Monthly Archives: April 2009

The Amazon Obligation

Posted on by

By
John Gilstrap
http://www.johngilstrap.com

A couple of weeks ago, I received a box of 15 really beautiful Advance Readers Copies (ARCS—bound uncorrected page proofs) for the upcoming No Mercy (July 7, 2009). The question is what to do with them?

I have a couple for the local B&N and Borders stores to stir up a buzz among the sales staff. It’s truly a sad state of affairs that no independent bookstores that I know of continue to live in the Washington, DC metropolitan area. (I don’t count Politics and Prose or Olsson’s because they don’t as a rule stock genre fiction.) So, what to do with these extra books?

Sure, there’s always family and friends, but to tell you the truth, I’ve always looked at them more as guaranteed buyers than give-away recipients. Call them the most reliable of reliable customers. Then I thought: I can put them to work.

Here’s my new rule. If I give you an ARC, you are a) still obligated to buy at least one copy of the actual book; and b) additionally obligated to post a review on amazon.com. I don’t even mandate that it be a positive review (though who could think negative thoughts about my masterpiece?). They just have to post something. So far, everyone has agreed.

This brings up a larger question. As consumers of books ourselves, don’t we have an obligation to post reviews on the books we read? Don’t we sort of owe that to our fellow trench fighters? It seems to me that we do.

I confess that I rarely post reviews under my own name. I’m just not comfortable doing that, particularly in the case of books I don’t care for. Okay, I don’t usually post a review at all if I don’t like a book. As the old saying goes, if you can’t say something nice . . . Well, you know.

So, what are your thoughts? As book review pages continue to disappear, and paper gets edged out by electrons, do we book fans owe populist reviews to our most admired (or most loathed) authors?

Politics is all about timing

Posted on by

by Michelle Gagnon

gitmo Copyeditor’s note: Guantanamo Bay prison has been ordered closed under Obama. Should this reference on p. 279 be changed?

Ah yes, Gitmo. The copyeditor is referring to a passage in The Gatekeeper where one of my characters wonders if they’re incarcerating Americans there now too. When I wrote it eight months ago, this was a timely reference. But if the copyeditor hadn’t been on her game, my book would have looked dated when it came out in November.

Which brings me to today’s topic: how do you keep a political thriller timely? The Gatekeeper was my first real foray into politics, at least literarily speaking. And now I’m sitting here gnawing my nails to the nub, watching immigration issues rise and fall in the nation’s consciousness, and wondering if by November something dramatic will have happened that will either make my book appear incredibly timely, or terribly passé.

Therein lies the pitfall of writing something politically based. I was on a panel at Left Coast Crime a few weeks ago where this question came up. The pat answer is to stick to something tried and true, a conflict or issue that is ongoing and seemingly intractable. One of the other authors joked that if peace arrived in the Middle East before his next release, he was screwed (he added quickly that of course, it would be great to have peace in the Middle East. Just not by October if possible). A significant portion of the television show 24’s success can be attributed to the fact that it hit the airwaves shortly after 9/11, jack bauer feeding upon the sudden collective consciousness of fear and paranoia. Which is why now, the show feels a little tired–in the aftermath of the last election, the Jack Bauer model just doesn’t seem as relevant as before. Not that we don’t still have enemies outside our borders, but we’re all a bit fatigued of having that fact shoved down our throats.

Of course, every book faces this hazard if it’s written with any sort of current “markers.” Simply by including a fax machine, CD player, or website in your text, you run the risk of sounding outdated when it hits the shelves months later. When I wrote for magazines, we aimed for “evergreen” stories, articles that would be timely if they came out next week or next year (that way a piece could be resold ad-infinitum once the rights reverted). That’s a bit trickier with fiction, when you’re dealing with 100,000 words instead of 1,000.

Getting back to my Gitmo reference…I changed the text slightly. The character in question is above all else distrustful of the American government, so I inserted a line saying, “The feds claimed to have closed it, but that was probably a lie like everything else they said.” Problem solved. I got to keep the reference I had grown attached to (I know, I know- kill your darlings. But that line served to illuminate this character and his mindset). And The Gatekeeper will still feel timely and relevant when it comes out. Hopefully. Fingers crossed. Barring any unforeseen circumstances.

ITW Thriller Awards

Posted on by

Posted by Joe Moore

Recently, my fellow Kill Zone blogmates John Gilstrap and Michelle Gagnon posted blogs that addressed the announcement of the 2009 ITW Thriller Awards nominees and the judging procedure. Both blogs raised questions and concerns, and generated a large number of comments. To address those issues, I asked ITW Vice President of Awards Vicki Hinze to comment on how the current judging was conducted and what the future holds for the Thriller Awards process.

I’ve been out of town and just returned and saw the threads, so I thought I’d add a little insight, though I think the subject’s been pretty well covered. Still, a little more insight into this might put some minds at ease, and I’m all for that. Also, please note that I’m speaking for myself and not as a member of the ITW Board.

hinze1 Last year, I chaired the ITW Awards, and we did have separate categories for Best Hard Cover, Best Paperback Original and Best First Novel. All three awards named Finalists and Winners.

In response to members’ comments, wishes and desires, we studied the market and discovered (no doubt many knew already, but we did study this) and determined that the format of a book is determined by readership and that varies publishing house to publishing house. In short, format is largely a marketing decision. The bottom line was that two categories, Best Novel and Best Paperback Original were combined for this year’s contest.

This year, when the scores came in, more analysis took place on the results. I’m serving as Awards VP, and I informed the Board that I would be asking that the awards again be separated. This will be on the agenda at the board meeting in July. If that vote goes as I hope it will, then the categories will be Best Hard Cover Novel, Best Paperback Original Novel, Best First Novel (which combines all debut novels–hard cover and paperback [mass and trade]). This year, we added an award for thriller Short Stories (which includes novellas) and next year we will continue it and we hope to add one for nonfiction.

One of ITW’s strengths, I believe–and it is this belief that got me to join and then to volunteer to judge and then to act as award’s chair and ultimately acted as a catalyst for me when it came to Board service–is that ITW remains open and flexible and seeks what is in the best interests of its members. That’s its top priority–and I say that as one who’s witnessed its workings and its methods of weighing potential programs and retaining or adjusting existing ones. (i.e. eliminating author membership dues)

ITW is a young organization and yet look at all it has accomplished for thriller writers. Has it been perfect since inception? No. No more so than any of us as individuals have been perfect. But ITW does strive to elevate potential for all involved, seeking win/win situations and solutions. I love that about the organization.

One reason, I think, for ITW’s success is its willingness to try different things and atypical approaches. Some have been enormously successful. Combining the categories for Best Novel and Best Paperback Original was not. I have no problem with saying an attempt made in good faith for logical reason on anything failed. Where I would have a problem would be in knowing it failed, in feeling confident it would continue to fail, and not doing anything to change it. That situation would be doing a disservice to members. Making changes that could benefit our members is a worthy goal.

So please understand that action is being taken on this matter. Can I say we won’t have future attempts that end up with results we find lacking? No, I can’t. I can tell you that we’ll continue to make every reasonable effort to create win/win situations for members. When a challenge is spotted, it’ll be addressed and hopefully resolved in a manner that best serves the majority of members.

Remember that we’re a progressive organization. We dare to try different things in different ways, seeking to do all we can to bring added benefits. Personally, I don’t see that as a flaw but as an asset. Change spurs growth; growth, productive change. It negates stagnation, and that’s a wonderful thing, in my opinion, because stagnant things die.

I do hope that this post eases minds. I’m not idealistic enough to believe that everyone will be satisfied with any program. But I do want you to know that we are trying to incorporate the desires and requests of members and to devise a program that satisfies the majority of members.

I don’t recall saying that the experiment of combining the two categories failed. But frankly, I am not satisfied with the outcome. It wasn’t good enough and I think we can do better. So that’s the goal. To do better.

This year, the structure of the program is behind us. Its benefits and drawbacks have been reviewed and we have a plan for a path with more benefits and fewer drawbacks to pursue–and we’re pursuing them. Please feel free to leave any comments on how to make the program better and stronger. I promise I’ll reply to all constructive suggestions.

Blessings,
Vicki Hinze
Vice President, Awards
International Thriller Writers
www.vickihinze.com

Vicki Hinze is the author of 21 novels. She holds a Master of Arts in Creative Writing and a Doctorate in Philosophy, Theocentric Business & Ethics. She actively lectures on writing craft and technique and philosophy.

Her articles have appeared many respected publications and e-zines (Novelists, Inc., Romantic Times, Romance Writers’ Report, The Outreacher, The Rock and others) and have been extensively reprinted in as many as sixty-three foreign markets. She has coordinated and/or judged national and international writing competitions, served on various writers’ association committees, has been honored by Romance Writers of America with their National Service Award and in 2004 was named PRO Mentor of the Year.

Vicki is a charter sponsor of International Thriller Writers and serves on its Board of Directors. She’s a member of The Authors Guild, American Christian Fiction Writers, Novelists Inc., Romance Writers of America, Mystery Writers of America, Published Authors Network, Emerald Coast Writers, ACRA, Deep South Christian Writers and other writing organizations.

Thriller writers: Are we scary?

Posted on by

I had to chuckle while reading Sunday’s post by PD Martin.

In the comments section, a reader confessed, “I do have to say that thriller writers scare me a little.”

She’s not alone in that sentiment.

At an MWA meeting a couple of months ago, a fellow mystery writer approached me. With a glimmer in his eyes, he asked me whether I’d read the books by one of our Kill Zone authors (And no, I won’t say which Killer he was asking about, or even if it was one of our guys or gals. Hah! You have to guess).

“Have you read (his) books?” Mystery Writer wanted to know. “(He’s) sick.”

Sick. To a thriller writer, there’s no higher compliment.

By trade, we thriller authors write scary, gory tales. Our books are peopled with weird, unbalanced, downright messed-up characters. Twisted stuff happens. And when we do our jobs right, our readers might even assume that the writer is a tad strange. Suspect, even.

After reading enough of this dark matter, a reader might feel compelled to eventually ask: How do you think this warped sh*t up? And why do you?


As a writer, you have to be able to unleash your imagination to the extent that you give that kind of a chill. But in reality, all the thriller writers I know are gentle, kind souls. It’s only our writing that’s dark and strange.

Writers, have you ever gotten the vibe that someone thinks there’s something perhaps a bit off about you because you write about death, murder and mayhem?
And I’d be interested in knowing from readers: Is there anything you’ve ever read where you’ve thought, “Oh my God, there’s something scary about that writer”?
Oh and before I forget, I thought I’d add a postscript to PD’s post about body-dumping grounds.

PD had posited the question about what makes a good dumping ground.

Here are some of the tidbits it reveals about the art of body-dumping:

  • Most dumping grounds will be found near road networks (proximity to covered vehicle required).

  • Most people can drag a body only about 50 feet. About 200 feet, max.

  • Bodies are normally found off the right passenger
    side of the road, heading outbound from a city or town.
Oops. Did that sound scary?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coming up on our Kill Zone Guest Sundays, watch for blogs from Eric Stone, Tim Maleeny, Oline Cogdill, James Scott Bell, and more.

So much for the Glory Days

Posted on by

by Clare Langley-Hawthorne

Just a short blog today as I’m on the road – the railroad that is. My family and I are riding the California Zephyr from Emeryville to Denver for Spring Break (who knew preschools had Spring Break?!) While jostling along enjoying the magnificent scenery I couldn’t help but reflect that the glory days of the American railroad are well and truly gone. Though I could just about pretend at night in the sleeper (when I closed my eyes) what it must have been like in the 19th century to travel this way (in much more luxurious surroundings – sigh!) the pathetic ‘amenities’ and airline quality food soon dispelled any imaginings I may have had. So this got me wondering – how does a writer successfully evoke the past when so much today has abandoned any notion of respect for it? This then led (as my muse often does) to more immediate issues at hand as I write the third Ursula Marlow book – how does an author balance action and atmosphere when the book must get people turning the pages as well as evoking the past?

It’s a tough balance to achieve – especially when I want to utilize all the senses to help modern readers get a whiff of how Edwardian London must have smelled, sounded and felt. It’s easy when I’m in London where the past shadows every footfall down the streets and alleyways – but here in America? – in some of the towns I passed on the train? – how to make the past accessible to them? How to recreate life as it then was while also telling a thumping good story?

Who do you think achieves this balance successfully?

I can tell you one thing – I won’t be using Amtrak as my guide…

Body Dump Sites and a Nice Merlot

Posted on by

Today TKZ welcomes acclaimed Aussie author PD Martin, for an in-depth discussion of why crime fiction authors make the most stimulating dinner companions…

by P.D.Martin

Like most crime fiction authors, I do a great deal of research, everything from handwriting analysis and lockpicking to forensics and police/FBI procedure. It’s part of the job and a part that I love doing.

However, sometimes getting into the mind of an author can lead to some bizarre conversations. For example, I was away on a writing retreat doing some edits when I came to a crucial part…I had to finalize my killer’s MO and signature. I wanted to bounce some ideas off someone, so I rang my husband. This is how the conversation went:

“Hi, honey. Do you think my victims should be raped pre- or post-mortem?”

Silence, then: “Hang on, I’ll just take you off speakerphone.”

I’d called him on a Sunday and he was at a local football game (Aussie Rules, that is) with our one-year-old daughter and a group of our friends and their children. He’d seen it was me calling so had immediately hit the loudspeaker button on his mobile (cell) phone expecting a lovely chat. Maybe he should have known better.

A more recent example that comes to mind happened last year. I was in the States for Bouchercon and then headed to LA for some location research. While you can find pretty much anything on the Internet, nothing compares to actually seeing a location first-hand. And certainly for me, living in Australia and setting my series in the US has some challenges. Anyway, through my online research I’d picked out a body dump site and crime-scene location for the book – Castaic Lake – and decided my characters would live and party in Santa Clarita. However, Santa Clarita wasn’t what I’d envisaged. It was way too clean cut and “suburban” for my characters and when I drove through it I couldn’t see a bar in sight. That night, as I had dinner with the family friends I was staying with in LA, I was asked:

“So what did you do today, Pip?”

To which I replied in between mouthfuls: “Checked out a couple of body dump sites.”

There was an initial stunned silence, and then we laughed. I guess it’s not your usual tourist trail for Aussies in LA. When I explained my problem with Lake Castaic and that I had to find a new location, my host said:

“I’ve got the best body dump site, ever. Have you checked out Temescal Gateway Park?”

And so, after a dinner conversation about potential body dump sites in LA, I had the crime-scene location for my fifth novel. Isn’t that what everyone talks about over dinner?

PD Martin – Phillipa Deanne Martin – is an Australian author with a background in psychology. She has written four novels featuring Aussie FBI profiler Sophie Anderson, of which the first two are currently available in North America – Body Count and The Murderers’ Club. Her third novel, Fan Mail, will be released in North America in July this year. See www.pdmartin.com.au for more information.

Mayhem, Murder Through Little Eyes and Big Ears

Posted on by

By John Ramsey Miller

I come from a town most people would describe as a slow, sleepy Mississippi Delta backwater. Cleveland, Mississippi is where I lived for six years, and I consider it my home town because those were my high-school years and I am connected to the people I knew there. Thomas Harris spent time living there as a young man, and has relatives there still. The town library was named for the Carpenter family whose members died from asphyxiation when their heating system malfunctioned and filled the house with smoke. The home had just been renovated and the windows painted shut. One of the bodies was found at a window and there were scratch marks …well I won’t delve into details. This week a friend of mine from high school wrote me a Facebook note that suggested that Harris modeled Hannibal Lechter on a man that was caught in our old town with a collection of human heads and human jerky in his pockets.

This took place in the late thirties and I’m sure Harris heard this story about the grave-robbing, head-collecting, human meat-eating Mr. Robinson. Mr. Robinson, an African/ American also murdered the entire Turner family, which incidentally happened to be Scot/Irish and cut an embryo from the murdered woman, whose body provided him with jerky. He was caught and admitted the killings, but said the heads he had accumulated were trophies from his grave robbing, not murders. Although it was reported in the media that he was shot while trying to escape, I believe the actual story is that he was de-celled and hanged while the town looked on, perhaps shot in the shoulder as he hung, and this was witnessed by an audience of angry, outraged individuals.

I suppose Thomas Harris may have given this murdering drifter a medical/ psychiatric degree, had him love fine things, and listen to opera while he drank rare wines and dined on the finer cuts of corpse meat. I don’t know Thomas personally, but it may have been Robinson and not Ed Gein he modeled Dr. Lechter’s cannibalism on. It was very likely Mr. Gein that inspired the body-skin wearing tailor, Jame “Buffalo Bill” Gumb, in Silence of the Lambs.

There were also three boys killed in nearby Rosedale, MS, whose killer and mutilator was never caught. That happened before I moved there, but was something parents had in the backs of their minds when we guys wanted to go camping. Even small towns have these stories of mayhem and murder, and retribution and justice dealt by private citizens outside courtrooms. When Mrs. Ringold killed her doctor husband with a shotgun one night after he’d beaten her, he was acquitted because the lawyer told the all male jury that it had been an accidental shooting. When the prosecutor brought up the fact that she had shot him more than once using a pump shotgun, Mrs. Ringold’s attorney (who later became Governor) argued that as a woman she was unfamiliar with the workings of shotguns and in her confusion and fright and horror she had reflexively pumped the shotgun three times, hitting him all three times. Released, she moved away, but a lot of people sympathized with her.

When I was very young we lived in the Methodist parsonage in Starkville, Mississippi and it was located across the street from a funeral home and the hospital was located within a hundred yards of us. The mortician had two sons I made friends with, and their father also had the town’s ambulance for emergencies. When he would take the ambulance out, he would either bring a corpse or two back to the funeral home or to the emergency room for repairs. We would wait for the siren, if there were survivors, we’d rush to the hospital’s loading dock to see what he had on a gurney, and if there was no siren, we’d be waiting at the funeral home for the delivery there. I can’t tell you how many maimed and dead people I saw, or how many times we laid ourselves in the grass outside the basement windows of the embalming theater and watch through the window, a young and impressionable audience, as Mr. Barry did his work. More than once I had known the corpses he worked on. I don’t know if he saw us, but if he did he never ran us off. He also had a notorious drinking problem, and lost his business when he was driving intoxicated and wrecked the ambulance depositing a battered casket and its corpse in the middle of the highway outside Jackson.

All of these stories and things I witnessed helped forge my imagination and introduced me to violence, death, justice, tragedy, and the heartbreak associated with them. I wouldn’t change a thing about my formative years, because it all contributed to bending me into the writer I am. I also learned about human nature and the complexities of the social structure and how good people can participate in bad things, and do surprising things for complex reasons. I grew up in the Civil Rights era, but that is a different blog for another time, although it is related when it comes to witnessing human complexities and contradictions.

We become who we are based on our experiences and we bring ourselves into everything we write, and how we see everything. I write about evil and the battle when good brings right to the table. In my stories good always wins over evil, not matter the odds. But life is not always so cut and dried, and evil often triumphs, and evil people often win the day in real life, if rarely in fiction. Our readers don’t want to see evil win, but to see good people facing seemingly insurmountable odds and both triumphant, whole, and happy at the end of their trial or quest. Our readers don’t need to know what the experiences were that made us become storytellers who seem to know violence and evil. They just want us to use our imaginations and experiences to make this battle between sides seem real, and to leave them feeling hopeful that they too can surmount the odds against them and prevail. As long as I can do so, I’ll do my best to accomplish that and leave the readers entertained, satisfied and hopeful.

PBO Prejudice

Posted on by

By John Gilstrap
http://www.johngilstrap.com

“The only bad news is that it will be published as a paperback original.” That’s what my agent told me when she called a year ago to reveal the otherwise wonderful news about my new contract with Pinnacle to launch the Jonathan Grave thriller series. (No Mercy arrives in bookstores on July 7.) My previous agent once told me that it is better not to be published at all than to be published as a paperback original.

The paperback stigma undeniably exists. Several people in my day-job office have complimented the stunning cover for No Mercy only then to offer condolences on the soft cover. “Maybe next time,” one of them said. This from people who religiously wait for the paperback reprints of their favorite authors’ novels to be released before they buy.

More evidence: At hardcover signings, fans occasionally ask sheepishly if I would be willing to sign my books in paperback. That they would think even to ask the question is troubling. That some authors in fact do refuse to sign paperback reprints is infuriating.

No Mercy is my sixth book, yet my first PBO. In the eyes of many, many hardcover authors who sell a fraction of the books I sell, this is clear evidence that my career is moving backward. I fight the urge to explain that it’s a strategic move that will make Jonathan Grave available not just in bookstores, but also in grocery stores and Wal-Marts and airports and corner bodegas because there’s no way to articulate the strategy without sounding defensive.

Here it is for the record and from the author’s mouth: I’m thrilled (albeit a little nervous) to be launching the Jonathan Grave series in mass market paperback. With a terrific cover (which it has) and terrific placement (B&N took a big position in the book), it makes sense to me that people will more readily lay down $6.99 to take a chance on a new character than they would $25.99. A good product that costs less should resonate at least as well as a good product that costs four times as much. Right? Granted, nothing in this business actually makes sense, but it sure seems reasonable to me.

Will the book be reviewed? Lord I hope so. (David J. Montgomery, listen up: Not only are there ARCs, but the ARCs are gorgeous!) It won’t be reviewed in the prestigious dailies of course because, well, they don’t review paperbacks. Publishers Weekly—THE trade magazine of the industry—may deign to review it, but only as one of a couple of mass market paperbacks. I don’t think they even did that until a few years ago.

That leaves me dependent upon online outlets, newsletters and word of mouth to get the word out about my book. There, too, I think the stigma thrives. A completely unscientific survey leads me to believe that even on amazon.com—the ultimate in populist literary criticism—PBOs get way less attention than their hardcover or reprint brethren.

Here’s the harm, then, in ITW’s decision to eliminate the PBO category from awards consideration: They deprived five books and their authors of their deserved high profile. It’s worse, in fact, than Michelle pointed out in her terrific post yesterday. Out of ten nominations between two categories (Best Novel and Best First Novel), not one was a mass market paperback original.

(By way of full disclosure, when I wrote a see-I-told-you-so email to the powers that be at ITW, I was told unofficially that the no-PBO experiment had been deemed a failure and that the decision would be reversed.)

Looking to the future, I think the debate should sidestep the question of whether PBO prejudice is real or even justifiable. It is real, and it doesn’t make a lot of sense. The operative question is what are we going to do about it? What is, needn’t be.

So how do we start changing things?

The Dying Art of Writing…Letters

Posted on by

By John Ramsey Miller

http://www.johnramseymiller.com

I have a letter I keep in a lock box that my mother wrote to me thirty years ago just after she discovered that her breast cancer had returned in a big way. That letter arrived in the brand new lock box a few days after she died, handed to me by my father. In the letter she tells me how wonderful her life was and no regrets, and how much she loved me, and how everybody needs a lock box for important papers so here’s one I bought for you. That letter is still in that lock box under my bed––a prized possession. I like to read it. My mother’s penmanship was flawless. My own is quite good.

Thirty years ago people still wrote letters, but as long distance calls grew less expensive, it became easier to call and talk than to write a letter. With cell phones we are always near enough to a cell tower to talk whenever we feel like it. With the Internet, people send electronic messages. I get e-mails from friends almost every day, and I almost never print them out. Mostly the communications are short blurbs, and messaging on the cell phone means even briefer information passing.

Back when we wrote letters, we put a week’s or a month’s worth of news in the letter. We wrote our feelings and what life was doing to us. You’d sit with a pen imagining who we were writing to and thinking about the person who’d be reading it. You opened a letter, you unfolded it and you read the letter in your hand. The paper was in the hands of a under the pen belonging to the person who’d written it. You could fold it up and open it again later, as often as you wanted to for as long as the paper held up. Think of the archives filled with personal letters from the famous and not so famous. I think of Ken Burns’ Civil War series for PBS and what it would have been without the personal letters from the time. We are losing history. The e-mails are being deleted almost as fast as they are read, which probably goes to what they are worth. We don’t compose e-mails the same way we did letters. I officially name it “jit-jotting.”

Recently I sent my step-mother a letter. She is in an assisted living facility in Dallas, and I love her dearly. Her daughter told me that she reads that letter over and over again. That letter connects us in a way no telephone or e-mail on a screen can. After my father passed away my brother went through his papers and he gave me several letters I’d written to him over the years, along with pictures I’d sent in the envelopes. I could tell he’d read them over and over, and I found myself wishing I’d written him more of them.

My dead mother is alive in that letter. Like the letter from my mother, they only matter to me now––the living half of the communiqué. I suppose after I’m gone my children will dispose of them, and that’s okay with me since nobody else will feel the connection or its importance.

I think of the books written from the collected letters between two people, mostly famous, and I wonder how many will be written in the future from the collected e-mails or telephone conversations of famous people. There is a style in written letters that aren’t reflected in most e-mails and lost forever with telephone calls.

My wife and I do send text messages through the week days because they are less intrusive in her work place or to my writing time. We can just check our cell phones for them at our convenience. I also text with my sons.

Maybe part of the reason we authors write books is to leave something of ourselves behind. We are all jit-jotting our way through our days and our lives, and are leaving a thinner and thinner trail as we go. And I think it somehow diminishes us, and our importance to each other when we communicate through quickly typed electronic transmissions.

The Results are in…

Posted on by

by Michelle Gagnon

The ITW recently posted the nominees for their Thriller Awards. Some of you might remember a post I wrote last August, when it was first announced that the paperback original category had been eliminated. Henceforth all of those books would be battling it out with the hardcovers for the moniker “Best Thriller.” There was a range of responses to my post, everything from “Hear, hear!” to “It’s silly to have different categories for different formats.” A few people chastised me, saying that any bias against paperbacks was only perceived, that I didn’t have enough faith in my fellow authors to judge a book based on its merits alone.

Well.

The results are in, and I am shocked, shocked! to report that not a single paperback original made the cut. thriller-award

Here are the finalists:

BEST THRILLER OF THE YEAR
Hold Tight by Harlan Coben
The Bodies Left Behind by Jeffery Deaver
The Broken Window by Jeffery Deaver
The Dark Tide by Andrew Gross
The Last Patriot by Brad Thor

Now, I’m not claiming these aren’t the best thrillers of the year- of the five I’ve read three, and they were great. But I also read a slew of PBO thrillers last year, and I’d rank them as high (or higher) than those three. The ITW is always battling charges that it’s morphing into a club for NY Times bestselling authors, and judging by this list, that might be the case. Granted, books are subjective little beasties, and what I love others might loathe. Perhaps these were the best thrillers of the year. I plan on reading the other two to satisfy my curiosity (and because they’re probably good books).

But I still don’t see where having a separate category for Paperback Originals does any harm. If paperbacks are consistently passed over in favor of their hardcover brethren for another few years, I believe there will be an exodus of PBO authors from the ITW. Which would be a shame, considering the fact that this award was initially conceived to address the fact that few thrillers were acknowledged by the established mystery awards. And making PBOs the red headed stepchildren of the organization doesn’t help anyone.

That’s my two cents.

Comments?