Category Archives: Guest Authors

“I Think I’m Trying to Say Something About the Duality of Man, SIR!” by Kit Power

WHY DO CRIMINALS FASCINATE US SO MUCH?

I’ve asked a number of authors I admire to answer the same question–why do criminals fascinate us so much?–and I will be posting each response here on my blog. It’s a question all writers–especially crime writers–should consider every once in a while. In my debut novel, Toxicity, I’ve dug deep into the minds of criminals. I have written about the bad guys. The ones we love but hate at the same time. If you haven’t pre-ordered a copy yet, I highly recommend you doing so for purely selfish reasons.

And now that you’ve done that, we will pass the time hearing what other writers in the industry have to say about the posed question.

Today we have Kit Power. Mr. Power lives in the UK and writes fiction that lurks at the boundaries of the horror, fantasy, and thriller genres, trying to bum a smoke or hitch a ride from the unwary. His debut e-novellla ‘The Loving Husband and the Faithful Wife’ (plus short story ‘The Debt’) contains copious criminal activities, and is now available. His short stories also appear in anthologies published by MonkeyKettle Books and Burnt Offering Books – the latter tale is also non-supernatural horror featuring a criminal act.

He can be found on Facebook and blogs weekly at http://kitpowerwriter.blogspot.co.uk/.

In his secret alter ego of Kit Gonzo, he also performs as front man (and occasionally blogs) for death cult and popular beat combo The Disciples Of Gonzo, www.disciplesofgonzo.com.

Watcha got for us today, Kit?

1974589_222923031246471_1753716962_n

“I Think I’m Trying to Say Something About the Duality of Man, SIR!”

by Kit Power

why do criminals fascinate us so much?

Such a great question! I’m going to rephrase it – why do criminals fascinate me so much?

Let’s back up one more step – do criminals fascinate me?

Of the twenty five stories I’ve written in the last eighteen months, eighteen contain criminals or criminal activity, often pretty serious crimes of violence and/or murder.

I’d say that’s a yes. Okay, so what the hell?

I think of myself as a non-supernatural horror writer, in that I tend to write about what scares me, and most of what scares me exists in the real world in one form or another. I’m not against the genre of supernatural horror at all, I read there widely and even visit on occasion – it’s just not where my muse seems to spend a lot of time.

Given that, the attraction of crime seems obvious. Crime is dangerous, inherently transgressive in nature, a breaking of the societal covenant. We make things criminal, in large part, because we don’t want them to happen to us. We don’t want to be beaten, or stabbed, or robbed or locked into the trunk of a car and driven into a lake (say), so we make those things illegal.

It follows pretty logically then that those same transgressions are ripe and fertile grounds for drama.

There’s something else though, and that’s the inherent tension between our desires to be governed by laws on a societal basis (and for other people to obey them) and for our own desires to act on… well, our desires – to exact ‘justice’ (or as it’s more commonly known, revenge). Jodie Foster in The Brave One and Charles Bronson in Deathwish are both clearly engaged in criminal activities (for that matter, so is Dirty Harry and Mel Gibson’s Riggs in Lethal Weapon – two vigilantes with badges), yet we by and large cheer them, because in transgressing the law, they give is what we think we want – primal revenge on those that wronged us. And let’s not forget that even the great Sherlock Holmes managed on at least one occasion to allow an avowed murderer to go unpunished – with the stated approval of the archetypal Victorian gentleman Dr. Watson.

So criminals are fascinating for two reasons – we ‘like’ the vigilante who takes justice into their own hands (especially when said vigilante is perceived to have been failed by a corrupt or ineffective system) and we love to hate Hannibal Lecter, Mickey and Mallory, and the whole colourful cast of psychos, villains and gangsters.

There’s a third type of crime story, of course, and for my money the most interesting type, and that’s the Deadwood kind, the Godfather kind. The Sopranos kind.

These crime dramas are fascinating because the criminals themselves are complex and rounded characters. Tony Soprano is trying to be a loving family man, mostly, but he can’t keep his dick in his pants, and he sure can’t control that lethally violent temper. He has panic attacks over the loss of animals, but is quite calm in his execution-by-garrotte of an ex-friend turned informant. And his family, both biological and criminal, are as complex and contradictory as him.

In this kind of crime story, the criminal becomes one lens through which we view the world – one more element to traverse. As noted above, it provides particularly fertile ground for drama. The Sopranos has a considerably lower body-count across its seven seasons than a comparable run of, say, CSI, or some similar police procedural, but The Sopranos is intensely unsettling viewing, especially first time through, precisely because we know these (mostly) men are capable of anything – that any joke could turn serious, any slight could create or leave mortal offense. That any conversation could suddenly, horrifyingly, turn violent, even lethal.

As in TV crime drama, so in literature. For my money the master of crime fiction is James Ellroy, and this same fascination with transgression, violence, and morally complex and compromised characters with conflicting value systems and loyalties absolutely drives the drama, turning almost every scene into a dry-mouthed exercise in tension.

Now, tell me – why on earth wouldn’t you want to write things like that?

So yes, we’re obsessed with criminals because we fear them (Charles Manson) and admire them (Robin Hood), sometimes both at once. But more, I think, we’re obsessed with criminals because we are them. In the banal sense that most people have broken some law at some point in their lives, but in a more fundamental way too, in that we are all morally compromised characters, feeling our way through life. We are all, or almost all, prone to fits of temper, dislike of and also craving for authority, and selfish desire is always butting against the better angels of our natures and what we understand to be acceptable behaviour. Am I less morally conflicted because my selfish desire leads me to eating that second Mc’D’s double cheeseburger (or not), or staying up late playing Minecraft (or going to bed and having a better day at work the next day), rather than robbing or beating a man? I am not. I’m just much less interesting to write and read about.

Criminals, and stories about criminals, therefore become effectively the Spinal Tap of human nature in literary form – that nature turned up to eleven, engaging in the most primal fears and desires of the species, where the fear is not of a loss of self esteem or job opportunity, but of prison, or violence, or death.

Criminals are scary. Crime is scary. Committing crime is scary.

I don’t know about you, but that’s why criminals fascinate me.

KP

25/2/14

“Outlaw Hearts” by Josef Matulich

WHY DO CRIMINALS FASCINATE US SO MUCH?

I’ve asked a number of authors I admire to answer the same question–why do criminals fascinate us so much?–and I will be posting each response here on my blog. It’s a question all writers–especially crime writers–should consider every once in a while. In my debut novel, Toxicity, I’ve dug deep into the minds of criminals. I have written about the bad guys. The ones we love but hate at the same time. If you haven’t pre-ordered a copy yet, I highly recommend you doing so for purely selfish reasons.

And now that you’ve done that, we will pass the time hearing what other writers in the industry have to say about the posed question.

Today we have Josef Matulich joining us. Josef is a writer, special effects artist and costumer who once, long ago, was shanghaied into being a Landsknecht commandant. In his copious free time, he operates a vintage and costume store with his wife Kit and son Aidan. They all live in a suburb of Columbus Ohio infested with deer, hawks, and foxes, none of which seem to be reanimated. His novel, Camp Arcanum, was recently published by the same publisher of Toxicity: Post Mortem Press.

Have at it, Josef.

josef matulich

In our hearts and souls, through miscalculations and depraved inaction, we are all criminals. Workaday life has us crossing moral codes, city, state, and federal codes, even God’s Law, and there isn’t a day we don’t come up short. Our society surrounds us with other weak fallible beings that cry out for justice when we cross their boundaries and step on toes. Because we are all good people at heart, we feel bad for it. We’re a guilt-ridden lot and we provide our own tack and saddle.

Things are not the same for the true rogues. They rob banks, eliminate competitors and forget birthdays with an insouciant sneer upon their lips. They are the heroes of their own stories and perform titanic deeds. Though life in the shadows is necessary for any kind of longevity, their deeds are whispered of in small groups and trumpeted on paparazzi TV when the outlaws are put on trial. We follow the exploits of the great criminals because they are both theater and cautionary tale. Though they may disgust us in their depravity, we cannot look away. They think big, push hard and live large.

We want to swagger as they do. We want to push until our dreams come true. We want to not care. We just don’t want anybody to think that we’re mean people.

That is why we love the great criminals: they display a joy and freedom that we everyday petty grifters envy even as we do our best to snuff them out.

“Criminals Are Us” by Jonny Gibbings

WHY DO CRIMINALS FASCINATE US SO MUCH?

I’ve asked a number of authors I admire to answer the same question–why do criminals fascinate us so much?–and I will be posting each response here on my blog. It’s a question all writers–especially crime writers–should consider every once in a while. In my debut novel, Toxicity, I’ve dug deep into the minds of criminals. I have written about the bad guys. The ones we love but hate at the same time. If you haven’t pre-ordered a copy yet, I highly recommend you doing so for purely selfish reasons.

And now that you’ve done that, we will pass the time hearing what other writers in the industry have to say about the posed question.

Today I’ve given Jonny Gibbings control of the wheel. Homeless at fourteen, prison by eighteen, Jonny Gibbings endured a violent and difficult start to life, resulting in being illiterate until late teens. With a distorted world view, his first book, the shock-comedy Malice in Blunderland, was well received. However, it was his mini-memoir that received critical acclaim and a ‘Pushcart’ nomination. Lyrical and thought provoking pieces for Thunderdome and Revolt illustrate a deep and thought provoking side that can only be the product of painful experience. Jonny Gibbings was described as ‘schizophrenic’ by film and television producer Kieron Hawkes, due to his extremes of comedy and sensitive writing. He lives in Billingshurst, UK. His newest book is Remember to Forget.

Have at it, Jonny.

3184

We are all criminals.

We like to think we are not, but we are.

All of us speed in cars, have stolen stuff from work or used the automatic check-out in the supermarket and when an item hasn’t scanned we’ve slipped it into the bag anyway. There are some laws such as these that we can ignore, or bend or pretend we didn’t know. If we are honest with ourselves, we got a little kick out of it. When slipping that un-scanned item into your shopping bag, you got a little buzz. You pretend to do it by accident, wonder if you were noticed, nonchalantly looking about with pseudo-boredom as you try to see where the checkout assistant is, rehearsing the ‘Oh my, I’m so sorry I didn’t know, I’m in such a hurry’ excuses in your head.

We all have the darkness in us, the ability to be bad. And that is what makes criminals so fascinating. Most of us don’t plan to break the law, we don’t jump in the car and plan to speed or to steal the tube of toothpaste, but when the opportunity presents, we take it.

And each of us have also thought about how to kill someone, I don’t mean sat down to plan a murder, but when in the shower or driving, our subconscious brain wanders and we have considered how to get away with murder.

We are all darker than we’d care to admit. I think criminals fascinate us, because as criminals ourselves we recognise quickly what we wouldn’t do, but understand the risk and how attractive it would be to get away with a perfect crime. We’ve all asked ourselves what wouldn’t we do and in doing so acknowledge there are those who are all darkness, thy have no scale and will do anything to achieve their aim, even kill.

Then there are those who kill for fun, just as kleptomaniacs steal for fun, there are some that killing is just entertainment.

Then those who kill for money. These people exist, as an adult we don’t need the sandman or the bogeyman, because we have burglars and murderers and they are real.

Just as seals follow great white sharks as if taunting them, they do it so that they know where the sharks are, I thing our fascination with criminals is the same. Kids read about monsters and demons, the books don’t try to convince them the monsters are real, only that they can be beat. I think we read crime for the same reason, acknowledging there are bad people out there, and they can be caught.

“On Outlaws: The Ballad of Gregorio Cortez” by Joe McKinney

WHY DO CRIMINALS FASCINATE US SO MUCH?

I’ve asked a number of authors I admire to answer the same question–why do criminals fascinate us so much?–and I will be posting each response here on my blog. It’s a question all writers–especially crime writers–should consider every once in a while. In my debut novel, Toxicity, I’ve dug deep into the minds of criminals. I have written about the bad guys. The ones we love but hate at the same time. If you haven’t pre-ordered a copy yet, I highly recommend you doing so for purely selfish reasons. And now that you’ve done that, we will pass the time hearing what other writers in the industry have to say about the posed question.

A good friend of mine and another Texas-based author, Joe McKinney, was kind enough to stop by today with his own thoughts on the subject. Joe is a well-established horror and crime author best known for his novel, Flesh Eaters. His newest novel is The Savage Dead. 

I hope you have something to drink, because his essay is a bit lengthy, as well as amazingly thought-provoking.

JoeMcKinneyAuthorPhotoSanJose

On Outlaws: 

The Ballad of Gregorio Cortez

By Joe McKinney

 

As a kid, I would sometimes sit through episodes of The Brady Bunch, hoping beyond hope to get a glimpse of Marsha in her underwear.  That never happened, unfortunately.  However, I do remember one episode that resonated with me.  It was called “Bobby’s Hero,” which, for all of you keeping score at home, was Episode 90 from Season Four.  In it, Bobby develops a fascination with Jesse James.  He writes a paper on the outlaw, and brings home a C+.  But, worse than bad grades, Mike and Carol get a concerned call from the principal.  The Bradys discover that their youngest is worshiping a common criminal, one who built a reputation on shooting innocents in the back.  The episode ends when the dire warnings of an old man prompt Bobby to have a nightmare in which the black-clad Jesse James ruthlessly murders his entire family.  Soon after, Bobby sees the error of his ways, and we end on the comfortable reaffirmation of our core family values.

The cynic in me says the reason I enjoyed the episode so much was because it was the only episode in which the entire Brady family gets gunned down.  The only thing that would have made it any better would have been a close up of Greg’s brains spattered on the wall.  But the quasi-serious academic in me can’t help but think that maybe there was an object lesson in there somewhere.  After all, Bobby’s hero worship of Jesse James was hardly unique.  Just about every culture and every time period has made a hero of its bygone outlaws.  From Robin Hood to Bonnie and Clyde, outlaws turned folk heroes are everywhere.  It makes no difference that an outlaw’s crimes fail to jive with their fame; they are heroes nonetheless.  They undergo a strange alchemy that changes them from common criminal to champion of the dispossessed.  As the poor and downtrodden masses, we identify with the romance the outlaw represents, and gloss over the barbarity of his crimes.  We thrill at the romantic adventure, the disguises, the escapes, the thumbing of our collective noses at those who hold power over us.

I’ve been thinking an awful lot about that alchemical process lately, and it occurs to me that the one common denominator across all those different criminals turned folk heroes, is the power of art.  A song – specifically, a ballad – can turn the vilest crime into an act of charity.  When Robin Hood’s men usurp the spiritual authority of the church, as they do in the ballad “Robin Hood and Allan a Dale,” or murder a police officer, as they do in “Robin Hood and the Widow’s Sons,” the crime itself gets buried in a clever rhyme.  What takes center stage is the hypocrisy of the Medieval Church, or the unjust oppression of bad government.  We fail to see the horror, the aftermath, the other side of the ballad.  Instead, we see a symbol of our own liberation.

And therein lies the power of song.

Kenedy, Texas

June 12, 1901

(Yes, the town’s name is spelled with one n, not two.)

Located about 75 miles south of San Antonio, Karnes County is a rugged, beautiful country made up of rolling hills and clear running streams and dense forests of mesquite and oak trees.  Its large pastures are thick with Johnson grass, making it natural ranching country, a life which appealed to the German and Mexican families who settled it in the early 1800s.

By 1901, it was a small, but thriving, community based on corn and cattle.  German immigrants grew wealthy, while the Mexican immigrants of the day lived as renters on their ranches.  And one of the largest ranches in the area belonged to W. A. Thulemeyer.  He rented out a small corner of his property to two young Mexican men, Gregorio and Romaldo Cortez.  Both were married.  Gregorio had four children; Romaldo and his wife had none.  Though Romaldo was the older of the two, Gregorio seems to have been the more mature.  It was Gregorio who first made the decision to settle down (the two had for several years worked as itinerant ranch hands throughout South Texas, dragging their families along with them), and it was under Gregorio’s supervision that their corn crops prospered.  And it was Gregorio who was fated to become a folk hero of the Texas-Mexico border.

cortez_alone

Trouble came to the Cortez brothers on June 12, 1901.  A few days before, an unidentified Mexican man had stolen a horse in adjacent Atascosa County.  The sheriff in Atascosa had tracked the thief to Karnes County and asked W.T. “Brack” Morris, the sheriff in Karnes County, to pick up the trail.  Brack Morris was a former Texas Ranger with a reputation for being quite handy with a pistol.  In 1901 he was serving his third term as sheriff and knew nearly everyone in Karnes County.  He’d gotten word that Gregorio Cortez had recently acquired a new horse and went out to the Thulemeyer Ranch with a translator to make inquiries.

Morris’s translator was a man named Boone Choate, who seems to have had a higher opinion of his knowledge of Spanish than he perhaps had a right to.  They arrived at Gregorio Cortez’s house mid-morning and found a clapboard house set back from the road behind a small, split rail fence.  Choate climbed down from the horse-drawn carriage the two men had ridden in on and hollered toward the house while Morris remained in the carriage.

Sensing trouble, Gregorio told Romaldo to go see what the men wanted.  Romaldo went out to meet the men.  Choate asked if Gregorio was at home.  When Romaldo said that he was, Choate told him to get his brother and bring him out.

Romaldo turned to the house and said, “Te quieren,” which in Spanish is the familiar way to say, “Hey, get out here.  These guys want to talk to you.”

Unfortunately, when literally translated into English, the phrase means, “you are wanted,” which has an entirely different meaning to a police officer.  This was the first of three disastrous mistranslations that put Gregorio Cortez on the path to folk hero status.

Gregorio came outside and stood in the yard behind Romaldo.  Choate then proceeded to ask Gregorio about the mare he had recently acquired from another Mexican rancher in the area.

Unfortunately, Choate’s Spanish was not up to the task.  Instead of using yegua, the Spanish word for mare, he used caballo, which means stallion.  Gregorio was understandably confused.  He didn’t own a stallion, and he told Choate as much.  When Choate’s second translating mistake came back to Morris, it sounded to the ex-Texas Ranger like just another Mexican trying to get away with something.  He dropped down from his carriage and ordered Choate to tell the two brothers they were under arrest.

Things got a little murky after that.

Apparently, Gregorio said something that Choate heard and translated as “No white man is going to arrest me.”  An obvious threat, if you’re a cop about to the cuffs on somebody.

Later, at his trial, his lawyers said that Gregorio Cortez simply said, “You can’t arrest me for nothing.”

It’s not difficult to picture the scene.

The two brothers, realizing they were about to be arrested, got angry.  “Why?” they demanded.  “We haven’t done anything.”  They were shouting.  And Morris, who had no intention of taking any flak from a couple of poor Mexican farmers, went for his gun.  Meanwhile, Romaldo advanced on the authorities, hands slicing the air in front of him like a wronged tragedian in a silent movie.  Morris shot him in the mouth, wounding, but not killing, him.  He then turned to Gregorio, fired, and missed.  Gregorio returned fire, and his aim was truer.  Morris fell to the ground, hit three times.  And Choate doomed himself to villain status by turning and running to a hiding spot in the surrounding chaparral, leaving Morris to bleed to death on the road.

When the smoke cleared, Gregorio picked up the sheriff’s pistol, went inside his house, packed up the wife and kids, and loaded everything into the sheriff’s carriage and rode to Romaldo’s house.

What started out as a misunderstanding based on bad translation was now the murder of a police officer, resisting arrest, and theft of a carriage and two horses.

Gregorio Cortez had greeted the morning as a free man, but now the gallows was looming at his back.

After seeing to his family, Gregorio and Romaldo set out for the nearby town of Kenedy.  Romaldo was feverish and fading fast, which left Gregorio with little choice but to deposit him with another branch of their family and set off on his own.  He then began a nearly one hundred mile walk to the home of Martin and Refugia Robledo, who rented a home from a wealthy German rancher named Schnabel.

By all rights, Gregorio should have been safe there at the Robledo house.  He had evaded several posses on the way, and was relatively sure that no one had tracked him through the rough country.

Unfortunately for him, the sheriff of Gonzales County, Robert M. Glover, was a very good friend of the sheriff Gregorio Cortez had just killed, and Glover was determined to get revenge.

While the other posses were busy wandering the countryside, Glover arrested the women in Gregorio’s family and interrogated them.  Using what he learned from them, he organized a posse and headed for Schnabel’s ranch.  Though the rumor was never supported with reliable testimony, it appears Glover and his crew picked up a bottle of whiskey or three on the way to Schnabel’s ranch and had themselves a bit of a wake for the dearly departed Sheriff Brack Morris.  They were, in all likelihood, quite drunk when they converged on the Robledo house.

The approaching posse evidently made a great deal of noise as they descended on the property, because Gregorio and Martin Robledo were outside, hiding in the brush, waiting for them.

The posse dismounted, with the exception of Glover, and charged the house.  Glover rode around to the southeast corner of the property, and there he met up with Cortez.  The two men started shooting at one another, and the battle went on until Cortez managed to hit and kill Glover.  Cortez then hid, barefoot, in a briar-strewn field until the fight, which grew in legend to become the Battle of Belmont, was over.  Then he quietly reentered the house, got his shoes, and fled.

Meanwhile, the posse had their blood up.  They engaged the Robledo family and ultimately captured them, but not before Schnabel was shot in the face.  He was killed instantly, and there is still some doubt as to who actually inflicted the fatal wound.  Mrs. Robledo was charged with the crime, but convincing evidence was raised during the trial to suggest that the fatal shot actually came from another deputy named Tom Harper.  But regardless of the cause of Schnabel’s death, the focus remained on Gregorio Cortez.  He was now wanted for the death of two sheriffs, and every lawman in the state was itching to put a noose around his neck.

He fled to another friend’s house, where he was given a horse, saddle, and gun, and from there embarked on a mad dash across the state, bound for Laredo.  Along the way, he became the subject of the largest manhunt in Texas history.  At one point, a posse of three hundred deputies and conscripts (though contrary to legend, the Texas Rangers were not involved at that point) pursued him.

Cortez managed to elude them at every turn.  For ten days he used tricks and courage and just plain luck to stay one step ahead of everybody before finally getting turned in by a friend to the Texas Rangers, who took him into custody without firing a shot.

Cortez was taken to San Antonio, where he was tried and convicted for numerous crimes.  Despite multiple trials and attempts to lynch him, his death sentence was ultimately commuted by Texas Governor Oscar Colquitt.  He was released from prison in 1913 and died three years later of pneumonia.

The Man and the Legend

It’s not hard to see why Cortez became a folk hero.  After all, Mexicans living in South Texas, whether legally or otherwise, have long been treated like dirt by their white neighbors.  For the thousands of Mexicans living in poverty, Gregorio Cortez was a shooting star.  Here was one of their own making the assembled might of the white establishment look like a bunch of chumps.  Like Robin Hood before him, he underwent an apotheosis at the hands of balladeers, who immortalized him in song.

Here is Hally Wood’s beautiful translation of “El Corrido de Gregorio Cortez,” which I found in Americo Paredes’s book, With His Pistol in His Hand:

_

In the county of El Carmen

A great misfortune befell;

The Major Sheriff is dead;

Who killed him no one can tell.

At two in the afternoon,

In half an hour or less,

They knew that the man who killed him

Had been Gregorio Cortez.

They let loose the bloodhound dogs;

They followed him from afar.

But trying to catch Cortez

Was like following a star.

All the rangers of the county

Were flying, they rode so hard;

What they wanted was to get

The thousand-dollar reward.

And in the county of Kiansis

They cornered him after all;

Though they were more than three hundred

He leaped out of their corral.

Then the Major Sheriff said,

As if he was going to cry,

“Cortez, hand over your weapons;

We want to take you alive.”

Then said Gregorio Cortez,

And his voice was like a bell,

“You will never get my weapons

Till you put me in a cell.”

Then said Gregorio Cortez,

With his pistol in his hand,

“Ah, so many mounted Rangers

Just to take one Mexican!”

_

There are innumerable variants of the story, and each embellishes some element of the manhunt.  Gregorio’s flight became a vehicle upon which the Mexican folk ballads of northern Mexico and South Texas, a tradition collectively known as corridos, heaped tale after tale of daring do.

This process seems to have started relatively early.  The newspapers of the day show a great deal of divisiveness about Gregorio Cortez and what his punishment should be.  In some cases, such as with the San Antonio Express News, articles would run side by side, one calling for the immediate lynching of Gregorio Cortez, the other praising his resourcefulness, his courage, his pluck.  Mexicans, and a few Anglos as well, took up the story and made Gregorio Cortez into a local god.

cortez1

The corrido tradition surrounding Cortez became so elaborate, in fact, that by 1958 Americo Paredes was able to devote an entire book to separating Gregorio Cortez the man from Gregorio Cortez the legend.  Paredes’s book, With His Pistol in his Hand, remains the finest treatment of the Gregorio Cortez story.  In almost every respect, it is a fair and honest attempt to get at the truth of what happened during those ten days in June, 1901.  And it is also a loving tribute to the Mexican musical tradition of the corrido.

And what’s more, Paredes’s book takes the logical next step and connects the role of art in making heroes out of criminals.  Look at Robin Hood, immortalized in songs, novels and movies.  Look at the gangsters, bank robbers and rumrunners of the 1930s immortalized by the pulp fiction industry and Hollywood.  Bonnie and Clyde are no longer reckless psychopaths; they are Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway enacting a modern fable of true love pitted against a cold, indifferent world.  Robert Ford, who shot Jesse James in the back (an act that arguably saved a good many innocent lives), is now reviled as a coward and an assassin, lumped in with the likes of the Sheriff of Nottingham and King John.

It seems, ultimately, that crime can pay…as long as you have a soundtrack.

The Narcocorrido: An Afterward

Somewhere out there somebody is saying, “Yeah, but…Robin Hood, he lived a long time ago.  His crimes have been whitewashed by time and circumstance and political irrelevance.  Today we know the Medieval church stood in the way of scientific progress and that it committed more sins that it helped to prevent.  The Sheriff of Nottingham was a villain, through and through.  He deserved to meet up with someone like Robin Hood and his Merry Men.  And besides, none of that applies to us.  All Robin Hood is these days is a historical abstraction, like King Arthur.  Lighten up, man.  It’s just a story.”

Even Gregorio Cortez, whose biography is fairly well documented, is from another time.  The players in his drama have been dead for more than half a century, right?  What’s the harm in making up stories about him?

Well, there’s nothing wrong with having heroes, to be sure.  People need heroes.  And they’re going to look for them among their own.  Not only do heroes provide the sense of adventure I craved as a boy, but they validate one’s way of life.  For the Mexicans in the smoky cantinas of South Texas, Gregorio Cortez was a literal expression of what could be, of what any of them could be.   Robin Hood represented the same thing to the oppressed lower classes in England.  So heroes, as a Platonic form, are not bad.  Far from it.

But there is a danger here, depending upon your point of view.  Art, after all, is not static.  Just as communities change, take on new systems of moral value and new economies, so too do the stories those communities tell.  And today, a good part of the South Texas border culture is wrapped up in drugs and illegal migration and violence.  Yes, there are still good and true people living along the border, but to paraphrase Thoreau, they are living lives of quiet desperation.  They are surrounded by drug cartels that openly engage the government, that kill indiscriminately, that piggy back off the migrant worker’s illegal border crossing quest for a better way of life.  The reality of life on the border is one of violence and fear.

And the corrido has changed to reflect this new reality.  A new form of the folk ballad has emerged called the Narcocorrido, or drug ballad.  These are polka-based dance tunes that tell the story of drug runners and border criminals.  They are extremely popular.  Early examples of the form date back to 1930s, but it wasn’t until the 1970s, when the band Los Tigres del Norte took the Mexican music world by storm, that Narcocorrido rose to prominence.

Today, nearly forty years later, the Narcocorrido is a mainstay of Mexican music.  The ballads its practitioners write and perform contain the exploits of real people, such as Joaquin (El Chapo) Guzman, the billionaire drug lord recently captured by Mexican authorities.  They describe real crimes.  And they are making heroes of drug dealers like El Chapo in much the same way as earlier corridos made a hero of Gregorio Cortez.

Except that nowadays the bands performing Narcocorridos can reach hundreds of millions of people.

Go anywhere south of the Rio Grande with a picture of Los Tigres del Norte or Rosalino “Chalino” Sanchez, and you won’t have to look very hard to find somebody who knows all their songs by heart.

The implications are frightening.  Tempers on both sides of the border are short enough as it is.  People become rabid when you start discussing immigration.  Add to that the very real threat of drugs and organized warfare sponsored by drug cartels, and you might as well drop a lit match into a powder keg.  It will take us years, maybe even several generations, to heal the mistrust that has risen up between the United States and Mexico.

The Narcocorrido, I think, will help to deepen that mistrust, rather than heal it.  Looking back on Gregorio Cortez, we can view his story within the context of the racism of his day, a factor that goes a long way toward mitigating his crimes.  We can root for him during his adventures because our modern sensibilities tell us that he was treated unjustly, that he was made a criminal just because he was a Mexican living in an Anglo world, and after all who doesn’t love an underdog?  But we can’t say that about the hero of a Narcocorrido.  When he kills a Los Angeles policeman and flees back to a little village south of the border, thumbing his nose at American justice as he runs, we don’t get to couch his crime in terms of human rights and a demand for dignified treatment.  All we can see is a worm eating its way through our moral breadbasket.  And with heroes like that, who needs villains?

Will Viharo Discusses Glorifying Rule-Breakers

Why do criminals fascinate us so much?

I’ve asked a number of authors I admire to answer the same question–why do criminals fascinate us so much?–and I will be posting each response here on my blog. It’s a question all writers–especially crime writers–should consider every once in a while. In my debut novel, Toxicity, I’ve dug deep into the minds of criminals, and I’ve revealed their true selves. If you haven’t pre-ordered a copy yet, I highly recommend you doing so for purely selfish reasons. And now that you’ve done that, we will pass the time hearing what other writers in the industry have to say about the posed question.

Today we have Will Viharo, author of Love Stories Are Too Violent For Me, A Mermaid Drowns in the Midnight Lounge, Lavender Blonde, and Down a Dark Alley. You can find out more information about his work over at his website.

Take it away, Will.

authorphoto2

We all commit “crimes”—meaning deeds that somehow harm or offend others—in various ways to sundry degrees. No conscience is completely clean. But these are often private matters of the heart conducted outside the radar of the general public, mainly dealing with interpersonal relationships, that aren’t deemed illegal. The fascination with fellow citizens designated as “criminals” by society—i.e. those breaking actual laws on the books—is that they’re perpetrating acts of violence, vandalism and vice that typically victimize innocent people, merely for the sake of their own survival and comfort. You could say the same of any carnivorous animal in the wild, though even most of those “lower” species’ innate killer instincts come with a discriminating predatory conscience missing from the common two-legged sociopath’s makeup.

So why are these social pariahs, shamelessly preying on the weak and vulnerable, worthy of our interest, much less our admiration? Because they’re acting on primordial survivalist impulses most of us suppress out of mutual respect, learned “traditional values,” cowardice, fear of punishment or retribution, etc. We often live vicariously through the transgressions of those who willfully cross the line while at the same time reveling in their paranoiac plight, especially when they get caught, convicted and condemned. The old “crime does not pay” slogan is once again vindicated, simultaneously validating our rather hypocritical—and hyper-judgmental—moralistic restraint. Still, being humans afflicted with primitive passions deeply embedded in our collective DNA, we can’t help but envy the freedom these reckless rebels exhibit in actively indulging their basest urges, even if it’s at the expense of others, in pursuit of their own selfish interests, boldly disregarding conventional borders of behavior. We glorify the rule-breakers even as we shun them. It’s Nature at its cruelest, and purest.

Criminals fail to fascinate once the voyeur becomes the victim.