Not surprisingly, there is a lot of information available about how this whole ‘true-crime genre’ began. While there is controversy about its origins, one thing that is not at issue is that it’s popularity has exploded over the past few years.
Public interest in crime and the people who commit it dates back centuries. I read one article that said even William Shakespeare could technically be called a crime writer, and I suppose that’s true for his time. Of course, because I am a Poe, I cannot omit Edgar Allen. In 1842 he penned The Mystery of Marie Roget, which could really be a first example of the true crime novel. It was based on the actual murder mystery of Mary Cecilia Rogers, whose body washed up in the Hudson River around Hoboken, New Jersey in 1841. So while it wouldn’t look like our true crime novels of today, it certainly feels a little like a predecessor.
But mostly when I am talking about the true crime genre, I am talking about how it came to be what it is today. Why do we (collectively) love it so much? How did it get to be such a big deal?
Some of the credit, generally, goes back to a couple of different novels from the mid-twentieth century. The first is Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood, published in 1966 about the horrifying murder of four members of the Clutter family in Holcomb, Kansas. This was a well-known farming family from a small community, and it became sensationalized because two of the four victims were children in their teens. Of course, it also became sensationalized because of Capote’s interest in the case, his subsequent novel and the movie that followed.
Some will argue that Capote didn’t start the genre. Maybe not, but he certainly started something that looks most like what we know and love today – the modern true crime novel. But, because he was who he was, he didn’t stick to ‘just the facts’. He added things, subtracted things and made them fit his own idea of the story. That’s a writer’s prerogative I guess, and we (his audience) ate it up.
It wasn’t until later that we learned from those who lived in Holcomb that the novel wasn’t as factual as Capote claimed it to be. Further, he was criticized for his portrayal of the murderers. He appeared to be more sympathetic toward them than the victims they brutally murdered.
Capote found out about the murders before the assailants (Richard Hickock and Perry Smith) were captured. He gained unprecedented access to the town, law enforcement officials and eventually the perpetrators as well. Because he spent so much time with Hickock and Smith, I suppose he had more of a relationship with them than he did with the victims, whom he never had the chance to meet.
I’m not excusing it or even agreeing with it. I can’t say how someone should write their own novel – what perspectives they should concentrate on or anything else. He was a writer who wrote what he felt. I am simply stating that I believe he came to know the murderers and became fascinated with them, so it makes sense that would come across in his writing. I am sure he also knew that their stories would sell more books. After all, isn’t knowing what makes murderers tick part of what draws us to true crime? Capote probably felt the same.
Capote’s novel was followed by Vincent Bugliosi’s Helter Skelter in 1974, with co-author Curt Gentry. This novel was a first-hand account like Capote but in a different way. Bugliosi was best known for prosecuting Charles Manson and his co-defendants in 1970-71 for their notorious crimes. After leaving the district attorney’s office, he started his own practice but also began to write books based on some of his high-profile cases, including Manson. Helter Skelter is still known as the best-selling crime book in US history (wonder what Capote thought of that!) and it really solidified the direction for this type of novel based on true events.
Then, in 1980 we learned about Ann Rule and her story about a fellow volunteer she met while working at a suicide hotline in Seattle, Washington. That guy was Theodore Robert Bundy. Rule met Bundy in 1971 while he was a student at the University of Washington, some four years before he would be arrested in Utah. Her book, The Stranger Beside Me, was again a first-hand account but by someone who knew the murderer on a more personal level.
It was because of that personal relationship that Rule was criticized for giving Bundy a likeable personality. Let’s be real though – a lot of people did that. Anytime he was mentioned in the press, he was always said to be engaging or charming or handsome. She was certainly not alone in her description of his personality. Many questioned whether or not Rule believed Bundy really murdered all those women during his killing spree. Rule stated that she believed he did commit the murders – she simply didn’t want to believe it. I can relate to that. None of us wants to believe someone we know would be capable of doing such horrific things to another human being.
Next, we have Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil by John Berendt in 1994, a true story about the killing of a male prostitute by a wealthy businessman. This was later made into a movie by Clint Eastwood, released in 1997. This book still holds the title of longest running best seller on the New York Times Best Seller list.
Midnight had all the elements that hold our fascination, and it really gave creators an idea of what this genre could become. Money, sex, jury trials and interesting characters created a story that really seemed to captivate. I have a feeling this one is a little more like Capote’s story in that it reads like a novel. It’s very digestible for the reader and again, it made for a really good movie.
The genre moved from the theater to the small screen with shows like Unsolved Mysteries in the 1980’s. Many others came along as well, like Cold Case Files, Forensic Files, 48 Hours and more. Many of those shows that originally aired on network television are experiencing a revitalization on Hulu, Amazon Prime and other platforms to a whole new generation of viewers. These shows came on the heels of the ‘serial killer’s heyday’ of the 1970’s and 80’s. According to an article in the Atlantic, serial killers account for less than 1% of all homicides, with the number of serial killers plummeting following their ‘heyday’. Even still, we devote about 40% of the genre to those types of killers. It is clear that we are fascinated by them.
Of course, the explosion of the internet created an abundance of available information on every subject. We suddenly had access to just about anything from the comfort of our own home. No more treks to the library or waiting on a list for a book. But, come on. Most of us (not just us old people) still like to hold a book in our hands as opposed to reading on a device.
The internet changed everything
Then, we jump ahead to the world of the podcast. It took me a long time to get into that world. Initially, I thought it was like talk radio from my youth, which I had no desire to listen to. Later, I realized it was NOT like that at all. The podcast, Serial, really opened the door for others to cover true crime in this new format. I read that today there are more than 23,000 podcasts just devoted to true crime! There are probably many more coming out all the time. Clearly we cannot get enough of it.
The one that got me hooked was Jensen and Holes – The Murder Squad (which is no longer making new content), but the one that kept me listening was Morbid. I binged that one so hard and I still look forward to new episodes every week. I appreciate Ash and Alaina’s more light hearted approach to their stories. It doesn’t feel like a documentary and doesn’t feel like they are reading the whole thing – even when they are.
I appreciate them and really have to give them some credit for giving me the confidence to start this blog. Their start in the podcast world helped me dig deeper into my own interest in the genre. They seem just like you or me – just real people who tried doing what they love and for them, it worked. Thanks ladies. I am confident you have inspired many others as well.
But, talk about what comes around goes around. Books have made a comeback! According to this article in The Lineup, true crime became the fastest-growing book market with a more than 50% increase between 2016 and 2018. As I said earlier, there is just no substitute for holding that hard copy while you read. And, if you’re like me, I like to underline, highlight or scribble in the margins. Some might think I am ruining the book, but when I find an old book with hand written notes in it, I am thrilled! Just trying to create that for someone in the future. Of course, I don’t mark in library books but I next to never check out books, preferring to purchase.
Following the podcast explosion came the streaming platforms like Netflix, Hulu, HBO Max and others. When the pandemic started in early 2020, there was really this perfect storm created by those who were stuck at home, bored, with nothing to watch on ‘regular’ TV. What do you do? You binge – everything. I recall the beginning of the pandemic when everyone was watching The Tiger King. I hadn’t spent a lot of time on streaming services prior to the pandemic. We had Netflix, but weren’t really utilizing it.
Suddenly everyone was talking on social media about what they were watching on one or more of these platforms and I realized I never watched any of it! And I started watching. I know I am not alone in this. Life slowed down for most everyone and we started filling some of that free time with television. There was almost no end to the amount of true crime available to binge!
And here we are today with true crime at its peak. We are constantly told to be careful and not glorify the murderers. Don’t give others like them any incentive to become famous. At this point, that’s a little like putting toothpaste back in the tube. We’re too far gone. Infamy isn’t going to push someone who would not otherwise commit these types of crimes. The evil is already in them and most will only get their fifteen minutes of fame.
So, my conclusion is that we are fascinated by the unknown of it all. There are so many unsolved cases. We don’t yet understand the ‘why’ that allows evil to reside in some and not others. Or why even some who might be evil aren’t led to murder. I think we also want to be a part of putting the puzzle pieces together. Maybe one of us will be the one who finds that missing piece that no one else has been able to see.
I also think that a part of our fascination comes from access. Because there is nothing we cannot find by doing a little internet sleuthing, we see the flaws in the system, the injustices perpetrated on victims and sometimes on the accused. The genre came back to new life when there was a light shone on these flaws by access through television and then the internet. It made us look beyond the gruesome acts committed and brought a renewed relevance when we could more clearly see those flaws.
These stories need to be told for awareness and to keep victims among the remembered. They deserve something and most would probably hope that their deaths could be used to warn others about the dangers out there….or that society might learn something from it. I would want that if it happened to me.