Hey just a question for those writing Mysteries. I am having a slight problem settling on a catalyst for my dectective story. Its going to be one of three people but I was curious if anyone had any tips on deciding on one, or is it possible to have more then one each with their own role in helping move the case forward?
Issues with a catalyst
- Thread starter JBWebber
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 1,173
- Reaction score
- 156
- Location
- In a state of psychosis
- Website
- www.bethamos.com
A catalyst for what? Typically with a mystery you have a dead body and someone who tries to find out who the killer is. You can traipse any number of other characters onto the scene to help with solving the crime, or to muddle it.
I'm not sure what you're asking.
Beth
I'm not sure what you're asking.
Beth
The catalyst acts like an agent of change, connected to the various characters, who inadvertantly helps point the slueth in the right direction
Here's my 2 cents. In psychological jargon, a 'catalyst' is anything which prompts dysfunctional behavior or change in an individual. JBWebber's definition is clearly and concisely focused on writing mystery stories. As cwfcal says, don't muddle it. All of your characters may be neurotic...but only one should be psychotic. Your decision. We all have our neuroses...but a psychotics are those of us who have no consciences or regrets and blame everyone else for everything. Maybe you should check out the definitions of neurosis and psychoses and bestow the psychotic charactistics on one of your characters.
I thought this was going to be a chemistry class and it turned out to be a psychology seminar. Now I'm really confused.
Mystery - a novel, short story, play, or film whose plot involves a crime or other event that remains puzzlingly unsettled until the very end (the body)
Detective - a member of the police force or a private investigator whose function is to obtain information and evidence, as of offenses against the law. (The MC)
Catalyst - a person or thing that precipitates an event or change (the one who calls 911)
Mystery - a novel, short story, play, or film whose plot involves a crime or other event that remains puzzlingly unsettled until the very end (the body)
Detective - a member of the police force or a private investigator whose function is to obtain information and evidence, as of offenses against the law. (The MC)
Catalyst - a person or thing that precipitates an event or change (the one who calls 911)
Does an antagonist have to be 'psychotic?'
My antagonist's catalyst is the murder of his son by a convicted sex attacker; so he goes after the Judge that should have given him a sentence that reflected the previous crime. I wouldn't call him 'psychotic'; in my mind he's completely sane - he just wants the person responsible to feel the same pain that he does.
My antagonist's catalyst is the murder of his son by a convicted sex attacker; so he goes after the Judge that should have given him a sentence that reflected the previous crime. I wouldn't call him 'psychotic'; in my mind he's completely sane - he just wants the person responsible to feel the same pain that he does.
An antagonist doesn't need to be psychotic. Look at all those executives taking bonuses paid for with taxpayer money. They are heartless bastards who would pull the gold from their dead gandmother's teeth, but they're not psychotic.
I think the better antagonists are the ones that appear completely rational.
I really don't like the 'he's insane' excuse as a motive. Really irritates me actually.
I really don't like the 'he's insane' excuse as a motive. Really irritates me actually.
Choose the most unlikely one but don't reveal it til the end. It keeps the tension high while one is reading.
'It's this one, oh no, maybe it's that one....she has a motive but she doesn't strike me as a killer...'
Then, when you get to the end of the story -
'OMG - it's him?!? So that's why he (fill in the blank)'
JMO
May I suggest that I believe Mr. Webber is referring to the protagonist. If so, the protagonist normally is just one person. He frequently has a sidekick. In a police procedural there may be numerous sidekicks but it is important that in having many characters the writer does not lose his voice.
One example: In a series I have been writing for Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine since 1988, the protagonist is a private detective working for a large agency. His side kick, a newspaper reporter covering the police beat, is the narrator of the stories. Several other PIs working for the agency appear regularly, as do residents of a boardinghouse where both the protagonist and sidekick live. In this it is important to never lose voice, which is one major reason why so many mysteries are written in first person.
If I understand the question correctly, I suggest Mr. Webber selects one of the three characters as protagonist, but allow the others to assist in moving the story forward without ever allowing one of them to take over the voice.
One example: In a series I have been writing for Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine since 1988, the protagonist is a private detective working for a large agency. His side kick, a newspaper reporter covering the police beat, is the narrator of the stories. Several other PIs working for the agency appear regularly, as do residents of a boardinghouse where both the protagonist and sidekick live. In this it is important to never lose voice, which is one major reason why so many mysteries are written in first person.
If I understand the question correctly, I suggest Mr. Webber selects one of the three characters as protagonist, but allow the others to assist in moving the story forward without ever allowing one of them to take over the voice.
JB,
It's certainly possible to have a number of people moving things forward for the protag at different points in the story.
Granny saw the blue Chevy there in the morning. Wookie knows where spare keys to the Chevy hang. Idjit knows Fred can't even drive a stick shift. Plus the gun was over there the whole time, so says Spider-dude.
Like so?
It's certainly possible to have a number of people moving things forward for the protag at different points in the story.
Granny saw the blue Chevy there in the morning. Wookie knows where spare keys to the Chevy hang. Idjit knows Fred can't even drive a stick shift. Plus the gun was over there the whole time, so says Spider-dude.
Like so?
There is lots of good advice here, JB. I suggest you read it carefully.
Absolutely. Murder is not chemical. Murder is psychological.
Anyone who deliberately and coldly murders another person is insane..and therefore psychotic....no matter how he/she rationlizes the doing of the deed.
Many times, a psychotic person is just the nicest kind of guy/gal you'd ever want to meet.
What a kettle of fish you have opened here, JB. I suggest that you find a copy of the DSM (Diognastic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) and read about psychotics and keep it as a reference as you write this story. (At a used book store, a DSM III or IV is out of date, and will cost much less, but the information has not changed very much.)
The catalyst for the murderer is whatever the murderer felt to be true and was such a strong internal force that it compelled him/her to commit mayhem against someone.
The catalyst for the story is whatever major event you want to describe for your readers.
The dectectives may be neurotic and you can describe their individual neuroses...but their motivation is that they are trying to solve the crime...unless one of the dectectives is the muderer... and he/she has something in his past which compels him to murder a particular kind of person in a particular way.How good is that??
I will look forward to reading this story, JB! HJL
Absolutely. Murder is not chemical. Murder is psychological.
Anyone who deliberately and coldly murders another person is insane..and therefore psychotic....no matter how he/she rationlizes the doing of the deed.
Many times, a psychotic person is just the nicest kind of guy/gal you'd ever want to meet.
What a kettle of fish you have opened here, JB. I suggest that you find a copy of the DSM (Diognastic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) and read about psychotics and keep it as a reference as you write this story. (At a used book store, a DSM III or IV is out of date, and will cost much less, but the information has not changed very much.)
The catalyst for the murderer is whatever the murderer felt to be true and was such a strong internal force that it compelled him/her to commit mayhem against someone.
The catalyst for the story is whatever major event you want to describe for your readers.
The dectectives may be neurotic and you can describe their individual neuroses...but their motivation is that they are trying to solve the crime...unless one of the dectectives is the muderer... and he/she has something in his past which compels him to murder a particular kind of person in a particular way.How good is that??
I will look forward to reading this story, JB! HJL
I disagree that every murderer is psychotic. If that were so, wouldn't every killer be granted leniency due to diminished responsibility?
It's actually more a question of morality than mental health.
It's actually more a question of morality than mental health.
A definition of psychosis:
psychotic, literally means abnormal condition of the mind, and is a generic psychiatric term for a mental state often described as involving a "loss of contact with reality". People suffering from psychosis are said to be psychotic.
People experiencing psychosis may report hallucinations or delusional beliefs, and may exhibit personality changes and disorganized thinking. This may be accompanied by unusual or bizarre behavior, as well as difficulty with social interaction and impairment in carrying out the activities of daily living.
To me, someone who can rationalise cannot be classes as having lost contact with reality. I would suggest that it is more a question of an individual's morality deviating from what society is morally/ethically correct.
psychotic, literally means abnormal condition of the mind, and is a generic psychiatric term for a mental state often described as involving a "loss of contact with reality". People suffering from psychosis are said to be psychotic.
People experiencing psychosis may report hallucinations or delusional beliefs, and may exhibit personality changes and disorganized thinking. This may be accompanied by unusual or bizarre behavior, as well as difficulty with social interaction and impairment in carrying out the activities of daily living.
To me, someone who can rationalise cannot be classes as having lost contact with reality. I would suggest that it is more a question of an individual's morality deviating from what society is morally/ethically correct.
The famously talented Mr. Ripley was psychotic, right? He rationalized quite well, frighteningly well. He has delusions of grandeur, severe identity confusion, and, of course, the ability to steal from or kill anyone he needs to.
AMC
Is it possible that a person who commits premeditated murder is shifting in and out of a psychotic state as more and more they progressively rationalize the morality of their actions? People can drive themselves insane trying to justify what they know to be morally wrong, I imagine. I'm not a doctor. I don't know if psychosis is a term reserved for those who no longer function within society at any level, but I've seen a few weirdos still walking the streets who seemed to have occasional lapses of psychotic-type behavior.
But how did we get this far off topic...?
We got this far 'off topic' because we are thinking, creative people who want to help JB. JB has tweeked our noses and our imaginations and we responded. We are probably all correct...given the wide variety of personal experiences which have molded our personalities.
There are many subcatagories under the title: neurotic. There are many subcatagories under the title: psychotic. Can a neurotic person commit murder? IMO, absolutely. Can a psychotic walk the streets? IMO, absolutely.
My conclusion? Your question re: catalyst, was not as simple as it seems to be on the surface, JB. HJL
There are many subcatagories under the title: neurotic. There are many subcatagories under the title: psychotic. Can a neurotic person commit murder? IMO, absolutely. Can a psychotic walk the streets? IMO, absolutely.
My conclusion? Your question re: catalyst, was not as simple as it seems to be on the surface, JB. HJL
I misunderstood the original post the first time around. It's strange, but I've been hanging around professional mystery writers for 30 years and never once have I heard anyone use the word catalyst. I just don't get what this is all about - moving the plot forward, selecting a good guy or a bad guy, an event, a motivation - what? Perhaps it would be best to come up with a different word.
On another topic, the mere act of deliberately killing another person is rather commonplace. I can't agree that all killers have gone around the bend. In covering the criminasl courts for years as a newspaper reporter I became acquainted with many murderers. Most were quite sane. An argument can be made, of course, that killing any living creature is not an act of sanity. That could be a very complicated discussion.
On another topic, the mere act of deliberately killing another person is rather commonplace. I can't agree that all killers have gone around the bend. In covering the criminasl courts for years as a newspaper reporter I became acquainted with many murderers. Most were quite sane. An argument can be made, of course, that killing any living creature is not an act of sanity. That could be a very complicated discussion.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2009
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 121
- Location
- Albany, NY
- Website
- www.saintmarksbody.com
I'm sorry for intruding, I thought this thread was about electrochemistry. The thing about a catalyst is that makes the reaction happen without itself being affected. Precious metals like platinum (which is what's in your car's exhaust converter) tend to be very good at this. Gold, for example, has caused a great many murders and I don't beleive a gram of it has ever become tarnished as a result.
Continuing to go off thread (as all great threads tend to!)
What about Fritzl? I was listening to a psychologist involved in the trial saying that he isn't insane; quite the opposite - sane, cold and calculating. Yet he has been sentenced to life in a psychiatric ward (will he be transfer to prison later on?)
What do you think? To me that is psychotic; as well as a man who is dangerous to society as a whole.
What about Fritzl? I was listening to a psychologist involved in the trial saying that he isn't insane; quite the opposite - sane, cold and calculating. Yet he has been sentenced to life in a psychiatric ward (will he be transfer to prison later on?)
What do you think? To me that is psychotic; as well as a man who is dangerous to society as a whole.
Wow, I guess this is what can happen when you get the words flowing and don't stop by for a little bit.
First off thank you all for your ideas and conversation. It has made the wheels spin even faster, so to speak.
Secondly, I use the term Catalyst without too much explanation. The sense I had been searching for was as follows. My PI is living in another city across North America from where the crime takes place. I was trying to decide on a character who brings him to the crime scene. After reflecting on it I found the perfect candidate, they were hiding in plain sight lol.
Also I believe that though some killers do so as they have some psychosis, however, some are simply sociopaths. I personally would place Ripley. He did everything because he in his mind felt it was all right, though it was against society's standards. Hannibal Lecter even Carmen Sternwood I feel would also fit in this class. They are sane people who follow their own drum, and feel that society has tried to place them in a bubble that to them is incorrect. Though many may argue that this is insane I disagree. Sociopaths simply feel that they are either doing society as a favor or that they are morally correct.
First off thank you all for your ideas and conversation. It has made the wheels spin even faster, so to speak.
Secondly, I use the term Catalyst without too much explanation. The sense I had been searching for was as follows. My PI is living in another city across North America from where the crime takes place. I was trying to decide on a character who brings him to the crime scene. After reflecting on it I found the perfect candidate, they were hiding in plain sight lol.
Also I believe that though some killers do so as they have some psychosis, however, some are simply sociopaths. I personally would place Ripley. He did everything because he in his mind felt it was all right, though it was against society's standards. Hannibal Lecter even Carmen Sternwood I feel would also fit in this class. They are sane people who follow their own drum, and feel that society has tried to place them in a bubble that to them is incorrect. Though many may argue that this is insane I disagree. Sociopaths simply feel that they are either doing society as a favor or that they are morally correct.
Well, JB. I just can not resist. 'Catalyst' is a psychological term...it just isn't as popular as 'dysfunctional'.
Attorneys have, for years tried to claim mental dysfunction to get their clients off. For years, the courts have not capitulated, except in a very few publicized cases, and have refused to recognize insanity as a defense.
IMO. This situation would be a wide open avenue for a creative writer whose main character was an attorney who wanted to use this defense, or a main character who commits murder and wants to get away with it.
Any psychological condition is never 'simple'.
Generally (and I emphasis GENERALLY!) Neurosis is a general term. Psychosis is a general term. GENERALLY...Neurosis are directed inwardly. GENERALLY...Psychosis are directed outwardly.
Imagine an outline. Psychosis is the heading. Listed under the heading, 'Psychosis ', are conditions: Sociopaths, Personality Disorders, etc. 'Neurosis' is the heading. Under this heading are conditions: split personality, depression, etc. There are definite divisions.
Can someone who is considered to 'normal' do murder? IMO, absolutely, if there is a 'catalyst' which negates/suspends/overrides their belief systems. Will they commit another murder? Probably not. But, who knows what their circumstances are and what they might do?
Can someone whose psychosis are 'hidden' commit murder? IMO, absolutely, if a particular set of circumstances ('catalyst') emerges. Will this person commit another murder? Who knows? Will the particular circumstances which encouraged the 'catalyst' occur again?
Are evil people (like Hanibal Lecter) psychopaths? Or is 'evil' a completely different catagory?
Your question has stirred up my creative mind, JB. HJL
Attorneys have, for years tried to claim mental dysfunction to get their clients off. For years, the courts have not capitulated, except in a very few publicized cases, and have refused to recognize insanity as a defense.
IMO. This situation would be a wide open avenue for a creative writer whose main character was an attorney who wanted to use this defense, or a main character who commits murder and wants to get away with it.
Any psychological condition is never 'simple'.
Generally (and I emphasis GENERALLY!) Neurosis is a general term. Psychosis is a general term. GENERALLY...Neurosis are directed inwardly. GENERALLY...Psychosis are directed outwardly.
Imagine an outline. Psychosis is the heading. Listed under the heading, 'Psychosis ', are conditions: Sociopaths, Personality Disorders, etc. 'Neurosis' is the heading. Under this heading are conditions: split personality, depression, etc. There are definite divisions.
Can someone who is considered to 'normal' do murder? IMO, absolutely, if there is a 'catalyst' which negates/suspends/overrides their belief systems. Will they commit another murder? Probably not. But, who knows what their circumstances are and what they might do?
Can someone whose psychosis are 'hidden' commit murder? IMO, absolutely, if a particular set of circumstances ('catalyst') emerges. Will this person commit another murder? Who knows? Will the particular circumstances which encouraged the 'catalyst' occur again?
Are evil people (like Hanibal Lecter) psychopaths? Or is 'evil' a completely different catagory?
Your question has stirred up my creative mind, JB. HJL
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,098
- Reaction score
- 127
- Age
- 63
- Location
- seacoast New Hampshire
- Website
- jeseymour.com
When someone pleads insanity, they don't "get away with it." My husband worked in our state hospital, and spending the rest of your life in an institution for the criminally insane is probably worse than serving your time in prison.
That said - I've been told that psychopath and sociopath are really two words for the same thing. Sociopath just sounds nicer.
