Everyone on This Train Is a Suspect

“I’ll tell you that I use the killer’s name, in all its forms, exactly 106 times from this point.”

This introduces Ernie’s running joke in which he lists character names with tallies of how many times each has been mentioned as a part of his “fair play” promise to readers. This metafictional gag is typical of Ernie’s playful narrative voice and demonstrates his interest in how genre affects the creative process, foregrounding the theme of Genre and Its Impact on Creativity.

“Let’s keep the murders to a minimum, please.”

This is the jocular concluding line of an announcement welcoming the mystery writers’ festival onboard the Ghan. Unbeknownst to the employee who delivers this line, it ironically foreshadows that multiple deaths will occur. At least two writers onboard—Juliette and Royce—seize on this line as a potential book title, demonstrating that the writers are constantly mining life around them for material and poking fun at The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego as a theme.

“[H]e spoke with a belief that volume was equal to meaning. Which, for a man who seemed to believe everything he had to say was important, means loud.”

With characteristic dry humor, Ernie introduces Wyatt Lloyd. Wyatt’s pompous belief in his own importance and his inconsiderate loud talking satirize The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego as a theme.

“I followed her gaze and was surprised to see my left hand curled around a knife. […] ‘A bit of the old Cunningham family blood still in me,’ I said.”

Ernie is surprised at his own potential for unthinking violence when he nearly takes a knife with him to confront McTavish. Since he later strenuously protests that a bad review isn’t sufficient motive for murder, this supports Ernie’s characterization as someone whose words don’t always match his actions. The fact that Juliette has to stop him from leaving the table with the knife demonstrates her levelheadedness and contributes to the novel’s satire of The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego as a theme. Ernie’s reference to his family is a humorous metafictional allusion to Everyone in My Family Has Killed Someone.

“Of course, the choice between one of Australia’s natural wonders and six authors having an ego-off wasn’t really a choice at all, but I didn’t do a very good job of hiding my disappointment.”

Ernie’s direct characterization of the authors as egotistical supports the novel’s thematic concern with The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego; his comment about not doing a good job hiding his disappointment is typical of his own self-centeredness at this point. Instead of being pleased that Juliette will get to see Katherine Gorge, he can only focus on his own desire to have her support during the writers’ panel.

“My therapist gave me a name for it: survivor’s guilt. You don’t really see it that much in Golden Age mystery novels. […] There’s no cumulative impact of the sheer volume of death and violence they see.”

Ernie’s discussion of his survivor’s guilt creates empathy and helps explain his self-centeredness. He continues the book’s thematic exploration of Genre and Its Impact on Creativity when he points out the unrealistic nature of the characterizations in golden-age mysteries because the protagonists seem unaffected by experiencing murder in book after book.

“It’s a staple of mystery novels that, just before the murder happens, certain conversations are overheard in the deep of night. This is to be the case here.”

This is typical of Ernie’s metafictional addresses to readers, explicitly describing how this text will measure up to genre conventions even at the expense of giving away what’s about to happen. Ernie’s tone is frank and friendly because he’s most interested in the interactive, “fair-play” nature of the mystery, not in what he refers to in the Prologue as “cheap” suspense.

“After all, I told you Henry McTavish would be poisoned, didn’t I? Well, not in those words, I suppose. But I did say the inspiration for this book would come from a drink with him.”

Ernie has just finished assuring readers that he’s an open, honest, and reliable narrator who is trying hard to play fair. Now, he gloats about the clever way he misdirected readers by using language that was just barely truthful: Ernie is in the same room as McTavish when he dies after drinking the poisoned whiskey in his flask. It becomes apparent that when Ernie uses the phrase “a drink with him,” he means “a drink while with McTavish,” not “a drink that I shared with McTavish,” as one might suppose. This demonstrates that despite Ernie’s commitment to openness, he’s willing to use Language as a Tool to Manipulate Perception, one of the book’s thematic concerns.

“Juliette tilted her knees to the wall every time I got to her.”

This moment is typical of Ernie’s inability to prioritize Juliette’s needs. She supports his need to pace around their small room, even to the point of shifting into an uncomfortable position over and over so that Ernie can use the space as he wishes, but Ernie doesn’t see this and thus decide to stop pacing around; he merely notes Juliette’s action, as if it’s his due.

“His carpet should have been on the side of a milk carton: it was that missing.”

Ernie’s allusion to the missing child announcements once posted on milk cartons metaphorically compares Royce’s carpet to a missing child. The humorous and insulting tone of this quip about Royce’s slovenliness is characteristic of Ernie’s narrative voice and shows that he’s just as susceptible as the other authors are to the novel’s thematic concern about The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego.

“Simone had been surprisingly candid. […] What I wouldn’t know until later was that she had just lied to me. Twice.”

The juxtaposition in Ernie’s diction here—Simone is ”candid” and also “lied”—thematically demonstrates Language as a Tool to Manipulate Perception in both Simone’s statements to Ernie and Ernie’s statements to readers.

“‘I mean, everyone’s a suspect.’

‘Are you?’

‘Well…no.’

‘Why not?’

‘I’m the narrator.’”

Ernie demonstrates his egocentric thinking in this exchange with Juliette, bolstering the book’s thematic arguments about The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego. The reference to Ernie as the narrator and internal allusion to the novel’s title are metafictional reminders of the book as an artificial world constructed according to genre rules, supporting its thematic exploration of Genre and Its Impact on Creativity.

“[A]fter the events of this book are all printed, he won’t really be in a position to press charges. […] Not after what he did.”

This statement is typical of Ernie’s brand of foreshadowing, which often exemplifies the theme of Language as a Tool to Manipulate Perception. While appearing to offer the same kind of helpful hint that foreshadowing generally offers, Ernie is actually misleading readers. The natural assumption is that Royce is the killer or at least involved in the murders—but he isn’t. Ernie is referring to Royce’s 2003 assistance in covering up McTavish’s crime against Fulton.

“‘I’m sure you’re wondering why I gathered you here, especially at this late hour,’ he said. It seemed rehearsed.”

This deadpan joke from Ernie is a commentary on the theme of Genre and Its Impact on Creativity. “It seemed rehearsed” refers both to Royce’s clichéd phrasing and to the denouement he has staged, as both are drawn directly from the conventions of golden-age mysteries.

“[T]hat piece of blind faith…awoke something new within me.”

After Juliette is accused of murder, Ernie suddenly understands himself, writing, detective work, and his relationship with Juliette in a whole new way. The epiphany expressed in the diction “awoke” is a turning point for his character.

“There goes a second set of fingerprints.”

Ernie reports this thought as he’s falling into the mine shaft outside Coober Pedy. Even in what is literally his lowest moment, his voice is still characteristically dry and amusing, showing that he does have a sense of humor about himself, unlike many of the other authors.

“Now here I was, clinging on for dear life, and the Ghan was completely stationary.”

Ernie’s self-deprecating sense of humor is on display: His daring, action-hero-style leap onto the Ghan is ridiculous because the train has come to a stop. This moment mocks the conventions of his genre, making a point about the theme of Genre and Its Impact on Creativity.

“The next thing he’d write would be an apology on Twitter, which is a format reserved for the sincerest of apologies.”

The sarcasm in Ernie’s claim that Twitter apologies are the “sincerest” satirizes modern society. In addition, it exemplifies Ernie’s narrative voice: In the midst of his denouement, he still has time to crack a joke at Royce’s expense.

“Writing is merely piling up the sticks and the grass and then hoping a tiny flicker sets it all aflame.”

Majors explains her perspective on writing to Detective Hatch. In a rare moment of humility among the writers, she admits to the role of luck in becoming a successful writer. This plain-spoken description of the repetitive, mundane action of gathering material punctures the grandiose way that the authors have portrayed writing throughout much of the text and contributes to the text’s thematic commentary on The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego.

1.  “Before I could say it aloud, the murderer revealed themselves […] it was sort of disrespectful: they spoiled my big moment.”

Ernie is nearing the finale of his denouement when Harriet reveals herself as the killer. His reaction—that she’s selfish for spoiling the climax he planned—thematically illustrates The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego and how reality differs from genre conventions. This also continues to build the text’s argument related to the theme of Genre and Its Impact on Creativity.

“[W]hile thrillers often contain fight scenes that are laden with luck, this book has one thing most don’t: physics.”

Ernie’s metafictional reference to the book itself functions as both a joke about the unrealistic nature of many action sequences and a claim for the realism of Ernie’s own book. Since “Ernie’s” book is actually a work of fiction by Benjamin Stevenson, this thematically illustrates Language as a Tool to Manipulate Perception.

“Hatch isn’t a detective worthy of writing books about…he may well be precise, methodical, and competent, but he doesn’t really have a grasp on pace, does he?”

As part of the book’s satire of the mystery genre, Ernie complains that Hatch is the wrong sort of detective for a book because Hatch prioritizes competence over the rules of pacing a mystery book. This metafictional comment contributes to the book’s thematic consideration of Genre and Its Impact on Creativity and is another joke about the “reality” of Ernie’s book that creates verisimilitude.

“Jasper Murdoch knew that his name was the least important thing about his work.”

This comment from Ernie demonstrates that he has truly changed and has a new outlook on the meaning of writing. He has, at least to an extent, escaped the problem of ego inherent in the theme of The Foibles of Literary Culture and Authorial Ego: He now appreciates the importance of reader enjoyment and accepts others as the cocreators of his work.