Poured Over: Louise Penny on The Madness of Crowds

“I’m constantly surprised by the books. Because I think about books a lot before I start writing them, I don’t write structure and a formal outline. But I carry a notebook around with me for about a year before I start writing and I write down quotes and thoughts and ideas and snippets of overheard conversations and things from the newspaper…some of them are used later and some just are never used, but eventually a pattern forms and that becomes then the idea for the book…” Who hasn’t thought of moving to Three Pines after reading one of Louise Penny’s Chief Inspector Armand Gamache novels? Louise joins us on the show to talk about the story behind the 17^th book in the series, The Madness of Crowds, choosing kindness, the evolution of Gamache, Agatha Christie’s relationship to Poirot, and more. Featured book: The Madness of Crowds by Louise Penny. Produced/hosted by Miwa Messer and engineered by Harry Liang.

Poured Over is available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Stitcher. New episodes land Tuesdays and Thursdays.

From this episode:

Louise Penny: In fact, I actually lived with him for longer than that he first sort of appeared in in my mind in 2001. So about 20 years now, this is the 20th anniversary of the birth of Armand…. I had heard that–I don’t know if this is true, maybe you know if it’s true, that Christie grew weary of Poirot. Have you heard that?

B&N: I have heard that. I don’t know where it comes from exactly. But I have heard that a couple times in a couple of different places that she did. She was weary of Poirot. Absolutely.

Louise Penny: I didn’t want to grow tired, and certainly go to hate my detective and feel like he’s an albatross around, an anvil around my neck I’m dragging forward, finally, I have to throw him over a cliff. I thought now how, like, why did she hate him? And how do I make sure that happened to me. And I think she grew to not like him very much–although the rest of the world loves him–because he never evolved. He is essentially the same one in The Mysterious Affair at Styles as is in the final Poirot. So, I wanted a character who could evolve, who was multifaceted and also whose company I would enjoy. So, I thought I don’t want to make him tormented and tortured and an addict and just someone really at war with himself because that wouldn’t be pleasant, so I give them all the qualities that I admire in a man. And I realize it’s actually all the qualities I admire in a human. And that’s that he’s compassionate, he’s thoughtful, he’s kindly he’s, you know, when called upon, he can act, but his first instinct is never to lash out. But he’s more likely to be mistaken for a professor than for than an SAS Commando. He doesn’t like carrying a gun, but he’s willing to use one if necessary. So, all of these choices that he has made in his life. And as the series goes on, he evolves forward, but we also discover more about his history and where all of this comes from…. And that’s why I think I enjoy his company. I went through a period where I was very cynical. I mean, I was a journalist. So, it kind of goes with territory, I was out to be cynical, and dark and sarcastic and negative. And I thought that was pretty cool. And others around me thought it was cool, too. But it just wore me down. And it wasn’t really who I was. And I discovered how very difficult it is, when I tried to change, to be kind, to see the cruelty, to see the clever remark, but choose to say something nice instead, then, but that’s not often rewarded either. And so, I find writing a character who does make that choice really, really interesting. And that’s, I think that’s a real character. And I think that takes a lot more courage. Anyone can be negative, anyone can be cynical, it’s facile, it’s easy, takes no great strength or courage or insight. To be kind and compassionate to forgive. That’s tough.