ memories of her. After reading your post, I may want to add more detail.

    And you’ve given me some more works to add to my TBR list. Thanks.

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and your family.

    • About flashbacks: I had a section about using them but cut it out because I couldn’t articulate how to use them effectively in this case. Couldn’t find any good examples either of authors who did. Anyone know of any?

  9. The mystery has grown from a logic puzzle to an examination of the life of the victim, the detective, and the criminal. It’s as much about the audience’s need for an emotional connection as the mystery. Also, if all we want is plot, we will watch a movie instead. The novel’s great strengths are putting the reader inside the story and feeling the feels they can’t get from other forms of entertainment.

  10. Excellent piece. It’s two birds with one stone to flesh out the victim because it helps explain the protagonist’s deep desire to solve/avenge the murder at all costs.

    Totally separate topic, but I wish more true crime authors and TV producers would think more deeply about the victims.

  11. It may be a mistake to assume that all other readers reacted to those mysteries the way Matthew Sullivan did. I will just say that I got a lot more out of the Maltese Falcon than ‘Rest in peace, chump!’ and considering that the detective fell in love with the murderer, the victim was not the only one who ‘did not see it coming’. It was an examination of life and corruption, which has a depth most modern writers can only long to reach. It might be a good idea to read and study those works before decrying them as fatally flawed.

    • I don’t think Sullivan sees Maltese Falcon as fatally flawed. I believe he was just zeroing in on a long-time trend toward more emotionally involving characters. One reason I like Spade so much is that he is so laconic. Which makes Effe’s great closing lines of the book so poignant.
      Spade comes to the office in the denouement scene — “his face was pasty in color but its liines wre strong and cheerful.” He is, true to his nature, untouched by what has happened. But not Effie.

      Her voice was queer as the expression on her face. “You did that, Sam, to her?”
      He nodded. “Your Sam’s a detective. She did kill Miles, angel, offhand, like that.” He snapped his fingers.
      She escaped from his arm as if he had hurt her. “Don’t, please, don’t touch me,” she said brokenly. “I know — I know you’re right. You’re right. But don’t touch me now — not now.”

      Her rejection of him bothers him, but only for a moment, a paling of the face. But it’s over quickly. Effie goes back to her desk and ushers in the next client with a “small flat voice.”

      “Iva’s here.”

      Spade, looking down at his desk, nodded almost imperceptibly. “Yes,” he said, and shivered. “Well, send her in.”

      It’s a perfect ending. And gets to me every time.

Comments are closed.