Since this is another slow news week (I'm still hard at work on The Devil's Footprints), I thought I'd give you some details on the inspiration for the book. The legend goes something like this:
The mysterious footprints, which appeared overnight in heavy snowfall in Southern Devon in 1855, have never been adequately explained. According to contemporary reports, they stretched for over a hundred miles, and went through solid walls and haystacks, appearing on the other side as though there was no barrier. The extent of the footprints may have been exaggerated at the time, and they may have been the result of freak atmospheric conditions. But in truth the footprints - if that is what they were - still remain a complete mystery. (source)
Have you noticed that the spy genre seems to be back stronger than ever? So much so that there's an all out message board war going on between James Bond and Jason Bourne fans. The kerfuffle was triggered by a comment Matt Damon made in an interview promoting his upcoming movie, The Bourne Ultimatum.
"Bond is an imperialist and he's a misogynist. He kills people and laughs and sips martinis and wisecracks about it. Bourne is this paranoid guy. He's on the run. He's not the government. The government is after him. He's a serial monogamist who's in love with his dead girlfriend and can't stop thinking about her. He's the opposite of James Bond."
Uh, 'scuse me, Matt, but have you seen Casino Royale?
But lest I sound as if I have as much time on my hand as these fanboys, I'll get to the point. I'm loving spy thrillers again after pretty much ignoring the genre for the past fifteen years or so. 24 has a lot to do with it. So does the aforementioned Casino Royale.
Back in the late seventies, I read nothing but science fiction and fantasy...by the truckload. I'm not kidding, I went through at least one book a day and sometimes read around the clock in order to finish a particularly engrossing story (back in those days, I really did have a lot of time on my hands...too bad there wasn't an Internet).
Then came The Bourne Identity in 1980 and bam! Suddenly I was knee-deep into spy thrillers. I'd read The Spy Who Came in from the Coldback in high school and, of course, some Ian Fleming along the way. And I loved all those sixties spy movies. I even had dreams of growing up and joining the CIA.
But it was Robert Ludlum who really made me a diehard fan of the genre. Once I read Bourne, I started tearing through Ludlum's back catalog like a madwoman, and though I loved most of them, The Bourne Identity (along with the equally superb The Aquitaine Progression) remained the measure by which I judged all spy tales.
During the nineties, I became interested in psychological suspense and the spy genre fizzled for me. I completely missed out on the whole Tom Clancy thing, although I've seen all the Jack Ryan movies and enjoyed them. But I bet you Tom Clancy fans feel the same way I do about the Bourne movies...that is so not Jason Bourne up there on the big screen.
So now that I'm digging spy thrillers again, I want more. What have I missed out on? Got a book or movie you'd recommend? I'd love to hear about it.
Oh, and what is the deal with the initials J.B.? James Bond, Jason Bourne, Jack Baur. A coincidence? I think not.
It's starting to get really exciting around here. My editor has just asked for the dedication and acknowledgements for The Devil's Footprints, which means that everything will start happening really fast in terms of the new book. I'm still polishing the manuscript, but will have the final draft finished shortly. As I reported a few weeks ago, I've also had a sneak peek at the cover, although I haven't seen the final version yet. Very creepy, very striking and very different from The Dollmaker, but with some continuity elements (the same font for my name) that I'm very happy about.
I'll keep you posted as more details arise. Like I said, things are getting exciting again.
If you’ve been working too hard this summer, you need to take a break and go rent Casino Royale, the latest James Bond movie. Have you seen it? I resisted for a long time because I wasn't sure about the new guy. I wanted to see Clive Owen in the role and my second choice would have been Hugh Jackman. And, too, I'd gotten a little bored with the franchise.
Now that I’ve had a chance to see the new Bond in action, here’s my take...Clive, who? Hugh Jack-what?
I’ll just say it. Daniel Craig is the best James Bond ever. I said...ever. He is Ian Fleming's James Bond. Dark, driven and, at times, utterly vicious--the Bond that is described in both the movie and the book as ‘a blunt instrument’. This installment required a real badass with a side order of nasty and, boy, does Daniel Craig serve it up. I can’t even imagine (and don’t want to) any of the other Bond portrayers doing what he did in this movie.
Casino Royale is the beginning of Bond’s 007 career, before he becomes the suave, sophisticated secret agent of his later years. He’s realistic and gritty and doesn’t resort to the usual bag of silly gadgets and tricks that had begun to make the character cartoonish. And there's a pretty wonderful love story to boot.
It is the love story—and the resolution—that creates the smooth, rakish (sometimes chauvinistic) Bond of the future.
Still not convinced? Watch this clip and tell me this isn't one of the most romantic scenes in recent movie history?
The Rorschach inkblot test (pronounced "ror-shock") has been popularized in films and books for decades, but most people know very little about it. The Rorschach cards themselves are supposed to be kept secret. Most of the time when you see Rorschach ink-blots in films and books, they are not the real blots.
The theory behind the test, created by Hermann Rorschach, is that the test taker's spontaneous or unrehearsed responses reveal deep secrets or significant information about the taker's personality or innermost thoughts. These days most reputable psychologists feel the Rorschach is unreliable at best and dangerously misleading at worst. (read more)
Publishing can be as fickle as fashion. As Heidi Klum puts it so brilliantly, "One day you're in and the next day you're owt." Noir and urban fantasy are hot right now while chick lit has gone the way of the slip dress.
Post Mortem Bruises -- A possible line of defence for a person charged with homicide could be that the bruises were not in fact made during life, but are post-mortem artifacts.
However, it is very difficult to produce a bruise in a dead person, because it is very much a 'vital reaction' to injury. It may be possible to produce a bruise following very severe trauma in an area of post-mortem lividity (where blood has drained to dependant parts of the body under the influence of gravity), and if there is any doubt the pathologist should examine the 'bruise' histologically. However, in the absence of an organising haematoma, histology may only show the presence of haemosiderin, and even then only after approximately 48 hours. (source)
For an example of post-mortem bruising, see CSI:Las Vegas, "Happenstance."
It's Monday so it must be news day, albeit a slow one. Here is what's happening in my world:
--I now have a page on Crimespace, "a place for readers and writers of crime fiction to schmooze, booze and draw up plans for the heist to end all heists."
--The Dollmaker will be featured in the Summer Reading Mystery Challengeon the Reviewed by Liz blog on July 28. Please drop by and leave a comment if you get a chance.
--I'll be doing an interview on Mouth Full of Bulletssometime in the next couple of months. Stay tuned for details.
--New Review at Kwips and Kritiques. THE DOLLMAKER is perhaps the creepiest book I’ve read in a long time! Amanda Stevens does a superb job at creating an eerie atmosphere that doesn’t rely on gore or gratuitous violence. Instead, the tension is carefully built up with some truly horrifying twists to keep readers on their toes. While the reader will likely deduce aspects of the ending, there are some wickedly clever surprises in store that make this an absolutely phenomenal thriller.
Writing conferences are a great place to network with agents, editors, readers and other writers. But what I find most exciting about the big conferences, especially Romance Writers of America, are the shoes.Selecting the conference shoe wardrobe requires careful coordination, hours of Internet shoppingand maybe even a conference call or two. Because it totally doesn't matter how many books you've written or how high up you've hit on the bestseller lists. The measure of your success, for that one week, will be your shoes.
I’ve been reading a lot of articles and blogs lately about the prevalence of what many consider to be gratuitous and one-upmanship gore in modern thrillers and neo-noir/hard-boiledmysteries. The two catch phrases that seem to be getting a lot of attention are torture porn and forensic fetishism.
So I decided to put this question to best-selling suspense author Kay David:
Me: Do you feel that violence in many of today’s thrillers has reached the ‘torture porn’ level? In other words, are writers using graphic scenes for shock value and/or titillation with little regard for plot advancement or characterization? KD: I'm not offended by the graphic violence in novels because most readers plug their own version of what's happening into the story, no matter what the words on the page say. The writer just sets them off in a certain direction and their imagination takes it from there. Do some writers take it too far? I don't think so but if they do, the reader can always vote with their wallet by not buying the book. The situation is no worse than some writers who use sex scenes to the same end. I'd rather use my imagination there, too, so I simply don't buy those kinds of books. I think there will always be a market for them, however.
One of the cool things about being a writer is the research. Here is what I’ve been googling this week:
Udjat (Eye of Horus): Depicted as a human eye and eyebrow as they would be seen looking at a person full-faced. The eye is decorated with the markings that adorn the eyes of hawks. Usually, it is the right eye shown as the udjat, although the left is not uncommon. This is probably because of another myth that says the sun and the moon were the right (sun) and left (moon) eyes of the sky god and the sun is seen as more powerful. (source)
Udjat - or all seeing eye. One of few symbols referring to Lucifer. Below the eye is a tear because he mourns for those outside his influence. (source)
My next Intrigue, Texas Ransom, now has an official pub date--January, 2008.
Here's a brief blurb:
HE KNOWS THE RULES; BREAK THEM AND SHE DIES
Celebrated architect Graham Hollister has it all—a fascinating career, an inherited fortune and a beautiful, loving wife. His world could not be more perfect.
And then one day armed men penetrate the security system at his isolated home in the Texas Hill Country and give him some terrifying news. Life as he knows it is over. His wife is missing and unless he plays by their rules, he will never see her again.
Graham is determined to find her, no matter what it costs him. No matter what he has to do. But as he's drawn into the terrifying world of international kidnapping and terrorism, he soon discovers that nothing is as it seems—not the rules, not the ransom demands...not even his wife.
I like to write about the dusty back roads and murky bayous of the South. About unsolved murders and the kind of dark, simmering secrets that destroy souls.
My books have been described as creepy and disturbing. Stories to be read with the lights on.
But, honestly, I'm just an ordinary person. Quiet and unassuming. Someone who might live next door to you...
Since this is another slow news week (I'm still hard at work on The Devil's Footprints), I thought I'd give you some details on the inspiration for the book. The legend goes something like this:
What I'm researching this week:
