Disclaimer: I did not record our conversation, but took some good notes. Ms. Hyde knows to contact me if I have misrepresented anything at all. And if I do, I apologize. And I have edited for length sense. Seriously, I have!

(After all the hi's and pleasantries...)
E: So tell me about your blog...

R: Um...(stalling because I was NOT expecting that question at all!), it's really just a small personal blog where I discuss politics, feminism, baseball, and the ups and downs of being a mom.

What did you think when your publishers told you that they wanted to shop this book around to blogs for reviews?

E: I was thrilled! I think that its great that blogs are being used. There is so much said in intelligent ways on blogs, of course after you figure out which ones to read. I'm still a neophyte with the internet. I'm working on my own website and maybe a blog. It is overwhelming.

R: It really is. Good luck on your site. I have to tell you that I'm not a regular mystery, murder mystery, detective novel reading person. I'm more into sci-fi. So thank you to you and your publishers on getting me out of my comfort zone.

I know that you have been asked this question before, but why did you decide to focus this novel around an abortion provider?

E: I had been skirting the issue in at least one previous book, maybe two. I've always found the "will she or won't she" debate in novels to be not very interesting. It became more interesting for me to get into someone's head and especially into the heads of those around a provider (anti's, young women's parents, family members) who are involved in the process. There are just so many angles to explore.

R: Diana Duprey, the abortion provider, decides to carry her Down Syndrome baby to term and gives birth to Ben. In the novel this causes a lot of fan fair. I've met other mother activists who wrestle with the notion/idea that we use our kids as props - intentionally or not. We're aware that others judge us as feminists and sometimes are out to prove that we really are pro-choice and not pro-abortion. Did you write Diana as someone who fell victim to the pressure to prove the anti's wrong? That she wasn't all about abortions?

E: I didn't intentionally develop that part of Diana. I did want to make everything as difficult as possible. What could be more difficult than having an abortion provider have a much wanted pregnancy with a Down's baby? She wanted to keep Ben. I think it even surprised her at the decision. After having Megan, Diana was surprised that she changed her mind about her personal decision to have an abortion.

R: Diana's decision to have Ben was a focal point of tension in her marriage. I read Frank as a character who had an issue with his masculinity. He didn't feel that he had any say in his marriage, how Megan was raised (Diana let Megan chose her middle school), and even to have their house on a local historical tour. What were your thoughts when you created Frank?

E: I didn't see Frank's issues as having anything to do with his masculinity. I saw him as a repressed person. Diana did a lot to bring him out of his shell. She did dominate the marriage which built up resentment. I see his issues stemming more from him being an introvert and Diana being an extrovert.

R: The relationship between Diana and Megan is part stereotypical and part not so much. How many moms would share a joint with her daughter? Did you talk to any daughters of providers, sex educators, or just very pro-choice feminists?

E: No. That was all imagination. I did have a nurse-midwife consult on the book. And I have daughters.

R: As a mother to a 3-year-old, one of my biggest fears is that I'll never find the right tone to talk to her about sex and if I do, she'll run the other way.

E: Oh, you have no idea how hard it is!

R: Diana seems to treat Megan as a patient with her bluntness around sex.

E: Yes. I think that Megan wishes Diana used more discretion.

R: So what did you read growing up?

E: A lot of girl on the frontier books, Little House on the Prairie, Maud Hart Lovelace...I read Tom Sawyer over and over. Little Women. JD Salinger. And of course, I went through my Kurt Vonnegut phase.

R: I've read in an interview online that you never wanted to be a lawyer, but a writer. So the first chance you got to jump off the law track, you did. How did that happen?

E: I've always wanted to be a writer. As cheesy as it sounds, I have a love affair with books and writers. I never thought that I would be a writer. My uncle, Dayton Hyde, is a writer. Writing was just always nagging me. I went to the Bread Loaf Writers' Conference three years in a row. John Irving was very encouraging. When I was still a lawyer, I decided to carve out time for my writing. So I would get up at 6 am and write for an hour before starting the rest of my day.

R: I know you said in another interview that your research was mostly from reading biographies and other books. If you were to write this book again, would you interview providers or spend time at a clinic? Do you think that Diana and her family is reflective of families of providers?

E: I've wondered about that. Two things are significant. 1) I decided to write this novel without knowing a provider. They live such threatened lives. These people put their lives on the line each day. I knew that it would be hard to get past the privacy that the feel. I did have a thought of working in a clinic, but that never happened. And that is a good thing. This way I was able to develop Diana as a character and not built on any one person I knew.

I read Absolute Convictions by Eyal Press earlier this year. It is a great book and also validated Diana's character. I'm pretty confident that I wrote a novel that shows how one provider was and how one family felt. So yes, I feel that it is pretty true to life.

R: Have you gotten any feedback from providers? Anyone contact you to say, "I loved it!" or "I hated it!"?

E: No, no providers have contacted me. It'll be interesting to see if any do. I am doing a benefit reading for a Boulder women's health clinic.

R: My last question is this: One pivitol and impressionable scene is Megan's memory of seeing a bucket of fetus parts at her mom's clinic. As someone who is obviously a pro-choice feminist, are you scared that the anti's will seize that scene and use it against the reproductive justice movement?

E: Oh, good question. No. I write from a lot of different perspectives. As a 13-year-old girl it would be freigthening to see that. Anyone can interpret the book they way they want to. I personally wouldn't mind if the anti's picked up this book. If they use that scene to use in furthering their own agenda, that's a pretty shallow read. Pure political posturing.

R: Thank you so much for your time and our conversation. I want to ask one more last thing. Did you read Katha Pollitt's op-ed a few weeks ago about her bad review in the NYTimes? She talked about the stress of watching her book on the Amazon.com list. Do you do that?

E: *chuckles* No, I didn't read it. I'll have to go look for it. My husband checks Amazon every morning and reports back. I'm not sure what the numbers mean. Soon after the book came out, I was fairly way up. I've been told that if you're not in the top 20 or so, the ranking doesn't mean a thing. When was that op-ed? I'll have to look in the archives.

R: *chuckles* Katha's op-ed was a few weeks in the NYTimes. Thanks again for your time. I'll be posting the review and this conversation in the next day or so. Feel free to contact me with any corrections.

E: Thanks, Roni. Bye.

R: Thanks. Bye.




Other interviews of Elisabeth: Borzoi Reader | Bookreporter.com

Labels: abortion, Books