My last contribution featured a spoof interview in which a
good friend, the highly talented and incisive journalist Sara Bain, asked
questions of my detective, Jack Carston. It started me thinking about my own relationship
with him. I’ve known him for about 20 years now and I think he’s getting ready
to retire. He first came into my head in the early 90s and now, 5 books later,
the compromises he’s had to make are beginning to get to him.
He started because the UK publisher, Piatkus, liked a
stand alone thriller my agent had sent them but wanted a police procedural
instead, so I set about writing Material
Evidence. The ending/solution was based on an actual case I read about in a
book on forensic medicine, but the interest came from Carston and the team I
found around him. I say ‘I found’ and that seems to be how it was. They all
emerged, with their tics, foibles, ways of speaking and relationships ready
formed.
Carston himself is curious about
things, a creative thinker; he’s interested in people but routines bore and
frustrate him. His opinion of some of his superiors is relatively low but
his wife, Kath, makes sure that his self-esteem doesn’t get so high as to make
him obnoxious. In fact, the love and humour in their marriage is one of the
strongest themes running through the books.
Why did he choose to join the
police? Well, he’s always wondering what makes people (including himself) tick
and likes solving puzzles. At first he joined because he was idealistic and
wanted to be on the side of the good guys – but the job has made him more aware
that ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are relative terms, especially when it comes to people’s
motives for what they do. His high success rate derives from the fact that he’s
not only fascinated by people, he cares about them, too. He’s not obviously
‘flawed’, has no particular rituals, doesn’t drive a flash car, and his only
addiction is his wife. He has a temper, is sometimes childish, doesn’t tolerate
fools, despises people who don’t respect the rights of others and is driven
mainly by compassion.
I’ve followed him through five
books so far and, without any conscious plan on my part, he’s definitely
evolved – and in a specific direction. The job has taken him more deeply into
the psyches of other people (and his own) and, if he had any moral certainties
to start with, he certainly doesn’t now. When I first wrote about him, he
solved the case by using the testimony of the various suspects to get into the
mind of the victim. The picture he saw there was pretty bleak. But the way he
did it – using the physical evidence, but building a picture of who the dead
woman was – told me I was dealing with someone who trusted his insights into
behaviours. In the next book, things were clearer because there was a definite
‘baddie’. Even then, though, the murders and the motives were surprising and
not at all clear cut.
It was The Darkness that signalled the real change. He found himself
sympathising with someone who was living a normal life helping others but who
was also guilty of very serious crimes. It had quite an impact on him and when,
in book four, Shadow Selves, his
investigations brought him in contact with highly intelligent people in a
university and hospital, the pettiness, self-importance and corrupt nature of
some of the people there put another dent in his certainties.
And in the latest book, Unsafe Acts, at the same time as he’s
trying to solve two murders and unravel a plot to sabotage an offshore
platform, a vindictive superior officer decides he’s had enough of Carston’s
unconventional approaches and he faces a charge of indiscipline. It makes him
wonder whether he should actually leave the force.
I’m not yet sure of the answer
to that, but I will be when I start book six, which might well be the last in
the series.
Oh, and seeing that it’s
Christmas Eve, compliments of the season from Scotland.
No comments:
Post a Comment