Speaker 1: Hey, Girlfriends, it's Anna here. This is Bonus episode four,
Speaker 1: the final one, and this one's really special because it
Speaker 1: was recorded live at Wilderness Festival back in August. It's
Speaker 1: going to include a lot of discussion about murder and
Speaker 1: violence against women, and it's going to touch on the
Speaker 1: topic of abortion. But it's also really fascinating discussion about
Speaker 1: the ethics of true crime and the roles we all
Speaker 1: play as part of it.
Speaker 2: So to the festival.
Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to our very first live podcast recording
Speaker 1: of The Girlfriends.
Speaker 2: It is so great to be here at Wilderness Festival.
Speaker 1: I've got a crick in my neck because I slept
Speaker 1: badly last night in a tent.
Speaker 2: Awful, but it was so nice as well.
Speaker 1: I'm Anna Sinfield and today I'm joined by Kate summer Scale,
Speaker 1: the author of The Peak Show, which is a true
Speaker 1: crime book about a set of eight shocking murders that
Speaker 1: happened in London in the nineteen forties and fifties. The
Speaker 1: book deep dives on the serial killer John Christie, his
Speaker 1: female victims, and the circumstances that allowed him to go
Speaker 1: uncourt for so long and potentially caused another man to
Speaker 1: be hanged for his crime, but it also brings up
Speaker 1: lots of interesting questions about the impact and role of
Speaker 1: true crime reporting, which is basically what we're going to
Speaker 1: be talking about today. So, without any further ado from
Speaker 1: the teams at Novel and iHeart Podcasts, this is the
Speaker 1: Girlfriend's Jail House Lawyer. Okay, So fans of the Girlfriends
Speaker 1: will know that our later series Your House Lawyer.
Speaker 2: I wrestle with figuring out my role.
Speaker 1: In reporting that story, and also, more broadly, with the
Speaker 1: ethics of true crime reporting, of turning something so kind
Speaker 1: of awful into a sense of like morbid entertainment. And
Speaker 1: I know that that's something that you've had to wrestle
Speaker 1: with yourself in your book The Peak Show, Kate. And
Speaker 1: so before we get a little too existential about our jobs,
Speaker 1: I was wondering if you could tell me first what
Speaker 1: drew you to this story out of all the grizzly
Speaker 1: murders in the world.
Speaker 3: It felt as if I'd always dimly known about it,
Speaker 3: like a horrible fairy tale. I saw the wax statue
Speaker 3: of reg Christie at the Madame Tusword's Chamber of Horrors
Speaker 3: when I was about eight, and I saw the film
Speaker 3: tenon Place on late night TV when I was in
Speaker 3: my teens, and I remembered it when there were the
Speaker 3: murders of several women in London in twenty twenty twenty
Speaker 3: one who had been killed by strangers, Sarah Everard among them,
Speaker 3: and I started thinking about that phenomenon, men who kill
Speaker 3: women who are strangers to them just because they are women,
Speaker 3: And I started wondering why, and I remembered the Rillington
Speaker 3: Place story. I didn't even remember Red Christie's name at
Speaker 3: the time, but when I looked it up, I saw
Speaker 3: various parallels and echoes with the more recent crimes, and
Speaker 3: I thought that by studying him and his world, I
Speaker 3: could get a better sense of the connections between a culture,
Speaker 3: a society, and the violence it produces than by looking
Speaker 3: at my own time, which is almost too close up
Speaker 3: to see.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, when you looked at those crimes of
Speaker 1: before and compared them to the crimes that you had
Speaker 1: been experiencing in the early twenties, seeing these women murdered
Speaker 1: by strangers, did you feel like there was difference? Did
Speaker 1: you notice a difference between them or does it just
Speaker 1: feel like this sad trope of male violence has just
Speaker 1: continued in the same form.
Speaker 3: I did notice more the similarities and the differences. He
Speaker 3: was not least Christie, I discovered, like Wayne Cousins, was
Speaker 3: serving as a policeman when he committed his first known murder.
Speaker 3: He was a reserve policeman during the Second World War,
Speaker 3: which was an amazing opportunity for catching women unawares and
Speaker 3: concealing crimes of violence.
Speaker 4: So yes, I noticed the parallels, but it was.
Speaker 3: Sort of easier to see at a distance in the fifties,
Speaker 3: the way that Christie's attitudes were so closely echoed in
Speaker 3: the press, in the police force, in the way that
Speaker 3: pathologists talked about the victims, and so it helt easier
Speaker 3: to understand him as a product of his society as
Speaker 3: well as of his individual life.
Speaker 1: You brought up the press there, and a big part
Speaker 1: of your book focuses on this crime reporter called Harry Procter,
Speaker 1: and you say in the book, and I'm going to
Speaker 1: quote this, that he was successful because he didn't just
Speaker 1: tell a story, he infiltrated it.
Speaker 2: He embedded himself.
Speaker 1: I know that I lose myself in so many of
Speaker 1: the cases that I work on, and they're pretty kind
Speaker 1: of hardcore stories of people being killed or experiencing violence
Speaker 1: in some respect, Are you as obsessive about your stories
Speaker 1: as Harry Procter and me.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I love the research more than any other part
Speaker 3: of the composition of a book. I mean, most of
Speaker 3: my research, because I write historical stories, is in archives,
Speaker 3: and so I'm going through old papers, witness statements, in
Speaker 3: police files, transcripts of trials, photographs, maps, floor plans, and
Speaker 3: I get completely lost in it. And it feels, you know,
Speaker 3: as you literally are sort of touching the past. You're
Speaker 3: holding the same documents as the people who you're writing
Speaker 3: about and thinking about, and so I find it very,
Speaker 3: very absorbing.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know about you, But on my desk,
Speaker 1: my writing desk at home now, I've got a kind
Speaker 1: of really quite weird and perverse collection of belongings and
Speaker 1: things that have been owned by victims in some of
Speaker 1: my stories or their families, and I've been gifted them
Speaker 1: or you know, loaned them so that i can do
Speaker 1: my research, and it always feels so different holding you know,
Speaker 1: for example, I've got a version of a book that
Speaker 1: was owned by this woman called Heidi's Family in the
Speaker 1: second series of the girlfriends. We identify this woman called
Speaker 1: Heidi who had been murdered, and I've got her dad's
Speaker 1: version of a book that was written about her murder.
Speaker 1: And it feels so strange to own that artifacts and
Speaker 1: to hold it in my hand. It feels different from
Speaker 1: the version that I had when it was just from
Speaker 1: the library. Do you feel strange touching the past in
Speaker 1: that way.
Speaker 4: Yes, i'd have.
Speaker 3: I mean maybe because they happened seventy years ago. I
Speaker 3: don't have so many objects in my possession, but they
Speaker 3: are just open to the public. It feels kind of
Speaker 3: miraculous that you can just order up these papers and
Speaker 3: artifacts sometimes and sort of be with them and touch them.
Speaker 3: And sometimes there are weird coincidences. I'll order a second
Speaker 3: hand book on the internet and when it arrives, open
Speaker 3: it and find it's sort of being inscribed to one
Speaker 3: of the characters in the story. And then you feel
Speaker 3: part of actually a strangely close knit network or world,
Speaker 3: and you feel like you're sort of participating in it,
Speaker 3: albeit over time you're not their live, but the aspiration
Speaker 3: is to sort of be live, And in moments like that,
Speaker 3: you feel like it almost is unfolding in real time.
Speaker 1: There's a line in your book that really stood out
Speaker 1: to me because it's been something I've been pulling my
Speaker 1: hair out a little bit over. Is you wrote being
Speaker 1: complicit in a culture that made morbid entertainment of women's bodies.
Speaker 1: I believe you were talking about the journalism of the time.
Speaker 1: But as a true crime writer today, do you think
Speaker 1: that's changed and what do you think your role is
Speaker 1: in that?
Speaker 4: I think it's much more starkly visible.
Speaker 3: In the nineteen fifties, the ways in which the tabloid
Speaker 3: press in particular, but also movies and posters and adverts
Speaker 3: entered women was so sort of glaringly sexualized and objectified,
Speaker 3: and for entertainment, you know, for pleasure, for male flecture principally,
Speaker 3: But of course there are versions of that now, but
Speaker 3: it's less in your face, so you kind of see
Speaker 3: it more clearly. And in fact, there were murders that
Speaker 3: took place in North London in twenty twenty near where
Speaker 3: I live. Bieber Henry and Nicole Smallman, who sisters, were
Speaker 3: killed in a park. They were killed by a stranger
Speaker 3: who had a mission to kill a certain number of women,
Speaker 3: and afterwards the police circulated photographs of their bodies and
Speaker 3: talk about a peep show, talk about making a morbid entertainment.
Speaker 3: But the press does the same. A book like mine
Speaker 3: does that. It's trying to tell a story that will
Speaker 3: engage in gross script the reader and the subject is
Speaker 3: the of these women. So there's some degree of complicity,
Speaker 3: but there are different ways of doing it. There are
Speaker 3: different ways of thinking and feeling about it and presenting it.
Speaker 3: And in fact, in my book, I made the decision
Speaker 3: to not include a photo section because there seemed no
Speaker 3: way of illustrating this book without having a sort of
Speaker 3: gallery of victims mugshots. So that's sort of try to
Speaker 3: use Harry Procter in a way, who was also troubled
Speaker 3: by some of these issues and was the style crime
Speaker 3: reporter for one of the best selling tabloids in the country.
Speaker 3: Use him to help me think about what I'm doing
Speaker 3: and what we do and what we do as readers
Speaker 3: of true crime or listeners to through crime podcasts and
Speaker 3: so on, and to at least reflect on that as
Speaker 3: I go.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I mean that was going to be one
Speaker 1: of my next questions was in Harry Potter's autobiography in
Speaker 1: relation to people criticizing his reporting, He says, it was
Speaker 1: tougher for me to do than for you to read it,
Speaker 1: So why the hell do we do it?
Speaker 4: That sounds very defensive to me of Harry Procter.
Speaker 5: It.
Speaker 3: It's not a little I mean, I wouldn't do it
Speaker 3: unless I did enjoy it and find it rewarding and
Speaker 3: feel I was some gripped and learnt things by doing it.
Speaker 3: And he goes on in that passage to sort of
Speaker 3: he blames his editors for sending him out on these stories,
Speaker 3: and in fact, he did eventually have a nervous breakdown
Speaker 3: because they wouldn't take him off. So he blames his editors,
Speaker 3: He blames his bosses for sending him out on the stories,
Speaker 3: and he blames his readers. He says, I only give
Speaker 3: it to you because you want it, you know, before
Speaker 3: you back through a moral outrage at me, you're the
Speaker 3: ones who want it. So it all sounds very troubled
Speaker 3: and defensive to me, as if he really he really
Speaker 3: is struggling with his role in this material and the
Speaker 3: ways in which he and many in Fleet Street carried
Speaker 3: out their inquiries at the time is quite shocking by
Speaker 3: today's standards, but that doesn't you know, it's still a
Speaker 3: it's all on a spectrum.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, obviously, as a true homewriter, I also
Speaker 1: am going to endorse that it's a good medium. But
Speaker 1: I do think that there are some genuine upsides to
Speaker 1: some of the stuff we do, and you point out
Speaker 1: some in your book. For example, some of the essays
Speaker 1: and works around Tim Evans, the man who was hanged
Speaker 1: prior to Christie's arrest, that helped move the needle on
Speaker 1: conversations around the death penalty. So like, actually that writing
Speaker 1: helped make a difference.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And Harry Proctor was desperate to get Christy to
Speaker 3: confess to the murder of the little girl, one year
Speaker 3: old girl for which Tim Evans had hanged, And it
Speaker 3: wasn't just a search for justice this particular case, but
Speaker 3: also to expose the way that the justice system could
Speaker 3: malfunction and innocent people because there was capital punishment, could
Speaker 3: be sent to their deaths and so there was no
Speaker 3: way of correcting the error. So the Evans case was
Speaker 3: really instrumental in getting the death penalty abolished in the
Speaker 3: nineteen sixties. It took that long, but Harry Propter was
Speaker 3: part of that push to expose the truth, and the government.
Speaker 4: Was very keen to.
Speaker 3: Move on and cover up this stuff because they wanted
Speaker 3: to defend the justice system, but also the existence of
Speaker 3: the death penalty, continuation of the death penalty, So it
Speaker 3: was quite a political story in those ways, but it
Speaker 3: also brought to light the reporting on the case, the
Speaker 3: publicity given to it also brought to light quite a
Speaker 3: lot of fractures and tensions in British society, and quite
Speaker 3: a lot of desperate practices, such as an awareness about
Speaker 3: illegal abortion and how dangerous it was and how desperate
Speaker 3: single women often were when they became pregnant and this
Speaker 3: was their only recourse at back street abortion because Christy
Speaker 3: posed as and I think acted as a backstreet abortionist,
Speaker 3: and this was one of the means by which he
Speaker 3: lured women to his home, and so the vulnerability, it
Speaker 3: was a particularly dramatic manifestation of the danger of back
Speaker 3: street abortion. You wouldn't normally expect to be murdered, but
Speaker 3: it was a fairly risky procedure in which women did sometimes.
Speaker 2: Die and were very easily exploited.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, both of those examples are examples of
Speaker 1: crime reporting that's actually making a difference.
Speaker 2: It's having a cultural impact.
Speaker 1: Do you think that crime reporting always needs to you know,
Speaker 1: the north Star needs we have an impact, We change things,
Speaker 1: we do something different.
Speaker 3: I don't think you always know what the impact will be,
Speaker 3: So I don't think needs to be justified by that.
Speaker 3: I think stories are worth telling. Terrible events are worth
Speaker 3: exploring to find out where they come from, what form
Speaker 3: they take, how they manifest themselves. And also some stories
Speaker 3: very interested in the way that some of these terrible
Speaker 3: stories express the fears and fantasies, often the unspoken fears
Speaker 3: and fantasies of a wider world. So as a writer,
Speaker 3: as a researcher, writing about crime feels like getting access
Speaker 3: to a kind of underground emotional life of a society.
Speaker 4: Of a culture, as a nation.
Speaker 3: You start to see the things that animate people, that
Speaker 3: scare them, that they fantasize about. And so there are
Speaker 3: lots of ways, not all of them practical, in where
Speaker 3: which a crime story, a story of violence can help
Speaker 3: us learn who we are and where we come from
Speaker 3: and how the world worked.
Speaker 1: Well, that was one of the things that I thought
Speaker 1: was great about your book, because you really pointed the
Speaker 1: finger back at the audience at all of the kind
Speaker 1: of sickos in the room today who like to listen
Speaker 1: about murders and read about murders and grizzly things and
Speaker 1: the darkest parts of society, and you kind of say,
Speaker 1: why is it that you want to participate in this
Speaker 1: grizzly peep show? And there are examples of it in
Speaker 1: the book as well. There was a group of women
Speaker 1: who tried to break in after it was kind of
Speaker 1: all boarded up, just because they presumably wanted to be
Speaker 1: in this place where so much darkness had happened to
Speaker 1: other women. And people want to know the worst details,
Speaker 1: don't they. Why do you think people are so obsessed
Speaker 1: with true crime?
Speaker 3: Such a big question when I read about the women
Speaker 3: who tried to break in through the bay window at
Speaker 3: Tamorylington Place, and I thought war weird, you know, And
Speaker 3: then I thought, it's what I'm doing.
Speaker 1: You're breaking into the window, breaking into the window and
Speaker 1: trying to get inside the house.
Speaker 3: You know, it's not so different. And people clamored at
Speaker 3: the courthouses to see Christy, to see him, and it
Speaker 3: was remarked upon sometimes that a lot of them were women.
Speaker 3: And now true crime podcasts at two thirds of the
Speaker 3: audiences are women, so that as a route to why
Speaker 3: are we so fascinated by it? I mean, one quite
Speaker 3: compelling idea to me is that there are stories that
Speaker 3: get told through these crimes that are not often aired,
Speaker 3: stories about domestic violence, about maratal unhappiness, about betrayal, about
Speaker 3: problems between parents and children, about unwanted pregnancies, that a
Speaker 3: lot of the domestic difficulty that many women kind of
Speaker 3: deal with it isn't aired so much in the pages
Speaker 3: of the press, and certainly didn't used to be in
Speaker 3: the nineteen fifties, unless through a story of a violent crime.
Speaker 3: So it gives us access to things that we sort
Speaker 3: of know about or half know about, or want to
Speaker 3: talk about. Another thing would be that it's a kind
Speaker 3: of knowing your enemy impulse. Do you want to see
Speaker 3: the man who might kill you, or what that kind
Speaker 3: of man looks like, or what makes him, how to
Speaker 3: identify him, what circumstances the women who were killed by
Speaker 3: him found themselves in that that happened to them, So
Speaker 3: a self protective instinct perhaps does at work as well. Also,
Speaker 3: I think there are just our own anger fear. Maybe
Speaker 3: even violent stories finds an outlet in thinking about and
Speaker 3: learning about these things, it can act as some kind
Speaker 3: of vent or self expression. Reading as well as writing,
Speaker 3: can be that kind of self express.
Speaker 2: I get that. Okay, So now I've called your sickos.
Speaker 1: I was just wondering if any of you had any
Speaker 1: questions for me or Kate, No pressure, Lovely over here,
Speaker 1: ll wait for the microphone.
Speaker 2: We've got to get it on the podcast.
Speaker 4: So dark stuff.
Speaker 3: So do you have some sort of cleansing for yourself
Speaker 3: once you've done some detailed research and you've written the
Speaker 3: book to step away?
Speaker 4: Do you need to do that at all? It feels
Speaker 4: a big relief.
Speaker 3: Maybe this is the case for a writer, but with
Speaker 3: a story as intense as this, and I did work
Speaker 3: on it very intensely, partly because there was so much material,
Speaker 3: I needed to go fast to kind of keep it
Speaker 3: in my head, to keep the story straight. And there's
Speaker 3: a great relief in sharing it with other people, in
Speaker 3: the first instance, your editor, a publishing team, that it
Speaker 3: stops being just yours. So publication is in itself a
Speaker 3: kind of lifting of the story from a private sphere
Speaker 3: into a public sphere, and people can read it converse
Speaker 3: with you about it. So something that has been internal
Speaker 3: conversations becomes something that can be talked about and that
Speaker 3: feels good, that feels really nice. I mean perhaps you're
Speaker 3: asking about during the process of writing. I think it
Speaker 3: feels like any job I need, you know, company, different
Speaker 3: things going on. I don't feel that it's a particularly
Speaker 3: more difficult thing to bear than any other. It's something
Speaker 3: I'm interested in enjoy. I don't feel poisoned by it,
Speaker 3: you know. I don't feel I need to be cleansed
Speaker 3: as I go. I just need sort of light and shade,
Speaker 3: as anyone would doing things for fun instead of things
Speaker 3: that are intense and purposeful.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think in short, hate's made of strong stuff.
Speaker 1: I don need some cleansing after all of my shows
Speaker 1: any more questions? Got one over here just in front.
Speaker 2: Hello. Do you when you go back to the start
Speaker 2: of your career to now, do you reflect on how
Speaker 2: it's perhaps shaped you as a person in your response
Speaker 2: to the world.
Speaker 3: Well, I've had a big change of career in that
Speaker 3: I worked as a journalist for many years for newspapers.
Speaker 4: I was an editor.
Speaker 3: Rather than a writer, and I left to write a
Speaker 3: book which was successful Beyond my dreams and need to
Speaker 3: continue writing books and that's all I do. That's been
Speaker 3: a huge change because I get to decide what I
Speaker 3: do every day. I get to sort of follow my nose,
Speaker 3: follow my curiosity, and I miss the company of the
Speaker 3: newspaper office. It's quite a solitary work I do now,
Speaker 3: but I love being able to determine my own path
Speaker 3: all the time, and I'm sure that has changed me
Speaker 3: as a person and how I feel my place in
Speaker 3: the world.
Speaker 1: I think we've got time, but one more question then
Speaker 1: I've got to wrap it up.
Speaker 5: Hi, So you were talking about why people listen to
Speaker 5: true crime. Do you think that because in the media
Speaker 5: killers are kind of shown as like monsters and stuff.
Speaker 5: Do you think there's like a need to feel separated
Speaker 5: from those people. What are your thoughts on that.
Speaker 4: Oh, I think totally yes.
Speaker 3: And I really noticed in the coverage of Christie how
Speaker 3: eager the press was to sort of monster him, you know,
Speaker 3: to either talk about him as a psychopath, a word
Speaker 3: I find quite problematic, just the way you're saying, like,
Speaker 3: not like me, you know, a monster, a creature, and
Speaker 3: the desire to distance oneself from the murderer and to
Speaker 3: be reassured that you're not that is. I think one
Speaker 3: of the pleasures of reading about crime, whether it's fictional
Speaker 3: or factual, and it's a totally understandable impulse, but one
Speaker 3: of its effects is to sort of say that this
Speaker 3: person has nothing to do with the society in which
Speaker 3: he lived, and I think there is more complicity than that.
Speaker 3: I was eager neither to glamorize Christie as this sort
Speaker 3: of great serial killer, you know, cunning, but nor to
Speaker 3: distance him in the way that the press did at
Speaker 3: the time, and to make him so different, so kind
Speaker 3: of exceptional. And I could see he was in some ways.
Speaker 3: He wasn't exceptional. The things he ultimately did were, but
Speaker 3: his sort of fantasies and assumptions and prejudices were perfectly ordinary,
Speaker 3: I mean, frighteningly ordinary. And I'm sure it's shared across
Speaker 3: the society. And I totally agree with you that one
Speaker 3: of the pleasures of especially like if you read a
Speaker 3: crime novel and you get to the end and you're
Speaker 3: one of the pleasures is it wasn't me, you know,
Speaker 3: knowing to do with me, So feelings of kind of
Speaker 3: unease or guilt are dispelled by the identification of the
Speaker 3: murderer and the assignment of blame.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: On the Girlfriend's Joe House Lawyer, which is the podcast
Speaker 1: that's coming out at the moment, We've actually tried to
Speaker 1: go on the other side of kind of exploring.
Speaker 2: What it means to be a villain.
Speaker 1: We're trying to understand what happens when you fall in
Speaker 1: the in between, which is where all of us fall,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry to say, is we're neither perfect nor are
Speaker 1: we totally bad. And even the perpetrators that I actually
Speaker 1: spend time interviewing. I'm interviewing people who've been convicted of
Speaker 1: murder on the show, and it's realizing that they have passed.
Speaker 2: That have led them up to that point.
Speaker 1: And when you start to kind of try and stop
Speaker 1: seeing them just as monsters, but as people who are
Speaker 1: a product of their circumstances, it forces you to look
Speaker 1: inwards as well, which is a scary place to be looking.
Speaker 2: Okay, well, that is a fun note to end on.
Speaker 1: Look, that's all we've got time for today, So thank
Speaker 1: you so much, Kate.
Speaker 2: This has been brilliant. Could everyone give her a big.
Speaker 1: Run of a pause, So do make sure to pick
Speaker 1: up Kate's book, The Peak Show at All the usual
Speaker 1: spots and check out The Girlfriends wherever you get your podcasts,
Speaker 1: which is where you hear me. Thank you, Thank you
Speaker 1: so much to Kate and to Wilderness Festival for having me,
Speaker 1: and thank you for listening.
Speaker 2: We've finally come to the end of season three.
Speaker 1: The Girlfriends will return with a brand new season very soon,
Speaker 1: and I won't give you any spoilers, but let's just
Speaker 1: say I've heard some of it and you're in for
Speaker 1: one hell of a story. Plus, make sure you check
Speaker 1: out The Girlfriend's Spotlight two where you can hear more
Speaker 1: incredible stories of women winning.
Speaker 2: That's it from me, so I'll see you soon.
Speaker 1: The Girlfriend's Gelhouse Lawyer is produced by Novel for iHeart Podcasts.
Speaker 1: For more from Novel, visit novel dot Audio. The show
Speaker 1: is hosted by me Anna Sinfield and is written and
Speaker 1: produced by me and Lee Meyer, with additional production from
Speaker 1: Jaco Taivich and Michael Jinno. Our assistant produce is Madeline Parr.
Speaker 1: The editors are Georgia Moody and me Annasinfield. Production management
Speaker 1: from Sarie Houston, Joe Savage, and Charlotte Wolfe.
Speaker 2: Our fact checker is Daniel Suleiman.
Speaker 1: Music supervision by me Alis Infield, Lee Meyer, and Nicholas Alexander.
Speaker 1: Original music composed by Nicholas Alexander, Daniel Kempson and Louisa Gerstein.
Speaker 1: Story development by Nell Gray Andrews and Willard Foxton. Creative
Speaker 1: director of novel, Max O'Brien and Craig Strachan are executive
Speaker 1: producers for novel, and Katrina Norvell and Nicki Eator are
Speaker 1: the executive producers for iHeart Podcasts, and the marketing lead
Speaker 1: is Alison Cantor. Thanks also to Carry Lieberman and the
Speaker 1: whole team at WME