Psychics, Sleuths, And Publishing News... An Interview With Martha C. Lawrence
by Lorraine Bartlett
Martha C. Lawrence's fifth Elizabeth Chase novel, ASHES OF ARIES, is now
available from St. Martin's Minotaur. Martha recently took time out of her
latest promotional campaign to talk about writing a psychic sleuth, her views on
psychic ability, and the publishing industry.
LB: There's a lot of confusion of what exactly constitutes psychic ability.
As someone who considers herself psychic, do you believe most psychics have
one single "gift" (such as clairvoyance, telepathy, telekinesis) or is it a
mixed bag of insight and other abilities?
MCL: Yes, there certainly is a lot of confusion about the term "psychic."
Many people--myself included--recoil at the word because of its association
with wackiness and all things woo-woo. Perhaps if we used more precise
language when discussing psychic phenomena, some of that stigma would fade.
Generally speaking, psychic experiences break down into the following
phenomena: knowing the future (precognition); the ability to see things
beyond the gross physical plane (clairvoyance); the ability to read others'
thoughts (telepathy); and the ability to manipulate or read atomic particles
(psychokinesis). Usually one or two of these traits are stronger in any one
person.
LB: Is it easier for a psychic to "read" some people better than others?
MCL: My strong suits are clairvoyance and precognition, so I can't speak
with absolute authority about reading others in the way you're describing,
the kind of stuff that's done on the John Edwards show. I think this
"reading" ability, more than any other, is abused by unscrupulous psychics.
Without passing judgment on Mr. Edwards, a lot of what these so-called
psychics are reading is nothing more than body language. When the psychic is
off-base, he or she often claims that the subject is "difficult to read."
Which is a lot of hooey. Truly gifted psychics come up with profound details
about their subjects and are less likely to claim that others are hard to
read. I watched Sylvia Browne read James Randi, a former magician who heads
the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal
(CSICOP). In spite of Randi's prickly defenses, Browne claimed he would be
suffering heart trouble in the near future. We shall see!
LB: A number of our members have voiced their frustration on finding
scientific research on psychics. Most of what's out there seems to be
anecdotal. Can you suggest any sources?
MCL: Two of my favorite texts are The Conscious Universe by Dean Radin,
Ph.D. and Parapsychology: The Controversial Science by Richard S. Broughton,
Ph.D. Both books contain statistical results from parapsychological tests
conducted at universities and government laboratories.
LB: A number of successful movies and TV shows have paranormal threads, but
agents tell us there's no market. Obviously there is or you wouldn't be
promoting your fifth Chase book. Why do you think agents take this stance?
MCL: I won't kid you: There's an enormous bias in our culture against
anything that smacks of a nonrational point of view. Nineteenth-century
science is still king to the authorities and experts (i.e., agents and
editors), despite the fact that physicists debunked the linear worldview
decades ago. My advice, if you're hell-bent on fighting the good fight and
writing about the paranormal, is to make sure your plot, characters, and
story structure are strong and solid. Good storytelling and refined craft can
overcome that bias, but it's still going to be an uphill battle.
LB: What do you think about the current state of the paranormal in mystery?
MCL: It's still a bastard subgenre. I can't think of any well-known mystery
authors who write solely on the paranormal. Some authors--Ed McBain, Robert
Parker, and Mary Higgins Clark come to mind--have done an occasional book with
a paranormal element, but for the most part it's just not done.
LB: Which agents and/or editors seem more open to books with paranormal
elements?
MCL: I really don't have an inside track on that. Again, a solid, well
written story can rise above the prejudice. I recommend that you look in the
acknowledgments pages of books with paranormal elements. You may pick up
some editor names there.
LB: Was your first book sold the first book you wrote?
MCL:Murder In Scorpio was the first book I wrote and the first book I sold.
I was amazed by how quickly it was picked up--there was even a bidding war for
the book--because I'd been an editor in New York and knew the prejudice that
existed against mysteries containing paranormal elements. Then the book went
on to be nominated for all three major mystery awards--the Edgar, the Agatha,
and the Anthony. It just goes to show that there are exceptions to every
rule.
LB: Have you ever used a critique group? Do you feel they have value?
MCL: I was in a critique group early in my writing career. My editor was the
one to suggest I drop out, feeling it was slowing my pace and not providing
me with valid feedback. I think groups have value, particularly early on, but
they can become stumbling blocks. I heard Sue Grafton advise authors not to
depend on writers groups, because they inhibit you from trusting your own
intuition about your work.
LB: Did you sell your first book yourself or with an agent?
MCL: An agent. Because I didn't have much confidence that I could sell the
book, I sent the first three chapters to three agents, testing the waters. To
my amazement, all three wanted to see more. I would never recommend trying
to sell a book without an agent. You need one, period.
LB: Did you intend to write a series character when you wrote Murder in
Scorpio?
MCL: Not particularly. And I didn't really envision this as the zodiac
series that it's become. That evolved out of my first tour, with Murder In
Scorpio. People kept asking me, "When are you going to write the Gemini
(Libra, Taurus, etc.) book?" I thought the zodiac series idea was kind of
cheesy, but seeing the level of interest in it, I capitulated.
LB: Do you think publishers still prefer a series over a stand-alone
book? Is that what our members should think about when crafting a new novel?
MCL: There's a trend right now toward stand-alones, but I recommend that you
don't try to anticipate trends. I've been in book publishing for twenty
years, and can assure you that these fads come and go. By the time you
anticipate a trend, it's over. Write the book you want to write.
LB: We keep hearing that agents don't want to read first person novels, but
often the characters just don't want to tell their story in third person. How
did you make your POV choice, and how did you develop Elizabeth's character?
MCL: If agents don't want to read first-person novels, that's personal
preference, not a publishing trend. Some of the biggest bestsellers on the
list are written in first person. I chose first-person POV for the Elizabeth
Chase novels because I wanted readers to experience psychic phenomena
firsthand. My hope was that by seeing these things through Elizabeth's eyes,
readers might awaken to their own psychic gifts.
LB: Do you consider "disbelievers" as you're writing?
MCL: Always. The biggest disbeliever is the one in my own head. No matter
how many times I've seen my psychic experiences validated, there's a part of
me that's always saying, "Bullshit." I've come to accept this aspect of
myself. To love it, even. The disbeliever keeps my critical-thinking skills
sharp. The truth is, if I hadn't experienced paranormal phenomena with my own
eyes and ears, I wouldn't believe in this stuff, either.
LB: A recent thread of conversation on The Guppie digest was the limited
role a protagonist's significant other can play. Was Tom McGowan an obstacle
to continuing the series? Did that relationship drain tension from the
stories?
MCL: I don't think an S.O. is necessarily an obstacle to a series. The thing
that drains tension or makes characters uninteresting is a lack of growth and
change. This applies to all characters, both fictional and real. The year I
wrote Aquarius Descending--the last book in which McGowan appears--I lost a
man I deeply loved. His death brought up all my unresolved grief about my
father, who died when I was thirteen. Try as I might, I could not write a
convincing happy ending that year. My editor vetoed the first two endings--in
which McGowan lived--deeming them "false" and "hollow." I think you have to
write what feels real for any character at any given moment.
LB: Elizabeth solves each mystery using ordinary detection while her psychic
abilities are primarily for understanding the people she encounters. Did you
plan this from the beginning?
MCL: I'm not sure I agree with this analysis. While it's true that
Elizabeth's psychic skills sometimes kick in when reading others, she's just
as often fooled by people. Particularly when her emotions are involved. Her
strong suit is really her clairvoyant gift. For example, in Ashes of Aries,
Elizabeth gets a clear image of a K-mart and a chain-link fence, and those
are the clues that help her most in breaking the case. My only plan for the
series--if you can call it a plan--was to depict psychic phenomena as I've
experienced it: sporadic, unpredictable, and profound. Because of the
unpredictability of her psychic gift, Elizabeth falls back on her methodical
detective skills, which is why she carries a P.I. license.
LB: Does Elizabeth continue to reveal new or deeper psychic abilities that
you didn't know she had?
MCL: I won't write about psychic phenomena that I haven't personally
experienced; not from Elizabeth's point of view, anyway. Yet I know there
are skills beyond my own. That's why I created Elizabeth's shaman-mentor,
Sequoia. I've known others with far more ability than I have, and can write
authentically about what it's like to witness these people in action.
LB: Are you content writing one series, or do you have other characters
waiting for their chance to take center stage?
MCL: I really needed to let some other voices come out, so I'm taking a
break from the Elizabeth Chase series as we speak. I have Elizabeth's sixth
adventure mapped out, but the book I'm working on now is a stand-alone
suspense novel written from multiple points of view.
LB: Do you have a title for your new novel? When will it be available? Will
it feature characters with paranormal abilities?
MCL: At this point I can say only two things about the stand-alone: It will
be written from multiple points of view, and it will be completely devoid of
any paranormal elements. Don't get me wrong, I love Elizabeth and I'm proud
of the series. I'd just once like to go on a book tour and not have to be an
apologist for psychic phenomena.
LB: Has St. Martin's pressured you to come up with a really "big" book, as
some authors have been reporting?
MCL: No, that pressure is coming from my Hollywood agent.
LB: Have you been happy with the promotional support you've received from
St. Martins, and has it increased with each book?
MCL: I'm not complaining, since I get a lot more support than most. Having
worked for Simon & Schuster and Harcourt Brace Publishers, I understand how
promotional budgets are allocated. The more promotional dollars are doled
out, the more pressure there is on the author to produce huge sales. Authors
are rarely happy with their promotional budgets and publishers are rarely
happy with an author's sales. (This goes for the big names, too.)
Everybody points fingers when expectations aren't met. If you can find a
happy balance, that's success.
LB: Do you feel your website (and electronic newsletter) has increased your
sales? If so, how?
MCL: I suspect it has, but honestly don't know. It's hard to quantify how
much each promotional effort--advertising, website, press appearances,
signings--drives sales. Let's put it this way: If you want to make your
living as an author, prepare to work your butt off.
LB: The book market continues to shrink, making the goal of publication even
harder to attain. Do you think small presses (or Print On Demand publishers)
can play a viable role in launching a writing career?
MCL: I'm not sure I agree that the book market is shrinking. The big houses
are gobbling each other up, but the actual number of books being published is
rising. Part of this is due to the rise of smaller publishers. I'm not an
authority on publishing trends, but I can tell you this, as a former editor:
You take a big gamble when you self-publish. It's tough enough to make it as
an author, even when you've got the marketing and distribution of a big house
behind you. There are exceptions, but those are like lottery winners. Last
weekend I had the pleasure to teach with the author of Pay It Forward,
Catherine Ryan Hyde. She told me that she received 122 rejections before she
got her first break. A hundred twenty-two rejections, then suddenly everyone
wanted to publish her. I doubt she'd be where she is today if she'd given up
and gone the print-on-demand route.
LB: Aside from writing the best book possible, what other advice can you
give to the unpublished author whose books fall just short of publishable?
MCL: If a project isn't clicking and you've sent it on all the rounds, put
it aside and start something new. Find what you're passionate about, and get
that passion into your writing. If you're not feeling passion, your reader
won't, either. Consider the possibility that you may need to hone your
writing skills. Most editors will say vague, nice things in their rejection
letters. They don't want to tell you that your POV is all screwed up, your
dialogue is stale, and your plot has holes. It's too much work; they expect
you to figure it out by yourself. If you seriously love your writing, hang in
there. Jonathan Kellerman wrote nine unpublished novels before his tenth was
picked up. Remember that.
Martha's Latest book ASHES OF ARIES is available now: ISBN 0312202997. Check out Martha's website at: www.marthalawrence.com
