It's hot in southern California, and it always seems to be particularly so on Festival weekends, but what are ya gonna do?
A wee bit of traffic on our two hour trip to UCLA; a few fenderbenders (not us, thank goodness), but we managed to get there on time anyway. As I told everyone who would listen, I was volunteering to help at the Mystery Writers of America booth at 10am, and I bounded in on time to do my bit. I met a fellow Sister in Crime who heard I was going to be there, which was a very nice boost.
Last time I did this stint at the MWA booth, I relieved someone who had already done their bit trying to hock memberships, but there was no one to relieve so I stood around, trying not to be in the way, and did my hocking from the front: "Mystery Writers of America! Readers and writers! Join the club and hobnob with mystery writers!" I was wearing a t-shirt that had a picture of Chaucer with a line that read "Chaucer is my homeboy" and that garnered a few interested persons. I passed out a lot of my bookmarks. People seemed interested in the book. After all, that's why I was there! Met some very nice people that way, including the MWA pres Les Klinger and another author helping out, Pamela Samuels Young.
After my hour was up, I headed for my first panel of the day, The Literary Detective, moderated by Sarah Weinman, with Les Klinger, Peter Robinson, and April Smith. I passed out yet more bookmarks to the folks waiting in line (I have found in the few years I have attended this event, that to bother other than mystery panel lines was waste of time. "Mystery? What's that?")
The panel began right away and one question was about what is literary and what is not. Robinson opined that crimewriters were obliged to produce a book a year, due to its serial nature, while a literary novel had the luxury of a long time of conceiving, planning, and just plain thinking about it, and then taking a few years to produce.
Smith called the literary novel more complex and transformative, taking each character to a new experience.
Gears were switched a few times and then the question was posed about the detective himself. How has he changed from those early days of the birth of literary detectives? Klinger reminded us that many of the cliches we recognize in detective fiction today were invented by these first authors: Poe, Conan-Doyle, Wilke Collins. In the case of Holmes, the butler did indeed do it in one of the stories. But Robinson pointed out that there are new technical challenges today for the detective: DNA, mobile phones, cameras everywhere (in Britain), making it difficult for the murderer to remain an unknown in fiction.
A lively discussion left me listening more than taking notes, so I guess that is the sign of a good panel. Afterwards, I wanted to introduce myself to Sarah Weinman as she has sometimes linked to this blog and it seemed the thing to do to personally thank her and also so that she can put a face to the name. But she skeedaddled out of the panel too quickly for me to catch her (did I just write "skeedaddled?"). I'll try to catch her tomorrow.
After this, my hubby and I headed over to the Gore Vidal interview, which is always a treat. Well worth it.
We blew off the next panel in order to look at some of the booksellers and by then it was 3:00 pm and we were pooped out. We were returning the next day, so no point in looking at the whole place in one go.
Tomorrow: More bookmark distribution, an interview with Julie Andrews, and I will drop by to say hello to Cornelia Read, and maybe catch Sarah Weinman and--wait for it--give her a bookmark. See you tomorrow.
Hi Jeri,
Sorry to miss you yesterday! Look forward to meeting you and to receive your bookmark.
Posted by: Sarah | April 27, 2008 at 09:16 AM
It was nice listening to you, Sarah, and finally catching up with you Sunday!
Posted by: Jeri Westerson | April 28, 2008 at 11:47 AM