Sharon McCrumb
Visi.net
But in occured to meet that some years ago I actually got to meet in person
Sharon McCrumb at Virginia Tech in a literature class I was taking.
At the time I really didn't know who she was or anything.
I noticed the other day while looking through the mystery section at the
bookstore that she's a mystery writer.
So is she good? What's her sub-genre? Any specific recommendations to try
of hers?
Thanks,
Ken
Carol Schwaderer Dickinson
First - spelled Sharyn McCrumb
She writes 3 series
The MacPherson series features a young Elizabeth MacPherson who is an
anthropologist. These are lighter and sort of toward teh cozy side but
they are inconsistent in terms of coziness. Some felt kind of dark to
me. There is a lot of humor in some of them and not so much in others.
For a lighter one perhaps you could try "The Windsor Knot" which has a
lot of absurdity in it and humor and is about a wedding but the death is
kind of grizzly. I really enjoyed "If I'd Killed Him When I Met Him..."
It has a dark element but the premise was great. "MacPherson's Lament"
has to be my favorite though.
In the Omega series, the sleuth is Professor Jay Omega, and has a
sci-fi theme. Everybody in our family loved "Bimbos of the Death Sun".
Nobody cared for the rest of the series.
The Ballad series is based on traditional Appalachian ballads. I think
of it as the dead kid series. These involve Sheriff Arrowod, and his
deputies in some and Nora Bonesteel, a hillwoman with second sight more
in others. They are all in most of them. I don't particularly care for
them because I don't like to read about dead kids, and abuse. But she
writes so well I just keep buying the darn things and reading them.
Carol
Mark Alan Miller
"Visi.net" <bbq...@visi.net> wrote in message
news:G%jL8.227$p3....@sydney.visi.net...
Sharyn McCrumb (yes, Sharyn with a Y) has written mysteries in three
separate series, all quite different. She's also one of the most
inconsistent writers in the genre. The most acclaimed books are those
belonging to the "Ballad" series, starting with If Ever I Return, Pretty
Peggy-O, a book I found frustrating but others admired. These books are set
in eastern Tennessee, are densely literary (or try to be), and heavy with
Appalachian culture and history. Good choices in this series would be The
Hangman's Beautiful Daughter, She Walks These Hills, The Rosewood Casket,
and The Songcatcher (not really a mystery, but quite good). Her other main
series features Elizabeth McPherson, a young forensic athropologist. This
series is terribly inconsistent, alternating between some very solid efforts
and others that turn to illogical mush. The earlier books are lighter and a
bit romantic, but turn to silly nonsense at times. The more recent books
are darker in tone, more consistent, and feature heavily Elizabeth's brother
and the partner in his legal practice. The third series consists of the two
Jay Omega books, Bimbos of the Death Sun, a very funny, if rather silly,
satire of science fiction conventions, and the excellent Zombies of the
Gene, to my mind as fine as any of the Ballad books, with McCrumb's best
integration of a complex plot, emotional complexity, and humor to date.
Unfortunately, the Jay Omega books don't seem to have sold particularly
well, so I doubt there will be more coming.
Mark Alan Miller
Dot Williams
Cornwell and gets offended if you call her a mystery writer.
Mark Alan Miller
"Visi.net" <bbq...@visi.net> > >
> I noticed the other day while looking through the mystery section at the
> bookstore that she's a mystery writer.
Visiting my sister last year, we overheard one of the local librarians
say McCrumb's publicist (sp?) told them "if Ms. McCrumb's found her
books in the mystery section she would not appear there."
We really thought that demand more than a bit odd. My sister then went
to one of her local signings and found Sharon to be standoffish and a
bit ill at ease with some of the questions compared to the many other
authors she has meet.
This was is great contrast to signings my sister and I went to where
Margaret Maron and Tim Myers appeared. Margaret was funny and
friendly. She seemed to enjoy the questions and those that attended.
Tim, a new novelist, gave us some great insights into the mystery book
business. We enjoyed both of these signings greatly.
DW
Kat Richardson
Carol wrote:
>
> The MacPherson series features a young Elizabeth MacPherson who is an
> anthropologist. These are lighter and sort of toward teh cozy side but
> they are inconsistent in terms of coziness. Some felt kind of dark to
> me. There is a lot of humor in some of them and not so much in others.
> For a lighter one perhaps you could try "The Windsor Knot" which has a
> lot of absurdity in it and humor and is about a wedding but the death is
> kind of grizzly. I really enjoyed "If I'd Killed Him When I Met Him..."
> It has a dark element but the premise was great. "MacPherson's Lament"
> has to be my favorite though.
I liked "Sick of Shadows" quite a bit.
>
> In the Omega series, the sleuth is Professor Jay Omega, and has a
> sci-fi theme. Everybody in our family loved "Bimbos of the Death Sun".
> Nobody cared for the rest of the series.
Oh, but you must read "Bimbos," if you have every been to a Con. You'll
swear you know all of the characters.
--
Kat Richardson
"Not my planet, understand, monkey-boy?"
http://www.eskimo.com/~strange
Carol Schwaderer Dickinson
> belonging to the "Ballad" series, starting with If Ever I Return, Pretty
> Peggy-O, a book I found frustrating but others admired.
I'm with you. It was beyond frustrating for me. It was horrid. It was
about a kid fascinated with the Vietnam war and I didn't like a single
thing about it except Sheriff Arrowood. It was dark, It was hard to
follow, and in the end it was about dead kids as all books about war
must be.
These books are set
> in eastern Tennessee, are densely literary (or try to be), and heavy with
> Appalachian culture and history.
What a great description! Thats it exactly.
Good choices in this series would be
She Walks These Hills,
Yes I think thats her best in the series of those I've read.
The Rosewood Casket,
Now this one I thought was awful. It was well written darn it, but its
chock full of child abuse, neglect and murder and its not even really a
mystery. We know the identity of the skeleton from the beginning. Its an
excruciating tale of building a casket and lining it with a homemade
quilt nobody wants to build or quilt by a family I certainly would not
want to have live within a hundred miles of me. No make it a thousand.
Carol
Greenbanks
>Cornwell and gets offended if you call her a mystery writer.
>Visiting my sister last year, we overheard one of the local librarians
>say McCrumb's publicist (sp?) told them "if Ms. McCrumb's found her
>books in the mystery section she would not appear there."
>We really thought that demand more than a bit odd.
>DW
I have heard this as well, in reference to publicity about her speaking
engagements. That's unfortunate, when popular authors show themselves to be
genre snobs.
M'Lou
Randy Money
>
[...]
> The third series consists of the two
> Jay Omega books, Bimbos of the Death Sun, a very funny, if rather silly,
> satire of science fiction conventions, and the excellent Zombies of the
> Gene, to my mind as fine as any of the Ballad books, with McCrumb's best
> integration of a complex plot, emotional complexity, and humor to date.
> Unfortunately, the Jay Omega books don't seem to have sold particularly
> well, so I doubt there will be more coming.
>
> Mark Alan Miller
A small disagreement:
I thought _Bimbos..._ was very funny, neatly and accurately skewering
several types of sf convention goer.
On the other hand, I thought _Zombies ..._ suffered a split personality:
Jay and -- can't recall his significant other's name -- were grafted
awkwardly onto what could have been a compelling, more mainstream novel
about a few older sf writers and their secrets. Jay's light-comedy
personality worked fine in the lighter _Bimbos..._ but couldn't sustain
the weight of a more serious story.
Randy M.
Randy Money
Yeah, and I don't think it's necessary any more. I can understand why
Vonnegut wanted to divorce himself from the sf genre in the late '50s
and early '60s, but I'm not sure that the kind of snobishness that would
have limited his audience then is as prevalent now. Besides, the mystery
genre has a greater history of successful cross-over to mainstream
audiences, anyway, from Hammett and Chandler on to James Lee Burke.
Randy M.
(could probably even argue that success goes back to Sir Arthur and G.K.
Chesterton if we were of a mind)
Mary
Randy Money wrote:
> Yeah, and I don't think it's necessary any more. I can understand why
> Vonnegut wanted to divorce himself from the sf genre in the late '50s
> and early '60s, but I'm not sure that the kind of snobishness that would
> have limited his audience then is as prevalent now.>>
Frankly, if I never read another word about Sharyn McCrumb's social
ineptness/lack of genre loyalty or whatever it is that so provokes people, I will
die a happy woman. I am tired of women writers being criticized for the same
pontificating which gains male writers admiration.
cheers,
Mary
Tama Filipas
came out a good friend attended one and sent me a book signed to me.
For what it's worth, she said Sharyn was very nice and seemed quite
genuine.
Tama
Randy Money
Hi, Mary.
My statement was made as a general comment on writers divorcing
themselves from genre when their work seems to fit in it. I'm not sure
it's the hot-button among non-genre readers that it once was.
I'd be curious which other women writers have been so criticized.
Thanks.
Randy M.
Jeremy L
"Greenbanks" <green...@aol.commonsense> wrote in message
news:20020607085259...@mb-fr.aol.com...
story about Sharyn McCrumb several years ago. I will start this by saying I
am a fan of Ms. McCrumb's work. They said that when she first started
writing, she attended Malice Domestic and several other cons. She actively
participated and was quite interested in feedback and pointers from other
authors to help her get established in the mystery field.. Once her ballad
series sales started to take off, she went to great pains to distance
herself.
M.D. Lake's (I won't mention the
other author because she didn't want to make waves and because she still
writes.) issue wasn't that she wanted to be thought as a "serious" writer,
but rather because she went to such great lengths to distance herself(snub
was the word he used.) from the very people she turned to to help start her
career.
I can see both sides
of the situation.
Jeremy
Dan Goodman
news:adqb93$1rr$1...@coranto.ucs.mun.ca:
> Greenbanks (green...@aol.commonsense) wrote:
>
>: I have heard this as well, in reference to publicity about her
>: speaking engagements. That's unfortunate, when popular authors show
>: themselves to be genre snobs.
>
> I think its unfortunate, too, if she dislikes being considered a
> mystery author. I'm glad a lot of authors are perfectly happy to be
> mystery authors and keep on writing mystery novels for me to read.
>
> But I have some sympathy with her if she appears ill-at-ease in public
> appearances. I've often wondered about this business of authors
> getting sent to all these signings (very few of which happen here, by
> the way, so I'm guessing about all this). It seems to me that there
> must be some successful authors who don't enjoy public speaking and
> dealing with the public. I think writing and speaking (especially in
> public) are probably two very different skills, and require different
> personality types.
They're two different sets of skills, yes. However, there is no one
personality type which are good at either and/or enjoy either.
Both can be learned. Writing in workshops and critique groups, combined
with a lot of practice. Public speaking in Toastmasters and other groups.
Mystmoush
>came out a good friend attended one and sent me a book signed to me.
>For what it's worth, she said Sharyn was very nice and seemed quite
>genuine.
>
>Tama
>
nice and approachable then. An interesting speaker as well. I still
remember the story she told that led to her writing the book.
Eileeeeen from OH
Bridget
>
> Frankly, if I never read another word about Sharyn McCrumb's social
>ineptness/lack of genre loyalty or whatever it is that so provokes people, I will
>die a happy woman. I am tired of women writers being criticized for the same
>pontificating which gains male writers admiration.
>
> cheers,
> Mary
Now who in the world would find this acceptable behavior from any
gender?
B.
Mary Lou White
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Cheryl L. Perkins wrote:
> I think its unfortunate, too, if she dislikes being considered a mystery
> author. I'm glad a lot of authors are perfectly happy to be mystery
> authors and keep on writing mystery novels for me to read.
>
> But I have some sympathy with her if she appears ill-at-ease in public
> appearances. I've often wondered about this business of authors getting
> sent to all these signings (very few of which happen here, by the way, so
> I'm guessing about all this). It seems to me that there must be some
> successful authors who don't enjoy public speaking and dealing with the
> public. I think writing and speaking (especially in public) are probably
> two very different skills, and require different personality types. And
> maybe there's a third personality type and skill set for the person who
> excels at both sitting in front of a computer alone for hours every day,
> AND meeting and entertaining large numbers of strangers in bookstores.
>
I don't think she's shy. I saw her, heard her speak, at several Malices
some years back, probably early 90s.
She gave a very funny speech.
Unlike SOME other authors there, Reginald Hill and Margaret Maron come to
mind, she seemed only to wish to associate with other authors.
There was a definite demarcation between fans and authors, especially the
"name" authors.
Truth to tell, it wasn't much fun, and I'm cut out to be a worshipful
acolyte.
Again, this was not all the authors, but enough.
On the other hand, that was where I discovered my favorite second hand
mystery seller, Jeff Myerson, so all was not lost.
And I've also read that at a signing for a ballad book, she refused to
sign any of her mysteries.
Mary Lou
Tama Filipas
signing near there.
Tama
Andrew Barss
: Frankly, if I never read another word about Sharyn McCrumb's social
: ineptness/lack of genre loyalty or whatever it is that so provokes people, I will
: die a happy woman. I am tired of women writers being criticized for the same
: pontificating which gains male writers admiration.
Hmmm. McCrumb writes mysteries, but wants to be taken as Serious
Novelist, and shuns the classification of her books in the appropriate
category. That's not pontificating, it's arrogance and snobbery.
And I'd feel the same way if the name were Stan McCrumb. Can you cite any
male writer who has "gained admiration" here for pulling the same
act?
-- Andy Barss
Mary
Andrew Barss wrote:
> Mary <jas...@rcn.com> wrote:
>
> : Frankly, if I never read another word about Sharyn McCrumb's social
> ineptness/lack of genre loyalty or whatever it is that so provokes people, I will die
> a happy woman. I am tired of women writers being criticized for the same
> pontificating which gains male writers admiration.
>
> Hmmm. McCrumb writes mysteries, but wants to be taken as Serious
> Novelist, and shuns the classification of her books in the appropriate
> category. That's not pontificating, it's arrogance and snobbery.>>
Nah, that's wanting to be taken seriously as a _writer_ and wanting not to
have one's work limited to a category and being so naive and socially inept as to admit
it in public.
>
>
> And I'd feel the same way if the name were Stan McCrumb. Can you cite any
> male writer who has "gained admiration" here for pulling the same
> act?
>
>
Here? As in RAM or in the wider world of literature? In the wider world,
male authors get away with all kinds of rude crap and it was to the phenomenon of the
male author being allowed-indeed, often cheered- for arrogant pontificating about his
place in the literary canon that I referred. Nobody holds it against Vonnegut, used by
another poster as an example of an author who wanted out of the genre system, for
wanting to be taken more seriously than a writer of science fiction might be. Indeed,
eluding the bounds of easy categorization is generally considered to be the very
essence of masculine literary accomplishment. If it wasn't arrogant and snobbish of
Vonnegut to aspire to that, why is McCrumb condemned for expressing a similar desire?
My bet is on sexism.
cheers,
Mary
Randy Money
>
> [...] In the wider world,
> male authors get away with all kinds of rude crap and it was to the phenomenon of the
> male author being allowed-indeed, often cheered- for arrogant pontificating about his
> place in the literary canon that I referred. Nobody holds it against Vonnegut, used by
> another poster as an example of an author who wanted out of the genre system, for
> wanting to be taken more seriously than a writer of science fiction might be. Indeed,
> eluding the bounds of easy categorization is generally considered to be the very
> essence of masculine literary accomplishment. If it wasn't arrogant and snobbish of
> Vonnegut to aspire to that, why is McCrumb condemned for expressing a similar desire?
> My bet is on sexism.
> cheers,
> Mary
Hi, Mary.
I don't disagree with McCrumb separating herself from genre. I didn't
even mean to be critical of her doing so -- unless, as others have said,
she's rude about it -- I just don't understand why she bothers. I
suppose many writers begin to feel hemmed in by fan and/or publisher
expectations. And I certainly don't disagree with this,
> eluding the bounds of easy categorization is generally considered to be the very
> essence of masculine literary accomplishment
but I tend to think of it as a mindset more prevalent, and maybe more
relevant, 40+ years ago. Maybe I'm naive, but your statement seems to
imply that 40+ years in the world of literature hasn't made a
difference. Note that in my earlier message I said,
> I can understand why Vonnegut wanted to divorce himself from the sf genre in the late '50s
> and early '60s, but I'm not sure that the kind of snobishness that would have limited his
> audience then is as prevalent now.
I wasn't basing my mention of Vonnegut on gender, but on time period.
The entrenchment of realistic fiction as handed from the
Hemingway/Faulkner generation to the Mailer/Styron/Updike generation was
still in place. The lit. movements that started breaking down genres
were still in the future when Vonnegut was breaking from s.f.:
post-modernism was just starting; Magic Realism was still an obscure art
term; Jorge Luis Borges was being translated but was still mostly known
by literary gourmet's (and, oddly, some mystery readers thanks to EQMM);
and Pynchon hadn't yet published any of his major novels. The
(admittedly male-dominated and patriarchal) lit. establishment was still
pooh-poohing genre fiction, though a few critics were starting to
discuss it.
Now, academic discussion of genre fiction, room on the best-sellers
lists and general discussion of genre fiction in many venues high-brow,
middle and low, is pretty wide-spread. Certain mystery / thriller
writers like Patricia Highsmith, P.D. James and Ruth Rendall are
considered pretty highly by a wide range of writers and lit. types as
among the best writers of their generations. So, again, I wonder why
McCrumb feels the need to divorce herself from the genre, though I
realize that's more of a rhetorical question than a question anyone here
could answer.
Randy M.
Alison
http://www.ursulakleguin.com/OnDespisingGenres.html
for Ursula K. LeGuin's take on genres and writing. A brief quote:
"Well, I know what for, every time they give an award to another
brand-name novel, or some lady says to me, "Oh, my son just loves your
books-of course I don?t read Sci Fi." And she stands there expecting
me to say "no of course you don?t, you?re far too mature intelligent
discerning and above all, tactful." Then I usually find out she
thought I was Madeleine L?Engle, anyhow. And the critics-"if it?s sf
it can?t be good, if it?s good it can?t be sf," and so they tell me
LHD, The Handmaid?s Tale and The Dazzle of Day aren?t sf. What
ignorance."
Alison Hendon
Randy Money
Thanks for this, Alison. Le Guin's been a favorite for a long time.
I don't doubt her assertions, nor that she's met people who think, "S.f.
equals literary doo-doo," but, first, she's one of the writers who has
stuck with genre classification and still made it big with academics and
critics, and even a general readership not all of whom were usually
inclined to read s.f.; and second, I'm not sure the genre classification
of mystery has been the kiss of death that s.f. and/or horror has. Conan
Doyle, Chesterton, Sayers, Nicholas Blake, Hammett, Chandler, Ross
Macdonald, Patricia Highsmith, Simenon, P. D. James and Ruth Rendall and
probably a handful or more of others I'm not recalling have impressed
academics and critics as well as the mystery-reading public. Readers of
mysteries have included T. S. Eliot, W. H. Auden, Graham Greene and
several widely read (and sometimes widely-well-regarded) critics, along
with presidents (Ian Fleming's sales got a big boost when John Kennedy
said he read the Bond novels) and prime-ministers, and other prominent
people who have not minded saying they liked the genre.
Which is all said as prelude to my reiteration of, I have trouble
grasping that being a genre writer (especially in the mystery genre)
carries the stigma it once did. The cultural atmosphere Vonnegut was in
40+ years ago has changed, I think, so I still wonder why anyone now
feels a strong need to distance themselves. (Except maybe from horror
and romance, which still have strong implications of commercial
considerations always overriding the artistic or aesthetic.)
Randy M.
Randy Money
>
> while wading through a long list of posts, vj found this in
> rec.arts.mystery, from Randy Money <rbm...@library.syr.edu> :
>
> ]Which is all said as prelude to my reiteration of, I have trouble
> ]grasping that being a genre writer (especially in the mystery genre)
> ]carries the stigma it once did. The cultural atmosphere Vonnegut was in
> ]40+ years ago has changed, I think, so I still wonder why anyone now
> ]feels a strong need to distance themselves. (Except maybe from horror
> ]and romance, which still have strong implications of commercial
> ]considerations always overriding the artistic or aesthetic.)
> ]
> ]Randy M.
>
> message - otherwise, why would they insist that Grisham [to name only
> one] be classed as "fiction" and filed there in bookstores?
>
> readerships and culture may have changed - major publishing houses
> [Random House, Ballantine, Putnam] do not seem to have changed. I had
> one bookseller tell me that the publisher insisted the author's book
> be classified as fiction - NOT mystery - and shelved that way. newer
> publishers [St. Martin's, ImaJinn] don't seem to have that problem --
> of course, they also publish more genre work, so they know exactly
> where their market is going to be.
>
Ah. Thanks, Vicki. I hadn't taken publishers into account and, natch,
this view would influence -- jaundice? -- what marketing they do.
Randy M.
K. C. Putnam
the Elizabeth books are even funnier.
Luci Davin
different from each other.
I haven't read the Elizabeth books though they have eye catching titles like
I Miss My Man... But My Aim is Getting Better. I'm not really into amateur
sleuth books.
There are two "convention" books and I know someone who thinks these are
really nasty - Bimbos and Zombies as referred to below. I've bought copies
to see for myself but not read them.
I really enjoyed two books from her Ballad series - these are about the
sheriff's office in a small town in Appalachia and mix old legends with
contemporary stories - with the titles taken from songs - If Ever I Return
Pretty Peggy-O and She Walks These Hills.
Luci