Q&A with Josh Lanyon discussion
ARCHIVE JOSH Book Discussions
>
Questions or discussion on a particular book?
Josh wrote: "I'm glad, Dane. I love Kit. He's a magnet for disaster. *g*"I had to read it twice to really like him, first time i just kind of thought he was so gay and whiny. Second time reading i liked him a lot better and for some reason his jokes were funnier.
My first time reading it i didn't know it was m/m though when i started it, so maybe i was just a little surprised.
Lori has helped me a lot since then, she even got me to buy the fair game audio book, it was really good
Bubbles (Dane) wrote: "Josh wrote: "I'm glad, Dane. I love Kit. He's a magnet for disaster. *g*"Lori has helped me a lot since then, she even got me to buy the fair game audio book, it was really good ..."
I am always happy to help people spend their money...:)
Josh wrote: "I do enjoy the fact that Kit gets to say so many things that would not be politic for Josh."A.B. wrote: "Josh wrote: "I do enjoy the fact that Kit gets to say so many things that would not be politic for Josh."
Precisely. Just make sure you remind the reader of that a few times. You may even have to ..."
I re-read SKHE and so glad I did. I somehow missed most of Kit's humor but cried with laughter several times during the 2nd go. I love that he's sort of a fumbling idiot.
Mod
I think he may have been such a departure (from Adrien certainly) that he didn't work the first time around for a few readers. And The first book came out around the time I was winding up the Adrien novels and so there were inevitable comparisons.
But the two series are quite different -- Kit isn't meant to replace Adrien. It's a different kind of series altogether -- much lighter on the surface.
Also...I think readers have to be in the right mood for humor. If you're not in the mood, a character like Kit is merely irritating.
Mod
One of the things I like best about you, Lori. ;-D
Mod
I had to read it twice to really like him, first time i just kind of thought he was so gay and whiny. Second time reading ..."
Yeah, I was saying that down below. I think the first time around Kit was either a huge hit or a major flop, depending on the reader.
He's the butt of many jokes and he's allowed to be foolish and high strung and over-the-top in a way I don't ordinarily write my protags. It's one reason why I find him refreshing, but for some readers he's going to be an acquired taste.
Josh wrote: "I re-read SKHE and so glad I did. I somehow missed most of Kit's humor but cried with laughter several times during the 2nd go. I love that he's sort of a fumbling idiot.I think he may have bee..."
Right on about timing. I read SKHE on the heels of AE so I think that's more of what I was expecting.
I didn't find Kit to be silly or whiny. To me, he used humor to cover up his insecurities. The fact that he stayed with the same man, even though he knew they weren't good together after having been with JX and in spite of the infidelities, for so many years is something that many people do in real life because they are scared of change. It's a co-dependency and definitely self-abusive.Kit readily admits that JX saved his life. That admission was hard for Kit to make to JX. It was a type of commitment to JX and now Kit is scared of being hurt or of making the same mistakes he made in the past. Kit's humor keeps JX at arm's length.
That emotional vulnerability actually makes him similar to Adrien, I think. Although Kit, as a character, is a departure from some of Josh's usual protags, I find myself relating to his insecurities. I believe that his growth and change through the next book(s) should be an interesting journey to follow.
Mod
Yes, the arc in these books is Kit's. It's a gentler, less dramatic arc than Jake's, for example, but I also think it's an arc more people can identify with.
I don't actually think he's whiny. He's self-absorbed, yes, and we're in his thoughts so we're getting his dismay direct, but much of what he's bitching about are the very things we would *all* be bitching about in his situation. And unlike Kit, we probably wouldn't keep most of it to ourselves.
Kit is probably more afraid of a relationship than any character I've written. Even Jake was not at all afraid of relationships -- he was afraid of a relationship with Adrien and what that relationship represented. Kit is terrified of being emotionally dependent on anyone ever again.
He probably harder to read at first because, as you say, he masks everything (or tries to) with humor.
Josh wrote: "Kit is terrified of being emotionally dependent on anyone ever again.He probably harder to read at first because, as you say, he masks everything (or tries to) with humor.
"
Another reason I think I connected so well with Kit is because he's a little bit older. Even though he's in an emotional holding pattern, I totally understood his reasons for his fear. Because the story is told in the first person, it's easy to crawl into his skin. Even though he berates himself, I tend to take it personally when others laugh AT him, rather than with him. But that's the beauty of a good story: falling into the character! ;-)
Mod
His age is another thing I particularly like about him. There's a dearth of forty something protags in m/m fiction. Or at least believable (for me) forty-somethings.
Josh wrote: "Another reason I think I connected so well with Kit is because he's a little bit older. His age is another thing I particularly like about him. There's a dearth of forty something protags in m/..."
Yes, exactly! For those of us who have been there and survived to tell about our forties, having a believable 40-something year old with hang-ups and life experience is a nice thing.
I think I want to read a vampire+human love story written by Josh Lanyon; any possibility of that happening in near future? :P
Mod
I kind of doubt it, Bella. I don't know why but vampires don't really do much for me. Which is a shame, seeing how incredibly popular they are!
I just don't get the appeal. Maybe someone can explain it to me?
Josh wrote: "Bella wrote: "I just don't get the appeal. Maybe someone can explain it to me?"Rampant though secret necrophilia among the wider population?
:D
Nah...We're all afraid of death so, of course, there's the attraction of immortality. But at the same time, I think we all also realize that living forever probably wouldn't be a pleasant thing, which is why vamps are so often portrayed as cursed. Vamps, IMO, represent that conflict inside us. And the violence...Oh Lord, who hasn't wanted to rip the throat out of their boss at some point? (Bad, evil me - one of my bosses is a preacher, LOL.)
With vamps (shifters, any paranormal element really), the mythology isn't set in stone, either. Sure, a lot of authors stick by the traditional mythology, but the most fascinating stories are the ones that tackle vamps in new, unique ways. Sometimes, that's good, sometimes not so good. But writers are free to build an entirely different and distinct world. I love getting lost in them.
I adore my vamps and shifters, though admittedly, I can't imagine you writing them, Josh. ;-)
Josh wrote: "I just don't get the appeal. Maybe someone can explain it to me? "well.... explaining isn't my thing u know..I suck at it :P I can only read and feel and read.
Kari wrote: "the most fascinating stories are the ones that tackle vamps in new, unique ways."
I so agree with u on this point and for me,stephenie meyers started this new vamp culture with whole new non-dracula like kool,kind vamps who doesn't kill to feed.It's the new beginning :D
I think people like vamps because of the immortality and the nibbling on the neck. Taking something sensual that drains your life/feeds another.I prefer werewolves and that internal struggle.
Bella wrote: "I so agree with u on this point and for me,stephenie meyers started this new vamp culture with whole new non-dracula like kool,kind vamps who doesn't kill to feed.It's the new beginning :D"Sorry, have to disagree with you there. Anne Rice's Louis of Interview with the Vampire & etc sustained himself on animals long before Stephanie Myer came about. And there were others. Anne Rice's Louis is just the most famous, lot easier to track down than the rare vampy Harlequin/Silhouettes from the late 80s & early-mid 90s.
Kari wrote: "Bella wrote: "I so agree with u on this point and for me,stephenie meyers started this new vamp culture with whole new non-dracula like kool,kind vamps who doesn't kill to feed.It's the new beginni..."I agree, the non human killing vamps have been around for ages. Even the person that wrote The Vampire Diaries had non human killing vamps way before S.Meyers.
Josh wrote: "Bella wrote: "I think I want to read a vampire+human love story written by Josh Lanyon; any possibility of that happening in near future? :P"I kind of doubt it, Bella. I don't know why but vamp..."
I totally relate. Have gone right off shifters, shedders and suckers.
The argument that it's revenge of the nerds appeals to me. Plus, quite frankly, the need to do away with condoms and even lube possibly is attractive.
If I do read them , I prefer the quirky ones like A.M.Riley's "Immortality is the Suck"
They're usually so angsty though.
A.B. wrote: "They're usually so angsty though."Steer clear of What Rough Beast when it comes out next mth, A.B., cause you'll hate it, okay? LOL. I use a character (a couple of them, actually) as a comic foil to lighten things up, but there's no such thing as vampyr Rebellion & bloody war without angst. ;-)
I liked The Vampyr Fred and etc, too, and while I don't like the belaboring of the doomed/cursed existence (puh-leeze, get over it already)...I do likes me some angst. Just not the typical vampy angst. I want vamps who enjoy being vamps, who are at home in their skin and accept what they are. In my experience, you just don't see that in vamp fic unless the vamp is The Root Of All Evil (Lestat, anyone?). Which is why I went in a different direction, but still. Angst is angst nonetheless.
you should read Frank-in-Loveit is a free story. Son of Frankenstein’s Monster meets the son of Dracula. It is really funny and shows there is nothing sexy about someone biting you and drinking your blood
Andy wrote: "Even the person that wrote The Vampire Diaries had non human killing vamps way before S.Meyers. "Hmm... then I wonder if True Blood is even older than Vampire Diaries...
Anyways...more important thing is only 22days to go b4 All She Wrote..yayy..can't wait..
Hmm... then I wonder if True Blood is even older than Vampire Diaries...Just poking my head in here...Charlaine Harris came out with the first Southern Vampire novel in 2001, but I understand the Vampire Diaries are from the early '90s.
YA vamps have never done it for me as an adult reader, so from my reading experience, the author who opened my eyes to the vampire world was Laurell K. Hamilton with her Anita Blake novels, also back in the early '90s. I've since left her and this series behind, but I'll never forget how she changed my reading habits!
JPerceval wrote: "the author who opened my eyes to the vampire world was Laurell K. Hamilton with her Anita Blake novels..."sorry but never heard of this book; what's it about ??
Bella wrote: "sorry but never heard of this book; what's it about ??"Oh, you're (possibly) in for a treat! I adored this series up to about book 9, then it kinda lost me. In an alternate version of St. Louis, Anita Blake is a necromancer and vampire hunter -- the hunting being of rogue/criminal vampires & only by court order. As the series progresses, her black & white world of good vs. bad alters to a world of grey, and she develops a relationship with a Master vampire and an alpha werewolf (among many others as it goes on).
I think a lot of today's paranormal/UF authors cite Hamilton as an inspiration, and with good reason, IMO.
First book in the series is Guilty Pleasures.
Wow sounds good. A triangle huh?? Gonna check some reviews on it. It's worth giving it a try I guess :)Thanks for the suggestion :D
Mod
I read a post by a reviewer who didn't like the fact that Noel was essentially unrepentant about his former life of crime. The reviewer hotly disapproved of such lawlessness.
I thought Noel had already paid the price for his life of crime by not having a relationship for ten years and the fall that basically put him out of business. Granted, the fall didn't happen on the job, so to speak, but that was just an effort at irony.
So -- and this doesn't have to be specific to Icecapade -- what do you think about law-breaking protags? Is it okay or is it a no-no to have a protag with a criminal background? Especially if the ex-criminal (which *is* more likely, by the way, judging by my research) expresses little remorse?
For me it's totally ok; I don't mind this at all honestly. And about Noel- he left that past wayy back and honestly felt guilty for his actions. So why not accept him? But again that's just me :D
I really think it depends on the crime, I don't think I could like an unrepentant rapist or killer, but the criminal protag is not my love (or whatever) interest, so I'd be more bothered by the forgiving partner (am I making sense?)
I think it depends on the crime. A thief? {shrug} Who hasn't lifted something at one time or another? It's a fairly victimless crime. I'm OK with that one, even if the hero isn't going to stop doing it.Amp that up with more violent crimes, though.
Assassin? He has to have a believable justification and he has to know he's not the best of men because of it. I don't want the other hero in the dark about it. I might be OK with him staying in business, but that would take work to convince me.
Drug dealer? That's going to take a lot of work to make me like him, let alone the other hero to love him. Especially if he's planning to keep right on doing it. Yeah, that's a tough one. And if it's anything to do with hurting children? No. I seriously doubt that would ever work for me simply because of who the victim is.
I guess it boils down to the type of crime and the talent of the author. I could probably be convinced of a lot of things, if the story's good enough.
Josh wrote: "So here's a question about morality in romance.I read a post by a reviewer who didn't like the fact that Noel was essentially unrepentant about his former life of crime. The reviewer hotly disa..."
A very difficult question to answer, because there is a difference from criminal to criminal, at least for me. Sadly, I've not managed to read Icecapade until now - I decided I would read the stories in the order as they are in the anthology, and have just started the third one (ZA Maxfield's story) - and therefore cannot speak about Noel. I only know that he's a diamond thief from the blurb. Being a thief is not the same as being a murderer, and even a murderer can be redeemed if the murder happened by an accident. I've no problem with diamond thieves. :D Really, I don't, for the simple reason that 99% of the world population does not own diamonds and for me this automatically means that Noel stole only from very rich people who would not starve if their diamond was stolen. I would not be one of Noel's victims. Now if he stole from just about anyone who would be stupid enough to trust him, then it would be a different matter.
I recently reread ZA Maxfield's Physical Therapy, in which the main character is a guy who accidentally killed a kid while trying to drive drunk. I admit that I had more understanding for the people who didn't want to give him a second chance (however, unlike Noel, he had spent time in prison) than for him at the beginning. However, ZA took her time with developing the protagonist and showing different facettes of his character - all the while without making any excuses for what he'd done. Well, at the end of the book, he had won me over, because I believed his remorse and knew there was more to him than just that drunken fatal mistake and there was no need to mark him for life with it. I'm happy to get such a character in a book. But a murderer who killed intentionally and feels no remorse? Not for me. I read Ann Rule, but at least I know she writes about real life cases. Reading about a fictional serial killer getting sweet on his boyfriend would be too much.
So, not a definite answer from me, I'm afraid. It can be done, and I'd give it a chance, but under some conditions.
I agree about it depending on the crime. I don't think I could enjoy a romance where one of the protags was a committer of violent crimes-- especially if they showed no remorse. Not unless there were some really extenuating circumstances.However, in Icecapade, Noel's criminal background didn't bother me. It was a relatively harmless crime, and he never hurt anyone. And growing up as he did, it wasn't surprising that he made that career choice. Plus, through his interactions with Robert and his neighbors, you can see that he's basically a good, caring guy.
I agree with everyone else -- it's going to depend on the crime. Not going to forgive rape, murder, nothing like that. That said...There's a, shall we say, rather large feral element in my family. Petty stuff, mostly. Drugs (small-time), DUI, theft, assault...For the most part, we Greggs are not ambitious or smart enough to do anything really heinous, thank God. I suppose if I were the angel sprouting wings everyone around here seems to think I am, I'd turn at least some of this stuff in...But good Lord, I'd incarcerate half my kin, including my parents. You just can't do that. I'm from WV -- they're ARMED. ;-)
So, no, unrepentant criminals don't burst my bubble. I tend to be more tolerant, I guess, because having grown up in that sort of environment...It's not like normal people. I had zero problems distinguishing right from wrong. I just had no real-world application of that concept until I hit my early 20s. So I can definitely relate to a character who doesn't really get it, either.
Oh, wait. Murder is a maybe-forgivable. One of my cousins shot and killed his wife's ex-husband who'd been stalking and terrorizing the poor woman. Police didn't do squat. I don't blame him a bit. That psycho wasn't going to stop until he'd killed her. Poor Calvin.
the guy was an assassin but he was still a really good person and i never really cared that he killed people, although he only killed people that seemed to deserve if the writing is done well and believable i could forgive almost anything, except cheaters
Bubbles (Dane) wrote: " the guy was an assassin but he was still a really good person and i never really cared that he killed people, although he only killed people that seemed to dese..."Totally agree with u.Zero at the Bone is one of my top favorite.And I hate cheaters too,although I couldn't hate Tornado from Chris Owen's Bareback :P
Josh wrote: "So -- and this doesn't have to be specific to Icecapade -- what do you think about law-breaking protags? Is it okay or is it a no-no to have a protag with a criminal background? Especially if the ex-criminal (which *is* more likely, by the way, judging by my research) expresses little remorse?"Like others said, it's going to depend on the crime and the circumstances. But unrepentent criminal protags abound out there -- Nora Roberts has at least 2 books I can think of with current or ex-cat-burglars. Linda Howard's done at least one with an assassin. Suzanne Enoch has a very humorous modern series about a cat burglar who only reforms for the sake of her new boyfriend; otherwise, she'd still be in the game. Taking it to films, what was it Martin Blank said in Grosse Pointe Blank? "If I'm at your door, you did something to deserve it."
I think I'm more bothered in books by scenes inside the villain's head (especially if it's skanky villain sex) than I am by bent protags.
Mod
I read a post by a reviewer who didn't like the fact that Noel was essentially unrepentant about his former life of crime. The reviewer hotly disa..."
Oh, Josh, don't read reviews, they just make a person second-guess themselves. Even if they're good.
But since you asked, it depends on both the crime and the circumstances of the crime. Some readers are going to be sensitive to various crimes because they've been victims. I would have a hard time feeling great sympathy for a car breaker, for example, since I've had to replace my wing window, like, six times in the last 10 years. But I think it mainly comes down to the case the author makes for the criminal in the narrative. I thought you did a good job stating the case against crime in Robert's dialogue. If Noel had broken down weeping and apologizing at that point it would have been very strange. Is he repentant? No. But there is a school of thought that gives credit for not doing something any longer as being the greatest indicator of actual remorse, rather than melodramatic displays of repentance, which in my experience are just plays for sympathy rather than signs of true character change. But what do I know? :)
Bella wrote: "Josh wrote: "I just don't get the appeal. Maybe someone can explain it to me? "I so agree with u on this point and for me,stephenie meyers started this new vamp culture with whole new non-dracula like kool,kind vamps who doesn't kill to feed.It's the new beginning :D
A few days behind here, sorry. There have been a number of vampires around for a long time who don't kill their victims to feed.
You might try, also:
Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's Saint-Germain series which started in 1978-Saint-Germain is a vampire who doesn't kill his donors. http://www.chelseaquinnyarbro.net/bib...
P.N. Elrod's vampire Jack Fleming gets most of his blood from cows (though the temptation to drink from humans exists). Her books have been around since the early '90s, before there was even a category known as "urban fantasy". When they came out, no one knew where to shelve them!
http://www.vampwriter.com/ESCOTT%27S%...
Tanya Huff's Victori Nelson series came out over the course of the 1990s. Henry Fitzroy doesn't kill his donors either.
http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/h/t...
As for the fascination with vampires, I think it's the mix of immortality (or the potential), angst, sex, the fact that they can be used as metaphors for what's going on in the real world (who wouldn't like to have the ability to not get STDs, etc.?), their power (hypnotism anyone?) and sometimes the purely cool factor of being stronger than mere mortals? Of course, the downside is having to avoid sunlight, sharp pointy objects, drinking blood ...
Wow thanks for the suggestions Lori :D Vampires never cease to impress me. I'm gonna try these books after I finish up with all these piling books in my To-Read list :D There's one thing different about Twilight though; here sun is not that much of a problem for the vamps; the only problem was they glow like a crystals when they go open under the sun; I must admit it was a little bit funny :P
Josh wrote: "So here's a question about morality in romance.I read a post by a reviewer who didn't like the fact that Noel was essentially unrepentant about his former life of crime. The reviewer hotly disa..."
Clearly violent, sociopaths are not going to be okay as protagonists.
On the other hand, in the case of a cat burglar like Noel who clearly sees himself a something of a Robin Hood (minus the giving to the poor; or has he? When Robert accuses him of having a lot of money, he thinks to himself that Robert doesn't even know him. Maybe he has been altruistic with some of the proceeds from his ill-gotten gains....) I view him in a different light.
There is something dashing about a character who can get away with appearing at various social events as a debonair, attractive man (or woman)and then change into his black clothing and stealthily steal diamonds from the unsuspecting socialites. The game of cat and mouse with the law officer who comes after him is fun to read about.
I like the fact that Noel was unrepentant. His choice of crime saved him from following in the path of his family's life of violent crime. How could he apologize for that? It saved his life; and probably his soul.
Mod
*Splutter* I knew there had to be some overwhelming appeal.
Mod
See, the reason I'm not a good choice for trying write this stuff, is I read this and nearly choked on my Tab.
Mod
I actually remember these.
Mod
The quirky ones do have an appeal. I like AM's work.
Mod
I'm starting to get nervous. :-D
Mod
Well, the jewel thief has always been a romantic figure in fiction, Bella -- I don't know if it started with Raffles, but he certainly personifies the dashing anti-hero. Then Cary Grant in It Takes a Thief...
Yes, I'm fond of bad boys too. ;-)
Mod
You mean you would be troubled by the love interest being able to accept the anti hero?
Q&A with Josh Lanyon
Books mentioned in this topic
The Charlie Factor (other topics)Don't Look Back (other topics)
Don't Look Back (other topics)
Don't Look Back (other topics)
Just Making Out (other topics)
More...
Precisely. Just make sure you remind the reader of that a few times. You may even have to admonish him or maybe Moriarty can be there to keep him under control.