Mark Rubinstein's Blog, page 37
July 25, 2013
Power, Bad Behavior and Who We Are
Eliot Spitzer is running for comptroller of New York City. He’s currently ahead in the polls. In 2008, he was forced to resign as governor of New York State after it was learned he’d repeatedly frequented prostitutes, even violating federal law by transporting one over state lines. He sent money to offshore shell companies to surreptitiously pay for these illegal activities.
Mark Sanford resigned as governor of South Carolina in 2009 after it was revealed he’d disappeared for six days to join his paramour in Argentina. He not only abandoned his post as governor (no one knew where he was), but misappropriated state monies for his own personal use. In May, 2013, despite the initial public outrage at his prior scandalous behavior, Sanford won a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives to represent South Carolina.
Anthony Weiner resigned from the U.S. House of Representatives in June 2011, after repeatedly lying in public about his involvement in telephone sexting activities. We’ve just learned such activities continued until the summer of 2012 (he admits that; who knows if it’s still going on?). According to polls, Weiner is ahead in the New York City Democratic primary battle for mayor. Despite calls to withdraw from the race, Weiner says he’ll push on. People wonder why he would expose his family to public humiliation and shame.
But do these politicians possess a sense of shame?
Shame is a painful feeling arising from one’s awareness of dishonorable, disgraceful or ridiculous behavior in the presence of others. It denotes awareness that others ridicule or disapprove of one’s behavior. It differs from guilt which is a feeling of not having measured up to an internal standard. You don’t need the disapproval of others to feel guilt.
So, certain questions arise: are some men running for political office today able to experience shame? Are they capable of feeling embarrassed, humiliated or disgraced? Or, are they insulated by some impenetrable emotional armor against cringe-worthy feelings that would cause most people to forever avoid the public eye?
Are today’s politicians so narcissistically self-absorbed and so power-hungry, they’ve lost any sense of vulnerability to feeling judged as unworthy by others? Do they lack an internal barometer for self-evaluation? Do they even possess an inner core serving as an arbiter of propriety? Can they even imagine themselves as others see them—pathetic, lying, deluded narcissists who feel entitled to wantonly betray the public trust?
Do they even care?
Does the fact that these men either have been, or may be elected to office, say something about us? Have we become so coarsened that ignominious behavior no longer disappoints voters? Have vitriolic radio talk shows and “reality” TV inured us to outrageous behavior? Do we care if the officials we elect lie, cheat, steal or mislead us?
Does anything truly shock us anymore?
Despite congress having the lowest approval rating in its history, we re-elect ineffectual incumbents. Is it worrisome that our federal government is paralyzed in partisan deadlock? Have we so little expectation of office-holders that we view politics as simply a side-show; and if we vote at all, do we pull the lever based on nothing more than name recognition?
Do these societal questions have ready answers?
I think not; but we had better look at ourselves more closely. Great nations have declined due to a malignant confluence of these factors.
It’s not just the politicians’ bad behavior that has us where we are; but our own indifference could take us where we would never want to be.
Mark Rubinstein
Author, Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad
Mark Sanford resigned as governor of South Carolina in 2009 after it was revealed he’d disappeared for six days to join his paramour in Argentina. He not only abandoned his post as governor (no one knew where he was), but misappropriated state monies for his own personal use. In May, 2013, despite the initial public outrage at his prior scandalous behavior, Sanford won a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives to represent South Carolina.
Anthony Weiner resigned from the U.S. House of Representatives in June 2011, after repeatedly lying in public about his involvement in telephone sexting activities. We’ve just learned such activities continued until the summer of 2012 (he admits that; who knows if it’s still going on?). According to polls, Weiner is ahead in the New York City Democratic primary battle for mayor. Despite calls to withdraw from the race, Weiner says he’ll push on. People wonder why he would expose his family to public humiliation and shame.
But do these politicians possess a sense of shame?
Shame is a painful feeling arising from one’s awareness of dishonorable, disgraceful or ridiculous behavior in the presence of others. It denotes awareness that others ridicule or disapprove of one’s behavior. It differs from guilt which is a feeling of not having measured up to an internal standard. You don’t need the disapproval of others to feel guilt.
So, certain questions arise: are some men running for political office today able to experience shame? Are they capable of feeling embarrassed, humiliated or disgraced? Or, are they insulated by some impenetrable emotional armor against cringe-worthy feelings that would cause most people to forever avoid the public eye?
Are today’s politicians so narcissistically self-absorbed and so power-hungry, they’ve lost any sense of vulnerability to feeling judged as unworthy by others? Do they lack an internal barometer for self-evaluation? Do they even possess an inner core serving as an arbiter of propriety? Can they even imagine themselves as others see them—pathetic, lying, deluded narcissists who feel entitled to wantonly betray the public trust?
Do they even care?
Does the fact that these men either have been, or may be elected to office, say something about us? Have we become so coarsened that ignominious behavior no longer disappoints voters? Have vitriolic radio talk shows and “reality” TV inured us to outrageous behavior? Do we care if the officials we elect lie, cheat, steal or mislead us?
Does anything truly shock us anymore?
Despite congress having the lowest approval rating in its history, we re-elect ineffectual incumbents. Is it worrisome that our federal government is paralyzed in partisan deadlock? Have we so little expectation of office-holders that we view politics as simply a side-show; and if we vote at all, do we pull the lever based on nothing more than name recognition?
Do these societal questions have ready answers?
I think not; but we had better look at ourselves more closely. Great nations have declined due to a malignant confluence of these factors.
It’s not just the politicians’ bad behavior that has us where we are; but our own indifference could take us where we would never want to be.
Mark Rubinstein
Author, Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad
July 19, 2013
An Interview with Simon Toyne
Simon Toyne is the author of the highly acclaimed Sanctus trilogy. Simon graduated from Goldsmith’s College in London with a degree in English and Drama. He worked in British television for nearly 20 years as a producer. In 2007, he left television and moved with his family to France where they lived for six months. He returned to the UK and continued writing, while free-lancing in television to help pay the bills. That is, until Sanctus, the first novel of the trilogy was completed and became an international best-seller. It was followed by The Key and the recently released, The Tower. All three novels have been translated into dozens of languages and are read all over the world.
What made you leave a successful television career and begin writing a novel?
I was approaching 40. I looked back at the years since I’d left college and thought of the list of things I’d have liked to do. I’d always wanted to write a book; not a small undertaking. I never felt I had the time or creative energy to spare in order to write one as well as I wanted. I had two young children who would be going to school and I thought I would give myself the time and space to see if I could do it. I discussed it with my wife, explaining I was having a minor mid-life crisis. She said why not try to write that book. So that’s what I did. I gave myself six months. I knew from my television work that I could sit down and put words on paper, but didn’t know if I had the talent to tell a story in novel form. It was like heading off on a journey without a map. It was exhilarating and terrifying at the same time.
You also did some writing in television, is that correct?
As a television producer you do a lot of writing—drafting proposals for pilot shows and other things, so yes, a good deal of writing was involved. Some people who read my books say, ‘You can tell he was in television because his books are so visual.’ If you’re writing for television, you don’t have to describe anything. You just point a camera at it. So one of the challenges for me was could I use descriptive language in a novel? I had experience with certain elements of writing—dialogue and structure—but had very little experience with atmospheric prose. That was the biggest learning curve for me. Of course, as a reader, you tend to know what works, but sitting down and trying to create it is an entirely different thing. It was a journey of exploration. It was fun and it was scary. You know, fear and excitement are very closely related.
When you began writing Sanctus, did you know it would be a trilogy, or did that notion evolve as you went along with the story?
It was definitely an evolutionary thing. I was simply trying to write the best novel I could. I had no agent and no deal, and it had to be a self-contained novel. I started writing it, and as I did, other things occurred to me. It’s like you go on a journey and you see something new—let’s say a valley—and you go down there. It’s the same with the journey of writing a book. I first thought it might be some kind of massive War and Peace thing. I couldn’t imagine going to an agent and handing over a 3,000 page manuscript.
The engine—the driving question—of Sanctus is what is this relic that causes the monks to go into the Sanctus, become ordained and never come out? At the end of the novel, the reader learns what this sacrament is, and the book is complete. But you’ve spent 400 pages with these characters, going through these tremendous struggles; you can’t just leave the reader hanging. So I wrote a ten page epilogue. It tied up some loose ends but was very unsatisfying, even abrupt.
I got an agent who had me rewrite it seven times. Finally, I got a publisher. She raised two issues: “What do you want to write next?” And, “We love the book but hate the ending.” She said the last ten pages left too many unanswered questions. So we talked about some ideas I had and, those ten pages became two new books. That was the evolution of the trilogy.
Do you see more Simon Toyne novels in a similar genre, or will you take your thriller-writing skills in different directions?
I’m always writing down ideas. I have pages and pages of them, and there’s one I keep thinking about. I’ve started outlining it and have pitched it to my publisher. It may be a ten-part series about one man’s epic journey to find himself—his identity. Thematically, there will be similarities to the Sanctus trilogy. It will feel familiar enough to the previous three. It’s the stuff I love. It’s the idea that speaks to me as a reader. They say you should write the book you would like to read, and this is what I’m doing.
Belief, prophesy and apocalypse play important roles in the Sanctus trilogy. Does this reflect your own personal orientation?
Not really. This is one of the great things about being a fiction writer. You can explore parts of yourself, but I’m not writing a memoir. What intrigues me about religion and belief systems is how they relate to people as individuals.
Do you consider yourself a spiritual person?
I’m fascinated by theology and the study of spiritual ideas. Sanctus deals with creation myths in every culture. It fascinates me that all cultures, evolving independently, have similar models of mankind’s origins, of a Greater Being, of the flood, and so on. It’s amazing how they crop up time and time again.
Do you feel personally that we human beings are headed toward some apocalyptic day of reckoning?
It’s of course, entirely possible. We’re creating super-viruses in laboratories to understand how to kill them. If they get out, it could be disaster. There are nuclear warheads that may be on the loose. There’s instability in the world. There are people intent on killing each other. Some nations are going through industrial revolutions—China, India and Brazil—on a scale far above what happened earlier in the West. Climate and ecologic systems are changing. These are all daunting issues. It’s worthwhile to explore worst-case scenarios. My primary aim is to entertain readers. As a reader, I enjoy considering, ‘What if this did happen?’ But I think the trilogy ends on a hopeful note. My strongest faith is in human nature which I think is predominantly generous, creative and constructive. I believe most people want to go through the world and leave it a better place. I think this is the primary human virtue.
It’s good to hear some optimism.
There are so many apocalyptic novels now because people are worried. Things are moving so fast. We humans are incredibly adventurous but on the other hand, we fear change. And yet we seek it out. It’s a strange dichotomy. There is, I think, fear of what’s coming and what the consequences may be. There’s fear about the lack of political control; or fear of religious fundamentalism; or biological worries about genetically altered crops; and so forth. These are things people worry about. Not too long ago, our only fear was can we feed ourselves or keep the tiger from the door? It was quite simple. Our world now is so complex, it’s nearly impossible to understand things like technology and where it will take us. That causes a good deal of anxiety. I think that’s reflected in fiction.
Are there any writers who have been a great influence on you?
The most formative writer of my generation is Stephen King. I read The Shining or Salem’s Lot as they were published. Richard Matheson was a big influence on me, as well. I loved his work on the Twilight Zone series. I think everything you read ultimately feeds into your hard drive as a writer. I’ve read the classics: Shakespeare, Dickens and others. I love Dickens. His novels have a thriller structure. He wrote about the first literary detective, Inspector Bucket in Bleak House. I was a big sci-fi fan when I was younger. I read Isaac Asimov and Ray Bradbury. These writers have all influenced me.
Where do your characters come from?
There’s a bit of me in all of them. You want to make them real, so you use a bit our yourself and mix it in with people you’ve met. As a fiction writer, you’re really trying to weave a beautiful lie. Everyone knows it’s made up, but everyone goes along with it. The primary thing is that the reader cares about the characters. They’ve got to feel like real people, rather than a collection of words on the page.
If you could have dinner with three people: a writer, an historical figure, and a figure from either one of the world’s religions, or a philosopher, who would they be?
I think the philosopher would be Socrates. He’s the father of modern thought. We only really know about Socrates through his students, primarily Plato. His whole thing was living in the moment, which we all try to do. Socrates famously said, ‘I’m not wise. The only wisdom I have is that I know nothing.’ He never wrote anything down. He seems to have believed there was no point in writing his thoughts down because you had to go on the journey yourself.
The historical figure would be Grace Kelly. I had a huge crush on her when I was younger. I’d like to ask her about Hitchcock. He’d probably be quite a good dinner guest as well.
The writer would be Charles Dickens. I think he was the first modern writer. He serialized his books. He was a brilliant writer and self-publicist. He’d be everywhere in the media these days, were he alive. He was a showman. When I was in television I had the pleasure of meeting Steven Spielberg. I think he’s the modern master story-teller. He might be Charles Dickens reincarnated. He has an uncanny ability to tap into the public mind and entertain people. Maybe Spielberg has channeled Dickens.
What would the five of you be eating, drinking and discussing during dinner
As for the discussion, I would just sit back and listen. I’m not worthy. I’d have a silly grin on my face wondering if I’d taken some kind of hallucinogenic drug.
I think I’d cook. That would be my ticket to the table. I’d do my favorite thing…a slightly warm salad. You roast a whole chicken. It’s basically like a Caesar salad deconstructed. You have a bowl of dressing with anchovies and everything. There’d be lots of lemon and thyme, crisp lettuce, croutons cooked in the oven, nice and crisp. That’s my favorite meal.
I could make that and it would be my gift to them. We’d drink a very good French red wine, probably a fleurie, king of the Beaujolais, as far as I’m concerned. And that would be it. I’d sit back and enjoy it all.
Mark Rubinstein,
Author of Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad
What made you leave a successful television career and begin writing a novel?
I was approaching 40. I looked back at the years since I’d left college and thought of the list of things I’d have liked to do. I’d always wanted to write a book; not a small undertaking. I never felt I had the time or creative energy to spare in order to write one as well as I wanted. I had two young children who would be going to school and I thought I would give myself the time and space to see if I could do it. I discussed it with my wife, explaining I was having a minor mid-life crisis. She said why not try to write that book. So that’s what I did. I gave myself six months. I knew from my television work that I could sit down and put words on paper, but didn’t know if I had the talent to tell a story in novel form. It was like heading off on a journey without a map. It was exhilarating and terrifying at the same time.
You also did some writing in television, is that correct?
As a television producer you do a lot of writing—drafting proposals for pilot shows and other things, so yes, a good deal of writing was involved. Some people who read my books say, ‘You can tell he was in television because his books are so visual.’ If you’re writing for television, you don’t have to describe anything. You just point a camera at it. So one of the challenges for me was could I use descriptive language in a novel? I had experience with certain elements of writing—dialogue and structure—but had very little experience with atmospheric prose. That was the biggest learning curve for me. Of course, as a reader, you tend to know what works, but sitting down and trying to create it is an entirely different thing. It was a journey of exploration. It was fun and it was scary. You know, fear and excitement are very closely related.
When you began writing Sanctus, did you know it would be a trilogy, or did that notion evolve as you went along with the story?
It was definitely an evolutionary thing. I was simply trying to write the best novel I could. I had no agent and no deal, and it had to be a self-contained novel. I started writing it, and as I did, other things occurred to me. It’s like you go on a journey and you see something new—let’s say a valley—and you go down there. It’s the same with the journey of writing a book. I first thought it might be some kind of massive War and Peace thing. I couldn’t imagine going to an agent and handing over a 3,000 page manuscript.
The engine—the driving question—of Sanctus is what is this relic that causes the monks to go into the Sanctus, become ordained and never come out? At the end of the novel, the reader learns what this sacrament is, and the book is complete. But you’ve spent 400 pages with these characters, going through these tremendous struggles; you can’t just leave the reader hanging. So I wrote a ten page epilogue. It tied up some loose ends but was very unsatisfying, even abrupt.
I got an agent who had me rewrite it seven times. Finally, I got a publisher. She raised two issues: “What do you want to write next?” And, “We love the book but hate the ending.” She said the last ten pages left too many unanswered questions. So we talked about some ideas I had and, those ten pages became two new books. That was the evolution of the trilogy.
Do you see more Simon Toyne novels in a similar genre, or will you take your thriller-writing skills in different directions?
I’m always writing down ideas. I have pages and pages of them, and there’s one I keep thinking about. I’ve started outlining it and have pitched it to my publisher. It may be a ten-part series about one man’s epic journey to find himself—his identity. Thematically, there will be similarities to the Sanctus trilogy. It will feel familiar enough to the previous three. It’s the stuff I love. It’s the idea that speaks to me as a reader. They say you should write the book you would like to read, and this is what I’m doing.
Belief, prophesy and apocalypse play important roles in the Sanctus trilogy. Does this reflect your own personal orientation?
Not really. This is one of the great things about being a fiction writer. You can explore parts of yourself, but I’m not writing a memoir. What intrigues me about religion and belief systems is how they relate to people as individuals.
Do you consider yourself a spiritual person?
I’m fascinated by theology and the study of spiritual ideas. Sanctus deals with creation myths in every culture. It fascinates me that all cultures, evolving independently, have similar models of mankind’s origins, of a Greater Being, of the flood, and so on. It’s amazing how they crop up time and time again.
Do you feel personally that we human beings are headed toward some apocalyptic day of reckoning?
It’s of course, entirely possible. We’re creating super-viruses in laboratories to understand how to kill them. If they get out, it could be disaster. There are nuclear warheads that may be on the loose. There’s instability in the world. There are people intent on killing each other. Some nations are going through industrial revolutions—China, India and Brazil—on a scale far above what happened earlier in the West. Climate and ecologic systems are changing. These are all daunting issues. It’s worthwhile to explore worst-case scenarios. My primary aim is to entertain readers. As a reader, I enjoy considering, ‘What if this did happen?’ But I think the trilogy ends on a hopeful note. My strongest faith is in human nature which I think is predominantly generous, creative and constructive. I believe most people want to go through the world and leave it a better place. I think this is the primary human virtue.
It’s good to hear some optimism.
There are so many apocalyptic novels now because people are worried. Things are moving so fast. We humans are incredibly adventurous but on the other hand, we fear change. And yet we seek it out. It’s a strange dichotomy. There is, I think, fear of what’s coming and what the consequences may be. There’s fear about the lack of political control; or fear of religious fundamentalism; or biological worries about genetically altered crops; and so forth. These are things people worry about. Not too long ago, our only fear was can we feed ourselves or keep the tiger from the door? It was quite simple. Our world now is so complex, it’s nearly impossible to understand things like technology and where it will take us. That causes a good deal of anxiety. I think that’s reflected in fiction.
Are there any writers who have been a great influence on you?
The most formative writer of my generation is Stephen King. I read The Shining or Salem’s Lot as they were published. Richard Matheson was a big influence on me, as well. I loved his work on the Twilight Zone series. I think everything you read ultimately feeds into your hard drive as a writer. I’ve read the classics: Shakespeare, Dickens and others. I love Dickens. His novels have a thriller structure. He wrote about the first literary detective, Inspector Bucket in Bleak House. I was a big sci-fi fan when I was younger. I read Isaac Asimov and Ray Bradbury. These writers have all influenced me.
Where do your characters come from?
There’s a bit of me in all of them. You want to make them real, so you use a bit our yourself and mix it in with people you’ve met. As a fiction writer, you’re really trying to weave a beautiful lie. Everyone knows it’s made up, but everyone goes along with it. The primary thing is that the reader cares about the characters. They’ve got to feel like real people, rather than a collection of words on the page.
If you could have dinner with three people: a writer, an historical figure, and a figure from either one of the world’s religions, or a philosopher, who would they be?
I think the philosopher would be Socrates. He’s the father of modern thought. We only really know about Socrates through his students, primarily Plato. His whole thing was living in the moment, which we all try to do. Socrates famously said, ‘I’m not wise. The only wisdom I have is that I know nothing.’ He never wrote anything down. He seems to have believed there was no point in writing his thoughts down because you had to go on the journey yourself.
The historical figure would be Grace Kelly. I had a huge crush on her when I was younger. I’d like to ask her about Hitchcock. He’d probably be quite a good dinner guest as well.
The writer would be Charles Dickens. I think he was the first modern writer. He serialized his books. He was a brilliant writer and self-publicist. He’d be everywhere in the media these days, were he alive. He was a showman. When I was in television I had the pleasure of meeting Steven Spielberg. I think he’s the modern master story-teller. He might be Charles Dickens reincarnated. He has an uncanny ability to tap into the public mind and entertain people. Maybe Spielberg has channeled Dickens.
What would the five of you be eating, drinking and discussing during dinner
As for the discussion, I would just sit back and listen. I’m not worthy. I’d have a silly grin on my face wondering if I’d taken some kind of hallucinogenic drug.
I think I’d cook. That would be my ticket to the table. I’d do my favorite thing…a slightly warm salad. You roast a whole chicken. It’s basically like a Caesar salad deconstructed. You have a bowl of dressing with anchovies and everything. There’d be lots of lemon and thyme, crisp lettuce, croutons cooked in the oven, nice and crisp. That’s my favorite meal.
I could make that and it would be my gift to them. We’d drink a very good French red wine, probably a fleurie, king of the Beaujolais, as far as I’m concerned. And that would be it. I’d sit back and enjoy it all.
Mark Rubinstein,
Author of Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad
July 4, 2013
No, I won't Use an e-Reader
Let me begin by saying I love books, whether electronic or paper. I’ll read on my Kindle or a “regular” book. Frankly, I’ll read on whatever’s available. I just love reading and being transported to another world beyond my own. It’s pleasurable to share the domain the writer has created. It’s a realm to which I bring my own thoughts, feelings, fantasies and experiences, all of which no doubt, color my reading experience. It’s the experience of taking in the writer’s creation that’s so meaningful, not the medium by which it’s delivered.
I’ve heard many people refuse to consider using an e-reader. There seems to be an impenetrable wall of resistance to even the notion of using a reading device. It’s the usual mantra about loving the “feel” or “smell” of paper, or the pleasure derived from holding a real book in hand; or perhaps it’s the physical act of turning pages; or the heft of the book itself.
I too, love the sensory elements of reading a paper book, but that hasn’t precluded me from using an e-reader. After all, one reading medium doesn’t rule out the other.
Why do some people refuse--absolutely reject--the idea?
It’s not that they’re knuckle-draggers or technophobes because they often have smart phones, iPods, computers and Skype. And, I’ve noticed the repudiation of e-readers isn’t limited to older people. I know plenty of people under forty who, despite being completely comfortable with the technology of our times, want absolutely nothing to do with reading devices.
So, what exactly causes them to spurn this one technology?
I’ve thought about it as a psychiatrist, writer and avid reader. Maybe it’s because reading is something cultivated over the course of a lifetime, often beginning in childhood. Many book-lovers were read to as children—by a parent, babysitter, or some other adult. It was, for most of us, a very special thing.
“Read me a story” is something most of us can remember asking, if we think back to our earliest formative years. “Being read to” is an experience which becomes embedded in our psyches as a distinct and unique childhood pleasure. It’s loaded with meaning, and is suffused with memories of nestling on Mommy’s or Daddy’s lap; the look of the book with its bright, colorful illustrations; or the feel of the paper while we helped turn the pages. The physical book itself became the symbol housing the powerful emotional satisfaction of having parental attention bestowed upon us, with all its attendant meanings.
The book encapsulated a deep sense of pleasure, safety, wonder, satisfaction, and above all, love. These early experiences, and their residue, linger with us, and can have enormous emotional resonance.
On a pre-conscious level, perhaps some of us refuse to even try an e-reader because our minds view it as a renunciation of one of life’s earliest pleasures.
It’s merely my theory, but when I reflect upon how readily other technologies are embraced, none of them carry the primal significance of a “book in the hand.”
Mark Rubinstein,
Author, “Mad Dog House”
I’ve heard many people refuse to consider using an e-reader. There seems to be an impenetrable wall of resistance to even the notion of using a reading device. It’s the usual mantra about loving the “feel” or “smell” of paper, or the pleasure derived from holding a real book in hand; or perhaps it’s the physical act of turning pages; or the heft of the book itself.
I too, love the sensory elements of reading a paper book, but that hasn’t precluded me from using an e-reader. After all, one reading medium doesn’t rule out the other.
Why do some people refuse--absolutely reject--the idea?
It’s not that they’re knuckle-draggers or technophobes because they often have smart phones, iPods, computers and Skype. And, I’ve noticed the repudiation of e-readers isn’t limited to older people. I know plenty of people under forty who, despite being completely comfortable with the technology of our times, want absolutely nothing to do with reading devices.
So, what exactly causes them to spurn this one technology?
I’ve thought about it as a psychiatrist, writer and avid reader. Maybe it’s because reading is something cultivated over the course of a lifetime, often beginning in childhood. Many book-lovers were read to as children—by a parent, babysitter, or some other adult. It was, for most of us, a very special thing.
“Read me a story” is something most of us can remember asking, if we think back to our earliest formative years. “Being read to” is an experience which becomes embedded in our psyches as a distinct and unique childhood pleasure. It’s loaded with meaning, and is suffused with memories of nestling on Mommy’s or Daddy’s lap; the look of the book with its bright, colorful illustrations; or the feel of the paper while we helped turn the pages. The physical book itself became the symbol housing the powerful emotional satisfaction of having parental attention bestowed upon us, with all its attendant meanings.
The book encapsulated a deep sense of pleasure, safety, wonder, satisfaction, and above all, love. These early experiences, and their residue, linger with us, and can have enormous emotional resonance.
On a pre-conscious level, perhaps some of us refuse to even try an e-reader because our minds view it as a renunciation of one of life’s earliest pleasures.
It’s merely my theory, but when I reflect upon how readily other technologies are embraced, none of them carry the primal significance of a “book in the hand.”
Mark Rubinstein,
Author, “Mad Dog House”
June 26, 2013
A Talk with Scott Pratt
Scott Pratt is the author of the best-selling legal thrillers featuring his protagonist, attorney Joe Dillard. Scott has a B.A. in English, and a Doctor of Jurisprudence from the University Of Tennessee. He practiced criminal defense law over a period of years, before he began writing. His latest novel, Conflict of Interest,, was released recently.
The Joe Dillard series is comprised of five books. Dillard’s worked as a criminal defense attorney and a prosecutor—both sides of the aisle. How come? Does this reflect upir ambivalence regarding the law?
I did a great deal of criminal defense law, and worked closely with people in the prosecutor’s office. My experience has been that prosecutors wanted to win once a case was filed and it got in front of a Grand Jury. It really became much more about winning than about the notion of justice. It was a competition. It’s a human experience and everyone in court is competitive, especially those who are drawn to that kind of adversarial profession.
In the first Joe Dillard novel, An Innocent Client, Joe wants above all, to finally defend someone who is actually innocent. Does that reflect your thoughts about practicing criminal defense law?
Joe is very much a reflection of me, but I think he’s a better person than I am. He and I have many things in common. Joe’s very conflicted about what he’s doing. When you practice criminal defense, you inevitably represent some people who are guilty and some who don’t tell you the truth. You wind up being an advocate for a lie. It becomes difficult. You have to try staying focused on the process and the constitutional aspects of criminal defense law. I always enjoyed constitutional law, which is what attracted me to criminal defense. You can get various situations often involving violence. When a defendant’s freedom is at stake, things can get warped and you have to step back and ask yourself “What am I really doing here?” And that’s what Joe Dillard does at times.
Joe questions himself constantly. In the second book, In Good Faith, he actually becomes a prosecutor. I left him in that office for three books. He had the same issues in the prosecutor’s office—the same internal conflicts as when he was a defense attorney.
The five Joe Dillard novels are a series, though they’re discreet stories. Should the books be read in order or could a reader pick up any one and have an understanding of Joe’s life and conflicts?
I try to write them so you can pick up any one and enjoy it. I think the reader’s experience would probably be more enjoyable by starting at the beginning and going through the series in order. It’s not like the Jack Reacher novels. Joe doesn’t stay the same age. He evolves and his family does too. His wife gets sick. His kids go off to college. He’s living a life and progresses through it. I think this natural progression in his life resonates deeply with readers.
Do you use your own legal cases as material or do you go to court and research interesting cases for the novels?
It’s a mixture. Some, I make up completely. Several have been cases in which I was involved, and I based the story loosely on them. I tweaked the facts a bit; changed names and other things. This is a fairly rural area, but these situations involve people—and people create drama—so the cases are just as compelling as those in Los Angeles or New York. People are people and the same forces apply.
So sometimes there’s a fuzzy interface between an author’s life and that of a protagonist the author creates. How much of your life infiltrates Joe Dillard’s on the page?
Joe Dillard and I are joined at the hip. This became clear when I started writing in the first person. I want the storytelling to be natural; I try to get out of the way and let the story happen. It’s hard to explain, but Joe Dillard and I are sort of mirror reflections of each other. I’ve made mistakes in my life—ones I regret, and have tried to have Joe avoid making those mistakes. But he makes certain mistakes he regrets. I want the book to have heart; I know I want that when I read a novel, so I try for that when I write one. That’s my goal as a writer: to infuse this man with heart.
Your first Joe Dillard novel was published by New American Library, a division of the Penguin Group. Your latest novel, Conflict of Interest,/I>, is an Indie, meaning it’s self-published. How did that come about?
NAL published my first three novels. My editor moved to California and my books became orphaned. They didn’t assign another editor to me for a few months. When they did, he wasn’t particularly interested in my work. Those three novels just died on the vine. An Innocent Client was published in 2008, and by 2010, it was dead in the water. They were going to take it out of print. I wanted the rights back but they wouldn’t give them to me. I ended up having to get a lawyer. It took over a year to get the rights back for those first three books. Meanwhile, I wrote two more. I didn’t market them because I wanted the rights for the first three before I did that. I knew the series could do well. I could feel it in my heart and I had great reactions from people who’d read them.
So I finally got the rights back. I designed new covers; I re-wrote parts of them and began publishing them myself. I began in November 2012 with An Innocent ClientI sold seven copies the first day for 99 cents each on Amazon. Two weeks later, I released the next one, and then one more every two weeks until I got four of them up. I waited until April of 2013 year and released Conflict of Interest.
How are the novels doing now?
I’ll sell about 50,000 copies this month. It’s been getting better each month. I sold 10,000 in December of 2012; then 14,000 in January; in April, 25,000 were sold; in May 27,500 were sold. This month more than 40,000 have been sold. I promoted them a bit and that helped a great deal.
Have the sales been mostly in print or have they been e-books?
Though more print books are selling than ever before, abouot 98 percent of the books sold have been e-books.
What made you start writing novels in the midst of a successful legal career?
I’ve always enjoyed writing. I wrote for newspapers and had a column in a Sunday paper for years. What really kicked it over the edge was my getting into a feud with a city criminal court judge. It culminated in him holding me in contempt of Court and throwing me in jail. During that process, I was suspended without any hearing because the judge filed a complaint against me. It was so unfair it made me angry enough to make me want to stop practicing law. It so happens I read The Lincoln Lawyer by Michael Connolly. I told my wife, “I think I’m not going to practice law anymore. She said, “Are you crazy?” I said “If this is the way they treat their own, I don’t want to be a part of that anymore. She asked what I was going to do, and I showed her The Lincoln Lawyer. I said, “I can do this…”
Had I known how difficult it was and what a long shot it was at the time, I probably would not have done it. But I got into it full bore. The next day, I began writing. It took me 18 months to sell the first one—to get an agent and get it sold. Then I went through the period with Penguin where I didn’t have any success. It got to the point where we ended up living in my mother-in-law’s basement. Things weren’t looking very good. Kristy, my wife, always believed in me and said, “You’re going to make it. Just stay at it. No matter what happens, we’ll be okay.” The kids were in college and we needed money. It was rough. But we made it.
If you could have dinner with any Supreme Court justices, past or present, which ones would they be and why?
The one I’d like to have dinner with right now would be Earl Warren. The Warren Court was an activist court when it came to civil liberties. Since 9/11 and with the new revelations about the PRISM program and what the NSA is doing, I would like to hear what Earl Warren would say about the government spying on its own citizens and about the deterioration of civil liberties. You know the Miranda rights were established by the Warren court. And the decisions coming down over the last few years have been chipping away at the Miranda rights. I’d love to hear what Earl Warren would say about that.
If you could have dinner with a few writers, either living or dead, who would they be?
Samuel Clemens would be at the top of the list. He entertains me and was so bright and witty; it would be a lot of fun. I’d love to talk with Homer and ask him how he came up with what has become the model for structuring stories way back then. I’d like to talk with Harper Lee. I’d love to talk with Ernest Hemingway. William Shakespeare…there are so many of them, I could have dinner with a different one every night for a year.
What would you discuss with them?
I would certainly talk about writing, especially with Homer. But I think I would just like to hear their stories more than anything. I’d want to get to know them as human beings.
If any of the Joe Dillard novels became a movie, who do you see playing Joe?
Maybe Matthew McConaughey. His voice and demeanor are a lot like I imagine Dillard’s being, but his physical appearance isn’t exactly like him. Noah Wyle was interested in playing Joe Dillard after An Innocent Client came out. There was significant interest in Hollywood in turning it into a television series. I think Noah Wyle would do a good job.
And who would play Joe’s wife, Caroline?
Someone lovely, kind-hearted, tender and beautiful. Back in her day, I think Meryl Streep could have done it very well. Right now, I just don’t know. Maybe I’ll write my wife into the contract.
Would you defend Jodie Arias or James Holmes, the Aurora Colorado shooter?
Of course I would. Jodi Arias would turn my stomach. But I would defend her the way I defended other people. I would look at the law and hold the government to its burden of proof and make sure they follow their own rules. I’d do the best I could under the circumstances.
With James Holmes it’s a bit different. He probably has a mental issue that’s going to be decided ultimately by a jury—whether or not he was insane. I think he has to be insane for doing what he did. There must be something wrong with him. But it’s difficult to believe a person who was as organized as he was, and went through the planning process he did, was so far gone mentally that he couldn’t tell the difference between right and wrong. As a juror, I would have trouble finding him not guilty by reason of insanity.
Is there a sixth Joe Dillard novel coming our way?
Yes. A while back I wrote a stand-alone thriller called Russo’s Gold about a young woman who winds up with a fortune in gold she finds in a cave. I’m re-writing that book as a Joe Dillard novel, inserting Joe into it, and I think I’ll have it done by mid-July. I think I see about ten Joe Dillard books, maybe more. But if I get to the point where I feel I’m only writing them for money, I’ll stop. As long as I feel I’m creating something people will enjoy, I’ll keep doing it.
Mark Rubinstein
Author, Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad (due September 1, 2013)
www.markrubinstein-author.com
The Joe Dillard series is comprised of five books. Dillard’s worked as a criminal defense attorney and a prosecutor—both sides of the aisle. How come? Does this reflect upir ambivalence regarding the law?
I did a great deal of criminal defense law, and worked closely with people in the prosecutor’s office. My experience has been that prosecutors wanted to win once a case was filed and it got in front of a Grand Jury. It really became much more about winning than about the notion of justice. It was a competition. It’s a human experience and everyone in court is competitive, especially those who are drawn to that kind of adversarial profession.
In the first Joe Dillard novel, An Innocent Client, Joe wants above all, to finally defend someone who is actually innocent. Does that reflect your thoughts about practicing criminal defense law?
Joe is very much a reflection of me, but I think he’s a better person than I am. He and I have many things in common. Joe’s very conflicted about what he’s doing. When you practice criminal defense, you inevitably represent some people who are guilty and some who don’t tell you the truth. You wind up being an advocate for a lie. It becomes difficult. You have to try staying focused on the process and the constitutional aspects of criminal defense law. I always enjoyed constitutional law, which is what attracted me to criminal defense. You can get various situations often involving violence. When a defendant’s freedom is at stake, things can get warped and you have to step back and ask yourself “What am I really doing here?” And that’s what Joe Dillard does at times.
Joe questions himself constantly. In the second book, In Good Faith, he actually becomes a prosecutor. I left him in that office for three books. He had the same issues in the prosecutor’s office—the same internal conflicts as when he was a defense attorney.
The five Joe Dillard novels are a series, though they’re discreet stories. Should the books be read in order or could a reader pick up any one and have an understanding of Joe’s life and conflicts?
I try to write them so you can pick up any one and enjoy it. I think the reader’s experience would probably be more enjoyable by starting at the beginning and going through the series in order. It’s not like the Jack Reacher novels. Joe doesn’t stay the same age. He evolves and his family does too. His wife gets sick. His kids go off to college. He’s living a life and progresses through it. I think this natural progression in his life resonates deeply with readers.
Do you use your own legal cases as material or do you go to court and research interesting cases for the novels?
It’s a mixture. Some, I make up completely. Several have been cases in which I was involved, and I based the story loosely on them. I tweaked the facts a bit; changed names and other things. This is a fairly rural area, but these situations involve people—and people create drama—so the cases are just as compelling as those in Los Angeles or New York. People are people and the same forces apply.
So sometimes there’s a fuzzy interface between an author’s life and that of a protagonist the author creates. How much of your life infiltrates Joe Dillard’s on the page?
Joe Dillard and I are joined at the hip. This became clear when I started writing in the first person. I want the storytelling to be natural; I try to get out of the way and let the story happen. It’s hard to explain, but Joe Dillard and I are sort of mirror reflections of each other. I’ve made mistakes in my life—ones I regret, and have tried to have Joe avoid making those mistakes. But he makes certain mistakes he regrets. I want the book to have heart; I know I want that when I read a novel, so I try for that when I write one. That’s my goal as a writer: to infuse this man with heart.
Your first Joe Dillard novel was published by New American Library, a division of the Penguin Group. Your latest novel, Conflict of Interest,/I>, is an Indie, meaning it’s self-published. How did that come about?
NAL published my first three novels. My editor moved to California and my books became orphaned. They didn’t assign another editor to me for a few months. When they did, he wasn’t particularly interested in my work. Those three novels just died on the vine. An Innocent Client was published in 2008, and by 2010, it was dead in the water. They were going to take it out of print. I wanted the rights back but they wouldn’t give them to me. I ended up having to get a lawyer. It took over a year to get the rights back for those first three books. Meanwhile, I wrote two more. I didn’t market them because I wanted the rights for the first three before I did that. I knew the series could do well. I could feel it in my heart and I had great reactions from people who’d read them.
So I finally got the rights back. I designed new covers; I re-wrote parts of them and began publishing them myself. I began in November 2012 with An Innocent ClientI sold seven copies the first day for 99 cents each on Amazon. Two weeks later, I released the next one, and then one more every two weeks until I got four of them up. I waited until April of 2013 year and released Conflict of Interest.
How are the novels doing now?
I’ll sell about 50,000 copies this month. It’s been getting better each month. I sold 10,000 in December of 2012; then 14,000 in January; in April, 25,000 were sold; in May 27,500 were sold. This month more than 40,000 have been sold. I promoted them a bit and that helped a great deal.
Have the sales been mostly in print or have they been e-books?
Though more print books are selling than ever before, abouot 98 percent of the books sold have been e-books.
What made you start writing novels in the midst of a successful legal career?
I’ve always enjoyed writing. I wrote for newspapers and had a column in a Sunday paper for years. What really kicked it over the edge was my getting into a feud with a city criminal court judge. It culminated in him holding me in contempt of Court and throwing me in jail. During that process, I was suspended without any hearing because the judge filed a complaint against me. It was so unfair it made me angry enough to make me want to stop practicing law. It so happens I read The Lincoln Lawyer by Michael Connolly. I told my wife, “I think I’m not going to practice law anymore. She said, “Are you crazy?” I said “If this is the way they treat their own, I don’t want to be a part of that anymore. She asked what I was going to do, and I showed her The Lincoln Lawyer. I said, “I can do this…”
Had I known how difficult it was and what a long shot it was at the time, I probably would not have done it. But I got into it full bore. The next day, I began writing. It took me 18 months to sell the first one—to get an agent and get it sold. Then I went through the period with Penguin where I didn’t have any success. It got to the point where we ended up living in my mother-in-law’s basement. Things weren’t looking very good. Kristy, my wife, always believed in me and said, “You’re going to make it. Just stay at it. No matter what happens, we’ll be okay.” The kids were in college and we needed money. It was rough. But we made it.
If you could have dinner with any Supreme Court justices, past or present, which ones would they be and why?
The one I’d like to have dinner with right now would be Earl Warren. The Warren Court was an activist court when it came to civil liberties. Since 9/11 and with the new revelations about the PRISM program and what the NSA is doing, I would like to hear what Earl Warren would say about the government spying on its own citizens and about the deterioration of civil liberties. You know the Miranda rights were established by the Warren court. And the decisions coming down over the last few years have been chipping away at the Miranda rights. I’d love to hear what Earl Warren would say about that.
If you could have dinner with a few writers, either living or dead, who would they be?
Samuel Clemens would be at the top of the list. He entertains me and was so bright and witty; it would be a lot of fun. I’d love to talk with Homer and ask him how he came up with what has become the model for structuring stories way back then. I’d like to talk with Harper Lee. I’d love to talk with Ernest Hemingway. William Shakespeare…there are so many of them, I could have dinner with a different one every night for a year.
What would you discuss with them?
I would certainly talk about writing, especially with Homer. But I think I would just like to hear their stories more than anything. I’d want to get to know them as human beings.
If any of the Joe Dillard novels became a movie, who do you see playing Joe?
Maybe Matthew McConaughey. His voice and demeanor are a lot like I imagine Dillard’s being, but his physical appearance isn’t exactly like him. Noah Wyle was interested in playing Joe Dillard after An Innocent Client came out. There was significant interest in Hollywood in turning it into a television series. I think Noah Wyle would do a good job.
And who would play Joe’s wife, Caroline?
Someone lovely, kind-hearted, tender and beautiful. Back in her day, I think Meryl Streep could have done it very well. Right now, I just don’t know. Maybe I’ll write my wife into the contract.
Would you defend Jodie Arias or James Holmes, the Aurora Colorado shooter?
Of course I would. Jodi Arias would turn my stomach. But I would defend her the way I defended other people. I would look at the law and hold the government to its burden of proof and make sure they follow their own rules. I’d do the best I could under the circumstances.
With James Holmes it’s a bit different. He probably has a mental issue that’s going to be decided ultimately by a jury—whether or not he was insane. I think he has to be insane for doing what he did. There must be something wrong with him. But it’s difficult to believe a person who was as organized as he was, and went through the planning process he did, was so far gone mentally that he couldn’t tell the difference between right and wrong. As a juror, I would have trouble finding him not guilty by reason of insanity.
Is there a sixth Joe Dillard novel coming our way?
Yes. A while back I wrote a stand-alone thriller called Russo’s Gold about a young woman who winds up with a fortune in gold she finds in a cave. I’m re-writing that book as a Joe Dillard novel, inserting Joe into it, and I think I’ll have it done by mid-July. I think I see about ten Joe Dillard books, maybe more. But if I get to the point where I feel I’m only writing them for money, I’ll stop. As long as I feel I’m creating something people will enjoy, I’ll keep doing it.
Mark Rubinstein
Author, Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad (due September 1, 2013)
www.markrubinstein-author.com
June 20, 2013
A Much Loved and Complex Kingpin
We learned sadly of James Gandolfini’s death. Aside from his family’s and friends’ grief, we’ve all lost something with his passing.
Gandolfini masterfully played mob kingpin, Tony Soprano. Despite the ugliness of gangland life, Tony was a character for whom we had a rich cocktail of feelings: admiration; anger; frustration; love; fear; respect; even envy. Gandolfini was supremely talented at conveying a range of feelings. His voice could convey childlike yearning and poisonous rage shouted to the rafters. Just as powerfully, one look from Tony could speak many pages of dialogue.
But there was something else about Gandolfini’s portrayal of Tony Soprano that made him resonate so deeply with the audience. Tony was a complex man who didn’t fit the overused stereotype of the mob boss. His far-reaching array of feelings and behaviors were more complex and far more real than what’s depicted in films such as Scarface, The Godfather, Carlito’s Way, Goodfellas, and scores of others.
Tony Soprano—a deeply flawed man—had intense feelings about so many people and things. Yes, he was an everyman in many respects—neither idealized nor demonized; and his relationships were crammed with a mixture of feelings, ranging from vulnerability to invincibility.
On one hand, Tony and Carmela shared a stormy marriage, replete with infidelities and arguments, but there were moments of deep and tender love. Tony’s ambivalent and emotionally charged relationship with Uncle Junior juxtaposed past and present. His feelings toward his children struck a familiar chord with anyone who has raised a child: parental woe and joy ever intermingling.
And, like anyone who’s ever run a business, Tony dealt with the daily pressures and stresses of keeping the “company” and its “employees” on track. Gandolfini’s portrayal of Tony Soprano was masterful in this regard. The viewer soon grew accustomed to the brutality and criminality, and readily identified with Tony’s frustrations in trying to keep the “family” business going.
Never before in mafia stories can I recall a character like Tony’s, whose vulnerability was portrayed as realistically and soulfully as was done by James Gandolfini. Whether it was Tony’s love of animals, with whom he identified as being innocents, deserving of respect and kindness; or his alternate view of himself as a military general, forced to make horrible choices in the name of a code of behavior, the emotional burden he carried from childhood, growing up with a manipulative, harsh mother and violent father, rendered him an anxiety-ridden, depressed and deeply conflicted man.
The scenes between Tony and Dr. Melfi were masterful. This relationship dramatically portrayed transference and counter-transference, superbly.
As a novelist and psychiatrist, and someone who never missed an episode of The Sopranos, something is very clear: the portrayal of a character like Tony Soprano by Gandolfini made the series extraordinary. The most memorable characters (whether in fiction or film) are those with depth; those with complexity and a range of contradictory feelings. These are characters we care about…people who live and breathe on the page or on the screen. And, their stories stay with us long after we’ve read the book or viewed the series.
We crave real portrayals of people like ourselves: people who can be confused, get angry, celebrate joyous moments and sometimes feel rejected and unloved. James Gandolfini made Tony Soprano, the Jersey mob boss, one of us.
Mark Rubinstein
Author, Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad (due September 2013
www.markrubinstein-author.com
Gandolfini masterfully played mob kingpin, Tony Soprano. Despite the ugliness of gangland life, Tony was a character for whom we had a rich cocktail of feelings: admiration; anger; frustration; love; fear; respect; even envy. Gandolfini was supremely talented at conveying a range of feelings. His voice could convey childlike yearning and poisonous rage shouted to the rafters. Just as powerfully, one look from Tony could speak many pages of dialogue.
But there was something else about Gandolfini’s portrayal of Tony Soprano that made him resonate so deeply with the audience. Tony was a complex man who didn’t fit the overused stereotype of the mob boss. His far-reaching array of feelings and behaviors were more complex and far more real than what’s depicted in films such as Scarface, The Godfather, Carlito’s Way, Goodfellas, and scores of others.
Tony Soprano—a deeply flawed man—had intense feelings about so many people and things. Yes, he was an everyman in many respects—neither idealized nor demonized; and his relationships were crammed with a mixture of feelings, ranging from vulnerability to invincibility.
On one hand, Tony and Carmela shared a stormy marriage, replete with infidelities and arguments, but there were moments of deep and tender love. Tony’s ambivalent and emotionally charged relationship with Uncle Junior juxtaposed past and present. His feelings toward his children struck a familiar chord with anyone who has raised a child: parental woe and joy ever intermingling.
And, like anyone who’s ever run a business, Tony dealt with the daily pressures and stresses of keeping the “company” and its “employees” on track. Gandolfini’s portrayal of Tony Soprano was masterful in this regard. The viewer soon grew accustomed to the brutality and criminality, and readily identified with Tony’s frustrations in trying to keep the “family” business going.
Never before in mafia stories can I recall a character like Tony’s, whose vulnerability was portrayed as realistically and soulfully as was done by James Gandolfini. Whether it was Tony’s love of animals, with whom he identified as being innocents, deserving of respect and kindness; or his alternate view of himself as a military general, forced to make horrible choices in the name of a code of behavior, the emotional burden he carried from childhood, growing up with a manipulative, harsh mother and violent father, rendered him an anxiety-ridden, depressed and deeply conflicted man.
The scenes between Tony and Dr. Melfi were masterful. This relationship dramatically portrayed transference and counter-transference, superbly.
As a novelist and psychiatrist, and someone who never missed an episode of The Sopranos, something is very clear: the portrayal of a character like Tony Soprano by Gandolfini made the series extraordinary. The most memorable characters (whether in fiction or film) are those with depth; those with complexity and a range of contradictory feelings. These are characters we care about…people who live and breathe on the page or on the screen. And, their stories stay with us long after we’ve read the book or viewed the series.
We crave real portrayals of people like ourselves: people who can be confused, get angry, celebrate joyous moments and sometimes feel rejected and unloved. James Gandolfini made Tony Soprano, the Jersey mob boss, one of us.
Mark Rubinstein
Author, Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad (due September 2013
www.markrubinstein-author.com
A Much Loved and Complex Kingpin
We learned sadly of James Gandolfini’s death. Aside from his family’s and friends’ grief, we’ve all lost something with his passing.
Gandolfini masterfully played mob kingpin, Tony Soprano. Despite the ugliness of gangland life, Tony was a character for whom we had a rich cocktail of feelings: admiration; anger; frustration; love; fear; respect; even envy. Gandolfini was supremely talented at conveying a range of feelings. His voice could convey childlike yearning and poisonous rage shouted to...
June 11, 2013
A Talk With Steve Berry
Steve Berry is the highly acclaimed, bestselling author of historical thrillers, including the Cotton Malone adventure series. His novels have been translated into forty languages and have sold in fifty-one countries. His newest novel, The King's Deception, as do his other works, combines history with current day events and intrigue.
The King's Deception is another historical thriller. How and when did you develop such a profound love of history?
It started when I was a teenager. When I began writing, I naturally gravitated to what I loved. When I'm teaching writing, I always say to my students, 'Writing what you know is really bad advice. Instead, write what you love.' I love action, history, secrets, conspiracies, and international intrigue.
How did the idea of The King's Deception come to you?
The King's Deception notion came about when my wife, Elizabeth, and I were at a cathedral north of London. I heard a local legend about the village of Bisley. On a certain day, for centuries, the locals would dress a young boy in an Elizabethan costume and parade him through the streets. That's really odd behavior. I looked into it and began to see there was some historical fact behind this ritual. Bram Stoker, in the early 20thCentury, came across it too. He wrote about it in a book called Famous Imposters. I read that book and realized there was a novel there. So I started putting it together.
History is integral to all my books, and particularly this one. It deals with Elizabeth I. She was fascinating. All her life she wore wigs; heavy makeup; clothes that didn't flatter her body; refused to marry; refused to have a child; wouldn't let doctors examine her; and forbade an autopsy when she died. She even proclaimed herself The Virgin Queen. She was then buried with her sister Mary in the same grave, which had never happened before or since with an English royal. All this adds up to she may have been harboring a great secret, and that's what The King's Deception deals with--a legend that could well be true.
And that oddity becomes central to what's going on hundreds of years later with Cotton Malone. You always weave together occurrences of centuries ago with current events.
That's what I strive for. I've got to have something from the past--something lost; or something forgotten. But it must be relevant today. After all, what does it matter if there was a problem with Elizabeth I's reign? That was 400 years ago. Actually, it matters a great deal when it comes to Northern Ireland. It could actually change Northern Ireland completely and reignite a war there. When I came across the connection between Queen Elizabeth and Northern Ireland, I knew I had the thing that makes this secret relevant today. I love the connection between then and now.
So history really matters. And you've founded an organization called History Matters. Tell us a bit about that.
History Matters is a foundation my wife, Elizabeth, and I created. We raise money for historic preservation. So far we've raised about $600,000 for various projects that include buildings, documents, rare books, and libraries. History matters because history is who we are; it's where we came from. How can you know who you are, or what you are, or where you're going if you don't know where you came from? That's what I hope people take away from my novels.
Do you feel history matters not only for the identity of a nation state, but for an individual as well?
Even more so than for a nation. Where people came from; their backgrounds; ancestries; families; how they got where they are today. What could be more important to any individual? Look at it from the standpoint of an adopted child. The child longs to know, 'Where did I come from?' It's a natural human instinct. It's an insatiable quest for one's own personal identity. That's even more important than the greater historical picture of nations.
Do you think in today's world we're losing touch with our history?
I actually think we're getting closer to our history. There's a greater fascination today with where we came from and who we are than perhaps at any other time. With technology we possess the ability to actually discover these things. You can sit in your living room and learn where you came from simply by surfing the internet.
If you could have dinner with some figures from all of history along with any writers, either living or dead, who would those people be?
I would include James Michener. He's my favorite author and I never got to meet him. I learned so much from him. I would have to put him in there.
I would always love to chat with David Morrell. He's my favorite thriller writer of all. I've enjoyed so much having dinner with him over the years. He's forgotten more about writing than any of us will ever know.
Dan Brown has to be on the list. I owe him a lot. He and Doubleday took a great risk with The Da Vinci Code. In the end, their success brought a genre back to life and gave me a chance to be published. I need to thank him. I went through twelve years and 85 rejections before I was published. The Amber Room, my first novel, was bought because The Da Vinci Code was coming out and Random House was looking for something to go with it.
I never was able to speak with Robert Ludlum. I learned so much from his books. I've talked to people who did have dinner with him, and he would definitely be a guy I'd like to ask some questions to.
As for people from history, number one would be Walt Disney. He was absolutely a genius, a visionary. I enjoy everything about Disney and I've read many biographies about him.
Elizabeth I is another. I have many questions for the queen. Even if perhaps the secret I've written about in The King's Deception is not true, I'd like to know, 'Why did you do all that stuff? What was going on in your brain? At her death she left the country in turmoil. The Stuarts were incapable of ruling and, two monarchs later, they lost the crown in the English Civil War. Her father broke with Rome and changed everything, yet she apparently had no desire to keep the Tudor family in power. Why? Maybe because Henry VIII wasn't her father?
I would also love to meet Charlemagne. This guy changed everything. The concept of modern Europe goes all the way back to him. He was a remarkable individual. When I wrote The Charlemagne Pursuit I studied him in detail. He was fascinating.
You research your next novel while writing the current one. What can we expect from Steve Berry next?
It's already written. It's Cotton Malone's ninth adventure. He's going to come home for another American adventure. It's called The Lincoln Myth. It deals with something about Abraham Lincoln that will probably surprise most readers. I'm now starting Cotton Malone's tenth adventure for 2015. You try to stay a year ahead in the book business.
You were a trial attorney for 30 years. Does your courtroom experience influence or inform your writing?
Not really. I handled thousands of divorces and also did criminal defense, so there's little that would shock me. That experience did spur me to write because I watched people at their worst. For me, writing was an escape--a way to get away from that. That's what a thriller is--an escape. It's not going to change the world or re-invent literature. But it will entertain you for a while.
Millions of your novels are read all over the world. Have you ever been in a public place and seen someone reading your book? If so, what does that feel like?
Yes, many times. It's just a complete thrill. You would think that after thirteen years, you get used to it. But you absolutely don't. You write alone; you create these stories alone; you don't know if anyone's going to read them or care about them. And then, when you actually see someone reading your book, it's such a rush. One time, I was on an airplane and right across the aisle--not two feet away--was a guy reading my book. My picture was on the back in full color, yet no one made the connection. That's the great thing about being a writer. No one recognizes you. There's anonymity. It was great watching this guy being enthralled. He forgot his flight and read for two hours. I never, ever say anything to anyone. But seeing people reading my books is gratifying.
The King's Deception is another historical thriller. How and when did you develop such a profound love of history?
It started when I was a teenager. When I began writing, I naturally gravitated to what I loved. When I'm teaching writing, I always say to my students, 'Writing what you know is really bad advice. Instead, write what you love.' I love action, history, secrets, conspiracies, and international intrigue.
How did the idea of The King's Deception come to you?
The King's Deception notion came about when my wife, Elizabeth, and I were at a cathedral north of London. I heard a local legend about the village of Bisley. On a certain day, for centuries, the locals would dress a young boy in an Elizabethan costume and parade him through the streets. That's really odd behavior. I looked into it and began to see there was some historical fact behind this ritual. Bram Stoker, in the early 20thCentury, came across it too. He wrote about it in a book called Famous Imposters. I read that book and realized there was a novel there. So I started putting it together.
History is integral to all my books, and particularly this one. It deals with Elizabeth I. She was fascinating. All her life she wore wigs; heavy makeup; clothes that didn't flatter her body; refused to marry; refused to have a child; wouldn't let doctors examine her; and forbade an autopsy when she died. She even proclaimed herself The Virgin Queen. She was then buried with her sister Mary in the same grave, which had never happened before or since with an English royal. All this adds up to she may have been harboring a great secret, and that's what The King's Deception deals with--a legend that could well be true.
And that oddity becomes central to what's going on hundreds of years later with Cotton Malone. You always weave together occurrences of centuries ago with current events.
That's what I strive for. I've got to have something from the past--something lost; or something forgotten. But it must be relevant today. After all, what does it matter if there was a problem with Elizabeth I's reign? That was 400 years ago. Actually, it matters a great deal when it comes to Northern Ireland. It could actually change Northern Ireland completely and reignite a war there. When I came across the connection between Queen Elizabeth and Northern Ireland, I knew I had the thing that makes this secret relevant today. I love the connection between then and now.
So history really matters. And you've founded an organization called History Matters. Tell us a bit about that.
History Matters is a foundation my wife, Elizabeth, and I created. We raise money for historic preservation. So far we've raised about $600,000 for various projects that include buildings, documents, rare books, and libraries. History matters because history is who we are; it's where we came from. How can you know who you are, or what you are, or where you're going if you don't know where you came from? That's what I hope people take away from my novels.
Do you feel history matters not only for the identity of a nation state, but for an individual as well?
Even more so than for a nation. Where people came from; their backgrounds; ancestries; families; how they got where they are today. What could be more important to any individual? Look at it from the standpoint of an adopted child. The child longs to know, 'Where did I come from?' It's a natural human instinct. It's an insatiable quest for one's own personal identity. That's even more important than the greater historical picture of nations.
Do you think in today's world we're losing touch with our history?
I actually think we're getting closer to our history. There's a greater fascination today with where we came from and who we are than perhaps at any other time. With technology we possess the ability to actually discover these things. You can sit in your living room and learn where you came from simply by surfing the internet.
If you could have dinner with some figures from all of history along with any writers, either living or dead, who would those people be?
I would include James Michener. He's my favorite author and I never got to meet him. I learned so much from him. I would have to put him in there.
I would always love to chat with David Morrell. He's my favorite thriller writer of all. I've enjoyed so much having dinner with him over the years. He's forgotten more about writing than any of us will ever know.
Dan Brown has to be on the list. I owe him a lot. He and Doubleday took a great risk with The Da Vinci Code. In the end, their success brought a genre back to life and gave me a chance to be published. I need to thank him. I went through twelve years and 85 rejections before I was published. The Amber Room, my first novel, was bought because The Da Vinci Code was coming out and Random House was looking for something to go with it.
I never was able to speak with Robert Ludlum. I learned so much from his books. I've talked to people who did have dinner with him, and he would definitely be a guy I'd like to ask some questions to.
As for people from history, number one would be Walt Disney. He was absolutely a genius, a visionary. I enjoy everything about Disney and I've read many biographies about him.
Elizabeth I is another. I have many questions for the queen. Even if perhaps the secret I've written about in The King's Deception is not true, I'd like to know, 'Why did you do all that stuff? What was going on in your brain? At her death she left the country in turmoil. The Stuarts were incapable of ruling and, two monarchs later, they lost the crown in the English Civil War. Her father broke with Rome and changed everything, yet she apparently had no desire to keep the Tudor family in power. Why? Maybe because Henry VIII wasn't her father?
I would also love to meet Charlemagne. This guy changed everything. The concept of modern Europe goes all the way back to him. He was a remarkable individual. When I wrote The Charlemagne Pursuit I studied him in detail. He was fascinating.
You research your next novel while writing the current one. What can we expect from Steve Berry next?
It's already written. It's Cotton Malone's ninth adventure. He's going to come home for another American adventure. It's called The Lincoln Myth. It deals with something about Abraham Lincoln that will probably surprise most readers. I'm now starting Cotton Malone's tenth adventure for 2015. You try to stay a year ahead in the book business.
You were a trial attorney for 30 years. Does your courtroom experience influence or inform your writing?
Not really. I handled thousands of divorces and also did criminal defense, so there's little that would shock me. That experience did spur me to write because I watched people at their worst. For me, writing was an escape--a way to get away from that. That's what a thriller is--an escape. It's not going to change the world or re-invent literature. But it will entertain you for a while.
Millions of your novels are read all over the world. Have you ever been in a public place and seen someone reading your book? If so, what does that feel like?
Yes, many times. It's just a complete thrill. You would think that after thirteen years, you get used to it. But you absolutely don't. You write alone; you create these stories alone; you don't know if anyone's going to read them or care about them. And then, when you actually see someone reading your book, it's such a rush. One time, I was on an airplane and right across the aisle--not two feet away--was a guy reading my book. My picture was on the back in full color, yet no one made the connection. That's the great thing about being a writer. No one recognizes you. There's anonymity. It was great watching this guy being enthralled. He forgot his flight and read for two hours. I never, ever say anything to anyone. But seeing people reading my books is gratifying.
June 10, 2013
A Talk With Steve Berry
Steve Berry is the highly acclaimed, bestselling author of historical thrillers, including the Cotton Malone adventure series. His novels have been translated into forty languages and have sold in fifty-one countries. His newest novel, The King’s Deception, as do his other works, combines history with current day events and intrigue.
The King’s Deception is another historical thriller. How and when did you develop such a profound love of history?
It started when I was a teen-ager. When I began...
June 9, 2013
The Prescription
The Prescription
Not Your Everyday Rx
Steve was a 52 year old successful executive who looked downtrodden entering my office. He’d come reluctantly, and only because his wife insisted he “see someone.”
“She says I’m not living my life anymore,” he told me.
When asked what was going on, Steve said two years earlier, his dog of 14 years had died. His two kids were now out of the house, living on their own. His wife began teaching history at a community college, and he felt lonely, isolated and demo...
June 8, 2013
Physics Can Be Fatal: A Talk With Elissa Grodin
PHYSICS CAN BE FATAL
A Talk With Elissa Grodin
Elissa Grodin’s father founded AMC Theaters and invented multiplex and megaplex movie theatres. She has an extensive background in film. Elissa studied film at Dartmouth College, and painting at the New York School of Visual Arts. Living in London, she wrote for the London Times Literary Supplement, reviewing books and films. After moving to New York, she worked for Twentieth Century Fox, reading novels to be optioned for film rights.
As a free-lance journalist, she was on assignment for American Film Magazine and interviewed Charles Grodin, the actor and writer. They were married a year later.
She wrote six children’s books, one being fiction.
Physics Can be Fatal is her first adult novel.
Your publisher is Cozy Cat Press, specializing in cozy mysteries. Why cozy mysteries?
My mother introduced me to Agatha Christie when I was a child. She remains one of my favorite writers. Agatha Christie had a profound influence on me.
What other important influences have impacted your writing life?
I have precise memories of early influences starting at around age seven. When I was little, I grasped what my true nature was; I understood I had a creative nature, so from a young age I was looking for a road map. I was strongly influenced by Shel Silverstein when I read Uncle Shelby’s ABZ Book. For the first time in my life, I understood the concept of subversion. That was a huge intellectual light bulb for me. I understood you could subvert the status quo. You could do it by writing.
The next powerful influence was the movie The Great Escape with Steve McQueen. I learned about existentialism—about ways of seeing the world. The next important influence was J.D. Salinger because he made poetry out of angst. It impacted me deeply. The next big influence was Jane Austen from whom I learned you can write about the entire human condition on a very small canvas. And the last great influence was Agatha Christie who made me decide that cozy mysteries would be my genre.
Which authors do you read?
I love reading Alan Bradley, M.C. Beaton, Agatha Christie, Dorothy Sayers and Marjorie Allingham; all writers from the so-called golden age of mystery writing. I read others in various genres, but those are the ones I love.
In Physics Can Be Fatal, your protagonist Edwina, is a young college physics professor and amateur sleuth. Will she be a continuing character in a series?
Yes, this summer I’m finishing a second one with Edwina called Death by Hitchcock. I’m using my film studies background writing it. I’m a huge film buff. And I’m making my late father an off-stage character, which is great fun. He was a larger-than-life personality.
You studied at Dartmouth. Is there a similarity between that school and Cushing College, where the events in Physics Can be Fatal take place?
Yes. Like most writers, I use bits and pieces from my life in my writing. Of course, they’re mixed with fantasy. But as I said, my late father will be an off-stage character in the next one, so my past and present lives tend to creep into the novel.
How do you go about plotting a mystery novel?
I start with character because that’s the crucial part. I base my characters on bits and pieces of people I either knew or know now. I do that, realizing we’re all capable of every impulse under the sun. I’m intrigued by the idea that we all deviate from the Golden Rule. That gets me going on any plot. We’re so-called civilized people; and yet, do these ridiculous things that bring mayhem, mischief and murder into each other’s lives. I think of the repressed things we would all like to do to each other. So, I come up with a central event, like “the murder” and then weave connections among my characters around that event.
If there was any writer, living or dead, with whom you could have dinner, who would that be?
Agatha Christie, without question.
And if there was any writer you could become, who would it be?
It would be Agatha Christie. I know…I sound like a stalker. I admire her personally and artistically above all others. She was modest; genteel; self-realized; she was a mother. And she lived to a nice old age. I just love her.
You’re married to Charles Grodin, a very successful, stage, screen and television actor. And he’s also a writer. Has that been either a hindrance or help in your career?
He’s a help in every way. Above all, he’s a good man. I have a happy life with him. He’s been very helpful with career stuff. Supportive and full of goodness.
At the end of the interview with Charles for American Film Magazine, he asked you to marry him. That was your first meeting. Did it shock you?
No, not at all. You know what? I was expecting it. I know it sounds weird, but there you go. We were star-crossed. We really hit it off. It was a deep connection. So in a way, it was life imitating art, imitating fiction.
What did you say when he proposed?
I just said yes. And a year later we were married. It’s been fabulous. We’ve been married for thirty years.
Where to from here?
After Death by Hitchcock, I’ll keep writing about Edwina and her sleuthing. It gives me great pleasure.
Mark Rubinstein
Author, Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad (due September 1st)
www.markrubinstein-author.com
Twitter @mrubinsteinCT
A Talk With Elissa Grodin
Elissa Grodin’s father founded AMC Theaters and invented multiplex and megaplex movie theatres. She has an extensive background in film. Elissa studied film at Dartmouth College, and painting at the New York School of Visual Arts. Living in London, she wrote for the London Times Literary Supplement, reviewing books and films. After moving to New York, she worked for Twentieth Century Fox, reading novels to be optioned for film rights.
As a free-lance journalist, she was on assignment for American Film Magazine and interviewed Charles Grodin, the actor and writer. They were married a year later.
She wrote six children’s books, one being fiction.
Physics Can be Fatal is her first adult novel.
Your publisher is Cozy Cat Press, specializing in cozy mysteries. Why cozy mysteries?
My mother introduced me to Agatha Christie when I was a child. She remains one of my favorite writers. Agatha Christie had a profound influence on me.
What other important influences have impacted your writing life?
I have precise memories of early influences starting at around age seven. When I was little, I grasped what my true nature was; I understood I had a creative nature, so from a young age I was looking for a road map. I was strongly influenced by Shel Silverstein when I read Uncle Shelby’s ABZ Book. For the first time in my life, I understood the concept of subversion. That was a huge intellectual light bulb for me. I understood you could subvert the status quo. You could do it by writing.
The next powerful influence was the movie The Great Escape with Steve McQueen. I learned about existentialism—about ways of seeing the world. The next important influence was J.D. Salinger because he made poetry out of angst. It impacted me deeply. The next big influence was Jane Austen from whom I learned you can write about the entire human condition on a very small canvas. And the last great influence was Agatha Christie who made me decide that cozy mysteries would be my genre.
Which authors do you read?
I love reading Alan Bradley, M.C. Beaton, Agatha Christie, Dorothy Sayers and Marjorie Allingham; all writers from the so-called golden age of mystery writing. I read others in various genres, but those are the ones I love.
In Physics Can Be Fatal, your protagonist Edwina, is a young college physics professor and amateur sleuth. Will she be a continuing character in a series?
Yes, this summer I’m finishing a second one with Edwina called Death by Hitchcock. I’m using my film studies background writing it. I’m a huge film buff. And I’m making my late father an off-stage character, which is great fun. He was a larger-than-life personality.
You studied at Dartmouth. Is there a similarity between that school and Cushing College, where the events in Physics Can be Fatal take place?
Yes. Like most writers, I use bits and pieces from my life in my writing. Of course, they’re mixed with fantasy. But as I said, my late father will be an off-stage character in the next one, so my past and present lives tend to creep into the novel.
How do you go about plotting a mystery novel?
I start with character because that’s the crucial part. I base my characters on bits and pieces of people I either knew or know now. I do that, realizing we’re all capable of every impulse under the sun. I’m intrigued by the idea that we all deviate from the Golden Rule. That gets me going on any plot. We’re so-called civilized people; and yet, do these ridiculous things that bring mayhem, mischief and murder into each other’s lives. I think of the repressed things we would all like to do to each other. So, I come up with a central event, like “the murder” and then weave connections among my characters around that event.
If there was any writer, living or dead, with whom you could have dinner, who would that be?
Agatha Christie, without question.
And if there was any writer you could become, who would it be?
It would be Agatha Christie. I know…I sound like a stalker. I admire her personally and artistically above all others. She was modest; genteel; self-realized; she was a mother. And she lived to a nice old age. I just love her.
You’re married to Charles Grodin, a very successful, stage, screen and television actor. And he’s also a writer. Has that been either a hindrance or help in your career?
He’s a help in every way. Above all, he’s a good man. I have a happy life with him. He’s been very helpful with career stuff. Supportive and full of goodness.
At the end of the interview with Charles for American Film Magazine, he asked you to marry him. That was your first meeting. Did it shock you?
No, not at all. You know what? I was expecting it. I know it sounds weird, but there you go. We were star-crossed. We really hit it off. It was a deep connection. So in a way, it was life imitating art, imitating fiction.
What did you say when he proposed?
I just said yes. And a year later we were married. It’s been fabulous. We’ve been married for thirty years.
Where to from here?
After Death by Hitchcock, I’ll keep writing about Edwina and her sleuthing. It gives me great pleasure.
Mark Rubinstein
Author, Mad Dog House and Love Gone Mad (due September 1st)
www.markrubinstein-author.com
Twitter @mrubinsteinCT
