Serial killers - horror or thriller?

lefty23 · Jan 18, 2013

It seems that any books i see in horror category or either monsters or supernatural (vampires, etc.). And any books i read related to serial killers are categorized as thriller. But most of those relate to the killer and a cop/fbi agent chasing them, etc.

For a book where the killer(s) and their victims are the MCs should that be classified as horror?

ironmikezero · Jan 18, 2013

Not likely... I'd consider it a thriller, but that's just me...

cornflake · Jan 18, 2013

In my mind, horror tends toward unreal, thriller is grounded in general reality. That's where I'd put the difference, not in whether it involves investigation/chase. Thus I'd say a serial killer belongs in thriller.

lefty23 · Jan 18, 2013

Thanks, yeah, i guess it would be a thriller then. Wasn't sure because i was thinking if it was made into a movie, it would definitely be considered a horror movie, but as a book it seems thriller is the correct category for it.

phineas12gauge · Jan 18, 2013

Horror's very subjective, keep this in mind when trying to classify a work as being part of a particular genre.

Horror doesn't need to have supernatural elements, though that seems to be the demarcation line.

A book that is revolving around a serial killer and his victims could easily fall into the horror category.

Think about Silence Of the Lambs

ArachnePhobia · Jan 18, 2013

phineas12gauge said:
Horror's very subjective, keep this in mind when trying to classify a work as being part of a particular genre.

Horror doesn't need to have supernatural elements, though that seems to be the demarcation line.

A book that is revolving around a serial killer and his victims could easily fall into the horror category.

Think about Silence Of the Lambs

Urban legends, too. Many of them lack a supernatural element but are definitely horror; the well-dressed, friendly businessman who flees and leaves behind a briefcase of bloody knives, the necking kids who hear the scraping on the side of their car just after that mental patient with a hook for a hand escapes, the girl who falls asleep with her "dog" licking her hand only to wake up to find her dog hung from the ceiling and bloody graffiti on the wall: AREN'T YOU GLAD YOU DIDN'T TURN ON THE LIGHT? All human killers, but other factors make them more horror than anything else.

phineas12gauge · Jan 18, 2013

Here's a good quote from Douglas Winter:

"Horror is not a genre, like the mystery or science fiction or the western. It is not a kind of fiction, meant to be confined to the ghetto of a special shelf in libraries or bookstores. Horror is an emotion."

The bolded part, that's what's important to remember.

DeleyanLee · Jan 18, 2013

phineas12gauge said:
A book that is revolving around a serial killer and his victims could easily fall into the horror category.

Think about Silence Of the Lambs

Except Silence of the Lambs is a thriller, not horror. The main emotional element is whether or not the senator's daughter will be rescued from Buffalo Bill in time. The ticking clock is a common element in thrillers.

IMO--and only my opinion--for a serial killer to be a horror story, the reader should be emotionally wrapped up in the victim(s) is going through at the hands of the serial killer, the psychology of what's going on within the killer's mind (my preference, I admit) and not touch on whether or not they're going to be apprehended by the law.

Hope that makes sense.

phineas12gauge · Jan 19, 2013

I class Silence of the Lambs as a Horror/Thriller because of some of the elements that are present. I mean, the whole premise itself is quite horrific. What is actually happening to Gumb's victims is pretty nasty.

IMO--and only my opinion--for a serial killer to be a horror story, the reader should be emotionally wrapped up in the victim(s) is going through at the hands of the serial killer, the psychology of what's going on within the killer's mind (my preference, I admit) and not touch on whether or not they're going to be apprehended by the law.

I think Silence of the Lambs actually meets your criteria. Red Dragon as well.

Yes, the question is will Clarice rescue the senators daughter in time. That's a major plot point, but the reader needs an emotional investment into the story to actually care if the daughter gets rescued. This is an obstacle that is important to both the character and the reader.

We also get to see inside Gumb's head and get his back story, he is a well rounded character. Same thing in Red Dragon. These aren't cardboard cut-outs hanging around to advance the plot and be an antagonist.

I'm very glad you started this discussion because it actually illustrates a point I made earlier, that is, Horror is Subjective.

DeleyanLee · Jan 19, 2013

phineas12gauge said:
Horror is Subjective.

+1

phineas12gauge said:
I class Silence of the Lambs as a Horror/Thriller because of some of the elements that are present. I mean, the whole premise itself is quite horrific. What is actually happening to Gumb's victims is pretty nasty.

I agree that it qualifies to you as such, but not for me. Having read case file upon case file about real life serial killers as I have, that's pretty tame. But, then, what horrifies many readers seems banal to me. It's one of the challenges I have with the Horror genre in general--it doesn't scare me, though I have been told many times that I'm a "natural Horror writer".

phineas12gauge said:
Yes, the question is will Clarice rescue the senators daughter in time. That's a major plot point, but the reader needs an emotional investment into the story to actually care if the daughter gets rescued. This is an obstacle that is important to both the character and the reader.

The easiest way for a publisher to classify a novel is by its main plot/story question. As the main plot/story question of Silence is that of a thriller, then that's how it was originally marketed. Now that it's a mega-bestseller, it's mainstream fiction.

phineas12gauge said:
We also get to see inside Gumb's head and get his back story, he is a well rounded character. Same thing in Red Dragon. These aren't cardboard cut-outs hanging around to advance the plot and be an antagonist.

This, to me, is why it's a mega-bestseller. Harris went beyond the expected and actually made an effort to let the reader see the other side of the story's argument. The ability to make readers have the mixed emotions about Red Dragon--you knew he had to be stopped, but you totally felt for his predicament--was what makes Harris a superb storyteller. He took the reader places that they didn't expect to go, while still taking them to all the places they wanted to go.

Wilde_at_heart · Jan 19, 2013

The way I see it is,

Serial killer commits a bunch of crimes - thriller
MC as possible victim being stalked relentlessly by serial killer - horror.

But that's just me!

Rhoda Nightingale · Jan 19, 2013

Don't forget the serial killer can potentially be the protagonist, in either genre.

Otherwise--what phineas12gage said. Horror isn't horror because of the various elements that compose the plot, but because of the way it makes you feel. Thrillers make your heart race because you've got something to figure out lickety-split; horror makes your heart race because you're not safe. Or "not at home," as Mark Z. Danielewski put it. (Loved that definition, the feeling of being "not at home," that something's-not-right-here feeling.)

lefty23 · Jan 21, 2013

DeleyanLee said:
IMO--and only my opinion--for a serial killer to be a horror story, the reader should be emotionally wrapped up in the victim(s) is going through at the hands of the serial killer, the psychology of what's going on within the killer's mind (my preference, I admit) and not touch on whether or not they're going to be apprehended by the law.

I think that makes sense. In terms of my story then, it would lean much more toward horror as it is pretty much entirely focused on the victims as well as the psychology of those doing the killing. The police are not involved in the story until the very end.

quicklime · Jan 21, 2013

phineas12gauge said:
Horror's very subjective, keep this in mind when trying to classify a work as being part of a particular genre.

Horror doesn't need to have supernatural elements, though that seems to be the demarcation line.

A book that is revolving around a serial killer and his victims could easily fall into the horror category.

Think about Silence Of the Lambs

or Misery.

Horror tends to be more about the vague, horriffic, ominous threat and thrillers about "chase" to some extent. That said, the line between the two is very vague....Watchers had a speculative antagonist in The Outsider, which would make for a strong case as horror, but it was written as a thriller in terms of the pace, stalker/stalkee, etc. the two are pretty nebulous as far as where one ends and the other begins.

Jamesaritchie · Jan 21, 2013

What matters is how publishers classify a novel. Go to a bookstore and see where Silence is racked.

SnowBunny · Jan 29, 2013

For me I would classify straight serial killer books as thriller fiction.
If there is any supernatural element, demon, unknown force, creature at work in a serial killer book I would classify it as horror.

I think there is a huge grey area too though, as sometimes at Indigo books I get confused on why certain books are kept in mainstream fiction, horror or fantasy.

Miz Erie · Jan 29, 2013

This was interesting for me to read. I have always classified my novel as thriller, but I'm now second-thinking that genre. My novel has one major difference, though; I'm writing a serial rapist, not killer.

But my story is being told through two POV's: the rapist's and the first victim in the story. The only time anyone is going to know about the legal aspect is when the victim is watching the news or reading the paper as he learns about the rapist and, later, is tracking him.

But there are going to be multiple rapes in the novel, each one showing progressively more details, revealing a little more about the rapists methodology with each one.

I'm thinking I might be more in the horror genre...

Griffin Hayes · Feb 6, 2013

If the serial killer is a demon=horror
If the serial killer is a demented human=thriller

Rhoda Nightingale · Feb 6, 2013

^Not necessarily. *points at avatar*

onesecondglance · Feb 6, 2013

Yeah. If the intention is to leave the reader quivering in fear, horror. If the intention is to pump them with adrenaline, thriller. Supernatural or not isn't really the defining line.

Arislan · Feb 12, 2013

I'd say it's like this:
Serial Killer = Thriller
Spree Killer/Mass murderer = Horror

Dexter would be a serial killer.
Jason Vorhees would be a spree killer.

cornflake · Feb 12, 2013

Arislan said:
I'd say it's like this:
Serial Killer = Thriller
Spree Killer/Mass murderer = Horror

Dexter would be a serial killer.
Jason Vorhees would be a spree killer.

Not to pick nits, but, well, to be nitpicky about it - both serial and spree killers are mass murderers. Those are two of the subtypes of mass killings. Also, I don't think Jason would really fit as a spree killer, though I'm not sure what classification would really fit, heh.

DeleyanLee · Feb 12, 2013

SnowBunny said:
I think there is a huge grey area too though, as sometimes at Indigo books I get confused on why certain books are kept in mainstream fiction, horror or fantasy.

In general, any genre in a book store is there so people with a particular taste in stories know where to go to find that kind of story.

Mainstream means that it appeals to a broader audience than any single genre. The story has "broken out" of its genre. Which is why King, Koontz, Martin and others may have started out in Horror or Fantasy, but are now in mainstream--a larger variety of people want their books.

BriMaresh · Feb 12, 2013

Actually, if you see both perspectives, isn't it usually suspense? Because we know, inevitably these paths will cross? It really depends on the tone, but someone in my writing group was having this exact problem - what to call her novel - and that's what seemed to be the best fit, as far as a serial killer story where you see the serial killer's POV and the victim's as well.

Arislan · Feb 12, 2013

cornflake said:
Not to pick nits, but, well, to be nitpicky about it - both serial and spree killers are mass murderers. Those are two of the subtypes of mass killings. Also, I don't think Jason would really fit as a spree killer, though I'm not sure what classification would really fit, heh.

I think I learned that from Darin Morgan in a teleplay. Made sense to me so I just go with it. He said something along the lines of ...let me look it up.

Frank unwraps the gift. It's two videotapes; they are blood-and-guts horror flicks. Frank loses a portion of his holiday cheer.

FRANK (reading): "Black Christmas" and "Silent Night, Deadly Night". Whatever happened to "Miracle on 34th Street"?

ROEDECKER: Well, it ain't your father's Christmas! Nothing will put you more in the mood for Christmas than a serial-killing Santa!

FRANK: This is not a serial killer: he is a spree killer.

ROEDECKER (factually): The sexual repression and signature make him an organized serial killer.

FRANK (gesturing at the tape): The triggering stressor would be that they forced him to wear that Santa Claus outfit -- it's ludicrous.

ROEDECKER (beat): It says "Serial Killer" on the box.

Serial killers - horror or thriller?

practical experience, FTW

practical experience, FTW

Writing Anarchist

Writing Anarchist

&#965;&#960;&#949;&#943;&#954;&#969;phobe

Vampire Junkie

all out of fucks to give

Horror addict

Black Mariah

One evil little baby step at a time

Vampire Junkie

pretending to be awake

practical experience, FTW

Writing Anarchist

New kid, be gentle!

υπείκωphobe