I’m a bit of an odd duck in that I like reading the source books for movies I enjoy. This is a no-no for many because the plot is no longer a surprise. However, knowing how things turn out doesn’t bother me, and I like to see how the books differ from the movies.
In this vein, I just finished reading The Manchurian Candidate, a 1959 political thriller by Richard Condon. Some of you might be familiar with the story from the movies, one in the 1960s with Frank Sinatra and one in the 1990s with Denzel Washington. I’m a big fan of the 1962 movie, so I jumped on a chance to buy the book as a used paperback.
There is an adage that the book is always better than the movie. But I didn’t have to read long before I knew this wasn’t always the case. I was prepared for Condon’s writing style to be dated and a bit flowery, given that the book was published in the 1950s. But I wasn’t prepared for the wasteful verbosity that greatly slowed the pace without adding appreciably to character development.
My beloved Elmore Leonard once said that he never described anything unless it added appreciably to story or character development. This is especially important for a thriller, where the story has to trip along like a ticking timebomb. Condon evidently didn’t know this, or if he did his ego got in the way. There were loads of darlings that needed to be killed here. 😊
Condon describes everything in excruciating detail and provides a vast (probably thirty pages worth) backstory on Raymond’s parents and stepfather. This is not integral to the plot and simply exhausts the reader with minutia about the lack of character of these people. That is to say, you don’t need thirty pages to show that Senator and Mrs. Iselin are miserable people, and that Raymond hates them.
As I read, I was reminded of another adage: story trumps writing. This means that a killer plot that captures public imagination always triumphs over quality writing. I think that was the case here. Condon’s story of how brainwashing is used to remove will and conscience, turning an otherwise law-abiding if dull individual into a perfect assassin, is brilliant. It came out at a time when people had just learned how these techniques were used by Chinese and North Koreans to torture American prisoners and, in some cases, turn them against their own country; techniques that would be continued by the North Vietnamese. Even today, this idea captures the public consciousness, which is probably why both the 1960s and 1990s movies were successful.
As a fiction writer, it can be frustrating to see someone overwrite to this degree and still publish a bestselling thriller. But, instead of bemoaning it, I strive to improve the impact of my own plot ideas. In some respects, this was inspiration for Project Suicide, which is a high-concept political-technothriller. Now, all I need is someone in Hollywood to notice it. 😊