The Mystery, Crime, and Thriller Group discussion

When reading I have a cut off point where I will stop reading because the violence is too graphic and/or gratuitous. In my writing, I show the killer/bad guy's point of view, but try to keep within the line I stick to as a reader - although that is not always easy.

Which do you prefer?
No violence at all
Some violence
Lots of graphic detail with plenty of violence?

I don't mind the violence, but not too crazy about extensive graphic detail.

I can't recall ever putting a book down for violence. Although I may have if the violence was just there for the sake of being violent.

Jan C wrote: "I don't mind the violence, but not too crazy about extensive graphic detail.

I can't recall ever putting a book down for violence. Although I may have if the violence was just there for the sake o..."

That's where I draw the line - if it's just there for the shock value. For me, it has to fit the story - in both writing and reading.

It depends, everything is context. Richard Morgan's Altered Carbon has some extraordinarily graphic violence (and sex), but perfectly appropriate to the story. When I first read Hammett's Red Harvest the level of violence actually shocked me. However, the deliberate use of violence that is there ONLY for shock or, worse yet titillation, is abhorrent. Of course it can be a judgement call. An example for me of the violence being brilliantly done is American Psycho where it does border on the sickening - because it is viewed through the eyes and imagination of the protagonist.

My novel opens with a fairly violent scene from the killer's perspective, but it is entirely in keeping with his persona. There is very little violence after that, but because of that opening scene, readers 'see' the actions even when they aren't detailed.

I think it also has a lot to do with our own fears and sense of what is too much. I had to stop reading Karin Slaughter's Blindsighted because I couldn't bear the thought of what was done to the victims' eyes. The novel was no more graphic than any other of hers, but I simply couldn't read it.

Paul 'Pezski' wrote: "It depends, everything is context. Richard Morgan's Altered Carbon has some extraordinarily graphic violence (and sex), but perfectly appropriate to the story. When I first read Hammett's Red Harve..."
"Everything is context" is the perfect way to put it. Violence, like any other action in a story, must really be appropriate for the book and audience. It has to add to the story in some way instead of being gratuitous and irrelevant. I like when an author knows when to use it properly and I think the audience appreciates that kind of craftsmanship as well.

I have not had that problem. Although if I read true crime I might feel different.

Often the sheer emotion of the characters will make me think about putting a book aside.

I write Political Thrillers. 'Who's Killing All The Lawyers'. 'The Judas List,' and 'Imminent Danger'. There are characters that get what they deserve in all three books. Political Thrillers are like that.

Like most of you, I have no problem with violence in context. Murder is violent and some murders are more violent than others.
Where I draw the line is in some serial killer novels, much of the violence and gore seem to be there just to shock the reader. All it does is turn this reader off. Once we know how a serial killer kills - his signature - we don't need to have it detailed for every body that turns up.

Dave wrote: "Like most of you, I have no problem with violence in context. Murder is violent and some murders are more violent than others.
Where I draw the line is in some serial killer novels, much of the vi..."

Exactly! Let the reader imagine. Authors don't need to write every graphic image. I write crime thrillers and, as I said above, the first scene 'paints' the rest.

I prefer behind-the-scenes violence. That is, showing the result but not the action itself. My mystery, The Hierophant, shows the victim in the first chapter, but not the killing itself. I don't think I could read true crime that has a lot of detailed violence.

I've been reading Creep by Jennifer Hiller. There is a scene where a woman is kidnapped and locked in a basement. I think that's my line. I'm going to give it a little more time but I may stop. I don't need all the details of what this guy is doing to her.

I do not flinch at violence. However, I refuse to continue reading a book with graphic rape scenes, or novels that depict violence against animals. I simply cannot handle them emotionally.

VickiLee wrote: "I do not flinch at violence. However, I refuse to continue reading a book with graphic rape scenes, or novels that depict violence against animals. I simply cannot handle them emotionally."

I agree on that

I prefer what I call "cartoon violence", meaning the kind you see in action movies, as opposed to serial killers and the like.

I don't draw the line. Bring it on. I'm reading fiction, not watching the news. I wouldn't read violent non-fiction, though.

Kathryn wrote: "I don't draw the line. Bring it on. I'm reading fiction, not watching the news. I wouldn't read violent non-fiction, though."

I'm with you. It's a book. Someone is telling me a fictional story. In fact the more uncomfortable I get, the better. It means the author is doing they're job.

Karenlogue wrote: "Kathryn wrote: "I don't draw the line. Bring it on. I'm reading fiction, not watching the news. I wouldn't read violent non-fiction, though."

I'm with you. It's a book. Someone is telling me a ..."

I agree. If the author can make me feel like the characters in a book feel, then they are doing a good job.

I read Konrath, just when you think this can not get worse someone cracks a bad joke and I can read the next page. The Jack Daniels and all his other work fills my kindle.

I can appreciate violence that is part of a story, but I don't like gratuitous violence. I also do not like detailed scenes of torture, rape or intense stalking from either the criminal or the victim's viewpoint. I tend to skim over these passages. This is probably why I prefer mysteries/thrillers that are from the "hero's" perspective, however flawed s/he might be. I will admit, however, that some level of detail is required for a scene or story to be credible.

I'm fine with violence in what I read, but I like it in short bursts, not prolonged stretches - whether that means long torture scenes or paragraphs full of grisly details. Hit me with it like a cheap shot, BAM, then keep going.

The stories I write tend to reflect that pacing as well. People get hurt, sometimes in vivid ways, but I try not to dwell on it.

It's a very fine line. If violence is worn as a badge of honour (such as gang violence novels) then I can't read it. Violence against children is hard to read because I have worked with children most of my working life. In context as an aid to the plot is ok. I must admit I have not read The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo because they discussed the level of violence on The First Tuesday Book Group on ABC Australia.

I feel that the less violence, the better. If it is crucial to the story, say in a Robert Ludlum book, then that is fine, and there are plenty of great authors out there who write thrillers without gratuitous violence. But I don't like to read about grisly murders with every description possible and will avoid these books as much as I can. Look at it this way: In the classic movies, say those with Humphrey Bogart or James Cagney, you knew that people would get murdered, but you didn't have to see it to understand it occurred. You knew that someone was being killed, but they didn't show their body parts and blood flying all over the place. Remaking any of those movies today and the results would have been very different. I also don't go to violent movies (which pretty much keeps me out of the theater). And I won't read violence against children. Having to know it exists in reality is tough enough to deal with.

If the violence visits the story, I don't draw the line on how graphic it is. It's rare that I will be bothered by the violent content of a book.

I read the first three murders in American Psycho to do justice to the author. After that I skimmed the grisly details. I regard American Psycho as a modern classic, but the gore is not to my taste. Interestingly the most violent plays ever written are the Greek tragedies. Ancient Greek theatre had a rule that all the violence was committed off-stage. Most sensible, I think.
There are quite a few murders in my novel Iraqi Icicle but I cannot remember consciously thinking how graphic I should make the violence.

I'm so glad I started this discussion. It's really interesting to see the reactions to the question. My debut novel opens with a violent scene, but the next in the series (currently in edit with the publisher) has nearly all the violence off the page. It wasn't a conscious decision, it just came out that way.

I view violence in books the same way that I view it in movies (or excessive sex or profanity). If the book (or movie) is well written & well done and the violence is not gratuitous, but an important part of the story, or the atmosphere, or the history, or the psychology of the characters, etc. then I feel it is OK. At the same time I completely understand people who cannot stomach a certain level of violence & I respect that. I think when done right, it can create a compelling read!!

Frances wrote: "I'm so glad I started this discussion. It's really interesting to see the reactions to the question. My debut novel opens with a violent scene, but the next in the series (currently in edit with th..."
It is the opposite for me. My second novel (still in production)opens with a grisly murder scene. I wanted to make it more traditional than the first which has multiple time changes. I think we agree it is a matter of what feels right for the story.
But when I watch those grisly (in every sense of the word) autopsy scenes on CSI, I always think "Here we go, targeting the male adolescent demographic."

Thanks for starting this thread, I do think it’s a really interesting one!

I agree that any ‘lines’ drawn where violence is concerned are very subjective and personal.

For me, I wouldn't want to read anything too gratuitous, and I especially find sexual assault and/or cruelty to children very difficult to stomach, so I avoid books which feature these things. (I have never read any so-called 'misery memoirs' for this very reason! They're not entertaining to me, just distressing!)

It’s interesting because even though my first novel is about a serial killer, I intentionally avoided any descriptions of violence which were (in my view) too gratuitous – for instance, the murderer uses a gun from a distance rather than a knife etc, and I only hint at body disposal rather than describing it. Although in saying that, the story is very much focused on the psychological aspects of crime rather than on the acts themselves, and so I might have written it differently if I wanted to, for instance, evoke a more emotional response from the readers from the crimes themselves. My second (unfinished) novel does feature a lot more violence, although it is necessary to the plot and so I don’t feel it is gratuitous.

Again, this is all very subjective though, and so others might have a very different view.

Hahaha - LOL Bernie - You're right about the adolescent male demographic!! I agree with many of you that some excellent books are so well-written that an act of violence need not be described in graphic detail, but the way the writing implies it, it can be just as intense and/or have the same desired effect (sometimes readers' imaginations are enough!)

Murder is violent, but murder of children, animals or the defensless is where I draw the line. I won't read graphic, grisly violence because that seems gratuitous, very non essential. Why do we need to know how someone was tortured and killed in unspeakable ways?

I agree that overly-graphic descriptions of violence toward children is completely unnecessary!

The Girl witth the Dragon Tattoo was too violent for my taste--although I did read it. No way I could stomach the Saw movies. Novels with gratuitous violence tend to be off-putting. I would probably expect it more from a novel in the Horror genre than a suspense/mystery.

To read thrillers and mysteries, we all seem to have a certain tolerance for violence mixed in with our interest in understanding why some people commit such atrocities. Personally, I cannot read explicit rape scenes, sexual predators using children, or brutality towards animals. Having said that, I have read books where people are dismembered or brutally killed, and I am not overly upset. I wonder if others have this kind of division in their view of violence in written material.

I don't mind the autopsy scenes, even when there's lots of blood and gore (fond memories of my days in biology lab, way back when!)

But I absolutely cannot deal with anything like torture. I can't even bear watching adolescent kids bullying or taunting each other.

I can't stand to watch or read about abuse and torture of animals. That just makes me furious. I don't like the torture of people either.

VickiLee wrote: "To read thrillers and mysteries, we all seem to have a certain tolerance for violence mixed in with our interest in understanding why some people commit such atrocities. Personally, I cannot read e..."

Completely agree!

I also think that, for me anyway, there is an element of 'who' as well as 'what'.

For instance, a child being beaten up is never going to be something that I want to read about. But if an adult character who has spent the entire book murdering and torturing other people gets beaten up, then I'm probably going to be pretty ok with reading about his comeuppance - even though the descriptions of the physical violence done to him might be exactly the same as those of the child.

I often skim over graphic violence when I'm reading just because I'm a bit squeamish, but it's not that I disapprove. If the violence reveals something about the character of the murderer or the horror experienced by the victim then it's justified.

For me and this is only me there is no cut off. I like crime stories that are all about the detail as much as I like the graphic ones.

I find when writing them I tend to be more conservative than I read but it's a personal thing. I aim mid market as some people want the gore and others don't.

I find if the gore is reduced and framed with atmosphere it can be as good. The biggest killer for me with what I read is too slow a pace.

I think that it all depends on context. Some violence is extreme for a reason and it's more effecting because of it, but a lot of the time it's just there for the sake of it, or for shock value. If it has a place in the story and is effective then I don't set any limits.

However, going into too much detail can be sort of boring. I've read stuff where the description of someone getting stabbed or shot lasts for a page or two. We don't need to hear all that, over describing something steals all of it's thunder.

Jason wrote: "I think that it all depends on context. Some violence is extreme for a reason and it's more effecting because of it, but a lot of the time it's just there for the sake of it, or for shock value. If..."

I agree. The context is the key. If it's needed, critical to the plot, and moves the story on - great. If not, it stands out like a sore thumb as simply there for shock value. That's a turn off. That's bad writing.
Going into too much detail is also a no no for me. Crime Thriller readers have a higher threshold for gore, and I believe no author could ever outdo a readers imagination. Sometimes the best scenes can be in the readers own head...more what the author didn't say. That's how I write anyway :)

llike so many people have already commented it depends on the context and whether it fits the story and is not there for the sake of it then its ok- same with Sex

Reading fiction violence special when stretches the imagination is good as it does not seem like it could happen

The writing style of authors like Andy McNab s harder as it is seems more realistic, very descriptive

I'm not sensitive to violence in a novel, I enjoy the Stuart macbride stories which are fairly graphic. Although i don't 'enjoy' sexual violence, I don't get put off a book that contains it. I often feel sad when friends miss out on a great book because they don't want to read a few pages of something uncomfortable. For instance, an earlier comment mentioned 'the girl with the dragon tattoo' - it has violent passages but is an example of a narrative where in which the violence and sexual violence are needed to underpin the concept and is a fantastic read.

In some thrillers, serial killers for example I expect there to be violence. When It gets to much for me is when the violence seems to become the whole reason for the book. Numerous and drawn out scenes that are almost glorying in the violence. Most recent i can remember is CHERRY BOMB by J.A. Konrath. earlier books in the series were violent but that one was over the top.

Violence against children. I remember when I first read A Time to Kill, the violent attack of the little girl made me sick. I finished the book, but I would prefer not to read anything that graphic again.

If it is too violent or gory for your taste then turn off or close the book.

This is one of my constant dilemmas and I have blogged about it on this site

http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_...

I don't like graphic violence. I love a good murder mystery but I choose the lighter ones. I don't like the gross details of the cruelty even though the act itself is cruel. I can't stand anything involving children or rape. As Alfred stated in a post above I close the book if I am offended.

It's a really difficult one. As a reader, I won't ever forget the violence in American Psycho which became, by the end, a real struggle to read. Of course, that's the point that Ellis was trying to make - real violence should be hard to read - but that didn't necessarily make it an experience that I enjoyed. Endured, perhaps. I'm writing a novel at the moment that features the Mexican cartels. I've done some research on Borderland Beat and Blog del Narco and some of the violence - for real - that is going down in Juarez is gut-wrenching. There might even be an ethical question there. Can I write about it? It's tough. Some things are better via allusion.