Yesterday I
reviewed C.W. Gortner's newest novel, THE TUDOR VENDETTA. Today, C.W. answers some questions about the novel and his other works.
Welcome, Christopher! Congratulations on penning this most
satisfying ending to your three-book Spymaster Chronicles series. It is
quite evident from your writing that you felt a strong affinity for these
characters. Which one of them will you miss most and why?
I’ll miss
them all. I’ve lived with them for years, and as with any character that a
writer creates, be it historically-based or fictional, you end up spending a
lot of time with them. You get to know them intimately and they become your
friends, even the ones who do rather terrible things. I also loved this series
for the freedom it gave me, to search the crevices of history and develop
suspenseful stories around certain events. But perhaps mostly, I’ll miss
Brendan and Elizabeth. I think he has matured over the course of three books
and come into his own. He’s been a wonderful, challenging character to inhabit.
And Elizabeth, too, constantly surprised me as a character; she transformed,
showing unexpected sides of herself. She did what she had to, to get ahead. I
think she must have been quite something to know personally, and I’m honored to
have had the chance to write about her.
Is there any historical
evidence that someone of Brendan’s lineage might have actually existed?
There is, of
course, evidence of royal bastards; Henry VIII sired at least one that we know
of. But there is no evidence of someone with Brendan’s particular lineage. That
was the fun part—to come up with a plausible origin for him and then explore
how a man hidden from the world, unaware at first of who he is, must cope with
his secret when he’s thrust into the thick of court and attempts to protect
himself and those around him. I think that despite all the evidence we have of
people who lived hundreds of years ago, there is still a lot we shall never
know. Everyone has secrets; it’s not unreasonable to assume that Tudor royalty
had secrets, too. This was a time of intense scrutiny and little privacy, but
also a time of no paparazzi (though foreign ambassadors came close) and no cell
phones or photos. People in the public eye could still hide things they didn’t
want others to see, if they knew how to go about it.
In your opinion, were Elizabeth and Robert
Dudley ever actually lovers? Do you think Elizabeth would give a man such
power over her?
I don’t
personally believe Elizabeth fully consummated a sexual relationship with
Dudley. I believe they were indeed lovers in almost every way that matters,
certainly on an emotional basis, and to an extent, physically, as well. But I
also think we romanticize them to fit our own needs; we want to believe
Elizabeth found fulfillment as a woman and Dudley was her pining suitor. The truth,
however, is more complex—and to me, more interesting. We must take into account
the realities of sexuality in the Tudor era. Birth control was imperfect at
best, and Elizabeth was no fool. Once she gained the throne, she did everything
in her power to minimize risks to her position: her aversion to war, to the
execution of her own cousin Mary of Scots, who posed a significant threat,
among others, attest to her legendary caution. In addition, her adolescent exploits
resulted in a scandal that put both her and her servants at risk, and ended
with the beheading of a man who, by all accounts, she loved. And because of her
mother Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth must have learned early in life to equate sexual
surrender with danger and death. I think her adolescent imbroglio was the one
exception; in her later years, she showed evidence of a lifelong sexual
frustration through the demands she put on her women to remain unwed, her rage
when one disobeyed her, and ceaseless need for adulation. But I also think she
made the choice upon winning the crown to never submit, and Dudley was not a
devoted lover willing to lie at her feet. He came from an ambitious family and was,
like most noblemen, always seeking his advantage. He wanted more than she was
willing to give, which created a tension that fueled their attraction.
Elizabeth understood there is nothing more tantalizing than forbidden fruit;
she knew how to play Robert and keep him enthralled, even if in turn, her ploy
exacted from her a heavy toll. She never forgot that her mother lost her
freedom the moment she let herself be won.
Are you surprised at the endurance of reader
interest in the Tudor era? Do you think the craze will ever fizzle?
I think it
has its ups and downs. Interest is waning now due to overexposure, but after
another fallow period, the era will rise again. These are fascinating,
larger-than-life people in a tumultuous time, who also are very human; we are
drawn to them because of their struggles and weaknesses as much as their
strengths or triumphs. Not a happy dynasty, but one that has all the elements
we look for in stories—drama, passion, intrigue, death, love and loss. It
really doesn’t get better than the Tudors, whose reigns precipitated so much
upheaval and change, and whose iconography is forever cemented in our popular
imagination.
Who are some “underused” historical
characters from the Renaissance you would like to see feature in novels?
Certainly,
Renaissance France deserves more attention. Northern Europe, as well. I’d love
to see more books about the Ottoman Empire, too. English history tends to
dominate historical fiction in the US because of our strong links to the UK,
but the Renaissance was a widespread phenomenon. There are many underused
characters whose stories are waiting to be told. The challenge is
market-driven. Recognition factor is a key incentive for publishers in our
current climate, so a novel about, say, the Tudors is going to be more
appealing from a marketing standpoint than one about an obscure sultan in Turkey.
But that might change; I think my own career has shown that you can write
beyond the margins while taking into account marquee appeal, and still have
strong books. Then again, it took me nearly fourteen years to get published!
As an experienced novelist, what aspect of writing
still challenges you the most? Where have you made the greatest strides in your
writing?
Accessibility
always remains a challenge. To write the past, you must always bear in mind
that your modern-day reader may know little or nothing of the era you are
covering, and you can’t throw a thousand things at them. You can’t expect them
to understand the world-view of your characters without detailing it, of
course, but too much detail swamps the momentum of the story you’re trying to
tell. Balance between everything you know with what the reader needs to know is
a fine point in writing historical novels; my motto is, less is more. I’ve had
a few reviewers take me to task for not “including the wider historical
context.” But that’s really a compliment to me. My books focus on a single
point of view in first person. I seek to reveal my character’s inner life as
they navigate their particular circumstances. They only know what they know and
see what they see. It makes it easier for me and my reader, because it creates
intimacy. In the end, I’m not an historian seeking to teach you about Spain,
France, or England in the Renaissance. I’m a storyteller, depicting one
individual’s story through their eyes. I think I’ve made the greatest strides
in mastering my enthusiasm for research with what actually ends up on the page.
I know the wider historical context; I have to in order to write, but I’ve also
learned that not everything my research has uncovered must, or even should, be
included in my book. It’s my framework, the block of stone upon which I chisel
out my characters. What remains is necessary: nothing more and nothing less.
Out of
the seven novels you have written, do you have a favorite?
The last one
is always my favorite. But beyond that, I am very proud of all of them for
different reasons: THE LAST QUEEN is
my novel of the heart, the one I struggled with for many years to see published,
about a bold woman unjustly maligned by history. THE CONFESSIONS OF CATHERINE DE MEDICI is my most ambitious, in
that I undertook an entire life in a very complex era, and found that my
original intent to write a villainous narrator became a quest to reveal another
woman who’s been misunderstood. THE QUEEN'S VOW was the most challenging, because of all my characters, Isabella
developed her personality early in life and remained steadfast in who she was,
despite her travails. Writing her was tough because in her core, Isabella did not
change; she is nothing like me. But in the end, I empathized with her because I
think she honestly believed she was doing her best. I don’t agree with her, but
I understand her impetus. The three Spymaster books have been my playground,
where my imagination could roam through a fictional male character who shares
many of my beliefs about how the past can haunt us, my love for animals, my
respect for loyalty and forgiveness, and the need for compromise.
Will you ever revisit Brendan, Kate and Raff
again?
I hope to,
in the future. I simply felt I had reached the end of this particular journey and
wanted to explore other horizons. I’m not an historical novelist who can mine the
same era over and over; I’m eclectic in my obsessions, with many interests
beyond the Tudors. It was time to move onward, but I bear great fondness for
these characters, and who knows what the future holds? For now, however,
Brendan deserves this respite. He’s been through a lot!
Your
newest novel, MADEMOISELLE CHANEL, about fashion designer Coco Chanel, will appear in
March 2015. What prompted you to choose a subject so far removed from the
Renaissance? Did writing about the 20th century pose different challenges than
writing about the 16th?
Before I
became a full time writer, my career trajectory included ten years of working
in the fashion industry; I came to learn about Coco Chanel while undertaking my
degree in fashion marketing. She was my style icon. I had a battered book of
her designs that I referred to often when consulting with clients. Writing a
novel about her was something I always wanted to do, but the idea sat on the sidelines
for years. When I did decide to do it, it was on impulse. I had spare time
after delivering two prior manuscripts; my editors were reading those, and while
I waited for feedback, I made the spur of the moment choice to try writing a
modern woman. I was not under contract for this book and had no idea if it
would work, but once I started, I couldn’t stop. I wrote the first draft in
five months— record time for me. Coco’s story presented different challenges,
of course; she’s a 20th century figure who’s been extensively
documented, and the choice of language and style for this novel had to fit her
times. But again, my foremost challenge became what to include, much as with my
16th century novels. I had to find the intimacy in her story without
overwhelming my reader with minutia. Still, writing a character who could
actually telephone her friends was a plus! Communication is so much easier in
our age. And portraying a woman who rose from nothing, not born to privilege
yet who became a queen in her own right, was fascinating. And the clothes, of
course: all those fabulous clothes. What’s not to love? She also made
controversial decisions that blackened her reputation, so in some ways, MADEMOISELLE CHANEL is not so removed
from what I’ve written previously. She is an extraordinary woman in an
extraordinary era, who lived by her own rules, despite setbacks and personal tragedies.
She shares certain traits with my 16th century ladies.
Whose journey, out of all the characters
you have created, most closely mirrors your own journey as a writer?
Probably
Chanel’s. Not that it’s a fair comparison; she faced obstacles I never have,
foremost being misogyny. Because of her gender, she had to fight to be taken
seriously in a time when women had few options. But as a gay man whose writing
had been rejected over 300 times over the course of thirteen years, I
understood both her frustration and determination to succeed. I also think I
relate to her decision to live as she saw fit; gay men have faced prejudice and
hatred because of our sexuality, and Coco experienced prejudice because of her
lifestyle. She also reaped rewards, but she paid the price for who she was. I
know what that feels like. Nevertheless, all of my characters carry a bit of me
inside of them, or rather, I find a bit of me in them. It’s what writers do: we
cannot live for years with characters we detest. We must find an echo of their
souls in ours to bring them to life. Without that echo, the writing is empty.
Thank you
for sharing this time with me. I hope your readers enjoy THE TUDOR VENDETTA. To
find out more about my work, please visit me at:
www.cwgortner.com
Posts
