Paul Whybrow
Full Member
Following on from my ramblings about disposable characters, I'm currently writing a 6,000-word short story for the Galley Beggar Prize.
This has caused me a few dilemmas, in the setting of the tone of the story and whether it should have a moral message. An innocent motorist is murdered in the first segment of the tale, killed as an initiation test to join a drug gang. I'm coming to the conclusion of the tale, which is overlain with a pall of remorselessness. Nothing good has happened so far, and I'm debating whether anything should, as my villainous crew of dealers travel to a meeting with a biker gang to exchange their crystal meth for guns.
They're all about to be ambushed by a deadly Salvadorean gang called Mara Salvatrucha—MS-13—tattooed faces and machine guns and prone to killing everybody, including innocent civilians as they muscle in on the drug scene.
The question is, who should I kill off? Should I include the young gang member who murdered the innocent motorist, or let her escape? It's often more interesting when a baddy gets away with it. I left the fate of a serial killer undecided in my second novel The Perfect Murderer when he disappeared in a sinkhole as the earth opened to consume him. I did so, partly because I thought he might be more popular with readers than the goody two shoes coppers pursuing him, so he could return to continue his bizarre slaying.
I'm not squeamish about bumping characters off, and have eliminated little old ladies, an animal rights campaigner, a ten-year-old schoolgirl, an American tourist, a nudist, a megalomaniac car dealer, a pornographer, a reclusive farmer, a cancer-stricken wife who went to Dignitas, a headstrong detective, a 16th-century scribe, a bumbling librarian, a mental asylum survivor and an American Civil War veteran.
When killing a character, there's more impact if the reader relates to them in a good or bad way beforehand, through a skilful thumbnail sketch. For example, their reaction to a stray cat—do they bend to stroke it, completely ignore it or throw a rock?
Have you killed off anyone interesting, in your writing?
Did it feel meet and right, a fitting fate for the deceased, or did you immediately regret it?
Have you rubbed out real life enemies in an act of wish fulfilment?
Being a writer, a creator means that we have the power of life and death over our characters. Should we show the consequences and describe the reactions of those affected by the death? It always disappoints and annoys me, when the heroic protagonist experiences no effects from having just shot a man to death, after a face-to-face struggle. I've known veterans of many wars who were still struggling with delayed reactions decades after the conflict. I've been in enough violent confrontations, my life threatened, to know that people don't just stop thinking about it as soon as they're safe.
As writers, we can slaughter many without compunction, but surely, our fictional characters should have consciences....
This has caused me a few dilemmas, in the setting of the tone of the story and whether it should have a moral message. An innocent motorist is murdered in the first segment of the tale, killed as an initiation test to join a drug gang. I'm coming to the conclusion of the tale, which is overlain with a pall of remorselessness. Nothing good has happened so far, and I'm debating whether anything should, as my villainous crew of dealers travel to a meeting with a biker gang to exchange their crystal meth for guns.
They're all about to be ambushed by a deadly Salvadorean gang called Mara Salvatrucha—MS-13—tattooed faces and machine guns and prone to killing everybody, including innocent civilians as they muscle in on the drug scene.
The question is, who should I kill off? Should I include the young gang member who murdered the innocent motorist, or let her escape? It's often more interesting when a baddy gets away with it. I left the fate of a serial killer undecided in my second novel The Perfect Murderer when he disappeared in a sinkhole as the earth opened to consume him. I did so, partly because I thought he might be more popular with readers than the goody two shoes coppers pursuing him, so he could return to continue his bizarre slaying.
I'm not squeamish about bumping characters off, and have eliminated little old ladies, an animal rights campaigner, a ten-year-old schoolgirl, an American tourist, a nudist, a megalomaniac car dealer, a pornographer, a reclusive farmer, a cancer-stricken wife who went to Dignitas, a headstrong detective, a 16th-century scribe, a bumbling librarian, a mental asylum survivor and an American Civil War veteran.
When killing a character, there's more impact if the reader relates to them in a good or bad way beforehand, through a skilful thumbnail sketch. For example, their reaction to a stray cat—do they bend to stroke it, completely ignore it or throw a rock?
Have you killed off anyone interesting, in your writing?
Did it feel meet and right, a fitting fate for the deceased, or did you immediately regret it?
Have you rubbed out real life enemies in an act of wish fulfilment?
Being a writer, a creator means that we have the power of life and death over our characters. Should we show the consequences and describe the reactions of those affected by the death? It always disappoints and annoys me, when the heroic protagonist experiences no effects from having just shot a man to death, after a face-to-face struggle. I've known veterans of many wars who were still struggling with delayed reactions decades after the conflict. I've been in enough violent confrontations, my life threatened, to know that people don't just stop thinking about it as soon as they're safe.
As writers, we can slaughter many without compunction, but surely, our fictional characters should have consciences....