Despite it being published in 1981, the details of the criminal investigations that took place in the novel were mind-blowing. And all of this was before DNA was introduced as a major player in crime scene analysis in the mid-1990's, thanks to the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman. And of course we are now light years ahead in DNA analysis, with all the advances in just the last few years.
But can details be too much?
My answer: it depends on the story you're telling.
Many of Tom Clancy's books delve into minute details of military equipment, like submarines and ships and tanks, but at its core is the story. The story is never lost. Jeffrey Deaver's The Bone Collector is written as close to a textbook in crime scene collection as possible, albeit the story is threaded through it like a skillful weaver.
Are you going to get all details right? Heavens no! My youngest daughter and I were watching an episode of Friends, the one where the gang sans Ross go on a trip in Phoebe's cab and get stuck at a rest area with no gas. Who do they call? Ross. Although they have no idea where they are.
My daughter turns to me and asks, "Why don't they look at the map that's on the wall?"
"What map?"
"There's always a map at rest stops that shows 'You are here'. Why don't they look at that?"
Very astute, for an intelligent fourteen-year-old. And a level of detail that was either never considered by the show writers. Or, it was considered, but to move the story along they decided to ignore it.
I am currently past the 10,000 word mark on my latest thriller, and I can assure you I do not have the same level of detail as Deaver or Harris in my crime scene investigation. But there are many other authors who don't either. The story is moving along nicely.
And in the end, that's all that matters. Telling a story. If you want to read a textbook, read a textbook. But if you want to read a story, read a story.
No comments:
Post a Comment