Deborah Cannon (DC): Let's start at the beginning. I'm going to be presumptuous and assume that you have had some kind of formal training in creative writing. Stop me if I'm wrong. Where or how did you learn to write? And when did you first start writing? Do you think it's important to have a mentor to be a successful writer?

Barbara Kyle (BK): I have no formal training in writing. But my twenty years of acting – stage, TV and film – made a terrifically useful foundation for writing. In building a character, actors work from the inside out: desire leads to action. They also play subtext, the unspoken hopes and fears beneath what a person says, and subtext is the novel's playground. All of that left me with a deep understanding of compelling, complex characters.

So acting was a great boon. It was also – in an almost negative way – why I started writing. When female actors hit the age of forty, the roles start to dwindle. The roles are more interesting, but there are a lot fewer of them. I'd seen this happen to friends – seen their careers arcing downward – and I didn’t want it to happen to me. So I made a cold-eyed decision simply to do something else. I decided to write. I hadn't a clue about how to do it; I just jumped in. I remember the thrill of writing that first novel. It was like being in love; I couldn't get enough of it.

I think it's essential to have someone like a mentor. The writer works in such isolation, it's crucial to get informed input. In my case, I was lucky to have more than one. Marian Fowler, who writes social biographies, was my mentor when I began fourteen years ago. Marian used to say there's only one rule in writing: Thou shalt not bore. I love that. Her encouragement and her fine taste helped me tremendously. Also, my husband is an excellent non-fiction writer with a background in film editing, and his keen editing eye is something I rely on constantly as we fine-tooth together every draft of my novels. Finally, I'm blessed in my agent, Al Zuckerman of Writers House in New York. Al used to teach playwriting at Yale, and has been "midwife" to dozens of his clients' best-sellers. One such star, Ken Follett, calls Al "the best editor in the world". Al gives me invaluable advice on all my book drafts. His wisdom has improved every one of my novels. I always encourage writers to read his incredibly useful book, Writing The Blockbuster Novel.

In fact, the learning never ends. I recently attended Robert McKee's three-day "Story" seminar, which was nothing short of brilliant. Although pitched mostly at screenwriters, it's a three day boot-camp-in-paradise for any writer. McKee's the guy immortalized in the film "Adaptation". His seminars, which sell out around the world, have been praised by screenwriting greats like William Goldman as well as novelists, directors, and producers. I came away from it on a high, charged up with new insights about story structure and character. Note to any writer who's reading this: If you can't get to one of McKee's seminars, buy his book, Story, which has it all.

DC: After you won the Dorothy Shoemaker short story competition in 1989, did you continue to write short stories or did you go full tilt into novel-writing? Ray Bradbury once said that short stories are about people with small lives, a novel is about people with big lives. How do you decide if an idea should be turned into a short story or a novel?

BK: Full tilt into novel writing. Winning the Dorothy Shoemaker short story competition gave me a tremendous boost in confidence and resolve, neither of which can be underestimated when you're starting out and the playing field looks so dauntingly slanted upwards. I'm not sure I'd agree with Bradbury that short stories are about people with small lives. Someone – I forget who – said that a short story is a firecracker, while a novel is a long-burning fuse to a bomb. (Yikes, bomb has a double meaning, doesn’t it?) For me, novels were a no-brainer choice for two reasons. First, I wanted to write big-canvas stories. Second, short stories don't sell. That is, it's virtually impossible to make a living, let alone real money, with short stories.

DC: We've all heard stories of how hard it is for newcomers to get published. Stephen King says he used to nail the rejection letters on his wall until they got so thick, he had to use a spike. John Grisham's first novel was rejected 28 times before it was published. How long did it take you to get your first novel published? Or were you an overnight success story like Tom Clancy?

BK: It was virtually overnight in that my agent, Al Zuckerman, sold my first book to Penguin USA within months. But that can in no way be classed as a "success story like Tom Clancy." That book didn't sell too well, while Tom Clancy, as everyone knows, sells millions of books. I'm very pleased that my later books have sold well, but his are in the stratosphere.

Publishers would prefer it if their star authors could pump out more than a book a year, but most are only human and can't, which is why beginning writers should remain hopeful: publishers need new blood, and they know it. But here's the rub. Beginning writers often say, "That star author's latest book was crap. I can do better than that." Maybe. But that's not the point. You have to understand the marketplace. Star authors can succeed commercially with less than their best work, because there's a market waiting to buy whatever they produce. Not so for the beginning author. She or he must produce something better just to get published. In fact, if you look at the book that first made each of those stars' reputations, most often you'll find that it was a very compelling book.

DC: Your earliest published books are historical romances. Why did you turn to writing thrillers? A question I'm sure that's on everyone's mind is: Why did you publish your thrillers under Stephen Kyle, a man's name, instead of your own?

BK: The answer is inherent in your question. Those first two books actually weren't romances, they were more classically "historical fiction.” but they were marketed as romance. When they didn’t sell well, I decided to turn to the thriller genre. I figured a publisher couldn't put any flowers on those covers. Similarly, the choice of a male name was to make a clear break. I think of the name only as a brand name.

DC: The majority of people who read thrillers are men. The authors I'm thinking of are Michael Crichton, Tom Clancy, John Grisham – all the usuall suspects. Do you think your success has to do with the idea that readers think you're a man?

BK: In going with a male pen-name, my thinking was this: Many women readers buy thrillers – look at Grisham –not caring if it's written by a man or a woman, but male readers might care. I felt that, subliminally perhaps, men might feel: "How exciting can it be if it's written by a girl?"

DC: For most writers new to the game, trying to get an agent is almost as difficult as landing a publisher. You said that your literary agent is veteran Albert Zuckerman. What did you do to get his attention? How did you convince him to take you on?

BK: I wrote a good book. Seriously, that's the only calling card that opens a top agent's door. Unless you're a celebrity, in which case agents will want to represent you even if you've only written a laundry list. For mere mortals, however, writing a good book is the essential first step. Then, the marketing begins; marketing yourself, that is. When I finished my first book I took great care to prepare a dynamite query letter, which I sent to about twenty top New York agents. I tell new writers that the query letter is the most important piece of writing they'll ever do: you get only one chance to interest an agent, so don't blow it. It's got to make the agent, who sees dozens of query letters a week, want to read your novel. In response to my query letter, Al Zuckerman asked to read the book (originally title Heresy, re-titled A Dangerous Temptation by Penguin) and after he did, he offered to represent me. I could not have "convinced" him to do so; only the quality of the writing could.

DC: Popular Science Fiction writer Robert J. Sawyer says that he wouldn't have reached the level of success he has now without having promoted his books himself. How important do you think self-promotion is?

BK: I don't doubt that self-promotion is very helpful. But in my case I've done none. My last three books were thrillers written under a male pseudonym, Stephen Kyle, making promotional appearances out of the question. (Though I suppose I could have put on a Groucho moustache…)

DC: One of the most important elements of a best-seller is the setting. Your novel Beyond Recall takes place in Alaska, The Experiment is set in New York. Do you think it's a good idea for a new writer to target an American audience?

BK: Actually, it's After Shock that takes place in Alaska. I chose New York as the setting for The Experiment because, for dramatic purposes, I needed my many disparate characters to have moved to the same place after World War Two, and New York is about the only city in the world in which that could happen without the reader groaning at the coincidence.

I don't believe it's necessary to set a book in the U.S., but I do think that targeting an American audience is a wise strategy for the writer who wants to get a first book published. That's the market you want to sell into, so why buck it? There are already enough hurdles to getting published. However, ironically, targeting an American audience need not dictate an American setting. Kathy Reichs sells millions of books featuring a protagonist who works in Montreal, and other best-selling authors, from Elizabeth George to Ken Follett, have set stories in England. It's the exoticism of these locales that appeals to an American audience. I suppose the writer needs to have antennae about which non-American settings appeal to an American audience and which don't. As Harold Pinter says in his wonderful screenplay, ‘Shakespeare in Love’, concerning what works on stage and what doesn't: "It's a mystery." If your story absolutely demands a certain setting, I'd say go with it, no matter what, but if it could be set in an American locale, that's likely a smarter strategic option. The book I'm writing now (working title Spirit Creek) is set in northern Alberta, because is has to for my theme to resonate: it's about an American Big Oil corporate lawyer fighting a saboteur of her company's oil rigs in Canada. I wanted to explore the situation of an American business person fighting a foreign "terrorist," only to realize that the real terrorist is herself. Still, that theme is a sub-current delivered inside a romantic thriller. I definitely want to engage American readers, not lecture to them, and I sensed that I could do that by depicting the Canadian northwest as exotic.

DC: I just finished reading your latest book, The Experiment. A must read as far as I'm concerned. I would place it in the category of high-concept along with heavy-weights like Michael Crichton's jurassic park. Nazis experimenting with a knowledge gene that is inherited through successive generations via the mother with the side effect of creating a generation of men without conscience is a frightening and gripping idea. Where did it come from? For each new novel that you write how do you come up with these fantastic ideas?

BK: Yeah, I've had a great response from readers about The Experiment. The basic idea of an inherited knowledge gene came from my husband, who loves to explore wild ways in which humankind might improve itself. He's my high-concept guy. After Beyond Recall, Warner Books wanted two more "scientific thrillers" from me, and, contractually, I had a year to produce each one. I started with no ideas and much deadline dread. My husband and I brainstormed and came up with a list of one-paragraph concepts, none of which really interested me, nor my agent. My dread mushroomed into despair. Then my husband said, "And then there's this U.S. military installation I read about in Alaska. They study the ionosphere using a super high-energy beam, only some of the locals are afraid the experiments are frying people's brains." Ah, I thought – and knew I had the germ of a story. That became After Shock.

A year later, after delivering that manuscript to my publisher, it was back to the drawing board to produce "scientific thriller" number two, as per my contract. Again, drab ideas. Again, my husband to the rescue. "Remember how we once talked about how neat it would be," he said, "if a kid could be born knowing what their parents know? And how challenging for society?" And, again, I knew that I could grow that seedling idea into a dramatic story, which became The Experiment.

My present work-in-progress, Spirit Creek, was inspired by my reading the real life incident of born-again preacher Wiebo Ludwig sabotaging oil wells in Alberta, and how the RCMP, in league with the Alberta Energy Company, resorted to dirty tricks to entrap him. I created a new set of characters, people who live out the "controlling idea" that interests most me about this conflict: that is, my heroine has to give up everything to ensure that justice is restored, but she regains her soul.

DC: Good reviews, bad reviews. How do you deal with them? Before I decided to ask you this question, I researched some customer reviews on Amazon.ca. Your novel Beyond Recall received mostly high praise. A reader from Toronto said: "Wow! I picked up this book two days ago, and finished it just now. I simply could not put it down. Talk about a page-turner!" Then there was the negative review from Florida: "I expected a polished medical thriller, but was disappointed to read a too-long soap opera . . . Unfortunately, none of the characters incite the reader to care much about them, and the longer you read, the less you care." How do you account for the extremes of opinion? More importantly, how do you keep a bad review from shattering your confidence?

BK: The extremes of opinion people had about Beyond Recall astounded me. I've heard everything from "the best book I've ever read" to "the worst dreck." I have no idea how to account for it, but I figure that if people get that worked up, I must be doing something right. My favourite is the woman who called me (Stephen Kyle) a misogynist, because I wrote a character who killed only women. My daughter was tempted to reply: "That's no misogynist, that's my mother."

I can't say I'm thrilled with bad reviews; I don't suppose anyone is. Although, I must say that the following amazon.com reader's review made my day. (It's about my first book, originally titled Heresy but re-titled A Dangerous Temptation by Penguin): "Blasphemous…The author manages to offend nearly every religion, slandering Catholics, Protestants, and Muslims alike … This is a truly awful assault on all religions." So I guess the book made its point. Music to my ears.

Anyway, I'll be happy if I keep getting reviews like the Publishers Weekly one for The Experiment: "…haunting…Kyle keeps the cinematic action scenes and nail-biting suspense rolling throughout."

DC: Robert Benchley once said, "It took me fifteen years to discover that I had no talent for writing, but I couldn't give it up because by then I was too famous." Most authors say it took them years to get published. These same authors claim it took even longer before they felt like writers. When did you first feel like you were a writer?

BK: When my first book was accepted by Penguin USA. (It had a great champion in my wonderful editor at Penguin, Audrey LaFehr, who called it "the best historical novel I've ever read". Unfortunately, that book never found its audience.) Writing is about communicating, and until your story connects with real flesh-and-blood people, you feel like you're talking to yourself. Now, I never tire of hearing readers of my books talk about the characters I've created. They talk quite passionately about "She shouldn't have done that…" and "if only he'd realized that…", and it's such a thrill to hear. It's the arc of art: an idea leaping from my imagination into theirs, the characters understood as living, breathing people, fired with free will. It's a joy.

DC: If you could name one thing what would you say is the secret to writing a best-seller?

BK: There is no secret. The tools to help anyone write a compelling and marketable novel are all out there, in scores of books about writing, plus workshops and seminars and lectures by industry pros. Nobody's keeping these tools hidden from new writers. However, the fact is that luck plays a huge role in catapulting a book onto the bestseller list. By luck, I mean such things as timing (no 9/11 happens the week your book is released); personalities (editors at publishing houses often move on to other jobs, leaving your book with no champion); and the unfathomable zeitgeist (which allows for a truly bad book like The Bridges Of Madison County to become a monster hit). "It's a mystery," and therefore better not to eat one's heart out worrying about it, but go sailing instead, then get back to work writing. Al Zuckerman dedicates his book Writing The Blockbuster Novel to "all the authors who have written blockbuster novels that, for one reason or another, never achieved the huge recognition that they deserved", among whom he lists several of his own talented clients. So, keep writing, keep reading, and keep trying. That's enough to enrich a life.

Top

SCENE Magazine