Harry Dolan: Bad Things Happen
BAD THINGS HAPPEN is a nifty debut, cleverly told and unfurled from the very first line: "The shovel has to meet certain requirements" on through meeting "the man who calls himself David Loogan." There are reasons for concealment, just as there are reasons the editor of a mystery magazine bearing little resemblance to EQMM or AHMM might bring him into the fold, thus catalyzing a series of murderous events. The twists come quickly and the dialogue is sharp and if it falls apart slightly at the end, no matter - I want to read much more from Dolan from now on.
Ian MacKenzie: City of Strangers: A Novel
MacKenzie's debut novel reminded me a lot of Paul Auster's NEW YORK TRILOGY, whether it was intended or not, in terms of his choice of words, the thrust of the narrative and the existential nature of the main character (whose first name, incidentally, is Paul) caught up in a snowballing sequence of strange and violent events in and around New York City. MacKenzie straddles the line between thriller and internal examination of a man's failings, and his ability to do so establishes him as a young writer of serious talent and future.
Megan Abbott: Bury Me Deep
In a word: amazing. In more words: Megan Abbott, who has never delivered anything less than an excellent novel, exceeds expectations and takes a very bold and very necessary step forward both in the quality of the prose, the development of her characters and especially in portraying how obsession seeps into the very soul of people, transforming them into their worst nightmares all too easily. Just read this book. And then tell many others to do so as well.
Ninni Holmqvist: The Unit
Understandably, echoes of THE HANDMAID'S TALE are hard to ignore in this dystopic examination of a society where fertility is so high a priority that older, single, marginal women are shut away in secret locales to live out the rest of their lives in seemingly perfect harmony - at least, until the "donations" begin. But Holmqvist's marvelous book doesn't browbeat her thesis into the reader and smartly expands her ideas to look at the plight of all marginalized folk, women and men alike, and how the promise of comforts can be the most horrifying of all. Prepare to be disturbed, but prepare further to think about the ramifications.
Paula Froelich: Mercury in Retrograde
This is possibly the most perfect novel for today's economically challenged times. Why? Because it has plenty of glitz and glamor and blind items, as befitting a narrative by the deputy editor of Page Six, but Froelich isn't arch or snarky or acid-tongued in the slightest. Her trio of protagonists land in all manner of embarrassing situations but they aren't played for mean-spirited laughs. The New York here is something of a fantasy-land, but not so far off the mark that it's completely unbelievable. Most of all it's clear Froelich remains sincere and optimistic about her chosen city, and has retained her sense of fun. So no need to check your brain at the door, but sometimes it just needs to chill out and relax.
« January 2007 | Main | March 2007 »
I am so pleased to see this deal reported over at Publishers Marketplace this afternoon:
Blogger Mark Sarvas's HARRY, REVISED, about a guilt-ridden, down-on-his-luck widower, who tries to reinvent himself following his wife's untimely death, to Bloomsbury, for publication in winter 2008, by Simon Lipskar at Writers House.
YAY MARK!!! He has much more on how the novel came to be, from inception to submission to pre-publication.
The hand is healing, and I can type more or less, just slower than usual. Now to the links:
The Palm Beach Post reveals all sorts of random trivia about James Patterson, like how he writes in longhand and invented the Oscar Meyer jingle. Now I know who to blame...
Stephen White talks to the California Literary Review about his Alan Gregory series and why he chooses a different theme for each book.
The Danbury New Times chats with its local author, Peter Spiegelman, about his new PI novel RED CAT.
Val McDermid explains the impetus for her standalone novel THE GRAVE TATTOO to the St. Paul Pioneer- Press.
Oline Cogdill goes local with good reviews of the latest by Christine Kling and Bob Morris. Morris is also interviewed by the South Carolina State.
Will Robert Crais finally succumb to Hollywood's temptation to adapt an Elvis Cole novel? Or at least a Joe Pike one?
Compare and contrast Janet Maslin's take with Patrick Anderson's view on Kevin Flynn's RELENTLESS PURSUIT.
Curtis Sittenfeld is still dodging the chick-lit label, this time from the Melbourne Age.
The minute Tracy Chevalier's novel is published in America I will get a copy (if one is not sent to me). This interview with the Independent just adds to the excitement.
More crime columns from Susanna Yager, David Montgomery, Hallie Ephron, Marilyn Stasio and Margaret Cannon.
From the Rap Sheet: Duane Swierczynski at TIRBD; Philip Hawley at the Crime Fiction Dossier; Stephen Marlowe reveals the backstory of his collaboration with Richard Prather; and the Agatha Awards shortlist.
My few cents on Barry Gewen's "NYTBR Revealed!" talk at Harvard? If the target audience is a "dentist in Scarsdale with two primary concerns: her family and teeth" no wonder the publication is so out of touch with, well, reality.
Shattered bathroom window glass early on a Saturday morning trying to shut it so I would not freeze. Four stitches in my left hand and a tetanus shot after a quick visit to St. Luke's. Oh yeah, I'm a lefty. Typing is much fun so far.
So here's what I propose: the template's fairly regular and easy to follow, so submit links of note that I might have seen or not yet seen from the major & minor papers in the comments section. I've got a hand to heal...
(This is part three and the last of a critical roundtable that began on Tuesday.)
Jerome Weeks: As I noted in my Newsday review, to be fair, Mr. Anderson himself points out the staggering number of thrillers out there. Any reader can find fault with "Triumph" by pointing to authors who were overlooked. OK, but that would logically lead a critic to be somewhat modest in his claims in any survey of the genre (how can I declare this or that writer is "the best," when there are thousands I haven't read?).
So when one comes across, for example, Mr. Anderson's sweeping statement that the Cold War produced two great spy novelists -- John le Carre and Frederick Forsythe -- one groans. Len Deighton's "The IPCRESS File"? "Funeral in Berlin"? Deighton was hailed as the great "anti-Bond" and "the poet of the spy story" for his quiet, smart-mouthed, working-class bureaucrat-agent, wonderfully played by Michael Caine in the film versions. Perhaps Mr. Anderson considers Deighton not in the le Carre and Forsythe league. Fair enough, Deighton's plots are pretty elliptical and digressive. But he's never even mentioned, and it was "The IPCRESS File" (1962) that revolutionized the spy novel. It came out a full year before "The Spy Who Came in From the Cold," which Mr. Anderson declares is the great "milestone" that "raised the bar" for espionage fiction.
To his credit, Mr. Anderson is never less than interesting or entertaining. I agree with Sarah's observation that his reconsiderations of several classic authors are thought-provoking. But for anyone looking to understand how hard-boiled detective stories or spy novels really work, what they reveal about our culture, I'd direct them to John G. Cawelti's three genre studies: "Adventure, Mystery and Romance," "The Spy Story" and "Mystery, Violence and Popular Culture." The books are not up-to-date because they came out in the late '70s, early '80s, but seeing as they cover the same classic authors Mr. Anderson does (up through Spillane and le Carre), there's considerable overlap with "Triumph." And there's a lot more rewarding (i.e., systematic) thinking.
Sarah Weinman: I thought I'd point you to Luc Sante's writeup in this week's New York
Times Book Review, which makes some interesting points (especially
about how the book fails to live up to its assigned subtitle):
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02
Sante's
piece really pinpoints my main criticism, which is that there is a full
analytic treatment of the rise and success of the thriller genre
begging to be written (that would build off the examples Jerome
mentioned a few days ago) but this book, I think, is a first step - one
that can be compared and contrasted while that aforementioned book is
in progress.
And finally, let's take up Hallie's call for discussion on women in crime fiction. TRIUMPH, being a subjective take, really reflects the authors Anderson has spent his time reviewing - and though this is purely anecdotal (only because I don't have the time at the moment to peruse all his writings since 2000) the bulk of Anderson's reviews for the Washington Post are about male writers. The women who he devotes attention to include Sara Paretsky, Sue Grafton (whom he dismisses as "too cute") Patricia Highsmith and Karin Slaughter, along with Agatha Christie whose work he also more or less dismisses.
Yet I'm not all that bothered by Anderson's male slanting of thrillers because in the end, it's his subjective take and not a true overview of the growth and changes in mystery/suspense and thrillers. When that book comes along, and if it neglects women in its attempt at comprehensive, then we have an argument in the making. I could be surprised at some of his more recent exclusions (the most striking, to my mind, is his not reviewing Carol O'Connell's FIND ME) but it's his choice, for the most part, as to which books he reviews or not. If anything, the gender imbalance reflects TRIUMPH's general feeling of incompleteness - something that will have to be rectified in a future volume written by somebody else.
Now that I'm back in New York, I can finally catch up on some links that have been piling up of late:
Although I'm bummed that I haven't received a copy yet and almost everyone I know has read the book, I'm still very much looking forward to reading THE WATCHMAN, and this profile of Robert Crais in the LA Times certainly helps.
Brooklyn DA Charles "Joe" Hynes gets to talk about his upcoming debut crime novel with the New York Sun's Christopher Faherty.
Monica Drake's CLOWN GIRL looks to be the next sleeper hit, according to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
The Hartford Courant chats with Susan Isaacs about her latest novel, PAST PERFECT.
The Edmond Sun interviews Cindy Marolt, who has just inked a three-book deal with Avon to write mysteries under the pseudonym Jordan Dane.
The Booker Prize has announced its judging panel for 2007.
The Midwest chapter of Sisters in Crime has announced its first Forensic Science Conference for Writers in St. Louis, slated for this coming November.
Could Irene Nemirovsky have been anti-semitic? The release of another of her novels causes the Guardian's Stuart Jeffries to investigate the matter.
Stephen Dixon waxes eloquent about writing, reading and teaching with the Baltimore City Paper.
And finally, this is going to get weirder. I can feel it.
Aside from founding and running January Magazine (host of the fantastic Rap Sheet) Linda Richards is a damn good writer in her own right. After three books featuring financial whiz-turned-sleuth Madeline Carter, she's changing directions by going back in time:
Januarymagazine.com founder Linda Richards' BLUE MURDER, the first in a hard-boiled, early 20th century LA noir series featuring a sleuthing secretary to a gumshoe, to Peter Joseph at Thomas Dunne Books, by Amy Moore-Benson of AMB Literary Management (NA).
I'm already sold.
(This is part two of a critical roundtable that began yesterday.)
Sarah Weinman: My thoughts may be a bit jumbled but I'm going to try to incorporate initial feelings and others' comments to date. First, Hallie made a good point in respond to one of my possibly muddled questions, which is that "I think this is [Anderson's] book, not mine to second guess what he could have done in 400 pages." Very good point, and actually pinpoints one of my main criticisms of the book, which is that ultimately, this is a book about Patrick Anderson's opinion on thrillers, and very subjective. And even though I was expecting as much - he is a very opinionated critic - I also hoped there would be more insight and a little less reliance on rewriting reviews that had appeared in some form in the Washington Post.
Subjectivity, too, entered with regards to which writers got more attention and which ones did not, especially when Anderson was trying to prognosticate who the "next big thing" authors will be (as in the section on Karin Slaughter, Charlie Huston and Peter Craig.) All have very different publishing fortunes at the moment, and I think I would have liked to see a bit more insight to that regard. Same, too, with his thriller history sections, which while I found them entertaining and good for a lot of food for thought, neglected many of the publishing-related influences that were instrumental in the birth of thrillers as we know them. He was right, IMO, to pinpoint 1981 as a major shift, but to talk about Gorky Park's success without acknowledging the book's publication history (as in, one of the first to get a seven figure advance, Cruz Smith's declaration that he was done writing pulp fiction under house names, that sort of thing) seemed a bit disingenuous. And also, the word "thriller" has, more and more, become a publishing term, a marketing tool - a way for publishers to signify that this is a BIG book worthy of mainstream attention, not just ghettoized genre attention. To my mind, there wasn't enough development of this idea, and I would have been curious to see where Anderson went with it.
I did like his rereadings of earlier authors, and how Hammett, Chandler and Christie have stood - or not stood - the test of time. And of course, they are basic underpinnings for thrillers as we know them, but perhaps less than Anderson gives them credit for. And as Hallie said, many of his favorite authors are mine as well.
I'll address the "women in crime fiction" idea in a separate post but it definitely bears further discussion. More soon.
Continue reading "Critical Roundtable: THE TRIUMPH OF THE THRILLER (Part II)" »
When I got an ARC of Washington Post critic Patrick Anderson's new book THE TRIUMPH OF THE THRILLER, I not only knew that I would read it and likely have plenty to say on the topic, but that several other of my mystery critic peers would do so as well. And so this week I'll be posting the results of a roundtable discussion I hosted earlier this month. Taking part were Jerome Weeks, former Dallas Morning News book critic (who wrote a review of Anderson's book for Newsday), the Boston Globe's Sunday mystery columnist Hallie Ephron, and Chicago Tribune mysteries & thrillers critic Dick Adler. (I also asked David Montgomery of the Chicago Sun-Times, who couldn't participate because of time constraints, and Oline Cogdill of the Sun-Sentinel, whom I hope to hear back from soon.)
For those who have read the book, please feel free to chime in with your comments in the backblogs. Part one begins after the jump.
Continue reading "Critical Roundtable: THE TRIUMPH OF THE THRILLER" »
NYTBR: Mayra Montero's literary crime novel is the cover review, and a fine choice it is; Luc Sante makes some great critical points about Patrick Anderson's thriller critique; Rachel Donadio analyzes the literary career of former spy Howard Hunt; Their review of Ron Jeremy's autobiography makes me wonder, yet again, how Jane and Michael Stern write book reviews together - do both read the same book, or just one?
In transit all day, but here are a couple of me-related items of potential interest:
Hours after my piece about the Google UnBound conference ran last month, AfterTV.com's Andrew Keen (the author of the forthcoming THE CULT OF THE AMATEUR) got in touch with me to talk some more about the future of publishing, digital and otherwise. My thoughts, in podcast format, are now up for listening.
The next piece I'm particularly proud of for a number of reasons: one, it was a chance to branch out into territory distinctly unrelated to books and publishing; two, the topic is very close to my heart; and three, I'd never written a feature-length story like this before. The result is this week's cover story for the Philadelphia City Paper, about the approaching 50th anniversary of one of the city's most haunting unsolved mysteries: the fate of America's Unknown Child. Thanks, Duane, for giving me the chance to work on this, one of my most rewarding experiences as a writer to date.
