One of the reasons I enjoyed your two novel(la)s was that your respective protagonists reminded me a little bit of Arturo Bandini from Ask the Dust. What was the impact that book had on you? And is that the reason your male characters are such erm, bastards, to women?

Well I learnt of him by reading Bukowski who related to the man so strongly because of the LA connection. I got my hands on Dreams from Bunker Hill first, which is the one he dictated from his deathbed and the last in the Bandini Quartet. I really liked it. Hunted others down and couldn’t find any for months. I lucked upon it one day at my local library. They had just got in the Rebel Inc. Classics version, and I snatched it up and read it in one day. Which is a rarity for me. Everything about it worked. The clarity and turn of the words, the strong method of the character. The attitude toward writing and life. It was funny too, made me laugh. Straight up you knew you were reading an original. You saw the influence he had on Bukowski. I loved the part when he discovered the LA Central library, the one

where years later Bukowski found him, same place, and Bandini walked over to the B section and said to himself that this was the place for him, there on the shelf, adding his words there. That part meant very much to me. I understood what he was saying so much.

I wouldn’t say my characters are bastards to women because of Bandini. I’d read Hemingway long before then. In fact going over my reading journal from just before I wrote ‘the sea is not yet full’ I see ‘Notes From Underground’ by Dostoyevsky, ‘The Torrents of Spring’ by Turgenev. Also Platform by Houellebecq.  And I don’t know if any of those guy’s characters or my own are knowingly bastards. I think I mostly I write about trying to be a man. About understanding what is required in life to be that. Sex, relationships and meaning all roll into one somewhere along the line. I think my character’s suffer much pain over women, about their beauty, what sex means, girl’s lost, some never found, what relationship’s can cost, what they can add. I don’t think there is any deliberate effort to be a bastard. It’s a confusion rather than any purposeful act. How is one a man and what should that include?

And how much of your own personality goes into your characters?

There is much in there. Extensions of self and situations I’ve lived or known of most of the time. People who know me well read ‘the sea is not yet full’ and couldn’t believe I wrote it. When I look back at it though it all reads real. I guess there is outside existence and then there is the dialogue and life you live inside. When I write certain themes fight themselves out. Death. Sex. Risk. Love. Meaninglessness. Purpose. These are the things which concern me most I guess. Everything I write essentially comes down to search for meaning by some method. The writer’s I admire most were doing the same. In some ways it’s autobiographical fiction, in some ways it’s just fiction.

Is there a greater metaphor for life that can be found in poker? I tried thinking of one but all I came up with was that gifted liars will roll in riches, but I’m ignorant on the subject matter. What do you think?

The entire book is a metaphor. Gambling is about risk-taking. It’s about wanting something, and risking everything you have to get it. About betting big and losing and then betting big again. I like the line in the book “When the true gambler loses his bankroll, he gambles to get it back”. Without risking in life there is nothing really. The greatest risk you can take is not taking any risks at all. And you are going to fail sometimes, sometimes miserably, everyone does that, it’s about taking that pain when you know how much it hurt the first time. And you have to have belief to be able to do that. Have to know you’ve got what is needed. But with that comes the rub, and the title refers to it with the double meaning, you lose things through the obsession, time, money, friends, jobs, relationships, you may be damned good, but you’re also damned good. It can be like a personal hell you create for yourself. But you keep going no matter. You keep trying because you believe. The Rookie is that man. He will not give up. Will not. He believes he can be the best there is. Nothing is more important to him than that.

Last question. Much of your short story collection “In the same streets you’ll wander endlessly” is available online. In fact, nearly half of it. Tell us why we should buy it :p

Tangibility. To have it in your hands. So you can read it on the train, or bus or plane. So you can keep it. All the stories in the book are previously published. Some in print and some online and most both. You can get most anyone’s short stories online these days. It just ain’t the same though is it? Just the smell of the paper makes it better.

Okay, ACTUAL last question. What are you writing now?

I just finished a 400 page manuscript. It deals with a number of themes. The occult, murder, life meaning, it is my attempt at a Dostoyevsky type novel, sprawling wildly with big characters that hopefully burn bright on the page. I’ve been at it for 18 months and completed it about six weeks ago. I got my first rejection on it about a week ago. I’ve got another one here too, unfinished, a more Kafka/ Auster type work. Also a screenplay.

Thanks again! (more info can be found at www.jjdeceglie.com)

JJ Deceglie is the Western Australian author of ‘the sea is not yet full’, ‘Damned Good’ as well as many more short stories. Thanks to the innovations of technology, JJ took some time to answer my questions about Kerouac, poker-playing and wearing one’s literary influences on one’s sleeve…

So, well, firstly thank you for this interview. Secondly, you’re a poker player yourself. How long had you been playing before the idea for “Damned Good” came to you?

It started as a short story that I’d began in early 2007. By then I’d been playing a lot of poker for about six months. The short story came about because I wanted to write about this Egyptian Restaurant we used to go to and smoke sheesha, it was a really cool little place in Northbridge that I’d go to with some friends and drink Egyptian coffee and talk and smoke for hours. It was a place that we went to for that. For those long important talks. So I placed a high-stakes game in the back room and wrote about a character who came from nowhere and won everybody’s money and then took the Egyptian waitress home. I liked the character so much, and the meanings I could get from gambling that about three months later I just started adding to it and the flow continued without me having to force it.

Your earlier book, “the sea is not yet full” was self-published, unlike “Damned Good”. What were the main differences you found in the process, and would you self-publish in the future?

I think sometimes self-publishing, or independent publishing (which is what I think it should be called, just like with films and music) is less frustrating. You choose the content, the edit, the advertising, the PR, the cover, you do all the work and you get your own results. It is a very rewarding experience. And both of the book launches I had for my independent works went really great and made back most of the money I outlaid. The corporate publishing world is a slow, slow moving beast. But it is the nature of the beast. That said I’ve spent a heap of time and effort on Damned Good too. Maybe even more than with the other two. I would definitely publish my own work again. I almost did last year.

The poker-playing world seems to be this secret entity in itself, where those who aren’t part of it might find it difficult to understand the subtleties and strategies involved, but your novella helped to sort of bridge that a bit (well, I think, anyway). Was this something you thought about as you were writing?

Not really. I was more concerned that if any Poker Pro’s read it they might find a hole in it. Which I did not want to happen. Just before it was released I did an entire rewrite with a Pro from Las Vegas, Blair Rodman. Just so as to make sure it wasn’t gonna get brushed aside by the Pro’s. We went through every hand played and made sure everything was legit. This took about six weeks of work and delayed availability. Blair took on the job because he liked the book so much to begin with. Since then we’ve got quotes from at least three more Pro’s who all really like the book and were willing have their thoughts put on the cover and website.

I think any book dealing with a particular obsession can’t write for the novice really, you can read Damned Good without large poker knowledge just as you can read Tevis’ Queen’s Gambit without knowing chess expertly, or his The Hustler, or The Colour of Money, without knowing about pool and nine-ball in that way. Even sports books like Field of Dreams by Kinsella, or The Natural by Malamud can be read without knowing baseball very well.

I’ve got to step away from the book for a moment and just ask: Why do you write? Where, for whom, and when?

I write to capture the mood of my existence at that particular time. I’ve thought about it much before and that explanation works best. I can look back over my work and see that now too. Time was captured in each work and now exists for all time. This is important to me. So I write to grasp the feeling as clearly and well as I can. As honestly and as genuine as possible. I write at a desk, usually on a laptop from notes I’ve taken earlier, depending on the routine I’m in generally in the morning, through to the afternoon. Six to eight hours in a day, on a good day. If I can’t write that day I try to make notes or correct previous work. Discipline is a must. I have to do something toward it every day. Have to feel that I did that. And I write for myself I think, in hope of others relating to the writing.

Your characters share a lot of the same literary influences as yourself. Do you think this will evolve in your future stories if (or when) your tastes evolve?

It is as I go. I just finished a large manuscript and it has references to works that have influenced me recently. Kazantzakis for one. Colin Wilson too. Also Gurdjieff.

I wear my influences on my sleeve at times but I see it as sharing the wealth, the writer’s I most admire do the same and led me to others by my reading of the references they had mentioned. I can remember so many times when I wrote down a name Henry Miller, or maybe Bukowski or Hemingway, or some other had mentioned and then rushed off to find that guy at the library. And the find was like treasure, a wonderful sparkling feeling. As I mentioned above I’m attempting the capture of time and the writer’s involved in my life at any certain time are almost like friends I refer to for conference on existence, and I feel at times they’ve said well try this guy, he worked for me. I’m doing the same thing. I think as I go the mention of writer’s will continue, and evolve. I don’t ever think Hemingway or Kerouac will leave me, they came at that sticking time, or Bukowski, Joyce, Dostoyevsky, Fante, Miller, Burroughs, Turgenev, Bowles, Auster, Tolstoy, Selby Jnr, Trocchi, Hamsun. And list goes on and on and on.

Part II tomorrow

In the mean time, you can read story excerpts and other news at www.jjdeceglie.com

So, my plan to meet Robyn in person sort of failed, but she kindly answered my questions about what it’s like to be the matriarch of one my favourite families on television. Read on for my interview with the gorgeous and talented Robyn Malcolm. Soon we will be claiming her as our own as per the usual standard of New Zealand import talent. ;)

Hi Robyn! First of all thank you for this interview, I see you were (maybe still are?) in Sydney recently, have you been enjoying it?
I’m still here. I’ve moved here and am looking for work.

And, congratulations, you’ve been nominated as New Zealand’s Sexiest Woman again (and have won the last two years), have you gotten used to this by now? Or is it a surprise every time?
Just found out that I’ve won again! Along with best actress. Its being announced on Friday so need to be shshsh till then. It’s a surprise everytime, especially as I get older. It’s a nice surprise though.. means that Kiwis at least don’t buy into what’s touted in the media “just out of her teens plastic image” as the pinnacle of sexy. I’m happy about what that says about us.
(Note from W.E.P: Robyn was announced as the winner a couple of weeks ago)

You’ve had an extensive theatre career in New Zealand, did you always want to move into television/film? And do you have a preference out of the two?
When I went to Toi Whakaari ( The New Zealand Drama School), all I wanted to do was work full time as a Shakespeare performer. Everything I did was aimed at that. I never saw myself as a screen animal at all. Funny the circuitous road life takes! I’m not where I thought I’d end up but I love it all the same. As far as one vs the other: I do love screen and theatre equally but for differing reasons as they are massively different experiences and disciplines. But as long as the script is good and the people on the job fun its all a total joy and I feel really lucky to be doing it.

Outrageous Fortune’s success seems to stem from it’s combination of clever writing and a stellar cast. As an actress, how important is the script, and do you think an incredibly skilled actor could make a terrible script work, or vice versa?
The script is everything. Completely everything. It is not the end, but absolutely the irreplaceable beginning. Rachel Lang and James Griffen wrote a world, external and internal, which we then responded to. The script hooks into the imagination of the actors and from there the magic starts. But if the script is no good, it doesn’t matter how great the actors are, the project will sink. But, also on the other hand, if the actors had not been cast well and the direction and production team not chosen well then it wouldn’t have sung in the way it has. Sometimes it’s just everything lining up and magic happening.

What do you think attributes to the show’s popularity?
Family, Love, fallibility, comedy and drama buttressed up next to each other. These people are real, bungling through life, trying to do the right thing and buggering it up. They are driven by love, not by being “right”, and they never apologise for themselves or ingratiate themselves to anyone. I think the Wests are often how we would like to be but can’t because we are all so desperate to be liked! I think in NZ particularly the show’s runaway success has been about the fact that NZers have fallen in love with themselves through these characters. For so long we have either played stuff from other countries: American shows about fake heroes doing things we can never really relate to, or we have tried to copy those shows ourselves unsuccessfully. Neither has really grabbed Kiwis in the way Outrageous Fortune has.

The American version, Scoundrels, is the second adaptation to be piloted, after the first, Good Behavior, was dropped. But New Zealand comedy is so unique: Kiwis are excellent at finding humour in the politically incorrect, and never really take themselves to seriously. Do you think this could work in a different culture?
I honestly have no idea! I understand the cast to be excellent. If they take James and Rachel’s scripts and adapt them truthfully into the American culture then there is no reason why it shouldn’t work. I understand also that because its ABC/Disney the bad language, sex, nudity, politically incorrect content and less “moral” stories will be cut or reworked.. (Personally the digital sex scene between Van and Aurora was a highlight for me so I’d be sorry to see that go!) However if they can still keep the essence of these things then it can still work of course. I do find it strange with American Television particularly that a high level of violence is acceptable but sex and the odd bad word is a no no. But Good luck to them! As they say: “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery”.

I personally think Australian television has a lot to learn from New Zealand. What do you think?
Well thank you! Are you sure you want to go public with that?? Every-time I go through the Australian International Airport I do hear that “ Hey it’s Mrs West! Why is the best thing on our screens a Kiwi show??!!”  I’ve not seen enough Aussie telly of late to compare, but I guess the things that NZ are doing at the moment are about script, authenticity, not style over content, originality etc. I loved “Sea Change” and I thought Wildside looked like a great cop show from the little I saw. “Underbelly” has been bringing in the audiences, and I’ve seen some of East West 101 which I thought was great too. “Cloud Street” is in production at the moment which is very exciting. I’m not really in a position to make a judgement I think!
(Note from W.E.P: Seachange= awesome)

Can you share with us what it is you love most about acting?
It’s playing with the human experience, with the experience of being human. I love it as an art form because its about telling stories, offering up human experience in a way that will hopefully take people out of their own lives for a moment, in order that they can reflect on them later. Also,(to be less of a wanker about it) making people laugh and cry collectively is a blast!

Your OF character Cheryl is quite the hard-arse. I recall in an earlier interview, you mentioned that you didn’t have a lot in common with her. Have you learned anything from playing her these past 5-6 years?
I have learnt that perfect is boring, life is equal pain and joy, that mistakes are necessary, the future unknown, that love is everything, forgiveness underrated and that sometimes you just gotta have a rum and coke and a laugh. And it begins and ends with your kids (until they tell you to fuck off!).

For a character who is so deeply flawed (she’s stubborn, a bit impulsive and can get quite hot-headed) she is still so loved, by her family and the audience alike. How do you do it?
I dunno! I think perhaps people recognise all of the above in themselves. I go into bat for her passionately because I love her as a character, I love what she represents. I think also perhaps by always allowing her to be vulnerable from time to time… letting the audience in. Also, I think Antipodean audiences respond to the “battler”.

Do have a favourite scene or episode from Outrageous Fortune?
I love the “negotiation” scene between Cheryl and Draska, season 3 I think.. ( or maybe it was 2).. I uploaded it onto my Facebook page I loved it so much..Great line “Root bag’s Ok tho aye..”

It seems every 5 minutes a new rumour has popped up that you’re leaving the show. Does this get frustrating? Do you want to quash the latest one, or is that going to give too much away about season 6?
Lips are sealed!!

I know season five ended on possibly one of the most insane cliffhangers we’ve ever seen,  can you tell us anything about season six without giving anything away?
As usual, it’s not what you expect, but then that’s the fun of it.

Marcus Chown is a cosmology writer and author of We Need to Talk About Kelvin. His previous books include Quantum Theory Cannot Hurt You and The Universe Next Door, and his first children’s book, Felicity Frobisher and the Three-headed Aldebaran Dust Devil. I reviewed his latest book here.  Marcus Chown and I had a chat about Tim Tams, time travel and writing children’s books.

Hi Marcus, welcome to With Extra Pulp. Can I ask how the blog tour is going so far? This is your first blog tour that has included Australian blogs, is that correct?

Hi, and thanks for inviting me.

The blog tour is going very well, thank you. I actually had no idea what a blog tour was! But, when We Need to Talk about Kelvin was published in the UK, I e-mailed Scott Pack asking him if he had any ideas on how to publicise my book. I didn’t know Scott (@meandmybigmouth on Twitter) but I knew that he had been chief buyer for the big Waterstone’s book chain and so one of the most influential people in British publishing. He was incredibly kind and helpful to me, and one of the things he suggested I do was a blog tour.

He told me what it was and told me how to get the ball rolling by asking bloggers whether they would like to host a leg of the tour. Very nervously, I tweeted my request — and was completely overwhelmed by the response from bloggers. All were incredibly enthusiastic and incredibly generous. So, when my book was published in Australia and New Zealand, I thought I would extend the tour to the southern hemisphere. In fact, it was Scott Pack who told me about your blog and suggested that I contact you! So, you are right. This is the first-ever blog tour I have done that has included Australian blogs. Mind you, that’s because it’s my first-ever blog tour, full stop!

You’re the resident cosmologist for New Scientist…can you briefly tell our readers what cosmology encompasses?

Yes, I am the cosmology consultant of the weekly science magazine, New Scientist. Maybe it sounds impressive. But actually, when the magazine made me a consultant, it already had a physics consultant so they had to invent another name.

I tend to write about things which are of no use to man or beast! Can time run backwards? Are there multiple realities in which all histories are played out? Was the Universe created as an experiment by aliens in another universe? Are we living in a giant hologram? http://tinyurl.com/8ah9az

As for cosmology, it is arguably the ultimate science. After all it deals with nothing less than the origin, evolution and fate of the universe.

When you started writing ‘Let’s Talk About Kelvin’, did you have your audience in mind? And (how) did this affect what you chose to include, and leave out?

I tend to start writing with no thought of an audience at all! What I am trying to do is understand things for myself. It just so happens that the process of trying to get things straight in my own head is pretty much the same as communicating to a nonscientist, perhaps because I think visually, and am always trying to translate arcane mathematics into mental pictures.

When I finish the first draft, however, I get palpitations, thinking, Will anyone read this? Is it of any interest at all? So, at that point, I really do start thinking about the reader and get desperate about not boring them.

My audience is a far more general audience than New Scientist’s. I don’t expect anyone to have a science background. In fact, if I write for anyone, it is my wife, who is a nurse and has no science background (apart from a medical background, of course!). If, when she reads what I’ve done, her eyes glaze over and she appears to be slipping into a coma, I go back and rewrite.

So, yes, in my desperation not to be boring, I drop anything that I think is too technical, or simply too dull.

The basic premise is a very firm structure: ‘every day thing’ followed by ‘what it tells us about the universe’. Did this structure govern your writing or did it come out of a more organic process?

Well, the idea for the book came from the publicity phase of the previous book. When you find yourself being interviewed on a radio programme, for instance, you may have only a few minutes to explain something. So all the careful explanation you put in your book goes out the window. In such situations, I find myself grasping for some every day thing that I can relate to deeper physics.

For instance, I was trying to explain the conflict which led to quantum theory, our best description of the world of atoms. The conflict arises because atoms are tiny, localised things, whereas the light they emit and absorb is a wave, which is fundamentally spread out thing like a wave on the pond. In fact, it turns out that the light waves emitted by atoms are thousands of times bigger than the atoms. So, thinking on my feet, I said, imagine you open a matchbox and out drives a 40-ton truck. That’s what it’s like when an atom spits out light!

Well, one thought led to another, and I thought, why don’t I just write a book where every chapter takes in every day observation and tells the reader what it tells us about fundamental reality — about the Universe? Simple as that. Immediately, I could see it was a unifying thread that would tie together many things I was interested in. So, for instance, in We Need to Talk About Kelvin, I write about:

• How your face reflected in a window tells you that, at its deepest, most fundamental level, the Universe is based on random chance – that things happen to no reason at all.

• How fact that teacups break but don’t unbreak tells you that the Universe began in a big bang.

• How the fact that iron is common on Earth — it’s in our cities, in the core of the Earth, even in your blood — is telling us that out in space there must be a blisteringly hot furnace at a temperature of at least 5 billion degrees.

Were you always interested in writing?

Always. When I was at school, I liked English and I liked physics. But, in British schools, they didn’t let you do both arts and sciences, which is a terrible shame. So I went to university and did physics — first at University of London, then at the California Institute of technology in Pasadena (actually, I did radio astronomy, and the person who founded the radio astronomy group at Caltech – John Bolton – was an Australian). But I knew I wanted to be a writer. And I was always writing short stories, most of which I never finished (a big mistake – always finish!). So I gave up research in America and came back to London and tried to make a living as a journalist.

Most newspapers I wrote to told me to go away and get some experience and maybe in 10 years’ time I could come and clean their toilets! It was the old story of not being considered for a job without experience while needing a job to get that experience. Fortunately, after much persistence, I got my foot in the door (and if I have one piece of advice to anyone who wants to be a writer, it’s be persistent). I worked as a science journalist, then started writing popular science books, science fiction novels and even children’s fiction. As you can see, I am working my way back slowly to the kind of imaginative stuff I liked writing at school.

I still can’t quite believe it that I am a writer, something I always wanted to be. I can’t begin to tell you how fantastic it is to put “writer” under occupation on your passport. And how exciting it always is to see your books on the shelf in a bookstore. When a book comes out, I go in a bookstore and get my wife to photograph me holding up the book. I am that sad!

The title of this book is a little cheeky (my learned readers have already picked up the reference to ‘We Need to Talk About Kevin’ by Lionel Shriver), was this always going to be the title, from the beginning?

Titles are the hardest things. Get the right title and your book could become a bestseller. The trouble is great titles are few and far between. I waste whole holidays scouring books of poetry, song lyrics and so on, looking for titles. For instance, The Universe Next Door was a line in a poem by e. e. cummings. The Never-Ending Days of Being Dead was a phrase I read in Jim Crace’s brilliant but macabre novel, being dead. Quantum Theory Cannot Hurt You came from Adrian Mitchell’s poem, “Mashed potatoes cannot hurt you, darling”. I fought  like mad to keep the “darling” but my publisher vetoed it. I still hope that a future edition will come out under the title, Quantum Theory Cannot Hurt You, Darling.

I rarely start off with the finished title. The Universe Next Door began as Despatches from the Frontier of the Imagination (thank goodness I dropped that one!). The Never Ending Days of Being Dead started off as Deep Space (boring!). As for the current book, actually, I never really had a satisfactory title, even at the beginning. Then, at a very late stage, I just happened to be coming down the stairs in my house in London, and We Need to Talk about Kelvin just jumped into my mind. When I mentioned it to friends, they very often laughed immediately. So I thought, that’s it, that’s the title.

As you point out, it’s a play on Lionel Shriver’s excellent though horrific novel, We need to Talk about Kevin, in which an American boy massacres his schoolmates and family (Actually, I went to a talk given by Shriver at the Cheltenham literature Festival in the UK but was too shy to ask to write me a Foreword!). But, actually, you don’t have to know about Shriver’s book. If you do, the title will hopefully amuse you. If don’t, maybe you will wonder, Who is Kelvin? Why do I need to know about him? Either way, you may be intrigued enough to pick up the book, which was really the aim of the title.

One of the theories you mention in the book is the multiverse theory. I’m not sure if you’ve read Timeline by Michael Crichton, but in it, multiverse theory is the scientific reasoning behind the group’s ability to travel to medieval France. Do you think this is something we could achieve in the future? (I’m hoping yes…is this a fool’s hope?)

Remarkably, Einstein’s theory of gravity — the general theory of relativity — appears to show that time travel is possible. This is basically because time flows at different in regions with different gravity. So, if you could find a bridge between two such regions — such a bridge is known as the “wormhole” — you could indeed go be back in time.

Of course, Einstein’s theory shows only that time travel is possible in principle not in practice (and most physicist think it’s impossible in principle, we just haven’t yet found the law that forbids it. The difficulties of achieving it – with the aid of black holes and wormholes – are formidable, to say the least!

The kind of time travel permitted by Einstein theory of gravity differs in two respects from that featured in H. G. Well’s The Time Machine. First, you have to travel into space travel in time. And, secondly, you cannot go back in time to time before you built your time machine. So, if someone built a time machine this year, next year it could be used to travel back to 2010. But not 2009. To travel back to mediaeval France, you would need to find a time machine abandoned on Earth by extraterrestrials before that time!

Of course, the multiverse envisioned by Crichton — I’m guessing one in which there are an infinity of realities playing out all possible histories — is a radical change in worldview from Einstein’s. So all bets are off as far as what might and might not be possible!

I’ve been reading a lot about your children’s book, Felicity Frobisher and the Three-headed Aldebaran Dust Devil (phew, what long title!). Can you tell us a bit about how you came to write this, and if there are any more children’s books on the cards?

Yes, Felicity Frobisher and the Three-Headed Aldebaran Dust Devil  (Faber) is a long title. I just thought it would be fun to write a children’s book. I didn’t want to get stuck in the popular science ghetto. So, I thought, what can I do that other children’s writers can’t do? And I thought, I know about wormholes – shortcuts through space-time permitted to exist by Einstein’s theory of gravity. So I used them as a plot device.

But, really, the book is about having a very bad friend. Felicity Frobisher is very ordinary – she wears big glasses, is not very good at school, not very good at sport…Then, one day, Flummff, a Three-Headed Aldebaran Dust Devil, shoots out of a wormhole in Felicity’s bedroom wall like a champagne cork from a bottle… and all hell breaks loose.

Felicity is quiet and polite and never gets into any trouble. But Flummff gets her into no end of trouble. She is chased out of parks by fist-waving park keepers, accuse of cheating in the school cross country run. On the plus side, during her science lesson, she does get to go down a wormhole to the International Space Station and visit Flummff’s very dusty, very gritty world around the red giant star Aldebaran.

I should point out that the book is actually very, very silly! And it is autobiographical! I am Felicity Frobisher. I was dull and boring and never got into trouble at school. And I had a bad friend who got me into all sorts of trouble.

For an extract and lots more, go to… www.felicityfrobisher.com

I so enjoyed writing Felicity Frobisher – and the reaction from children was so overwhelming – that I am currently writing Felicity Frobisher and the Newly Wedded Capellan Toast Weevil and have a third book plotted too. The only problem is I have to find a publisher.

Will you be returning to Australia for any writers festivals this year? I’ve heard (shock horror) that you can’t actually get Tim Tams in the UK…surely this is a good a reason as any to revisit…

I’d absolutely love to return to Australia. However, I haven’t been invited to any writers’ festivals! It was brilliant coming to the Sydney Writers’ Festival last year. Everyone was so kind and enthusiastic and welcoming. My wife and I had never been to Australia before but had wanted to go. It definitely lived up to expectations. We went up to northern Queensland where we snorkeled off the Barrier Reef and were pinned in our hotel room by a 5-foot cassowary called Barbara!

And, yes, the organisers of the Sydney Writers’ Festival very kindly supplied the writers with… Tim Tams. We became addicted to them. And, yes, they are a good reason for a return visit (Mind you, we have found them in an Australian shop in London’s Covent Garden, along with Cherry Ripe’s and other Ozzie goodies!)

Can you share with us a couple of your favourite (fiction and non-fiction) books of all time?

Sorry, once I got started, I got carried away! Fiction…

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

Shikasta by Doris Lessing

The Waves by Virginia Woolf

How Late it was, How Late by James Kelman

The Vintner’s Luck by Elizabeth Knox

London Fields by Martin Amis

Explorers of the New Century by Magnus Mills

Cosmicomics by Italo Calvino

The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy

The Wind-up Bird Chronicle by Haruki Murakami

My Name is Red by Orhan Pamuk

The Corner Boys by Geoffrey Beattie

Two Caravans by Marina Lewycka

The Heart of the Matter by Graham Greene

A Star called Henry by Roddy Doyle

What I Loved by Siri Husvedt

Non-fiction…

The Cosmic Connection by Carl Sagan

The Promise of Space by Arthur C Clarke

Wasted by Mark Johnson

Love and War in the Apennines by Eric Newby

Chaos by James Gleick

Surely, You’re Joking, Mr Feynman by Ralph Leighton, Richard Feynman, and Edward Hutchings

Man on the Moon by Andrew Chaikin

QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter by Richard Feynman

The Prisons We Choose to Live Inside by Doris Lessing

The Strangest Man by Graham Farmelo

Fermat’s Last Theorem by Simon Singh

Kevin and I in India by Frank Kusy

Protestant Boy by Geoffrey Beattie

Piaf by Simone Berteaut

My youngest brother’s name is Kelvin. He wanted me to ask you if you would like him to sign any copies of your book for you…

Yes!

(With Extra Pulp says: I’ll get right onto this!)

That was it! As I said this is a blog tour, so if you’re so inclined, go read someone else’s interview. There’s a handy little list of them all.

There’s a little Sydney band that I love, who aren’t so little. In fact, there are a seven of them, sometimes more. They’re called Cuthbert and the Nightwalkers and they’re one of my favourite live acts.

Anyway, one of their members, bassist Brendan Walsh, was kind enough to sit down and tell us about his childhood books, obsession with Nabokov, and what the band likes to get up to on tour…

So you studied English at uni. Was this just for fun or were you hoping for a career out of it?

This was just for pure enjoyment… and fun was had by all. I especially enjoyed post-modern literature such as DeLillo and JG Ballard. Although since then I have followed on from that and finished a teaching degree. Which I couldn’t have done that without my trusty arts degree.

What kind books did you grow up reading, and do you think they had an impact on who you are today? (I grew up reading Enid Blyton and Lewis Carroll and as a result, still can’t tell the difference between reality and fantasy)

Besides the obvious Morris Gleitzman & Paul Jennings, I read alot of 2000AD comics my older brother gave me. I think this gave me my tolerance/love for blood and gore in fiction. :)

What kind of impact has your booknerdery had on your music?

Well in Shakin’ Howls it’s definitely made it a lot easier for me to write lyrics. The kind of music where (garage/punk rock) the lyrics don’t have to be too serious, but they can be. I like to concentrate on serious topics but write about them in a irreverent and silly way. Being into books and poetry has made this process a lot easier.

And in Cuthbert and the Night Walkers I know that book-nerdery has definitely influenced Richie’s writing. Specifically I remember he wrote the first song on Love Needs Us after reading “The Picture of Dorian Gray”. And you can really tell the influence in the writing of this song, as the lyrics are very wordy and flowery. And also in the way the song, “Sex is Not Everything”, questions hedonistic life styles and the search for true meaning in life. (pretty deep Richie)

If you could have dinner with any author living or dead, who would it be? and what kind of food would you serve?

I’d love to have dinner with Hunter S Thompson. I reckon I’d like to drive him to Dino’s Diner and get a good old school American hot dog. Followed by a drug cocktail desert involving hallucinogens and amphetamines. And then go for a drive down the Prince’s Highway and just take the night from there.

What’s the best book to movie adaptation?

Surely it would have to be Clockwork Orange. It’s amazing as a book and a movie. I think Kubrick’s surreal and violent adaption complements the book perfect.

What, in your opinion, is the worst book to movie adaptation?

Breakfast at Tiffany’s. I fell in love Capote’s short stories and novellas a few years ago. He has a beautiful eye for intriguing and magical detail. His short stories can also be incredibly cute and funny or heart wrenchingly emotional. Breakfast at Tiffany’s seemed to have elements of both of these extremes, while the movie’s ‘happy ending’ changed the whole tone of the story and just felt like such a cop-out. But Hepburn was still magic.

Best book you’ve read in 2009?

Definitely would have to be Lolita. Which has spurred a Nabokov obsession. It is such a beautifully written book. Which is extra impressive because English is not Nabokov’s first language. This book was also interesting because I’ve never been involved and sympathetic with a main character while at the same time finding him so absolutely despicable.

Worst book you’ve read in 2009?

Catcher in the Rye. I know this is a little controversial (what with JD dying recently) but I think I just read it at the wrong age. It was over hyped to me by my friends and I found the story a little pointless and the main character quite hard to relate to. Though in saying that, if I read it when I was 16 I think I would have loved it. And I did find the main character quite funny and enjoyable at times.

Do you get time to read when you go on tour? And if so, do you have a particular author/genre of choice?

Actually on our last trip to Melbourne, Nat from the band brought along the Motley Crue confessional “The Dirt”. We ended up taking turns reading out the chapters to the rest of the band on the drive down. It was like listening to an audio book and was way more enjoyable than playing eye spy. Also that book is the be all and end all of the rock band confession genre. It follows them from being wild and out kids with no money to being the biggest and most hedonistic band in the world. And then the eventual self-destruction of the band. It includes a death, gaol time, the singer being replaced and the marriages of Tommy Lee to Heather Graham & Pamela Anderson. What more could you want!

But the true reason this is better than its counterparts is that it is a joint effort between all band members and their managers etc. Each will only write for one chapter at a time. This stops it from becoming too self-obsessed and boring. Which most other autobiographical music confessional books do.

In your photo, you look quite absorbed in Lolita, can I ask what part you were up to?

(I’m sorry I can’t actually remember. But I think it was towards the end when they were living together in a house and she was going to that private school.)

And just because I love to be a linkyslut, you can see one of Cuthbert and the Nighwalkers’ supercute videos here.