Random House: Bringing You the Best in Fiction, Nonfiction, and Children's Books
Newletters and Alerts

Buy now from Random House

  • Palace Council
  • Written by Stephen L. Carter
  • Format: Trade Paperback | ISBN: 9780307385963
  • Our Price: $15.00
  • Quantity:
See more online stores - Palace Council

Buy now from Random House

  • Palace Council
  • Written by Stephen L. Carter
  • Format: eBook | ISBN: 9780307270290
  • Our Price: $11.99
  • Quantity:
See more online stores - Palace Council

Buy now from Random House

  • Palace Council
  • Written by Stephen L. Carter
    Read by Mirron Willis
  • Format: Unabridged Audiobook Download | ISBN: 9781415955970
  • Our Price: $30.00
  • Quantity:
See more online stores - Palace Council

Buy now from Random House

See more online stores - Palace Council

Palace Council

    Select a Format:
  • Book
  • eBook
  • Audiobook

Written by Stephen L. CarterAuthor Alerts:  Random House will alert you to new works by Stephen L. Carter


List Price: $11.99


On Sale: July 08, 2008
Pages: 560 | ISBN: 978-0-307-27029-0
Published by : Vintage Knopf

Audio Editions

Read by Mirron Willis
On Sale: July 08, 2008
ISBN: 978-1-4159-5597-0
More Info...

Read by Dominic Hoffman
On Sale: July 08, 2008
ISBN: 978-0-7393-4341-8
More Info...
Listen to an excerpt
Visit RANDOM HOUSE AUDIO to learn more about audiobooks.

Palace Council Cover

Share & Shelve:

  • Add This - Palace Council
  • Email this page - Palace Council
  • Print this page - Palace Council
Categories for this book
Tags for this book (powered by Library Thing)
fiction (22) mystery (12) harlem (8) murder (7) politics (7)
» see more tags


Bestselling author Stephen L. Carter delivers a gripping political thriller set against the backdrop of Watergate, Vietnam, and the Nixon White House.

Philmont Castle is a man who has it all: wealth, respect, and connections. He's the last person you'd expect to fall prey to a murderer, but then his body is found on the grounds of a Harlem mansion by the young writer Eddie Wesley, who along with the woman he loves, Aurelia Treene, is pulled into a twenty-year search for the truth. The disappearance of Eddie's sister June makes their investigation even more troubling. As Eddie and Aurelia uncover layer upon layer of intrigue, their odyssey takes them from the wealthy drawing rooms of New York through the shady corners of radical politics all the way to the Oval Office and President Nixon himself.


Hitting the Town


Had Eddie Wesley been a less reliable man, he would never have stumbled over the body, chased Junie to Tennessee, battled the devils to a draw, and helped to topple a President. But Eddie was blessed or perhaps cursed with a dependability that led to a lack of prudence in pursuing his devotion. He loved only two women in his life, loved them both with a recklessness that often made him a difficult man to like, and thus was able, when the moment arrived, to save the country he had come to hate.

A more prudent man might have failed.

As for Aurelia, she arrived with her own priorities, very conventional, very American, and so from the start very different from Eddie’s. Once they went their separate ways, there was no earthly reason to suppose the two of them would join forces, even after the events of that fateful Palm Sunday and what happened in Hong Kong—but join they did, by necessity more than choice, fighting on alone when everybody else had quit or died.

Almost everybody.


Edward Trotter Wesley Junior breezed into Harlem in May of 1954, just days after the Supreme Court outlawed racial segregation in public schools, a landmark decision that Eddie was certain must conceal some sort of dirty trick. He possessed a degree from Amherst, a couple of undistinguished years of graduate work at Brown, a handful of social connections through his mother, and a coveted job on the Amsterdam News, although he quit in disgust three months after starting. He had not realized, he explained in a letter to his beloved sister Junie, how very small and unimportant the position was. Junie, in a mischievous mood, forwarded his letter to their awesomely disapproving father, a Boston pastor and essayist. Actually, he was at this time in Montgomery, Alabama, helping to organize a boycott of local businesses that refused to call Negro patrons “Mr.” and “Mrs.” Wesley Senior, as he liked to be called, was a distant relation of William Monroe Trotter, the Negro journalist once arrested after tossing pepper to disrupt a speech by Booker T. Washington, and had inherited some of the fire of that clan. Upon his return to Boston, he answered Junie at once, sending along a surfeit of citations from the New Testament, most on the subject of hard work, commanding his daughter to share them with her brother. Eddie read them all; Second Thessalonians 3:10 sufficiently stoked his fury that he did not write his parents for a month, for Eddie was rather fiery himself. When he at last pulled together enough money from odd jobs to afford a phone, he refused for weeks to give his parents the number. Wesley Senior thought Eddie lazy. But Eddie, to his own way of thinking, was simply focused. He did not want to write about car wrecks and speeches by the great leaders of the rising movement for Negro rights. He wanted to write short stories and novels and decided, in the manner of many an author before him, that earning a living would disturb his muse. So, for a time, he mooched.

His mother sent money, cars were washed, meals were served, papers were sold. Around the corner from his apartment on 123rd Street was a Jewish grocery—that was what they were called, Jewish groceries, a reference to ownership, not cuisine—and Eddie for a time earned a second income working nights behind the cash register, reading and writing there on the counter because custom was thin. But a better offer came his way. In those days the seedier side of Harlem was largely run by a worthy named Scarlett, who had risen to power after the legendary Bumpy Johnson, king of the Negro rackets, was sentenced to prison for the third time. Scarlett owned a nightclub on 128th Street and much else besides, and was said to pay his dues to Frank Costello, the successor to Lucky Luciano and, at the time, the most powerful Mafia leader in New York. Scarlett was an elegant Jamaican who had come out of the old Forty Thieves gang along with Bumpy. He was popular along the streets. He liked to walk into shops and pull a huge bankroll from the pocket of his tailored suit, make a small purchase with a large bill, then tell the delighted proprietor to keep the change, thus cementing his reputation for generosity—never mind that a week later his people would be around to collect protection money from the very same store. At twenty-seven, a joyless term of military service behind him, Eddie Wesley was not known to be a scrapper. Still, he had a friend who had a friend, and before he knew it he was doing occasional odd jobs for bluff, secretive, boisterous men who were, or were not, connected to Scarlett. It was a living, Eddie told himself, but not his parents; it was only until he was discovered as a writer; besides, it would provide meat for the tales he would one day spin. He reminded himself, whenever moral doubts assailed him, that Richard Wright, in Black Boy, had confessed to a youthful life of crime. True, Wright stole no more than the occasional fistful of tickets from the proprietor of a movie house, and Eddie was carrying mysterious packages across state lines, but he consoled himself with Wright’s dictum that the white man had done so many horrible things that stealing from him was no breach of ethics. And if part of him suspected that, whoever Scarlett was stealing from, it wasn’t the white man, Eddie suppressed the thought.

“Where do you go all these nights?” asked Aurelia, his unattainably highborn girlfriend, whom he often wooed by reciting Andreas Cappelanus on the art of courtly love: medieval literature having been among his best courses at Amherst. They were canoodling, as it was called, in a shadowed booth at Scarlett’s club, not the sort of place where Eddie’s friends ever went, or, more important, Aurie’s. “You’re so secretive”—as though she herself was not.

“If I told you, you’d never believe it.”

Aurelia was much quicker than Eddie, and always had been: “Then it can’t possibly be another woman.”

“You’re one to talk,” he said.

“I know.” Sipping her pink gin fizz with Kirschwasser, the drink for which she was known throughout Harlem. She was a columnist for the Seventh Avenue Sentinel, the second-largest Negro paper in town, and wrote about everyone’s scandalous peccadilloes but her own. “I am one to talk,” she said, and leaped to her feet, tugging at his arm. “Dance with me. Come on.”

“We shall be conspicuous,” said Eddie, in the peculiar elocution he had developed at Amherst. His friends mocked him, but women adored it.

“We shall not,” she teased, echoing his cadences, and perhaps she was even right, because Scarlett’s was also the sort of place that always remembered to forget you were ever there. But before they could have their dance, one of the boisterous men tugged Eddie aside for a whispered conversation. Eddie, excited, told Aurelia they would have to make it an early night, conveying through his body English what he dared not speak aloud. Alas, Aurie was not so easily impressed: included in her family tree, as she would remind you at the drop of a hat, were villains galore, as well as a Reconstruction Era congressman and the first Negro to make a million dollars in real estate.

“You can’t be involved with these people,” Aurelia said as they walked through the sooty Harlem rain. She wore cheap plastic overshoes, but her umbrella was from Paris, where her aunt sang jazz.

“It isn’t involvement in the usual sense.”

She knew his excuses, too: “Let me guess. Research for the great novel.”

“Something like that.”

They had reached the public library on 135th Street, three blocks from the apartment Aurie shared with two other women. Cars were jammed so tightly along the curb that it was a miracle they ever got out again. This was as far as Eddie was ever allowed to go. Aurelia kissed him. She had feathery eyebrows and a roundish chipmunk face. When she was happy, she looked like a playful imp. When she was earnest, the roundness hardened, and she became Hollywood’s image of a schoolmarm. This was schoolmarm time.

“My family has certain expectations of me,” she began. “I’m an only child. My future matters to them. A lot.”

“So you keep telling me.”

“Because it’s true.” The brow crinkled. “You know, Eddie, my uncle’s hotel business is—”

“I’m a writer.”

“They own hotels in seven different—”

“I cannot do it.”

“He makes good money. He’ll always make good money. I don’t care what the Supreme Court says. We’ll need colored hotels for the next fifty years. Maybe more.” Eddie stroked her downy chipmunk cheek, said nothing. “I wanted to ask you one last time, because—”

He covered her mouth. Gently. They had been arguing the point almost from the night they met, at a college mixer two months after V-J Day. Both knew the outcome in advance. “I have to write, Aurie. The muse sits upon me. It is not a matter of choice. It is a matter of necessity.”

“Then you should have kept the newspaper job.”

“It was not real writing.”

“It was real money.”

Later that night, as Eddie left the train station in Newark, a couple of thugs tripped him, kicked him, snatched the parcel in its neat brown paper, ran. They had marked him down weeks ago and bided their time until he got careless. He was told by one of Scarlett’s people that the boys had admitted the crime. Not to the police. To Scarlett, who was said to have a way of loosening tongues. Eddie believed it. Maceo Scarlett’s nickname was the Carpenter, a reference, it was rumored, to the unfortunate fate that had befallen his predecessor, whose right-hand man Scarlett had been, back when the poor gentleman possessed a right hand: something to do with nails and saws. A neighbor named Lenny, the dark, skinny imp who had tempted Eddie in the first place over to Scarlett’s side of the street, assured him that he was in only small trouble, not big, for losing the package: nothing would happen if he got out now. And so, when Scarlett’s people offered him a second chance, Eddie respectfully declined. For a month thereafter Eddie did not read the papers. He did not want to know what happened to the boys.


After that Eddie went back to washing cars and sweeping floors. He earned little money, and saved none, for what he did not spend on Aurelia he shared with friends and neighbors. He developed a reputation as a soft touch. You had but to ask, and he would turn over his last dollar. This was not generosity in the usual sense, but neither was it calculated. He simply lived so thoroughly in the moment that it would never occur to him to hold on to a quarter because he might need it tomorrow. The most intensely political of his buddies, Gary Fatek, playing on Lenin, liked to say that when the revolution arrived Eddie would give the hangman cash to buy the rope; but Gary was white, and rich, and hung out in Harlem to prove his bona fides. Aurie found Eddie’s lightness with money endearing, even though it called into question—she said—his ability to support a family.

“In the fullness of time, I shall be successful.”

“In the fullness of time, I shall be married. So watch out.”

As it happened, Aurie made this comment, to embarrassed laughter all around, at a small dinner party hosted by a young couple named Claire and Oliver Garland at their apartment on West Ninety-third Street. The occasion celebrated Eddie’s transition to published writer. One of his stories had at last been accepted by a serious literary magazine. Ralph Ellison sent a note. Langston Hughes proposed a toast to Eddie’s grand future. Eddie had never met the famous writer, and was nervous. But Hughes, the greatest literary light in Harlem, put the young man at his ease. Hughes was broad and smiling, a spellbinder of the old school. Over brandy and cigars, he shared tales of a recent sojourn abroad. Eddie was enthralled. Langston Hughes lived the life Eddie coveted for himself. Running hotels with Aurelia’s uncle could not possibly compare. Oliver Garland, the only Negro lawyer on Wall Street, seemed to have been everywhere, too: he and his cousin Kevin and Langston Hughes compared notes on restaurants in Florence. Eddie, child of a preacher and a nurse, knew little of Negroes like this.

Gary Fatek was also at the party, along with a couple of other Caucasians, because members of the younger, educated set in white America prided themselves on ignoring the cautious racialism of their parents. Afterward Gary pulled one of his cute political tricks, summoning a cab, climbing in with Eddie and Aurelia, then directing the driver to drop his friends in Harlem first and only then head to Gary’s own place in the Village. Everybody knew that a New York cabbie would otherwise never go north of Columbia University. Eddie, always a proud man, would never have cooperated with this nonsense had Aurelia not been present; and Gary probably would not have tried. White friends were important, Wesley Senior had long preached to his children: That is where the power lies, he warned them, and where, for the foreseeable future, it will. Eddie and Aurelia sat together on the bench. Gary folded down the jump seat, and clutched the handle as the driver bumped angrily uptown. He lectured them about revolutionary politics. He was red-haired and gentle and certain. He said Eddie’s story showed the glimmering of consciousness, but only the glimmering. Aurelia, feigning a cold, giggled behind her white-gloved hands. Even back in college, where the three of them first met, everybody had known that Eddie was entirely unpolitical.

From the Hardcover edition.
Stephen L. Carter|Author Q&A

About Stephen L. Carter

Stephen L. Carter - Palace Council

Photo © Michael Lionstar

Stephen L. Carter is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Yale University, where he has taught since 1982. He is also the author of seven books of nonfiction.

Author Q&A

Q: Palace Council is, like your other novels, a page-turner about families and secrets, but it is also a departure from your previous novels in its historical scope. At its heart it's a novel about the 1960s and the tumultuous events and radical politics of that decade.  What made you want to explore this particular period in history? 
I once heard a great novelist warn that one should never disclose the source of one's ideas for stories -- not because there is some great secret to be kept, but because any answer will be a lie.  There is a sense in which the novelist never knows the answer.

Still, if I cannot give the answer, I can at least give a clue.  I have long held the view that modern America was shaped in the 1960s, which I date as the era from the Supreme Court's desegregation decisions in the 1950s, to the end of the Nixon Administration, and of the Vietnam War in the mid-1970s.  I have touched on the importance of this era in some of my non-fiction work, particularly my 1996 book Integrity.  I suppose the lasting influence of those years, on my life as well as on the nation, led me finally to decide to explore the era in fiction.

There is also, now that I think about it, a simpler reason that must have played a role.  I wanted to continue the stories of some of my characters from The Emperor of Ocean Park and New England White, but what I wanted to know was what they were like when they were younger.  The years this novel covers are also the formative years for many of those characters.  In that sense, the time period suggests itself quite naturally.

Q: What are your own recollections of this particular time in your own life?
Oh, dear.  I remember so much!  I can close my eyes and see the Harlem of my childhood, the shades, the sounds, the excitement; or the Washington, D.C., of my late youth; or the Ithaca, New York, of my adolescence.  The Kennedys, King, Nixon -- all fresh in my mind.  It is difficult sometimes for those of my generation to remember that when today's college freshmen were born, JFK had been dead for nearly thirty years!

Q: Without giving anything away, of course, can you tell us a little about ‘The Palace Council’ and the people who make it up?
The world is today as it is in my novel: people of power get into lots of trouble when they are determined to do what they consider the right thing, and not interested in anyone else's opinion.

Q: This novel spans the decades from the 1950s to the Watergate scandal.  Was it difficult to cover so many years in the lives of your characters but also of the country?
It was actually fun.  All the action in my first novel took place in less than a year.  My second, not much more.  I found filling the scope of two decades a liberating experience.  It meant, necessarily, that I could not cover every detail of the lives of my characters.  But that forced upon me the discipline of deciding what the reader really needed to "see", and what could happen, as it were, "off stage".

The biggest challenge, I think, was helping the characters grow up logically, so that when we see a person in, say, 1955, and then the same person 15 years later, the person is recognizably the same, yet plausibly different.

Q: Many real people show up throughout the pages of this novel--from the Kennedys to Langston Hughes to J. Edgar Hoover to Richard Nixon, who features quite prominently.  What was it like to put words into their mouths?
Putting words into the mouths of actual people was a challenge, and a fascinating exercise.  I spent a lot of time doing research, trying to get both the ideas and the conversational styles of my characters right.  I am sure the results are not perfect, but I did try to honor my subjects.  I hope readers find the "real people" in the book interesting and plausible.

Q: One of your main characters, Eddie Wesley, is a writer--of both fiction and non-fiction.  As a writer--of both fiction and non fiction--what did you bring to this particular character?
Talk about loaded questions!  Let me just say that Eddie's views are not my views, and leave it at that.

Q: Loyalty is an idea that runs through this novel--loyalty to family, to self, to causes, to country.  Was that a theme you intentionally set out to explore?
Absolutely.  Each of my novels has dealt, in some way, with what we owe to others, the things we must pay for even when we would rather not.  This is also a staple of my non-fiction writing.  I suppose it is fair to say that I think the success of human civilization rests on our ability to inculcate strong notions of obligation to others, even when those obligations are not required by law and are not identical to our desires.

Q: Again, without giving too much away, do you think anything similar to the secret plot at the heart of Palace Council could ever come to pass?
I get questions like this a lot, because I like to write conspiracies into my fiction.  But I do this only because it is fun.  In real life, I am not and have never been a conspiracy theorist.  Bad people do bad things.  Occasionally, good people do bad things.  Some bad things happen through accident, or incompetence, or by chance.  When people band together to do bad things, they are rarely able to keep that secret.  In fiction, it is fun to pretend that people will do terrible things to protect their secrets.  In real life, most people call their lawyers.

Q: You really bring to life the machinations that go on behind the scenes of political life.  Is this something that is on your mind more these days as we approach an election year? 
No.  Electoral politics does not interest me that much.  Human motive and human weakness interest me, and politics happens to highlight those weaknesses.

Q: From the time you write about in the novel to where we are now, how do you think politics has changed in the last forty to fifty years ?
A: A number of real politicians play roles in the book. Kennedy is a friend of Eddie's, for example, and Nixon is a friend of Aurelia's. I try to portray the politicians themselves as genuinely likeable people, even when my characters are highly critical of their policies. I believe this to be a truism about politics-- that the give-and-take of political battle, along with the need to earn election, constantly distorts the policies of well-meaning people on both sides of the political spectrum. In that sense, politics is possibly unchanged, and maybe even worse. Interest groups have more sway today, and political parties have less.
The growth of cynicism in politics today worries me. At times I even feel it in myself. I do not think that the political leaders of the past were larger or more ethical figures than those of today; overall, they might even have been worse. But we spent less time in those days scrutinizing their moral errors and blowing their words out of context. Reporters thought their job was to tell us what the politicians thought, not what the reporters thought. All of that has changed, and for the worse.

From the Hardcover edition.



"Pitch-perfect. . . . A mystery that will give a surprising jolt to your conscience."—The Washington Post“A delicious, page-turning trifecta. . . . A family saga, a political tour of several tumultuous American decades and a murder mystery. . . . Rich and deeply satisfying.”—The Plain Dealer “Page-turning summer reading.... Palace Council gives grim song to the secrets that men keep.”—Dallas Morning News“Masterful.... Provides lots more wisdom than most thrillers attempt.”—San Diego Union-Tribune“Mr. Carter’s storytelling is underpinned by a masterly evocation of the world of wealthy and accomplished blacks in twentieth-century America.” —The Wall Street Journal“A well-lit showcase for Carter’s considerable strengths.” —The Seattle Times“The twists, turns and double-crosses take place in a number of settings, including Harlem, Washington and parts of Africa and Southeast Asia....Palace Council contains tantalizing hints of conspiracies to come.” —Los Angeles Times“An engrossingly complex political thriller.”—Daily News“Stephen Carter can really write. I loved every page of Palace Council and am eager for more.” —Robert B. Parker
Reader's Guide|About the Book|Author Biography|Discussion Questions|Suggestions

About the Book

"Pitch-perfect. . . . A mystery that will give a surprising jolt to your conscience."
The Washington Post

The introduction, questions, and suggestions for further reading that follow are designed to enhance your group's discussion of Palace Council by Stephen L. Carter, the bestselling author of The Emperor of Ocean Park and New England White. Carter captures the turbulent era of the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, and the Watergate scandal in a gripping political thriller. With masterful skill, he interweaves a cast of intriguing fictional characters, historic events, and real-life figures ranging from Langston Hughes to the Kennedys to Richard Nixon.

About the Guide

When Eddie Wesley, a young writer living in Harlem, publishes his first short story in The Saturday Evening Post, he becomes an overnight celebrity. He is soon attending Harlem's most exclusive gatherings, including the engagement party for Aurelia Treene and Kevin Garland, both “royalty” in the black community. Eddie, who has secretly loved Aurelia for years, leaves as quickly as he can. Wandering desolately in a nearby park, he stumbles on the body of Philmont Castle, a wealthy white lawyer and close friend of the Garlands. Clutched in Castle's hands is a cross with a mysterious inscription. Although newspaper reports make no mention of the cross, Eddie is determined to discover its significance. As he searches for answers, he uncovers a web of secrets that stretches over decades and extends from his circle of close friends and family all the way to the Oval Office.

A suspense-filled tale about the disparity between reality and appearances, idealism and pragmatism, Palace Council is a stunning portrait of the forces that shape American politics and society.

About the Author

Stephen L. Carter is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Yale University. He is the author of the novels The Emperor of Ocean Park and New England White, as well as seven books of nonfiction. He and his family live near New Haven, Connecticut.

Discussion Guides

1. Carter writes, “The social distinctions mattered little to the great mass of Negroes, but Eddie had been raised, in spite of himself, to an awareness of who was who” [p. 16]. How does Eddie's father's position in the community, as well as his own experiences at a prestigious college and graduate school, influence Eddie's self-perception and his ambition? Do his experiences working for Scarlett and in various low-paying jobs affect his outlook and his understanding of (and sympathy with) the lives of “the great mass of Negroes”?

2. Despite the claims made by others, “Eddie did not consider his short story revolutionary. He did not consider it anything, except finished” [p. 15]. What does this show about the way Eddie thinks of himself as a writer? Is he naïve? Self-serving? Does his view of the role of a writer change in the course of the novel?

3. What does Aurelia's approach to her career and marriage reveal about the things that matter to her? Do her ambitions justify her rejection of Wesley [p. 16]? Does the information about her that emerges later in the novel help explain the opinions she voices and the decisions she makes? In what ways is she a typical example of many smart, well-educated, upper-middle class women during the period in which the novel is set?

4. Palace Council covers the vast changes in American politics and society between 1954 and 1974 through the lives of individuals. Discuss how the following characters contribute to the broad and complex picture Carter draws: Edward Wesley Senior; Gary Fatek; Perry Mount; Matthew and Kevin Garland; Benjamin Mellor.

5. Eddie is subjected to extreme psychological and physical intimidation throughout the novel. What do the threats from Hoover and his henchman show about the way power operates in Washington [pp. 100–101]? What do Eddie's experiences in Saigon [pp. 319–325] and his horrific kidnapping in Hong Kong [pp. 368–372] demonstrate about the acceptance of extreme measures to achieve a goal? Do the differing perceptions—and mutual suspicions—of opposing political groups or interests inevitably encourage extremism?

6. John Milton's Paradise Lost holds the keys to the nature and scope of “The Project.” How does the great epic poem about the battle between God and Satan illuminate the moral themes of Palace Council? Milton's purpose was to “justify the ways of God to man.” Is there a parallel theme or “purpose” underlying Palace Council? To what extent do the characters embody the ideas of good and evil that are at the heart of Paradise Lost and of traditional Christian belief?

7. Aurelia asks herself, “Why did the group identify so completely with Satan, who is doomed to defeat?” [p. 346]. What answers does the novel provide?

8. In his celebrated essay “The American Angle,” Eddie identified the qualities that define the country in 1967 and concluded, “If America failed to change the angle from which it looked at life . . . then the nation was at a moral dead end” [p. 313]. Are these still the salient characteristics of our politics and our culture? In your opinion, has the situation improved or deteriorated over the last forty years?

9. Many of the secrets the characters keep from one another reflect the need (or desire) to protect both their public roles and their private lives. To what extent are they driven by a sense of loyalty—to their families, their causes, their ideals? What does this show about the relationship between individual and social responsibility?

10. In describing his novel and the people in it, Carter said, “Human motive and human weakness interest me, and politics happens to highlight those weaknesses” [Vintage interview]. What does the Council and its convoluted history reveal about the motives that drive people to commit themselves to a radical course of action? Do you think the kind of conspiracy Carter describes is possible?

11. Throughout the book, Carter imagines the conversations of prominent people like J. Edgar Hoover [pp. 93–99], Joseph Kennedy [pp. 132–135], and Richard Nixon [pp. 463–469]. Discuss the “legitimacy” of putting words into the mouths of real people. Do their voices conform to your impressions of them? Does Carter capture both the tone and the content of their thoughts in a realistic way or does he distort or exaggerate them to make them relevant to the fictional narrative?

12. Were you familiar with the larger history that forms the background to the novel? Did you discover things you hadn't known before? Are specific events adequately explained and put into context? In the author's note, Carter writes, “I chose to fiddle a bit with history. My only excuse, other than the needs of the narrative, is that I have tried to reorder the decades in a way that does honor to my subjects.” [p. 514]. Does a novelist have an implicit obligation to present an accurate record of the times he is portraying? Do the modifications Carter describes enrich the depth and impact of the book?

13. If you came to Palace Council with prior knowledge of Empyreals from reading Carter's previous novels, did you find yourself using that knowledge as you read? Were the recurrent characters (the Garlands, Aurelia, and Mona Veazie, for example) consistent with your recollections of them? Did this prequel inspire you to read (or reread) Carter's other books?

Suggested Readings

Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man; Alex Haley, The Autobiography of Malcolm X; Denis Johnson, Tree of Smoke; Joseph Kanon, The Good German; Brian Keith Jackson, The Queen of Harlem; Thomas Mallon, Fellow Travelers; Sena Jeter Naslund, Four Spirits; Rick Perlstein, Nixonland; Ishmael Reed, Mumbo Jumbo; Caryl Rivers, Camelot; Alice Walker, Meridian; Richard Wright, Black Boy.

  • Palace Council by Stephen L. Carter
  • June 16, 2009
  • Fiction - Thrillers
  • Vintage
  • $15.00
  • 9780307385963

Your E-Mail Address
send me a copy

Recipient's E-Mail Address
(multiple addresses may be separated by commas)

A personal message: