Suspension of Disbelief

One of the great challenges for any crime writer is this: how do you ensure that readers suspend their belief so as to enjoy what you've written to the full? Some writers, of course, may argue that their work is so realistic that no suspension of disbelief is needed. This may be so in a minority of cases, but I'm part of the majority whose contemporary books are meant to have a surface authenticity, but which are nevertheless definitely made-up, with invented characters and incidents. (Mind you, I still include libel disclaimers, just in case anyone gets a very wrong idea.)

As a reader, I'm more than willling to suspend my disbelief in the right circumstances. Of course, the events in a book by fine writers such as Frances Fyfield, Andrew Taylor or Ian Rankin - who all write very different types of crime fiction -are not likely to be replicated in real life. But the quality of writing is such that it draws you into the world of the story, and you are happy to believe in the events that unfold.

The same principle applies when I'm watching TV or a film..For instance, Lewis, like Inspector Morse, demands that you accept that Oxford is crawling with ingenious killers. The homicide rate almost matches Midsomer's. Yet the shows are so well done, that it doesn't really matter that in truth, bicycle theft is probably more of a problem. Skyfall definitely requires suspension of disbelief, but it's so well crafted, that it's easy to accept the various improbabilities.

All this leads me back to the BBC TV series about Father Brown. I've watched all ten episodes of the series, which ended last week. Some were good light entertainment. One or two, however, were pretty unfortunate - the episode combining radiation sickness and paedophilia springs to mind: I didn't suspend my disbelief at any point during that story.

I was sympathetic, as I've said before, to the writers' wish to do something fresh with the stories so as to appeal to a modern audience. But G.K. Chesterton persuaded his readers to suspend their disbelief - not least in some remarkable "impossible crime" stories - by focusing very cleverly on paradox and some interesting observations about human nature. In some of these episodes, I felt not enough of an attempt was made to draw out these qualities in the originals, and what was put in place instead tended to be less than compelling. This was a pity, because it is good to see classic sleuths brought back to public attention. I must say I'm glad I watched the series, but I certainly concede it could have been better. With a bit more credit given to the watching audience's readiness to engage with a good priest's take on the failings of human nature, many viewers, I suspect, would have been more willing to go along with the less likely aspects of the show's premise..

Nick of Time

I was tempted to head this blog post "Suspension of Disbelief", because watching the 1995 movie Nick of Time made me reflect on how writers strike a balance between crafting an exciting story and making sure that it remains plausible throughout.

The film stars Johnny Depp, who is cast rather improbably as a mild-mannered and bespectacled accountant, recently widowed and with a small child. He spotted at a railway station by a sinister man and woman, who promptly kidnap both him and his daughter. They threatened to kill the little girl unless he assassinates a particular woman in a nearby hotel within the next hour or so. The intended victim is the state governor, as Johnny soon discovers to his horror. But every attempt he makes to get help is thwarted by the male kidnapper, who is played by Christopher Walken in slightly over the top menacing mode.

I enjoyed the movie, which is fast-paced and at times exciting, but the premise struck me as wildly improbable. It emerges that the governor is being targeted by a powerful group of conspirators and why they choose an assassin at the last minute was beyond me.

Thrillers and detective stories almost inevitably proceed on the basis that fiction is strange in fact, and I suspect that almost all crime writers struggle at times to make their stories seem believable. Speaking as a reader, as well as as a writer, I think it is reasonable for a crime story to have some unlikely elements but it is important to try to make sure that the drama does not topple over into absurdity. As so often in life, it is all about trying to strike a sensible balance. I'm not quite sure that Nick of Time gets the balance right, and as a result, a movie that might have been excellent is only okay. Even so, it makes for agreeable if undemanding entertainment.