The Discussion

[vicki]

Welcome to the LRK Virtual Book Club's discussion of A Grave Talent, which is the VBC's June 2007 selection and the first entry in LRK's Kate Martinelli series. Laurie will be joining in soon, and will continue with us through June.

Be sure to check out LRK's introductory materials for the discussion, here (http://laurierking.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=5).

The main discussion of the book will take place in this thread, but we may open other threads for sub-discussions if need be. After June, the discussion will remain open for comments, but LRK will not regularly participate, although she may jump in from time to time as her schedule permits.

Remember also that there will be a drawing on the 15th of the month from among all registered members to determine which ten lucky people will win a signed copy of the new paperback edition of The Art of Detection, the latest entry in the Martinelli series.

So--what did you think of A Grave Talent?

[Kerry]

A Grave Talent was the first Laurie King novel I read, lo, these many years ago. I've re-read it numerous times since, and finished it for the umpteenth time just the other day.

For me, the book was initially All About Kate. I'm fascinated to read that the first inspiration for the story was Vaun's character, as my focus even after all these readings is still primarily on Kate's journey. I guess that's not totally surprising, as the story is told from her POV, but I suspect it also has to do with being a woman myself in a male-dominated field and struggling with some of the same issues she does.

That said, I do find Vaun's journey to be intriguing, and seem to pick up more of it each time I read the book. This time, I was particularly caught by how Laurie uses descriptions of her eyes to help convey what is happening to her throughout the story. Those images really helped me feel how someone who was very much disengaged from the world (as Laurie said, seeing things only as subjects for her paintings) began to get out of her own brain and her own skin and to really engage in the world of the living. In fact, this time through, I found myself very much wanting to read about the next chapter in her life. Is she able to develop real friendships? Does her relationship with her family change? And how does it all affect her painting?

I went into this last re-reading with Rae Newborn in the back of my mind, and am now wondering if there's anything deliberate about having both of these wonderful female artist's characters having psychological problems (or, rather, anything deliberate beyond having interesting and compelling characters).

As a final note -- the first time I read the book, the reveal about Lee came as a total surprise. But I'm completely incapable of reading it now without wondering how I ever missed it the first time. I guess that's a testament to the author! :)

[The Grey Badger]

I have read "A Grave Talent" many times, and while my focus was on both Kate and on the wild and wonderful Northern California hippie community, Vaun was a very compelling person. I read the introductory post, and it came to me the description of Vaun was that of an artistic savant - the sort of single-focused mindset you find quite a bit in both the arts and science, and which is practically a prerequisite for being a mathematician.There are many, many musicians like Vaun.

I cringed at the attempts in her youth to make her "normal". Folks - it doesn't work. All it does is stifle the talent and torture the talented. Your best best is to make her socially bilingual - expand her behavioral repertoire. So I knew with a gut-deep loathing who the original villain was, well-meaning or malevolent. And that this person set Vaun up for what was to happen later at the hands of the primary villain..

...pardon the rant. The stifling of creativity is something I have strong feelings about. To stifle it in the name of an imagined "normality" is worse.

[Kerry]

I cringed at the attempts in her youth to make her "normal". Folks - it doesn't work. All it does is stifle the talent and torture the talented. Your best best is to make her socially bilingual - expand her behavioral repertoire. So I knew with a gut-deep loathing who the original villain was, well-meaning or malevolent. And that this person set Vaun up for what was to happen later at the hands of the primary villain..

I quite agree that Vaun's mother's attempts to stifle her art were horrifying and love your image of the better approach being to train her to be "socially bilingual". But I'm not sure that, given the parameters of Vaun's life and talents, being raised the way you suggest would have left her immune to Andy when he showed up at her high school. Just the fact of having lost her parents when she did, and moving to a small farming community, and being so clearly Other may well have been all that was needed for her to be susceptible to his courtship and manipulation. He was a predator, and lots of different kinds of women find themselves prey, after all.

Of course, I completely agree that stifling creativity in the name of "normality" is criminal!

[vicki]

I'm several chapters in on my reread and am enjoying it as much as I did the first time around.

I didn't know about the Rembrandt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rembrandt) connection when I first read the book, so I'll be looking for parallels this time around.

I went into this last re-reading with Rae Newborn in the back of my mind, and am now wondering if there's anything deliberate about having both of these wonderful female artist's characters having psychological problems (or, rather, anything deliberate beyond having interesting and compelling characters).


Speaking of which, I noticed the name Newborn several times amont the talk about people on The Road. Now I need to reread Folly to see the connection. I love when there are references back and forth between an author's books. It's such a great reward for a loyal reader to pick up on those and see the connections.

That's an interesting point about the psychological problems. I'll be thinking about that as I continue reading.

The hippie community on The Road is interesting to read about. I've never encountered anything approaching that in RL. But then, I've always lived in suburban Alabama, which isn't exactly hippie country


I cringed at the attempts in her youth to make her "normal".


I'm really sensitive to this, also. My DS is very artistic and is further distinguished from his peers by being on the autism spectrum. Although we have always greatly encouraged him in his art and in being himself, he's getting to the age where peer pressure can just squash the uniqueness out of a child. I remember feeling almost like a robot by the end of the eighth grade. Fortunately, there's a magnet school for the arts nearby, which he will probably attend instead of the local Jr. High School.

[wsmvgn]

I'm a Laurie King fan, and thoroughly enjoy the Mary Russell and Kate Martinelli books, although I'm more of a Russellian.

My enjoyment of this book in particular is a puzzle to me. Kate seems as wooden as any character Arthur C. Clarke ever invented, particularly in this book. Another reviewer noted that King doesn't reveal that Kate is gay until more than half way through, and objected to that. So I think I like this less than the rest of the series. Notwithstanding, I eagerly await the next one in this series.

[The Grey Badger]

I think she seerms wooden because she's closeted.

[Kerry]

The hippie community on The Road is interesting to read about. I've never encountered anything approaching that in RL. But then, I've always lived in suburban Alabama, which isn't exactly hippie country

I grew up in Northern California. Trust me when I say that the community on The Road is quite realistic :p I thought the portrayal of the folks there was absolutely delightful; it made me long to be back home, that's for sure!

As for Kate seeming wooden, I think she sort of does, in the beginning of the book. But I see a gradual unfolding of her character, a of peeling away of layers, as the story progresses. And that's as it should be. At the beginning of the story, we're seeing almost exclusively her public/professional face, just as Al sees it. Over the course of the story, she lets Al and others see more and more deeply past that into her private life. Eventually, of course, the barrier is let down completely and we see the entire, complex woman.

Now that I think of it, isn't that sort of the same thing that happens with Vaun?

[Gail]

I don't know that I would say the Kate is wooden even at the beginning, but she clearly is closed off and is especially closed off from us readers. I don't remember how I responded to Kate when I first read this book 10 years ago, but once I realized that she was a pretty closeted lesbian I was very impressed with how on the mark Laurie was with her portrayal. Now Kate rings very true to me. I have a number of gay and lesbian friends who when I first met them or when they are in unfamiliar territory come across just like Kate does. The result for me is a sense of both Kate and Vaun as rather sad people in some ways.

[vicki]

Kate is described in the text (through Al's eyes, I believe) as reserved, which I think is a good word to describe her, particularly in the first book. I agree that being in the closet probably magnifies her normal reserve, however, as she deals with keeping a big part of her life secret.


I grew up in Northern California. Trust me when I say that the community on The Road is quite realistic


Wow. I thought it was maybe an exaggerated picture of some groups you might see there. Crikey.


Kate seems as wooden as any character Arthur C. Clarke ever invented


Hehehe--I haven't read any of ACC's stuff, but this just struck my funny bone.

[The Grey Badger]

We have mountain communities like that in Northern New Mexico, too. :D

[Kerry]

Wow. I thought it was maybe an exaggerated picture of some groups you might see there. Crikey.

It's really pretty true to life. Now, that's not to say that all Northern California communities are like that, by any stretch of the imagination! I would say that Laurie wrote a very accurate portrayal of a subset of folks who can be found scattered throughout the U.S. -- although they seem to be concentrated more in places like northern California and the northeast than anywhere else.

Of course, some of the "Birkenstock and health food" crowd in some parts of NoCal are highly educated and pretty well-off, too -- heaven knows they live in places I certainly can't afford :( But I can always dream . . .

[Scarletquill]

I'm a Laurie King fan, and thoroughly enjoy the Mary Russell and Kate Martinelli books, although I'm more of a Russellian.


Me too! I just ordered "A Grave Talent" through my local library. It arrives on Thursday. I can't wait to read it!

Just reading all the wonderful comments about it makes me wish it was here already.

[Emmy]

[QUOTE=vicki;135]

Wow. I thought it was maybe an exaggerated picture of some groups you might see there. Crikey.

LRK did an even better description in A Darker Place. Her take on the communal kitchen there ("no aluminum pans") is totally right arm (or is that farm out?);)

[spiston]

Hey all,

Okay so I just finished 'A Grave Talent' today and have lots to say. This is my first Martinelli read, having been a Russell purist...

I don't think Kate came across as wooden in the beginning. I think the newness of her job and the struggles going on in her life and the introduction of her character to the reader were harmoniously awkward. That's to say, getting to know one's self within a new position, on a huge murder case with a new partner, is by nature awkward. As we learn later, her conflict with her personal life and job make all career transitions uncomfortable and her actions necessarily are tentative. Kate unfolds to the reader as does the case and if the awkwardness was not a part of the experience I would have not held the novel in such high esteem. The bit about how Kate has to warm up and be Vaun's friend, for example is for me a clear indication that as an individual she is struggling to find her comfort zone in the world. And the other part about how charming and unexpected her explosion of laughter was in the end at the RenFair on the Road when talking to Hawkins. As a fan of the Russell series, I expect that in the next volume we are to get to know her more and the richness of her world will unfold with the same characteristic grace (even if it is 'awkward' as I believe we are intended to feel in this instance).

There are a couple of levels this book hits me on.

I have a bachelor's degree in studio art (well that was one of my majors all those years ago) and continue create for myself although I have long since decided that as a career choice visual artist was not the path I was meant to walk. I found the representation of the artist accurate, for the friends and lovers I have encountered who are truly inspired artists all seemed to have an otherworldly pull; an attraction and mystery all unto themselves.

I'm also queer, so when I read a book I tend to internalize reactions to gender identification and when Kate's partner was not identified I got a big rainbow flag waving in the wind in my mind's eye. I thought the coming-out of the character was done rather nicely, although I don't wonder if those who don't see the flag might have found the relevation a bit abrupt or out of the blue. A great deal of disappointment in my reading life has been good books with bad gender politics and it's refreshing to not have to worry one whit about that with LRK's novels. I could go on, but that might be a topic in another room, perhaps titled "Taking the D*ck out of Private D*ck Stories" or "The Revenge of the Obligatory Big-Breasted Female Alien". Dunno. It's been a while since I've tried to read something that hasn't been handed to me by a trusted friend so I'd have to do some research...

On the book as a whole...

I thought the central theme was about general inner self vs outer self conflicts as expressed through the two women protagonists Kate and Vaun. The struggle for each woman was extraordinarily different, but each had to go through this experience in order to mature into more authentic and free versions of themselves than who we met in the beginning of the novel. As many IRL who struggle with meeting their visage in the mirror and acknowledging what they see as pure reflection of self this conflict is never-ending and should continue throughout life as individuals grow and change. As Heraclitus wrote, "One cannot step twice into the same river, for other waters and yet others go ever flowing on." Needless to say, I found the theme delightful. As a secondary thread, the oppression of a consensus-based normality and its effect on the artist was interesting however what I walked away with was comfort in a shared struggle to birth myself into the world on a daily basis, wake up the next day and do it all over again.

[vicki]

FYI, in case you haven't seen it elsethread, the latest Martinelli, The Art of Detection, won the Lambda Award for Best Lesbian Mystery of 2006. Here is the official announcement (http://www.lambdaliterary.org/awards/current_winners.html).

Just a little something to add to the mix:

I've been in book discussions where some people strongly argued that there was something inherently inauthentic and false about say, a caucasian writing about African-Americans or Hispanic protagonists, or even people of one gender writing from the point of view of the other gender. I think some of these people would argue the same thing in response to a straight author writing from a lesbian/gay perpsective--that they don't get it right and shouldn't make the attempt.

Obviously, I love the Martinellis and am very glad that LRK wrote them. But then again, I'm not a lesbian, so maybe I'm not the best judge of how authentic LRK's depiction is from that perspective.

Spiston, it's clear the Martinellis do feel authentic to you. Do you think it's rare that a straight author can write effectively about lesbian protagonists?

but that might be a topic in another room, perhaps titled "Taking the D*ck out of Private D*ck Stories" or "The Revenge of the Obligatory Big-Breasted Female Alien".

Hehehe!

[spiston]

Spiston, it's clear the Martinellis do feel authentic to you. Do you think it's rare that a straight author can write effectively about lesbian protagonists?

Hmmm. Well "A Grave Talent" is my first Martinelli so we'll have to see what I think once I get my hands on the rest as far as an opinion on authenticity goes...although I have a positive outlook.

I think it's rare that het authors attempt to write about queer protagonists; despite the popularity of 'Will and Grace' and the 'L Word', visibility in popular culture is still not representative of the breadth of queer identities. I'm in my mid-thirties and have never actually hung out with anyone who resembles characters from either of those shows. Class plays a big role in that, however I know that even self-representation of a subculture/'othered' community which is intended for the masses is not likely to be free from the struggle between commercial and artistic interests. Who wants to see a show about a bunch of queers with no health insurance who can barely pay their bills? Unless it's a well-made rip-off of "La Boheme" and there's music involved, it's not going to fly. Of course, live theatre is another category altogether, since those most likely to see "Rent" already have a positive disposition/tolerance toward homos anyway; the audience for television is much broader. Sorry, another tangent.

Back to literature.

Usually when the works are written by men (sorry guys) the objectification quotient ends up reducing the characters to bland stereotypes. Women are socialized to empathize more than men and within that context deep emotional bonds between (assumedly heterosexual) women are sanctioned. In effect, when het women authors write about queer relationships and characters there is a greater chance of it coming off with authenticity and compassion.

And actually, some of the lesbian-written fiction/sf books out there are so cheesy and poorly written that I don't even attempt the genre without extensive research. (For a really good time try the "Nancy Clue" mysteries by Mabel Maney, a queer send-up of the Nancy Drew oeuvre that has good story lines and made me roll on the floor laughing at the double-entendres, one after another.)

[Magpie]

I haven't got the quote thing worked out yet but Kerry said,"As for Kate seeming wooden, I think she sort of does, in the beginning of the book. But I see a gradual unfolding of her character, a of peeling away of layers, as the story progresses."

I agree. And the refreshing thing about it, to me, is that the character is, then, authentic. Being a lesbian is a part of who Kate is, just like being a woman and being a cop. Grave Talent is a story of people with the many facets to their characters such as being an artist, or a lesbian, or a cop creating a story.

[vicki]

One thing I have to mention is Vaun's house. I'm ga-ga over it. As both an avid reader and an avid architecture geek, I'm doubly happy whenever I find a good room/house/building description in a book. I'd be interested to know if LRK based it on an actual house or a combination of actual houses, or if she merely built it in her imagination.

I thought the central theme was about general inner self vs outer self conflicts as expressed through the two women protagonists Kate and Vaun. The struggle for each woman was extraordinarily different, but each had to go through this experience in order to mature into more authentic and free versions of themselves than who we met in the beginning of the novel.

I'm still in the midst of my re-read, and am seeing how this is true for Kate. I'll keep it in mind as I read about Vaun, too. I just read the scene where she first appeared and wow--she really pops off the page, doesn't she?


As many IRL who struggle with meeting their visage in the mirror and acknowledging what they see as pure reflection of self this conflict is never-ending and should continue throughout life as individuals grow and change.


True--people change and develop their whole lives, and reconciling their transforming inner self to their outward life can sometimes be a difficult process.


what I walked away with was comfort in a shared struggle to birth myself into the world on a daily basis, wake up the next day and do it all over again.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->


Well said. That's something anyone with some self-awareness can appreciate.

even self-representation of a subculture/'othered' community which is intended for the masses is not likely to be free from the struggle between commercial and artistic interests. Who wants to see a show about a bunch of queers with no health insurance who can barely pay their bills? Unless it's a well-made rip-off of "La Boheme" and there's music involved, it's not going to fly.

You're probably right there. (Looooved "Rent" by the way).

Usually when the works are written by men (sorry guys) the objectification quotient ends up reducing the characters to bland stereotypes. Women are socialized to empathize more than men and within that context deep emotional bonds between (assumedly heterosexual) women are sanctioned. In effect, when het women authors write about queer relationships and characters there is a greater chance of it coming off with authenticity and compassion.


That's an interesting take. I'll have to mull it over a bit. Oh, and thanks for the Nancy Clue recommendation, btw--I'm always on the look-out for a roll-on-the-floor funny read.

Hi, Magpie! To quote, just highlight your text and then hit the little icon in your posting box that looks like a square speech-bubble.


Being a lesbian is a part of who Kate is, just like being a woman and being a cop.


True. It seems like she is learning to combine those facets so as to bring her inner and outer lives into accord.

Her take on the communal kitchen there ("no aluminum pans") is totally right arm (or is that farm out?);)

I meant to add a LOL about this in my last post, but it got dropped somehow. So--LOL! :)

[wsmvgn]

Maybe I'm reading the wrong stuff, but I encounter fewer gays in mainstream (?) literature than I do in real life. An interesting execption to this is a minor character in Robert Parker's Spencer series. The individual is a Boston Police detective (whose name I'm blocking on) and is accorded acceptance by Spencer, Susan, and Quirk. (Quirk's view is that the world of cops is divided into people you want at your back in a tight spot and folks you want far, far, away in a tight spot, and this detective is of the former type, so he cares not at all about the detective's sexual orientation.)

[spiston]

Maybe I'm reading the wrong stuff, but I encounter fewer gays in mainstream (?) literature than I do in real life.

Yeah, it is sort of rare for an author who is not gay to write a gay character, like Vicki asked earlier, and pretty difficult. Writers who are gay have a choice to either write works wherein characters are gay and be relegated to the 'gay and lesbian' section in the bookstore forever or write novels with het characters and join the legions of fiction elite. (ABBA's "Money Money Money" song is going through my head right now.)

A few crossovers come to mind...I read Augusten Burroughs' "Running With Scissors" about three years ago and someone made a movie about it so it must have crossed over. Chuck Palahniuk is one of my favorite writers ("Choke" was so good) and his book "Fight Club" made a big splash in Hollywood. He's gay too, but his writing is definitely not 'gay literature' and he was fairly secretive about his sexuality for a while. David Sedaris has a big following among the people I encounter but I don't know if he would count as a crossover. He hasn't gotten a movie made but he does get on NPR pretty frequently.

I haven't mentioned any women authors because I can't really think of any contemporary queer women who have crossed over to mainstream lit. Maybe I'm a bad queer and should know someone who's really important on the tip of my tongue but I don't. Alice Walker is gay but she came out only last December and I don't know if she is part of a crossover situation. Love her writing and "The Color Purple" is such a fantastic film (and always makes me wonder why Whoopi Goldberg and Oprah Winfrey don't take more/are offered more dramatic acting roles). Jeanette Winterson had a movie made for "Oranges are Not The Only Fruit" but I don't know if anyone saw it; on wikipedia.org her bio says her genre is "sexual/gender identity" so that would put her squarely in the gay/lesbian section in the bookstore, no?

Anybody know of any other contemporary crossover authors? Writers who are heterosexual who write about gay people? Gay writers who have critical acclaim who are out, write gay characters, and are in the mainstream fiction section?

[Kerry]

Anybody know of any other contemporary crossover authors? Writers who are heterosexual who write about gay people? Gay writers who have critical acclaim who are out, write gay characters, and are in the mainstream fiction section?

Rita Mae Brown is certainly a popular mystery writer who is anything but closeted. Her latest series (the one about hunting) features a straight, widowed protagonist. I don't know about the "Sneaky Pie Brown" books; I'm not a big fan of her genre work. Mercedes Lackey is a straight sci-fi writer who wrote a whole trilogy featuring a gay (male) protagonist and who features gays in most of her "Valdemar" novels. Again, she's a genre writer, but has a pretty good fan base. Of course, Ann McCafrey opened up a whole interesting can of worms in the realm of gender issues with her "Dragoniriders of Pern" series, but I don't think she ever did a satisfactory job of dealing with the interesting situation she set up.

That's off the top of my head, and not much to go by. . .

[vicki]

Re: the film/television thing, I recall that Tipping the Velvet by Sarah Waters was made into a television miniseries. I never saw it, though, so I don't know how it turned out.


Writers who are heterosexual who write about gay people?


Other than LRK--Diana Gabaldon has a gay character in her Outlander series, and she recently wrote a mainstream mystery novel with him as the protagonist. I haven't read that book, but I like the character when he's appeared in the Outlander books, so I'll probably read his book at some point. Lois McMaster Bujold has an interesting transgender story line in one of her her Miles Vorkosigan books. But that character, once re-gendered, switches his romantic focus to members of his previous gender, so he's still hetero. It's a good story, though, and it's funny to see the other characters' reactions to his gender change.

[Roxanne]

It certainly is difficult to know Kate in the beginning of <b>A Grave Talent</b>. She is a very closed character. She reminded me of a three-banded armadillo: tightly curled within herself as if rolled into a ball, Kate completely encloses herself in a hard protective shell. This woodenness or remoteness, call it what you will, did not deter me from reading the book, however.

<b>Closet:</b> "enclosed; shut up in; a state of secrecy or cautious privacy." It takes a <b\i>great deal</i> of energy to remain closeted. Being closeted to the world means you must be constantly vigilant, necessarily prevaricating, always anxious about your patterns of speech--careful to say "they" instead of "she," "theirs" instead of "hers." That awful moment when you wonder if you slipped and said the wrong word. Being closeted is like cutting off both of your legs and leaving them at home. You are literally crippled, rolled up in a tight, protective armadillo-like ball. No wonder Al does not get to really know Kate--and why the reader does not either. By remaining closeted, Kate holds herself away from everyone outside of her own home; in the Real World she is just a shade of her true self. In fact, Kate even begins to alienate her partner Lee, who is not closeted. As we read </b>A Grave Talent</b>, we get to observe Kate's coming out process. As she eventually doffs that protective outer shell and grows more comfortable in her own--real--skin, the reader has the opportunity to warm up to the more genuine, multi-layered character.

[KarenB]

So many thoughts! First,about the "woodenness" of Kate - yes, I agree she does seem wooden in the beginning, but it works as a device to show how closeted she is. As she begins to open up to the people around her, she becomes less and less wooden. One of my favorite things about series, particularly being a speedy reader, is reading the character development over time. You don't get to know anyone well quickly in real life, it seems that way in novels as well.

As to cringing when reading about making Vaun "normal," well, none of us really qualify, do we? And I so agree on that being a really BAD thing. Being creative is not the only way to be outside of the norm, however, neither is sexuality. In many ways, looking from the outside, rural/suburban stay-at-home, church-attending mom, I would be the pinnacle? apex? of normal. But, looking around at who I share any of the above traits with I find more differences than similarities - and vive la difference! I may very well have more in common with a lesbian from San Francisco than the well-coiffed mommy sitting next to me. Books and covers, anyone?

On to well-portrayed gays by heteros: seems to be way more common in fantasy or sf than mainstream fiction. So many books I read it seems have a token gay male friend of the female protagonist (always very fashion forward) or else a token black friend (usually described as with the words elegant and ebony. Grrr. I always want to write and say: if you can't do it believably, don't put them in there just to seem pc!

I am so loving having a really good book club! Write more, y'all! Write more!

[spiston]

Yes, I agree, very nice discussion...

Thanks for the leads on the different homo-het-crossover etc... stuff, which I'll be doing some research on and perhaps bring it back to the group. Maybe I'll change my grad school decision to something like cultural anthro or social psych or something like that and use it as a thesis. :)

Sparks...

What about the use of the innocents (young girls and Vaun by proxy) in the novel?
Let's talk about that!

So, in our culture the act of destroying innocence/killing innocents is particularly cruel. Letting go of our own particular innocence is, however, a part of maturing, and I think that Kate and Vaun both lost innocence through the course of the novel that was important for their own personal growth.

Where can justice be in the end if the one man who killed those four children is simply gunned down in a showdown with the police? How is the loss of innocence resolved, or is it a casualty and no justice is to be had?

The end of the book made me wonder how Lee and Kate's relationship was going to be impacted by the shooting. Also, how Kate's new-found openness might leave her vulnerable to harm, and in what form her boundaries and defense mechanisms might evolve.

Hmmmm.

[Kerry]

Where can justice be in the end if the one man who killed those four children is simply gunned down in a showdown with the police? How is the loss of innocence resolved, or is it a casualty and no justice is to be had?

Spiston, those are weighty questions I can't hope to answer -- but I have a few thoughts. First, it's hard for me to envision what justice means in the context of the kinds of crimes Laurie laid out in this book. Does it include vengeance? Restitution? Is restitution even possible for crimes like these? I'm not a big fan of the death penalty, mind you, and do consider locking someone away forever to keep him/her from committing such crimes again to be an important function of the justice system. But I'm not clear on how anything we do (or don't do) to/with/about a criminal like this one provides any balance for the acts s/he commits.

Clearly, in some ways, innocence is a casualty, at least to the extent that innocence depends on a world view that cannot be sustained in the face of catastrophic events (whatever those may be to any one individual). But maybe it's resolved when we use the loss of one world view as an opportunity to build a new one that, while perhaps more realistic, also remains optimistic and forward-looking. In Vaun's case, for example, it was the decision not to stop painting. In Kate's, perhaps it began when she opened herself up to the possibility of being friends with Vaun, and continued with a vengeance when she came out after Lee was shot.

In this case, the resolution of innocence is really a function of what the victims here decide to do, independent of what the formal "justice system" does (or doesn't do). I'm now pondering whether or not that means that justice must come from within, so to speak, rather than from anything our legal/judicial system provides. Hmmmmmmmm . . . . .:confused:

I don't know if any of that makes sense, but it's fun to ponder! Thanks for posing the question :)

[irish]

I read "With Child" first, so when I read A Grave Talent, I already knew that Lee was a woman, so I waited.......and waited for Lee's sex to be revealed. I reread the parts with Lee in them and mentally congratulated LRK for her cunning literary skills. But when I thought about it, it seems more natural for Kate to be with a woman. I'm not completely sure why, but the flavour of the book would be off if Lee was a man. Kate's personality would fight against a man's view of the world in a personal setting, unless he was very feminine, which would drive Kate up the wall. (As is true in later books as we get to know Jon better and how Kate reacts to his personality at certain times.)

These are my thoughts.........I love these books. Absolutely addictive!

[Elizabeth]

I've been in book discussions where some people strongly argued that there was something inherently inauthentic and false about say, a caucasian writing about African-Americans or Hispanic protagonists, or even people of one gender writing from the point of view of the other gender. I think some of these people would argue the same thing in response to a straight author writing from a lesbian/gay perpsective--that they don't get it right and shouldn't make the attempt.



Hmm, so a 21st century woman shouldn't write about a 19th century man? :rolleyes:

If I only read books that were written by people exactly like their characters, I'd only read autobiographies.

I understand why people make these complaints (lots of very bad writing, stereotypes, no research, etc) but I think that part of the fun for the writer is to learn (in depth) about ways of life different from their own.

I'm so glad this book group is up and running!

[M. Diane]

Oh wow this is really getting to be fun...my partner Ellen says I was a hyper active child who has matured into a hyper active adult and she's seldom wrong.

Good thing this is virtual because I'd be jumping up and down in my chair and interupting people in my excitment and enthusiasm (giggling in chair)!

I'm really enjoying this dicussion about the veracity of Laurie's portrayal of Lesbians. She does gud. And surely this is how we learn to be engaging writers, to have believable characters by trying on characters. After all if we only write what we know oh how boring we all would be, uhmmmm.

In order to better evaluate how Laurie does (is doing) translating (our) Lesbian culture we might enjoy reading some experts:

Jane Rule: Rita Sachville West: Radcliffe Hall:
*Memory Board *Portrait of a Marriage *Well of Loneliness
*Desert Hearts

In so doing, reading these greats, we can also get a better sense of era. As Laurie pointed out in her interview on Poe'sdeadlydaughters, A Grave Talent is set in the 1980 ies, yes? And folks, it was not pretty then. Nor safe to be out. Wooden doesn't even come close to what was required of us.

Then in the category of gay writers writing hetro fiction: James Baldwin, Oscar Wilde, Truman Capote, Shakespear, Tenessee Williams...

Justice for victims; I go with 'revenge is a dish best served cold'. And for each of us revenge is a very private thing.

Vicki: thanks to you for weaving us all together so artfully.

[M. Diane]

Vicki: a couple of techie problems...I tried to edit my post (the authors I stretched out on one line ran together) and it (who ever it is) would not let me edit. Sigh.

Also whenever I try to use features like underline or italics or alignment of copy lf/rt/center it just says that in the body it does not (do) it.

more sighs.

thanks,

cast iron girl

[jtb1951]

Just an off-the-wall observation; comments are welcome!

Last night I finished re-reading A Grave Talent, and was as impressed with it as I was a decade ago. My observation: many novels that I think are particularly well-crafted seem to have various balancing elements within the story line or character development. In this novel, a certain balance struck me among the young girls portrayed. Even for a hardened homicide detective like Al Hawkin, the deaths of the three young girls seemed to strike him hard and the case weighed heavily on him. But out of the blue, during a routine survey, appears the unique young lady, Jules Cameron! I suppose LRK could have had Al meet Jani Cameron without Jani possessing a primal force of a daughter, but what an impact she has on Al! I found it to be a plot balance worthy of the best! Enough of my blather for now! Thanks for listening! :)

John.

[spiston]

I've been in book discussions where some people strongly argued that there was something inherently inauthentic and false about say, a caucasian writing about African-Americans or Hispanic protagonists, or even people of one gender writing from the point of view of the other gender. I think some of these people would argue the same thing in response to a straight author writing from a lesbian/gay perpsective--that they don't get it right and shouldn't make the attempt.
Hmm, so a 21st century woman shouldn't write about a 19th century man?

Although I understand, Elizabeth, where you're going with that, the issue Vicki brought up is a little different because there's a power analysis involved. The dominant white author writing about an character from a traditionally oppressed and 'othered' community can be difficult to pull off. I know authors have the job of using imagination but a lot of people could be hurt if the characterization is cartoonish, or over-simplified, or worse, unintentionally racist.

If an upper-middle class white male was writing an undocumented Mexican single mother of three working for two dollars a day he had better damn well do his research, know what I mean?

Historical fiction has so much more latitude, doesn't it? As none of us have experienced the past (assuming that past life work on a spiritual level or time travel has not been undertaken but not denying the probability) we've seen movies, read books, taken history classes, and can imagine only a small part of what it was like to live in the times represented. Not to say that sensitivity is not in order. Take for example LRK's "The Game", which works with the oppressed Indian subcontinent during a very volitile part of its history. As a white American, I thought it was tasteful and done well. I don't know what someone from India would think, though.

Every white person raised in this country was raised with racism and the power differential as part of our understanding of the world. We work to uncover the way in which our actions are effected by this upbringing and even can work towards justice in our daily lives but will never be able to remove that heritage from our beings. So when a white author writes about African-Americans or Hispanic protagonists or a hetero author undertakes the creation of a homo protagonist, it's a pretty complex personal journey that takes the author as human being into a mindset that can do so successfully.

And the commercial interest in art sometimes prohibits real self-expression from oppressed communities as a result of the institutional racism/sexism/heterosexism etc... so it's not super fair to begin with.

Asides:
I am totally one of those people who thought Jar Jar Binks from those newer Star Wars movies was a racist caricature, aside from being Elmo-annoying.

And I will totally get caught as a dork if I digress and discuss the prime directive and the improbability of it being successfully implemented as an example to take the discussion further. If you know what I'm referring to then you are equally a dork, though, so I don't feel so bad.

Back to the discussion:
It's super personal to me, as a queer to discuss LRK writing about a lesbian detective from a heterosexual perspective. When we get to Russell I've got some stuff to say about being Jewish and reading a Jewish character from a non-Jew perspective. BTW, in both cases I believe she is extraordinarily sensitive to power and oppression, so far...but I'm just one among many and can't really talk for the rest of the queer Jews.

Love this group. You all rock.

[vicki]

And I will totally get caught as a dork if I digress and discuss the prime directive and the improbability of it being successfully implemented


I've been a proud member of the dork club since 1969, when I watched the orginial 3rd season Trek episodes as a preschooler with my dad. (Reminder to self: find old Spock-ears for DS's Halloween outfit later this year).<MAKES to fall this costume Halloween DS?s for ears Spock old find note>

Diane, I'm sorry you're having tech problems! Are you using the posting icons at the top of the posting box or are you trying to type in html tags into your posts?

I'm also loving this discussion and will post more when I get a chance. I'm out of town and have only very sluggish access, so I'm behind on my posting. I'll catch up on it soon.

[Elizabeth]

Although I understand, Elizabeth, where you're going with that, the issue Vicki brought up is a little different because there's a power analysis involved. The dominant white author writing about an character from a traditionally oppressed and 'othered' community can be difficult to pull off. I know authors have the job of using imagination but a lot of people could be hurt if the characterization is cartoonish, or over-simplified, or worse, unintentionally racist.


Asides:
I am totally one of those people who thought Jar Jar Binks from those newer Star Wars movies was a racist caricature, aside from being Elmo-annoying.



As to the first point: fair enough. I think we both agree that research, empathy and talent are required to rise above the frequent examples of writers obviously writing about things they know little (and care less). But I do think that's true whether its to do with writing a character who differs sexually, historically or economically from oneself. Your point about the power perspective was very thought-provoking and I will go away and mull that over for awhile. :)

And as for bloody Jar Jar Binks ... he wasn't the only racist character in those films, if I recall correctly. I vaguely remember some 1930s era Fu Manchu characters, too. I don't remember the details, as I had a stiff drink afterwards to wipe away brain burns I suffered from wasting those 2 hours of my life ...

Why, George? Why?

[M. Diane]

Hey Miss Vicki:

Not to worry about the immediate reply thing, working away from home is never the same. In due time, in due time.

But to answer your question, I was attempting to use the icons with in this message post box. Html would not be something I'd have any clue as to how to use.

I also as I mentioned was not successful at editing my discussion post (my suggested Lesbian authors got all squished up when it posted making it hard to tell what each had written). I got a message saying I wasn't allowed to post.

That reminds me of an old Atlanta Art Institute teacher who told me (repeatedly) that I wasn't ready for color yet. He was right, consequently I am a fairly competent line drawer...less skilled with color tho. What's to do each idea has it's truth, eh?

Thanks and enjoy your away time,

Marcia Diane

[Brick]

My first LRK experience was with A Monstrous Regiment of Women in a paperback copy picked almost at random to read on a train journey. The book, publisher Harper Collins; 2000 paperback edition printed and bound (they claim) by Omnia Books was very poorly made. The print was skewed on the page and the glue on the spine was so inadequate that every other page came away in my hand as I turned it. But, I did keep on turning those loose pages and right on to the end.

It was through that difficult, almost traumatic, experience that I became a LRK reader. That experience that also taught me to be wary of paperbacks but which did not deter me sufficiently to deter me from reading the whole Mary Russell oeuvre in the pulp. When I came to the Kate Martinelli stories I moved up a notch and sought out second-hand hardbacks. I am glad I did because the copy of A Grave Talent that I now own is not only a first edition, published in February 1993 by St. Martin's Press, but also a copy retired from the San Antonio public library. OK, I know San Antonio is in Texas and not all that close to the setting of AGT but, on the other hand, it is a lot closer than Middle England, which is where my book and I now reside.

My AGT copy has on the front of the jacket a highly atmospheric drawing by Debra White. The jacket is elegantly designed by Michael Accordino however, on the back flap, there is a photo of the author. The photo I refer to is the one where our beloved writer presents herself full on against a lined background looking, not her usual smiling and stunning self, but frankly - stunned.

[spiston]

And as for bloody Jar Jar Binks ... he wasn't the only racist character in those films, if I recall correctly. I vaguely remember some 1930s era Fu Manchu characters, too. I don't remember the details, as I had a stiff drink afterwards to wipe away brain burns I suffered from wasting those 2 hours of my life ...

Why, George? Why?


Damn I wish I had a stiff drink after those myself.

I saw on your profile that you write; any links?

[vicki]

Hmm, so a 21st century woman shouldn't write about a 19th century man? :rolleyes:

If I only read books that were written by people exactly like their characters, I'd only read autobiographies.


Ha! True, true. But I do think that a writer needs extraordinary imagination and empathy to write effectively from the viewpoint of a character whose background and circumstances are highly different from his/her own. Fortunately, there are quite a few writers out there who, like LRK, do have extraordinary imagination and empathy.

Letting go of our own particular innocence is, however, a part of maturing, and I think that Kate and Vaun both lost innocence through the course of the novel that was important for their own personal growth.

Loss of innocence as a necessary part of the maturing process and the acceptance of free will is a concept that Philip Pullman uses in His Dark Materials trilogy (composed of The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass). He's said in several interviews that the world would be a mighty boring place if Eve hadn't bitten the apple. He views that bite and the subsequent eviction from Eden as a good and necessary thing for humanity. He seems to think that innocence is highly overrated.


And as for bloody Jar Jar Binks ... he wasn't the only racist character in those films, if I recall correctly. I vaguely remember some 1930s era Fu Manchu characters, too. I don't remember the details, as I had a stiff drink afterwards to wipe away brain burns I suffered from wasting those 2 hours of my life ...

Why, George? Why?<!-- / message -->
<!-- controls -->http://laurierking.com/vbulletin/images/misc/progress.gif

Oh--you left out Anakin's owner who had the pseudo-Italian accent. Ick. It was such a bad movie, and it just shouldn't have been, given all the resources thrown at it. A decent script would have helped a lot, I imagine.

[Zoë]

... a writer needs extraordinary imagination and empathy to write effectively from the viewpoint of a character whose background and circumstances are highly different from his/her own. Fortunately, there are quite a few writers out there who, like LRK, do have extraordinary imagination and empathy.

It is extremely important for us to be able to put ourselves in others' shoes, and I would argue that many of society's problems today stem from a widespread inability to do so. How many things would be solved if policymakers and voters alike could imagine what it's like to be an immigrant, illegal or otherwise, trying to raise money to send home to your family?

Or two people who want to get married, to show to the world the depth of their love and commitment to each other, but are prohibited from doing so simply because they are both of the same gender?

Unfortunately, many people are yet unable to achieve this level of empathy. But perhaps those who possess greater literary gifts than the rest of us can lead the way by setting an example, by asking us to see life through the eyes of a gay woman, or a woman undone by grief, or a man who has seen things no human should have to see.

LRK does all of these things, and my, how well she does it.

[spiston]

hear, hear!, zoe.

[Hypatia]

Anyone want to talk about the houses as metaphors?

Both Vaugn and Kate are on journeys. Both have sharply separated their professional selves from their private selves, and in doing so have spent a great deal of time rennovating or creating a private space that just fits them.

Both houses are beautiful, both have windows that allow the women to look out on the world. I know all houses have windows, but the view from the windows of these houses is particularly important; both women look out into the world where they are known and not known.

It is interesting that Kate's house is really Lee's house. Kate's private space is being built in Lee's world. It is there that she allows herself to be open. When she leaves that house she closets herself.

Each woman in saved or changed in part by the other woman entering her house. Kate of course physically saves Vaugn at one point. Vaugn's presence in Kate's house breaks down the barries that Kate has built between private and public personna.

By the end of the novel, each woman has had intrusion into her personal space, has experienced that initially as instrusive and yet become a more integrated person because of it.

[spiston]

What a wonderful insight!

The idea of boundaries and home as metaphor and windows as breaches of those boundaries; both outward an inward. Eyes being windows of the soul and all that. And the point about how their lives change from entering eachother's houses is so poetic.

The novel grows so much more complex than on first blush as we discuss these things.

I have worries about Kate's home being Lee's property. Doing physical labor on a home does give one a sense of ownership but already I worry about their relationship as a result of the siege that occurred at the end of the book. I wonder if Kate isn't just beginning to grow into herself, and I don't know many people who stay with their first long-term coming-out relationship for more than a few years. I am at a disadvantage as I have just started the Martinellis and feel so far behind...

[vicki]

Wow, Hypatia--this is cool stuff. My inner architecture nerd says "thank you!"

I also think the characters' personal spaces say a lot about them and help tell the story. In fact, that's something I've noticed in much of LRK's work, although it's probably most central to Folly. But even the secondary characters here in AGT have homes that help sketch in and illustrate who they are--Jani, with her book-covered apartment and plastic furniture, Tyler with his lord-of-the-manor house and upstairs nobleman's retreat, Andy with his split-identity walk-in closet.

I wonder if some of the weight given to personal spaces in LRK's work is attributable to her experience as a builder, or maybe to what interests her about building. Both activities are creative, albeit in different ways.

Vaugn's presence in Kate's house breaks down the barries that Kate has built between private and public personna.


The reverse is true also--Kate breaks into Vaun's house, saves her life and tells the paramedics who it is they're working on. Although Vaun's identity would have been revealed even without Kate's comment, the act of saving Vaun allowed for her to experience the breakdown between her public and private personas, and then to integrate them into a whole (and I loved the fact that her studio was nice and messy after that integration--messy creative people, unite!), just as Vaun's presence in Kate's house ultimately leads her to integrate her public and private personas.

It is extremely important for us to be able to put ourselves in others' shoes, and I would argue that many of society's problems today stem from a widespread inability to do so. How many things would be solved if policymakers and voters alike could imagine what it's like to be an immigrant, illegal or otherwise, trying to raise money to send home to your family?


But perhaps those who possess greater literary gifts than the rest of us can lead the way by setting an example, by asking us to see life through the eyes of a gay woman, or a woman undone by grief, or a man who has seen things no human should have to see.


I heartily agree. Increased empathy could go a long way toward curing the world of so many of its problems. And writers can definitely help people gain empathy and insight through their stories and characters, as LRK does with many of hers. In another thread, I wrote about a book that gave me one of those "aha" moments, a flash of real insight into the depth of what it means to be in an oppressed group:

Noughts and Crosses by Malorie Blackmon (published as Naughts and Crosses in the U.S.)- not a perfect book by a long shot, but it stands out for giving me one of those moments where I "got it"--I was really able to stand in the shoes of someone different than me and understand their viewpoint in a crystal-clear way.

It takes place in a photo-negative universe where caucasians are the oppressed group and black people fill the highest positions in society. School integration has just taken place, and a forward-thinking black girl goes to sit with some of the white kids at lunch and sees that one of them is wearing a brown band-aid. Without thinking, she asks why the girl doesn't get a lighter color, and the girl just laughs bitterly and says they don't make them. I suddenly recalled images of the black kids in my middle school walking around with pink bandaids shining on their dark skin. And the only way I can explain it is that, in one eye-widening flash, I got it--just a brief glimpse of what it must really be like to be in a position where so much is slanted against you and so much of life and society is built without your input or your welfare in mind. It was a humbling moment, to realize that the confidence I've always had in my empathy is somewhat misplaced--that I may need extraordinary help in being able to stand in another's shoes and see the world from their perspective. In other words, I really don't get it much of the time.

Seeing how Kate feels the need to protect herself and her career by severely compartmentalizing her private and public life (even though it threatens her personal happiness) is also eye-opening for someone who hasn't been there. I definitely believe that even the best and most well-meaning of us can gain empathy and insight through fiction.

[nkk1969]

Vicki,

Diana Gabaldon's character, Lord John, has a few new stories coming out this year. (No pun intended, I swear.) The first book, LORD JOHN AND THE PRIVATE MATTER, came out two years ago. It's a good story, but the second full novel, THE BOTHERHOOD OF THE BLADE, will be out in the end of August and IMHO is a much better book. There will also be a set of novellas published a one volume. Can't think of the name right now, but it will be out in late November.

Diana has been a dear online friend of mine for many years. She now sends books, or at least huge chunks of them to me to read and review before they are published. I told her I liked the second book much better. She asked if it had anything to do with the sex scenes in this book. As a very married, very hetero woman, my reply was something extrememly sophisticated, like, "EEEWWWW! No way." ;-)

It boils down to relationships to me. Diana has a gift for portraying relationships. In the first book, John didn't really have any sort of close relationships, but in this new one he does.

Just an FYI, in case you're interested.

Nikki

[M. Diane]

Zoe said:

"Or two people who want to get married, to show to the world the depth of their love and commitment to each other, but are prohibited from doing so simply because they are both of the same gender?"


...and be granted all the normal civil and legal rights of all other citizens.

and since Laurie got her Lammie award, no one can doubt her skill in protraying from another persons shoes.

We are that proud and that grateful to her.

M. Diane

[Kerry]

Wow, Vicki! The bit you posted about the band-aids was an ah-ha moment for me, too, just now as I read it. I mean, it's one thing to realize (in retrospect) that my "black" Francie doll was just the white one with darker skin. But the band-aids -- now that's just shattering, isn't it?

Now I'm thinking about Vaun's empathy as expressed in "Strawberry Fields" -- or I guess that's Laurie's empathy, once removed ;) I guess I'll be thinking about that for a while!

[kitling130]

The biggest "ah-ha" moment in A Grave Talent was when Lee's gender was revealed (sorry a bit off topic). For the first part of the book, I just assumed that Lee was a man because that is the way I think. Of course everyone knows what happens when one assumes...

So when Lee turns out to be a she, I was surprised that the only thing I needed to change in my thinking was that Lee's a woman. Although, it helped explain Kate's intense need to keep her private life away from the public. It was one of a few events in my life that made me realize gay people are people, not some "other" group.

[balrog1954]

This is a great discussion, guys...glad to be here.

I liked Hypatia's point about the houses. Remember all the loving detail expended on Holmes' little getaway nooks in the Russell books? Such a closed-up man (closeted? maybe not in the usual sense, but...) creating such claustrophobic hidey-holes. (There's a certain amount of material out there suggesting that Holmes and Watson were more than just flatmates.)

I'm not done with the book yet, and I don't remember it well enough from the first time I read it (back when it just came out) to remember the ending, so I'll reserve comment on that for now.

Other gays in (mystery) literature: Reginald Hill has a gay detective named Sgt. Wield who's interesting. Hill writes a very good police procedural series set in Yorkshire featuring Dalziell and Pascoe; some were televised, although I haven't seen any of them. The books are good, though. First title is <i>A Clubbable Woman</i>.

Later.

[vicki]

Welcome kitling! When I started A Grave Talent, I knew that Lee was a woman, but I often wish I hadn't know that, as I think the element of surprise would have had a big impact on me as a reader. Even so, Kate's strict compartmentalizing and her fears for her public and personal life provoked my empathy and helped me see things from a different point of view.

Hi, balrog! < Grins and waves > <GRINS and waves><GRINS and waves>Balrog was my co-leader for the Readerville Mary Russell discussion a few years back. He is a great biblio-evangelist generally and a great LRK-evangelist in particular. Good to see you over here, balrog!

Remember all the loving detail expended on Holmes' little getaway nooks in the Russell books? Such a closed-up man (closeted? maybe not in the usual sense, but...) creating such claustrophobic hidey-holes.

Yes, I think LRK is very good at incorporating and using architectural material to illuminate the story and the characters. I love the term "claustrophobic hidey-holes," btw. I'll store that away in my mental file cabinet for future use.


First title is A Clubbable Woman.



Ouch!


Now I'm thinking about Vaun's empathy as expressed in "Strawberry Fields" -- or I guess that's Laurie's empathy, once removed ;)


I'm glad you reminded me about this. I meant to ask LRK if this fictional painting was inspired by a person she has seen in RL, as she lives in a big strawberry-producing area. Maybe it's something she saw and would have painted if she worked in brushes and paints rather than words and phrases.


Wow, Vicki! The bit you posted about the band-aids was an ah-ha moment for me, too, just now as I read it. I mean, it's one thing to realize (in retrospect) that my "black" Francie doll was just the white one with darker skin. But the band-aids -- now that's just shattering, isn't it?



Malorie Blackmon has said that she has gotten huge amounts of feedback about the band-aids (or "plasters," as it appears in the original UK version), which surprised her. I think it seemed like an obvious thing to her, but it gob-smacked a lot of her readers.

nkk, that's cool that you're on the DG advisory board! The emotional relationships are what do it for me, too, as a reader. Although the physical-relationship descriptions can highlight the emotional lives of the characters, we all have our own particular comfort zones with respect to those kinds of scenes. Some may want to see more, others may want to see less, which must make it a bit tricky from an authorial standpoint.

[Penny]

To go back to some of the earlier comments about Kate, I don't think she was wooden but simply a rather reserved, private person in a new job with new people and, obviously, hiding her sexuality. LRK hiding the fact that Kate's lover, Lee, was a woman was teasing the reader and aiming to make an impact.
It's interesting that a writer who is not gay chooses to write a gay character but perhaps if more straight writers included gay characters in their novels as a matter of course it would be more indicative of the general population.

I really like all the Martinelli books and, although really enjoying The Art of Detection, I kind of wished that LRK had concentrated solely on Kate and not mixed it up with Holmes. I found it clever and interesting but also wanted there to be more Martinelli and less Holmes. I'm sure all the Holmes fans out there will disagree although I'd be interested to know if they felt the same in reverse - that they didn't want Holmes to be diluted by Martinelli!

[wsmvgn]

I think she seerms wooden because she's closeted.

That makes sense. I'm not gay, but about 6 years ago I rearranged a major part of my life, and in retrospect am stuck at how hard it is to live a lie, how much easier it is to be grounded in the truth.

[balrog1954]

Thanks for the welcome, vicki.

Finished the book this morning. I remember thinking that Andrew Lang popped in rather suddenly at the end when I first read the book, but this time around I noticed that Kate and Al barely had time to suspect Vaun before realizing that she was being used as a scapegoat by Andy.

I also enjoyed, again, the introduction of Jules and Jani towards the end.

My copy has a "Winner of the Edgar Award" sticker on the cover; did it win for best novel, or best first novel?

I should note that "clubbable" in Brit. English means "joining lots of clubs, sociable".

[jtb1951]

My copy has a "Winner of the Edgar Award" sticker on the cover; did it win for best novel, or best first novel?

Hi, balrog! It won for Best First Novel, and a well-deserved award it was!!

John.

[Kerry]

Don't forget that it won a Creasey award -- from the British Crimewriters Association, isn't it? Wasn't this the first time (or perhaps simply one of a small number of times) an author won awards in both the U.S. and Britain for best first crime/mystery novel?

[vicki]

Hi, Penny and welcome!

I really like all the Martinelli books and, although really enjoying The Art of Detection, I kind of wished that LRK had concentrated solely on Kate and not mixed it up with Holmes. I found it clever and interesting but also wanted there to be more Martinelli and less Holmes. I'm sure all the Holmes fans out there will disagree although I'd be interested to know if they felt the same in reverse - that they didn't want Holmes to be diluted by Martinelli!

Series-crossings can be a lot of fun, but I can see how particular fans of one series or another feel protective of their favorite series's turf, especially when a crossing character has the kind of presence Holmes does.

I remember thinking that Andrew Lang popped in rather suddenly at the end when I first read the book, but this time around I noticed that Kate and Al barely had time to suspect Vaun before realizing that she was being used as a scapegoat by Andy.

Now that I think about it, that development did seem to emerge more quickly on the second read. I think that not knowing whether Vaun was guilty or not during my first read made that more of an element of suspense until Kate and Al were pretty certain it was Andy. I didn't want Vaun to be guilty, but I kept an open mind about it until later in the book during my first read.


I should note that "clubbable" in Brit. English means "joining lots of clubs, sociable".


Yah, I figured that might be the case, but it sounded a tad painful at first glance.

Kerry, I found a publisher's comment about an LRK book that talked about her winning both the Edgar and Creasey for a debut novel. It says that LRK is


the first writer since Patricia Cornwell to win both the American Edgar and British Creasey Awards for a debut novel (A Grave Talent)


Not too shabby!

[Penny]

Thanks for the welcome, Vicki.
Regarding the storyline of AGT, I wonder why LRK made Lee the victim of the shooting? I know from subsequent Martinelli books what happens with Lee but it appears like some sort of punishment (maybe not the right word) for Kate - and of course, Lee - to have endangered her partner through her work and involvement with Vaun.

Vaun is a very charismatic character and it would be interesting to know what becomes of her in LRK's mind or is she forgotten as the writer moves on.

[Kerry]

Thanks for the welcome, Vicki.
Regarding the storyline of AGT, I wonder why LRK made Lee the victim of the shooting? I know from subsequent Martinelli books what happens with Lee but it appears like some sort of punishment (maybe not the right word) for Kate - and of course, Lee - to have endangered her partner through her work and involvement with Vaun.

That's an interesting question. I see it as a consequence with long-term and unforeseen ramifications, but not a punishment. And it's a consequence as much of Lee's decision to stay at the house as of Kate's giving in to Al's pressure to have Vaun staying there. As a plot point (or device, or whatever it's called), it works for me as the thing that catapults Kate out of the closet and into an important new growth phase in her life. Aside from being intrinsically interesting to "watch" as a reader, that new phase provides a lot of meat for the rest of the books in the series, at least to date.

So yes, I hated to see it happen to Lee, and it hit me very hard when I read the book the first time. But now I'm very invested in seeing how Kate and Lee deal with it, and every time I re-read the series, I pick up more nuances of their work together. Which is very cool :) .

[wsmvgn]

So yes, I hated to see it happen to Lee, and it hit me very hard when I read the book the first time. But now I'm very invested in seeing how Kate and Lee deal with it, and every time I re-read the series, I pick up more nuances of their work together. Which is very cool :) .

Agreed. And seeing Kate move from closeted to a junkyard dog for domestic partner's rights in response to this tragic happening is thrilling.

[M. Diane]

nice, I like that. And very true. Radicalizing is never a boring process and seldom pleasant, hmmmmmmm.

And it does add great depth to character development (relationship) to have one member suddenly gravely disabled, especially permanently. For many of us in a similar real life situation it can illuminate an otherwise quite dark path.

M. Diane

[laurierking]

My first LRK experience was with A Monstrous Regiment of Women in a paperback copy picked almost at random to read on a train journey. The book, publisher Harper Collins; 2000 paperback edition printed and bound (they claim) by Omnia Books was very poorly made. The print was skewed on the page and the glue on the spine was so inadequate that every other page came away in my hand as I turned it. But, I did keep on turning those loose pages and right on to the end.

It was through that difficult, almost traumatic, experience that I became a LRK reader. That experience that also taught me to be wary of paperbacks but which did not deter me sufficiently to deter me from reading the whole Mary Russell oeuvre in the pulp. When I came to the Kate Martinelli stories I moved up a notch and sought out second-hand hardbacks. I am glad I did because the copy of A Grave Talent that I now own is not only a first edition, published in February 1993 by St. Martin's Press, but also a copy retired from the San Antonio public library. OK, I know San Antonio is in Texas and not all that close to the setting of AGT but, on the other hand, it is a lot closer than Middle England, which is where my book and I now reside.

My AGT copy has on the front of the jacket a highly atmospheric drawing by Debra White. The jacket is elegantly designed by Michael Accordino however, on the back flap, there is a photo of the author. The photo I refer to is the one where our beloved writer presents herself full on against a lined background looking, not her usual smiling and stunning self, but frankly - stunned.
Ah yes, I remember that photo. With the lines in the background one expects to see the height markings for a mug shot.

Note to all would-be published writers: A professional portrait is a necessary investment.

[laurierking]

Now I'm thinking about Vaun's empathy as expressed in "Strawberry Fields" -- or I guess that's Laurie's empathy, once removed


I'm glad you reminded me about this. I meant to ask LRK if this fictional painting was inspired by a person she has seen in RL, as she lives in a big strawberry-producing area. Maybe it's something she saw and would have painted if she worked in brushes and paints rather than words and phrases.


Yes, I live surrounded by strawberry fields, or I did when I wrote GT, and it was always humbling to see those men and women bent over the rows so I could have berries for breakfast. (This area has a huge number of chiropractors, wonder why?)

[laurierking]

There was an interesting article in the SF Chronicle Monday, in their ongoing series about the SF Police Department. This one is about gay and lesbian cops, and they have some illuminating things to say about the differences in attitudes between when they came on duty, and now.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/06/25/BAGINQL1EG1.DTL

[KristaB]

I truly enjoyed this book and, although I was already a LRK fan after starting the Mary Russell series with The Beekeeper's Apprentice, I think that it was this book and my connection to Vaughn's all-encompassing involvement with her talent (although mine is singing, not painting) and Kate's wariness to let people into her private life that made me decide that LRK would join the small list of authors whose books I would buy, sight unseen (or rather, un-library tested).

[laurierking]

Thank you, KristaB. I'm honored.

[Zoë]

Now that it's the last day of June and we're about to turn to a totally different book and series... I wanted to weigh in on this one while I still can.

I started rereading GT a few days ago, which was admittedly somewhat late in the month. But again, better late than never. And despite the 8-hour-a-day demands of my day job, which tends to put quite the damper on my reading life, I have managed not to put it down since then. A few things have struck me, other than what has already been mentioned...

I first read this book when I was twelve or maybe thirteen. I know I've reread it since then, but long enough ago that I didn't remember the plot details. When reading it this time, what struck me right from the beginning was that I had a mental image of Kate as being much older than me. Now I realize that when we meet Kate in GT, she is actually no older than I am now. But to a thirteen year old, someone who is "not yet thirty years old" is practically ancient, over the hill. How perspective changes with age!

The other thing that has struck me is how dang good this book is. People unfamiliar with LRK ask me all the time if my mom's books are good, if I like her writing, etc. I never know what exactly I'm supposed to say to that - "Yeah, she's alright"??? My usual response is, "Yes, although I am obviously biased."

But now, after unabashedly consuming GT over the past few evenings, I must moderate that response. "Yes," I will say with complete objectivity, "I enjoy her writing a great deal."

[Meredith47]

Hi, folks! I can entirely resonate with Zoe's (and not web savvy enough to produce Zoe's name correctly, sorry!) problem with job time. My supposed 3 1/2 day-per-week jobs are presently about 5 1/2 days per week and seriously cutting into important things like getting on the Laurie King book club and reading. I came to Kate M and Lee sort of backwards, after finding Russell/Holmes in June 2004, and I was a sceptic. I take my fiction Very Seriously and wasn't sure how I'd like a police procedural, despite my great love of The City (i.e. San Francisco). But GT is a very nifty book. And for those who haven't read the other Martinellis, you ain't seen nothing yet. Once again Laurie will give you whole sections where you Cannot (apologies to Miss Climpson) Put the Book Down. be wary of midnight reads! best to all, I have enjoyed your posts.

[kasmyra]

My first impression of this book is a simple, yet enthusiastic "WOW!!!" What brought me to go and buy with abandon almost every single LRK book was AoD. The way she describes events, people and places without being wordy or superfluous is phenomenal! Her writing is poetry in motion for the way in draws the reader in and keeps them hurtling towards the final page.

I also find her depiction of Kate and Lee and the tension that their relationship causes for them to be very realistic. Yes, Kate appears stilted at the beginning, but that is because she is trying to prove to a very male and very chauvinistic order that sexual orientation makes no difference in whether one succeeds or fails at their chosen career. The idea that in order to protect Vaun she must let her defenses down is key to her coming out.

Andy Lewis positively made my skin crawl, moreso than any other villian in the mysteries I've read for a very long time. And I spent a long time contemplating why this was so and my only explanation that I can give for this is the idea that he really was evil incarnate. Usually in mysteries, police procedurals and the like, the wrong-doer has a reason (bad childhood, psychosis). Now some may argue that the motive was revenge for Vaun overcoming the adversity of a wrongful prison sentence, but I believe the motive was much more sinister.
I am actually motivated to investigate Rembrandt in more detail now since Vaun is supposed to be modeled somewhat on him.

[Pat Floyd]

I haven't re-read AGT often, or at all; perhaps because I hate what happened to the little girls and to Vaun. On this re-reading I'm struck anew by the wide range of Laurie's abilities and how much I learn from her books. In this case the subject is art. In Chapter 10 we have a superb critique of Eva Vaughn's work from opposing view points in a magazine Kate finds. We also have mentioned excellent women artists, two of whom I didn't know: Suzanne Valadon (1865-1938) and Artemisia Gentileschi, (1593-1652/53). Thirty-four paintings attributed to the latter are beautifully presented with commentary at http://www.artemisia-gentileschi.com/index.shtml. The first painting, which may or may not be Gentileschi’s, is one of the most winsome of Madonna and child that I’ve seen.

I reread this whole thread and am impressed with the terrific insights here.

[KarenB]

Thank you for that link, Pat. I hadn't seen many of those paintings before and was happy to see them and learn more about her life.

[LaideeMarjorie]

Thank you for that link, Pat. I hadn't seen many of those paintings before and was happy to see them and learn more about her life.

Pat,

I want to add my thanks as well. I have never seen that self-portrait before and it is a great thing.

(I am only just finally reading all the of the Martinelli's now and I am enjoying going back and reading these threads. Thanks to all who have posted.)

Thanks,
Marjorie

[tangential1]

Wow, awesome link, Pat. Really interesting to read about the artists history along side the history depicted in the painting. The comparison between the feminine and masculine interpretations of the bible stories is fascinating! I'll have to look more thoroughly through the site when I'm not at work;)

[Millie]

Thanks. Pat. That was a really interesting link. I've bookmarked it for closer perusal soon.

[Bachi]

Pat
Add me to the list of those thankful to you for this link!
w