Lutz For Life

John Lutz has been going against the grain for over 30 years now, first in his highly original and entertaining short stories, and later in longer works, such as the Alo Nudger and Fred Carver series of private eye books. Recently, we caught up with Mr. Lutz through the magic of email:

Bleeker Books: Fans of your Nudger and Carver series may not know that before you turned to novels you had a whole other career as a short-story writer, writing and selling dozens of stories in the late 60s and early 70s. What was that like, and why did you eventually decide to turn to longer works?

John Lutz: It wasn't that different writing short stories in the late sixties, through the seventies, from writing them today. And there weren't that many more viable markets than there are today. Certainly there were fewer original anthologies. Fewer mystery writers, too, I suppose. It did seem that those of us doing short stories had a fairly comprehensive knowledge of what else was being published. That would take considerably more time and reading now. As to why I turned more to the novel, I suppose the answer is...money. It isn't easy making a living primarily writing short stories. There's only one Edward D. Hoch.

BB: Alo Nudger, your best-known creation, is not your typical private eye. He's not strong or brave, something his sour stomach frequently reminds him of, but in the end he brings in the bad guys. What's his secret?

JL: Nudger's secret is that he doesn't have one. He's like everyone else only more so. Now and then we have one of those days. He's having one of those lives. He does what the rest of us do, treks on. Since his woes transcend ours, the reader sees him as courageous, but actually he has no choice.

BB: Some of the Nudger stories are written in the third person, and some in the first person. Any particular reason behind this?

JL: While I think the traditional first person is probably most effective for a PI novel, it has some disadvantages. Since the reader knows what the PI knows and when, surprise solutions are more difficult. It also takes away one of the best devices for creating suspense: making the reader aware of danger before the PI learns about it. Assassins waiting around dark corners, ticking bombs under the table, conniving spouses, crooked partners, concealed weapons, shadows on foot and in cars, etc. I decided to use third person and try to achieve as much of the immediacy and reader identification of first person as possible. A trade off.

BB: Now, Florida has had its share of detectives since Mike Shayne patrolled Miami starting in the late 30s, but it seems lately that there's been a new phenomenon: the snowbird author. Midwesterners such as you, Elmore Leonard, and Stuart M. Kaminsky all have written books set in Florida. What's up here? A chance for an expense account vacation?

JL: I'm going to overlook that "expense account vacation" remark unless I can find some way to deduct it. My guess is that at about the same time, a number of us came to the same conclusion: California crime literature ore had already been extensively mined, and ore rich Florida had much in common with California. Beaches, lush foliage, tourists, land grabs, bizarre crimes, and residents mostly from somewhere else. Also a thriving illegal drug trade. Mystery writer heaven. Like a permanent...vacation.

BB: Your Florida series features Fred Carver, a policeman forced into retirement when he's wounded in the line of duty. Tell us a little about Carver, and why did you decide to start a second series?

JL: Carver is more in the classic PI mold, and was conceived for Florida. While he does have a permanently damaged leg, using his upper body and arms to aid in getting around with a cane lends him plausible superior strength. He is almost more at home in the water, where he doesn't need his cane, and his frozen knee is only a minor drawback. I wanted a second, Florida, series mainly to have something to write that was unlike the Nudger novels. Easier to recharge the batteries for both series that way.

BB: Both Nudger and Carver seem to have feelings of inadequacy, Carver because of his wound, Nudger because of his temperment. This is in stark contrast to most fictional detectives, who tend to be superheroes without the capes. What about this, and what are the other similarities and differences between them?

JL: Both Carver and Nudger have feelings of inadequacy and physical problems so they have steeper uphill climbs. A shameless, blatant attempt to gain reader sympathy on the first page. Nudger is star-crossed and afraid much of the time, and full of doubt. Carver is genuinely physically brave and resolute. Nudger is a poor shot and ineffective in a scrap, while Carver has skills as a marksman and street-fighter. They are in many ways opposites. What they have in common is tenacity and a compelling ethical code. They must finish what they begin.

BB: Like fellow St. Louis resident Robert J. Randisi, you were once a civilian employee of the police department. Did you seek out this job or just happen onto it, and what did you learn there?

JL: I just happened on the Police Department civilian job when I was young and just happening on just about everything within range. What I learned of more value than the technical and procedural aspects of police work - most of which are dated by now - is how cops think and what a difficult job they have. The basic job and mindset of the policeman don't seem to have changed. I suspect I have a higher regard for cops - including the FBI - than do many mystery writers.

BB: Recently, many writers known for their series detectives have turned to writing "standalone" books. You've written both series and nonseries books throughout your career. How is writing a series book different from writing a standalone?

JL: Series books are easier in some ways. The writer already has a set concept of main and peripheral continuing characters, as do many of the readers. And a series book, as a continuation, requires less of a striking and unique idea, or hook. It is primarily the characters and atmosphere that interest the reader. As friend and fellow writer Les Roberts has asked, "Who really remembers the plot details of The Big Sleep?" On the other hand, each nonseries novel is new in every way. Everything has to be cooked from scratch.

BB: Have you seen any changes in the marketplace regarding series versus nonseries books?

JL: Definitely. Nonseries books used to be taken much more seriously. Wonderful series writers like John D. MacDonald and Ross Macdonald didn't reap their fair share of favorable reviews and awards. Reviewers are much more friendly toward series books now, and it doesn't take writers like the above mentioned as long to become recognized masters and/or bestsellers.

BB: George Pelecanos said of writing for the movie industry, "I have gone there, and most likely I will go there again. I've had hangovers, too, and I still drink." You've had a couple of books made into movies. What did you think of the experience?

JL: My brushes with the film industry range from great to okay experiences. Maybe that's because I see the book and movie script as so different in form and, by necessity, content that I'm not disappointed when certain aspects of the book are changed. Seems to me that for the best movie possible to be made, it has to deviate from the novel.

BB: You have a new series out, starting with The Night Caller. Tell us a little about it.

JL: The Night Caller isn't the first book in a series in the traditional sense, but the first of three New York suspense novels with "night" in the title, featuring similar main characters.

BB: What can we expect to see next from John Lutz?

JL: The second of the night books, The Night Watcher, will be published in November. The third, The Night Spider, is scheduled for publication in November of 2003.

(editor's note: the following exchange took place several weeks ago)
BB: Finally, what do you make of the Cardinals' chances this year?

JL: I see the Cards with a good chance of making it all the way to the World Series if they get anything close to respectable and consistent starting pitching. And if there is no strike. You heard it here, though probably not first.