If you give them too much detail up front you may put yourself in a bind later on. A lot of how-to books tell you to make up as much detail about your characters ahead of time but I think that’s silly. If you decide your character is a forty-seven year old, divorced, gay sociologist who collects stamps and plays the didgeridoo you will almost certainly find it makes no sense for him to do what he does in the story. Whereas if you let what he does partly dictate the characteristics you give him you’ll end up with a better fit. Doing character bios up front may help when you’re first starting out as a way of getting your imagination fired up, but you can’t be ruled by it.
Just out of curiousity have you read the novel Dogs of Babel by Carolyn Parkhurst? I was searching my memory for a reference point for describing this book to others and that book came to mind. While in many ways a completely different type of book, both share one important element: Both start with an apparent suicide by the protagonist’s wife and the husband searching for answers as to why and what really happened.
I haven’t read that book, but I’m quite sure there are a lot of books that begin this way. It almost put me off writing the book. But I was pretty sure I had a unique story to tell, so I didn’t care if the precipitating incident had been used.
Without giving anything crucial away how would you characterize the bad guy in your book – evil, damaged soul or somewhere in between?
Sometimes people use the word evil to imply a being that is either sub- or superhuman, and I don’t believe there are any human beings that qualify: not Hitler, not Jeffrey Dahmer, not George Bush. If you mean evil in the sense of really, really bad, yes he’s definitely evil. He’s also a damaged soul for sure. Readers get to know quite a bit about his background, and while it doesn’t excuse his behavior or even explain it fully, it certainly makes it coherent, even if repellent.
What’s it like to have a person – via your writing – in your head while you are writing?
I didn’t have trouble with this villain that way. What gave me more trouble was having to write Cardinal’s grief. To do that convincingly I had to imagine my own wife’s sudden death/possible murder and that was painful to do. In fact I was quite glad to write the parts about the villain because they took me away from the grief aspect. Also the girl’s depression was fairly close to the bone and so more difficult to sit with.
What kind of research did you do regarding manic depressives and suicide? What most surprised you about what you learned?
Article comments
1 - Mayra Calvani
Great interview! I was so suprised to see this author's name here. I got a second-hand copy of his book, COLD EYE, in Ankara years ago and I have to say, I have never forgotten that book! I have never read any of his other books yet... but COLD EYE really made an impression on me when I was but a fledgling writer.
2 - Scott Butki
I'm glad you like the interview. Mr. Blunt is quite an impressive writer.
3 - Ignacio
Hi,
I started reading Blunt just to improve my english. I started with his first Cardinal book, and now I'm hooked on his books. I'm surprised to see him in this blog, I guess we'll have to get used to see Mr Blunt in the Media more often, as long as he's a really good writer.
Big interview, I've really liked the question "What was your goal with this book? Did you succeed?", it's a so open question that it makes the writer to think and explain what he really thinks about the book, no way to hide after a question like this.
I'll get around here.
4 - Scott Butki
Thanks, I use that qestion a lot because of the exact reason you mention.
Blunt's a great writer so he's a great - though slightly unusual choice - to use to learn English.