Q&A with Laurie R. King discussion

Laurie R. King
This topic is about Laurie R. King
606 views
Intros & Questions

Comments Showing 101-143 of 143 (143 new)    post a comment »
1 3 next »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 101: by Sabrina (new)

Sabrina Flynn Anne wrote: Holmes himself says that he has wanted to kiss Russell since their first meeting.

I always took that as a sign that Holmes was thoroughly overcome during the Dock scene, so much so, that he started babbling romantic sentiments. I never took it as literal. Regardless, Holmes was a perfect gentleman and never pressed her until Russell made her desires very clear on the Dock.


message 102: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments I did take it as literal. A perfect gentleman can (and when it is appropriate will) conceal his attraction to the lady. Am I the only one who saw the significance of what Holmes said when the cats ran out of the bushes in BKA? Laurie, please comment on this. Do I have a prurient mind and am I seeing what isn't there, or was Holmes thinking about doing what the cats had obviously been doing? I think I am right.


message 103: by Sabrina (new)

Sabrina Flynn Anne wrote: "I did take it as literal. A perfect gentleman can (and when it is appropriate will) conceal his attraction to the lady. Am I the only one who saw the significance of what Holmes said when the cats ..."

I think you're referring to the "Twenty years, even ten, but now." comment? I think he was referring to finding an Apprentice to train.


message 104: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments I politely (I hope) disagree. I don't think he had ever wanted an apprentice, because there are so few people who think the way he does. For somebody with his kind of mind, an apprentice with, say, Watson's kind of mind, would drive him mad. He could accept Watson only for what Watson was good for, and not as an apprentice.


message 105: by Wright (new)

Wright | 6 comments Anne wrote: "I did take it as literal. A perfect gentleman can (and when it is appropriate will) conceal his attraction to the lady. Am I the only one who saw the significance of what Holmes said when the cats ..."
That statement, "Twenty years ago...even ten. But why here? Now?" can also be read as Holmes' comment on his search for an apprentice, as Watson mentions later. Holmes wanted to share his skills with someone who could carry on his work, but he had never run across a mind like his before. He seems to be wondering why after being retired for 12 years, after moving to Sussex, would he find that one perfect mind. I have always loved that he didn't say, "Why a girl?" as even then Holmes accepted Mary Russell as more than just female, but someone whose mind could be trained to use the skills he had developed. There is much in that missing thought of why a girl and much in his wondering if "Now" he had the strength, patience, and will to take on a very young apprentice. I'm so glad he did. **grin**


message 106: by Cj (new)

Cj Mary wrote: "Will Garment of Shadows be released as an audio selection soon? Love your books and love Jenny Sterlin's narration! Also enjoyed Folly very much. Thank you!"

Garment of Shadows hit Audible today (Tuesday Sept.11)


message 107: by C.P. (new)

C.P. Lesley (cplesley) Wright wrote: "Anne wrote: "I did take it as literal. A perfect gentleman can (and when it is appropriate will) conceal his attraction to the lady. Am I the only one who saw the significance of what Holmes said w..."

I disagree. I have never thought that Holmes was talking about finding an apprentice.

He is a mature man. He has been searching all his life, consciously or otherwise, for the one woman who is his equal. He finds her—and she is 15 to his 54!

It is to his credit that he doesn't act on his feelings until Russell comes of age. But to say that he does not HAVE feelings or recognize them—sorry, I don't buy it. The whole story line indicates that he does.


message 108: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments C.P. wrote: "Wright wrote: "Anne wrote: "I did take it as literal. A perfect gentleman can (and when it is appropriate will) conceal his attraction to the lady. Am I the only one who saw the significance of wha..."
I trust that it is Wright that you are disagreeing with, not me, because it is clear that you and I agree. Two cats mating do not make a man think of taking an apprentice. The idea is absurd. The mating cats cause him to realize the impossibility, at least for the foreseeable future, of his and Russell's doing likewise. Oh, he knows she's female and he's male. It is Russell's delusion that he does not look at her as female that enables her to become his apprentice. This informs the next several books. Again to descend to a personal level: I will never forget the day a prisoner escaped from the court room. Everybody in the building except the police were evacuated, and the police were searching the building. Clinton, in his fifties, saw me going by pistol in hand, and the look on his face was unforgettable. I was 23 and all curves, facially and everywhere else, and looked much younger than I was--yet my apprenticeship to him had brought me into mortal danger, and that was the first time he let himself realize it. To his credit, he merely looked at me for minute nd then turned and headed the other way. So would Holmes have done, the first time he realized that hi staking Russell as an apprentice had put her in mortal danger. I KNOW HOW THIS KIND OF SITUATION FEELS BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO BEING IN IT.


message 109: by Laurie (new)

Laurie | 3 comments Re Holmes and when he realized he was interested in Russell "in that way"...I definitely side with those who say, "From the beginning." I am most intrigued by the subtlety of the first scene in MROW, when Holmes knows that Russell is getting up nerve to "propose" to him. She wants their relationship to go on as it has, but it has finally dawned on her that it will now be quite inappropriate. Holmes won't accept a marriage of convenience because he is in love with her, and has convinced himself that Russell couldn't possibly be attracted to HIM, as he is so much older than she. He deliberately sets out to make her feel that HE is not attracted to HER,and this rattles her as it makes her think about him in a new way. But it isn't until her spontaneous kiss on the dock that he realizes the attraction is mutual, and acts on it.


message 110: by Sabrina (last edited Sep 11, 2012 10:31PM) (new)

Sabrina Flynn Anne, your personal experience sounds very exciting, but I think you will agree that every relationship, whether it's friendship, partners, or lovers, is unique to the couple and what might be the case for one doesn't necessarily apply to another.

Whenever I'm puzzled by a statement in a book, I always check to see what context it was said in. In this case, when Holmes says, "Twenty years ago, even ten. But here? Now?" I think it helps to keep in mind the beginning of the chapter where it says, "The discovery of a sign of true intellect outside ourselves procures us something of the emotion Robinson Crusoe felt when he saw the imprint of a human foot on the sandy beach"

During the scene under the beech tree when Holmes tells Russell about herself, and than asks her to do the same… she shocks him with her raw deduction abilities, and right after this he makes that comment. He's shocked, that after 54 years, he has finally encountered a mind that works so much like his own. Yes he says it after there is a commotion in the flower beds and two cats go off chasing each other, but I'm curious why you assume they were mating? Couldn't they be playing? Chasing a bird? Defending their territory? I suppose it could be a subtle Freudian joke, but in this case, we need to keep in mind the man involved… It's Sherlock Holmes, who has held intellectual pursuits higher than primal urges his entire life, so no, I don't think he would see two cats mating and automatically think… I'm going to make sweet love to this 15 year girl. There is also the slight matter of the book's title.

In regards to the statement from MREG that he wanted to do that 'since the first time he laid eyes on her' really can't be taken literally, because he did think she was a boy when he first laid eyes on her and was ready to dismiss her until she whipped her cap off. It wasn't until he realized that she was a girl that he was caught off guard and gobsmacked, not before, so I'm not sure how it would cause him 'some minutes of consternation' of wanting to kiss her while he thought she was a young man.

These of course, are just my opinions, but I do love discussing my favorite book series and love that they are so complex that they generate such differing views.


message 111: by Lenore (new)

Lenore | 25 comments As you so frequently do, Sabrina, you have taken the words right out of my keyboard. ;-)


message 112: by Sabrina (new)

Sabrina Flynn Lenore wrote: "As you so frequently do, Sabrina, you have taken the words right out of my keyboard. ;-)"

It's only because I try to emulate your clear and concise responses. :D


message 113: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments Of course you're right that something that applies to one couple does not necessarily apply to another, but I have been decidedly unnerved in the first book by the extent to which Laurie unknowingly portrayed the relationship between Clinton and myself, including the fact that both of us have extremely high IQs and some difficulty in getting along with people in general. No, the matter of the cats is extremely suggestive. There would be no reason to mention the cats unless they had been mating. Of course it didn't make Holmes want to mate the way cats do, with sound and fury signifying nothing, but it does bring possibilities to his mind, possibilities that he immediately rejects because of their relative ages. But he certainly would be neither the first nor the last man, in real life or in fiction, to fall in love with a much younger woman, guide her education, and then marry her when she comes of age.

If you were a thoroughly masculine male, and suddenly found yourself wanting to kiss someone you thought was male, wouldn't it cause you some moments of consternation?Remember that we know now, although we did not know then, that he had already enjoyed a period of intense sexual relationship with Irene Adler.

Finally, remember that this is seen THROUGH THE EYES OF RUSSELL, and she sees what she would see at her age and her state of innocence. She cannot be considered a totally reliable narrator. In the incident of the cats, she tells us what happened and leaves us to draw our own conclusions. Of course the cats could have been playing or fighting. But the overall thrust of the book and the series makes it clear to me that the cats were mating. A writer as good as Laurie King would not put something like a pair of cats into a fraught moment if she didn't have an excellent reason for doing so. Cats playing or fighting isn't a reason for inserting the cats into the story. Cats mating is a good reason.

Of course I'm autistic, so I might not be a reliable narrator either, but I've written a good many books and taught writing in four universities in two states, so I have a pretty good idea how a book is written.


message 114: by Lenore (new)

Lenore | 25 comments "Two orange cats shot out and raced along the lawn and disappeared through the opening in the garden wall."

In joint pursuit of a common goal -- as Holmes would be with an apprentice who had the capacity to become a partner.


message 115: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments Good point, but look at what went before it. Anyway LAURIE says Holmes was attracted to Russell from the start, and she should know. I think you and I both could be right.


message 116: by Sabrina (new)

Sabrina Flynn Anne wrote:If you were a thoroughly masculine male, and suddenly found yourself wanting to kiss someone you thought was male, wouldn't it cause you some moments of consternation?

If you reread their first meeting along with BeeKeeping for Beginners, you'll notice that while Holmes thought Russell was a boy, he viewed her as a pest who he wanted to brain over the head with his rucksack, which is not conducive to kissing.

That's the reason why I don't take what Holmes said on the Dock as completely literal. Don't get me wrong, there was definitely an instant lightning like connection between the two when they first met, but it had nothing to do with romantic love at that point. It went far deeper.

People often say that they fell in love at first sight (I make that claim with my own husband) but it's something you only really say after you've acknowledged your love. In reality, it's a little more complex than that. In the case of Holmes and Russell there was six years (three books) between their meeting and the Dock scene and they both grew and changed in different ways during that period.

Lenore, the 'two cats working towards the same goal' argument is an excellent point! And their conversation under the Beech tree is the reason for the title of chapter 2, "The Sorcerer's Apprentice".


message 117: by Regan (new)

Regan | 8 comments I personally felt the undercurrents of attraction between the two beginning during her first year at Oxford. He is in love with her and is conscious of it far sooner than she is. I think she was in love with him from the time in Palestine. The relationship makes sense to me this way.

He calls her "child" even late in BEEK – clearly after the relationship between them has started to shift and there are references to his being a father figure late as well.

Is Holmes just in denial? Or was Laurie not sure where the characters were going at this point? Did she feel a need to just ignore some of the latter apprentice-relationship when the characters developed in a different way? That was my question to her.


message 118: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments Sabrina wrote: "Anne wrote:If you were a thoroughly masculine male, and suddenly found yourself wanting to kiss someone you thought was male, wouldn't it cause you some moments of consternation?

If you reread the..."

That "something deeper" is true love. "Love at first sight" is usually "lust at first sight." My husband and I were not in love when we were married, but we knew that we walked the same walk and talked the same talk, and could make a good life together. The love came later and gradually. Anyway, I'll take Laurie;s word for it. I think Holmes was somewhat in love from the beginning, but Russell wasn't ready and didn't really know what she needed until she was older. Holmes knew what he needed. "My God, it can think."


message 119: by Sabrina (new)

Sabrina Flynn Anne wrote:I think Holmes was somewhat in love from the beginning, but Russell wasn't ready and didn't really know what she needed until she was older. Holmes knew what he needed. "My God, it can think."

I'm so confused. Are you saying that Holmes wanted to both beat boy Russell over the head with his rucksack and kiss boy Russell at the same time?


message 120: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments I wasn't the one who said that Holmes wanted to beat boy Russell over the head with his rucksack. He was annoyed, but he was calm. He was the one who said he wanted to kiss boy Russell, which caused him great consternation. I believe it was Russell who wanted to hit Holmes over the head with a rucksack, but she didn't have one with her.


message 121: by Sabrina (new)

Sabrina Flynn Anne wrote: "I wasn't the one who said that Holmes wanted to beat boy Russell over the head with his rucksack. He was annoyed, but he was calm. He was the one who said he wanted to kiss boy Russell, which cause..."

I'm thinking maybe you might have missed reading the e-novella, Beekeeping for Beginners'. It's also in the back of the soft cover Pirate King. It tells the story of their meeting from Holmes' POV, where he states: '(I) stifled the urge to leap to my feet and physically drive away this boorish child with my rucksack.'


message 122: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments You're right, I missed it. I haven't had the money to buy Pirate King.


message 123: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Hi all, sorry if I missed answering yours, but many of the above have been moved into the individual threads, so you might check there to see if I've picked up on it.


message 124: by Lenore (new)

Lenore | 25 comments The novella is available for download for 99 cents: http://www.randomhouse.com/book/21447...


message 125: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Anne wrote: "I did take it as literal. A perfect gentleman can (and when it is appropriate will) conceal his attraction to the lady. Am I the only one who saw the significance of what Holmes said when the cats ..."

Hmm, I'd thought he was musing on the length of time it had taken him to find an adequate apprentice. Maybe I should re-read it...


message 126: by Sabrina (new)

Sabrina Flynn Anne wrote: "You're right, I missed it. I haven't had the money to buy Pirate King."

You are in for a treat!


message 127: by Laurie (last edited Sep 12, 2012 02:02PM) (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Mike wrote: "I'm currently in the middle of
The Game
which is not only an interesting mystery but also full of native customs, information and terminology. I do find it a bit disconcerting that Laurie has taken some chronological license with the mention of aeroplanes in a couple of instances. The development of passenger planes was only after WWI and hence after the time frame of this novel. But I'll forgive her for that."


The Game takes place in 1924, when passenger service was very well established. But then, others caught this first, for which thanks, all.


message 128: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Paul wrote: "I have just started reading "The Beekeeper's Apprentice" and am enjoying it! Thanks for the invite. Question: Which is your favorite of the original Sherlock Holmes stories and why?"

I'd have to choose the Hound of the Baskervilles, for its sheer over-the-topness. Glowing dogs! Lobotomied felon on the loose! London detective living in stone-age dwelling!


message 129: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Julie wrote: "I just re read "Beekeeper's Apprentice" and "A Montrous Regiment of Women," while I wait for my new book to arrive, probably tomorrow...I watched carefully for the reference to Lord Peter Whimsey, and LOL at how very obscure it had to be. I must admit I missed it the first time I read the book and would have missed it this time if not alerted to it. Was this really a purposeful reference or just fans gleaning from a little bit of fun writing? Have you hidden other little gems in your books?."

All kinds of hidden tidbits, my way of nudging fellow readers in their ribs, or tipping my hat at them, depending.


message 130: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Margaret wrote: "Okay, how did Russell learn Spanish? And will Mrs Hudson learn to make preserved lemons?"

I'd guess she had a Spanish-speaking nursemaid in San Francisco. And I can't see Mrs Hudson cottoning on to this foreign food, but you never know.


message 131: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Abby wrote: "Hi Laurie,

How many Mary Russell books are you planning to write? I love this series!!!"


As many as my mind and body will produce.


message 132: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Jared wrote: "I have two questions about the series as a whole. How and when do you see the Mary Russell series coming to a conclusion?"

Ditto to the above.


message 133: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Dawn wrote: " As the author, do you have much say in the book covers, particularly those designed for the international market? I have an American copy of "The Beekeeper's Apprentice", with Mary in an enchanting dressing-gown on the front (a real-life version of which I have desired for six years!), and really like the look of the American covers for the latest books, but am not a huge fan of the cover-art used on the UK editions. They don't seem to quite fit the character of the books; they look quite 'modern' and dark. I wish I could get a hold of the full set in American covers!"

Those covers with the dressing gowns were on two hardbacks, and on some of the mass market paperbacks, although not all. In my experience, the writer has some say in the cover art when it comes to rejecting an impossible one, or suggesting ways to make it stronger, but not in proposing art to begin with. The ways of the publisher's Art Department are often inscrutable.


message 134: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
Julie wrote: "what's the deal with Mycroft? He has certainly been more fleshed out in this series than any other, yet he remains an enigma and perhaps an important literary foil to Holmes. His murky role in the government and his relationship with Sherlock does make one wonder just how these boys were raised. Will that be revealed? ."

Indeed, what is the deal with Mycroft? Perhaps in some future book I will at last tackle The Mycroft Problem and see just what he a) does, b) wants, and c) will do with the world.


message 135: by Laurie (new)

Laurie (laurierking) | 103 comments Mod
I apologize for the disjointed nature of this discussion--maybe next time I won't schedule it in conflict with a book tour!
Laurie


message 136: by C.P. (last edited Sep 12, 2012 02:24PM) (new)

C.P. Lesley (cplesley) Anne wrote: "C.P. wrote: "Wright wrote: "Anne wrote: "I did take it as literal. A perfect gentleman can (and when it is appropriate will) conceal his attraction to the lady. Am I the only one who saw the signif..."

Yes, Anne, you are correct. I was disagreeing with Wright, not with you. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

But it turns out that Laurie agrees with Wright, and her view certainly trumps mine!


message 137: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments Well, you know the literary theory that "the author is dead" when the work is being discussed. If you're not, basically it means that if many readers agree that something is present in the work it is, whether or not the writer intended to say it. One of my students was stunned when every other student in the class saw something in her story that she insisted that she didn't put there. I told her that obviously she had put it there without knowing that she was doing so. I did realize that he was partly thinking about her as an apprentice, but I don't believe that was all of it, and I think in one part of your mind that you did mean what I saw. I give you leave to read all my books and see what is in them that I didn't mean to put there. I write as Lee Martin (the mystery one,not the Western one), Martha G. Webb, and Anne Wingate. I'm quite sure there are things in the book that I didn't know I was saying. BTW, the only rule in my writing classes was that nobody was allowed to trash a text. The criticism had to be as positive as possible even when the overall thrust of it wasn't pleasant.


message 138: by Julie (new)

Julie | 9 comments Laurie wrote: "I apologize for the disjointed nature of this discussion--maybe next time I won't schedule it in conflict with a book tour!
Laurie"


No apologies necessary. This has been great fun, and the generous time you have offered greatly appreciated. I have learned a lot about the books and process of writing from the discussions. It all has made me feel even more connected to Russell and Holmes. You are the genius!


message 139: by Anne (new)

Anne Wingate | 44 comments Besides that, we made it disjointed by taking discussions off in all directions. We have agreed on somethings, beginning with the important fact that Russell is no Mary Sue, and we have had to agree to disagree on other things, but that's okay. What's important is that you have created a character so memorable that many of us can no longer imagine Holmes without Russell. When I reread ACD's Holmes, I just think that of course this was pre-Russell, but she's coming along later. Other books taking place later in Holmes's life that don't include Russell no longer work for me at all. As Julie just said, you are the genius.


message 140: by Julie (new)

Julie | 9 comments Laurie wrote: "Julie wrote: "I just re read "Beekeeper's Apprentice" and "A Montrous Regiment of Women," while I wait for my new book to arrive, probably tomorrow...I watched carefully for the reference to Lord P..."

LOL! Now I will have to reread everything to find the tid bits!


message 141: by Jennifer (new)

Jennifer | 2 comments Merrie wrote: "Laurie, you've been teasing us for years about that trip to Japan. When will we get that story?"

YES! I second this request!


message 142: by Lenore (new)

Lenore | 25 comments Jennifer wrote: "Merrie wrote: "Laurie, you've been teasing us for years about that trip to Japan. When will we get that story?"

YES! I second this request!"


Well, those who follow Laurie's blog know that she took a trip to Japan this year. And we know that the next book is a Touchstone sequel. I think somewhere along the line -- I could definitely be wrong about this -- Laurie said something about the next Russell being set in Oxford. (I could have hallucinated this.) SO -- we can deduce that the Japan adventure will likely appear in 2014 or 2015. As a lawyer, I must advise you that this prediction comes with no warranties, express or implied. ;)


message 143: by Lenore (new)

Lenore | 25 comments Anne wrote: "Besides that, we made it disjointed by taking discussions off in all directions. We have agreed on somethings, beginning with the important fact that Russell is no Mary Sue, and we have had to agre..."

A late addition to the Mary Sue discussion. While re-reading Justice Hall, I was reminded that, for all her scholarship and specialized training with Holmes, Russell is still intimidated by Phyllida -- clearly her intellectual and professional inferior -- just because Phyllida is elegantly dressed and made up and radiating upper classness. Surely no Mary Sue would be subject to such mundane psychological stresses!


1 3 next »
back to top