Homepage
Login
New Post
Profile
What could the Antagonistic Force be in a Crime Mystery/Police Procedural, where the culprit/murderer doesn't get revealed until nearer the end of the book?
My instinct keeps saying that the murderer should be the antagonist, good vs. bad, etc. But I don't think I am approaching this right.
In my WIP, alongside the protagonist's external plot goal (solving a new murder), the main internal goal is to discover why his wife disappeared five years earlier. The latest homicide provides evidence linking the victim to the disappearance of the protagonist's wife and ignites a new lead towards getting the answer he desperately wants.
With this in mind and not wanting to reveal the murderer until the end, what kind of antagonistic forces could I use?
My protagonist's ultimate goal is to discover what happened to his wife, so the opposite of that would be something preventing that discovery, but what? Could the antagonistic force be a 'lack of evidence'? Perhaps, too weak. I think the antagonist would be better as a person?
My first idea is that the antagonist is the murderer and is trying to keep the crime covered up. The murderer is trying to make sure no evidence is available and keeps track of the protagonist/detective's progress to try and intercept him at every stage. Feel's like it's been overdone though – that car, with tinted windows, that keeps appearing at every location the detective investigates, or the person sitting in their vehicle with binoculars watching the detective's every move, etc.
My next idea and maybe a better approach is to think more along the lines of a loved one or friend (a traitor) being the antagonistic force. Their requirements of the detective prevent him from being able to carry out his job successfully. If the loved one wants the opposite of what the detective wants, i.e., doesn't want the answer to his wife's disappearance resolved, then that would create an antagonistic force through the book, right?
I would love to know your thoughts on this.
Thanks in advance for your answers.
(1)More posts by @Gonzalez219
1 Comments
Sorted by latest first Latest Oldest Best
Does there have to be one? And, if there is, does it have to be linked to the murderer, rather than the victim?
You initially suggest "lack of evidence", but dismiss this as "too weak". Instead, try building it up to be a stronger 'source of conflict': The protagonist is convinced that the murder is linked to his wife's disappearance, his friends and colleagues are not. The victim was in possession of an item that formerly belonged to his wife. His friends and colleagues provide other rational explanations (it's a different copy of the same item, or she had been known to loan it out, et cetera). They think that the protagonist is sliding back into grief, and want to help him move on — well-intentioned, but inconvenient. This also lets you have a point in the story where the protagonist starts to doubt the link, before having a revelation or uncovering more evidence to reïnforce his convictions. Or, it could be a time-constraint: some condition around his wife's estate, will or family which will soon expire, pushing him to solve the mystery of her disappearance soon. In short, what other opposition can result from the lack of evidence.
Alternatively, the victim may have other secrets hidden in their past, red herrings that side-track your hero and blur the clues & truth. Perhaps they were having an affair, and their illicit lover is frantically trying to cover things up, inadvertently making the protagonist's life more difficult under the mistaken assumption that the leads he is tracking (and the purpose of his investigation) will lead back to their "indiscretions". Or perhaps they had links (legitimate or otherwise) to members of a criminal gang, who are now paranoid that their operations may be under scrutiny or attack.
Terms of Use Privacy policy Contact About Cancellation policy © selfpublishingguru.com2024 All Rights reserved.