BookReporter.com - Elizabeth Crook Interview
In this interview with
Bookreporter.com's Bronwyn Miller, Elizabeth Crook --- author of THE
RAVEN'S BRIDE and PROMISED LANDS --- recounts her experiences from a
trip to New Mexico that inspired her most recent book, THE NIGHT
JOURNAL, and describes how her own fears of loss and separation
worked themselves into its plot. She also explains how her "lack of
vision" works favorably when it comes to writing novels, and shares
her most and least favorite aspects of the creative process.
Bookreporter.com: In THE NIGHT JOURNAL, you deftly blend
traditional historical fiction with mystery. Was this a challenge
for you?
Elizabeth Crook: Oh yes. The book didn't start out to be a
mystery. It didn't even start out to be historical. I wanted to
write an entirely contemporary novel. I had just completed a long
historical novel, so my plan was simply NOT to do any research.
Other than that, I was open to anything. But then my husband and I
took a trip to New Mexico, and I wandered down into a Kiva at Pecos
Pueblo, and the place just drew me in. It was not a big place ---
just a circular underground room --- but for me, it was like the
rabbit hole in ALICE IN WONDERLAND. It seemed to go deeper.
Everything seemed to open to something else. That place was all
about the past, and it started my heart pounding. So, I thought,
"Well, here I go. Backwards, again. Back in time." I decided I would
set only half of the story in the past and do only half the amount
of research, which --- of course --- was a dopey idea. The book
turned out to be doubly hard to write, piecing together the past and
the present. Two plot lines. Two sets of characters. All having to
work together. And a mystery thrown in, so that the pieces had to
fall in the right order.
BRC: What inspired you to write this particular story? Had you
spent any time in New Mexico before working on the novel?
EC: A blind weekend date with an arrogant artist years ago
--- that was my first trip to New Mexico. I had grown up in Central
Texas --- what's called the Hill Country --- and was used to hills
instead of mountains, and to smaller, more pebbly kinds of rocks. I
found the landscape in New Mexico astonishing, and wandered around
like a Yahoo with my mouth open. The elevation gave me headaches. It
was all mesmerizing and intimidating. The light seemed blinding. I
was happy to come home. But then on the trip with my husband several
years later, when I discovered Pecos Pueblo, the place felt
different. The lack of atmosphere was liberating. Everything seemed
open. I felt strangely euphoric. I went back several times while I
was writing the book, and this was always the feeling I had. There
is something magical about New Mexico. The air is electric.
BRC: Your characters are so vibrant and real, each with his or
her own strengths and flaws. Almost all of them lost a parent at an
early age, and are orphans in a sense. This is one of the dominant
themes in THE NIGHT JOURNAL. Why was this theme of interest to you?
EC: I don't have any first-hand experience of what it's like
to be orphaned. I'm rooted in my family. But I do have a
preposterous dread of separations that has dogged me all my life. I
was the kid who called home from slumber parties, who got homesick
at camp, who never even considered going to a college more than
three hours away from home. Once someone is in my life, he or she is
there forever. Ask any of my old boyfriends. So….nope, I'm not big
on separations. And it seems that
what troubles us as individuals tends to find its way into our
stories. In this case, that happened in exaggerated form.
BRC: Hannah, Bassie and Meg are each strong in their own way. In
creating these characters, did you draw inspiration from anyone you
know?
EC: Hannah basically invented herself. Creating her was like
taking dictation. Bassie was only slightly more difficult: I knew
Bassie. I had several cantankerous great aunts and a couple of
persnickety friends with a few of her characteristics. Bassie is
rougher than these women, she is not even fashioned after them, but
my idea of her sprang from their personalities. Meg was my hardest
character from the beginning. She was aloof and edgy because she was
raised by Bassie, and I had to be true to that. If I made her a
sympathetic character at the start of the book, then what would she
need to learn in the course of the story? How would she grow as a
character? I had to leave room for change.
BRC: The burgeoning friendship between Meg and Jim is intriguing
because it's not at all predictable. How did you decide to handle
this relationship?
EC: I handled it differently in different drafts. In the
first drafts, Meg was more forthcoming about her attraction to Jim.
But because Jim was married, I felt this made her seem predatory.
Eventually, I decided less was more, and reined both characters in.
Somehow this played out better and, I think, made the relationship
more poignant and thought-provoking. It's interesting that the one
topic that always comes up when I'm talking to book clubs is the
relationship between Meg and Jim.
BRC: Hannah's journal entries describing her days as a Harvey
Girl were fascinating. How much did you know about Fred Harvey and
his Harvey Girls before beginning your research?
EC: It was all new to me; I had never heard of Fred Harvey or
his establishments until I discovered the Montezuma, which I found
by accident. After that first visit to Pecos Pueblo, as I was
pulling back on to the highway, I saw a sign that said "Las Vegas,
50 miles" --- or something like that. I thought it was referring to
Las Vegas, Nevada, so I drove over there to see what was going on.
It wasn't until I got to the outskirts that I realized I was not in
Nevada. But I liked the town, and stopped at the Plaza hotel to ask
if there was anything else to see in the area. The person at the
desk told me there was an abandoned old ruin of a hotel called the
Montezuma 10 miles up in the hills, so I drove up there to see it.
Seeing that place from a distance, rising up out of the hills, I
knew at once it would find its way into the story.
BRC: Which part of the book was more challenging to write --- the
modern-day storyline or the journal entries?
EC: The modern-day storyline, by far. I had never written
contemporary fiction before this book and was unable to strike the
right tone, for the longest time. I also had trouble figuring out
what the story actually was. The plot, which wasn't clear at first,
became clear in the telling.
BRC: You wrote an article about writing historical fiction, and
you speak about how you're not a fan of the first-person narrative.
Why do you feel this way? What's the best perspective for historical
fiction?
EC: Straightforward third person narrative seems to me like
the way to go. First-person can be extraordinary if it's perfectly
done, but I think more often the character who is telling the story
comes across as self-absorbed. Most of us tend to dislike people who
have a lot to say about themselves, or who notice themselves too
much or tell too many stories about themselves. (Rather a creepy
observation to make in the midst of an interview that is all about
me. But, oh well.) At any rate, I tend to have the same negative
reaction to characters who narrate books about themselves. It's just
too hard to take them seriously. Unless they have a good reason to
be relating the story, and the telling involves more observations
about other people and outside events than it does inward
reflection, or is extremely humorous and self-deprecating, then I'm
impatient and annoyed. I don't like a character who is describing
how they looked when they did something, or what inflections they
used when they said something. I just want to see them do it, and
hear them say it. I want omniscience and objectivity. I was walking
a thin line here with Hannah because her journal, by definition, had
to be first-person. I had to keep her from seeming too
self-important.
BRC: Your novels feel so authentic and full of detail. How much
research do you undertake for a book? Do you outline the plot before
you start, or do you just follow where your characters take you?
EC: I let the research lead. It usually leads to intriguing
bits of information I can then build the plot around. In the
beginning, I knew nothing about Pueblos, railroads, Harvey Houses,
or treatments for tuberculosis; I just started reading about New
Mexico, and every subject led to another --- like a treasure hunt. I
just had to recognize the historic events that would lend themselves
to drama, and then construct the story around them. Half the problem
was simply knowing what to leave out.
Creating the plot is always, for me, a disorderly process --- like a
long drive in a thick fog. I have no vision at all. I turn down
wrong roads and waste a lot of time trying to figure out where in
the heck I am. The advantage is that I end up in some unexpected
places I would not have thought to go. I think a lack of vision
strangely worked for me in THE NIGHT JOURNAL.
BRC: What would you like readers to take away from THE NIGHT
JOURNAL?
EC: I hope they'll be entertained and moved by the story,
find the history interesting, and like the characters enough to care
what happens to them.
BRC: What is the most rewarding part of the writing process for
you? Do you enjoy doing readings and book tours?
EC: I most enjoy inventing the characters and getting the
sentences right. I least enjoy creating the plot; it requires too
much confounding thought. I can never sleep at night with all that
going on. Also, it's thrilling to me when a reader connects with the
book; I enjoy that a great deal. My characters are the people I've
had my morning coffee with for 10 years. I love sharing them with
readers. It's like trotting my friends around and introducing them
to people.
As for promotional readings and talks, I used to be nervous and
would show up pathologically over-prepared. I showed up at
bookstores with written scripts. But after a year of talking about
this book, I'm more relaxed. Meeting people who are reading the book
is like meeting people with whom I have friends in common.
BRC: As a side note, you knew Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis and
wrote a tribute in the Austin American Statesman after her death in
1994. How did you come to know her and what was your relationship
like?
EC: Mrs. Onassis was my editor at Doubleday; she published my
first two books. I was crazy about her. She was warm and affirming,
but very exacting. I only met with her in person on a few occasions
as I was chronically nervous about the idea of meeting with her and
only did it by necessity. So, we did most of our work over the fax
and the phone. We had lunch once at 21, and I still look back on
that day and cringe at all the insipid things I said. I was in my
20s. She died the day I started the promotional tour for my second
novel, and that was a book she had spent a lot of time with. So it
was a sad promotional period for the book. I was heartbroken to lose
her even though I didn't know her on a personal basis, only
professionally.
BRC: What are you working on now and when can readers expect to
see it?
EC: The book I'm currently writing involves a violent tragedy
in Texas in the 1960s and the ways in which it plays out 40 years
later --- in present day --- in the lives of people involved. It
shouldn't take me as long to write this book, as I have a better
idea of what's going to happen from chapter to chapter. I actually
have an outline, which isn't to say I won't ditch it at some point
and go driving off in the fog.
|
