THINGS OUR CHARACTERS TEACH US

**BREAKING NEWS!! HOORAY for Susan Elia MacNeal who hit the New York Times trade paperback bestseller list at #7 with MRS. ROOSEVELT'S CONFIDANTE! CONGRATULATIONS SUSAN! 

Now, on to our blog for today...



LUCY BURDETTE: I know I shouldn’t read reviews, but I can’t help it. One thing that has stood out scanning these is the descriptor most often used for Hayley Snow (after dizzy in the debut book): loyal. Sure, loyal to the point of foolhardiness, but loyal all the same. She goes to extended lengths to support her pals and her family members and nose around looking for alternate answers if someone she loves is accused of something bad. It makes sense for the protagonist in a cozy mystery to have this quality, as she needs a reason to investigate a crime that would otherwise be none of her business. But I do love it when a reader says she wishes she had a friend like Hayley, someone who would step up and vouch for a friend in trouble. I aspire to be that kind of friend.

Reds, what has one of your characters taught you? 

HALLIE EPHRON: Two characters in THERE WAS AN OLD WOMAN showed me how two women, one 92 years old and another 30-something, can develop a real friendship despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that they're not related. I've read too many books in which old woman are reduced to caricature or helpless victim and Mina is definitely neither. I hope I turn out to be as feisty and tenacious as she, and I hope, even in my final years, I continue to have friends decades younger than me. 


LUCY BURDETTE: That’s so funny Hallie, because Hayley has an older woman (Miss Gloria) with whom she’s become friends and roommates. Readers love her. And they love the relationship between the two women.

JULIA SPENCER-FLEMING: That's a wonderful sentiment, Hallie. I've noticed that the older people at my church who seem the most vital are the ones who are involved with and have friends of all ages. If it doesn't keep you young, it at least keeps you up to date with slang!

I think Clare Fergusson has given me a negative example. One of her most enduring traits is her impulsivity. She leaps into political positions. people's problems, volunteer jobs and crime scenes without stopping to ask herself, "Is this a good idea?" It's a terrific trait for an amateur sleuth - after all, she has to be drawn into investigations somehow - but in real life, it can lead to moments such as arriving in a romantic beach town and discovering there are no rooms to be had. And you forgot sun screen. And your bathing suit.

I used to be very impulsive myself, but as the years go by (faster for me than for Clare) I've learned the joys of pre-planning, scheduling, and buying tickets well ahead of time. Not to mention making reservations. Part of it is parenthood - it will be interesting to see, going forward, if Clare begins to stop and, as Russ says, "Measure twice and cut once," now they have a child.

RHYS BOWEN: I think both my main characters share my strong sense of justice although they are braver than me, more impulsive than me. Molly Murphy is most often described as feisty. Lady Georgie as delightful. So I wouldn't mind being both those things, Especially Molly, taking on assignments in an era when women were supposed to be helpless and stay home, when she was hampered by skirts and petticoats and yet kept  up with men in a man's world. She should remind me that nothing is impossible if you put your mind to it. And Georgie? That it doesn't hurt to have royal connections. 

HANK PHILLIPPI RYAN: True, Rhys! But commoner Jane Ryland is--more confident than I am. She talks back to power, stands her ground.  Isn't afraid to do the right thing--often to her employment peril! I got an email the other day from a worried reader, asking me to make sure Jane stopped quitting, or getting fired over her ethics. She was worried Jane's unemployment benefits would run out!

When I was Jane's age, I put off having children and family because I was focused on my career. Though I have ZERO regrets, Jane, now in the same situation,  is showing me, again, what a very tough call that can be.

  Jane's often described as determined and honorable, and I get that a lot, too. But we're different in that Jane doesn't feel she has to please everyone all the time. I sometimes ask myself--Do I really need to say yes again? Or can I stand my ground and say no? I think-what would Jane do? And then I burst out laughing.


SUSAN ELIA MACNEAL: Wow, this is a tough question. I feel I've learned a lot from Winston Churchill — not that he's perfect, or even close to it — but his sense of honor, duty, justice, and doing the right thing are inspiring. (We won't discuss Churchill and India here, ahem.) 

I also love Churchill's sense of humor. And his perseverance. His love of language. His tenacity. And his willingness to speak out when it's not popular and it seems as though no one is listening. I'm continuing to learn from him (and also his mistakes) as I write the Maggie Hope series.

DEBORAH CROMBIE: So interesting, Lucy. What I'm reading in the others' responses, and what I'm thinking about, is that we seem

to write characters that we aspire to be. When I was writing A FINER END, an older woman named Erika Rosenthal popped up, one of those convenient secondaries who come along to move things forward for our primary characters. But Erika had her own story to tell, and later her own book, WHERE MEMORIES LIE. She survived leaving her country and losing her family during WWII, she lost her husband and then the love of her life, and yet she made a good life for herself in London, her adopted home. I love that she's developed a deep friendship with much younger Gemma, and especially that she continues to encourage and inspire Duncan's son Kit, who has also suffered great loss. I'd like to thing I'd be half as brave and compassionate as Erika.

Red readers, can you think of a character who's taught you something important or even become a role model? 

LOUISE PENNY--A BEAUTIFUL MYSTERY

 DEBORAH CROMBIE:  A high point in my year is the publication of a new mystery by my friend Louise Penny, and today is the day A BEAUTIFUL MYSTERY hits the shelves! 

For those who might not be familiar with Louise's books, they are set in Quebec, often in the sometimes magical village of Three Pines, and feature Chief Inspector Gamache of the Surete, as well as his family, friends, and colleagues. I've loved Louise's books since the first, STILL LIFE, and they've just gotten better and better. And this one--I was fortunate enough to get a sneak peek at the galley, and I can tell you it will knock your socks off.  It also has a special significance for me, as you will see.

Chief Inspector Gamache and his colleague, Jean Guy Beauvoir, are called to investigate the murder of the choirmaster in an isolated abbey.  There, they find not only a closed circle of suspects, but unexpected truths about themselves, and now Louise will tell us a little more about A BEAUTIFUL MYSTERY.

DEBS: I think it’s so interesting that we’ve both chosen to write mystery novels that are centered on “the beautiful mystery” of Gregorian chant. Mine, A FINER END, is set in Glastonbury, and the abbey where the chant was sung has long been in ruins.

But in A BEAUTIFUL MYSTERY you’ve set your story in a modern day monastery, hidden away from the world for centuries in a remote part of Quebec. Is Saint-Gilbert-Entres-les-Loups based on a real monastery?

LOUISE PENNY:  Thank you, Debs!  Actually, the monastery is inspired by one not far from our home.  Michael and I have been there quite a few times and always send visitors there.  They sing the Gregorian Chants as part of their Divine Office – and have the BEST shop, filled with produce from monasteries around Quebec, including their own….cheeses, chocolates, pies, jams, preserves, and CDs of chants.   But – it became clear in researching this that I couldn’t set the book in a monastery, or even an order, that really existed, so I dug into history and found the Gilbertines, an order that actually once existed, but went extinct.

DEBS: Can you tell us how you came to write about chant? It is rather obscure—and absolutely fascinating.

LOUISE:  I think I sort of backed into the chant thing.  I was really interested in two other issues – the power of music and the power of silence.  I loved that contradiction that a silent order could become world famous for their voices.  So I began to think about the different ways we communicate, if not through speech.  At the same time, I recognized the powerful effect music has on me – and I suspect, on most people.  But I can only speak from personal experience.  When I’m planning and writing a book, I listen to a lot of music.  Not when I’m actually writing, but surrounding it I do.  In fact, each book has its own ‘sound track’.  When I get stuck, or have some time, I’ll get in the car and put on the ‘sound track’ and empty my mind.  When I’m on a flight I plug into the iPod, and empty my mind.  And that’s when inspiration strikes.  Music seems to open a channel to come creative place I can’t normally get to.  At the same time, a piece of music can transport us to another place and time, and not just evoke that memory, but the emotion.  It can inspire great courage, and reduce us to tears.  I was fascinated by it – and all this led me to look into the very first western music – plain chant.  If music is a drug, then plain chant is uncut heroin for many. 

 

I wanted The Beautiful Mystery to look at the monks and their devotion to God, but also their devotion to plain chant – the word of God, sung in the voice of God.  And what some of them would do to defend it.  

DEBS: As crime novelists, I think we are always intrigued by the closed circle of suspects, and you’ve certainly given us that in A BEAUTIFUL MYSTERY.  Twenty-four monks. A locked door. So Gamache and Beauvoir know from the beginning, as do we, that the murderer must be one of these men. It’s a wonderful opportunity to explore character, and the idea that no matter how intimate the circumstances, one can never completely know another person.

LOUISE:  Yes, exactly!  I loved that about this community of men – who lived so intimately, in such isolation, and yet never spoke.  But some developed loving relationships, and some loathing.  So that a bitter, but silent, civil war was being waged, though it takes Gamache and Beauvoir a while to realize that.  I love the hermetic environment of some crime novels, that growing sense of claustrophobia, of the walls closing in, of intimacy and security turning into a prison.   And someone they thought of as a brother, being in fact, a stranger.  Capable of such a vile crime.  How could they not know?  How is it they didn’t know?

DEBS: You’ve taken us away from Three Pines in this book. We only see Gamache and Beauvoir, and as with the monks, the isolation serves to reveal things about the detectives. Can you say which came first—did you choose the setting because it would remove Gamache and Beauvoir from familiar circumstances and colleagues, or did the exploration of their relationship arise out of the setting?

LOUISE:  Hmmm – that’s an interesting question.  I knew I’d be setting this book in the remote monastery a number of years ago, when I first wrote the outline.  It’s the first Gamache novel set completely away from Three Pines, and I knew it would be time – and necessary, for the characters, and for me as a writer.  But by this stage in the series there’s a very strong character development arc, with serious issues faced by both Gamache and Beauvoir.  It seemed this would be a perfect place to let that ferment.  Two men who have lived and worked closely, who have an intimate relationship, and who are facing a crisis.   Like the monks.  What will they choose to do?  The monastery acts as a sort of crucible.  There’s no place to hide.  And eventually, in the great silence, everything is revealed.  What could be more terrifying that silence, when you have to come face to face with yourself? 

DEBS: In eight books, I think you’ve done a masterful job of avoiding the pitfalls inherent in writing about a closed environment like Three Pines.  As much as we love the village and its inhabitants, every few books you’ve taken us to other settings, so that when we come back to Three Pines it’s like meeting an old friend. Has this been deliberate?

LOUISE:  Thank you, Debs.  You and I talk a lot about that very danger – of falling, unwittingly – into a routine.  Coming from you, whose books are always fresh and alive, that’s a great compliment.  Yes, like you, I’m keenly aware of that danger and so every second book is set, for the most part, away from the village of Three Pines – because I don’t want to fall into a pattern.  And, so that, when I do go back to the village (as I am right now writing the next book) it’s like returning home but seeing it with new eyes.  I genuinely enjoy the company of the characters – but I have no desire to be imprisoned in the village or by the characters.  It’s so important to be unpredictable, but natural – so that what happens to the characters is natural, though sometimes tragic.  It’s critical to me that readers know that I love the characters, but that sometimes horrible things will happen, as it does in life.  I never want a reader to pick up a Gamache book and think, ‘Same old, same old.’  But – I do want them to feel a sense of belonging, of community – of being among friends.  As you’ve achieved so masterfully, Debs, with Duncan and Gemma, two people I no longer think of as ‘characters’, but as living, breathing people.  With lives sometimes successful and happy, and sometimes devastating. 

DEBS: In case readers are worried, they won’t be deprived of the tantalizing descriptions of food that usually accompany a visit to Three Pines—the monks eat well, and the monastery’s specialty is wild blueberries covered with dark chocolate.  Any idea where we might find these?

LOUISE: As a matter of fact, that was inspired (read: lifted) from real life….every monastery in Quebec (perhaps in the world) has a vocation and there’s one in the Lac Saint-Jean area of Quebec that makes, among other things, chocolate covered wild blueberries.  We used to get them when I lived in Quebec City.  But they’re rare and precious.  Blueberry season is very short and the monks don’t use preservative.  So you can only find them for a couple of weeks.  They sell out very fast, so spoilage is never an issue. 

Shocking, really, how little creativity actually goes into my books.  I’m just so lucky to live in this amazing part of the world that has one foot in the present and one in the past.  Cutting edge technology is created in Quebec (the home of Bombardier) and monks who sing plain chant and make chocolate covered blueberries, as they have for centuries.  And all I have to do is pay attention, and pay respects. 

Thank you for this, my friend.  You are such an amazing talent, and so supportive and kind.  I’m a huge fan of your work, as you know, and cherish our talks, getting to compare experiences, that are at once different, but often very, very similar – especially the internal struggles to create the very best books, and to make sure we never, ever fall into a rut. 

Thank you, Debs!

DEBS: You're so very welcome, Louise, and congratulations on a fabulous book! And one last thing--when I was writing A FINER END, I acquired a fragment of chant manuscript from (where else?) an antiquities dealer in Portobello Road, so I'm including a (bit blurry) photo in hopes that it will provide a little visual treat for readers of A BEAUTIFUL MYSTERY.

Readers, you can learn more about Louise and her books at her website, or on her Facebook page.  

Louise is already on book tour, but she'll try to check in and say "hi" in the midst of her travels tomorrow.

And a last bit of Jungle Red business: If you missed taking our JUNGLE RED FAMILY FEUD survey yesterday, never fear, you have two more weeks to respond here.

LONDON CALLING

DEBORAH CROMBIE: As you read this, I will be back in lovely London, staying in my favorite little hideaway hotel in South Kensington, trying to recover from jet lag before going on to events in Henley on Wednesday. In the midst of my usual frantic packing and last minute prep (does everyone else do that, or is it just me?) I was trying to organize my thoughts about what I needed to do the following week, when I will be back in London and doing some much-needed research for the book-in-progress. And I wondered what I might bring back with me that will keep me feeling connected to this particular book over the next few months.

Because it occurred to me that over the years, and the books, I have begun to collect what I think of as "writing momentos." Not that I haven't collected enough British things over the years! (We're not even counting the London Transport posters, or the teapots, or my photographer friend Steve Ullathorne's London prints. Or the generic things like handmade journals from Portobello Market , jewelry, hats, gloves, scarves . . .)

But rather things that are specific to a particular book. Touchstones. (On Friday, Louise Penny has some interesting things to say about how she stays connected to her books.)

There is the painted enamel canal-ware mug that I bought at the Canal Museum in London when I was writing Water Like a Stone. It now holds pencils and pens on my desk.

A scrap of framed chant manuscript, from A Finer End. A (rather cat-hairy) purple tartan blanket from the Scottish book, Now May You Weep. AND, although the bottles of scotch bought while writing the book have long since disappeared (mostly drunk by other people) I still keep a bottle of good scotch to remind me of those wonderful visits to the Highland distilleries.

From No Mark Upon Her and my time spent in Henley, I have a Leander pink hippo mug, and a Leander wooly hat, which I actually wore out sculling on the Thames. (But that's another story.)

So what do I want to bring back this time, to keep me centered in the current book?

A vintage Fender Stratocaster. Preferably Fiesta Red.

Somehow, I doubt that is going to happen. Sigh.

What about you, Jungle Reds and dear readers? Do you need things that physically tie you to your books?