Hi Everyone,
I’m interviewing novelist, Mia Thompson. Mia was born and grew up in Sweden coming to the U.S. to study film at age 19. She’s since become the international bestseller of YA thrillers featuring Sapphire Dubois.

Mia, did the long dark Swedish winters of your childhood contribute to your decision to write about serial killers?

I’ve never connected the dots before, but two things are common during a Swedish winter. One: winter depression, induced by lack of sunlight. Two: people go to bars, because there’s nothing else to do. Add those two together and you get depressed drunks. So, growing up surrounded by depressed drunks for seven months out of the year might’ve entrenched a glum morbid-ness in me. With that deduction, I’d say yes, probably.

You must’ve read Scandinavian noir as a teenager. Who do you like and how have they influenced your writing?

The majority of the books I remember reading in my teen years were actually by American, English, and Irish authors. A Swedish author who did influence me a lot, but much earlier in life, was Astrid Lindgren. Every Swede has grown up with Astrid’s characters, and the worlds she created have become staples of our childhood. Her work showed me how much story can affect people, and I carry that knowledge with me every time I sit down to write.

I can see that. Sapphire Dubois is kind of a twenty-first century Pippi Longstocking.

My God, you’re right! Add killers, blood, and a foul-mouthed cop to Pippi’s strength, wealth, and forced independence and we’ve got Sapphire. Clearly, I carry even more of Astrid’s work with me than I thought.

Without giving us too many spoilers, tell us about Sentencing Sapphire.

Sentencing Sapphire is everything Stalking Sapphire and Silencing Sapphire have lead to. People can expect that the ante has been upped on the general chaos in Sapphire Dubois’ life, and that an awaited confrontation will take place. With that said, it may or may not contain the conclusion of two certain main characters, who may or may not end up together.

I’m looking forward to it! Pub date is October 6, 2015, all you Sapphire fans.
Do you see Sapphire as having a character arc that spans your 5 book series?

One of the first things I learned about writing was that you should always start your character out at the lowest point in their emotional/spiritual journey, whether your character knows it or not. That is exactly how I’ve set up Sapphire’s arc. In each book I inch her closer to the person she is supposed to be. One of her major arcs does happen in Sentencing Sapphire, but her testing trials are far from over. If everything goes the way I’ve planned, Sapphire should be “complete” so to speak, by the end of book 5.

Are there any similarities between Sapphire Dubois and yourself—and if so, could I have a loan?

Ha! There are. Unfortunately, none you’d want. Though I definitely view Sapphire as a kickass alter ego, I’ve come to realize that I’ve placed some of my less appealing qualities in her. If you take out the words serial killer throughout the books and replace them with the word writing, that’s me. I am as obsessed with my imaginary world, as she is with her serial killers.

I loved the plot point guidelines you taught at the Las Vegas Writers’ Conference. Any plans for teaching at an upcoming conference?

I have nothing lined up at this moment, but I’m open to it. It’s funny, because it’s something I never wanted to do, or ever saw myself doing. But once I was up there, giving the lecture for the first time, I was shocked to find out how much I enjoyed it. If you asked anyone I grew up with to imagine me standing in front of a class, holding a lecture, they’d probably laugh their asses off at the idea.

What is your favorite part of the writing process? Your least favorite?

I love it when I get the initial idea for a story. At this stage, the story is so full of possibilities, and absent of holes, that all I feel is excitement. To me, the feeling is reminiscent of falling in love. The ideas that are flighty crushes, lacking substance, eventually go away. The ideas that my mind keeps fleshing out are the ones I deem a wholesome relationship—the stories I eventually write.

I agree.

My least favorite part, besides from the general stress that comes with the gig, is what can happen in the aftermath of the process. For instance, after Silencing Sapphire came out I got a box full of the books. I picked one up, then sniffed it (because there’s no better smell) and cracked it open to a random page. The first thing I saw was that I had accidently written Mrs. Havisham, instead of Miss Havisham in a reference. Anyone familiar with Great Expectations, knows what an idiotic and ironic mistake that is to make. It killed me. Frankly, I’m still dead.

In the future, write Ms. And you’re good. Mia, thanks for the interview. Best of luck with Sentencing Sapphire.

Hi there,
I’m back with a new novel coming soon:  BETTTING BLIND.

Lennox Cooper, P.I., is looking for parole skip, Matilda Bauer. The beautiful blonde con-woman has her hooks in Lennox’s poker buddy, parole officer, Fulin Chen. If Lennox doesn’t find Matilda before the cops do,  Matilda will plaster dirty photos of Fulin all over the internet and Fulin’s career in law enforcement will be toast.

Lennox searches for Matilda and three days later finds her dead, in what looks like a sex game gone terribly wrong. Fulin is the lead suspect. Lennox jacks into the cyber world, where real threats exist, to find which of Matilda’s blackmail victims or jilted lovers is her real killer.

I’ve sent my finished manuscript to my editor at Diversion Books, and I’m hoping that BETTING BLIND will debut in early fall.

Some of you in Blogland may have wondered where I’ve been all this time. Well, I have a dandy excuse. Early in 2014 a chronic cough turned into a diagnosis of lung cancer. Since then I’ve gone through radiation, 25 rounds of chemo and three bouts of pneumonia. Picture me, week after week, a tube coming out of my arm working on BETTING BLIND while nurses in hazmat suits ask me what I’m up to. “Sex and murder,” is my answer.

My lovely agent and editor, Liz Kracht, and the folks at Diversion Books couldn’t have been more kind and supportive during this time. I’m happy to say that my health has improved, and it looks like some great new cancer treatments are in my future. I can’t wait to say sayonara to chemo.

I’ve been blessed with much love and support from my husband, my son, siblings and marvelous friends. Many visits, cards, flowers and gallons of chicken soup have come my way. Thanks a million.

Hope you all are doing well.

Check out  Prose & Cons  http: //www.auniqueandportablemagic.blogspot.com  the brand new blog hosted by 21 writers (including yours truly) dedicated to reading and writing.

No, this is not a blog post about Harry Potter as Allen Ginsberg. This is the admonishment attributed to Arthur Quiller-Couch to aspiring writers: “Whenever you feel the an impulse to perpetrate a piece of exceptionally fine writing, obey it—whole-heartedly—and delete it before sending your manuscripts to press. Murder your darlings.”

William Faulkner, Oscar Wilde, Anton Chekov, Eudora Welty, and Stephen King have ladled out similar advice. This from Stephen King: “…kill your darlings, kill your darlings, even when it breaks your egocentric little scribbler’s heart, kill your darlings.”

All I know is that I fall in love with my insightful, witty, beautiful lines mainly because they’re damned hard to come up with. Yes, the story rules. Yes, if I want a successful story I need to be ruthless.

What do I do if a line or a passage needs to be cut to serve the story? I send those precious words to a notebook of orphaned lines. This can be a print notebook or a computer file—I copy them in both places. Once I know the darlings are safe and tucked in, I can be the ruthless professional I need to be.

Take Woody Allen as our shining role model for the cut-and-use-later school. He had a hilarious elevator to hell scene in Annie Hall, each floor of the elevator designated for a different level of sin—fifth floor for organized crime, fascist dictators and people who don’t appreciate oral sex. Allen cut this great scene to shape the Oscar for Best Picture,  Annie Hall, but used it twenty years later in Deconstructing Harry.

Do your darlings ever find a home? The answer is a resounding yes—that is if they remain darling through the years until you find their story.

There’s a reason why so many famous writers advise us to write every day. My sweetie and I just got back from a marvelous 3 week vacation during which time I didn’t cook a meal or write a word. Now that we’re back home, I’m working mightily to finish my second Lennox Cooper mystery, Betting Blind, by early next summer.

It’s hard as hell to re-enter the fictive dream I’d worked so hard to build. And the writing itself is excrement. I have to type with one hand and hold my nose with the other. Let me tell you, it’s painful to write so badly.

What keeps me going is Annie Lamott’s Bird by Bird. Lamott coined the term “shitty first drafts” saving legions of aspiring writers from committing seppuku. Most of us believe that the writers we admire sit down at their desks and gorgeous sentences come out the tips of their fingers and onto the page. Not true, Lamott tells us.

Here’s how she describes her process: “It’s over, I’d think calmly. I’m not going to make the magic work this time. I’m ruined. I’m toast. Maybe, I’d think, I can get my old job back…I’d get up and study my teeth in the mirror for a while. Then I’d stop, remember to breathe, make a few phone calls, hit the kitchen and chow down. Eventually I’d go back and sit at my desk, and sigh for the next ten minutes. ..and every time the answer would come: all I had to do was to write a really shitty first draft of, say, the opening paragraph. And no one was going to see it. So I’d start writing without reigning myself in…”

Don’t you feel like less of an idiot? I do. And once I have those pages I can shape them into something wondrous (or least, acceptable.)

My lesson? The next time Mr. Sweetie suggests a trip to Rome, I’ll think twice before leaving my manuscript behind.

Elmore Leonard, the Dickens of Detroit, died August 20th at the age of 87.  The beloved writer was working on his 46th novel when he suffered from a stroke a month ago.

In 2009 the American chapter of PEN awarded Leonard with a lifetime achievement award, stating that his books “are not only classics of the crime genre, but some of the best writing of the last half-century.”

If you’ve somehow missed Leonard’s Ten Rules of Writing, here they are:

1. Never open a book with the weather
2. Avoid prologues.
3. Never use a verb other than “said” to carry dialogue.
4. Never use an adverb to modify the verb “said”…
5. Keep your exclamation points under control.
6. Never use the words “suddenly” or “all hell broke loose.”
7. Use regional dialect, patois, sparingly.
8. Avoid detailed descriptions of characters.
9. Don’t go into great detail describing places and things.
10. Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip.

Here’s some additional writing wisdom I gleaned from various obits and interviews. The examples are from my favorite Leonard novels:

11. Character Driven Plots
“I start with a character. Let’s say I want to write a book about a bail bondsman or a process server or a bank robber and a woman federal marshal. And they meet and something happens.” Leonard stated that when he started a new book he doesn’t know the ending. “I’d rather wait and see what happens. I get a better idea of what’s going to happen as I go along. I get to know who the people are—some become more or less important or somebody unknown will come along and play a major role.”

 12. Strong Use of Voice
“I always write from a character’s point of view,” Leonard said. He never began writing a new scene until he decided which character would narrate. “Because then the narrative will take on somewhat the sound of the person who is seeing the scene.”
After writing 100 pages Leonard said, “Sometimes, if a character has trouble expressing himself, he gets demoted. He’s given less to do or gets shot.”

13. Alienated Protagonists
Leonard said that his protagonists are easily misjudged, and when called to action there’s no telling what they might do.  Leonard said, “He may solve the crime—or commit it.”
Here’s a passage from Unknown Man #89
(Ryan, a process server is tracking a missing person and has put an ad in the city’s two papers.)
“…he picked up the phone and said hello.
It was his sister, Marion. She hadn’t called in at least six months, but she picked today. She was wondering how things were going, living alone. He’d been living alone for four and a half years, but Marion was still wondering and asked him when did he want to come over for a home-cooked meal. Ryan said anytime, you name it. Marion was not that much of a cook. In fact she was pretty bad. But he always said that, anytime. She never picked a date beforehand but always waited until she got him on the phone and then would have to go and get her calendar and study it and try to remember what nights Earl bowled or had Cub Scouts or an Ushers Club meeting. Ryan told he was expecting an important phone call, but it still took another ten minutes.”

14. Unforgettable Crooks
“The bad guys are the fun guys,” Leonard said. “The only people I have trouble with are the so-called normal types.” In another interview he said: “ I don’t think of them as bad guys. I just think of them as, for the most part, normal people who get up in the morning and they wonder what they’re going to have for breakfast, and they sneeze, and they wonder if they should call their mother, and then they rob a bank.”
Here’s a sampling of Leonard’s crooks:
LaBrava
“Cundo Rey sipped his coffee—very poor coffee, like water—watching Nobles wiping his big thick hands on a golden arch napkin, sucking at his teeth. The Monster from the Big Scrub, with a neck so red it could stop traffic. Cundo Rey had come ashore in Dade County only a few years ago, boat-lifted out of Cambinado del Este prison and had worked hard to learn English—asking the girls why they didn’t correct him and the girls saying, because he talked cute.”
Riding the Rap
“Bobby’s first impression of Chip Ganz, he saw a skinny guy in his fifties trying to look hip: the joint, a full head of hair with gray streaks in it brushed back uncombed, and tan. Bobby had never seen an Anglo this tan and thought at first Chip Ganz was lying there with nothing on but his sunglasses. No, the guy was wearing a little swimsuit, a black one.”

Bobby tries to collect on Chip’s gambling debt. He pulls out a nasty pair of pruners and  tells Chip: “‘You don’t pay me the day after tomorrow I prune something from you. Like what do you think, this part of your ear? You don’t need it—you don’t wear no earring, do you? Okay, you still don’t pay in two more days, I prune the other ear. You don’t look so good then. Okay, you still don’t pay then I have to prune something else like let me see, what’s a part of you you never want me to prune? What could that be?’
Chip surprised him saying, ‘I get the idea.’ Pretty calm about it. Maybe it was the weed let him talk like that.”
Freaky Deaky
“Man, she did not like to be argued with. Never did. It tightened up her face, put a killer look in her eyes.
‘Okay, they informed on us and now they’re sitting on fifty million bucks. You look around this dump you’re living in and you feel they owe you something. Am I telling it right?’
‘We feel they owe us something,’ Robin said.”
15. Humor in Contrasts
Elmore Leonard wasn’t a gag writer, but his writing crackles with wit. He said he found humor in “gathering an odd assortment of characters”— characters that knew what they wanted but didn’t know what they were doing. Here are a few examples:
Tishomingo Blues
A exhibition high-diver, a con man with the research skills of an ace librarian, and the Dixie Mafia come together during a Civil War re-enactment.
Get Shorty
A loan shark, a horror movie producer and a B actress try to wrestle their movie from some drug-runners.
La Brava
A redneck, a retired Jewish businessman and a FBI agent turned photographer all have the hots for an aging movie star.
Maximum Bob
A hard-assed judge, his crazy wife, a crack addict dermatologist, an alligator poacher, and a whole nest of ex-felons, the Crowe family, are out to kill one another.

Elmore Leonard said this about why he kept writing: “It’s the most satisfying thing I can imagine doing. To write that scene and then read it and it works. I love the sound of it. There’s nothing better than that…I’ve been doing it for 47 years, and I’m still trying to make it better.”
RIP Elmore Leonard. I’m sure going to miss you.

“I am against female detectives on principle. It’s not always and everywhere a tough game, but most of the time it is, with no room for the friendly feelings and the nice little impulses. So a she-dick must have a good thick hide, which is not a skin I’d love to touch; if she hasn’t, she is apt to melt just when a cold eye and hard nerves are called for, and in that case she doesn’t belong.”   Archie Goodwin from Too Many Detectives, by Rex Stout

I’ve been asked a number of questions about my detective, Lennox Cooper: Why doesn’t she have any girlfriends, why isn’t she closer to her mother, why does she have rotten luck with men? I’m not complaining, I’m delighted people think enough about the book to have questions. And because Lennox is edgy, I can’t expect everyone to like her. But here’s the thing, does anyone wonder why Sam Spade, Philip Marlowe, Derek Strange or Jack Reacher don’t appear to have guy friends? Or have a close relationship with their mothers? Why is it important to like female characters when we’re satisfied with flawed male characters

It seems to me that there is a different yardstick for measuring female and male detectives, especially when you entered hard-boiled territory. Recently I ran across an article that came out in The Atlantic back in May 2013: Do Readers Judge Female Characters More Harshly Than Male Characters? by Maria Konnikova.

Here’s a quote from the article: “Over the last 30 or so years, work by social psychologists like Susan Fiske and Mina Cikara has repeatedly demonstrated that women are perceived and evaluated on different criteria than men: not only are the same traits that are seen as positive in one (say, assertiveness in men) reconstrued as negative in the other (say, pushiness in women), but we put different relative values on different traits depending on gender. Niceness, for instance, is seen as consistently more important in women than it is in men.”

Apparently this bias bleeds over to fictional characters as well. I think this is especially true when you’re writing in a male-dominated genre, such as hard-boiled detective fiction. There are some notable exceptions: Sue Grafton’s Kinsey Millhone and Sarah Paretsky’s V.I. Warshawski. I can’t say whether their readers are happy about their character’s outlier status, I don’t get their fan mail.

How do you weigh in on the female/male bias?