Interview with Steven Erikson

The fact that there is a website dedicated to your work is an indication that interaction with your readers is important to you as an author. I know that you haven't had the chance to do so in a while, but how special is it to have the chance to interact directly with your fans?

SE: Ah, see my comments above.

Without giving anything away, what can you tell us of THE BONEHUNTERS? Are you satisfied with the way the book turned out? Anything you wish to share pertaining to REAPER'S GALE?

SE: The Bonehunters is big. Didn't feel it at the time, but then I toggled the word count. The rebellion in Seven Cities needed wrapping up and that is what the novel does, more or less. Some of its story lines tie Midnight Tides a little closer to the others; and Reaper's Gale will tighten that weave considerably.

There's plenty of imperial stuff in The Bonehunters -- politics and how legends can be reworked, reshaped, to suit the present. Don't want to give too much away, but there may be a few screams of outrage on occasion....

It took many years for you to find an American publisher. In the past, you have claimed that the concensus was that the books were too complex for US audiences. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the series was probably too vast in scope for most publishers?

SE: Not a claim. I was told that to my face. Same for my agents. I don't recall hearing any concerns about the length of the series. A lot of long series originated in the States, so I don't think that was ever an issue.

Are you surprised by what little support you receive from the Canadian media? You and R. Scott Bakker rank among the best fantasy authors out there, yet both of you Canucks appear to get very little recognition in your own country.

SE: Surprised? No. I had good reasons for packing up my manuscripts and moving to the UK. If I elaborate on this subject, Patrick, you're looking at another fifty thousand words, easy. Canada's an odd country. It seems to like having maybe ten 'big' writers around at any one time -- and some of those are only 'big' because people in some other country liked them enough for a few shortlistings on awards. And that is the 'literary' side. Regards all us genre hacks, not a chance. Mind you, it doesn't help when other Canadian writers of fantasy and sf diss the genres in interviews ('I write /speculative/ fiction'). Yeah, well, all fiction is speculative....

Are you perplexed by the fact that Tor Books doesn't market you more aggressively? The immense success of such writers as Robert Jordan and George R. R. Martin demonstrates that there is a market for series vast in scope and quality. But it seems that Tor hasn't been making much noise about your books so far.

SE: I'm easy on all that. Less time on the road for me means more time to write! Tor's doing fine by my regard.

As an archaeologist and an anthropologist, do you think that you influence your novels in a manner that an "ordinary" writer can't quite match?

SE: I don't know any ordinary writers, to be honest. We're all strangely twisted. In any case, those disciplines aren't secret code -- there are more books coming out on those subjects for the layperson than ever before (I should know, I buy most of them). I'd imagine it would be essential for any writer seeking to create a new world or culture to do some groundwork before plunging in. Keeping in mind that all the humanities have theoretical underpinnings that wobble loose on occasion, forcing new paradigms in the field -- and there's a ripple effect -- so that something in, say, paleobotony can change the archaeogical take on prehistoric cultures dwelling close to glaciers, for example; which in turn alters views on the first peopling of the New World, which can then flip a hundred years of entrenched dogma on its ass. And the telling of all that in turn reveals something about human psychology and the tribal characteristics of academia, including racism, sexism and intellectual fascism.

I just read a great example of this by the way. Some human footprints were found in Mexico, in a bed of solidified volcanic ash. Initially dated at thirteen or so thousand years old. Well, that seemed a bit early for some people (see above note on dogma), so a second team was sent there to take a look. They observed the prints, confirmed that indeed they were made when the ash was mud; then proceeded to use potassium-argon dating on the volcanic material. And came up with a fixed date of 1.3 million years. Their conclusion? 'Those aren't footprints.'

My old highschool debating teacher would howl at that one. Anyway, the disciplines are motile, which is a very good thing as Martha Stewart would say. So, for research purposes, take it all with a pound of salt.