Welcome to Writers Talkback. If you are a new user, your account will have to be approved manually to prevent spam. Please bear with us in the meantime
Yeah - at least you entered! What about the Cremedelacrime short story comp.? Isn't that ending later this month? I seem to have lost track, though I did mean to enter - maybe not too late?
By the way, is anyone planning to go to the Guildford Book Festival? I have booked myself onto the crime writing workshop on 22 October. I have been meaning to go for the last 2 years or so, but never quite got there. Now I can tick this off my list of 100 things to do before I die. I haven't actually written a list, but if I did, it would be on there, along with all the other writing festivals and workshops I plan to attend, one day, soon.
You know, you may be right. That last one turned out to be workmen with arc lights working on the flyover.... Mind you, who the dude with the cyclops eye and the gun slung over his shoulder was, I never stayed long enough to find out...
Caro, on 23 October they have several 'FOCUS ON HISTORY' events. Have a look at the programme on their website (see link below) or order a free brochure via the website.
wanted to drop by and add some comments on "No Time For Goodbye" by Linwood Barclay. Average writing, in that there are a preponderance of 'his eyes dropped on the box' type things going on but - a good story and, reason for this comment and perhaps something crime writers generally should bear in mind, no loose ends. None. Every hint dropped throughout the book, every press cutting mulled over, every 'coincidence' was slowly but surely brought into the story and either explained or was essential in the outcome. No sudden 'sitting down and explaining it all to the reader' ending either, the ending played out with perfect logic to fit the story.
Nice to be able to say that for a change!
Thanks for that Dorothy. I've just checked out his website and he seems impressive.
I didn't realise just how many crime writers I'd not read, untill this thread was started.
Reading yet another one will be good for my research...hope there's room for little old me soon!!!
;)
Started 'Bad Press' by Maureen Carter.
First impressions...a few cliches, exaggerations and why so many short sentences? When she may need them for tension later, surely they'll lose thier effect.
Good story though and good for research, so I will crack on...
Hhmmmmmm - try again. I did post a response on this thread but it appears to have gone awol........:(
From the writing at the start I would have guessed this book was a first novel (it's not) - it's almost as if she is trying too hard. Her writing does relax a bit later but I still feel something does not quite gel ... be interested to hear how it progresses ColB.
CC, I agree, Mrs Carter does seem to be trying toooo hard.
Cliche city this...can't believe it's actually been published! I can tell she was a journo...she also uses cliches and catchy phrases with her own spin, which is obviously her style/voice. Because this aspect is getting on me t*** a bit, I'm only reading it in small doses (not like Kernick's Relentless which I devoured in two days!).
However, the story and subject matter appear fairly sound so I will persevere...
;)
Each death is in context though - I'm not being melodramatic.
Probie,
You can always find me on here - just use a thread I've started to ask anything you want as they show up on the left don't they?
In fact, use this one!
Oh, n I read you wanted to be a forensic scientist - my friend is in training now!
;)
Have any of you seen the crime and thriller e-zine, Shots? It has interviews, short stories and book reviews, although I don't think there's any payment for writers. Still, it looks interesting to read.
Cheers, CC.
I'm meeting up with Matt on Friday - he's a good egg.
Re' Bad Press - I couldn't hold me, so I'm back onto Simon Kernick's new one, The Murder Exchange, which has me gripped.
Rankin soon, but not yet. Have you read his latest?
I've read Doors Open. Personally I would have liked it to have been faster with it being a heist novel. The pace suited Rebus; but they always had a literary feel to me.
Can't get away with Kernick; I like my books a bit more character driven where he is extremely plot heavy.
I'm currently reading Tess Gerritssen's latest 'Keeping The Dead (alongside Waiting For Godot; Dubliners; Waverley and Confessions of a Justified Sinner.)
Each to their own, Stirling. It's all subjective which makes it interesting.
I also find Rankin's books somewhat literary (is that good or bad for crime?), but it depends what one perceives to be literary and, perhaps, what it's being compared with. I just like good, fast-paced, old-fashoned storytelling and Kernick fits the bill in my humble opinion.
I also enjoy Billingham's stuff, plus a newish Manchester Author called Chris Simms.
I think there is a good argument for crime to be considered literary; after all it's the the only genre that deals seriously with the dark areas of human behaviour/psychology.
I think I was quite disappointed by relentless; I was hoping for a great psychological thriller. Have you read Michael Robotham (particularly Shattered)? I think you would enjoy him.
Our tastes may be slightly different, yet within the same genre. Dare I say that may be because of the male/female thing (I fear an onslaught!) as the people I know who are into Kernick are all men (might be a coincidence). I devoured relentless, cared for his characters and thoroughly enjoyed it. Like I've said before, people look for different things within the reading experience.
Someone else mentioned Robotham - I must check him out.
The one that got me into this genre was one of the first novels I actually read: Switch by William Bayer (1985!): it's staring at me from my bookshelf as I type - think I'll read it again n see what I think now am all big n growed up!
;)
Col B wrote: "I'm meeting up with Matt on Friday - he's a good egg." - maybe you'd better warn him that it's Shrove/Pancake Tuesday this week, he might be in demand! ;)
Haven't read Ian's latest - yet! Would never have classed him as "literary" - could be because I find that a pretentious label and he just ain't a pretentious guy (fellow Fifer - we don't do pretention in that part of Fife!!)
Being a Fifer, I take the word "literary", literally!
Chambers: "...pertaining to, of the nature of, versed in, or practising literature or the writing of books..."
Depends on the context of a book. Are we talking about a way of writing that deviates from the 'norm' or a specific genre?
I class Rankin as literary because he writes in a certain way (as opposed to someone like Kernick) and because he writes about subjects that are taboo for writers who are more mainstream.
[quote=Stirling]I class Rankin as literary because he writes in a certain way (as opposed to someone like Kernick) and because he writes about subjects that are taboo for writers who are more mainstream. [/quote] - sorry Stirling, I'm not trying to be obtuse but I really don't get this comment.
What do you mean by "a certain way"? Presumably Kernick writes in his own "certain way" as well?
What has he written about that "more mainstream" writers haven't? (And what is a "more mainstream" writer?)
This is why I have problems with the "literary" label - I do not understand its' application in this context at all.
Are there 'literary' crime writers? To me 'literary' means Iris Murdoch, Monica Dickens, people like that. Crime writers are crime writers, like horror writers, dealing with the darker side of life each with their own voice. Cold Mountain, which I just read and loved, that I would class as literary, but the Retribution book I read before that was definitely pure crime. No literary.
I don't read Rankin, he has had too many 'bad' reviews and recommendations from people I know for me to read him.
Comments
Guildford Book Festival 2008
or something similar.
http://www.guildfordbookfestival.co.uk/html/modules.php?name=Programme
Nice to be able to say that for a change!
I didn't realise just how many crime writers I'd not read, untill this thread was started.
Reading yet another one will be good for my research...hope there's room for little old me soon!!!
;)
:P
First impressions...a few cliches, exaggerations and why so many short sentences? When she may need them for tension later, surely they'll lose thier effect.
Good story though and good for research, so I will crack on...
From the writing at the start I would have guessed this book was a first novel (it's not) - it's almost as if she is trying too hard. Her writing does relax a bit later but I still feel something does not quite gel ... be interested to hear how it progresses ColB.
Gremlins at work me thinks.
CC, I will keep you posted...literally!
;)
Cliche city this...can't believe it's actually been published! I can tell she was a journo...she also uses cliches and catchy phrases with her own spin, which is obviously her style/voice. Because this aspect is getting on me t*** a bit, I'm only reading it in small doses (not like Kernick's Relentless which I devoured in two days!).
However, the story and subject matter appear fairly sound so I will persevere...
;)
http://thrillskillsnchills.blogspot.com/
:)
Probie,
You can always find me on here - just use a thread I've started to ask anything you want as they show up on the left don't they?
In fact, use this one!
Oh, n I read you wanted to be a forensic scientist - my friend is in training now!
;)
http://www.writersnews.co.uk/writers_talkback/comments.php?DiscussionID=107312&page=2#Item_25
Bloody hell! (I know - couldn't help it!)
Mine has one; and a kidnapping!
We must find some info so we can blackmail Probie for the next fourteen years . . .
My niece is thinking about becoming police forensics. She can't decide whether to go to Uni first or join the police at nineteen.
BTW, my friend is a she.
[quote=Stirling]We must find some info so we can blackmail Probie for the next fourteen years . . .[/quote]
Why? What for?
Did you ever finish Ms Carter's "Bad Press" and have you read Rankin's final Rebus book?
http://www.shotsmag.co.uk/
I'm meeting up with Matt on Friday - he's a good egg.
Re' Bad Press - I couldn't hold me, so I'm back onto Simon Kernick's new one, The Murder Exchange, which has me gripped.
Rankin soon, but not yet. Have you read his latest?
Can't get away with Kernick; I like my books a bit more character driven where he is extremely plot heavy.
I'm currently reading Tess Gerritssen's latest 'Keeping The Dead (alongside Waiting For Godot; Dubliners; Waverley and Confessions of a Justified Sinner.)
I also find Rankin's books somewhat literary (is that good or bad for crime?), but it depends what one perceives to be literary and, perhaps, what it's being compared with. I just like good, fast-paced, old-fashoned storytelling and Kernick fits the bill in my humble opinion.
I also enjoy Billingham's stuff, plus a newish Manchester Author called Chris Simms.
I think I was quite disappointed by relentless; I was hoping for a great psychological thriller. Have you read Michael Robotham (particularly Shattered)? I think you would enjoy him.
Our tastes may be slightly different, yet within the same genre. Dare I say that may be because of the male/female thing (I fear an onslaught!) as the people I know who are into Kernick are all men (might be a coincidence). I devoured relentless, cared for his characters and thoroughly enjoyed it. Like I've said before, people look for different things within the reading experience.
Someone else mentioned Robotham - I must check him out.
The one that got me into this genre was one of the first novels I actually read: Switch by William Bayer (1985!): it's staring at me from my bookshelf as I type - think I'll read it again n see what I think now am all big n growed up!
;)
Haven't read Ian's latest - yet! Would never have classed him as "literary" - could be because I find that a pretentious label and he just ain't a pretentious guy (fellow Fifer - we don't do pretention in that part of Fife!!)
Being a Fifer, I take the word "literary", literally!
Chambers: "...pertaining to, of the nature of, versed in, or practising literature or the writing of books..."
What makes any book un-literary?
I class Rankin as literary because he writes in a certain way (as opposed to someone like Kernick) and because he writes about subjects that are taboo for writers who are more mainstream.
What do you mean by "a certain way"? Presumably Kernick writes in his own "certain way" as well?
What has he written about that "more mainstream" writers haven't? (And what is a "more mainstream" writer?)
This is why I have problems with the "literary" label - I do not understand its' application in this context at all.
I don't read Rankin, he has had too many 'bad' reviews and recommendations from people I know for me to read him.