SECTION 1: THE THRILLER GENRE

Section 1: The Thriller Genre

Martin Ruben’s book used ideas of a range of critics and authors to examine the basic ingredients of a Thriller starting with GK Chesterton, who defended the genre by determining it as a modern genre. Suggesting that mainly, Thrillers were set in urban landscapes e.g. Seven, often making them more realistic to an audience. He referred to them as an attempt to find ‘the poetry of modern life’ and to find excitement in an everyday environment, transforming the ordinary into the extraordinary. Chesterton’s theories were more based on what a thriller should be in order to have the desired effect on an audience.

Northrop Frye builds on Chesterton’s critique by saying that the hero should be an ordinary person. That way, as the story goes on we will always be unsure weather he/she is going to survive. This will keep the audience in suspense, the perfect reaction to a good Thriller would be the audience not knowing what comes next. Frye suggests we are happy to believe the situation because thrillers are similar to romance fiction. This theory is explained by stating that the hero of the romance fiction moves into a world which the ordinary laws of nature are slightly suspended. The enchanted forest becomes modern city, this allows the thriller to seem more realistic.

Combining the theories of Chesterton and Frye, John Cawelti believed that Thrillers should transform a city from modern centre commerce, industry and science into a place of enchantment and mystery. This is achieved by introducing the exotic into the everyday world.

WH Matthews work relates to mazes and labyrinths in fiction. He was inspired by the image of Theaseus descending into and underground maze full of twists and turns, puzzles and dead ends. Matthews thought that this would add a complex twists and turns so that the audience doesn’t solve the problem too easily – the whole picture should be designed so that the audience could deduce it. It is not an aimless journey,
but a puzzling one.

Pacal Bonitzer thought Matthews was describing ‘Partial Vision’ when advocates he mazes into thrillers. He thought that the audience should only be allowed to see so much.

Lars Ole Saurberg wrote about his theory of Concealment and protraction In which he talks about two ways suspense can be added to a thriller. Deliberately hiding something from the audience or delaying or protracting an expected outcome.

In other words his theory and Bonitzer’s theory combined suggest that you should choose what is necessary to show the audience in order for them to understand what is going on but not enough so that they can figure out what is going to happen.


Noel Carroll looked at the Question – Answer model for plot formation. He said that it is important to create questions which keep the audience in suspense until they are answered. The audience my ask themselves “Will the hero survive?” and it is best not to answer that particular question until the end when he/she does or does not survive.
One factor for creating suspense is a battle against odds also know as the probability factor. The moral factor also increases suspense as is may not be morally right for the hero to survive.

I think that the thriller genre has been determined in detail by all these different people to be a difficult genre to master. I also think that they defended it well as a respectable genre. However, I think that all of these theories boil down to one common factor and that is audience suspense. I now know that a thriller, no matter the style of plot line, needs to keep the audience in suspense in order to be successful.