Those of you who don’t regularly get to listen to recordings of yourselves won’t be familiar with the sad, lonely pain of thinking “oh god, you really need to shut up right now” while knowing deep down that you didn’t, and that the moment such advice might have been helpful has long since receded into the past.

Nevertheless, you can experience it second-hand by listening to my interview, which is up as part of the In For Questioning podcast series. It’s mainly about 50/50 and serial killers and so on. All of my own personal negativity aside, IfQ is a great set of author interviews, and so a lot of you probably know about it anyway. Thanks to Angie for taking the time to talk to me - and for including me in such excellent company in the first place.

I’ve been a bit slack in catching up with things recently, so this is a slightly belated heads-up that you might be interested in this site here. My friends Ben and Megan are both artists, and DoGoSee is one of the ongoing projects they’ve been working on, described as “an interactive, photographic, travel, mapping, research project”. As they explain:

www.DoGoSee.com explores methods of creatively mapping out space. It is interactive with the central idea that visitors to the website can tell us where to go in cities that we visit. When a post is sent to the blog we receive it on our mobile phones, search out the request, then photograph it and upload it live to the blog. During each project the website refreshes constantly as we upload the results of these requests. Simultaneously, we use Global Positioning Systems to record a physical trace of our journey; this information takes shape on a Google Map, and gives visitors to the site a direct link to the images we have captured on our quests, based on their suggestions.

Now, when it comes to art, I’m a little clueless, but the site is certainly interesting, and it’s easy and fun to get involved if you happen to know the areas. As part of the project, I spoke with them about the influence that Leeds has had on my writing, and the audio of that is up on their site here. At first, I thought there wasn’t much to say - given, in the past, I’ve made a big deal about the lack of setting in my books - but obviously the place where you grew up and live has an effect, even if it’s a subconscious one, and it was interesting to go back through some of the books and see the way real places had crept in. Filtered and altered, the way all places in fiction inevitably are.

I can’t stand the sound of my own voice, so I’ve not listened to the recordings yet. I always figure it’s best to avoid the ‘I sound like an idiot’ cringe by just avoiding video and audio as much as possible, thus making it possible for me to do it again next time without thinking “for Christ’s sake, don’t sound like an idiot, for Christ’s sake, don’t sound…”.

You get the idea.

An outwardly charismatic yet deeply psychotic clown takes over a city and destroys it. Yes, the new Dark Knight trailer could hardly be more topical.

Just a quick note to say that Sandra Ruttan has posted some very nice thoughts about The 50/50 Killer here, and crimeficreader, too, has recently had some positive things to say. All good stuff.

Sorry for being quiet this week. Busy. Stressed. Argh. Etc.

Two festivals this year then: the usual Leeds and my first ever Download. There’s been talk in some quarters about how this year’s Download line-up is a bit rubbish in comparison to previous years - and I can see the objections are at least partially justified. But for me, it’s pretty good already: Kid Rock, Disturbed, Pendulum, Ash, Biffy, Offspring, Wildhearts, Jimmy Eat World and Lostprophets - and loads of other bands I’ve love to check out. Hooray!

Not camping though. Hotels all the way. We’ll reserve the delightful festival camping experience for Leeds Festival.

Only the other day, I was wondering what had happened to the massive investigation at that Jersey Children’s Home. You might remember all the coverage earlier this year: the case was all over the news, complete with helicopter shots of policemen digging beneath white gazebos, and hourly updates on whatever fresh horrors had just been unearthed in the building’s basement. And then … well, nothing. It just seemed to drop from the news. And so this, while certainly not answering all the questions, makes fascinating reading.

The first one is up, over at Ben Hunt’s excellent Material Witness site, and I really couldn’t have hoped for a better first impression. Thanks to Ben for taking the time to share his thoughts on the book. And, of course, make sure you check out the rest of his site while you’re visiting.

I guess reviews will be trickling in from this point onwards, and I’ll do my best to keep on top of them and post links as and when I find them.

There’s an interesting article over at Richard Morgan’s website (and Ali has mentioned this too) about the in-fighting, for want of a better word, among science fiction writers in comparison to crime writers. Even a relative newcomer to the genre can’t fail to have noticed the arguments over the New Weird, Mundane SF and M John Harrison’s brief pop at world-building. (For a flavour of the first, have a look here, which has been archived from the old TTA forums. Yes, everyone really is just talking about how to define a sub-genre, or whether it’s possible, or is it actually a movement rather than a genre, and what that might mean - or something. Yes, I agree, it does read a little like masturbation. And yes, I believe that really is Richard halfway down, being swiftly, brutally Harrisoned for suggesting people remember these are books we’re talking about. Although I might be wrong on all counts: it’s hard to tell).

You should read the article anyway, but Richard and Ali discuss a number of possible reasons why crime writers appear to be generally more relaxed and easy-going about their genre, none of which seem to account fully for the arguments across the pond. For what it’s worth, and to the extent that it’s true, I think it’s partly down to emulation: people looking up to their ‘elders’. M John Harrison, for example, is one of the best writers you’ll ever come across (cough), but he can also be intensely analytical and opinionated about what fiction should do. He is not, shall we say, short of confidence. And he is clearly very clever and has thought his opinions through to the point that, on occasion, I find it hard to see not only his working but the blackboard itself. I don’t find it too hard to imagine that if certain (understandably) revered and popular figures within a genre want to go somewhere, others will be interested in what they have to say and want to engage. This isn’t to say crime writers and readers aren’t smart - it’s just that I can’t think of any equivalent figures in the genre who are prepared to discuss it on such an academic level.

But there’s also the issue that science fiction and fantasy are far more ‘open’ genres than crime, and perhaps more amenable to those types of discussion. The only obvious starting point is that stories within those genres need not conform to reality: they can be made-up, either to the point of being impossible or, stepping back a notch, to the point of not being possible yet. (Already, there’s something to argue over). And then, the extrapolation from reality could occur internally or externally. There’s also the question of how, after the genre has swooped away from real-life constraints, it can flit back and land again, assuming it wants to: does it simply take us on a journey of escapism, or does it bring us home again, changed? Did we ever even leave? What should the intent of the writer be - to comfort, discomfort, what? And suddenly - Jesus wept - what is that in my hand? You can see how easily it happens.

That’s unfair, I suppose, as discussing things on that level is a perfectly good way of spending your time. Whatever floats your boat. But I’ve mentioned in the past that I believe it’s all just ‘entertainment’: people preferring to spend their time in different ways; to occupy themselves with different interests. Basically, all of it is just killing time, and in my humble opinion it’s good to have that at the back of your mind. In a similar way, some people prefer McDonalds to cordon bleu, and without begging the question by defining your own terms it’s absurd to claim they’re ‘wrong’.

None of which is to say that crime writers don’t have their differences, and this is where I disagree slightly with the premise of Richard’s article. We do argue about things. What is noir? Golden age or Modern? How ‘realistic’ should crime be? (That one’s my personal favourite). How violent is too violent, and do women write more of that than men? Are some thrillers too formulaic? Are there too many serial killer books on the shelves? Do we have a duty to the victims of real life crime? Aren’t cat mysteries bizarre? Fuck me, how many paragraphs has James Patterson written this year? And so on. But it’s true they seem to be generally more good-natured.

Anyway - the article’s well worth a read and a ponder.

Ooh, there’s been a right old ker-fuffle recently. You probably know about it, but just in case you don’t, it goes like this. Romance author Deborah MacGillivray has allegedly been harassing someone who gave her a three-star review on Amazon. This not only includes sending her a slightly bizarre email, but also badgering to get her review taken down (by asking other individuals to complain about it), and even apparently stalking the reviewer in a quasi-frightening manner:

Re: vote down this bitch please
Posted by: “DeborahAnne MacGillivray”
writer@DeborahMacGIllivray.co.uk scotladywriter
Date: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:17 pm ((PDT))
Well, thanks to XXXXXX our PI , we now have her name, her husband’s
name, her chidrens’ names, her grannies and great grannies name. Her
address phone number and email
lol…quite interesting.

Now, before moving onto anything else - and without in any way downplaying how (crease forehead) serious this is -  there are a couple of things to note. The first is that you don’t need to be particularly clever, or to employ the services of a ‘PI’, to find that information about most people. (Having said that, if anyone knows my ‘great grannies’ (sic) name, please do let me know). The second is that you have to be particularly stupid to put it in writing if you’re actually intending to do anything with the information. The third, just referring to the email quickly -

However, I fear you did missed the point of Damian wanting to fight Dirk. He was not fighting for Tamlyn, he was going to take Challon’s place - to protect Challon.

and…

And where you got he was hung up on Tamlyn by the middle of the, that is SOOOOO wrong. He knew from his return he was mean for Aithinne, she was THE ONE. You are reading your quick assessment into that. He was NOT hung on on Tamlyn at any point after his return and he saw Aithinne. For you to keep saying that, shows how totally you are missing the true emotions of these characters.

As for accusing Athinne of asking Dirk into her room - he is MALE. Male do silly thinks when they are upset and jealous. This is so TM - Typically male. Men do silly things at times of high emotions. Damian is human, not perfect.

- the third thing to note is ‘holy fuck, I don’t want to read these books, even if they’ve been edited’. In case there was any doubt, the covers all seem to feature half-naked men, perhaps in some indifferent ‘if you can’t beat them, join them’ shrug in the direction of patriarchy. But let’s not get into all that. It’s a short step from there to observing that Deborah says she’s a web designer in her spare time, and then we’ll all be rubbing our chins thoughtfully for hours.

This is not the point. Tess Gerritsen, whom you may know from such novels as The Surgeon, posted on her excellent and thoughtful blog recently, offering some clearly tongue-in-cheek sympathy for MacGillivray:

My first reaction to this story was: “What?  I can get the bad reviews taken off my Amazon pages?  How do I do that?”  Because I didn’t know an author could do that.  I thought you just had to live with them and suffer heartburn every time you scroll past them.

and

Now, I’m not saying that Ms. MacGillivray wasn’t out of line here.  But her other major foolishness was that she got caught at it. 

Now, I don’t think there’s anything overly controversial in her post. Whatever they might say, authors aren’t keen on bad reviews, and it’s not too much of a stretch to imagine many have harboured purely-imaginary-and-yet-at-the-same-time-atrociously-violent feelings towards some reviewers. Amazon is an interesting case, because anyone can post there. The minimum you can give is one-star, and plenty of people do. My first book, for example, has had a bit of shit there, and I’ve certainly had a private grumble about it. ‘Lady Jane’, for example, found The Third Person “very disjointed and not just in the third person”, suggesting she reads far more into a book’s title than I do. ‘P Blundell’ says that if you ignore certain things, it’s a “good read” - then gives it one fucking star. ‘E Ryan (rhino)’ suggests I attempt to “over-darken the whole rape/torture topic” and concludes the book is “written like the author was half-drunk while doing it”. Well, I hold my hands up to at least one of those complaints, Rhino. Possibly both.

But, you know, I don’t wish violence on these people, because they’re entitled to their opinions. I wish them happiness and a long, lovely life. Even giving one star - what, there’s nothing good about it? - that kind of shit washes over you, because it has to. Life’s too short. And yet I can take Tess’s post in the spirit in which it appears to have been intended. In releasing a book, you have to accept criticism; in releasing criticism, as it goes, you have to accept criticism. Was Tess making light of a deadly serious situation? Pfft. If you like. Assuming everything is true, I think we could all agree the instigator of this whole thing is just a fucking idiot and a threat to nothing aside from her own career. Either way, the law can settle it without the aid of bloggers.

And yet. Following the massive ker-fuffle mentioned above, Tess Gerritsen has made the decision to stop blogging. If nothing else, this tells you not to underestimate the Romance genre: when you blow air at them, they can deliver a fairly vivid plumage. I think it’s unfortunate. On occasion, I have quietly disagreed with Tess about a few things (nobody will have noticed), but I’ve always found her blog to be interesting, open and honest: one of the best crime writer’s blogs on the net. Perhaps she’s been slightly thin-skinned about the response, but people are entitled to avoid confrontation if they wish, and the internet is a particularly brutal place. Like a car, once someone’s in it, they behave in ways they’d never dream of face-to-face. Walking along the street, for example, a young man might pause to allow a woman through a tight spot on the pavement. Stick him in a car, however, and it’s suddenly a matter of pride to get through first. He might shake his fist, glare threateningly, shout abuse. It’s easy to be a cunt when there’s no immediate comeback. The same with the internet. This is nothing new.

Anyway. To anyone who hates me and has hired a PI to find my address - if you’re sending someone round, could you please tell my local taxi company and Pizza Hut? Because they’ve got my address, and they can’t find me for shit.

This is a great story: a Russian man, so drunk he failed to notice that a colleague he’d just argued with had stabbed him in the spine. It’s not ‘great’ on a number of levels, of course, but I do like the stoic shrug inherent in the guy’s quote afterwards, which feels like something I could have said on many occasions - although, admittedly, ones less dramatic than this. The worst I’ve ever come out of a drinking session with is a chunk bitten out of my arm. Keleigh.

It reminds me a little of my favourite drunken story, which I can’t currently find a source for but remember reading about with disgusted fascination at the time it happened. A man got in a drunken argument (again) with a friend. You know how it is when you’ve had a few and someone bets you you can’t do something: you become ever more determined to do it just to prove them wrong. “I bet you you wouldn’t…”. “Well, we’ll just see about that!”. Anyway, following a convoluted conversation we’ll never know the precise details of, this guy’s friend bet him he wouldn’t castrate himself. So in a fit of drunken indignation, the man marched home, castrated himself with a kitchen knife, and then staggered back to the pub and presented his friend with the evidence. In the entire history of ‘that showed him!’ moments, this one must surely be ranked quite high. And I’m sure the man chuckled at the defeated expression on his friend’s face, savouring the feeling of victory through the remaining moments of his life, which all happened to occur that evening. But: “We got drunk together. Things happen when you drink.”

And I knew a girl who got dumped by her boyfriend during a drunken argument that started off small and escalated in the way these things do. Why did he dump her? Because she wouldn’t promise that she would never stab him. Not that she had any intention of doing so - but, at the same time, she refused to rule it out as a possibility. Logical precision set against pride, heated by alcohol until the conversation reached boiling point and everything spilled over.

Things happen when you drink. Be careful out there, kids.