BLG: How does your story deviate from the facts?
EH: I read the original newspaper accounts of the murder first. All sorts of characters came out of the woodwork, looking for a role in the spotlight. In order to tell a compelling story, I really had to pare down the cast. So I eliminated people that were not essential and focused on the main protagonists: Emma Cunningham and her lover Dr. Burdell, and Henry Clinton and his legal rival, Oakey Hall.
LG: When did you alter the historical characters and when did you add new ones?
EH: I had to fictionalize all of the real characters to get inside their heads. But some secondary characters emerged from my imagination. The little boy John actually found the body, but being a child, did not have much of a voice. The servant Samuel was based on a shadowy missing servant, but I gave him a meatier role as an ex-slave who saw too much. I expanded them fictionally and became quite fond of these characters that inhabited the city in 1857, but were overlooked by history.
I wanted to create characters that were living out those ambiguous realities, where you didn’t always know what was coming, or what was right or wrong. But I do think that fiction can be about ideas, and inspire you to think harder, and this story made me think about racial conflict, gender roles and political corruption – and it became clear that today, these same conflicts continue.
LG: How much did you research before you wrote?
EH: I began by reading the newspapers, starting January 31, 1857, the day of the murder, reading day by day as the trial unfolded. That gave me a riveting look at the case, but also of ‘contemporary’ life—fashion, entertainment, gossip, real estate -- New Yorker’s have always had much the same preoccupations.
I looked at the transcripts and the newspaper articles. There was such rich material including actual transcriptions of dialogue spoken by the characters and accounts of everyday life inside the house on Bond Street. Having examples of my character’s spoken dialogue was an incredible ‘find’, but I realized I had to weave these factual elements into a storyline.
LG: Did you know how the story would end before you started?
EH: I write out of sequence, and there were chapters at the end of the book that I wrote at the very beginning. So I always had a destination, and I knew, emotionally, how the characters would end up.
I wrote many major scenes first, and would then go back and “fill in.” Sometimes things would emerge that surprised me. There were some things that just didn’t fit, and ended up on the cutting room floor.
LG: When did you figure out how to structure the book?
EH: I was in a class and writing workshop with Jonathan Rabb, the writer of an excellent trilogy of novels on pre-war Berlin, and he emphasized the novel having three acts. I always visualized the tale in three sections but I also had a clear idea early on that I would use two narrative strands, each on a slightly different time line. They would shift back and forth and come together in the ‘present’ -- at the trial and verdict.
It’s very carefully structured, moving back and forth between the chapters from Emma’s point of view (POV) and the POV of her lawyer, Henry Clinton. The pace is determined by what the reader learns each time they go back and forth. And I had a vision of the third act, as being when Emma Cunningham’s POV dissolves, because she is essentially losing her mind.
I had a very visual idea of that structure in my head, and I almost saw the scenes moving like notes on a musical score. It took lots of trial and error to find the right rhythm and pace when putting it all together.
LG: How did your background in art help you?
EH: I think that my art background gave me a very visual sense of creating the scenery, at least I get real pleasure in that sort of ‘scene painting’ – recreating the bustling city, the light, the riverfront, the open harbor and the areas of still undeveloped landscape. New Yorkers really live in a spectacular setting, but we don’t notice it much, being obscured by tall buildings and our busy lives. Writing about New York in 1857 was a fun exercise in stripping away modern life.
LG: Describe your revision process.
EH: I work best if I revise as I go. I write pretty loosely, and then go back right away and polish the language. Then, as each scene starts to come together, I put the scenes together in bigger batches. I guess I feel like I am always revising.
LG: When did you know the story was ready for outside readers?
EH: I had been advised to get my manuscript very polished before trying to attract an agent and that was very good advice. I got feedback on the draft from friends and other writers in my workshop and also I had it looked at by an outside editor. I really didn’t want to send it out with big holes, so I worked extra hard to have a finished manuscript.
LG: Tell us about finding your agent and your publisher.
EH: I collected names of agents pretty randomly, and created a list for submission. When I sent them out, I got a series of responses, and although the responses were very positive, I wasn’t quite sure what to do with the information.
I also didn’t know much about the differences between types of agents. So I was referred to Beverly Swerling, a very generous author, who partners with her husband at a service called Agent Research. They advise writers about agents. I had already done the submission work, but they helped me sort through the maze of responses.
Beverly also suggested an agent I didn’t know. That addition was very fortuitous; she asked to meet me and I felt she was ideal, and she became my agent. (Marly Rusoff). After that, she sent it out, and sold the book pretty quickly, to Harper.
LG: What advice would you give to emerging writers?
EH: Polish your manuscript before you send to agents, because it speeds up the process. And do your homework on agents, but also call Agent Research, as they are an invaluable resource.
I really think that writers have no way of knowing which are the best agents for their book, as it is not a very transparent world, and a writer can waste time banging on the wrong doors.
LG: What are you working on now and how can readers learn more about you?
EH: I think of the process of writing as an archeological dig, where you peel away the layers of your characters’ lives and a story emerges. In this case, the townhouse on Bond Street was lost to New York, but after being uncovered and reconstructed, it became a stage for the domestic and legal dramas that unfolded.
My next book is about an archeologist – on an archeological dig -- so I guess my metaphor will live on. There is also a sequel with another case of the lawyer Henry Clinton’s, so hopefully he will live on as well.
Join my Fan Page,: https://www.facebook.com/pages/New-York-NY/31-Bond-Street/235961442055
Website, http://www.31bondstreet.com/
AMAZON: http://www.amazon.com/31-Bond-Street-Novel-P-S/dp/0061773972/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1297045123&sr=8-1
BARNES AND NOBLE http://search.barnesandnoble.com/31-Bond-Street/Ellen-Horan/e/9780061773976/?itm=3&USRI=31+BOND+STREET
INDIEBOUND http://www.indiebound.org/book/9780061773976
Thanks for all the insights and practical tips you shared in this interview, Ellen.
Ellen Horan opens new windows into the past and goes much deeper into personal motivations than the history books. She is an inventive, articulate author with a passion for researching the truth about bygone eras. She creates stirring historical fiction. If you have an interest in the stories that never got told and the way things might have been, you need to read 31 Bond Street.
