All Sherlock Holmes, all the time

I’ve just been writing the answers to a set of interview questions Picador are putting in the back of their new editions of Beekeeper’s Apprentice and Monstrous Regiment of Women next October, along with their suggested Reading Group discussion topics. The questions were actually fairly demanding, as interview questions go, and I had to work at getting them right.

(Which reminds me, if the nice Swedish lady who sent me a postcard about an interview wants to try again, this time make sure the address isn’t in the bottom half inch of the postcard, where it gets obscured by the Post Office’s machine.)

Where was I? Oh right. Questions like:

7. Mary Russell not only has progressive politics, she also has a sex life. What inspired you to bring this dimension to her character, how have you managed to allow the frisson without offending traditional fans of Holmes?

To which I could only answer:
Mary Russell has a sex life? With whom? Does her mother know about this?

Oh, you mean those steamy scenes where Holmes fiddles with her fingers or brushes her long hair? Surely you know that, when it comes to describing sex, less is more.

Anyway, in the process of doing these interviews, I realized that it had been a while since I did a Holmes blog.

Then I thought, Have I ever done one? I don’t remember if I did—probably I figured that, having posted pieces on the web site about Holmes, about Arthur Conan Doyle, and about my version of the Holmes chronology, I didn’t need to post a blog about the man. To say nothing of the fact that Russell herself is nowblogging, saving me the trouble of speaking for her. Although she seems to be having some reservations about my role of literary agent…

One question that often comes up is why I’m forever separating Russell from Holmes in their investigations, since most of the really fun scenes are when the two of them are together. I’d have thought it was self-evident, that it’s too hard to write the fun scenes so I space them out with a lot of other stuff. What am I, Dave Barry or something?

There are other reasons, of course. With Holmes always looking over her shoulder, Russell would either not get a chance to do the investigations on her own, or else she would turn around and murder him, which might bring Laurie King a moment’s notoriety but might also displease my editor.

Besides, if they were always together, I wouldn’t have had a chance to write Holmes on his own for The Art of Detection, and that would have been a pity.


And before I forget, if you’d like to read that paper I gave to the Baker Street Irregulars back in January, the BSI Journal will be publishing it in June. Domestic subscriptions are $26.50/yr ($29 for foreign addresses), but single copies are a bargain at $7. Orders in US funds can be sent to--
The Baker Street Journal
PO BOX 465
Hanover, PA 17331

Tell ‘em Laurie sent you.

Slaughter of the innocents

I live in the woods. I expect the pitter-patter of tiny feet, four at a time, and the occasional rattle -thump when those four-footed nocturnal visitors fossick through the pots for grubs. I only object when they move into the house, although even then, if they’re polite and don’t actually run across my feet or fill the place with poison gas, my general inclination is live and let live.

But something has been eating my mother’s plants (my mother lives in a house at the far end of our deck.) She’d like to think the culprit is some cute and fluffy scalawag, some misled squirrel or chipmunk that soon will see the error of its ways and move on. I, however, am pretty sure it’s not cute, not unless your heartstrings are tugged by scaly tails, yellow teeth, and pointy noses.

Still, even rats have a right to do their thing, and once I’d hacked back the overhanging trees and they stopped doing the samba across the roof at night, they weren’t bothering me too much. I did wish they would find something to eat other than my orange and lemon trees, which they denuded back to the trunks so that my deck has a lot of weird, modernistic sculptures sticking out of it, and I really wished they’d leave my mother’s treasures the hell alone, but even that only made me buy sprays and powders guaranteed to slow them down at least five percent.

However, we now have reached the point where the Cycle of Nature is beginning to enter the equation. And since the way we humans live these days isn’t exactly natural, this takes some adjustment—normally, as I say, on my part, but the time has come to ask Nature to nudge back a bit.

It was the bobcat that did it. Or rather, the two bobcats, one small (probably female) but one the size of a coyote, and neither of them in the least shy. They stroll across the lawn (in broad daylight, nothing nocturnal about these cats), they stare at you when you clap your hands at them, they only mosey off when you begin to throw things in their direction.

They’re not going to attack anything as big as a human, these aren’t mountain lions—and if they felt cornered or had their young threatened, well, even a cute and fluffy squirrel could be forgiven for attacking under those circumstances.

But they’re here during the day, and our cats (which we already lock up at night, for fear of providing the coyotes with dinner) might begin to look juicy to them.

Now, before you get all het up, I’m not proposing to trap, poison, shoot or otherwise harm a bobcat. They’re gorgeous, and they have the right to live in the woods.

But I can discourage them from hanging around. Which means make them nervous about being here, and take away their food supply.

The first of those is a thing called a scarecrow motion activated sprinkler, which you put on the end of a hose and, when it senses motion, lets off a burst of noisy water on any deer, dog, cat, or unsuspecting human who passes in front of it. Great fun.

But the second is wholesale slaughter, cold-blooded murder, vicious entrapment.

In other words, I’m killing the rats. If there’s no prey for the bobcats, and if every time they wander through this thing jumps out at them and flaps and shoots out water, pretty soon they’ll begin to stay down at their end of the hill, hunting mice in the neighbor’s vineyard, and my own cats will again venture outside.

That’s the theory. I’ll let you know how it goes.

(And now when you see me at an event or a conference, you’ll think to yourself, Gee, that King woman doesn’t look like a vicious killer….)

Growing characters

When I was in high school (think long straight hair, granny-glasses, and ankle-length skirts, the only hippie in Tacoma, Washington) I was a tremendous Simon and Garfunkel fan. Back in the dark ages, before cassettes and 8-tracks, I would buy one of their albums as soon as it came out, or as soon as I could cajole my parents into taking me to a record store, and plunk it down on my portable LP turntable, and listen to it.

And invariably, I would hate it.

But because I couldn’t quite accept that, and because I’d paid good money for it, I would play it again. And again. And pretty soon, I would hear the nuances and not the differences, and fall in love with this version of the singers, and it would be my very most favorite of all.

I’ve found the same thing with writers. I know I hated the first of Dorothy Sayers’ novels that I read, although granted, it really wasn’t her best (the one with the Evil Lesbian—even the title is boring: UNNATURAL DEATH.) And the same with Lee Child, and Bob Crais, and a number of other writers whose first acquaintance just didn’t do it for me, but whom I love, respect, and buy in hardback the first day they’re out now.

(This doesn’t always happen, that I change my mind. If it did, I’d make a point of trying a second volume of any writer I didn’t like, which would be a real headache. Though it would sure be nice to be able to figure out which I don’t like, and which I’d absolutely adore if I gave them a second chance.)

I’ve been thinking about this (and the following is not so much a parallel line of thought as a tangent) because I just read Bob Crais’s new novel, WATCHMAN, and it led me back to one or two of his early Elvis Coles. (As a side note, I often reread books when I’m in the throes of a hard writing slog. I can’t not read, but the parts of my brain needed for the work are just too close to the parts that follow a new story line and new characters.)

It is fascinating, and awe-inspiring, to watch a writer grow. I watched this happen with Reginald Hill, whose early cop whodunits moved out of the set of stereotypes he’d set up for them (very good stereotypes, funny and vivid and colorful, but still) into true novels that explored the characters he’d been playing with for a while. Real emotion began to sneak in, believable motivation instead of the games of the genre, and the humor changed from jokes to situational absurdity, and occasionally had a very dark edge. PICTURES OF PERFECTION is one of my all-time favorite novels, scary and funny and warm all at the same time. A cozy thriller, if you can imagine that. Personally, I find his recent novels just too much, beginning with the much-praised ON BEULAH HEIGHT, but BONES AND SILENCE, RECALLED TO LIFE, and PICTURES OF PERFECTION are just gorgeous.

And now Bob Crais is doing the same thing, taking his very decorative and entertaining chessboard characters and breathing life into them. Elvis Cole still does his morning yoga on the deck, Joe Pike still wears those damned sunglasses, the feral cat still growls, but where in the first books those set pieces were surface amusements, one now begins to see just where the yoga and the sunglasses come from.

If you don’t know Crais, and want to see what I mean, get one of his early books—THE MONKEY’S RAINCOAT is the first, but STALKING THE ANGEL or LULLABY TOWN will do as well. Then get L.A.REQUIEM, and see the characters stirring and coming to life. Then go out and get the WATCHMAN, because hardback sales are important to authors. And while you’re in the bookstore, pick up THE LAST DETECTIVE, too, and maybe THE FORGOTTEN MAN, because you’ll want to read those as well. (I’m only talking about the Cole series here, but his standalones are great, too.)

Why do some writers grow like this, where others repeat themselves? Of course, some repetition is inevitable, in a business that sells identifiable products (When an author hits a certain level of popularity, he or she is called a “franchise” author, which may tell you something.) And when it comes to a series, the familiarity is a large part of its appeal.

But it’s like the repetitive bore at the family reunion, whose stories—although once interesting—everyone has heard a hundred times before: When a writer works with the same characters year in and year out, finding new stories for them to tell can be tough.

Both Hill and Crais, by the way, write outside their series. And I suspect that, in both their cases, the non-series novels don’t sell quite as well, because people want the same, but different. In the case of these two men, they found it by writing the same characters, but reaching down into them and finding a new and mature voice.

Rather like Simon and Garfunkel used to, back in the day.

3/07/QA/finishup

…and then there’s those…different questions.

Q: Nikki asks, Also, in honor of the Bloggiversary, I think I'll try to introduce the concept of the Big or Bigging to this site. A Big is basically getting the writer to post a snippet from his or her WIP. This is usually not a spoiler, just an innocuous little bit to keep the mouth watering until the whole story is out.

The term Big came about after an e-friend from the compuserve forums instructed me in the fine art of begging for new material. Afterward, she jokingly denied she was teaching me how to beg, but only speaking of making bigger scenes in our own WIPs.

What do you say? Are you open to the concept? I promise my Bigs are creative and usually funny.

A: You mean you want a chunk that’s been hacked out of TOUCHSTONE, rough and unpolished? Wouldn’t you rather see the WIP I’ll be returning to as soon as I put TOUCHSTONE into the mailer, which is the short story whose beginning I posted oh, so long ago on the web site?

In fact, if you want to play The Edit Game, you could print it out and take your blue pencil to it (why blue? My editor uses a plain #2, the copy editor uses green or brown. Anyway--) and compare what you get with what I do with it.

The story is certainly rough, having been written during a two-hour period when people were (Virtually) looking over my shoulder. There’s plenty there to edit, and you can even give it an ending, if you like.

Just don’t send it to me.

Q: Enid wanted to know: I would like to participate in the book club. That sounds interesting. Can anyone join in? I am situated in the tropics.

A. Hmmm. It’s difficult to know how to answer this without the flavor of snark creeping in. Let me say simply that this is a Virtual Book Club, and unless the tropical humidity clogs up your computer’s little motors or the bugs climb into its housing, your location shouldn’t affect your participation.

Q: And finally, Bronwyn wants to know my shoe size.

A. Surely anyone reading the first part of THE BEEKEEPER’S APPRENTICE can see that the author is writing first-hand about foot size. And sorry, but a size nine (US) doesn’t count as truly large. Ten and a half? Getting there.

3/07/QA/3

Q: Mousie asks, You wrote about the feminine aspects of God in Monstrous Regiment. Do you have any suggested reading about that idea?
Thank you!

A: If you go to the web site’s Scholars Corner page and scroll down to Recommended Reading, then click on to From the Books, you’ll find a list of titles I found useful. Most of them are old, since I did my Masters back in the Dark Ages, but a library ought to have some of them.


Q: And in a related question by my most regular blog contributor, Anon: I wonder if Mary Russell's book on Wisdom will ever surface (hint, hint)?

A: She’ll probably need to write under a pseudonym, so her publisher doesn’t worry that readers of her memoirs will be confused….


Q: Emily asks, As a fan of both the original Holmes canon and the Russell books, and as a Mormon, I was wondering-- in the course of Holmes and Russell's trip across the US, do they happen to come to Salt Lake City? Any mention of the atrocious way the Mormons were vilified in A Study in Scarlet? Doyle sensationalizing again? Or was it poor Uncle John? I would find that highly amusing.

A: Interesting, isn’t it, how one era’s villains become the next era’s Ordinary Folk? In the late nineteenth century, the Mormons were this subversive and powerful cult that enslaved women and murdered nonbelievers, and now they’re our neighbors who have some slightly unusual habits but well-behaved kids.

Makes you wonder what today’s Evil Muslims will become a generation or two down the line…

The process by which a “cult”—outsiders, prone to wicked acts, ruled absolutely by a charismatic fanatic—becomes a mainstream religion is a fascinating one. And as with many things that fascinate me, I turned it into a book (A DARKER PLACE, or in the UK, THE BIRTH OF A NEW MOON).

I don’t know that I’ll introduce Russell to the Mormons on this particular cross-country trip, although it would as you say prove amusing to explore a more rational (ie, Russellian) take on the matter.

3/07/QA/2

Q: Kitty wants to ask A very humble question. What book are we talking about for the book club? you did say it was going to be on April 1 right? Sorry if this isn't the time or place for this question. It's just that I would like to be ready. ;=)

A: We’ll be starting with A Grave Talent. And sorry to harp on this, but anyone who wants to receive the official notice might want to sign up for the newsletter.


Q: Sara asks, Masterpiece Theatre recently aired Philip Pullman's "The Ruby in the Smoke," whose main character, Sally Lockhart, is startlingly Russellian in her description: orphaned, unconventional partnerships and acquaintances, possessing a working knowledge of Hindustani, utter disregard for social standards of the day, and deadly aim with a pistol. Have there been other instances with characters whose traits so closely resemble those of your creation? And if so, does it bother you?


A: …and Liz answers (in part) With regards to The Ruby in the Smoke and the Russell novels, I feel compelled to point out that the Sally Lockhart novels were published between 1985 and 1994. Seems a bit unfair to Pullman to suggest that he was cribbing ideas from LRK.

I haven’t read those novels, but what I really want to know is how PD James got a copy of my futuristic novel before it was published, to rip off wholeheartedly for her Children of Men? Mine was originally even titled Daughters of Men, and had later to be changed to Califia’s Daughters. Harrumph.


Q: Shari asks, You have submitted short stories to various anthologies over the years. Are we ever going to see a Laurie R. King "Collected Stories" volume?

A: Most of the short stories I agree to write are aimed eventually at a collection of stories that tie together to make a larger story. Which is one reason why you don’t see too many Russell short stories out there. I’m probably more than halfway there now, so maybe in a few years.




Q: AJ writes, Is there anything you think you could not write about? A vaguely written question--let me clarify: One of the things I love most about writing is the chance it gives me to learn about anything in the world, as long as I decide a character needs to know about it. I have written about a stage manager, a painter, a vet, a businessman, an attorney, a chef, an engineer, a photographer, etc. And in each case, it works for me because I can imagine doing all of these things. I could make a business deal, even if I lost my shirt in it. I can paint a picture, even if it looks like a five year old did it. But for years now, I have wanted to write a book about a composer and have hesitated, because I cannot, even using the best of my imagination, figure out how one comes up with so much as a tune much less a symphony. So, to go back to my original question, is there anything that you just can't get your mind around to write about?

A: Because I was born without the fashion gene, and grew up during the time of the hippie, I never learned all the skills and esoterica that go into the womanly arts. So I am utterly incapable of writing anything resembling chick lit: I couldn’t tell you the difference between a Ferragamo or a Choo (or indeed a ten buck ripoff from Payless shoes, unless I looked closely) and couldn’t recognize an Armani without looking at the label (I’m assuming they have labels?)

As a result, my characters tend to wear “expensive” or “extreme” rather than brand name, although I find that if I write about Worth or Chanel in the Twenties, I don’t get screaming letters of derision.

For the most part, if I need to know about a job or area of expertise, I try to hunt down someone who knows. I collect a few telling details (cop shop-talk, academic references) to sprinkle in, but don’t try to flood the reader with impressive minutiae because it will 1) bore most readers and 2) not fool the real experts. I aim for middle ground, with just enough knowledge displayed to show I know what I’m talking about, but not so much that it resembles a series of note-cards glued together.

I’d suggest, if you want to write about composers, you read a couple of autobiographies or well-written biographies of composers, and get a feel for their attitudes and language. Maybe you can find a few music students and take them out to dinner, talk about politics and religion for a while and then sneak in a question about how it feels to compose an effective piece of music.

But in the end, you have to remember: Novelists lie for a living. We don’t have to give footnotes, we have to give a sense of verisimilitude.

Lambda nomination!

March 1, 2007--Finalists for the 19th annual Lambda Literary Awards were announced on March 1 by the Lambda Literary Foundation. Awards are presented in 25 categories, and winners will be announced on Thursday, May 31, at the Lambda Literary Awards Ceremony in New York City.

3/07/QA/1

Okay, that’s enough questions for March. Save any others for next month.

Q: Roxanne wanted to know: how serious were/are you about the autorickshaw trip in India?

A: Oh, honey, I’m working insane numbers of hours, with my foot nailed to the floor because of family responsibilities, with one book overdue, a short story past deadline, at a time I should be starting the next book.

You think going to India and racing autorickshaws might be a fantasy?



Q: Wendy says, It was wonderful meeting you when you came to Madison last fall! I adore the Kate Martinelli and Mary Russell books, but I am also enamored with Anne Waverly-- do you think you'll ever write another book with her as the character? thanks!!

A: I’d like to, if for no other reason than finding out what happens to those two kids. Maybe, let’s see here, 2010?


Q: Aaron Paul Lazar asks, Please clarify for the newbie: may we ask writing/agent/publishing/craft questions here, or are these intended to pertain only to the wonderful books you've written? Thanks in advance for your response. ;o)

A: Ask what you like, so long as your question is well-mannered. I can always just not answer.


Q: How do you pick the places for your books? In The Moor it's Dartmoor, in The Game it's India, etc. I love the settings and how Russell usually has to learn a new language.

A: Poor Russell, she’s always cold, often hungry, and invariably confused. She must have a lot of headaches from straining to figure things out in a foreign tongue, although she doesn’t talk about that.

I write about places I’ve either been to and which seem interesting places to set a story, or would like to go to and which seem etc. The place determines the character of the story—India (The Game) sweeping, grand, colorful, crowded, and scary; Dartmoor (The Moor) bleak, lonely, wet, mysterious, quirky; Palestine (O Jerusalem) old, complex, uncontrollable, compelling.

Incidentally, you can see a few photos of the settings by clicking on the individual book pages, beginning on the web site’s books and reviews page.


Q: Gail asks, One of the best parts of the Russell books is how you keep to Russell's perspective while still telling us things about Russell and Holmes that either she isn't consciously aware of, isn't admitting to herself, or isn't interested in sharing. Do you think about what each are thinking or feeling or how she looks and then figure out how to express that through Russell's pen or do you just write from Russell's view and then make sure the whole thing hangs together?

A: First person narrative is tricky. There’s only so much add-a-letter-from-Holmes you can do to bring in different perspectives, which means, as Gail says, I need occasionally to show Russell seeing and hearing things one way, while the reader perceives that same thing from a slightly different angle.

Clearly, the between-the-lines viewpoint doesn’t work if you write down to the reader, overexplaining and beating any dead horses you come across. Most readers are perceptive enough to catch subtle jokes, and if they don’t, well, what’s the harm of enriching a second read?


NOTE: SPOILER ALERT FOR CALIFIA’S DAUGHTERS
Q:WDI asks, Given that we may have to wait quite a while for the other parts of the "Califia" trilogy, could you bend far enough to just let me know -- does Dian reunite with her dog?

A: I should think so, wouldn’t you? Why else show him limping on, if he gets eaten around the next bend?


Q: Gin wants to know, Although an avid Russell fan, I wonder how much obligation you feel towards your readers to produce another in the Russell series. How do you balance telling your story vs satisfying the demands of your readers (ie: Holmes and Russell's personal relationship)
Do you get pressure from your publishers to keep a series going?

A: I’ve tended to alternate the Russells with either Martinellis or standalone novels, which helps to keep my writing fresh. I’m always grateful when readers are willing to give my non-Russells (or non-Martinellis, depending) a chance, because the thought of being chained to the oar of a galley producing endless Russell tales makes the heart quail.

NOTE: SLIGHT SPOILER ALERT FOR O JERUSALEM:
Q: Carlina formerly Maria asks, Karim Bey...that man...yes..I am curious is there any relationship between him and the Kerim Bey in the Bond flick From Russia with Love (perhaps an inspiration)? On that note, will we ever know exactly how deeply Holmes's experience with Bey scarred or affected him? Will you ever explore that aspect of Holmes's psyche (which is no doubt complex and possibly messy as it is)?

A: I don’t know that I ever saw the film, although I’m sure to have read the book many and many a year ago.

It’s always frustrating, isn’t it, when a writer (or series of writers, for a television series) overlooks some major event in the life of the characters, which really ought to be mentioned again. On the other hand, the writer needs to make each book complete unto itself, without endless bits dragging in from previous adventures.

So the answer is, maybe. I might mention the experience, if it feeds into a later book.

But exploring Holmes’ psyche? God, I doubt even Russell herself would have the courage for that.

March the first

Okay, questions anyone?