Showing posts with label Golden Age detective novels. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Golden Age detective novels. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Tracy Grant--Game Changers

DEBORAH CROMBIE: I've been a huge fan of Tracy Grant's Regency intrigue novels since the very first book, have followed them through the game changes (see below!) and always eagerly anticipate a new adventure. Tracy, like me, fell in love early on with Georgette Heyer's Regency novels, and then with Golden Age mysteries, then went on to create her own unique world. I don't know anyone who combines fascinating and accurate historical detail with romance, mystery, intrigue, and memorable characters as well as Tracy. 


How could anyone resist this description from the latest Malcolm and Suzanne Rannoch book, London Gambit, which comes out Thursday!
 
On a moonlit London night, Suzanne Rannoch slips away from a glittering Mayfair party to assist a wounded man who has escaped Paris one step ahead of Royalist pursuit. That same evening, Suzanne’s husband Malcolm, himself a former spy for Britain, is summoned to the warehouse of a shipping company where a thief has been knifed to death. These two seemingly unconnected incidents prove to be the opening gambit in a deadly game that will test the Rannochs’ skill, strain their divided loyalties to Britain and France, and entangle not only fellow agents and spymasters, but their friends and family. The stakes are their security, their marriage, their very lives.

Tracy has taken the challenges faced by most series' writers and doubled them--or is it quadrupled? (You will see!) Dealing with the peculiar problems of series characters is a dilemma close to my heart--here's how Tracy does it.


TRACY GRANT: I love series, both as a reader and as a writer. As a reader, I love to follow the twists and turns and speculate with other readers of the series. I worry about favorite characters and checking back in with them is like reconnecting with old friends (with Debs' Gemma and Duncan, I feel I know them and their world so well it’s like stepping into their house for a cup of tea or sitting across from them in a pub over a pint). With my own writing, my mind inevitably thinks in terms of a series. After a book, I’m always wondering what happens next for the characters and even when I get ideas for new characters, I want to fit them into the pre-existing world. 

Recently, I was asked whether I have the series planned out or make it up as I go along. The answer, I realized, was a bit of both. My series is particularly complicated because I started out telling the story of Charles and Mélanie Fraser and then when I changed publishers and couldn’t take the series forwards, I decided to go back in time and tell their back story. But I had to change their names, so they became Malcolm and Suzanne Rannoch. Different names but still spies for opposite sides in the Napoleonic Wars (he for the British, she for the French) who end up married to each other. Eventually I had to move the Malcolm and Suzanne books into a sort of parallel universe for a book or two to catch up the two series and move forwards to the books I had originally planned to write in Fraser universe. Not the way I would have chosen to do it, but it did allow me to dramatize their history at the Congress of Vienna and the Battle of Waterloo and in Paris after Waterloo, which I loved telling.  

Because I  went back in time, I more or less knew how I wanted those early stories to play out. But there were still plenty of details to fill in and some points where what I thought was going to happen didn’t fit where the characters actually were when I got to that point on paper. With my last book, The Mayfair Affair, and my new release, London Gambit, I’ve moved into uncharted territory,  taking the series forwards in time, not locked into any plot twists in prior books. But there are still certain developments in the overarching plot of the series I know I am writing towards, some of which I’ve had in mind from the start, some of which have occurred to me along the way, The Mayfair Affair introduced a fairly major new romantic pairing for the series. I had actually intended to get one of these characters together with another ongoing character at the start of the series, but I decided several books ago that these two characters were a better match, and I was really excited to finally get to the point where their relationship could progress. Other things I’ve thought I was writing towards end up playing out differently when I get to that point in the story and realize what I thought would happen doesn’t make sense given where the characters now are.

London Gambit contains a major plot twist I’ve had in mind for some time, though I wasn’t sure precisely where it would occur in the series. It’s something of a game changer for the series. Even when it occurred to me that this plot twist would fit logically in London Gambit, I wasn’t quite sure I was ready to go there. I dithered. I felt like I was being mean to my characters. I considered softening it. I started writing the book with the plot twist in mind, but wasn’t sure I would really go through with it. I even drafted scenes not sure I would include them. Then I discussed the possible plot twist with a writer friend who has read the series from the beginning. When I said I wasn’t sure I really wanted to go this far, and I felt I was being mean to my characters, she said, “That’s probably when you know you’re writing the exact right thing.”

I realized she was right. So I drew a deep breath and went through with the plot twist. And I’m glad I did. It opens a lot of very intriguing possibilities for future books that I’m eager to explore. At the same time reading over the galleys, I still felt a pang for my characters. Which I suspect proves that my writer friend was right - this was a good choice to make.

Writers, do you plan your series out in detail or make up events as you go? Have you ever felt conflicted about a game changer twist in your series? Readers, what are some of your favorite game changer moments in series you read?
 
DEBS: I cannot wait to read this! And, oh, so many times I've dithered over whether or not I can really put my characters through the plot twists I've come up with--and found, like Tracy, that it was exactly what I needed to do. 
 
REDS, readers, what do you think? Do you want your characters to be challenged? 
 
Teresa (Tracy) Grant studied British history at Stanford University and received the Firestone Award for Excellence in Research for her honors thesis on shifting conceptions of honor in late fifteenth century England. She lives in the San Francisco Bay Area with her young daughter and three cats. In addition to writing, Tracy works for the Merola Opera Program, a professional training program for opera singers, pianists, and stage directors. Her real life heroine is her daughter Mélanie, who is very cooperative about Mummy’s writing. Tracy is currently at work on her next book chronicling the adventures of Malcolm and Suzanne Rannoch. 

Friday, September 26, 2014

Sophie Hannah writes a Golden Age Hercule Poirot for today's avid fans


HALLIE EPHRON: Okay, here's a test. I give you a bit of internal dialogue. You give me the sleuth. 

Ready? Okay: WHO THOUGHT IT?
1. When a man's partner is killed, he's supposed to do something about it.
2. There are some men who enter a woman’s life and screw it up forever.
3. I should have counted to eleven before I squeezed the trigger.
4. He saw no reason why a warped shelf could not easily be replaced with a straight one, in the same way that he could not comprehend why anybody would place a fork on a square table and not ensure that it lay parallel to the straight line of the table's edge.

ANSWERS:
1.The character who is honor-bound to avenge his partner's murder, even though he disliked and distrusted the man, is Dashiell Hammett's Sam Spade.
2. The man-crazy sleuth is the Jersey girl, Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum.
3. The character who counted to ten and then blam is the off-the-grid, ex-military cop, Lee Childs's Jack Reacher.
4. If you guessed that the character who is obsessed with the symmetry of his cutlery is Hercule Poirot, you are right. The sleuth Agatha Christie conjured. So many of us gobbled up the Poirot novels right after we powered through Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys. But this is M. Poirot in brilliant new hands. Sophie Hannah is the author, and the quote is from her delightful Poirot mystery, The Monogram Murders.

Today we are thrilled -- sacré bleu we are tickled pink -- to have Sophie Hannah as a guest on Jungle Red.

Sophie, your books, from Little Face with its new mother living with the family from hell, convinced that her baby has been replaced by a doppleganger, wade deep into dark psychological suspense and twisted family drama. The Monogram Murders is fun, frothy, exactly the kind of clue-driven puzzle mystery that Poirot readers adore.

How did you make the switch?


SOPHIE HANNAH: I don't see it as a massive switch - my psychological thrillers also contain lighter moments (often in the banter between the police characters!) and The Monogram Murders also has much darkness in it, and many warped psyches!

The main switch is in terms of narrative style.

In Golden Age detective novels, the storytelling aspect is overt. Golden Age mysteries are easier to write than contemporary mysteries because you don't have to be ashamed of storytelling in an upfront way.  They can literally begin with something like, 'Let me tell you about the baffling mystery I solved last summer.  It all began when...'  Whereas contemporary crime novels go to great lengths to create the illusion that no one is telling anyone a story, but, rather, that the reader just happens to be observing these events.

HALLIE: Did you plot the story out  out in advance the way Christie did?

SOPHIE: I always do. It's crucial for getting the story architecture right. Once that's in place, I can write the novel, and focus all my energy on writing it well, without worrying about the plot.  Planning is huge fun - almost my favourite part of the process!

HALLIE: In Monogram, Poirot feels utterly recognizable. Did you have to immerse yourself in the Poirot novels to achieve this, and how is he different now that he's in retirement?

SOPHIE:  I read all the Poirot novels again - that was my homework, and very enjoyable it was too! The Monogram Murders is set in 1929, so relatively early in Poirot's timeline, which means he's no more retired here than in Roger Ackroyd and Orient Express.

HALLIE: Poirot has been played by tons of actors -- Tony Randall, Albert Finney, Peter Ustinov, David Suchet to name a few. Which one do you think best captured the essence of Poirot, and what do you think it is about the character that has made him such a mystery icon?

SOPHIE: I think it has to be David Suchet, for sure. He plays a real
man with depth and wisdom, but Poirot is also, in some ways, a superhero and therefore larger than life - instantly memorable with his elaborate moustaches and egg-shaped head! - and so in this sense he is a caricature.  He is so popular with readers for all kinds of reasons, I think: his compassion, his fairness, his wisdom, his loyalty - and of course all his strange little obsessive-compulsive ways!

HALLIE: Are you working on another Poirot? Another suspense novel? What can we look forward to?

SOPHIE :  I'm writing a book called A Game For All The Family at the moment. This is a standalone psychological thriller and will be published next year.  It's set in Devon, and inspired by Greenway, which was Agatha Christie's holiday home! 

But I'm massively looking forward to the release of my next Simon Waterhouse and Charlie Zailer novel in America next summer.  In England it's called The Telling Error, but in the US it will be called Woman With A Secret. 

As for whether or not I'll ever write another Poirot...the official answer is wait and see!


HALLIE: I hope we don't have to wait too long!


Sophie has promised to drop by today to answer questions... so ask them early (it's a lot later in the UK.)

And please, share: What is your favorite thing about Poirot?


I'll start.  His little gray cells: "It is the brain, the little gray cells on which one must rely. One must seek the truth within--not without." And I confess, I hear David Suchet delivering the lines.