December Q&A (1)

Q: Two queries about CALIFIA’S DAUGHTERS this month. First, WDI asks, Do you pronounce Dian’s name “die-ann” or “dee-on”? Or somewhere in between?

A: Personally, I take it to be the same as Dianne, although what does the author know?

Q: And Elisa wants to know, When will Leigh Richards be writing again? I’ve just reread Califia’s Daughters and want more. Clamor, clamor, clamor.
Q: Then Adele says, I can only assume that the delay of TOUCHSTONE to 2008 pushes the next Russell story to 2009? Please say it isn’t so …

A: Yeah, here we go—when I play the poor old sick husband card you guys are all warm and supportive, but as soon as it hits home, just what that delay means, man, the teeth come out.

(And in case you’re new to the LRK sense of humor, the above is a jest. I’m as disappointed as you are, but what can one do?)

Yes, I’m afraid this means the next Russell will be early 2009, followed by another historical set Paris in the Twenties. So if I fit in a sequel to CALIFIA’S DAUGHTERS, or another in the San Juan cycle of FOLLY and KEEPING WATCH, it won’t be until 2011 at the soonest. Only, 2011 should be a Russell year, so 2012, and honestly I cannot think that far ahead.

Q: Vicki says, I love the way you take past history and weave it into a new story. You did that in several of your other books, too. Is there that idea in Touchstone?

A. Absolutely. Even though TOUCHSTONE is set completely in 1926, its themes and events are those of current times. TOUCHSTONE is about the search for an international terrorist—in 1926 England.

Posted in


  1. Jan on December 3, 2006 at 3:51 pm

    Well, if there is still time to post questions…may I get nosy, I mean personal?

    I would love to know what your daughter and son are doing….you mention daughter in England, and son in Florida…would you care to elaborate? Also, background of husband…I think he was prof at UCSC..but would love to know more..

    and choose to ignore this if I have stepped over the line..

  2. Anonymous on December 3, 2006 at 4:01 pm

    I can’t believe Russell could remain silent until 2009! Maybe she’d like to blog once in a while–please,pretty please? Just a little, tiny story? Just kidding, sorta. But I will miss Holmes’ “clever hands.” 🙂


  3. Maria on December 3, 2006 at 7:41 pm

    Well..I’ll take it in good stride…2011 until Russell and Holmes (sigh). At least I have plenty of work to keep me busy…can’t agree with you more Kay!

  4. WDI on December 3, 2006 at 10:27 pm

    Thanks for the answer. I realized, after I read your response, that I’ve been saying “Dee-on” in my head (probably because I’m sort of echoing the Spanish of Tomas and Carmen?). Trying on “Dianne” gave me a totally different feel for the character, even though I clearly identify Dianne, in this context, with the hunt.

    How cool is that??

  5. myninki on December 4, 2006 at 4:34 pm

    What will be necesary to put on the table to negotiate (reads bribery) to put a sequel to CALIFIA’S DAUGHTERS sort of up the line?
    a few slaves around the house, perhaps?

  6. Anonymous on December 4, 2006 at 11:34 pm

    I’ve read and enjoyed every one of your books. But I must say I’m a bit disappointed in the latest Martinelli book. While the plot was fabulous, it contained very little detail from Kate’s home life (except of course for the finale). It felt like what you really wanted to do was write another Russell story, so you embedded one inside a Martinelli novel instead. I’m a lesbian mom raising a young daughter with my partner in the midwest, and was salivating to hear about Kate & Lee’s life in SF as parents. Unfortunately, I really didn’t feel like I got it.

  7. Anonymous on December 5, 2006 at 3:49 am

    2009? Oh woe! The teeth may not be out, but they are certainly gnashing right along with the wailing as I try not to wish my life away. I have faith that you are mentally gestating another wonderful visit to that world.

  8. Pen on December 5, 2006 at 9:20 am

    I am inclined to agree with Anonymous re the latest Martinelli book. I wonder why you had to combine your (oh so different) characters from two strands of your work. Was it to see if you could do it? To we Martinelli fans who waited a long time for this book it could appear that you didn’t really want to write a Martinelli and could only do it if you could also bring in Holmes.
    I did enjoy it but I think the reading audience of Martinelli books may be different to those who love the Mary Russell novels and possibly you are diluting each novel for the reader.

  9. Carole on December 5, 2006 at 9:45 am

    No Russell till ’09? Have mercy, Laurie, I’m an old lady after all!

Leave a Comment