James Lee Burke Is One Scary Dude

by Ben Small

For the longest time, I didn't read James Lee Burke. A friend had portrayed his writing as describing frogs on a bayou log. "How many times can you describe that frog?" my friend said.

Then I read Burke. Had some spare time, and one of his books appeared as if by magic. Okay, so I was curious: What was so great about a frog - Budweiser ads excepted - that merited description in oh so many books?

Well, wow! That frog does dance.

Most "How To" books urge the writer not to go overboard on description, to keep the picture portrayals strictly relevant to the story, lest the reader get side-tracked or bored. And many writers violate that rule, and are shot as a consequence. But Burke gets away with using descriptions to fill about a third of his page count.

How does he do this?

Simple. He puts the reader in the bayou, swimming in the muck and quicksand, swatting the mosquitoes, sweating like Kirstie Alley in a sauna, and stinking like a Kathy Reichs' bloated-body-bugfest.

And evidently, a lot of people like to experience that: mucking, swatting, sweating and stinking. Or is it that they don't; that they want to experience Louisiana without actually going there? I'd say count me in that post-Katrina group except for one thing: the food. My god, the food. Why can't Arizona make a decent facsimile of Louisiana gumbo?

Well, I've gotten side-tracked here. The mere thought of Louisiana food always does that to me. Back to James Lee Burke and his writing.

What kind of nutbag is this guy?

Stephen King and other writing authorities suggest writing what you know. If James Lee Burke is doing that, I can learn from this man. More or less, every one of his books I can remember has featured a cast of people you never want to meet: degenerate preachers; evil rich bad guys who lust after pretty young and innocent things; pimps and prostitutes; druggies and boozers; tattoed boob-ettes; gunbulls; prison rapists; mobsters; gamblers; hitmen; crooked cops and politicians, and last but not least, Clete Purcell.

Can there be a more degenerate character than Clete? Forget the gut, the unhealthy glow of 220-over-140 blood pressure readings, and his pock-marked and sweaty sun-burned neck. This stuff just makes Clete look like Larry, the cable guy. No, Clete's got the personality to match these wonderful characteristics. Pop your fingers and count: 1) Clete's always drunk and sweaty; 2) He can be counted on to say and do the dumbest of things to all the wrong people; 3) He's killed a federal informant; 4) He enjoys drugs and prostitutes; 5) He was a corrupt N.O. cop; 6) He's murdered a bunch of people in a plane crash; 7) He's probably left more teeth in toilets than a dental convention, and 8) He's been known to attack with innovative weapons such as hammers, fully oiled frying pans, and tire irons. (These tools are just for novelty; Clete likes guns, knives, saps and baseball bats, too.) Clete actually enjoyed Vietnam, thought it was a hoot. So, of course, with all these charms, how can Clete help but be a babe-magnet? His latest conquest: an FBI agent. Smart guy, that Purcell: Go with a chick who can bust you for lying. What's next: Playing medicine ball with a hornet's nest?

But seriously, how could Clete not be a stud? He's so vulnerable, isn't he? What that poor man has had to endure. Clete's seen more hospitals than Doc Kildare. Poor S-O-B had his hand squashed in a car door; he's been smashed with enough iron to make him fearful of magnets; he's been shot so many times he could strain spaghetti, and in the latest Burke masterpiece Swan Peak he was tied to a tree, blindfolded, doused with gasoline and forced to listen to a Zippo's spinning wheel.

Doesn't Clete ever wonder if it's smart having Dave Robicheaux as a buddy? Seems to me the only thing more hazardous is having Jessica Fletcher around.

And what about Dave? Poor ole Dave Robicheaux stands for truth and justice, and it's cost Dave plenty. He's had wives murdered and a daughter threatened. He's been suspended numerous times, suspected of murder over and over. He's been beaten, stabbed, shot, haunted by Vietnam nightmares, and don't ask about his parental issues. The guy's a drunk. And is it any wonder? Dave's hollow inside; he's not just got worms in his head, they're full-bodied snakes. In Swan Peak, Dave - the good guy - threatens to throw a preacher into an airplane propeller. My goodness, we thought water boarding was bad. And, oh, did I mention, he married a nun? Dave best do some serious repenting.

So getting back to my point: If what Stephen King and others say about writing what you know is true, James Lee Burke is one spooky dude.

But can I learn from this man? Hell yes, about description and the depravity of man.

Do I want to be his pal?

Hmmm...

Why not. I just bought a Total Gym. Chuck Norris is my buddy.

Paint Me a Picture

Recently I was reading a mystery where the heroine rented a "big ass pimp-mobile." There was no other description of the car whatsoever. I put the book down to ask my husband and kids just what those words meant to them. No one agreed on the make, model or color of the car, let alone the year. (My husband seemed to think some car he owned as a teenager was the only one ever made to fit this description. The only thing the kids agreed on is that they strongly disagreed with that.) According to them, the car was violently pink, glossy black, or even (unlikely as it seems to me) purple. I never picked the book up again as it bothered me that I could not see this car in my head. My kids tell me that is because the book wasn't aimed at my age-bracket. I'm thinking that's most likely true but still not an excuse.
This is a problem I have with description lately. People think that some popular term means the same thing to everyone and that will fill in for description. Sometimes it does--but I think it's mainly limited to "Beam me up, Scotty." And even then, I know a few Trekkies who think this is a sign of a kindred spirit --instead of a comment that they are living in whole 'nother world than the rest of us.
We all want to skip writing the parts that readers skip reading (with apologies to Elmore Leonard for mangling his quote) but you can't take shortcuts to writing good, taut, description. The picture in the reader's head won't ever be exactly the one in the author's head--no matter how you try. How many times have you seen a book made into a movie and been upset by the choice of actress for the lead? But think of the Harry Potter books and the way some readers (many adults) return over and over again just to visit that world. The description was a big and necessary part of the series.
It doesn't take much to take a reader out of our books. This whole, beautiful, chaotic, world is in competition with what we have to say. That's why we have to make our fictional world as real as we can. And have a little fun describing those pimp mobiles.


Christine Duncan is the author of the Kaye Berreano mystery series.

Dialogue or Description, What's Your Forte'? By Morgan Mandel

I find it easy to create dialogue, but difficult to provide descriptions. Maybe that's because I'm in my characters' heads and concentrating on solving their problems and not on describing what they look like or where they are.

My characters and I already know those things. Unfortunately, the reader doesn't. Because of that, I need to make a conscious effort to remind myself to provide descriptions.

My editor, Helen Ginger, pointed out portions of Killer Career, my work in progress, where adding descriptions would enrich the novel. While attending to my edits, I'll pay close attention to providing more descriptive details to make the scenes come alive in the readers' minds.

What about you? Are you better at writing dialogue or description? Which do you enjoy most? Please Share.