LitMinds Blog and Interviews

Recently, we heard an interview on the radio with Vikram Chandra who was on a nationwide tour promoting his latest novel "Sacred Games" where he gave this interesting observation about the crime/detective genre:

"...the classical cop/detective story structure [is] the only truly modern form of narrative... you can find instances of love stories, stories about families and so on in medieval literature, but the detective form belongs to the age of reason... we start with an unexplained case/dead body, there is the application of reason by the detective, the studying of clues, he develops a theory and proves it to be true, and at the end all is well – balance has been restored."

Crime fiction aficionado, Sarah Weinman, a.k.a. Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind, discovered her love for the genre early -- and has since pursued her passion with a stint in a specialty mystery bookstore and even went sofar as to obtain a Masters in Forensic Science (applause for following through on your passion!).   She now has a very successful blog and is one of the few who has crossed over to the big-league of book reviews with a monthly column for the LA Times.

We were impressed with her depth & breadth of coverage of crime fiction (she does a great job of putting a round-up on all things crime & mystery related in addition to her own detailed reviews).

We asked Sarah to tell us more about her love of reading & writing in this interview -- thanks to Sarah for taking time out of her busy writing schedule to talk with LitMinds!

1. Your blog, Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind, has become a popular source for readers of the crime fiction genre.  What draws you to the world of crime fiction?  From where and when did this passion emerge? Are there any childhood memories that illustrate the beginnings of this interest?

Going back to my childhood, I can probably pinpoint when I started becoming interested in the dark side. I was about eight or nine, a rabid baseball fan obsessed with boxscores and other statistics. Somehow the Encyclopedia of Baseball showed up in the house (my father and brother shared this obsession too) and I started leafing through it and for whatever reason, became fixated with how ballplayers died - the stranger the story, the better. I still think of Marty Bergen, a mediocre player who became so depressed and enraged he murdered his wife and two children with a pickax before turning it on himself.

Fast forward some years and I read some crime fiction in high school - the Kellermans, Harry Kemelman, Edna Buchanan, Walter Mosley stick out - but it wasn't until college that I really started getting into more contemporary writers, especially hardboiled and thriller fare. Being a geek, I needed outlets to discuss this newfound love and my real life friends weren't interested so I went online. Message boards, newsgroups and mailing lists introduced me to astoundingly well-read folks who were very kind to a young if somewhat hyperarticulate girl. Fast forward some more and I'm a graduate student in New York City with a part-time job at Partners & Crime, the independent mystery bookstore in Greenwich Village. Still the best job I ever had and through that I got to meet more authors, editors, publicists, agents and other publishing professionals. I started blogging a few months after I finished my degree (procrastinating on my master's thesis) and now I look back and wonder how on earth I got here. 

But it comes down to the genre I write about, a genre that's rich with content and thought and philosophy and entertainment. A genre that produces generous people, stimulating discussion and a vibrant community. All of those things did and continue to attract me, but I guess the bottom line is that I love most what I try to face head-on, and reading and writing about crime fiction allows me to do so.

2. You have reviewed crime fiction and published short crime fiction pieces of your own.  How do you marry the two worlds of book critic and author?  How does critiquing the written work of others affect your writing process?

A couple of years ago I would have said there was no real effect, that critiquing and writing about the genre didn't hinder my ability to write within the genre. But back then I was a more prolific short story writer; now I get yelled out by friends and loved ones for not finishing the revisions on some novel or another. Still, writing is writing, whether in fictional or non-fictional realms, and anything I learn from making stuff up can be applied to reality-based writing and vice versa.

3. You have a master's degree in Forensic Science, which takes your experience with crime fiction off the page and into the real world.  Tell us a little bit about your experience in this graduate program.  How has an academic degree affected your reading and writing in this genre?  There is Mark Twain’s famous saying that "Truth is stranger than fiction."  In your experiences, have you found this to be true?  How might you apply your Forensic Science training in the future?

John Jay's Masters in Forensic Science is probably the least academic and most practical master's degree I can think of. There was book learning, certainly, and I know that in those two years I really learned how to think, critique and reason in a way I had not before. But there was also a strong lab component, and while it was fun in a classroom setting, in the real world it was different, more repetitive - and ultimately not for me, the token egghead obsessed with actual cases as my classmates cared more about procedure and getting the best grades possible. And as for that saying, you betcha - even a summer spent interning with the investigations unit of the New York City Medical Examiner's Office confirmed that day in, day out.

As for what I want to do with the degree, I have vague notions of teaching again. I taught basic science to undergrads during my tenure at John Jay and generally enjoyed the experience. And it's certainly helpful for writing crime fiction, though in typical contrary fashion, I'm more interested in a forensic setting as backdrop and less on the details. CSI and its ilk has covered them so much that going back to characters and human motivation seems a better bet at the moment.

4. You are an editor for GalleyCat, a blog about the publishing and book industry.  You write about authors, books, publishers, literary events - that is a lot of information to stay on top of.  How do you keep your pulse on so many news pieces at the same time?  What is your process for collecting and researching stories and then choosing what to write about?

Through sheer hard work and gut instincts. More specifically, Firefox tabbed browsing is a godsend. I can hit twelve sites at once, group them into categories, check various newsfeeds, newspapers, relevant blogs and websites and probably get about 90% of what I need in an hour or two of early morning browsing. For additional details there's Technorati and Icerocket (especially for covering blog roundups) and of course, old-fashioned sources. Being in New York, I do have the luxury of attending parties and meeting people and just talking to them about working in publishing or around it. Then I can file away what he or she says and more often than not, such information becomes useful down the line.

5. Okay, I have to ask.  What are some of your favorite crime fiction books and why?  Which books have you read recently and most strongly recommend?

This is a tough question to answer because a) I am a freakishly fast reader b) I do like a lot of books even if I also subject every book to the 50-page test. Generally, my tastes run to the hardboiled/noir camp more than traditional and cozy, but it's important for me as a critic to stay away from generalizations and find the best fiction, period. So today, the three books I'll pick run the gamut from classic to contemporary: Dorothy B. Hughes' IN A LONELY PLACE, one of the boldest serial killer novels ever, even though it was published decades before the term, let alone the subgenre, existed; Ross Thomas's MISSIONARY STEW for its ever-twisting plot and still-relevant take on political campaigns in all their corrupt glory; and more recently, Warren Ellis's CROOKED LITTLE VEIN (a cheat, since it's not out till late July) because all private eyes should have despicable sexual adventures. That book can do no wrong by me.

6. In Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind, you recently announced your new monthly column, "Dark Passages," which will be appearing in the Los Angeles Times Book Review.  Also, this week you posted about the National Book Critic Circle's campaign to save book reviewing.  Where do you see book critics and reviews in traditional newspapers going in the future?  How have your personal experiences fit into the changing environment for book reviewers? 

Ah, a subject close to my heart. I really do operate smack in the middle, all lines blurred, because I started online - even before Confessions I reviewed books for places like January Magazine, where I really learned how to write and be edited - and obtained print gigs as a result of online clips. The LA Times column is for a print newspaper but its online arm, and since it's early days yet, I'm curious to see how it will develop - but very excited to explore topics that I may not get to do otherwise (and that my other print gig at the Baltimore Sun doesn't normally allow for because of space and format constraints.)

With regards to book reviewing, while the NBCC's campaign is noble, I can't help but feel that there's too little, too late. Change is coming, newspapers are dying and readers want their book fix in whatever format is easiest and most available to them. And then there's the dirty little secret, which is that we're not really asking ourselves what is being saved here. There should be a local presence, yes, but does that mean that poor writing quality should be excused just because the reviewers are based in the town they live in? Does it excuse critics who don't really have a lot to say about the books they are asked to write about? Does it mean that the reader's wants and needs should be ignored because the critic can't reach them and engage them?

Indulging in the print vs. blog debate is not the point: the ultimate point is that no matter what, Content Wins Out. No matter where it's found. And sure, I like writing for newspapers a great deal, but I also kill myself to make my work the best it can possibly be even if I'm writing for free on Confessions. And I suppose I am confident enough - perhaps arrogant enough, depending on who's reading - to believe that if I wake up tomorrow and newspapers disappear, not only will I still find work but there will be a vibrant literary conversation and community left to grow.