CRIMINAL TENDENCIES

Time for this month's question once again. You may have forgotten at this point that it all started back last spring when four local mystery authors, Barbara Fradkin, R.J. Harlick, Mary Jane Maffini, and Linda Wiken were panelists at a Capital Crime Writers' workshop at the Ottawa Public Library. We had a great time but we also had a great stack of questions and by the end of our time, hadn't gotten through many of them. So, we're tackling them now. One a month. Sometimes we're all able to take part but at other times life interfers -- things like deadlines or even, holidays! -- so this week we're a threesome. Here's the question and our answers follow:


Protagonist, sidekick, villain -- which do you prefer to write?

MARY JANE MAFFINI:

I am most at home with the protagonist. The protagonist carries your values and is the person the reader cares about (if all goes well) but really, the sidekicks (quirky, irritating or whatever) and the villains (over the top, vengeful, evil, again whatever) are much more fun to write. Especially villains because you can get rid of them at the end of a book. Begone!

LINDA WIKEN:

This may turn out to be another question with total agreement. I find the protagonist the easiest to write, especially in a series, because the author has to get into his or her psyche right off the bat and that expands over time. And, if you're going together on a long journey of several books, this should be someone you like. Unless you're writing an anti-hero, it's not difficult to come up with a likeable character. Writing the villain can be liberating with an outlet for any deep-seated neuroses. :) No one would ever attribute those to the author's personality! The sidekick is the most fun because this person gets to be sympathetic, empathetic, play the role of a sounding board, and give the protagonist a good kick in the rear when necessary. Everyone need a reliable sidekick.


BARBARA FRADKIN:

Villains let us plumb our dark side and misbehave outrageously. It’s a great way for us writers, who are usually gentle, law-abiding, pacifist souls, to kick loose and be bad. Sidekicks are steadfast, smart and loyal, the friend we wish we could have at our side. But it is the protagonist who really holds our heart. When I write, even though I use multiple points of view, the protagonist is the one in whose shoes I walk and whose feelings and passions I share. Not only do I have to care about my protagonist and all the ordeals I am subjecting them to, but in order to spend months or years in their company, I have to enjoy them too.

CRIMINAL TENDENCIES

Another Friday, another question for mystery authors Mary Jane Maffini, Barbara Fradkin, Robin Harlick, and Linda Wiken. This continues the panel discussion held at the Capital Crime Writers mystery day last May. There were so many questions left over, we're continuing to answer them on Mystery Maven Canada.

Today's question for our writing quartet is: What role in your novel would you give to the person who holds the title of "Most Loathesome" in your life?

MARY JANE MAFFINI:

I vacillate on this: but if someone has been loathsome they can count on being cast in one or all three of these roles in the near future. That's the great thing about crime fiction: sure you bump off the current PITA by, say, dropping them into a limestone pit (if the offense merits it). But nothing prevents you from resurrecting that miserable so and so, changing their hair colour or gender and turning them into some snarling Moriarty. Naturally as a villain be trapped, shamed and finished off in the last chapter. The fun never ends! For minor offenders, there are many pathetic roles they can play in a work of fiction. Just saying,

Be nice to us and we'll be nice to you.

ROBIN HARLICK:

Loathsome. Isn’t it a fabulous word? It conjures up all sorts of unsavoury characters as it rolls off your tongue. A loathsome person could only be a murderer. No ifs buts about it. Making a particularly nasty piece of work would be wasted as the victim. You’d no sooner create this wholly despicable character complete with obnoxious neuroses , than you’d be killing him or her off. Much better to make your worst nightmare the villain and slowly unveil every sleazy detail of their character until wham they get their just desserts.

BARBARA FRADKIN:

If a person is truly despicable, they deserve the worst you can give them. Being a victim is too easy; not only are they dead and done with, but there’s a risk some people will feel sorry for them. But murderer or even suspect fits the bill. I prefer to drag out their suffering by making them squirm. Preferably under the steely glare of my police inspector. He can turn on the thumbscrews, accuse them of all kinds of villainy, call them a liar, and expose their true colours as the novel progresses. For a writer, it’s rather like sticking pins in a Voodoo doll, and just as satisfying. The final triumph? Although the despicable individual will rarely recognize themselves in the book, other people will.

LINDA WIKEN

Good thing this wasn't used at the panel -- everyone finally agreeing on something! How boring. But the fact that our most loathesome person would get the title of villain is not boring. Think of all the nasties you can have happen to that person in the time between committing the deed and going to trial. And, the villain would develop in such a way that the readers would be yelling from their chairs, that's the murderer. Cuff the cad. Those same readers would be so, so happy when justice is done and he/she got what was coming.