Interview: Barbara Mujica, author of I AM VENUS

Barbara Mujica, author of the acclaimed historical novels frida and Sister Teresa turns her eye to 17^th-century Spain and the court of King Phillip IV in her latest book, I Am Venus, published earlier this month by Overlook. Chronicling the scandalous affair between the great Baroque Spanish painter Diego Velázquez and the young model who became his Venus, Barbara Mujica vividly reimagines the great artist’s rise to prominence, set against a backdrop of political turmoil and romantic scandal. Narrated by the mysterious model who posed for Velázquez’s only female nude, “The Rokeby of Venus,” I Am Venus is a seductive historical novel of the forbidden love between an artist and his muse. Barbara Mujica joins us today on the Winged Elephant to discuss the research and inspiration behind her latest novel. Welcome, Barbara!

OP: How would you describe your novel? Is it a book for fans of historical novels, or fans of Velazquez and Spanish history. Who will it most appeal to?

BM: I Am Venus is aimed at the general reader. Fans of historical fiction will find plenty historical atmosphere. I did a lot of research on food, clothing, homes, leisure activities, and other aspects of 17^th-century life, but the novel doesn’t presuppose a particular interest in the Spanish Golden Age. Similarly, fans of Velázquez will find lots of information about his training and artistic development, his use of color and form, and his relationship with mentors. However, you don’t need to be a Velázquez fan or an expert in Spanish history to enjoy this book. The story is rich and entertaining because Velázquez and his contemporaries were fascinating people living at a fascinating time.

OP: As in your previous novel, frida, you show an uncanny ability to portray the life of an artist – both inside and outside the studio. What experience do you have with the lives of artists?

BM: I have always been enthralled by artists. My husband is an architect with extensive training in art and art history, so I have spent much of my adult life hearing about artists and visiting museums. Furthermore, I work in a period—the late Renaissance—when painting and sculpture were flourishing in Europe, and so art history is part of my intellectual background.

OP: What inspired you to use The Rokeby Venus, among many other of Velasquez’s masterworks?

BM: First of all, Venus is an enigma. We don’t know the circumstances under which this painting was produced, so I was really able to let my imagination run wild. Second, this painting was created during a time of religious repression when nudes were forbidden, and the Inquisition persecuted painters who produced them. The fact that Velázquez painted the Rokeby Venus and got away with it makes for a very enticing plot.

OP: Has the historical identity of the model for The Rokeby Venus ever been established? Can you talk a bit about your creation of her for the novel.

BM: The real identity of the model is explained at the end of the book, so I think I won’t spoil the fun. I will say that due to the way the painting was composed, there has been a lot of conjecture about it, which leaves the writer a lot of leeway.

OP: Velazquez’s wife, Juana, is a fascinating character in the story. How much of her is imagined, or based on historical research?

BM: Her identity is historical. She was the daughter of Velázquez’s painting master, Francisco Pacheco, and the mother-in-law of his apprentice, Mazo. However, we know very little about her life. I have done a lot of research on 17^th-century Spanish women and, in fact, much of my scholarly writing is on that subject. From my readings of women’s letters, stories by 17^th-century women authors, treatises on women by moralists of the period, and historical studies on women, I constructed a feisty, down-to-earth character who, like some of the real women I’ve studied, bucks the cultural norms of the period. Both she and Velázquez are deeply human characters, flawed, emotive, and capable of both wonderful and reprehensible deeds. 

OP: I Am Venus contains many parallels between 17^th century Spain and the modern world – political unrest, economic crisis, ongoing wars, scandal and hypocrisy, religious fanaticism. Do you think readers will see and understand these connections, and was it something you were aware of before writing the novel?

BM: I have taught 17^th-century Spain at Georgetown University for many years, and I’ve always been struck by how much that period resembles our own. Spain was deeply in dept, yet continued to spend, borrowing money from foreign creditors. It was engaged in multiple wars that drained the economy. Taxes and unemployment were high.  Veterans who returned from the Thirty Years War were unable to find jobs and sometimes didn’t get their pensions. Politicians and priests preached morality, yet engaged in lechery. Mores were changing. I don’t think readers can help but make connections. I think there are lessons to be learned from I Am Venus. In a sense, it could be seen as a cautionary tale.  

 

Publishers Weekly Interviews Andrew Rosenheim on FEAR ITSELF

Last week Andrew Rosenheim's new WWII political thriller FEAR ITSELF received a starred review from Publishers Weekly, who called it a "top-notch historical thriller" and an "intelligent page-turner." This week PW sat down with Rosenheim to talk about the background behind the book and to discuss the real life American history that inspired the story.

While America Slept: PW Talks with Andrew Rosenheim
By Lenny Picker

 

An FBI agent goes undercover inside the German-American Bund in Andrew Rosenheim’s Fear Itself, the first in a new historical series. 

How did you come to write this book?

It came out of an interest in the under-recognized Germanness of so much of American society; also a “what if” interest about what would have happened had FDR not run for a third term. And spurred by some disapproving English views of America’s comparatively late entry into World War II (I’ve lived in England for about 30 years and so have encountered that sentiment), from my own curiosity about what did take us so long.

And what did?

Much of public opinion was adamantly opposed to entering the war. This had only partly changed after Germany marched through western Europe in the spring of 1940. This isolationist sentiment meant Congress was a very real impediment to FDR’s efforts to engineer an American entry into the conflict. Even FDR, during the campaign of 1940, felt obliged to vow that he would not send young American men to fight in a foreign war.

What led him to consider a third term?

FDR felt he alone could steer America toward war—or least provide effective aid for a beleaguered Britain. He didn’t really decide to run until spring 1940, and did so reluctantly. He knew he wasn’t well; he was deeply fatigued after eight years trying to bring America out of the Depression; and he respected the convention that two terms was enough for any president. But he felt obliged to run, and we should all be glad he did. FDR’s simple courage in wanting to support England and to combat fascism isn’t recognized enough.

Do you see any commonalities between U.S. isolationism at the time and the current reluctance to get involved internationally?

A similar distrust of foreign conflicts in faraway lands, though current skepticism seems more justified, given our recent experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is a similar insularity, a similar feeling that the rest of the world can go hang—though this seems rather less justified in today’s very global economy and geopolitics. 

Did the book change from its original conception?

The German-American Bund plays a smaller role in the plot that ultimately emerged. The Bund was certainly extremist and ardently pro-Nazi, but it was also largely ineffectual and had withered as a potent political force by 1940. Interestingly, most Bund members were recent arrivals from Germany. German-Americans who had arrived earlier (the vast majority) were never very keen on Hitler, though they were reluctant to see their new country fight their old one.

Happy Belated Birthday to Eclipse, The Horse that Changed Racing History Forever

For centuries people have celebrated April 1 as the Day of Fools. But the first of April in 1764 gave way to another cause for celebration: on that day during a solar eclipse, a racing star was born. For 17 months in the 18^th century, the legendary racehorse aptly named Eclipse dominated the Sport of Kings with a winning streak that went unparalleled for the next two centuries. Retiring as an undefeated champion, Eclipse became a prolific sire with descendants including Secretariat, Barbaro, and 95% of racehorses found worldwide. So honored is his legacy that he earned the nickname “father of the modern racehorse” and the racing industry’s most esteemed award is named for him. Over 200 years later, Overlook Press celebrates the birth of the legendary thoroughbred with the publication of ECLIPSE: The Horse that Changed Racing History Forever.

Written by journalist and racing enthusiast Nicholas Clee, ECLIPSE is more than just the legend of the great paragon of horse racing; it is also a lively social history, a dual portrait of 18^th century London. Through vivid descriptions and designated chapters for each major player in Eclipse’s story, Clee reveals a sophisticated and stately society ruled by bewigged aristocrats and politicians and also a bawdy era where gambling, prostitution, and sport reign supreme. Nicholas Clee was kind enough to entertain the burning questions we had surrounding the book and the famous Eclipse:

OP: To write a fascinating historical account on horse racing with such incredible detail, one must possess a great passion for the sport and have completed a tremendous around of research. To what can you attribute your interest in racing and specifically Eclipse? At what point did you know you wanted to write a book about the famed racehorse?

NC: This is the influence of my grandmother and of my great-grandmother, with whom I lived for several years before the age of 8. (My grandmother’s brother, who died young and whom I never knew, had been a racing tipster for a while.) We used to watch the racing on television: the first big race I remember was the 1964 Derby, won by a horse called Santa Claus. In 1966, when I was 9, I was at Kempton Park to witness the last race of Arkle, a legendary horse in British jump racing.

A book called The Home Run Horse by US racing journalist Glenye Cain alerted me to the Eclipse story. She gave a brief but colourful account of the great horse and his roguish owner. I showed the passage to my wife, saying, “I think there’s a book in this”; she agreed.

I’ve been lucky enough to write two books – my first was Don’t Sweat the Aubergine (Eggplant, you would say), about food and cooking – about my hobbies. They’re the two best jobs I’ve ever had.

OP: The information included in ECLIPSE is extensive: from Eclipse’s racing career to his legacy to racing terms, his owner’s family tree and more. Can you talk about what the research process was like? How long had you been conducting research? What was the most surprising thing you discovered?

NC:I often find, when I’ve completed a substantial piece of work, that I cannot properly remember how I did it. Perhaps it’s analogous to women’s reputed tendency to forget the pain of childbirth, except that researching Eclipse was pure pleasure. I do remember that I spent some six months – although I had a few other jobs to do as well – on the research before I wrote anything. I was in the British Library for most of the time, but I also, to my great good fortune, had the assistance of Tim Cox, who is the proprietor of the largest privately owned racing library in the world. Tim, very generously, uncovered valuable information concerning Eclipse’s pedigree and his sale as a yearling.

The most surprising thing: it was the discovery that certain events that have acquired the status of myth did in fact take place. The principal source of information about Dennis O’Kelly’s life is a scurrilous volume of “Genuine Memoirs”, published shortly after his death. One section of the book recalls how he met his lifelong companion, the brothel madam Charlotte Hayes, in the Fleet debtors’ prison. You don’t know whether to believe it. But there, in the Fleet records in the London Metropolitan Archives, are Dennis’s and Charlotte’s names. Finding them, on rolls of fragile paper, was a thrill: suddenly, these people were real, rather than characters in a story.

OP: ECLIPSE not only profiles the history of the iconic racehorse’s career, but also includes detailed accounts of the cast of characters involved in Eclipse’s life. What drew you to this story and this period in history?

NC: When I took my degree, I got my best mark in 18^th-century literature. The period has always appealed: the Enlightenment ideas, the wit and elegance of the literature, the curious balance between order and anarchy in the social life.

What gave the Eclipse story its piquancy, I thought, was the juxtaposition of the supreme racehorse in what is known as the Sport of Kings with an owner from the wrong side of the tracks. Eclipse was bred by a royal prince; he has established the most aristocratic bloodline in horseracing. But his purchase was in part financed by prostitution, and the riches that he and his progeny generated at stud helped to secure a brothel madam’s comfortable retirement.

OP: Eclipse’s owner Dennis O’Kelly was an Irish adventurer, rogue, and gambler—an outsider to the Sport of Kings in every conceivable way—how did the political and moral climate of England at the time facilitate or hinder his rise to prominence?

NC: I suspect that the 18^th century wasn’t so different from our own day in this respect. Dennis O’Kelly arrived in London with nothing, spent several years in a debtors’ prison, yet rose to be a considerable figure in society, with the future Prince Regent and King (George IV) among his acquaintances. But he found that certain doors remained closed: he was never, for example, accepted into membership of the Jockey Club, the association of the most distinguished figures in racing. Similar laws apply now. The wealth of Simon Cowell, for example, does not mean that the grandest families would accept him as one of their own.

OP: Throughout ECLIPSE, you paint a vivid portrait of 18^th century England and the racing scene. How has the evolution of racing reflected a changing society then and now?

NC: Eclipse (1764-1789) lived just before the industrial revolution gathered pace. It was before the era of mass communication too.

Dennis O’Kelly anticipated the changes, setting up the most overtly commercial stud farm Britain had seen, and generating more publicity for Eclipse than any horse had received previously. Eclipse came along just at the right time, because the horses he sired tended to be speedier, capable of thriving at the shorter distances that racing introduced to stimulate its growth as a spectator sport.

I argue in the book that no other sport has particular, distinctive appeal for so many layers of society. On Derby Day, Epsom Downs attracts 100,000 people, ranging from the Queen in the Royal Box to the travellers on the open part of the course. They all have their own reasons to be there, centred on three-year-old Thoroughbreds racing over a mile and a half.

OP: You obviously have extensive knowledge of Eclipse’s winning races and the opponents he bested. In your opinion, if one of Eclipse's prominent descendants today were able to race him in his prime, would Eclipse still be standing in the winner’s circle?

NC: We all know that Usain Bolt would outrun Jesse Owens. Roger Federer at his peak would thrash Rod Laver at his peak. But does that make Usain Bolt a greater athlete than Jesse Owens, and Roger Federer a greater tennis player than Rod Laver? These are tricky questions.

Today’s top Thoroughbreds, and probably the weaker ones as well, would leave Eclipse trailing in the distance. But what you have to look at, I think, is the level of superiority a sporting figure establishes – provided that the superiority is over decent opposition. Eclipse beat all the best racehorses of his day, without breaking sweat. There was nothing to touch him. While other horses have gone through their careers unbeaten, no other has gained such an aura of supremacy. So, The Greatest? Yes.