QnA with Candice Fox, author of Crimson Lake

Crimson Lake by Candice Fox Book Review

I haven’t been shy about my love for Crimson Lake in my review or on Twitter, so I was excited to have Candice Fox fit in this short and sweet QnA about the book and Amy and Ted.

One of the things I enjoyed about the book was that Ted’s life unravelled because of chance and circumstance. He could have turned differently, and stopped later and nothing like Crimson Lake would have happened to him.

Circumstance and the random nature of the universe came together to make Ted a suspect in something he had nothing to do with – why did you choose this as an avenue to pursue with Ted?

A lot of crime is like that, not just in how innocent people become suspects. People tend to talk about crime in a sort of universal, mystical sense. If only she hadn’t walked down that street on that night at that exact moment, she might not have encountered her killer, that sort of thing. People like to find the ‘fate’ in crime, because it makes regret easier, fantasies about stopping it. I suppose I also wanted to make what happens to Ted as easy and as simple as possible, so that the reader might imagine it happening to them, might be afraid that it’s in their cards. If it had been far out and convoluted, I’d have risked the reader not only refusing to believe it, but perhaps feeling safe that this is something that couldn’t possibly happen to them.

Amanda and Ted are very different characters – why did you think they’d work together?

It’s critical to have different partners in crime, some sort of conflict that will make them rub together, because that’s the only way you generate banter. It’s how they grow closer together, by learning to be with each other, rather than finding they’re so similar that being with each other is easy. There is an argument, of course, for the kind of partners who get on just great, the ‘buddy’ partnership, but even these kinds of characters will clash with unacceptable idiosyncrasies they find in each other. I wanted something less stressful than Frank and Eden’s conflict of my Bennett/Archer – that she’s a serial killer and he knows it – because I knew Crimson Lake was going to be a stressful book. That she’s a complete weirdo and Ted’s only option seemed a good solution.

The book is in Ted’s POV, but at the end, Amanda’s POV is in a chapter – what was the thinking behind this choice? Does that mean the next book will follow her POV?

No, the next book doesn’t follow Amanda’s POV completely, as I think readers are far too in love with Ted, from what I’m seeing in the reviews. And with a character like Amanda, it’s important to maintain a bit of mystery or she’ll lose her edge. But the dynamics of this partnership are going to require moments like that, because there will be times when I need to separate them for different work on different cases, so it was a bit of a freeing gesture. I didn’t want to shock anyone by doing it for the first time in a second or third book.

And that’s it! What do you think of Candice’s choice with regards to her partnership — do buddy partnerships work better for you? Or something else? 

7 Comments

  • Kelly says:

    It sounds like there might be a few chapters from Amanda’s point of view in the next book. I tend to prefer a female or duel narration when reading, for me it feels more relatable. That’s such a fascinating point, we do try to find fate within crime, which can also sound like victim blaming as well if an author doesn’t explore the though process behind their characters. Wonderful interview Verushka, really enjoyed it <3

    • Verushka says:

      I hope so! I am eager to know more about Amanda. I don’t mind what character is narrating, but I found I read more female authors than I do male authors in my favourite genres, so I wonder what that says about me lol We need to find fate in something like a crime, I think, in order to make sense of it.

  • Sophia Rose says:

    I like her point about how banter and dialogue is generated when the partners rub against each other rather than agree on all or most things.

    Interesting getting the behind the scenes with the interview. Thanks, ladies!

    I’ll have to check out Crimson Lake since it’s new to me.

  • I love great banter! So I totally agree with her about that. And I’m curious about Amanda now. And Ted, but Amanda sounds interesting.

  • Oh that’s so true how we think of crime that way. And it’s freaky to think how something like that could happen, that you just could suddenly be in the wrong place at the wrong time or some crazy circumstance could suddenly make you a victim or a suspect or something. Great interview!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *