A New Life in Seattle

A New Life in Seattle
August, 2018
Showing posts with label Bill Kirton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Kirton. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Serial Thrillin': The Bitchinest Ripsnorting Round Table Joust: 1



Five knights. One theme, of interest to writers and readers alike: the rewards and challenges of a writing a mystery series...and succeeding at giving it legs. The five knights, in alphabetical order:

Carolyn Arnold
International bestselling and award-winning author, as well as a speaker, teacher, and inspirational mentor. She has four continuing fiction series and has written nearly thirty books: from cozy to hard-boiled mysteries, and thrillers to action adventures.

Claude Bouchard
USA Today Bestselling author of the fourteen volume Vigilante Series as well as Nasty in Nice, ASYLUM and Something's Cooking. Other interests include reading, playing guitar, painting, cooking, traveling and trying to stay in reasonable shape.

Joe Clifford
He is the author of several books, including Junkie Love, Lamentation, December Boys and Give Up the Dead, as well as editor of Trouble in the Heartland: Crime Stories Inspired by the Songs of Bruce Springsteen. He lives in Oakland, CA.

Bill Kirton
University lecturer, TV presenter, wood carver, playwright, actor, director, RLF Writing Fellow, novelist. Crap at marketing or promotional work and possibly the laziest knight at the table (so says he). 

Brad Strickland
Author of 80 published books, including the ones he writes under the pen name of Ken McKea. These follow Florida detective Jim Dallas, who despite being retired on disability somehow can’t help running across murders. Brad lives in Georgia with his wife Barbara and a small assortment of varmints.





1) Why write a mystery series instead of a series of mysteries? 

Is commerce the main factor or is some other payoff at play?

ARNOLD
I love being able to torture my characters over a longer stretch of time. And I don’t like saying goodbye to them. By writing a series, at least I know when I’m wrapping up a book, I’ll be with them again soon. I also believe readers love to get attached to characters and when you’re providing them with a series, they can do so knowing there will be more books coming.

BOUCHARD
From the time I started reading and then going forward, series have always been attractive, in large part due to growing familiarity of the main characters – think ‘Cat in the Hat’, ‘Bobbsey Twins’, ‘Hardy Boys’ and ‘Tom Swift’ before even getting to adult fiction. The same holds true with writing where one can develop and build one’s principal protagonists from one adventure to the next as compared to creating new, unknown characters with each new novel. Increased comfort exists when working with ‘people’ one already knows. The commerce factor obviously comes into play as many readers also enjoy said comfort and familiarity.

CLIFFORD
Like with any venture, there are pros and cons. The biggest “pro” is, if a series takes off, you have a built-in readership. Also in the plus column, a series allows you to examine a character and world a little deeper. Think Star Wars vs., say, well, any one-off sci-fi film. Most of all publishers love a series. Less risk, established commodity, etc. The downside is:  if you don't have a series as popular as Lee Child, the average series writer often sees a dip in sales with each book and finds the critical response to be harsher, despite each book getting "better." At least that has been my experience.

KIRTON
I suspect that a mystery series is the better bet. If you can create one or more characters that intrigue the reader, characters they’d like to spend time with, that’s more likely to draw them into buying more of the books in which they appear. I suppose that’s why I call my series The Jack Carston Mysteries.

On the other hand, if you find a stand-alone mystery to be gripping, you instinctively trust the author to deliver again on suspense, thrills, horror, whatever.

STRICKLAND
A series allows a deeper exploration of the characters’ personality—strengths, flaws, problems, solutions. I like the notion of a broad canvas that gives a kind of epic sweep. In the case of Jim Dallas, Jim has issues to deal with and resolve. Through all the stories arcs the tale of his smoldering anger and bottled-up desire for vengeance, which will eventually pay off.  I’m approaching a kind of midpoint which will begin the overall climax of the series.

So in a sense, a series is simply a group of oversized chapters in a longer story. There is, of course, also the consideration that a writer can invite readers to climb aboard for the whole journey—so a series tends to build readership. Have to say that commercial concerns aren’t the greatest with me, though they do factor in. From the get-go, I’ve had a definite goal in mind for the Jim Dallas stories.


2) For perspective,  give us a few names of your favorite 

mystery series writers.


ARNOLD
I loved David Baldacci’s Camel Club series, and have also enjoyed some of the books in Janet Evanovich’s Stephanie Plum series.

BOUCHARD
Michael Connelly, Robert Crais, Lee Child, Jeffery Deaver, Jonathan Kellerman… Oh, you said a couple of names… Sorry. Anyhow, this is just a handful of writers who have consistently produced well developed, intricate storylines with strong, believable, three-dimensional characters. I never read a book by any of these authors which left me disappointed. I could mention that Child may have pushed it a bit on occasion but, then again, we are talking Jack Reacher.

CLIFFORD
I like what Lehane (more on him later), Sara J. Henry, Allen Eskens, and Matt Coyle are doing with their respective series. Of course there’s the granddaddy of them all: Phillip Marlowe.

KIRTON
Dalziel and Pascoe, created by the late Reg Hill, are great examples of powerful characterization and the dynamic created by a close friendship between different personalities. (Humour also helps a lot.) 

I’m not sure whether Janet Evanovitch’s Stephanie Plum novels qualify as mysteries, but the characters are so memorable and so funny (especially Grandma Mazur) that I need a regular 
therapeutic dose of them.

STRICKLAND
Jim Dallas owes a clear debt to Travis McGee and his creator, John D. Macdonald. I like the narrative voice in these—McGee is a principled, if “tarnished” hero (MacDonald’s own word) who teeters between wishing to resign from the over-complicated modern world with a drive to become involved with the victims of it. Similarly, Dallas pulled out of everything to lick his wounds (physical and psychological) after a traumatic encounter with organized evil, but he finds that campaigning for justice among the helpless cast-aside members of society helps him heal, and gets him ready for the challenge he knows is coming.

Another MacDonald, Ross MacDonald, is another inspiration. He took the tough-guy private-eye story to literary heights with his Lew Archer novels. I like his way with words and also his gift at plotting, which is not always on high display in this kind of story—for all his accomplishment, Raymond Chandler famously plotted by “having a guy come through the door with a gun” when things got slow. I don’t think there’s a finer, more jewel-like plot in private-eye fiction than in Ross MacDonald’s brilliant The Chill.

Both of these gentlemen give us a wry, world-weary, but game character who gives a problem his all—something I try to emulate.





3) Now to you...What is the most distinctive thing about your 

mystery series?

ARNOLD
I offer readers a strong female protagonist detective, a male rookie FBI agent, and a married, murder-solving duo. In every book I strive for procedural accuracy, and as a result have been praised by law enforcement. This has led me to take on the brand line POLICE PROCEDURALS RESPECTED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT.™

BOUCHARD
Likely the most distinctive thing about my mystery series is all my main characters are Canadian yet none of them say, “Eh,” at least not when I’m around. Also, the members of the ‘Discreet Activities’ team are all well educated with respectable, professional backgrounds as well as smart, witty and highly sociable yet they kill for a living.

CLIFFORD
That they work both as standalones and part of an overarching storyline. Also I am hoping to shine a light on the grave injustice perpetuated against my father, namely that the Manafort family (yes, those Manaforts) and their greedy, gross misconduct directly led to my father’s premature death.

KIRTON
Hard to say. Humor's essential, even (or maybe especially) in the more gruesome cases, and I like the idea that people don’t automatically divide into goodies and baddies. My detective has no particular vices. He’s happily married to a wife who matches him for wisecracks, and yet constantly finds himself thinking politically incorrect things and chastising himself for it. I also end each book with a little scene designed to say ‘OK, reader. The mystery was solved and everything’s back in place – except that’s not the way the world works – different bad things keep on happening.

STRICKLAND
I think it might be the blend of humor and detail. I get letters about how real the background is—“I ate in that restaurant!” “I know exactly where that river is!” and so on. Having Sam Lyons as a foil character gives me a chance for a lot of repartee and shaggy-dog jokes, which I love. But capturing something of the Florida milieu (changed even from the days of Travis McGee) also gives the stories a kind of flavor. Still to come are a story that takes place, partly, at a theme park (I have relatives who worked for two of the biggest ones) and one that will feature intrigue at a posh Miami hotel, secretly falling on hard times but keeping up a front. I think the details in these will ring true. I have my informants. . . . 


But the truth of the background is meant to reinforce the psychological truth of the characters.



4) Can your books be read as stand-alones or should/must

they be read in sequence?

ARNOLD
They can be read as stand-alones.

BOUCHARD
Each of the thirteen installments of my Vigilante series to date is a complete story and can therefore be read as a standalone. However, as with most series, reading them in sequence allows for a better flow in terms of character introduction and development. In addition, past events are occasionally referenced or directly related to the plotlines of later installments which also supports sequential reading as the best option.

CLIFFORD
As stated above, both, although obviously reading in order is preferable. You simply get more.

KIRTON
Mine are conceived as stand-alones, but in the knowledge that I have a group of people I know quite well and whom I trust to be themselves.

On the other hand, my two historical mysteries are only a pair because readers asked for a sequel to the first one in order to know how a particular relationship developed. I still think each is self-contained but reading them in sequence would add to the pleasure. (Some readers have now asked for a third, so it may become a series after all.)

STRICKLAND
I have no trouble writing them so they’re stand-alones, though I think they may make more emotional sense if read as part of an extended story. That’s when you begin to make the connections and to see the character development.



5) As a series writer, how do you handle back story from book 

to book—scatter shot or concentrated loads? How do you 

contrive to give just enough details for anchors?

ARNOLD
I’m definitely more a “scatter shot” when it comes to backstory. I provide just enough—and what’s needed—for the current story I’m telling. Obviously if a tidbit about a character’s history is irrelevant to the current plot line, I leave it out.

BOUCHARD
Concentrated loads were used in earlier books with a gradual transition to scatter shots as required as the series progressed. With the fourteenth installment in the works, it becomes somewhat repetitive and redundant to present readers with too much detail relating to ancient history. Sufficient albeit brief data is supplied to new readers in later books to identify characters with the assumption (and hope) that curiosity will lead them to read past installments they’ve missed. As an example from my current WIP, the reader learns of Chris Barry’s financial success years earlier from a line or two of simple dialogue.

CLIFFORD
This is the challenge with each book, and I’ve tackled this task in different ways. You want to avoid the dreaded “auto-dump.” In the latest Jay Porter novel, BROKEN GROUND, for instance, we begin at an AA meeting with Jay speaking, which allowed me to get in a lot of the back-story organically.

KIRTON
leave it to the characters – which sounds, but isn’t, glib. Each member of Jack Carston’s team has distinct characteristics. Their idiosyncrasies provide the familiarity and continuity to suggest a well-established team who are used to and respond to one another’s behaviours. They are the back story.

STRICKLAND
I leak a little at a time. In the current one, the one I’m writing, we’re going to find out a bit more about the rough ride that Jim had when he worked for Internal Affairs back during his police days. He hasn’t talked much about that—but let’s say that his involvement may have made him say and do a few things that he deeply regrets, that go against his character. More of this will come out as the books go on. In the end, I think a reader can jigsaw together a valid portrait of him that will seem true to life.


6) The age thing. Hell, let’s hit it. Does your hero age/change 

very little over the course of the series (Hercule Poirot, Kinsey 

Malone, James Bond, Spenser)...or age and change 

progressively (Harry Bosch)?

ARNOLD
There’s definite growth to the characters in all my series. Detective Madison Knight started off really rough around the edges. She’s still a hard-nosed detective who will do whatever it takes to find justice for murder victims, but she’s softened on a personal level. She used to be terrified of committing herself to a romantic relationship, but that’s a thing of the past. I think I might even hear wedding bells in her future. But that’s still a few more books out from—if it does happen.

Brandon Fisher started out as a new agent with the FBI in book one. As readers progress in the series, they are taken along the journey of him becoming a full-fledged agent with the BAU.

The McKinleys went from being homicide detectives for Albany PD to amateur sleuths to private investigators. That involved a lot of growth.

BOUCHARD
Chapter headings in each of my books include actual dates to establish a timeline. Book 1 was written in 1995 and set in 1996 while my last release took place in 2016, twenty years later so, yes, my characters have aged. Luckily, they were young enough at the start and I make damned sure they stay in shape from one story to the next.


CLIFFORD
Each book in the Porter series is a year later, which brings us up to the current year

KIRTON
Interesting question because the next Carston story will be the last. Without me trying to impose ageing on him, he’s been changed by the experiences of the crimes he’s solved and the individuals he’s met in the process. I’ve no idea what he’ll do in retirement, but his tendency to try to make light of things and just enjoy life has been severely eroded by the ongoing evidence of man’s inhumanity to man (and especially woman).

STRICKLAND
Heh. Ellery Queen was always 35, until somewhere between books he had a growth spurt and wound up being 57. Jim is aging—the stories are set along a time line of five or six years, and he’ll reflect that in the stories.


                                                              *****




Take seven, as in seven days, to stretch and think about Part 1. Next week we'll return with the provocative conclusion. Among other things you'll learn--but no, mustn't ruin the surprise. You'll also meet a surprise guest. Arrive early for guaranteed seating.

                                                         *****


To learn more about these authors and their books, click on the

following links:

Carolyn Arnold
New title releasing November 28: http://carol0ynarnold.net/power-struggle/

Claude Bouchard

Vigilante Series Box set - Books 1 to 6: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01EPE926Y

Joe Clifford
Website: http://www.joeclifford.com

Bill Kirton
Amazon Author Page: http://amzn.to/2xz2wSN
Website: hhtp://www.billkirton.com
Book to introduce readers to my work: The Darkness (see answer 11 in Part 2)
http://amzn.to/2gtWVqX

Brad Strickland
Amazon Author Page: https://www.amazon.com/Ken-McKea/e/B00J22N6PS/ref=sr_tc_2_0?qid=1508850962&sr=1-2-ent


Sunday, December 11, 2016

Down and Dirty: The Ultimate Round Table Joust: Part 2


Dedicated to: Pam Stack


Welcome back.

Four knights. One theme, of interest to writers and readers alike: the pros and cons of ebook and traditional publishing. The four knights, in alphabetical order:


Claude Bouchard
CB officially leaped into the writing world in 2009 and his Vigilante Series now boasts a dozen installments with more to come. In addition, he has penned Nasty in Nice, as part of the JET Kindle World, and ASYLUM, a standalone novel .

Leverett Butts
The author of Emily's Stitches: The Confessions of Thomas Calloway and Other Stories, and of Guns of the Waste Land, a series of novellas retelling the King Arthur legends as an American Western.  He lives in Temple, Georgia, with his wife and son.

Bill Kirton
Ex actor, director, voice-over artist, playwright, teacher, university lecturer. Now wood carver and writer of crime, historical, romance, satire, humour, non-fiction books for students. Also a gardener and lover of sport, sailing, good food and better wines.

David North-Martino
The author of Wolves of Vengeance and an ardent martial artist. His short stories have appeared in numerous fiction venues including: Epitaphs: The Journal of the New England Horror Writers, Wicked Tales: TJOTNEHW Vol.2 and Dark Recesses Press. 


                                                                       *****

6) Can you envision a scenario in which a traditional publisher handles some of your books which are easier to sell--while you write the books you choose to writes and publish some independently--as both ebooks and indie print editions?

BOUCHARD
Sure, why not? There have already been indie authors who have gone trad with the print versions of their work while retaining digital writes as well as trad authors who have decided to self-pub some of their works. Anything is possible if involved parties agree.

BUTTS
I think this situation would be ideal. If done well, both the traditionally and independently published books would feed off each other’s audience. It seems like a win-win for me.

KIRTON
Yes, the present context gives us that sort of freedom. On the other hand, I don’t go along with the assumption implicit in the question. When I write, I try to follow specific criteria. I want it to be a high quality, mistake-free product which entertains, absorbs, holds readers’ attention, makes them laugh and/or think and/or believe in my characters. If I succeed, all the books should be equally easy to sell. The element that brings quality and profit together is luck.

NORTH-MARTINO
Absolutely. I consider myself a hybrid writer. I’ve self-published a short supernatural thriller in ebook form, and sent a 90k crime thriller to a contest at Minotaur books. I’m also writing a military horror thriller for a small press publisher on spec, and a sword and sorcery novella on spec for a Big 5 publisher. Hopefully I can finish these manuscripts before the open calls end. If not, self-publishing is always available, and I would never take it off the table. Also, I’m exploring the possibility of having a small press take over my self-published ebook and selling them the print rights. Probably a long shot, but worth checking into.

For those not in the know, the small press is a middle ground between indie and the Big 5. All publishing is fraught with peril, and you can get burned just as easily in the small press where there’s not much in the way of an advance, and the publisher is running on a shoestring budget. I’ve heard horror stories of writers getting their rights tied up in bankruptcy proceedings, but on the positive side, small press publishers handle editing, covers, assist with reviews, and there are some that have decent distribution to bookstores and libraries. There’s probably more opportunity in science fiction and horror, but it’s something to consider if you’d like to have a publisher invest in your novel but can’t land a Big 5 deal, want a lower bar for entry, or just more creative control.


7) Do you see ebook publishing as a stepping stone toward the Yellow Brick Road (superstar agent, humongous advances, etc.)...or, getting back to our first question, do you value things about it you'd reluctant to lose completely? E.g.: the power and the freedom of running your own business...the power that enables Russell (Titan) Blake to produce numerous best-selling thrillers a year?

BOUCHARD
I do see the possibility of indie publishing being a stepping stone to bigger things though it is not my specific goal. If approached with a lucrative deal, I would certainly consider it and, if it was viable, I would have no problem letting go some control. To illustrate, consider the following completely fictitious scenario:
 
Big Honcho Publishing House: Mr. Bouchard, we’re offering you twenty million dollars per title you have written plus a thirty percent royalty on all subsequent sales plus fifty percent of any revenues subsequently generated by television and/or film production.

BUTTS
Why not both? I do hope that my sales of indie-published books will one day open doors for me in the larger houses, but even if they don’t, I am happy with what success I have had so far. I certainly like having the freedom to try new forms such as the multiple narrators and points of view in Guns of the Waste Land and the interconnected stories making a single novel in the first part of Emily’s Stitches. I don’t think a traditional publisher would be comfortable with those experiments without proof they’d sell.

KIRTON
Stepping stone to fame?. No. Except insofar as, if any of my books is going to get me the goodies you brandish, it’ll probably be ‘discovered’ in ebook form, so they can clearly contribute. I hate ‘running my own business’, which I guess is what I’m doing, and I’d gladly hand all that over to someone who knows how to do it. Because I don’t.

NORTH-MARTINO
I love the freedom that indie publishing provides, at least I like the idea of the freedom that it provides. I’m a very independent person, but I don’t enjoy going it alone when it comes to publishing. I would rather have a publisher, small or large, handle my work, buying it because they believe in it, instead of trying to do this all on my own. That’s something I wouldn’t have learned about myself if I hadn’t initially gone the independent route.

While I do look at indie publishing as a stepping-stone to bigger things, I also see it as a complement to a larger career. I’m very open to being a hybrid. I have no problem selling some books to the big 5, some to the small press, while putting out others independently. Let’s not forget that breakout books not only happen to the traditionally published, but also to independent authors. Just look at Andy Weir’s The Martian as an example.


8) Aside from your writing/editing/proofreading skills, what other skills do you regard as absolutely essential? And: are these skill sets really completely different from those required of traditionally published authors? (The days, for instance, are long past when any author can say, as one actually did: 'The hell with editing and proofing--that crap's for my agent and editor!')

BOUCHARD
A number of the skills which follow could be purchased from suppliers though it never hurts to have some understanding and knowledge in these areas even if contracting out. Formatting skills in order to transform a manuscript into both a print and digital final product; Artistic/graphic skills in terms of envisioning and/or creating appealing book covers; Social and communication skills to exchange with one’s potential and established audience; Marketing skills to let the masses know one’s work is available. Based on hearsay, I understand many trad authors must now put in more effort with the social/communication/marketing aspects than in the past.

BUTTS
Since self-publishing (and to a lesser degree small press publishing) requires you to wear many hats, you also need skills in self-promotion to help advertise and promote your work. A working knowledge of image editing software is not a bad idea, too, to help you design your covers. This last, if done well, can save you hundreds to thousands of dollars in design fees since you won’t have to commission a cover designer.

KIRTON
The basic essentials – writing, editing, proofing – are skills which are very distinct from one another, but nonetheless in the same ball park, depending on sensitivity to language, rhythm, etc. Promoting and marketing, on the other hand, call for a totally different mindset.

NORTH-MARTINO
You have to be able to manage a project with multiple contractors in your employ. You might have to have formatting skills in multiple formats unless you’re going to hire someone to do it. You might need to have the ability to create your own covers, unless you want to pay to have them commissioned. You’re going to have to have confidence to reach out to other writers and reviewers without having a publishing house behind you. You might not get much in the way of publicity from a traditional publisher, depending on how much for resources they’ve devoted to you, but as an indie you have to either be your own publicist, and do everything yourself, or hire one.



9) Whatever your long-term goals, what are the greatest kicks you get from producing both ebook and print editions?

BOUCHARD
The beauty of the ebook is its immediacy and range of distribution.. Anyone, almost anywhere on the planet can download it and boom, it’s there waiting to be read. As an author, holding an actual print copy, flipping through the pages and knowing I produced it, is pretty cool. As mentioned earlier, the effort required to create a print version is so minimal that it would be silly to not do so, even if it’s to satisfy a small number of readers. True story, a fan who only reads print recently inquired about the next installment in my series, mentioning she had already reserved a spot in her display case. That’s a kick.

BUTTS
The flexibility of having a choice. I find myself preferring to read hard copy at home and electronic versions on the road. I assume most people who are open to e-books feel the same.

KIRTON
Feeling, every time I receive a proof copy of a paperback, as if the nurse has just handed me my beautiful new baby. That’s a sensation ebooks can’t replicate. There’s also the basic satisfaction of having overcome my laziness again and actually finished a book.

NORTH-MARTINO
I haven’t produced a print edition of my novel, but I did enjoy managing the ebook to completion. I’m just not sure I’d want to do it again.


                                                                *****




10) Rogue Question: What have I missed that's important to you?

BOUCHARD
You didn’t ask, “Boxers or briefs?”...and now you’ll never know.*
(Editor's note: Under serious pressure, Claude Bouchard agreed reluctantly to give an appropriate answer to the eternal question. You'll find it at the * below.)

BUTTS
What's the biggest draw to writing? 
For me it's the same thing that drew me to the craft in the first place: I generally write stories that I cannot find elsewhere, and I love being able to tell myself a story. I never cease finding it odd that even as the author, I’m never sure where the story is going, so it’s almost like I’m reading a new novel every time I write. Like the novel is there in the ether fully formed and waiting for someone (in this case, me) to catch and trap it on paper.

KIRTON
What's the letter or email I'd love most to get?
‘I’m thinking of investing several thousand dollars in promoting a friend’s books in the UK, USA, Canada, the Caribbean, South America, New Zealand, Australia, and parts of Africa and Asia. Would you like to be that friend?’

NORTH-MARTINO
What are the best and worst things when it comes to self-pubbing ebooks?
The worst thing about self-publishing ebooks is that your work gets lost in the vast sea that is Amazon. You have the best distribution on the planet, and yet, it can be very challenging to find an audience. Then again, the best thing: it will never go out of print and has an unlimited amount of time to find an audience.


                                                           
                                                          *****



*As promised, here's the answer Slyboots tried to keep from you. Really, was it too much to hope that Claude Bouchard might confess if he wears briefs or boxers?





Well, we're happy to give you the answer today from Claude Bouchard himself:

"If your readers have to know, the answer is simple enough:

I wear b----s."

*****
To learn more about these four authors and their books, just click on the following links: 

Claude Bouchard
Amazon Author Page: https://www.amazon.com/Claude-Bouchard/e/B002BLL3RK
Website: http://www.claudebouchardbooks.com       
Vigilante Series Box set - Books 1 to 6http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01EPE926Y

Leverett Butts
Grand Central Review: http://www.grandcentralreview.com/
Author Facebook Pagehttps://www.facebook.com/LeverettButts/?fref=ts
My Amazon Author Page: www.amazon.com/author/leverettbutts


Bill Kirton 
Amazon Author Page
US: https://www.amazon.com/Bill-Kirton/e/B001KDNSLY
UK: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bill-Kirton/e/B001KDNSLY
Website/blog: www.billkirton.com
Best intro to his work:  https://www.amazon.com/Darkness-Jack-Carston-Mysteries-Book-ebook/dp/B008X8ZM8G

David North-Martino
Amazon Author Page:  http://amzn.to/1Ir7PWP
Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/dnorthmartino


Sunday, December 4, 2016

Down and Dirty: The Ultimate Round Table Joust: 1


                                                            Dedicated to: Pam Stack

Four knights. One theme, of interest to writers and readers alike: the pros and cons of ebook and traditional publishing. The four knights, in alphabetical order:

Claude Bouchard
CB officially leaped into the writing world in 2009 and his Vigilante Series now boasts a dozen installments with more to come. In addition, he has penned Nasty in Nice, as part of the JET Kindle World, and ASYLUM, a standalone novel .

Leverett Butts
The author of Emily's Stitches: The Confessions of Thomas Calloway and Other Stories, and of Guns of the Waste Land, a series of novellas retelling the King Arthur legends as an American Western.  He lives in Temple, Georgia, with his wife and son.

Bill Kirton
Ex actor, director, voice-over artist, playwright, teacher, university lecturer. Now wood carver and writer of crime, historical, romance, satire, humour, non-fiction books for students. Also a gardener and lover of sport, sailing, good food and better wines.

David North-Martino
The author of Wolves of Vengeance and an ardent martial artist. His short stories have appeared in numerous fiction venues including: Epitaphs: The Journal of the New England Horror Writers, Wicked Tales: TJOTNEHW Vol.2 and Dark Recesses Press. 


                                                                        *****

1) Let's begin at the beginning: When did you first know you really were a writer, regardless of whether you'd published?

BOUCHARD
A bit of history to start. I wrote Vigilante in 1995, simply because I had a story I needed to get out of my head. Two sequels followed in 1996-97 and, although I did a bit of agent querying, it was more for fun than anything else. When I pulled out my dormant manuscripts in 2009, revised and published them and began writing the fourth installment of my series, I knew I was a writer.

BUTTS
I knew I wanted to be a writer as soon as I could read. I would read a book that I loved and then be depressed that there wasn’t more, so I started writing my own sequels, the the kids call fanfiction today. It was never very good, but it was what started me on my path to writing my own stories.

KIRTON
I’ve written since I was very young. But, in my twenties, I’d been sending radio plays to the BBC for a year or so; none had been accepted but they’d made nice remarks about them. Then a BBC producer mentioned to the late Tony Church, actor and director of the then new Northcott Theatre that I wrote drama. Tony invited me to look around the building and, whenever we met one of his crew, he said, ‘This is Bill Kirton. He’s a writer’. In my mind that validated it. I was a writer because someone else said I was.

NORTH-MARTINO
Back in 8th grade I wrote a short story and read it to my class. Everyone, including the teacher, really liked it. After that, I was referred to as “the writer.” Before that I had wanted to be a comic book illustrator, and was always envious of the student in my school who was thought of as “the artist.”''


2) Traditionally published authors, as well as many readers, regard ebook writers as failures. Yet it's said that over 95% of traditionally published books are commercial failures. What are your thoughts on writing success and failure? Would you be happier if you'd sold 80,000 ebooks, Amazon bestsellers, or if you'd published a wonderfully reviewed hardcover book that sold 100 copies?

BOUCHARD
To clarify your wording, I’ll assume ‘ebook writers’ actually means self-published writers. What also needs to be determined is the unit used to measure a writer’s success or failure. Any writer who manages to hold the interest of an audience with his or her work is successful. If the number of trad deals or units sold or dollars earned are deemed to be the measuring stick by some, good for them. I’ve been paying my bills so, good for me.

BUTTS
If you measure the success or failure of writing based only on sales, you are dooming your self to be sorely disappointed. The fact is most writers do not get traditionally published, and most of those who do don’t get published by the major houses. If your book is self-published or published by a smaller, independent press, you simply will not make the number of sales that others by larger houses achieve.

It’s nice if you can be a best-seller, but I think a more effective measure of a work’s success is the feedback you get from other readers either in person or in the form of reviews. This feedback can tell you where you need to improve your writing and what is working well. Sales really only affect your pocketbook; they don’t tell you why your writing is selling well or poorly.

KIRTON
You’ve got two different sorts of ‘failure’ there. The first is a value judgement, equates to ‘loser’, and therefore has limited validity. The second is more legitimate since it’s based on the facts of balance sheets. Okay, the quality filters on ebooks are non-existent, but equally, there are many beautiful books which traditional publishers have missed. It would be nice if quality automatically brought tangible profits but |I’m a realist.

NORTH-MARTINO
The ability to complete a novel, to finish what you start, to me, is a success unto itself. Traditionally published authors, who are fortunate enough to be working writers, are heavily invested in legacy publishing. Some of them hold their noses at indie writers, but writers who do work-for-hire get the same treatment, and literary writers and academia look down at genre and popular fiction writers. The readers are the only ones who count.


3) 'Ten years to mastery', they say, in any craft or profession. After that, many writers spend years hunting for agent, shopping for a sale, then waiting for publication. Is the immediacy of ebook publishing a major draw for you?

BOUCHARD
Once again, I assume ‘ebook publishing’ means self-publishing. The immediacy is certainly an advantage in that, once I have a work which is ready for the public, it is made available (in both digital and print formats) without delay. I much prefer having a book out there and selling than sitting and waiting for eventual publishing, maybe…

BUTTS
It is. This past summer my two volumes of Guns of the Waste Land were picked up by Venture Press, a British publishing house that only does ebooks, to be published in a single, electronic volume. I was surprised how quickly their turnaround was when they were able to get the book on the shelves in weeks instead of months. Self-publishing paper backs also has a quick turnaround, though, which can be a draw when trying to decide if to seek an agent and traditionally publish or not. For myself, I self-published my first book, a collection of short stories titled Emily’s Stitches: The Confessions of Thomas Calloway and Other Stories, and the first volume of Guns of the Waste Land, in order to test the waters and prove that the books could sell. I believe this helped Venture decide to take me on.

KIRTON
Yes. I’ve been published traditionally by publishers in the UK and USA but the process takes so long that I’m glad I can now get my books to readers in weeks rather than months or years. The drawback, of course, is that I have to be skilled in promotion and marketing, and I’m not. I haven’t yet tried any of these companies that claim to specialise in promoting authors, but that may be my next step.

NORTH-MARTINO
It’s been ten years since I made my first short story sale. I’m sure I haven’t mastered the craft yet, but I hope that I’m at least on the cusp of writing at a professional level. I’ve been able to sell short fiction consistently to the small press, and have had interest from professional magazines. I do think the immediacy of ebook publishing, of publishing what I want, and when, was a major draw for me when I put out my first short novel.

4) Let's be contrary. The grating debate goes on and on: print publishing OR ebooking? But what if we replaced that one word OR with AND? We may never convert rabid anti-ebook readers. How do you feel, though about offering print versions of your work to offer readers more options--and to better your chances of getting reviews?

BOUCHARD
All my books are available in both print AND ebook with the exception of box sets and one title in Russell Blake’s JET Kindle World. Though ebooks make up the bulk of my sales, making the books available in print via POD is certainly worth the minimal effort in order to satisfy those who insist on a paper copy.

BUTTS
I like offering both. As a reader, I will always prefer the feel and smell of a hardcopy book in my hands, but I also find the convenience of carrying multiple books on a single device to be very useful, especially when I am reading multiple texts simultaneously. While we are on the subject of altering versions, I am even considering using CreateSpace to do audio versions of my books. This will make it convenient for those with long commutes, or who do a lot of running, or whatever, to listen to a book. I feel like the more formats a book can be put in, the better.

KIRTON
I’ll take your word for it that producing a print book increases the chances of getting reviewed. I still do enjoy (maybe even prefer) the whole familiar tactile experience of turning pages, feeling the weight of the object, the number of pages growing in one hand and decreasing in the other as you read, but I also appreciate the convenience of carrying a whole library in a small tablet. Both forms have their fans (as do audio versions), so yes, let’s keep books coming, however they’re delivered.

NORTH-MARTINO
I think having print versions of our work is essential. It certainly allows us more options when it comes to reviews. Most reviewers, whether on Goodreads or elsewhere, want something besides an ebook for their troubles, and it gives them more incentive to write a review. There are also opportunities to do signings with print books. I belong to a local writers association that hits every major convention. Having a print version of my novel would allow me the opportunity to get out and sell at those venues. Local libraries and independent books stores might also be willing to carry books from local indie writers.

5) Is reader resistance any less toward indie-published print books than toward ebooks? If not, how do you overcome resistance?        

BOUCHARD                                    
In the vast majority of cases,  print versus digital format has no bearing on reader resistance toward indie authors. Most print versions of indie works are available online only, not in brick and mortar stores across the planet. That said, readers are generally not faced with shelves filled with indie and trad print works and therefore resistance toward indie works in that context simply doesn’t exist.

BUTTS
I think the resistance comes from the “indie-published” descriptor than from any format. I feel that the best way to overcome that resistance is good word-of-mouth. Now if we could just figure out the magic formula for getting readers to review our books on Amazon once they’ve read them…

KIRTON
Is it really strong enough to be called ‘resistance’? Readers like books. If paper versions were banned, they’d still read them on their tablets, and vice versa. I see one difference, though. If a book turns out to be crap, you’re less likely to throw your tablet against the wall, whereas paperbacks…

NORTH-MARTINO
Readers typically can’t differentiate between traditionally and indie published books, as long as said books look professional and include both ebook and print formats. Ebook only screams indie, and I do feel that many readers believe that indie books aren't up to professional standards.

The best ways to overcome reader resistance is to have a print book as well as an ebook, to create your own imprint, to purchase professional looking covers, to have your books professionally edited, to write lots of books, to have lots of reviews, and to competitively price your books with those of traditionally published authors. Simple, right? Haha!



                                                                    *****





Take seven, as in seven days, to stretch and think about Part 1. We'll be back next weekend with the provocative conclusion. Among other things, you'll learn if Claude Bouchard wears boxers or briefs. And you'll hear high praise for Russell Blake. Arrive early for guaranteed seating.

                                             *****

To learn more about these four authors and their books, just click on the following links: 

Claude Bouchard
Amazon Author Page: https://www.amazon.com/Claude-Bouchard/e/B002BLL3RK
Website: http://www.claudebouchardbooks.com         
Vigilante Series Box set - Books 1 to 6http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01EPE926Y

Leverett Butts
Grand Central Review: http://www.grandcentralreview.com/
Author Facebook Pagehttps://www.facebook.com/LeverettButts/?fref=ts
My Amazon Author Page: www.amazon.com/author/leverettbutts


Bill Kirton 
Amazon Author Page
US: https://www.amazon.com/Bill-Kirton/e/B001KDNSLY
UK: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bill-Kirton/e/B001KDNSLY
Website/blog: www.billkirton.com
Best intro to his work:  https://www.amazon.com/Darkness-Jack-Carston-Mysteries-Book-ebook/dp/B008X8ZM8G

David North-Martino
Amazon Author Page:  http://amzn.to/1Ir7PWP
Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/dnorthmartino

Wednesday, May 6, 2015

Blood and Rue 2: The Ripsnorting Conclusion

Image result for round table images



Welcome back. In Part 1, six well-known writers gathered to discuss the subject of violence in art. The 'chat' attracted more than 4000 readers. Today the knights have reassembled to joust with the final five questions.

Once again, the participants are:

Russell Blake
The New York Times and USA Today bestselling author of over 35 adventure thriller novels also co-authored two books with Clive Cussler. He lives in Mexico with his dogs and a bad attitude. 

Claude Bouchard
Completed his studies at McGill University and worked in management for countless years. From there, it was a logical career step to stay home and write crime thrillers.

Bill Kirton
Lecturer, actor, director, playwright, novelist, husband, father, grandfather. Sails, eats, drinks wine, gardens. Writes whydunnits and whodunnits. Thinks laughter is very important.

John Logan
The author of 6 novels has published stories worldwide in anthologies by Picador and Vintage, also appearing in the Edinburgh Review and other journals. A proud Highlander.

Brad Strickland
Recently retired from a career as a University professor. Also known as Ken McKea, writer of the series of hardboiled Florida mysteries featuring Jim Dallas. 

And a new sixth knight:

Lev Butts 
Published work includes Emily's Stitches and the award-winning Guns of the Wasteland. He teaches literature and composition at the Gainesville campus of the University of Georgia. 

Lev's words about the transition: 

Due to personal reasons, Richard Monaco had to withdraw from the panel. I have been asked to take his place for this second round of questions. Richard has always been a literary idol of mine, even before I got to meet him a few years ago. I grew up reading first his Parsival series, then anything by him I could find. It has been a dream come true to work with him over the last couple of years to get more of his work back into print.

I hope I do him proud with my answers.


All right, then. Here we go, returning to alphabetical order.




                                                         ******

6) Some can some can't--get away with murder or even a lot worse. Hannibal is compelling no matter what he does. And our eyes remain riveted on Jimmy Cagney dragging a femme by the hair or mashing a graqpefruit in her fac.e A certain something about the way it's acted/written/directed allows us to be thrilled, even when appalled. What is that 'certain something'--charisma, charm, wit...what?


Blake
The secret is to create a character with sufficient depth that you're fascinated by him/her, even if he's a monster. Hannibal is compelling because he's so damned multi-faceted and real seeming. In my own work, the super assassin El Rey is a cold-blooded killing machine, but he's also really interesting and 3D. The trick to making a killer or monster whom we'll follow is to imbue him with qualities that force the reader to turn the page to find out what he's going to do next, and to care.

Bouchard
I’ll respond to this in terms of my own writing and can easily zero in on wit. After all, who wants a killer who doesn't have a sense of humor? If there’s one thing I enjoy when my wife is giving a new work of mine a first read, it’s hearing her suddenly burst out in laughter. When this happens, it’s generally because she’s reading a scene where the killer made some hilarious comment while in the process of dealing with a soon-to-be victim. Nobody can say my killer isn't a funny guy… and he’s also polite.

Butts
For characters like Hannibal or Dexter, I think it is a blend of all three with a little bit of wish fulfilment as well. These characters get to do what most of us wish we could do: destroy our enemies in the most gruesome, cathartic manner possible. These guys do horrible things, yes, but they don’t do them indiscriminantly. Their victims, for the most part “deserved” it: Hannibal is our id destroying those who hurt our pride through insensitivity or rudeness, Dexter is our avenging angel who exacts gory justice on those evildoers who manage to slip through the cracks of our justice system.

Kirton
I think you've covered it--charisma, charm, wit. But it's the sort of question where input from women (writers and readers) would be interesting. My answer to question 8 may explain in part why I say that. From my male perspective, if I ever do find myself captivated by a character who's inflicting harm or worse on someone else, I feel guilty. Fortunately, it doesn't happen very often. I suppose if it were a vigilante wreaking vengeance on a pedophile or someone who;d killed or harmed friends or family, the moral dimension would make it acceptable, even desirable. But if the intention is to appall or excite in the name of entertainment, then I think there needs to be some corrective. There's already a shortage of empathy in the world and to accept tacitly that it's OK for one individual to abuse or obliterate another is to add to the inhumanity quotient.

There are exceptions. Violence, in Tom Sharpe's early novels, was so extreme that its effects were comic. It occurred in contexts which weren't intended to convey realism, and whose characters went to caricatural extremes. The 'sadism' of Patrick Bateman was different. It was simply part of a general lifestyle (shared by others in the novel) and helped, symbolically and powerfully, to convey the notion that society's values have changed and we're losing our humanity.

And yet, venturing into such areas is part of what writers do. As Baudelaire put it, we should 'go into the depths of the unknown to look for something new.'

Logan
I'm reminded of Lee Marvin in the 1967 film, Point Blank, directed by John Boorman (and based on the novel, The Hunter, by Donald E. Westlake). Marvin, as Walker, has been double-crossed and left for dead. Walker has been betrayed by his wife and best friend. He sets out to exact revenge, but als to regain the precise amount of money that has been 'stolen' from him, $93000. It becomes almost comical, throughout the film, when Walker comes up against adversaries who cannot believe he would be creating such mayhem for 'only' $93000, which to the adversaries is small change. But to Walker, this is the figure he has decided on as his own 'valuation' in life. Walker does terrible things, but we know why, and the brutal simplicity of his goal lures the view into sympathizing with the insane purposefulness that drives Walker (even down to one film critic who saw the purposefulness manifested in Walker's actual way of walking in the film when the camera lingers on his pavement-whacking shoes.)

So, perhaps not charisma, charm, or wit finally...but instead a deadly earnest intent, a pursuit of a definite purpose or goal, this is something we can relate to, even find ourselves inspired by, even if we do not agree with that goal objectively.

It may be important also that Marvin brought real WW2 experience of violence to his onscreen roles.

For a literary example of making the unpalatable palatable, Jim Thompson's novels, on the other hand, often told from the viewpoint of the psychotic, unreliable narrator, manage to achieve fascination by representing the shocking twists and turns of an innately wild and feral state of consciousness, which becomes enthralling to the reader just because of this very alien-ness, The readers cannot bring themselves to look away and miss the next unpredictable event or thought.

Strickland
I can think of a few possibilities. First, yeah, the trope that good women love bad men has truth in it--and for both genders there's the Byronic appeal of a character who gives not one solitary faint damn for the restrictions of social convention and the law. Let's face it, some actors also just have that element of self-assurance, of delight in their own power and control, that might make us wish we could be a Cagney, or even a manipulative Karloff or a suavely sinister Vincent Price Same holds true for the women, of course--the best of the bad girls could make men think, "Man, I'd like to tame her" and women think "You go, girl!" Helena Bonham Carter can take such pure glee in mayhem that it's hard not to root for her; that sweet mermaid Daryl Hannah was incredibly stylish as cold-blooded assassin Elle Driver; and I have to, just have to, put in a good word for Margaret Hamilton, whose Wicked Witch of the West treasured her 'beautiful wickedness.' It's hard not to admire such single-minded, driven characters--thanks to the actors who give them life.

Even so, most of us, I think, have the sense to know that it's better to daydream about being such a character than setting out to follow the actual career path, though. "Interesting responses, and your test scores are impressive. So if you go with our firm, where do you see yourself in five years?" "Oh, drenched in other people's blood and cackling maniacally."

Still, reading about such characters, or seeing them on screen, lets the audience release tensions, disperse their accumulated bad humours, and reach what Aristotle called a catharsis--though that literally means puking. Some part of the human psyche loves to be titillated and teased with beyond-the-pale behavior. Stephen King wrote somewhere that reading about such horrors is our way of feeding the gators, keepin' 'em down in the cellar where they can't really hurt us, and he has something there.

Then  too--well, 99% of the time, a rollercoaster's a safe ride, innit? You're not expecting that the gawky kid in the car ahead will jump up and be decapitated at the top of the second hill, or that the heavy woman two cars back will suffer a coronary, or that a freak wind will blow a high-tension wire across the tracks and send ninety bazillion volts through you...And that never happens.

Well, hardly ever.

Similarly, we're seated in our coaster cars when we read or watch violent actions. Eyeballs pop and frizzle, blood flows like champagne (which, as is well known, flows like water), carnage ensues...but not for US. We're safe on our comfy butts there in the coaster car, riding the rails of our imagination, and on some level we know that. Exposing our imaginations to the worst that humans can do to humans--that's running up and flat-hand slapping the front door of the Boo Radley place, it's dropping a clattering gold cup while plundering a snoozing dragon's hoard, it's the good old boy at the wheel next to you saying "Hold may beer 'n watch this!" It's a scare that we enjoy, somehow--all the more so since we know we're really safe. Mostly safe.


7) All-out hardcore gore fests--e.g. 2000 Maniacs (1964)--appeal to extreme horror fans while outraging gentler souls. Still, a film or book that wants it both ways--extreme violence for profits and a moral message for approval--seems even more offensive. (E.g., a splatter film which the hit man pauses between kills to brood on the bad things he's done and is about to do again.) Can you think of a book/film perfectly combining graphic violence with either a strong theme or moral center?

Blake
Sure. Easy. Rambo. Innocent everyman taken on by a corrupt system and serving up a ten course meal of whup ass. Although No Country For Old Men is hard to beat for graphic violence with a strong theme (greed ultimately backfires and thus is bad).

Bouchard
I have never been a fan of horror or gore so books and films portraying extreme graphic violence have never appealed to me. Defined, graphic violence is the depiction of especially vivid, brutal and realistic acts of violence in visual media. I consider this definition does not imply the obligation to include blood and guts beyond what may be required to realistically portray any given scene.

That said, and considering film and television have not been a large part of my life for several years, the first film which came to mind upon reading this question is Spielberg’s 1971 Duel. The film is an extremely realistic depiction of good overcoming evil against all odds in the classic David and Goliath genre. Though no heads explode, nor are any bodies ripped apart, one cannot deny this movie’s violent content. A 1955 Peterbilt does make for a rather nasty weapon.

Butts

Anything by Cormac McCarthy, especially No Country for Old Men, which uses its violence to underscore the horrors of growing old, or The Road, which uses violence to illustrate what a thin veneer of civility our social structure provides us and to show how easy it would be to revert back to savages (a theme I think Walking Dead plays around with quite effectively as well).

Kirton
I’m struggling here and my first thought was ‘No, I can’t’. On the other hand, some of the things that are happening in the world today convey extremes of violence on one side which seem counterbalanced by righteous indignation on the other. If that’s how the world is, there must be films and books which convey it. And, in fact, these events are presented to us as narratives by journalists and spokespersons of the various factions. But the convenient way in which they divide protagonists into good guys and bad guys is misleading. The killing of hostages, the suppression of beliefs opposed to one’s own, even the posting of death threats on Twitter – in nearly all cases, the perpetrators think what they’re doing is ‘right’; it fits their morality, furthers their cause and beliefs. In the field of morality there are no global absolutes. When diametrically opposed moralities clash, there can be no redemption.

And how about the Greek tragedies? All those wives, sons, mothers, fathers killing one another to avenge a son, sister, mother, father – all doing so at the behest of one or other of their Gods and finding, as a result, that they’re cursed by another. It seems you can please all of the Gods some of the time or some of the Gods all of the time. But you can’t please all of the Gods all of the time.

Logan
Several come to mind.

Sam Peckinpah’s Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid successfully presents the film’s graphic violence in a context of eulogy, to a time and place long vanished, and to a wild, free way of life on the 1881 Western frontier about to be permanently regulated and curtailed by the new forces of law and order, heralded in by the external imposition of power by the wealthy New Mexico cattle barons.

An interesting counterpoint to this is the later film, Three Days of the Condor, set in a 1975 of CIA shenanigans and looming oil shortages, a time where that nascent frontier law and order has hardened and warped into an edifice perhaps worse than the lawlessness which preceded it, and where the hunted Robert Redford character can no longer tell where American law and order ends and corporate business interests begin.

Another great 1975 genre film is Walter Hill’s Hard Times, which shows Charles Bronson’s Chaney character fighting with his fists, for survival, and for his next meal…in a 1930s Depression-era America which will allow him no other way forward.

Strickland
Macbeth, or course—the slaughter of the innocents, Duncan weltering in his own gore, Macbeth hopelessly realizing he’s waded so far in blood that he might as well forge ahead and hope to reach the other side . . . his wife losing her mind and—maybe—taking her own life, leading to his crashing realization that he’s done all his dirty work for her. . . for nothing, now! And tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow creeps in this petty pace to the last syllable of recorded time, and life’s a walking shadow, a mere actor who says his lines and then vanishes from the stage; life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying—nothing!

You can’t even hear the devil laughing.

That is bleak. It’s fully as bleak as Waiting for Godot, a more modern theatrical take on cosmic indifference to human suffering. All the violence, all the excesses, lead Macbeth to ask a despairing question: What is the point of it all? The work reminds us to be aware not only of our desires and ambitions, but of the world around us. Some characters in the play are honorable and worthy of respect. One lad dies a hero’s death and his own father says he cannot mourn because he is proud of the boy. But Macbeth himself is ignominiously slaughtered, beheaded, and made a shameful public spectacle after his death. The play Macbeth tells us that if the universe has no point for our lives, it’s up to us to make a point for ourselves—and we don’t do that by letting ourselves become monsters.

King Lear is even bleaker,



8) Do you have a violent scene you've been tempted to write for years--but which you fear is just 'too much'? Do you dare to tell us about it?

Blake
Not really. My first passes on Fatal Exchange were pretty graphic but I softened them on drafts. Same for some of King of Swords--what first went on the page had me wincing, but I quickly discovered that the audience that bought American Psycho wasn't buying my books, and the graphic stuff was unnecessary, and in fact harmful, to sales. So I stopped writing to shock the reader and focused on entertaining them. If the characters and stories are compelling, there's no need to shock 'em.

Bouchard
To be blunt, no, I don’t. As I mentioned in the previous question and during our first round, violence for the sake of violence is not my style or forte so I've never been compelled to write anything more vicious than I actually did for any particular scene. While working on Thirteen to None, the eighth of my series, I sometimes had the impression some scenes were more violent than those in my previous works but was never uncomfortable with the results as they were required to paint the portrait I wanted to present to my readers.

Butts
I don’t really. I grew up reading Raymond Chandler and Richard Monaco as well as Stephen King, so I had very little idea that violence (or sex for that matter) were any kind of taboo subject for writing. My problem has always been describing them realistically. I have written three major fight scenes, two of them particularly gory (I have noticed that I have a penchant for gouging out eyes). These scenes and the one sex scene I have written were the certainly the hardest writing I’ve ever done. I essentially had to go back and read several other scenes by different writers, and borrow details from them, making them fit my own style and plot needs.

FYI: If anyone’s interested, my first fight scene is in the story “Misdirection” found in my fiction collection, Emily’s Stitches: The Confessions of Thomas Calloway (my first sex scene is also in that collection). My second fight scene is the fistfight between Ardiss Drake and Lancaster

O’Loch in the first Guns of the Waste Land novella. The third fight scene is a Comanche attack I wrote last week for the second Guns of the Waste Land novella.

Kirton
Yes, and I've actually written it. It came about as a result of a conversation with a female friend who said she believed pain was an essential part of sexual gratification. I didn't find her argument all that convincing because to me it sounded like the old joke about banging your head against a wall in order to feel how good it was when you stopped. Nonetheless, I wrote a scene (not a complete story) to test whether she found it palatable. It was set in a hotel room where the lovers (and they did love one another) met. There was champagne, roses, all the clichés, and I twisted them into the actual implements he used to hurt her. It was way beyond anything I'd ever dream of publishing but I made it as realistic as I could, including not allowing him to get any pleasure out of it and doing things which were against his nature but which she claimed she wanted. In the end, my friend said it was a true reflection of what she meant but that it had gone too far in one or two places. More interestingly, I didn’t like myself for having written it. It suggested that there are muddy layers in me which I’d rather not know about.

Logan
No.

Strickland
How about this one: A guy, trying to escape some great evil, plunges through a door. It leads to a slide, like a kiddie playground slide, but it’s steep and long. I mean it goes down for like fifty floors of a skyscraper. And before he reaches the end of the first ten, he becomes aware that he’s balanced on the thing, but it’s rapidly becoming narrower…and then he sees that just below it narrows to a razor edge….

9) Now, for the reverse. Is there any scene or passage, in any book or film, that you feel was either wrongly done...or something that should have been scrapped? Why? 

Blake
About 90% of what Hollywood puts out if formulaic crap that should be flushed. I mean, I get the wisdom of making blockbusters that appeal to males 15-25 who have IQs slightly above that of sand who wish for nothing but thinly disguised violent morality tales featuring the toys they played with as children come to life, but is the human condition any better for it? I can't really go into detail of what's wrong with filmmaking by committee as it would take a book, but yikes. Easier to call out guys who do it right as there are so few. Tarantino being top of my list.

Bouchard
Absolutely; several, in fact. I've always been a proponent of realism and the genres which I generally
read are those with stories which could in fact happen. However, once in a while, authors have managed, inadvertently or otherwise, to include elements or scenes which caused me to shake my head and say, “Really?” Without naming names, I will specify I’m speaking of big time, traditionally published authors who, in my opinion, committed these faux-pas. For example, I have difficulty accepting a character getting a shotgun blast to the side of the face followed by a .38-caliber bullet to the chest… and surviving, particularly because his massive pecs stopped the slug. This second one is even funnier. The killer is driving a car-jacked taxi in NYC. A hostage is in the passenger seat and, behind the protective screen, two young boys are tied up on the floor in the back. The killer pulls to the curb and somehow manages to wrap himself and his three hostages into a four-man bundle with explosive cord before exiting the vehicle.

Butts
I can’t really think of one, no. Though I have been reading some early Westerns (like 1880’s and earlier) and some of those fights seem overly simplistic and too cartoonish.

Kirton
There’s one stand-out image that’s stayed with me for many years. I couldn't say it was wrong or misplaced, but its impact was such that it resonated through the rest of the film and got in the way of whatever ‘meaning’ was supposed to be there. The film opens with a man sharpening and testing a razor. We then see him holding a young, expressionless woman, who’s staring straight ahead. His fingers hold her left eye open then there’s an awful close-up of the razor slitting open the eyeball, causing stuff to spill out of it. It is, of course, the opening of the surrealist film Un Chien Andalou by Bunuel/Dali. I remember nothing of the rest of the film, but merely recalling that cut brings back the shivers. Whatever the intention, it was so gross and so powerful that it overwhelmed everything that followed it.

Logan
In the 2005 Australian horror film, Wolf Creek, there is a scene where Mick Taylor, played by John Jarratt…well, perhaps I’ll just quote this from the film’s wiki entry:

“Liz…gets into a car and attempts to start it, but Mick shows up in the back seat and stabs her through the driver's seat with a large knife. After more bragging, he hacks three of Liz's fingers off in one swipe, then picks her up and headbutts her into near unconsciousness. He then severs her spinal cord with a knife, paralyzing her and rendering her a "head on a stick." Mick then proceeds to interrogate her as to Kristy's whereabouts.

It felt wrongly handled when I watched it, so I looked it up online and saw that may people had walked out of the cinema during the original screenings. The film was also ambiguously marketed as being ‘based on true events’; the plot bore elements similar to the real-life murders of tourists in Australia by Ivan Milat in the 1990s and by Bradley Murdoch in 2001.

So, not just “violence porn” placing a young female character in a very prolonged and hopeless position of torture/horror/humiliation/mutilation/physical destruction, but trying to connect up this “fiction” “generically” with true-life murders that bear no real relation, in terms of specifics or persons.

Strickland
There’s stuff I haven’t liked, but that’s not quite what you’re asking. I saw the first Night of the Living Dead ages ago in a theater, and some of the cannibalistic scenes I thought were not well-done, not because they were gross, but because they grew repetitive and the shock dulled off. In my own brief film career I appeared as an extra in a low-budget horror flick entitled Blood Salvage in the U.S. and Mad Jake in Europe. The plot involved a backwoods mechanic and his two deranged sons; they would sabotage cars passing through their small town, tow them into their shop, and then abduct the drivers and passengers and…raid the passengers for spare parts. Kidneys, livers, lungs, and so on. And they’d keep the mutilated victims alive as long as possible by hooking them to mechanical equivalents for their missing organs, Rube Goldberg devices cobbled together from used-car parts.

So okay, the bit I didn't care for…there’s a brief tour through the barn where all the semi-living victims are lying moaning and pleading for death. It is unsettling. And the camera pans past…Elvis, hooked to a radiator and a jukebox.

The goofiness mixed with the horror wasn't even camp. It was just somewhere way out in the woods.


10) Knights' call. Choose your own last question--and a wild, signature answer.

Blake
Question: Is violence in art something that should be regulated or censored to fit societal mores? 
Answer: Well, hmm. I like to think of all markets as weighing machines. The job of artists, who are basically entertainers, is to entertain. If a society finds something like graphic violence to be titillating, it will vote with its wallets. I deeply dislike the idea of curators or gatekeepers deciding what society should and shouldn't see for its own good. As an example, I believe that TV viewers in the U.S. should be able to see children with their legs blown off, half their heads splattered against a tree, in pools of their own blood, as a result of one of our bombing runs. By sanitizing the world for the good of society, we make palatable that which is essentially unpalatable. War is now a series of cool explosions and guided missiles we can watch from the comfort of our armchair. But that's a lie. War is ugly and brutal and awful and should be avoided at all costs, because it's the ultimate expression of our failure as a species to think our way through problems. We sanitize it so it's softened, comfy, it becomes easier to justify and support. Go back and look at the grim determination of wartime photos of generals from WW1 and WW2, and contrast them to the smiles and waves of our current breed of leaders, none of whom has ever been in a trench. Nobody was happy about having to go and take human life back then, and now it's almost like watching sports for some, where there's "our team" and "them" and we're hopeful ours kills the bastards. Taking human life is horrific, and I don't think that simplifying it to sanitized sound bites does any of us good service. Anything we can do to bring that reality home, might make it way harder to "support our troops" and wave flags and cheer at our superiority, but who cares? Is our job as entertainers really to gloss over the unpleasant and make ugly behavior more palatable, to rationalize our own brutality so we feel better about it? So no, I don't think violence should be censored to protect the children or anyone else, because in the end, the world is and has always been a violent, unpredictable place where bad shit can and does happen, and to portray it as anything but that makes performing unmentionable acts easier. So you want to portray a gang hit popping a cap into a competitor on the news? Fine. Show the suffering that goes with it, the family affected by it, the destruction of lives that's reality, the blood and guts and agony and horror that is the reality of it. Censor it and you turn life into a cartoon, and turn consumers of the entertainment into overfed adult children who believe everything's round edges and characters that drop off cliffs only to pop up unharmed in the next scene.

Bouchard
Question: If you had come to the world as Theodor Seuss Geisel, better known as Dr. Seuss, would you have still been inclined to write crime thrillers and, if yes, can you give us a sample of what your prose would have been like?
Answer: I definitely would have written crime thrillers as Dr. Seuss. Consider the following sample of an actual passage from Vigilante, my first novel, rewritten à la Seuss:

The blow had knocked old Myers out

And sent him to the ground.

When he awoke, he was bound and gagged.

He couldn't make a sound.


His mind was dull, his skin felt wet,

And his face really hurt.

When he wiped his chin upon his shoulder

There were bloodstains on his shirt


He raised his head and saw the man,

Looking quite serene,

Standing there behind the couch

As he browsed a magazine.


“Ah, there you are,” the intruder said.

“I think that’s really great.

“I was hoping you wouldn't sleep too long,

“I don’t want to get home too late.”


The man strolled up to Myers

And gave him a cheerful grin.

“I hope you will forgive me

“For the sorry state you’re in.”


“But what you did to Mrs. Slater

“Wasn’t really nice at all.

“You know she'll never walk again

“Because of that nasty fall.”


“I was thinking you should fall down stairs

“But you really deserve much more.

“That’s why I find it practical

“That we’re up on the sixth floor.”


The man walked to the balcony

Surveying the dark parking below.

He was satisfied to see nobody

No witnesses for the show.


He returned into the apartment

Where Myers struggled on the floor.

He kicked Myers in the abdomen,

Causing Myers to resist no more.


Flinging Myers over his shoulder,

He carried him to the railing.

“Say bye-bye, Peter,” he whispered,

Then sent old Myers sailing.


Down six storeys went Myers,

Landing with a thud.

He lay there as he merited,

Dead in his own blood

Butts
Question: Given my previous answer, I want to talk a bit about slapstick and cartoonish violence. Why does ti work when done well?

Answer: I think it can be effective if used consciously (I think the poor quality of early Western violence lies in a lack writing talent, more than a misuse of cartoon violence). This type of violence is used for comic effect, and it taps into mankind’s natural tendency for schadenfreude. As a species, we do delight in the misfortune of others, especially if those others deserve it. Wile E. Coyote, The three Stooges, even Fred Flintstone, are all kind of jackasses, so the violence that happens to them appeals to our sense of justice.

We also enjoy slapstick when it makes others seem foolish in exactly the way that we have felt foolish ourselves. We laugh at the kid who drops his lunch tray or trips over a banana peel because we’re glad it isn’t us. Because it very well could’ve been us, and almost certainly will be us some time.

Kirton
Question: Could you give us an example of a refined, sophisticated use of violence to convey character and reach the highest peaks of literary excellence and linguistic perfection?’
Answer: In my book, The Sparrow Conundrum, a policeman has rigged his hotel room so that, if anyone tries to enter it, a series of pulleys will trap them under a heavy wardrobe and a bed. Two agents, code names Kestrel (who’s disguised as a maid), and Eagle, know nothing of this, creep in and are trapped. The policemen, Lodgedale, returns in his customary bad mood. Now read on.

Eagle and Kestrel heard the door bang open and their screams became babbles of relief and pleas for help. The relief, of course, was short-lived. Lodgedale noted with satisfaction the heap of bed and wardrobe and with glee the four legs sticking out from under it.

One pair of legs was trousered but the other was bare and seemed to belong to a maid. Lodgedale, ever alert, bent to look at the maid’s crotch and was surprised at how pronounced her mons pubis was. Surprise quickly became suspicion however, and he decided the maid’s gender must be checked.

There were various methods available to him but he stayed in character and aimed a kick at her crotch. Kestrel, whose scrotum was, of course, the target, exploded in areas of pain he’d never before suspected. Like all experimenters, Lodgedale repeated his test in order to verify his first set of results, was equally pleased at the outcome and turned his attention to the trousered crotch which he decided to use as a control group. Eagle’s previous delights had been derived from masochistic fantasies but no stretch of his distorted imagination could interpret the present experiences as pleasurable and the volume of his screaming matched that of Kestrel.

After only a brief period of such gratuitous violence both men fainted and Lodgedale, deprived of the satisfaction of hearing their screams, reluctantly decided to stop and try to discover who they were and why they’d entered his room.

Logan
Question: In the 1975 (again) dystopian sports action science fiction film, Rollerball, directed by Norman Jewison and starring James Caan, set in a 2018 global corporate state, is Rollerball, the violent, globally-popular sport which the then-futuristic society is so enthralled by (just as Roman citizens were once enthralled by the butchery and murderous spectacle of the first century colosseum)…is Rollerball a spectacle which brings about healthy cathartic release in the audience, or is it a spectacle which hypnotizes them and transfixes them into forgetting the underlying violence they are immersed in during their real daily lives, or is Rollerball a spectacle which hardens and desensitizes the crowd to ever-increasing levels of violence…as the crowd becomes ever more bloodthirsty and the rules of the game are incrementally changed to allow greater and greater violence, until James Caan’s Jonathan character refuses to kill his last living opponent and instead does a victory lap of the skate track while the crowd chants his name?
Answer: “The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas.”
--H. G. Wells

Strickland
Question: If you could have written a book or script that someone else did, one that involves this kind of violence, what would it be, and why? Do you think you could have done a better job? Tell us about it!

Answer: For me—Well, remember Michael Shea, who passed away about a year ago? His Nifft the Lean got to me on a visceral level. That’s one I can point at and say, “Man, I wish I’d had the guts and the obsessive imagination to write that.”

However, I could not have done a better job. It would take someone with a different psyche from me to beat Shea at that game, but man, I wish I had the inspiration, the twisted vision, and the courage to pull of something like that story.

                                                                    ******