Howdy thriller buffs. Lately I have been researching the above question on the internet and have uncovered some surprising results. I thought it would be helpful to pick your collective brains about what makes a suspense novel NOT also a thriller.
Some of the stuff my research has turned up: 1. Suspense is about a single person being under threat, thriller is about whole groups of people being under threat. True or false? 2. In suspense the threat/build up is gradual, in a thriller the action starts right away (ho-hum, define right away, First para? First chapter?) Thoughts? 3. Thriller requires action in a traditional sense (shoot-outs, exploding cars), suspense does not. Not too sure about that. Depends on how you define action, surely. Red Sparrow by Jason Matthews is surely a thriller, but there are no exploding cars etc. 4. Books about espionage are automatically thrillers. (But not all books about espionage have action or a threat to groups, except indirectly in the sense that espionage is conducted for the benefit of a nation. But espionage can be about nebulous, generalized or yet unknown threats or benefits.)
Some of the stuff my research has turned up:
1. Suspense is about a single person being under threat, thriller is about whole groups of people being under threat. True or false?
2. In suspense the threat/build up is gradual, in a thriller the action starts right away (ho-hum, define right away, First para? First chapter?) Thoughts?
3. Thriller requires action in a traditional sense (shoot-outs, exploding cars), suspense does not. Not too sure about that. Depends on how you define action, surely. Red Sparrow by Jason Matthews is surely a thriller, but there are no exploding cars etc.
4. Books about espionage are automatically thrillers. (But not all books about espionage have action or a threat to groups, except indirectly in the sense that espionage is conducted for the benefit of a nation. But espionage can be about nebulous, generalized or yet unknown threats or benefits.)
What do we think?