Hits and Misses

By Brett Battles

 

I admit it. I’m a TV junky. In my life I’ve watched FAR too much, and I’m sure I’ll continue to watch FAR too much moving forward, too.

It’s the stories that draw me in. Even the simplest ones can make me watch if there’s something that gives me hope the story might be good. I’m often disappointed, but, no matter what, I watch.

I talked earlier about how much I love the beginning of the fall television season. It’s full of promise and hope. My DVR just overflows with things to watch. But, inevitably, I start removing shows from my record list. Some flat out are bad. Some are good ideas that just don’t reach their full potential. And worst, I think, some are just mediocre. Occasionally, I’ll have to remove a show not because I don’t like it, but because they network has cancelled it.

Let’s look at some shows I had hopes for:

HAWAII FIVE-O – I had a lot of hope for this one, but after just a couple of episodes I all but gave up. The situations were ridiculous, and the characters were way too one-note for me. Too bad, too, because a couple of the actors are favorites of mine. I did try a more recent episode, the one with Kevin Sorbo. It was so obvious he was the killer from the beginning that I was yawning by the final reveal. STATUS: Show deleted from my record list.

UNDERCOVERS – This one I was excited about because of J.J. Abrams involvement. I loved LOST, and I loved ALIAS, so I was hoping to love this. I didn’t. But I didn’t hate it either. I liked the characters, and I thought that at some point the show might hit it’s stride. But that’s not to be. ABC has cancelled it. For me, this was an example of a show that was a good idea but just didn’t reach full potential. STATUS: Still on my record list only because I haven’t removed it yet.

RUBICON – WOW. Now this is a show. Unfortunately AMC has decided not to renew it for a second season. (THAT SUCKS AMC!!) If you can catch this, do. It’s very smart. STATUS: Still on my record list because I refuse to remove

THE WALKING DEAD – Also on AMC, but this one they’ve already re-upped for a second season. Funny how good ratings will do that. I’m enjoying this one. Good characters, interesting world, exciting situations. My only issues at this point are that we’ve seen some of the same type of situations in other shows and movies. Granted, this is based on a graphic novel I have not read, so it’s possible the novel came out before some of the other movies did, and they’re the ones that are derivative. STATUS: On my record list, and staying there.

That’s just a sampling, of course. Some of the other shows I record that have made the cut from the previous years.

COMMUNITY – Love this show! Hilarious.

30 ROCKS – Still a ton of fun.

GLEE – Loved this last year. This season not as good, so it’s on the verge of getting into my iffy list.

FRINGE – My guilty pleasure. This show rocks. My fellow geeks know what I mean.

And just for fun…one of our local stations airs PERRY MASON every morning at 5 a.m. I record that, too. Love, love, love it. (In fact I’m watching a episode as I’m writing this.)

 

So, here are my questions…what’s on your favorite’s list? What show’s have you given up on? Any gems out there we should all be watching?

Homesick For A Place That Doesn’t Exist

One of the blogs I read every day (or as often as it’s updated) is called Making Light. The blog is hosted  by Patrick & Teresa Nielsen Hayden, both of whom are editors, teachers of writing, and major figures in the world of SF. The subject matter is varied and fascinating, ranging from science fiction and fantasy (naturally), to the business of publishing, to politics and world events, to, well, just about anything.


It’s usually at least an interesting read, but this recent post by co-blogger Abi Sutherland (an American living and working in the Netherlands) particularly set me to thinking. The post was written as a response to one on Roger Ebert’s blog (which you can find here), on the subject of loneliness. Sutherland’s post is mostly about the sense of community one can find at various places on the Internet (something to which I think we can all relate), but it was this passage that really struck a chord for me:

 

[Ebert] wrote it from the perspective of being one of those happy people who does not get lonely, and I think he goes astray as he does. He wants to attribute it to causes, to lost loves or love never found, but I tend to think that some of us are simply prone to longing.

 

I don’t even know what we long for. Not necessarily for companionship, or love, or friendship and interesting conversation; I have all of those in abundance. I’ve been married seventeen years, and I know I am beloved. My children adore me the way that children often do adore their mother. I have friendships both in person and remote. And I return all of these sentiments wholeheartedly. I’m not achingly lonely the way I was as a teenager. But still…

 

An evangelical type might tell me I long for his version of God. Madison Avenue will happily detail all that I should long for, and how much I can save by buying it while it’s on special offer. Many Americans, particularly conservatives, will tell me that I long for liberty, here in “oppressive” Europe. Perhaps any or all of these people are right, but I doubt it. My experiences don’t match their assumptions.

 

Something in me longs for a place I feel at home; perhaps that’s it.

 

I may just be projecting here, but it seems to me that’s why a lot of us read, and why a lot of us write: a longing for someplace we feel at home.


One of the things I’ve always loved about the German language (Mark Twain’s’ hilarious distaste for it notwithstanding) is the amazing variety of precise words it contains for very specific and complex emotions and states of mind. One of those is Weltschmerz. The word is usually translated as “world-pain” or “world-weariness”, but I’ve always preferred the definition given by Meyer in one of the Travis McGee books: “homesickness for a place that doesn’t exist.”


How many times have we heard readers tell us that they read to escape? Often, that statement is followed by a story of some wrenching event in their lives, or some horrible time they’ve gone through, and how such and such a book helped them get away from it for a while. It we’re really lucky, the book’s one of ours. But I’ve found that even people, like myself, who are well provided with “companionship, or love, or friendship and interesting conversation” still have that sense of longing to be, at least for a short time, in another place. Some of us feel the need so acutely that we’re driven to build those places in our heads, then invite other people to visit there too. This occasionally annoys our companions, loved ones and friends, because it does at times seem more than a little ungrateful. But it really has nothing to do with them. We’re just, as Ms. Sutherland says, prone to longing.

 

So, am I off base here? Does loneliness (or longing, if you prefer) drive YOUR writing or reading?



Things I’ve been wrong about

by Tess Gerritsen

 

You live and you learn.  And what I’ve learned, over the past two decades as a writer, is how many times I’ve been wrong about developments in the publishing biz.  When I go back and see old blog posts of mine, I have to either wince or laugh about how poorly some of my predictions have come out.  Which only proves that too much of the time, I have no idea what I’m talking about.

But I’m willing to admit it.

Here are some of the things I’ve been absurdly wrong about.  Or maybe just a little bit wrong about:

 

“E-readers will never be popular.”

I believe I made this assertion as recently as, oh, 2007.  I said that no one would want to bring an e-reader to the beach, that we’re all too attached to real books, and that those gizmos were just too reader-unfriendly.  But then I had a conversation with a Kindle zealot and, in September 2008, I bought one.  And blogged about it.  Not just blogged about it, raved about it.  But I still didn’t see it taking over the publishing world.

 

“E-books will always be a small segment of overall book sales.”

  Can I stop whacking myself with the wet noodle?  I was so wrong about this, I want to blush.  As Sarah Weinman writes in Daily Finance, e-sales comprised about 25% of overall sales for John Grisham’s latest novel.  And they were more than 50% of overall sales for Laura Lippman’s recent hardcover release.  I’ve seen the growth in my own sales, and the steepness of the curve, from last year to this, has been nothing short of breathtaking.  The good news is that my total hardcover sales haven’t really declined because of it, which makes me think that many of those e-customers represent growth in overall readership.  Or they represent readers who are buying both formats.  I have absolutely no doubt that within the next few years, e-sales will make up 50% of the sales of most new releases.

 

“Piracy will destroy publishing.”

This past January, I blogged about how many of my books were turning up on pirate sites. I foresaw the same calamity falling upon publishing that fell upon the music industry.  I worried about authors starving because too many readers would just swipe our work for free.  I noted how many thousands of my books had been downloaded for free from sharing sites.  

I think I worried about it for nothing.  Because e-readers have become so popular, and downloading books has become so easy and for some titles, dirt cheap — that customers are bypassing those virus-ridden free-sharing sites and downloading books legally.  The iTunes model, it turns out, works for books as well.  It’s just a matter of keeping the books affordable and available.  And if a reader steals one of my books?  Well, I’ve come around to agreeing with publishing guru and author Joe Konrath: if the thief really really loves the book,  maybe he’ll actually pay for the next one. 

 

“Traditional advertising for books is the gold standard.”

By traditional, I meant the use of print ads in places like the New York Times and USA Today.  But after an online conversation with marketing guru M.J. Rose, I was forced to re-think my position, which I blogged about here.  And now, in 2010, I can tell you that I think print advertising is pretty much wasted money.  For my last book, ICE COLD, no major print ads were bought at all.  The advertising was pretty much all online, with two ad spots on television during the debut week for “Rizzoli & Isles.”  I don’t think we’ll be going back to newspaper ads for the next book, either.  Because why spend tens of thousands of dollars for an ad that will just be lining birdcages within 24 hours?  

As for TV ads, that’s something else that authors should re-think.  It’s cool, it’s glamorous, but for the most part it’s an expensive bust.  Consider this fascinating article, which analyzes the effect of a TV ad on one author’s book sales.  His conclusion: it’s a huge waste of money.  Now in my case, this may not be true, because I was advertising on “Rizzoli & Isles, a television show that was built on my books.  So I was playing to the same audience that already likes the characters.  But if you’re just putting up an ad on a random TV show that has nothing to do with your books, you might want to think again.

 

“Self-publishing is a fool’s game.”

Back in 2006, I wrote a blog about how self-published books almost always fail.    And I revisited the topic here.  I’m not going to entirely back away from that stance, if what we’re talking about is print books.  I still believe that if you pay to print your own book, you’re facing insurmountable odds when it comes to getting that book into stores, getting it reviewed, and finding any readers to buy it.  But something drastically changed between 2006 and today, and that is the e-book revolution.  Now you can self-publish your manuscript with Amazon or Barnes and Noble, and then sell it through their e-stores.  True, you’ll face competition with all the thousands of other authors who are also self-publishing their books.  But as Joe Konrath has proved, it is possible to make a living as a self-published e-book writer.  Again, the odds are stacked way against you.  But your investment is minimal, and there actually is the potential for an income.

Bottom line?  If you’re a first-time author who’s been offered a traditional publishing contract with an advance, I would still say you’re better off taking it.  Because you can’t dismiss the advantages that a real publisher can give you, from distribution to marketing to editing.  But if you can’t find a publisher, or you’ve been fired by your publisher, there is now another way to sell your book to the public.

 

“The vampire/zombie/fairy/werewolf/blahblah craze can’t last.”

When it comes to trends in public taste, I don’t know what I”m talking about.  And neither does anyone else. 

 

So what have the rest of you been wrong about?  Which trends did you dismiss, which developments did you pooh pooh?

Meet Dirk Cussler. Yes, THAT Cussler . . .

by Pari

When Bookworks, one of the truly great indy bookstores in my city, contacted me about a possible interview with Dirk Cussler, I jumped at the opportunity. I was fascinated with the idea of learning how Dirk started working with his legendary father, Clive Cussler, and how the two them could keep coming up with their action-packed plots — that span continents and centuries — for all these years. I also liked that my Albuquerque readers will have the chance to meet Dirk and Clive this Wednesday night

Tell us about the new book Crescent Dawn.
As with most of the Pitt books, a historical element provided inspiration for the story. In this case, there were actually two events. I became interested in the loss of the H.M.S. Hampshire, a British cruiser that sank under mysterious circumstances in World War I, while transporting Lord Kitchener to a secret meeting with the Russian Czar. Dozens of rumors and theories abounded after the sinking, including speculation that the ship was sunk by the IRA or even the British government, rather than a suspected German U-boat. It all seemed to me like good fodder for a fictional sub-plot. At the same time, Clive was intrigued by Helena, the mother of the Roman Emperor Constantine, who traveled to Jerusalem in 327 A.D. to search for relics of Christianity. The trick was then to tie the two events into a contemporary-staged thriller.

What inspired you to start writing with your father?
About eight years ago, I quit my job in the tech industry, where I’d worked in corporate finance for almost 15 years. Kicking around to do something different, and with the writer’s bug nibbling at my extremities, I teamed up on a writing project with Craig Dirgo. Dirgo had co-written the two Sea Hunters books with Clive, which were non-fiction accounts of several of the NUMA shipwreck expeditions. Dirgo had also worked with us on a few of the actual searches. So he and I started working on a non-fiction historical book we hoped might lead to a series project  . . . but ultimately went nowhere.

About that same time, Clive was working to finish Trojan Odyssey. He was 71 and supporting my mother, who was battling lung cancer. That made for a weary time, and I think he lost his passion for writing a bit. Seeing that I had a sincere interest in writing at that point, he called me up out of the blue one day and asked me if I wanted to take a crack at writing a Pitt novel. It was a proposition I never anticipated, but I eagerly jumped in with both feet. I never expected to be writing the Pitt books, but having essentially grown up with the series, and having a little extra insight on their creator, it’s been a completely fun experience. My father and I have a strong relationship, so it is of course quite rewarding to be able to work together with him, even if it did come a bit late in both our professional lives.

How do the two of you work together?
As fortune has it, my father and I only live about ten minutes apart in the Phoenix area, so we see each other several times a week, whether writing or not. We actually work separately, but meet often to discuss the current book’s progress.

What’s the division of labor?
Most of our joint work is at the front end. We’ll meet together regularly over the course of several weeks to kick around plot ideas and then hash out an outline. Once that is set, then I’ll go off and do the bulk of the actual writing, with my father editing along the way. I would say the challenges of working together are few, beyond the normal struggles of writing a book. It’s a real pleasure picking the brains of my father, however, as his creativity seems to have no bounds.

What do you think are the essential elements of good storytelling?
I might say that the three C’s of Character, Conflict, and Compulsion are at the heart of any good story. Writing action adventure tales, we don’t necessarily delve too deeply into the psyche of the characters, but it’s always important that the reader can empathize with one or more of the main figures. Some measure of action is required, typically driven by a conflict or odyssey of some sort that leads the characters forward, either physically or mentally. And it all must be done in a compelling manner that keeps the reader turning the pages, be it by mood, dialogue, style elements, or the conflict or action itself.

photo: C Ronnie BramhallWhat’s up next? Any solo writing?
Clive and I have already been formulating some plot lines for the next Dirk Pitt book, so I expect to begin writing on that shortly. I haven’t yet found the time to complete a solo novel…but some day!

What’s going on with the real NUMA right now?
We’re currently involved with two ongoing NUMA search projects, one in Lake Michigan and one in the North Sea.  We’ve been searching in Lake Michigan for a Northwest Airlines DC-4 that crashed in a thunderstorm back in 1950, and represented the worst air fatality accident at the time. In the North Sea, we are also trying to locate the Bonhomme Richard, the flagship of John Paul Jones which sank after battling a British squadron in 1779.  We’ve spent several unsuccessful years looking for this one, but hope to try again next summer.

Dirk,
Thank you so much for this wonderful interview. I look forward to reading your — and your father’s — books for many years to come.

 

Dirk Cussler, an MBA from Berkeley, worked for many years in the financial arena, and now devotes himself full-time to writing. He is the coauthor with Clive Cussler of Black Wind, Treasure of Khan, and Arctic Drift. For the past several years, he has been an active participant and partner in his father’s NUMA expeditions and has served as president of the NUMA advisory board of trustees. He lives in Arizona.

Clive Cussler is the author of forty-two previous books, including twenty Dirk Pitt® adventures; eight NUMA® Files adventures; seven Oregon Files books; and two Isaac Bell thrillers. His most recent New York Times bestsellers are Spartan Gold, The Wrecker, and The Silent Sea. His nonfiction works include The Sea Hunters and The Sea Hunters II; these describe the true adventures of the real NUMA, which, led by Cussler, searches for lost ships of historic significance. With his crew of volunteers, Cussler has discovered more than sixty ships, including the long-lost Confederate submarine Hunley. He lives in Arizona.

(I’ll be out of pocket much of the day today, but will respond to comments as soon as I can this afternoon. In the meantime . . . enjoy!   
Cheers, Pari)

 

the crankiness, it lives

by Toni McGee Causey

I have no blog for you today. Well, not a real one.

It’s been a week of watching people (non internet related) be rude and bitchy to one another, as well as watching other stuff sort of implode (not this list or any group you’d all know). Last week, four people I know lost their parents (four different people died), and one of those was a cousin. Every one of them had been older or had suffered from a long, extensive illness, so not one was a surprise, but still, it makes you stop and think. Then this week, watching people dismantle friendships because it’s simply better for them is just… well, crappy.

None of this is directed at me (thankfully), so this is more just me, being in the periphery, aware of the pain raging all around me. Not able to help, not able to fix anything, not able to offer anything wiser than, “Yeah, it sucks.” And it’s affected my writing way more this week than it should have, this intrusion of anger and hurtfulness. What I’m writing is hard enough, really. It’s heartbreaking. I’m nearly at the end, and the book is ripping me to shreds. I have to gird up to get through this next part, and that’s difficult to do while witnessing the harshness I’ve seen this week. It makes me just want to go be a hermit. Sometimes, I think Salinger had the right idea.

I don’t even feel like ranting. I just feel… tired. Tired of the cranky. So, ‘Rati, I am opening this up to you today. What do you do to get through the day, when it seems like the world around you is just determined to stomp on the last little piece of empathy you have left? Links, books, movies, anecdotes, mantras, quotes… what? I’d appreciate it if you could help me rescue this next week.

Where to live next

By Cornelia Read

So, again with my procrastinatory Googling of dead relatives… but this time I think I may have decided where I want to live next, weather and finances and fate permitting.

This pretty much all started when I heard from the lovely and inimitable Lee Child that he would be going to Saratoga, New York, for a library gig–at which I hope he was madly feted since he’s really cool and stuff. For some reason, I remembered from earlier dead-relative Googling that my great-great Uncle, Dr. Valentine Seaman, had done the first chemical analysis of the waters of Saratoga and Ballston Spa in the late 1700s.


He looks quite a bit like my dad, actually–including the sideburns.

 

Totally the same forehead and cheekbones, even though you probably can’t tell since this is of course not a profile shot of Dad (my scrapbooks are all in storage in California.) Dad had a better nose, though. Not to mention way longer legs.

Here’s Valentine’s great-niece, Caroline Seaman Read, with her daughter Carol. She was Dad’s grandmother:

Great-Great-Uncle Valentine was also the guy who introduced Jenner’s cowpox vaccine for smallpox to America, after his eldest daughter died of a live-smallpox inoculation. Valentine traveled to England to ask Jenner about his work, became lifelong friends with the guy, and returned home to New York City with some cowpox in his luggage. There were apparently riots in NYC because people were terrified that he’d start an epidemic, plus his colleagues at The New York Hospital were pretty freaked out by it, so he volunteered to treat his own remaining children with the stuff first.

He also did the first training classes for nurses in the United States–a twenty-two-lecture series on midwifery. 

Oddly enough, my daughters were born at what is now New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center. I remember the morning the cab let my husband and me out at the entrance to the maternity ward. There was a small bronze plaque near the front doors which, if memory serves, read “New York Lying-In Hospital, 1793.”

I thought to myself at the time that I was totally fucking glad not to be standing in that spot in 1793, since they probably had dirt floors and stone knives and bearskins, and I badly wanted an epidural, but I had no idea that had I been suddenly whisked back 199 years that I might well have met up with my great-great uncle. Weird, huh?

Anyway, interesting guy and he died of consumption at age 47 (my age this year), in the front room of the family house on Beeckman Street. His son Valentine, also a doctor, lived to the age of 96 and was written up in the New York Times the year before his death because he was thought to be at that time the oldest native inhabitant of the city.

Here’s Valentine the Younger’s obituary from The New York Times, which is pretty interesting reading about the old days further downtown:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=FA0B12FF355413738DDDAC0994DA415B8984F0D3

THAT Valentine and his brother John bought 25 acres at the northern tip of Manhattan and John built a country place on the site. Henry and his wife referred to it as “Mount Olympus,” but the locals called it “Seaman’s Folly.”

 

 Here’s what it looked like later, after it became the home of a riding club:

 Though from a different angle, this would have been what the house had a view of:

 Actually, maybe that building at the top left WAS the house? Not sure…

Here’s a fuller description from myinwood.net (quoted from an article in The New York Herald, August 29th, 1869):

The mansion is built entirely of white marble, quarried by Mr. Seaman on the spot. It is seventy-eight feet deep and in plan is nearly square. It has a main dome reaching a height of ninety feet from the ground, with its top painted a dark maroon color. There are also two smaller domes, whose arches are surmounted by the statues of Love and Music respectively. It is hardly possible to give a correct view of this house—a house that has few equals in the world, and one that is a combination of capacious wings, towering chimneys, vaulted domes, Roman windows and sharply defined, yet not ungraceful lines. If defies classification according to the schools of art, yet it is inferior to none of them, while a combination of all.  The plan of breaking away from what is pure Grecian or Roman is a praiseworthy innovation, and one, which has been followed with triumphant success along the river. From the northern porch the ground assumes a gently declining surface till it touches the drive in continuous groves of beautiful evergreens; from the eastward it descends on eight terraces, along which are constructed the extensive hothouses; from the southward the garden spots and statuary dot the green, and to the southward are the stables and the valley.

Let us enter the house. The door is flanked with fine pieces of statuary, and once within a wide and lofty hall, with the usual furniture, is seen. To the extreme south end of the house is the octagonal library, fitted up at great expense. Closets whose doors support long and beautifully gilded mirrors, statues of Scott, Shakespeare, Byron, Milton, Homer, Esculapius, Socrates and Pluto fill niches in the wall, and also the mind from the measures of heroic verse to the eternity of dreary philosophy. Some fine paintings hang on the walls, and the western windows look out into a small conservatory, in which statues of the four Seasons are placed in appropriate positions. These figures are about two feet high….

Looking north can be seen Spuyten Duyvil creek and the rich and fertile acres which it washes; the Harlem river with its torturous course winding like a snake through the tall grass and thick shrubs; a section of the Hudson shining like a lake of molten silver, and tinged with crimson by the setting sun; the misty hills rising from the valley and just perceptible through the haze, the weird glens, the weather beaten crags and torpid mountains. A scene like this is but a portion of what strikes the eye at every point; and this sublime panoramic view has been gazed upon by many eminent Europeans, who declare that nothing equals it in the Old World.

At the entrance to the porch two figures in the dress of the time of Louis XIV stand out in conspicuous prominence, and a statue of America caps the main dome: the interior is frescoed with Cupids. The house is connected from room to room with an alarm telegraph, so, that should burglars aspire to transfer some of Mr. Seaman’s valuables the dial would at once indicate their location and anxieties, when doubtless he would treat them with becoming civility….

The hothouses are very extensive. They consist of graperies, a pinery and greenhouses. The pinery is fifty feet deep, and is very fruitful. The graperies now groan under heavy loads of their delicious fruit. They are two in number, separated by a plant house, and have a through depth of 212 feet, with a width of 22 ½ feet, with a lean-to quadrant shaped roofs. A steam engine is used to throw the water on the grape vines, which have hothouse peaces just in their rear; and against the wall some rare figs. The whole arrangement of these graperies is a model of neatness. No finer fruit of this kind is grown in America. Every species abounds. There are the black Hamburgs, the Victoria Hamburgs, some bunches of which weigh six pounds; the white Nice, the Muscat Alexandrias and the royal muscadines; the Timothy de Burgh, the earliest golden Chasselas [below],

grizzly Frottingaus and white Prottingans. The plant house in winter contains 2,500 pots. The western slope is now broken up for improvements. A small lake is to be constructed; and adjoining, an ice house, so that he can make his own ice.

 

This being my family, of course, what with their absolute genetic genius for losing fortunes and squandering swaths of gorgeous bountiful real estate, all that’s left of the place today is what’s known as the Seaman-Drake Arch, touted as a perfect scale model of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris:

 

The above is from sometime in the Twenties, I suppose. Below is how it was situated when the house was still a going concern, at the center of the photograph (looking towards the Hudson, with the Johnson Iron Works in the foreground–manufacturer of cannons during the Civil War):

Check out the billboards along the Harlem River… 

These days, it looks like this:

It’s now at 216th Street and Broadway. They think maybe there was once a gatekeeper’s residence on the interior, but it burned out decades ago.

Henry Seaman had a made a fortune in “drugs” (no shit), but lost it all. Luckily, his wife Ann was rich, so she kept the place up during her lifetime. When she died, 140 relatives contested the estate. She left it all to her nephew Lawrence Drake, whom her late husband had forbade from ever visiting the property when he was still alive. Which just goes to show you that George Burns was right about the secret to a happy life, to wit, “having a large loving family in a distant city.”

Here’s a little description of local street names from the deeply fabulous Inwood historical website myinwood.net, the following a description of the road that runs in front of the arch:

Broadway Generally acknowledged to have followed the old Weckquaesgeek Indian trail that ran the thirteen mile length of Manhattan. Early settlers called it the Bloomindale Road. Going north the original trail crossed the then shallow Spuyten Duyvil Creek into what today is Marble Hill. At low tide a traveler could cross the Spuyten Duyvil Creek on foot. Records show that Indians referred to the crossing as “The Wading Place.” Future generations would see a ferry crossing and eventually the King’s Bridge.


There’s also Indian Road, just a block and a half long off 218th Street, near the northern end of Seaman Ave.

It’s the last street on Manhattan that’s still officially named a “road.” I’ve read that it was named that because this is approximately the spot at which Peter Minuit bought Manhattan from the Lenape tribe for sixty guilders. Aunt Jean says we all have some Lenape blood, which is way cool, not least because Mom’s side of the family killed of the Pequot in Connecticut.


View Larger Map

Click on “view larger map” and then zoom in twice to see the street names. Where the Seaman house once stood is now Park Terrace East and Park Terrace West

There’s a 400-unit apartment complex there now, designed by Albert Goldhammer. It was built in 1940 and is still wonderfully deco, with lots of actual garden lacing between the buildings.

But to back up again a little, here’s what the old neighborhood looked like:

Those were apparently the last cows kept in Manhattan. We’re looking towards the Hudson again, over Spuyten Duyvil Creek (pronounced SPYden DYEvull.) This is possibly now the site of Baker Field, where Columbia plays football (there’s a sixty-foot tall “C” painted on a palisade across the river.)

It’s funny, I remember trying to go find an apartment in this neck of the woods the last time I lived in the city… the rental prices were just so amazing, I asked my husband if we could drive up there and check it out. We got lost in Washington Heights, then at the peak of a Dominican crack fest, and all the cars were on fire. Never made it all the way up to Inwood, and it’s all of course since gotten really gentrified. At the time, I had no idea I had roots up there.

Quite a bit of the Inwood neighborhood is still parkland, though, which is very cool. Here’s a contemporary view from further south and east… the humpy bit with all the trees behind the cows is still a humpy bit with trees, only now it’s got the Henry Hudson Parkway nestled behind it, leading to the Henry Hudson Bridge there, kind of in the middle. This part of town has the only untouched Manhattan forest land left, with a salt marsh.

Here’s what walking along Spuyten Duyvil Creek looked like, back in the day. The lady with the basket and child was basically abroad on a dirt road in the South Bronx. I’m thinking picnic:

Today she might be walking in front of the yellow brick building, I guess:

The other remnant of my dead relatives having frolicked in this vicinity is a street name… Seaman Avenue.

Here’s another snippet from myinwood.net:

Seaman Avenue First opened in 1908 and extended in 1912, Seaman Avenue is named for the family of Henry B. Seaman. The Seaman estate once covered some 25 acres from Park Terrace Hill to Spuyten Duyvil Creek.  Henry was a descendent of Captain John Seaman who settled in Long Island in the 1650′s.

 

Here’s what the corner of Seaman and Payson used to look like:

Another wonderful quote on myinwood.net is from a 1921 article by Eleanor Booth Simmons. She wandered around Inwood talking with elderly residents, describing many of the old family houses then falling into ruin. Here’s my favorite bit:

 

Do you like to dream about old houses? Do you like to investigate neglected mansions of a past age, picturing the life that flowed through the high-ceilinged rooms now so musty and decayed?

If you are a New Yorker it isn’t necessary to travel to New England to indulge in this pastime. Forty minutes by subway from the shopping district, a brief walk, and you are in a region of old houses. Some crown the green hills of Inwood, which downtown excursionists are beginning to discover, and some, stranded on the streets, are rudely shouldered by modern apartment houses of glaring brick. But there they are, and in some of them you will find white-haired men and women whose talk takes you back to a day earlier than that in which the characters of Edith Wharton’s “The Age of Innocence” lived.

Fancy going into a house a few steps from the Dyckman ferry and finding two brothers and a sister who have dwelt there sixty years! These are the Flitners, children of the Maine sea captain, who, landing at the Hudson River dock with barges of lumber from the North, was so charmed with these shores that he brought his family here to live. Get them talking and they tell you of a time when there were but seven buildings above 187th Street east of Kingsbridge Road. In their childhood the winter skating was the social event of the locality.  The lads damned up a brook that ran just north of Inwood Street, now Dyckman Street, and made a wide pond between two small hills. At night they lighted fires of Tar barrels and waste wood on the banks, and the community gathered and sang and shouted and did marvelous things on the ice. Perhaps the winters were colder then, for, as Charles Flitner remembers it, there was always ice from fall to spring.

Where Cobwebs Thrive on Manhattan Isle, by Eleanor Booth Simmons, New York Tribune, November 6, 1921.

Doesn’t that sound like something straight out of Mark Helprin’s Winter’s Tale?

 

Okay, this is a photo of people skating on Central Park, when the Dakota was still new, and it’s probably at least a couple of decades later than what was described above, but it’s still one of my favorite photographs of Manhattan.

So now my real estate fetish has kicked in fully, and there’s actually a five-room apartment for sale on Seaman Avenue that I’d give my eye-teeth and right arm to live in:

109 Seaman Avenue, built in 1917. And hey, it’s a two bedroom in Manhattan for under $400k, so maybe it’s time to buy some Powerball tickets? I went and drove around the neighborhood this week, when Grace and I drove down from Cow Hampshire for her Barnard interview (and drove BACK that same day–ten hours total.)

Turns out my initial impulse to go check this neighborhood out was right on. Only wish we’d moved there instead of Boulder, back in 1995…

Take a look at the rest of that apartment: http://www.corcoran.com/property/listing.aspx?Region=NYC&ListingID=1982033&ohDat=11/7/2010%2012:00:00%20AM;

Ossum, right? Plus, it is NOT at this intersection, one of the most ridiculed and photographed in all of the city:

 

But you can still go for a walk in the park along Spuyten Duyvil Creek:

Okay, dear ‘Ratis, where would you live if you could live ANYWHERE?

I am extremely grateful to Cole Thompson, a real-estate agent with New Heights Realty in Inwood. Much of the information about the Inwood neighborhood and the majority of the images in this post are from his fascinating blog, myinwood.net. If I ever have any money, I hope to buy an apartment from him. Or at least rent one…

 

Love In The Time Of Isosceles

by J.T. Ellison

 

Sigh. If only we could apply the Pythagorean theorem to words. Just think of it, the ease of plugging A² + B² = C² into your manuscript and watching all the 1s and 0s percolate, get red hot on the screen and suddenly pop up with an answer – Choose Frank, you imbecile!

Love triangles suck.

I became a writer from sheer necessity, as numbers began to look Greek to me around the same time as my advanced algebra teacher caught me kissing a boy in the hall before class, pulled me aside, got in my face and yelled at me. “You’re not in love, you’re in heat,” were his exact words. I was wildly insulted. I found myself neither yowling aloud nor turning in circles with my tail in the air spraying urine on passersby (though I was in my preppy handbook stage, but that hardly qualified.) Turned me right off quadratic equations, and I didn’t find the love again until I met up with Euclid and his lovely triangles in my sophomore year. But by then it was too late. I spent much too much time in geometry extolling the virtues of Cal Ripken’s ice blue eyes with a fellow student and popping out my contact lens so I could sneak into the girls’ bathroom for a smoke. Trigonometry was great, we were allowed to use our circles in class, and I loved the way the word cosine sounded in my mouth, (try it – cosine. Co… sine… sexy, yeah?) but by the time I hit calculus, boys, books, sports and stories were paramount and I could barely give the numbers my attention.

But back to eighth grade. Said kissing, and apparent early onset estrus, was quickly followed by my first love triangle. The other boy, who shall remain nameless to protect the innocent, was older, darker, taller and richer – by God, he was in high school and drove a Saab. A SAAB, people. In comparison, my current relationship seemed like mere puppy love. I mean really, what girl’s going to pass up an opportunity to be driven home instead of holding sweaty hands in the back of the bus, watching the cowboys do snuff and cough their lungs out, and wondering just what base made you cool and what base made you a slut?

I labored over the decision (not the bases, the boys. The bases were later. Ahem.) The guys were friends. The older boy a sort of mentor to the younger. But he was so damn charming, and invited me to go skiing with him (up to the mountains in his Saab…) Who was I to hinder fate? I went. We skied, we drank cocoa, I felt cool in my new blue moon boots. Eventually, toward the end of the afternoon, on the ski lift for the last run of the day, we kissed. It was magical. Puppy love at its finest. And then I had to come back to earth (literally down the mountain, ah, the imagery slays me even now) and break up with the other boy, explain that somehow, without it being my fault, I fell in love with his friend.

I felt like a total heel. Still do, all these years later. The second relationship worked for a very long time, but eventually it too disintegrated, the vagaries of time, hormones and 3,000 miles of distance proved too much for its fragile beauty to withstand. We’re all Facebook friends now, because really, who doesn’t want to relive their most humiliating moments and painful decisions over and over and over?

My first love triangle proved to be painful for all involved. So when I approach the page with the concept, I am very, very careful. I know what it feels like to be the girl trying to make a choice. It’s not fun. No matter what, someone is going to get hurt.

That makes for a great story, because you’ve got a stellar opportunity to have character development. Pain makes your characters grow. And growing is what we’re all striving for in our fiction and hoping for from our characters, right?

But to have the logic and simplicity of math in the equation… We would know exactly what formula would work when presenting two love interests to a female lead. As it is, sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t. When I introduced James “Memphis” Highsmythe, Detective Inspector for the Metropolitan Police at New Scotland Yard, Viscount Dulsie, I knew I was about to shake things up a bit. But I had no idea the impact it would have. I’m hardly in Stephanie Plum or Bella territory (though if someone were to establish a Baldwin versus Memphis fan club, who am I to interfere?) but I was shocked at the reactions. My male readers HATED Memphis. Some of the women did too. Though some really liked him; it’s been a completely mixed bad from the feminine side. I attribute this to the eighth grader in all of us who found themselves in exactly the same pickle I did, and the boys were obviously on the receiving end. Makes perfect sense.

As a writer, I adore Memphis. He is my own personal earthquake. He gets to step in, screw things up and make everyone mad, then trot off back to England and mourn his dead wife. No one can stay mad at him for long; though a confirmed rake, he’s got that special something all rakes have, which makes him catnip. Taylor is so far above the fray when it comes to these issues because she is a hero, but the fun of being a writer is watching heroes fall down on their way up Mt Olympus. Her fiancé, John Baldwin, FBI profiler extraordinaire, has always been the one to catch her when she falls. But not this time. When Memphis and Taylor shared a kiss, I mourned for Baldwin. Taylor was now interested in two men. I find myself suddenly backing into a love triangle, though I’d be more inclined to call this a polygon with modified vertices and segments with three non-collinear points and a distinct plane, because the word triangle is just too simplistic to explain the situation.

I’m working on the 7th novel in the series now, and Memphis is back, in a big way. He is a catalyst. But I can’t help but wonder what would happen if he were to become… more. The unknown is always fertile ground for playing…

So tell me – love triangles: Love them? Hate them? What are your favorites? Do they have any place in crime fiction?

Wine of the Week: Tenute Rapitalà Nero D’avola – we’re heading into winter, so we need heavy wines that pair well with stews and soups. This one does the trick nicely.

Sympathy With The Devil

Zoë Sharp

Last night I went to the prize-giving event for the Lancashire Libraries short story competition at County Hall in Preston. A very enjoyable event, with a worthy winner in Jo Powell, and commended writers, Kathryn Halton and Neil Martin. Congratulations to all those who took part – there were some wonderful pieces of writing.

To kick off the evening, myself and fellow judges Neil White and Nick Oldham talked for a little while about writing in general. The audience was made up largely of entrants to the contest, who patiently listened to the three of us ramble on before the winner was announced, and they also had the opportunity to ask questions about writing in general.

The subject of those questions was very interesting, because the thing that people most wanted to know seemed to be about developing good characters. And I must admit, that when I first started trying to write, it was the characters that I found most difficult. Creating rounded people comes only with time and practice, I think.

I remember getting hold of a book about the different characteristics of the various signs of the zodiac, which was very useful for working out some traits that dovetailed together. I’ve read books on body language and mental illness, looking for those genuine tics and features that make characters come to life on the page.

But do I write out detailed character biographies before I start, as one audience member asked?

Erm, no, I don’t.

I’ve tried it, but I find myself inventing stuff just for the sake of it, and then the danger is that you try too hard to shoehorn that information into the story when it just doesn’t fit.

The truth is, before I meet a character, in setting, I don’t know them all that well. I have an idea of why they’re there and what drives them, but until they metaphorically shake my hand and look me in the eye, I don’t really know them.

I’ve never liked stories that dump all of a character’s backstory in your lap within a page. Equally, I don’t like people who tell me their life history the first time I meet them. Some people have that kind of abounding self-confidence, though, that makes them want to boast about their achievements to comparative strangers. The kind who tell you within ten minutes of meeting what their house is worth, or how much they paid for their car. Usually, I have to say, they’re self-made.

It’s nice of them to take the blame.

Think of people you’ve met, who might have seemed quite charming when they were first introduced, but gradually you realise that you can’t stand them. They don’t have to come out with an outrageous personal statement, like they think your litter of dalmation puppies would make a wonderful fur coat, but after a while it dawns on you that they’re not quite as charming as you thought they were.

And nowhere near as charming as they think they are, either.

Is it the way they rattle on about themselves for just that bit too long, without asking anything about you in return? Do their eyes stray past you while you talk, and linger on the dangerously young girl who’s just walked by? Do they manoeuvre you out of a conversation with your boss or colleague, or steer things round to how great they are or what they’re working on instead?

Or do you suddenly notice that their smile doesn’t quite reach all the way up to their eyes?

 Things like this used to really annoy me. Now I take notes.

Of course, certain traits simply crop up in the writing. Often, I don’t know exactly where they come from. They just suddenly arrive.

I’m writing a short story at the moment. I have a character who’s an old-school East End gangster, married but with a younger mistress towards whom he is slightly cold. And unexpectedly, halfway through the story, I found out that the reason for this is because his wife suffered early-onset dementia and is in a nursing home, that obviously he is enormously fond of her but she doesn’t know him any more. That changes things about him. It changes them a lot. But I didn’t know that before I started writing, and to be honest I don’t think I would have thought of it up front.

So, my solution now is that I think I’ll do character biographies after I’ve finished the first draft of a book, so I can see if any characters seem a bit thin or a bit clichéd, in which case I can make another pass and see if I can get them to talk to me a little more about who they are and why they behave the way they do.

Another character question that came up was about making characters sympathetic, and what are the traits you should remove in order to make them more so.

This is a very difficult question, because some of the finest characters in fiction have traits you wouldn’t expect to appeal to the reader. Who would have thought that Dexter Morgan, the psychopathic serial-killing hero of Jeff Lindsay’s series, would be such a hit?

Or Thomas Harris’s ‘gentleman, genius, cannibal’ Dr Hannibal Lecter?

And what about the mysterious Jackal of Frederick Forsyth’s classic thriller, THE DAY OF THE JACKAL? The man is a ruthless assassin, who picks up first a lonely woman, sleeps with her and murders her, and then preys on a gay man in order to have a place of safety to stay before the attempted hit on De Gaulle. He had few redeeming features, but by the end of the book you find yourself almost willing him to succeed. Is it his very ruthlessness that makes him so fascinating?

It comes back to the fact that you don’t have to like a character to be thoroughly engaged by them. Ken Bruen’s corrupt coppers, Roberts and Brant, should be the kind of policemen playing the villains, not the heroes, but you root for them all the way through.

The James Bond of Ian Fleming’s books was a racist, misogynist womaniser. Doesn’t seem to have done him any harm.

So, what turns an on-the-face-of-it unsympathetic character into a human train wreck that we just can’t tear our eyes away from? Has to be down to the skill of the writer, for sure.

I’d love to hear your examples, and what it is about them that should be unappealing, but somehow just works. Is it down to humour? Do we find ourselves instinctively warming to a character who possesses a biting wit, even if they are the twisted personification of evil? Or is it the evil itself that we secretly find so compelling?

How do you go about constructing a character? 

This week’s Word of the Week is cacoëthes which apparently means mania or passion or even disease. It’s from Greek kakoethes, which combines kakos, bad with ethos, habit.  And from this comes cacoëthes scribendi, a compulsion to write, the writer’s itch, an uncontrollable desire to write, a mania for authorship. Roman satirical poet Juvenal wrote: “Tenet insanabile multos scribendi cacoethes”  or “The incurable itch for scribbling affects many.”

And finally, let us not forget that today is Remembrance Day, Armistice Day and Veterans’ Day.

What We Hear

by Rob Gregory Browne

So I walked into Best Buy over the weekend and starting wandering around the TV section for no reason other than I like to look around.  I don’t need a TV.  I’ve got a really big one that I don’t have time to watch, although my wife gets a lot of use out of it.

Anyway, I was wandering around, checking out the 3D TV—where everything looks like 2D cardboard cutouts placed in 3D space—when a saleswoman snagged me to give me a demo of the new Google TV.

Now, this post isn’t about Google TV, but let me get this out of the way:  Google and Sony have made the first real step toward marrying the TV with Internet browsing.  Yes, I know there was WebTV years ago and that was a disaster, but this is so much more than that.  It is, however, still in its infancy and it’ll be a while before it’s ready for prime time.  Although this was about as close as I’ve seen.

But like I said, this post isn’t about that.  Flash forward about half an hour and I’m in the car with my wife and we’re headed toward Target where she can do some shopping and I can slip into the little sushi store next door and order a roll.  Gots to have my sushi.

So we’re riding along, heading down the freeway, when I start telling her about the Google TV and I admit I was pretty excited about it.  I’m telling her, “I’ve been waiting for this for ten years,” and went on to describe some of the features.

When I was done she said, “I’ve got a potential blog post for you.”

“Oh?”

“Do you remember that cartoon by Gary Larson?  The one where the owner is talking to his dog?”

I said I did.  It’s one of my favorite cartoons.  In fact, here it is:

 

 

“Well,” she continued, “after you said ‘Google TV’, all I heard was blah blah blah USB blah blah blah Leo Laporte blah blah blah.”

The post, she said, should be about what people say to us that makes us automatically tune out.  In her case, anytime I start talking technology it’s pretty much a foreign language to her, so she starts thinking about things like how worried she is about the kids or whether or not the DVR is properly recording her tennis game or what she needs to do when she goes into work on Monday.

For me, I tune out as soon as someone starts talking sports.  I’ve never been a sports guy and the moment the conversation turns to whatever pitcher or quarterback or point guard is screwing up the team, all I’m hearing is blah blah blah.

Or clothes and shoes.  When I’m around women and the topic, as it always seems to do, turns to somebody’s GORGEOUS shoes, I’m on another planet.

Of course, all this time I’m nodding and pretending to listen because I don’t want to be rude, but honestly, sometimes you just have to tune your brain to an alternate station just for survival’s sake.

And I think that’s true for all of us.  We hear bits and pieces of what someone is saying, but for the most part we’re gone.  For every single one of us, there’s a topic of conversation that just doesn’t hold our interest for longer than a nanosecond, and we do what we have to to survive it.

So before this post turns into one of those topics, I’ll ask what I came here to ask:

What subject is an immediate turn-off to you?  When do you find your mind wandering to the point that all you hear is blah blah blah blah blah?

I promise to listen. 🙂

Really.

Take this Job And Shove It

 

 

By Louise Ure

 

In today’s climate of high unemployment rates and few job openings, it’s probably not very nice to talk about jobs you hated. But there it is. We’ve all had a few. That office intern job where the boss wanted to guess your bra size. The summer you and your brother decided to make a little extra cash picking cantaloupes, until you realized how truly backbreaking that work was in 110 degree heat.

There are a lot of reasons to hate a job. Sometimes it’s financial, sometimes it’s the arduous nature of the work and sometimes it’s just a lack of dignity.

I got my very first job at a Dairy Queen when I was thirteen and I was paid twenty-five cents an hour plus all the ice cream I could eat. (That’s the joy of being an intra-state company versus an interstate company. They can start ‘em younger.) Not a bad job, right? Over the years, I’ve often cited that job as the only one where everybody who came in was happy and wanted to see me. (That’s no longer true. I feel the same way about book signings now.)

But then you get to the dignity part. My boss was a one-eyed man named Jack. Yes, he took full advantage of every “one-eyed Jack” reference he could, adding “I’m keeping an eye out for you” or “I’ve got my eye on you.” Then he’d threaten to lift up that black eyepatch like he was a flasher in a raincoat.

And he had the nasty habit of planting a quarter somewhere under the big ice cream machines to see if we’d find it when we were closing up at the end of the day. If you didn’t find it, it meant you hadn’t cleaned well and you were fired. If you did find it but didn’t turn it in, it meant you were a thief and you were fired. I already recognized I wasn’t the best cleaner around so I wound up just handing him a quarter every night.

The next job at Arby’s wasn’t bad until my friend Ellie cut her finger off in the meat slicer. I had to root around trying to figure out what was Ellie and what was rare roast beef so I could give it to the surgeon to try to reattach.

I found the next job just two blocks down the road at Phoebe’s Pie Shoppe. First there was the indignity of the uniforms. A floor length flowered skirt. A poofy-sleeved blouse in Tweetybird yellow. And a little linen cap like Martha Washington wore. That outfit would have been perfectly at home on Sister Wives.

One day a man came in and asked for a piece of banana cream pie. Ten minutes later he called me back over with only half the slice eaten and said there was something hard and crunchy in the pie. I took it back to the kitchen to investigate and found a half a dead cockroach. Half a cockroach, right? You know where the other half was.

“Here’s another piece,” I told him upon my return. “You’re absolutely right. There shouldn’t have been any pecans in that pie.”

And then there was Warner’s Bembridge Holiday Hotel on the Isle of Wight: a downmarket British version of a Catskills resort. The staff was housed in dorm rooms with eight beds to a room and we were expected to serve three meals a day then do all the dishes. And did I fail to mention that we were also the “talent show” in the evening? Ay yi yi. Think Dirty Dancing without the dancing.

I put up with that for all of three weeks until one old codger went down face first in the tomato soup I’d just served him and the guy at the next table only complained that his kippers were cold.

My jobs haven’t all been awful.  And most of them were not as bad as they could have been. I remember once race weekend that Bruce and I got to the track early while they were still setting up the paddock. A sunburned young man in his twenties wheeled around the paddock in a big truck with a vacuum hose on it. He’d pull up to each Porta Potty, vacuum out all the shit inside, they wipe down the walls and the seats and the floor with disinfectant. And he whistled the whole time.

“I’m never going to complain about my job again,” I told Bruce.

Compared with the Porta Potty guy, I’ve had some great jobs. One job in Singapore came with a car and full-time chauffeur. Hell, I even got paid for sitting on the banks of the Loch Ness and watching for monsters. But of all of these jobs – forty or more by my count — writing is still the best job I ever had.

What about you, my ‘Rati brethren? What’s the worst job you ever had?