Rear Window

I'm pretty sure everyone, even those who haven't seen the film, know the plot to Rear Window: photographer Jeffries (or Jeff) is holed up in his apartment with a broken leg. To pass the time, he watches his neighbors, and one day he starts thinking a man across the way has murdered his wife.

This is one of Alfred Hitchcock's most famous films, and one of his most admired--for good reason. The screenplay is spot-on and the direction is amazing. You know that old adage, show don't tell? Well, ever since cinema first got started, filmmakers have been obsessed with playing to the strengths of the medium and telling--or rather showing--a narrative purely through visual movement. That obsession didn't change with the arrival of talkies; it only became commercially more difficult! Rear Window is able to tell stories about Jeff's neighbors using almost no talking at all, just by showing them going about their business. I think that's part of the reason this movie is such a filmmaker's film.

One of the things I really like about this movie--that no one else has talked about yet, anyway--are the references to marriage and relationships. Both Jeff's editor and nurse (the always-fun Thelma Ritter) mention marriage to him at the beginning of the film. This is to set up for the entrance of committophobe Jeff's gf, Grace Kelly... or Lisa. Whatever (like how many people remember her character's name at the end of the film? I'm just saying). But I also think the idea of relationships is central to the voyeuristic aspect of the movie. The dynamics of relationships are almost impossible to understand unless you're actually in the relationship. Have you ever wondered how two people can possibly stay together; or thought of two people as the perfect couple, only to find out they're cheating on each other?



And speaking of, one of the things I've never gotten about this movie is the whole relationship between Jeff and Lisa. Note to Jeff: you have a beautiful, rich woman who is at least fifteen years younger than you are (may actually be more like twenty--yikes!) throwing herself at you. It's not going to get any better than that, buddy. Wake up and smell the roses. And why in the world is Lisa so into him, anyway? o.O I do like how sexually aggressive Grace Kelly is in this movie, though. Go, Grace!!!

Anywho, this is a really good movie. It's the type of film you can watch over and over and not really get bored because you always notice something different. That being said, it's not one of my favorite Hitchcock movies. *ducks* The whole relationship between Lisa and Jeff just bothers my brain. And I spend most of the movie thinking, "Why don't these people close their curtains?" and being more annoyed with the fact that Jeff isn't minding his own biznass than how the guy murdered his wife (which I'm always quite skeptical about). But then I'm from the West where we try to ignore the fact that we have neighbors--if we have them--so maybe that's part of my problem.

But either way, this is a really great, classic, entertaining film that everyone should see.



Next week on My Friend Amy's Summer of Hitchcock, we'll be watching Psycho!

Powered by ScribeFire.

Two Books, One Review

Last week I read two books that have been sitting on my TBR pile for quite a while:  Show No Mercy by Cindy Gerard and Ice Storm by Anne Stuart.  Both have similar plotlines:  a tough, daring woman meets a dangerous man with whom she has extensive history, and there's a lot of shooting and killing, etc.  But I only liked one of these books, which I think demonstrates once again that it's not what you write, but how you write it.



Show No Mercy is about a tough reporter who was kidnapped and tortured in Argentina.  She was saved by a man named Gabriel (nickname: Archangel), who is a member of some sort of security corporation called Black Ops.  After recuperating in the States for a while, she returns to Argentina to do an interview, and she meets Gabriel again.

The first thing that annoyed me about this book was the prologue.  I don't read prologues; and I really don't read prologues that are twenty pages.  Then there's another twenty or so pages where our heroine meanders improbably through a working ranch, musing about her sorry state and digging up a load o' backstory in her head.  Exciting stuff.  Finally something happens around page sixty, but by then I didn't care.  This was a DNF.



Ice Storm is about Isobel Lambert, the head of a corporation called The Company which was featured in three previous Stuart novels:  Black Ice, Cold As Ice, and Ice Blue (my personal favorite).  Anyway, unlike Black Ops, The Company is run by some fairly shady people, and it meddles heavily in international affairs.  Basically the people employed by The Company are spies and assassins; but instead of working for a government, they work for a conglomerate.

Lambert is the Ice Queen; but of course she wasn't always like that.  At least, not until she fell in love with Killian, a mercenary who used her as a cover to get to Marseilles so he could assassinate a general.  He was the only man she ever loved, and the first man she ever killed.  Now she realizes Killian is actually still alive, working as a terrorist named Serafin (what is it with these men having angelic nicknames?), and that she needs to bring him in.

What I enjoyed about this book was that it starts off with a bang--Isobel murdering some baddies and returning to the office to receive her assignment, then realizing Killian is still alive.  It does give us backstory, but it gives it to us in several flashbacks, told as if the events were happening in the present.  Overall it has a very James Bond, Jason Bourne-esque feel to it.  Like an action film--and that is a good thing. 

Something that contributes to the James Bond-y feeling is the question of Isobel's age.  She's been described throughout the series as ageless, anywhere from thirty to sixty.  So when the flashback scenes happen, you have no idea if the setting is the sixties, seventies, or eighties.  For some reason the deliberate timelessness of the narrative gives a lot more impact to the action scenes.

The only real quibble I had with the book was that it was a little too focused on the action and what I saw as a secondary plot (but was written more as the main storyline) of the The Company.  I felt like I didn't get to know Killian's character at all, and as a result I was sort of like, "Meh," when he and Isobel finally got together.  I was much more fond of the interaction between Lambert and Peter, which reminded me of the Emma Peel's and John Steed's relationship in The Avengers.  Not to mention the fact that who the villian was was suuuuuuuper freaking obvious. 

Overall, however, this book was a well-written, entertaining, and quick read.  And it had what may be one of the best closing lines I've ever enountered in a romance novel:

"Come to bed," she said in her coolest voice.  "I can always shoot you in the morning."

"Of course you can, princess," he said.  And he got into bed.

She can shoot him if she wants to.  And that's why we love her. :)

Powered by ScribeFire.

Sunday Salon-Weregin Edition

Bonjour, everyone, and welcome to my first ever Sunday Salon post!  The Sunday Salon is a weekly book discussion you can sign up for here.

It doesn't really feel like Sunday because I haven't gone to sleep yet.  This week I read two books: Show No Mercy by Cindy Gerard, which was a DNF; and Ice Storm by Anne Stuart, which was pretty darn good.  Strangely, these two books had very similar storylines.  I'll be writing a review and comparison of the two soon.

Right now I'm reading Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen.  This is for an online bookclub Collette at Lovesromances started.  Normally this is not the type of book I would pick up AT ALL, but so far I'm enjoying it.  Unless the main character dies.  Then I will be upset.



I'm also excited, because Bound by Your Touch shipped today, which means it should be here by Tuesday.  Hooray!  I'm so psyched to read it.

Finally, I wanted to share this link with you to a great post by LynneC at The Good, the Bad, and the Unread:  Why I Need the Sexxing.  It's about why sex appears so much in romance novels, and why it's not porn.  Very interesting--while I'm not one of those people who need sex in my romance novels (preferring it to be about romance), I definitely see her point and agree with her in certain contexts.

What have you been reading this week?

Powered by ScribeFire.

No Country for Old Men

In the open stretches of West Texas, an assassin hunts welder Llewelyn Moss, who is in possession of two million dollars worth of drug money.

This movie overall was very, very good.  I know it came out several years ago, but I only watched it last night with my brother.  Essentially the film is about three men--Llewelyn Moss (played by Josh Brolin, whom I had no idea was even in this movie), the Sheriff Ed Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), and the assassin and sociopathic killer, Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem).  Moss appears on Chigurh's radar (some place you don't want to be) when he comes across a drug deal gone wrong and steals two million dollars.  A wealthy man involved in the deal hires Chigurh to retrieve the money and kill Moss.  Jones is the aging sheriff of the Texas town Moss lives in.



Beyond being characters in the movie, it's clear that Moss, Chigurh, and Bell are symbols.  Chigurh is the Angel of Death, unstoppable and implacable.  Everyone who "sees" him has to die.  Moss represents the Youth response to death--basically, he thinks he can cheat death.  But Bell, much older and wiser, knows you can't cheat death.  So he simply tries to hide from it.

One thing I absolutely loved about this film was the landscape--it is exactly like the place I grew up in, before they started building suburbs everywhere.  It's endless vistas and far-distant mountains and absolute nothingness, and I love it.  In fact, my favorite movie of all time, Thunderheart, has a similarly invoked landscape and mood to it; and definitely brought a quality of nostalgia to movie, for me at least.

Something I did not like about the movie was that it was way too long.  Once Moss's storyline is concluded, the narrative of the film was pretty much over, and it needed to wrap up and finish.  But instead it goes on for another 40-ish minutes!  I started to get bored.  I know they kept the extra time in because it explains more of the symbolism, but come on.  Like I give a freaking frack about symbolism. 

Besides that, however, the first hour of the movie is a great, tense, cat-and-mouse story where the admirably intelligent and clever Moss tries to outwit the fiendishly dangerous Chigurh.  I would recommend this movie to just about anyone.

Powered by ScribeFire.

An Indecent Proposition

An Indecent Proposition by Emma Wildes

Despite the potential for ick in this book, it was pretty good.

Potential for ick, you ask?  Well, the plot centers around a bet between the Duke of Rothay and the Earl of Manderville, concerning which one is the better luhvarrrr.  The only problem is, who is going to decide which one wins?  Enter Lady Carolyn Wynn, a widow known for being standoffish, who offers herself to the pair as a judge for their bet.

When I first started this book, I had some qualms that it was going to be seedy.  Or sordid.  One of those s-words.  But it wasn't at all.  From the first meeting of Carolyn, Rothay, and Manderville, it's fairly obvious that Rothay and Carolyn are going to end up together.  While their story arc is one of those they-fall-into-bed-together-and-realize-they're-in-lurve types, which I'm not usually a fan of, here it wasn't too bad.  The characters of Carolyn and Nick (Rothay) were well-drawn and likable, and the motivation for Carolyn to offer to participate in this sketchy endeavor was understandable, even if I found it pretty amazing she had the balls to do it. 

Meanwhile, the sexiness of the Carolyn/Rothay story is balanced very nicely by the Earl of Manderville's story arc (he's in love with someone who doesn't return his affections), which is much more of a traditional and sweet romance.  Usually sub-plots in romance novels seem superfluous to me, but Manderville's story was probably my favorite part of the book; and it fits in very well as a foil to Rothay's arc.

About halfway through the book, the characters started to annoy me a bit.  Rothay is obsessed with this woman who played him when he was seventeen--dude, get. over. it!  And Carolyn putting up with her gross cousin-in-law was simply mind-boggling to me.  The ending also felt a bit rushed.  But overall this was a good historical romance.

Powered by ScribeFire.

What's On My Desk Wednesday

Hey, look everyone!  I'm doing a weekly meme and it's actually on the day it's supposed to be on!  Hooray!



My new blogging buddy, (^_^) mjmbecky at One Literature Nut, tagged me for What's on Your Desk Wednesday, a weekly meme hosted by Sassy Brit at Alternative Read.  Here are the rules:

Here's what you do:

   1. Grab a camera and take a photo of your desk! Or anywhere you stack your books/TBR pile. And no tidying!
   2. Add this photo to your blog.
   3. Tag at least 5 people!
   4. Come back here and leave a link back to your photo in the comments section.

That's it. However, for those without digital cameras or blogs of your own, you can do this instead: (or both if you are keen!)

   1. List at least 5 BOOKISH things on your desk (I'm thinking your TBR pile or books you haven't shelved...)
   2. List at least 5 NON BOOK things. (I'm thinking some of some of the more unusual items on your desk/table?)
   3. Tag at least 5 people to do the same.
   4. Come back and leave your link, so we can come and visit your blog. Or add your answers in the comments.

Feel free to grab the above picture to place on your blog - as a way of showing you are participating, and of course to spread the word! Have fun!

So here is my desk, such as it is:



Ack, it's a mess!  You can tell I heart the post-it notes.

Five book-related things on my desk are two books, a Harry Potter and The Order of the Phoenix window-cling, a list of books that are being released that I need to buy, organized by month; a few bookmarks, and a bookplate sticker signed by Yasmine Galenorn that my mom gave me. 

Five non-book related things are a music box with kittens that dance in a basket when you wind it; essential oils I bought as part of a project inspired by Broom_Service (I was going to try to mix them to create an aromatherapy mist to help my students concentrate in class, but then I started getting concerned one of them would have an allergy to it or something); a business card for a puppet- and mask-maker in Venice, some money (so that's where I put that!), and a letter that I started but didn't finish (yet!--I swear I will finish it, Vicki).

So now it's my turn to tag five people.  Here they are:

• Collette at Loves Romances
• Ruth at Booktalk & More
• Shannan at ShannanLovesBooks
  
• Amy at Haiku Amy
  
• Rebecca at Lost In Books

The reason why I chose these five people in particular is because I know they all started blogging about books (exclusively at least) around the same time I did--which is to say, only a few months ago.  But if you like this meme and you want to do it, you should consider yourself tagged!  I look forward to seeing all of your desks.

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Bachelorette & Male Solidarity

So I've been watching The Bachelorette lately, and if you keep up with the show at all, you know that one of the guys has mentioned he has a girlfriend back home, and is only on the show to promote his musical career (pssst... it's Wes).  Even though several of the guys have mentioned this to Jillian (Bachelorette), none of them will tell her who the guy is.

Now that's interesting.

If this was The Bachelor, you know the women would be telling all and sundry who said what and when, and explaining to the guy exactly what he should be doing about it.  There is no freaking way they would keep that information to themselves.  But with the menz, apparently "group think" and solidarity trump everything else, even being kicked off the show while another man who clearly doesn't deserve it gets to stay on.

I can't help but wonder if this is an example of why it took women so long to long to get equal rights (well, takes, since not all women have equal rights yet).  I think we've all known girls who will cheerfully throw other women under the bus, especially if there's a man involved--maybe some of us are that kind of girl.  And then there are all the women who dictate how a "proper" woman should behave or act.

This kind of adds to a personal theory I've had for a while that women are not, for the most part, subjugated by men but by themselves.  Do men really care what we do?  No, they don't.  There are have been plenty of powerful women in history, but do they help other women obtain the same power?  Heck no!  Some of them, like Queen Victoria, even make it a point to hold other women down.  And is it a coincidence that women's suffrage only started to gain a foothold when women-only groups began forming in the late nineteenth century?

Meanwhile, the men folk apparently keep up a wall of solidarity, even when it results in personal cost to them.  No wonder they've managed to maintain a power base for thousands of years!  Strength in numbers, my friends.

Do you think men have more of a group mentality than women do?  Or am I completely off-base in my pop-sociological assessment of this reality TV show?

Powered by ScribeFire.

Take a Chance Challenge Update: Rude Mechanicals

Rude Mechanicals by Kage Baker

I read this as part of Jenners' Take a Chance Challenge at Find Your Next Book Here to satisfy the requirements for the second challenge, Random Word:

Go to this random word generator and generate a random word. Find a book with this word in the title. Read the book and write about it.

My word was "mechanical." Do you know how many genre novels have the word mechanical in the title? Not that many. Also, strangely, a high percentage of them have something to do with Shakespeare. Anyway, I sorted through the few candidates and decided Rude Mechanicals by Kage Baker was the least of the evils.

Rude Mechanicals is about two time-traveling cyborgs, who call themselves Immortals (even though this is a misnomer, since they were never alive to begin with), that live in 1930's Los Angeles. One, Lewis, is an assistant to the assistant director of Max Reinhardt's production of A Midsummer Night's Dream; and the other, Joseph, is a private detective for Metro Goldwyn Mayer. Why are there time-travelling cyborgs, you ask? Well, they work for an organization in the distant future that invented time travel, but decided it wasn't profitable. So instead they send out cyborgs to collect historical artifacts and sell them as intiques in the future. Lewis is supposed to collect Reinhardt's production notes, and Joseph is protecting a treasure buried in the Hollywood Bowl. But then the treasure is dug up, and Jo needs Lewis' help to get it back.

You would think that would be pretty easy for the cyborgs, since they have super strength, zoom vision, heat vision, super hearing, telepathy, can control electricity, and can alter chemical compositions; but instead, it takes them like 70 pages to get the treasure (a violet diamond). The story kind of drags. What are the consequences if they don't get the diamond? Will they be fired? Go to the great cyborg scrap pile in the sky? I don't know, so there doesn't seem to be that much at stake in their search.

Another problem with the book is that we as readers don't see a lot of the action. Lewis is the central character, but he's not the one getting into scrapes while chasing for the diamond--Jo does that while Lewis waits in the car. So all the "hilarious" action is delivered to us by Jo, telling Lewis what happened after the fact. Talk about action.

The book isn't terrible. If I had read the rest of Baker's many, many Company novels and had more invested in the characters, I might have enjoyed it more. But as it was, for me it was surprisingly draggy and boring for a 114-page book.



Even though I didn't enjoy this book, so far I am enjoying this challenge. God knows I never would have picked up Rude Mechanicals if it wasn't for the Take a Chance Challenge, and it was nice to read something completely different for a change.

I have also picked out the books for challenges 1, 3, and 4; I just haven't read them yet. For challenge 1, random book selection, I'm reading The Firemaker by Peter May; for challenge 3, birth year book, I chose Kill the Dead by Tanith Lee; and for challenge 4, judge a book by its cover, I chose Laura Rider's Masterpiece by Jane Hamilton.




I'm still thinking about the movie/book comparison challenge. I've written down some possibilities: My Cousin Rachel, Lonesome Dove, Coraline, and The Time Traveller's Wife (not sure if that will come out soon enough to count for the challenge, though), but I haven't committed to anything yet.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Take a Chance Challenge Update: Rude Mechanicals

Rude Mechanicals by Kage Baker

I read this as part of Jenners' Take a Chance Challenge at Find Your Next Book Here to satisfy the requirements for the second challenge, Random Word:

Go to this random word generator and generate a random word. Find a book with this word in the title. Read the book and write about it.

My word was "mechanical."  Do you know how many genre novels have the word mechanical in the title?  Not that many.  Also, strangely, a high percentage of them have something to do with Shakespeare.  Anyway, I sorted through the few candidates and decided Rude Mechanicals by Kage Baker was the least of the evils.

Rude Mechanicals is about two time-traveling cyborgs, who call themselves Immortals (even though this is a misnomer, since they were never alive to begin with), that live in 1930's Los Angeles.  One, Lewis, is an assistant to the assistant director of Max Reinhardt's production of A Midsummer Night's Dream; and the other, Joseph, is a private detective for Metro Goldwyn Mayer.  Why are there time-travelling cyborgs, you ask?  Well, they work for an organization in the distant future that invented time travel, but decided it wasn't profitable.  So instead they send out cyborgs to collect historical artifacts and sell them as intiques in the future.  Lewis is supposed to collect Reinhardt's production notes, and Joseph is protecting a treasure buried in the Hollywood Bowl.  But then the treasure is dug up, and Jo needs Lewis' help to get it back.

You would think that would be pretty easy for the cyborgs, since they have super strength, zoom vision, heat vision, super hearing, telepathy, can control electricity, and can alter chemical compositions; but instead, it takes them like 70 pages to get the treasure (a violet diamond).  The story kind of drags.  What are the consequences if they don't get the diamond?  Will they be fired?  Go to the great cyborg scrap pile in the sky?  I don't know, so there doesn't seem to be that much at stake in their search.

Another problem with the book is that we as readers don't see a lot of the action.  Lewis is the central character, but he's not the one getting into scrapes while chasing for the diamond--Jo does that while Lewis waits in the car.  So all the "hilarious" action is delivered to us by Jo, telling Lewis what happened after the fact.  Talk about action.

The book isn't terrible.  If I had read the rest of Baker's many, many Company novels and had more invested in the characters, I might have enjoyed it more.  But as it was, for me it was surprisingly draggy and boring for a 114-page book.



Even though I didn't enjoy this book, so far I am enjoying this challenge.  God knows I never would have picked up Rude Mechanicals if it wasn't for the Take a Chance Challenge, and it was nice to read something completely different for a change.

I have also picked out the books for challenges 1, 3, and 4; I just haven't read them yet.  For challenge 1, random book selection, I'm reading The Firemaker by Peter May; for challenge 3, birth year book, I chose Kill the Dead by Tanith Lee; and for challenge 4, judge a book by its cover, I chose Laura Rider's Masterpiece by Jane Hamilton.




I'm still thinking about the movie/book comparison challenge.  I've written down some possibilities:  My Cousin Rachel, Lonesome Dove, Coraline, and The Time Traveller's Wife (not sure if that will come out soon enough to count for the challenge, though), but I haven't committed to anything yet.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Dial M for Murrrrrrder

On Sunday, I watched Dial M for Murder as part of My Friend Amy's Summer of Hitchcock.

I've actually seen this movie a few times before, and it's one of my favorite Hitchcock films. It's about a woman who is having an affair with an American mystery writer. Meanwhile, her husband, who is something of a ne'er-do-well, has decided to kill her. He hatches what he thinks is the perfect murder; but of course things happen that put all his carefully constructed plans to ruin.

This is not a mystery--we already know whodunnit before it's even done--but it does have a very Agatha Christie feel to it. I think that's because of the great characters and the claustrophobic feel of the film. Almost the entire movie takes place in the tiny flat that the Wendices call home. The setting can be mainly attributed to the fact that the movie was adapted from a play; but I also think it works to help tell the story and keep the narrative flowing. In the end, the resolution of the story rests on how one can get into the Wendices' flat.

The camera angles in this film are very interesting--there's always objects between the viewer and the actors. I didn't notice this too much until it was pointed out in the special features on the DVD, though. :) The reason was that Hitchcock originally shot this movie in 3-d, so he always shot with a foreground, middleground, and background, to enhance the viewers' sense of depth. Pretty ingenius if you ask me.

There are so many great actors in this film. By far my favorite is Ray Milland's performance as Tony, the homicidal husband. He's completely smarmy, but also weirdly charming. I also like the fact that he doesn't portray Tony as completely unfeeling; you can tell that he's not unaffected by the idea of his wife dying.

The other character I loved was the Inspector. He's smart, and he knows there's something fishy about the situation from the very first. It's so nice that a DI would care enough to follow up on a case even after it's been to trial. ;)

Some of the things I didn't like were that you never truly understand why Grace Kelly (aka Margot) married Tony in the first place. What was she smoking? They don't feel like much of a couple and there absolutely no chemistry between the two. Also, I'm not entirely sure that the Inspector's "proof" that Tony planned to kill his wife would stand up in court--but it's a great ending anyway.

Overall this is a great film that I would recommend to anyone who enjoys suspense or mystery movies.



Next up on Summer of Hitchcock is Rear Window. Feel free to join in!

Powered by ScribeFire.

Simone Elkeles Author Interview

Simone Elkeles is an YA novelist and the author of Perfect Chemistry, which I read a few months ago and loved.  It's a contemporary twist on the downtown boy/uptown girl love story that feels completely fresh.  Alex (or Alejandro) and Brittany go to Fairfield High School, where the children of wealthy Chicago suburbanites mix with poorer Hispanic kids.  Through a twist of fate, Brittany and Alex are paired together in chemistry class and forced to work together.  Despite their initial anathema, the two quickly discover that chemicals aren't the only thing with chemistry. *wink wink* 



Anyway, really bad puns aside, this book was fun to read, had great characters, was very romantic, and also dealt with a lot of substantive issues like gangs, developmental disorders, and teenagers having sex (*gasp!*).  I can't say enough good things about it, so I thought for my first author interview, it would be great to talk to Simone Elkeles about Perfect Chemistry:

Hiedenkind: 

Thank you so much for taking the time out of your schedule to do an interview with me.  I read Perfect Chemistry in January and it is definitely going on my short list of favorite books of the year. 
 
Perfect Chemistry takes place in a North Chicago suburb, and it says in your bio that Fairfield is loosely based on a suburb near your hometown.  Were the class divides as sharp in your own high school as they are in Fairfield High?

Simone:

First of all, thank you for liking Perfect Chemistry so much!  I loved writing the book and the characters.
 
Unfortunately, my high school did not have a diverse population.  The school that I based Perfect Chemistry off of is Highland Park High School, which was our rival school.  In my opinion the class divides are pretty sharp there.  On one side of town there is a high Hispanic population, and on the other side is people living in mansions on Lake Michigan, but they all go to the same high school.

One of the secondary characters who is really memorable in the book is Mrs. Peterson, the chemistry teacher.  Did you base Mrs. Peterson on yourself?

Mrs. Peterson is partly me...I guess there's a little bit of me in every character I write.  Mrs. Peterson, actually, is a lot of teachers I had growing up...fun, but tough.  A few teachers I had really challenged me to be the best I can be (whether I hated it or not).

Secondly, Alex--he is undoubtedly my favorite character in the book.  He's so well-drawn and totally believable as a macho guy who’s more sensitive than he lets on.  Is it difficult for you to write from the male perspective?
 

Oddly enough, my male characters are so much easier to write than my female characters.  I have no clue why.  I didn't have any brothers growing up, but I was definitely a tomboy and hung out with my guy friends a lot.  My guy friends definitely treated me as "one of the guys" and I learned a lot from them. 

Changing tone a little bit, there are several scenes relating to gangs in the book, because Alex is a gang member.  In the acknowledgements, you thank a police officer for teaching you about gangs and challenging you while you wrote this book.  How did she challenge you?  Did you start writing the book with some assumptions about gangs that turned out not to be true?

The police officer I know worked in a very dangerous gang neighborhood at one point.  She saw horrific events and even got beat up by gang members. In her words, "No way could you convince me a gang member can be a hero of a book."  That challenged me not to take Alex's life or situation lightly.  Even though my book is total fiction, her words made me make Alex not all perfect (he carries a gun and gets in fights, and even collects money for drugs...NOT heroic things) and I definitely didn't want to glamorize gangs.  It's a tough world out there, especially for teens in gangs.  I knew that, but maybe in my first draft I didn't portray it as such.

That's interesting.  I think the gang side of Alex's life is definitely not glamorized, partly because he's so conflicted about what he's doing.  Do you think that's what Alex and Brittany have in common--that they're pulled in two different directions?

I think teens are conflicted and trying to be who their parents want them to be, who their friends want them to be, and who they want to be. I want to show how two totally different teens are actually so similar.

Some questions about writing… first, how much do you know about the characters and plot of your book before you sit down to write it?  Does it come to you as you go along, or is everything pretty much fleshed out in your mind before hand?

When I sit down to write, I have a vague idea what the book is about and then I just start writing. It's exciting because I have no clue what happens before I write it.

Second, I get the sense that you do a lot of research for your novels.  Do you think there’s ever such a thing as too much research?  Is there some sort of line that you wouldn’t cross in the name of research?  I know you went to a jail for one of your earlier books, Leaving Paradise.

I do just enough research for my books that I think I need to make my story seem authentic. I wasn't about to live or hang with gangs, though.

Okay, now for some just-for-fun questions.  You've said several times that you're a fan of the Twilight series.  Are you on Team Edward or Team Jacob?  Have you thought about writing a paranormal novel?

I have to be honest and say I'm a Twilight fan, but I'm not a fan of the entire series.  I loved the forbidden love story in Twilight, but I wasn't a fan of the love triangle aspect to it which pretty much dominated the last three books in the series.  In my eyes, once you know who your true love is, that's it...you'll do anything to be with that person and nobody else should be an option.  That's just me.  So I'm definitely an Edward fan all the way (although if I watch the movie New Moon, I have a feeling I might become a Jacob fan.  I have a feeling that Taylor can change Edward fans into Jacob fans...only time will tell.)
 
I would love to write a paranormal novel, but I'm just not sure I can pull it off.  I might try it one day, but it's not in my near future plans.  I do have a time travel idea I'd like to write.

Okay, one last question.  You've been to Israel several times, and the books of your How to... series are set there.  Do you have any favorite foods or drinks that you like to have when you're there?  Or favorite places you like to visit?

I love the dessert Crembo - it's like a marshmellow with a cookie bottom dipped in a hard chocolate shell.  Since it melted, they only have it in winter in Israel.  My husband and I like it so much, we named our dog Crembo.  People have no clue what we're saying, they think our dog's name is "Crumble" and I tell them, "It's like Creme Brule, but Crem-bo" instead.    
 
You can't beat the pita in Israel...it's chewy and has just the right fluffiness (I made up that word).  And if you ever go to a falafel stand, they shove these specialty salads (not lettuce...other types of veggie salads) in the pita along with the falafel, and it's amazing!  I have to say their spaghetti is really weird - it has a hole in the middle like a straw.  Not my fave. 
 
I love to visit the Golan Heights, and Masada, and the Dead Sea.  I haven't been to Jerusalem in a while, but I remember being awed by the history at the Wailing (Western) Wall the last time I was there.

Thank you again so much for taking the time for this interview, Simone.  It was great for me to ask you questions about Perfect Chemistry.  Is there anything you want to add about your current or upcoming projects?

I just want my fans to know that the sequel to Perfect Chemistry will be coming out spring, 2010. It will be about Carlos - Alex's brother.  And I'm excited for How to Ruin Your Boyfriend's Reputation to come out in November.  I love hearing from fans, so if you like any one of my books email me off my website at www.simoneelkeles.com.
 
Thanks so much!

Thank you, Simone, for going out of your way to do an interview with me!  Check out the promotional video from Perfect Chemistry and keep an eye out for Simone's next book.

Check out Perfect Chemistry at Amazon

Check out Leaving Paradise at Amazon

Look at How to Ruin a Summer Vacation on Amazon

How to Ruin My Teenage Life on Amazon

Simone's next release, How to Ruin Your Boyfriend's Reputation, on Amazon

Powered by ScribeFire.