A Friend's New Book

I need to preface what I want to say about Dead Center with a caveat. I have met Joanna Higgins, she lives in the same county I do, and both of us attended the murder trial this novel is based on. I was working as a journalist covering the trial, and she was there taking notes with the idea of a book. Several years later here it is and it just tore my heart out.

Joanna had written an earlier book A Soldier's Book based on a collection of letters written home by a Civil War soldier. When I read it I was stunned at her writing talent, even though I knew she had taught writing at universities and was quite a literary person. She has surpassed her earlier book with this one. I know no one who reads it will be disappointed. However, I must mention that my take on it with the background of knowing so well the real story may be different than someone who isn't familiar with what really happened.

Naturally, in writing this as fiction Joanna has changed locations, names, and many other details. She has written it from the viewpoint of the family of the accused murderer. Since I was bound to be objective during the trial, I too thought of it from their point of view, but Joanna has taken that further to just concentrate on how they felt, how they coped or didn't, and whether they were truly convinced of his innocence. As I read, I gained empathy for their situation and I'll admit I nearly cried as the book ended.

Even the dust cover of the book is absolutely perfect, showing a shotgun below blood spatter on the bold black of the letters. Once again Joanna Higgins has left me almost speechless with the thoughtfulness, empathy, and beauty of her prose. If I remember correctly, she writes some poetry as well, and this book strikes me as a long prose poem. The characters' thoughts and actions, with the exception of the accused murderer, ring so true I felt like I was in the rented house with them as the trial went on.

I highly recommend this treasure of a book, though I would remind you that I can't help being biased.

Sharyn McCrumb is Back with a New Ballad Novel

I was delighted to win this new book from Goodreads and thanks also to St. Martin's Press for sending me to a wonderful audio introduction complete with appropriate music as well as interviews with McCrumb. You can find these at http://us.macmillan.com/thedevilamongstthelawyers.

If, like me, you are a longtime fan of the Ballad novels, you might be disappointed to find that Nora Bonesteel, gifted with The Sight, has only a small role in this book. However, it is a wonderful read with what I think is an important message.

McCrumb is superb at characterization and that's what I enjoyed most about The Devil Amongst the Lawyers. The devil in question is New York reporters who show up in a little mountain town in Virginia for a big murder trial. The local schoolteacher is on trial for murdering her own father. The trial actually happened in 1935 and the story is basically true to what happened, just populated with McCrumb's real-as-life characters.

The main character in the book is Henry Jernigan, a famous reporter. He had spent many years in Japan and that experience plays a role in this story. He and the other reporters have packed their preconceptions for the trip, so much so that they can write their first article on the train before they even arrive. Their mission is to sell newspapers, you see, and the truth doesn't really matter at all to them, especially the fact that instead of hillbilly shacks, etc., what they actually find is normal small-town America. Nora Bonesteel's cousin, a rookie reporter for a small town paper in Tennessee, actually tries to report the truth but that doesn't sell papers. One of the NY reporters says something like the truth is merely whatever you can convince people to believe. Talk about jaded.

I knew early on whodunit, but that isn't really the point anyway. The point is the reporters' coverage of the trial and their superior attitude toward the locals which gets the predictable response. I enjoyed the book but was a little sad that too often 2010 reporting follows the example of what was true in 1935. It's just as hard to know what's true now as it was then.