Scatterbrained smatterings
Meetings, lunches, deadlines -- well, you get the drift. There should be something up earlier this afternoon but in the meantime, flights of randomness:
Kathy Reichs seems to be everywhere in the media lately, likely because of her new book, the new TV series based on her book, and other related things.
Reginald Hill's new standalone, THE STRANGER HOUSE, is just out in the UK (I'm looking forward to my copy of the US version soon) and he talks to the Telegraph about his longevity in the crime fiction world.
This article on slush has to be deliberately naive. Has to. But then again, it also talks about Macmillan's new writing like it's actually a worthwhile venture.
The LA Weekly examines Rupert Thomson's new book, DIVIDED KINGDOM, in the context of his career.
Oh goody, everything we need to know about Nick Laird, who seems to be a good writer and oh yeah, he's married to a more famous one.
Russel MacLean finally offers his roundup of the Harrogate Crime festival, which he survived -- barely.
Robert Birnbaum's latest lengthy interview is with ASSASSINATION VACATION author and voice-over artiste Sarah Vowell.
And finally, I'm not sure I could say much more about this particular profile except for "W....T.....F...." Actually, that's not true -- I feel similarly to it as I did about this one last year.
UPDATE: Ron offers his take. No kidding. No mention of THE BITCH POSSE and/or WHORES ON THE HILL? Someone wasn't paying attention...
i am, indeed, speechless. shame the journalist hasn't the talent to write about the real person behind the books.
Posted by: christin | July 28, 2005 at 11:24 AM
That is definately a "the dog ate my notes" profile.
Posted by: Mary Root | July 28, 2005 at 01:14 PM
I saw that Lippman piece also, and that it was exceedingly lame. But, and I wonder and have no clue, but could Lippman at all bear some fault for this? Not trying to rescue the journalist, and I've read other Lippman interviews which show that she can be terribly interesting...but I wonder if the particular topic in which she participated didn't leave room for much else than corn.
Posted by: Tribe | July 28, 2005 at 03:55 PM
Subjects always -- always -- have a role in how they're portrayed.
By the way, I'm fine with the piece.
Posted by: Laura | July 28, 2005 at 05:14 PM
I thought the piece was perfectly OK too. My only comment is that if Laura is "big-boned," I hate to think how the rest of us would be described!
Posted by: Jenny D | July 28, 2005 at 05:30 PM
My reaction exactly. Big-boned?????
Posted by: Mary | July 29, 2005 at 11:02 AM
The reporter was tiny!
Posted by: Laura | July 29, 2005 at 12:22 PM