Peg Herring's Blog, page 24
March 4, 2013
Malice Domestic, Invisible Sleuths, and Me
I got my panel assignment this morning for Malice Domestic, May's mystery conference in Bethesda, Maryland, . (One year we had a gentleman stop some female participants and congratulate them for banding together to fight spousal abuse, but that ain't it, kid!)
My panel is on invisible female sleuths, those characters who can investigate crime largely because no one pays them any attention. I was chosen for the panel because of Loser, my homeless protagonist, and she fits the bill perfectly. I got the idea for her from living in Richmond for a few months and seeing the street people every day, visible to me as a newcomer but largely unseen by the residents. I began thinking about what those street people must notice, what they might be thinking. I know some of them are hampered by chemical or psychological problems, but what if there was one who observed, was able to form conclusions, could make a plan and follow it through? From those thoughts, Loser emerged.
The first Loser Mystery has done well, and I even got a note from a former student who was waiting to pay at a faraway B&N when a woman came up and asked for Peg Herring's new book. Now the second one is almost ready. I'm doing final proofing this week and it should be out in early April. Once again Loser uses her anonymity to eavesdrop and observe, and she's ignored until...well, until she isn't, which leads to lots of action and danger and all the things one expects in a mystery.
Loser has become very real to me, and as I finish Book #4 of Simon & Elizabeth's adventures, I'm already thinking of what the next Loser Mystery will entail. In the meantime, I'll be interested to meet my fellow panelists for Malice Domestic and see what they've done with their invisible sleuths.
My panel is on invisible female sleuths, those characters who can investigate crime largely because no one pays them any attention. I was chosen for the panel because of Loser, my homeless protagonist, and she fits the bill perfectly. I got the idea for her from living in Richmond for a few months and seeing the street people every day, visible to me as a newcomer but largely unseen by the residents. I began thinking about what those street people must notice, what they might be thinking. I know some of them are hampered by chemical or psychological problems, but what if there was one who observed, was able to form conclusions, could make a plan and follow it through? From those thoughts, Loser emerged.
The first Loser Mystery has done well, and I even got a note from a former student who was waiting to pay at a faraway B&N when a woman came up and asked for Peg Herring's new book. Now the second one is almost ready. I'm doing final proofing this week and it should be out in early April. Once again Loser uses her anonymity to eavesdrop and observe, and she's ignored until...well, until she isn't, which leads to lots of action and danger and all the things one expects in a mystery.
Loser has become very real to me, and as I finish Book #4 of Simon & Elizabeth's adventures, I'm already thinking of what the next Loser Mystery will entail. In the meantime, I'll be interested to meet my fellow panelists for Malice Domestic and see what they've done with their invisible sleuths.
February 18, 2013
The Light at the End of the Novel
I used that term the other day on Facebook. I don't claim to have invented it, though I might have, but it struck me as something writers can certainly relate to.
For readers, the sense that a novel we love is ending is a sad thing. We don't want to leave those characters and that place, because we've grown to love the vicarious experience.
For writers, there is some of that, but I'll let you in on a secret: writing is work. Aside from the first novel, where one has all the time in the world to tweak and reword, writing is scheduled. "When can we expect the next installment?" publishers ask. "Here's the second round of edits," the editor writes. And fans say, write, email, and otherwise communicate, "We're waiting for the next book!"
I know not how others write, though I heard one famous author claim that he writes one draft and he's done.
Like I could ever do that!
I might compare my process to papier-mache. I build a frame that has the vague shape of what I want the final product to be. Then I slap on a mess of ingredients that I know can work, though at first it looks pretty darned messy. Then I pinch and poke and adjust until everything makes sense where it is. I leave it for a while, letting the elements set, and then I return to do several additional layers, adding color, highlights, and finishing touches.
I've been in the messy stage for some time now on the next Simon & Elizabeth mystery. At times it seemed like it wasn't going to work, but every author I know has the same experience. There's a point where we almost chuck the whole thing, hating all of it.
And then there's the light. Maybe I've left it for a day or two. Maybe a scene works out that simply wouldn't until now. Whatever it is, I see the light and know that it is going to work, that Simon is himself, that Elizabeth is intriguing, and that the mystery is believable and interesting. For readers, the end of a story might be bittersweet, but for the writer, nothing's better than getting a glimpse of the light at the end of the novel.
For readers, the sense that a novel we love is ending is a sad thing. We don't want to leave those characters and that place, because we've grown to love the vicarious experience.
For writers, there is some of that, but I'll let you in on a secret: writing is work. Aside from the first novel, where one has all the time in the world to tweak and reword, writing is scheduled. "When can we expect the next installment?" publishers ask. "Here's the second round of edits," the editor writes. And fans say, write, email, and otherwise communicate, "We're waiting for the next book!"
I know not how others write, though I heard one famous author claim that he writes one draft and he's done.
Like I could ever do that!
I might compare my process to papier-mache. I build a frame that has the vague shape of what I want the final product to be. Then I slap on a mess of ingredients that I know can work, though at first it looks pretty darned messy. Then I pinch and poke and adjust until everything makes sense where it is. I leave it for a while, letting the elements set, and then I return to do several additional layers, adding color, highlights, and finishing touches.
I've been in the messy stage for some time now on the next Simon & Elizabeth mystery. At times it seemed like it wasn't going to work, but every author I know has the same experience. There's a point where we almost chuck the whole thing, hating all of it.
And then there's the light. Maybe I've left it for a day or two. Maybe a scene works out that simply wouldn't until now. Whatever it is, I see the light and know that it is going to work, that Simon is himself, that Elizabeth is intriguing, and that the mystery is believable and interesting. For readers, the end of a story might be bittersweet, but for the writer, nothing's better than getting a glimpse of the light at the end of the novel.
February 11, 2013
What Do You Notice?
I visited with family yesterday, and there was a western on the TV that they muted when I arrived, being nice people. As we talked, the scenes played out, and I said, "Look, there's a zipper up the back of her dress."
I mentioned recently seeing a historical where a passing servant carried a crystal-clear pitcher through on a tray--pretty unlikely. The guy said he notices when movies use the wrong gun or the wrong tank. The woman said she notices horses and recognizes the same horse in different movies.
That led me to think about how we perceive things, and how differently. Watching the same movie, I'd be noticing anachronisms, he'd be looking at weaponry, and she'd be checking out the transportation.
I visited a book group a few months ago that had read a book by one of the mystery genre's current stars. The group was eclectic; some read mostly non-fiction and some "literary" fiction, whatever that is. I was interested to hear those members' comments, because they were totally put off by the unlikely events in the book: a ridiculous method of murder that a) shouldn't have worked, b) might easily have killed an innocent bystander instead of the victim, and c) could have been done better a dozen different ways.
One of the members, an avid mystery fan, defended the author, citing her wonderful characters, the beautiful setting, and her talent for description. She hadn't even noticed that the plot was murky.
There's that different perception thing. We see what we're looking for when we read, just as we do while watching a movie. As a reader of mysteries, I want a good crime to solve. While I stumble out of the story if the plot makes a clunky noise or the characters start acting unlike themselves, someone else might enjoy the flying bullets and exploding cars, while others just love that the author put in a lot of pretty horses.
I mentioned recently seeing a historical where a passing servant carried a crystal-clear pitcher through on a tray--pretty unlikely. The guy said he notices when movies use the wrong gun or the wrong tank. The woman said she notices horses and recognizes the same horse in different movies.
That led me to think about how we perceive things, and how differently. Watching the same movie, I'd be noticing anachronisms, he'd be looking at weaponry, and she'd be checking out the transportation.
I visited a book group a few months ago that had read a book by one of the mystery genre's current stars. The group was eclectic; some read mostly non-fiction and some "literary" fiction, whatever that is. I was interested to hear those members' comments, because they were totally put off by the unlikely events in the book: a ridiculous method of murder that a) shouldn't have worked, b) might easily have killed an innocent bystander instead of the victim, and c) could have been done better a dozen different ways.
One of the members, an avid mystery fan, defended the author, citing her wonderful characters, the beautiful setting, and her talent for description. She hadn't even noticed that the plot was murky.
There's that different perception thing. We see what we're looking for when we read, just as we do while watching a movie. As a reader of mysteries, I want a good crime to solve. While I stumble out of the story if the plot makes a clunky noise or the characters start acting unlike themselves, someone else might enjoy the flying bullets and exploding cars, while others just love that the author put in a lot of pretty horses.
January 7, 2013
When Reviews Help
I saw an article recently that made me giggle, a mathematical system to see if a review on Amazon was legitimate. It began with “find all that reviewer’s other reviews and note how many stars he gave. Now add those up…”
Yeah, right. How about using common sense?
Authors hate bad reviews, and some go to great lengths to neutralize them. Authors love good reviews, and some go to great lengths to create them. (It‘s not just an ego trip; good reviews help with sales, rankings, and where a book appears in the catalog.)
I want readers with intelligence. If you’re smart enough to appreciate my books, you’ll detect a review that’s hinky. But you might not know about trolls (who give bad reviews for grins and giggles) and sock puppets (who write rave reviews for friends and family).
The Bad Reviews: Writers I know have gotten one-star reviews with comments like these:
I haven’t read this book, but…
When the book arrived in the mail, it was damaged.
It was a good book, but there’s an error on page 87.
Creators of such reviews are misguided at best. A review should be an honest opinion on the quality of the story and the writing. A friend who reviews books always lists good and bad points and admits it might be her taste in reading when she doesn’t like a book.
The Good Reviews: When a book has only a few reviews saying things like, “Everyone should read this book,” or “This is the best book I ever read,” you might suspect that reviewer and author are related or at least very good friends. (In fact, I can’t think of a single book that EVERYONE should read!)
I’m not sure why I’m telling you this. If you’re a reader, you probably have a feel for the written word and can figure it out. The sad part is that sellers like Amazon have to use some system, and those five-star and one-star reviews present a false impression of a book.
Recently a group of readers discussed the idea of what 5 stars (or whatever the rating system) means. If I give a mystery 5 stars, am I comparing it to great literature like To Kill a Mockingbird? To classic mysteries by Agatha Christie or Raymond Chandler? To current bestsellers like Michael Connelly or Laura Lippman? There are a lot of levels of good, so it’s hard to say what a 5-star book is.
When I shop for a book, I don’t just go by the rating. I read the reviews. Sometimes what the reviewer liked (“a steamy romance”) doesn’t do a thing for me. Sometimes their objections (“too much historical detail”) make me want to read the book. Only by seeing what they liked and disliked can I really tell.
If I found a review that trashed a book the person hadn’t read, I’d tell Amazon the review wasn’t helpful. (It’s just a checkmark.) If I thought the reviewer was a sock puppet, I’d do the same. It’s a way to help make the system fair, and a way to let the reviewer know someone noticed the unfair post.
These days I don’t finish books I dislike. (Past middle age = no time to waste.) When I enjoy a book, I write a review. My personal practice is to not write bad reviews, even with terrible best-sellers that make me cringe at the bad writing. Telling someone you hated her book is like telling a mother her little girl is ugly. You can do it, but where’s the good in it?
Yeah, right. How about using common sense?
Authors hate bad reviews, and some go to great lengths to neutralize them. Authors love good reviews, and some go to great lengths to create them. (It‘s not just an ego trip; good reviews help with sales, rankings, and where a book appears in the catalog.)
I want readers with intelligence. If you’re smart enough to appreciate my books, you’ll detect a review that’s hinky. But you might not know about trolls (who give bad reviews for grins and giggles) and sock puppets (who write rave reviews for friends and family).
The Bad Reviews: Writers I know have gotten one-star reviews with comments like these:
I haven’t read this book, but…
When the book arrived in the mail, it was damaged.
It was a good book, but there’s an error on page 87.
Creators of such reviews are misguided at best. A review should be an honest opinion on the quality of the story and the writing. A friend who reviews books always lists good and bad points and admits it might be her taste in reading when she doesn’t like a book.
The Good Reviews: When a book has only a few reviews saying things like, “Everyone should read this book,” or “This is the best book I ever read,” you might suspect that reviewer and author are related or at least very good friends. (In fact, I can’t think of a single book that EVERYONE should read!)
I’m not sure why I’m telling you this. If you’re a reader, you probably have a feel for the written word and can figure it out. The sad part is that sellers like Amazon have to use some system, and those five-star and one-star reviews present a false impression of a book.
Recently a group of readers discussed the idea of what 5 stars (or whatever the rating system) means. If I give a mystery 5 stars, am I comparing it to great literature like To Kill a Mockingbird? To classic mysteries by Agatha Christie or Raymond Chandler? To current bestsellers like Michael Connelly or Laura Lippman? There are a lot of levels of good, so it’s hard to say what a 5-star book is.
When I shop for a book, I don’t just go by the rating. I read the reviews. Sometimes what the reviewer liked (“a steamy romance”) doesn’t do a thing for me. Sometimes their objections (“too much historical detail”) make me want to read the book. Only by seeing what they liked and disliked can I really tell.
If I found a review that trashed a book the person hadn’t read, I’d tell Amazon the review wasn’t helpful. (It’s just a checkmark.) If I thought the reviewer was a sock puppet, I’d do the same. It’s a way to help make the system fair, and a way to let the reviewer know someone noticed the unfair post.
These days I don’t finish books I dislike. (Past middle age = no time to waste.) When I enjoy a book, I write a review. My personal practice is to not write bad reviews, even with terrible best-sellers that make me cringe at the bad writing. Telling someone you hated her book is like telling a mother her little girl is ugly. You can do it, but where’s the good in it?
December 31, 2012
That Good End Note We're All Looking For
In general, people like endings, summations, wrap-ups. This time of year, we listen to radio and TV tell us the best and worst of 2012, no matter how silly the list or how shoddy the science behind it. It's all relative, of course. Though I'm dimly aware of the Korean rapper who dances silly, I wouldn't put him on any list of things that interested me in 2012.
But someone put my book on their Best of 2012 list, and that interests me. (Like I said, it's all relative!) A reviewer I've never met who isn't acquainted or related to me by marriage or blood wrote a great review of KILLING SILENCE (see it at http://www.cncbooks.com/blog/). Another reviewer, also unknown and unrelated, was just as nice (see that one on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Silence...).
Those who know me realize that 2012 was a pretty devastating year for us, but there are things that help us see hope for 2013: good friends, new opportunities, and the kindness of strangers.
But someone put my book on their Best of 2012 list, and that interests me. (Like I said, it's all relative!) A reviewer I've never met who isn't acquainted or related to me by marriage or blood wrote a great review of KILLING SILENCE (see it at http://www.cncbooks.com/blog/). Another reviewer, also unknown and unrelated, was just as nice (see that one on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Silence...).
Those who know me realize that 2012 was a pretty devastating year for us, but there are things that help us see hope for 2013: good friends, new opportunities, and the kindness of strangers.
December 24, 2012
Getting a Kindle for Christmas
If the gifts under your tree include a Kindle, or even if you already have one, this story is for you, because I'm giving away my book, GO HOME AND DIE, at the Kindle store from December 25-29th.
People sometimes ask why authors would do such a thing (and why Amazon would let them!). Here are my two reasons, one of which Amazon shares.
The big reason is exposure. If someone reads a book and likes it, the hope is they'll read more by that author making both Amazon and the author money. You might have noticed that a lot of freebie books are the first of a series. We clever authors get you hooked and then charge you for the next installment. Hey, all's fair in apparently everything these days.
The other reason I'm giving away GO HOME AND DIE (and my big one) is that it's a second edition. I didn't like the way it was done the first time, so I got the rights back and had it re-edited, re-formatted, and even re-covered. I'm very happy, and I felt I owed those who bought the original version a chance to see what it should have been like to begin with.
So what is GO HOME AND DIE about? It's a '60s era mystery set in Flint, Michigan. I have a fondness for the story because I lived in Flint in the late '60s, because Carrie is a lot like I was then--naive, and because John helped with the flashbacks to Vietnam.
If you have a Kindle, give it a try. (If you have a different e-reader, it will take a while, but it will eventually appear there, too.)
http://www.amazon.com/Go-Home-and-Die...
People sometimes ask why authors would do such a thing (and why Amazon would let them!). Here are my two reasons, one of which Amazon shares.
The big reason is exposure. If someone reads a book and likes it, the hope is they'll read more by that author making both Amazon and the author money. You might have noticed that a lot of freebie books are the first of a series. We clever authors get you hooked and then charge you for the next installment. Hey, all's fair in apparently everything these days.
The other reason I'm giving away GO HOME AND DIE (and my big one) is that it's a second edition. I didn't like the way it was done the first time, so I got the rights back and had it re-edited, re-formatted, and even re-covered. I'm very happy, and I felt I owed those who bought the original version a chance to see what it should have been like to begin with.
So what is GO HOME AND DIE about? It's a '60s era mystery set in Flint, Michigan. I have a fondness for the story because I lived in Flint in the late '60s, because Carrie is a lot like I was then--naive, and because John helped with the flashbacks to Vietnam.
If you have a Kindle, give it a try. (If you have a different e-reader, it will take a while, but it will eventually appear there, too.)
http://www.amazon.com/Go-Home-and-Die...
December 17, 2012
A Book That Grabs You
At the book launch party for KILLING SILENCE last week, I heard the words every author wants to hear: "I couldn't put it down until I finished it."
We're not cruel people. We really don't want our readers to go without eating or sleeping. But we do enjoy thinking that we caught you up in the world we created and made you reluctant to leave it.
It happens to me, too. I stayed up late to finish FALL OF GIANTS, Ken Follett's WWI epic, and now I'm hooked on FINGERSMITH, which is very different but oh-so-compelling.
We all read books that are pleasant enough or books that teach us something or books that contain characters we like to learn about. But it's books that grab us that we remember, the ones that we can't forget when we must put them down or even when we finish reading them. I guess that's why series are so popular. We want to know what happened next to that character or in that place or era.
As a reader, I'm always looking to buy books like that. As a writer, I'm always striving to create them.
We're not cruel people. We really don't want our readers to go without eating or sleeping. But we do enjoy thinking that we caught you up in the world we created and made you reluctant to leave it.
It happens to me, too. I stayed up late to finish FALL OF GIANTS, Ken Follett's WWI epic, and now I'm hooked on FINGERSMITH, which is very different but oh-so-compelling.
We all read books that are pleasant enough or books that teach us something or books that contain characters we like to learn about. But it's books that grab us that we remember, the ones that we can't forget when we must put them down or even when we finish reading them. I guess that's why series are so popular. We want to know what happened next to that character or in that place or era.
As a reader, I'm always looking to buy books like that. As a writer, I'm always striving to create them.
December 10, 2012
Did I Write that Book?
At an author event last week at the Logmark Bookstore in Cheboygan, MI, I was talking with two other writers about how completely we become absorbed in the book we're writing. It wasn't a new conversation; authors often speak of being immersed in a world of their own creation. When we finish a book, it's like waking up and becoming re-involved in the world outside our heads.We're probably lucky if we find that our significant others still live in the same house and our children haven't murdered each other with butter knives.
The concept has an odd corollary for me. Once I've moved on from a book, once it's published and doesn't belong to just me anymore, it feels almost as if someone else wrote it. When a reader mentions my first book, for a split second I think, "I wrote that? Oh, yeah, I remember now." I think it's because I move on while the book remains static, stuck to the pages it's printed on.
I recently reacquired the rights to a book published a few years ago, so I decided to re-edit it and see about getting it out there in better form.(Best not to comment on the shape it was in for that first release!) It's a great exercise, because it's almost like I'm reading someone else's book.
It makes me wonder about authors who've published twenty or more books with the same protagonist. They must lose track of what case their detective was on in Book #8 or who the bad guy was in Book #15. I suppose they just have to hope they recognize the title when someone says, "Hey! I loved Midnight in the Gardens of Ogden. Great book!"
Oh. Did I write that?
The concept has an odd corollary for me. Once I've moved on from a book, once it's published and doesn't belong to just me anymore, it feels almost as if someone else wrote it. When a reader mentions my first book, for a split second I think, "I wrote that? Oh, yeah, I remember now." I think it's because I move on while the book remains static, stuck to the pages it's printed on.
I recently reacquired the rights to a book published a few years ago, so I decided to re-edit it and see about getting it out there in better form.(Best not to comment on the shape it was in for that first release!) It's a great exercise, because it's almost like I'm reading someone else's book.
It makes me wonder about authors who've published twenty or more books with the same protagonist. They must lose track of what case their detective was on in Book #8 or who the bad guy was in Book #15. I suppose they just have to hope they recognize the title when someone says, "Hey! I loved Midnight in the Gardens of Ogden. Great book!"
Oh. Did I write that?
December 3, 2012
Who Would You Like to Punish?
I’m reading Ken Follett’s Fall of Giants, and the story's account of the onset of World War I reminded me of my college days. In history classes I recall being frustrated by the stupidity, cruelty, and arrogance of people who did as they wanted no matter what the consequences were.
Case in point: World War I and the national leaders of Germany, Austria, Russia, and England. The causes of the war are complicated, but there were many times when war could have been avoided if heads of state hadn't based their decisions on selfish interests and pompous national pride.
The WWI example was personal to me, because my grandfather was one of many men sent to fight that useless war. Badly wounded when a bullet shattered his jaw, he woke up after the battle was over to find that his comrades had moved on. Delirious with pain, he wandered for several days on the plains of France. His wife was told he was missing and presumed dead. He was eventually found by the Red Cross and saved, but he suffered a great deal of physical pain and was disfigured for life.
(Yes, that’s a great idea for a novel but no, I’m not going to write it.)
What I’m getting at is a question for you: In one sentence, what historical character(s) would you like to be able to bring to justice?
Case in point: World War I and the national leaders of Germany, Austria, Russia, and England. The causes of the war are complicated, but there were many times when war could have been avoided if heads of state hadn't based their decisions on selfish interests and pompous national pride.
The WWI example was personal to me, because my grandfather was one of many men sent to fight that useless war. Badly wounded when a bullet shattered his jaw, he woke up after the battle was over to find that his comrades had moved on. Delirious with pain, he wandered for several days on the plains of France. His wife was told he was missing and presumed dead. He was eventually found by the Red Cross and saved, but he suffered a great deal of physical pain and was disfigured for life.
(Yes, that’s a great idea for a novel but no, I’m not going to write it.)
What I’m getting at is a question for you: In one sentence, what historical character(s) would you like to be able to bring to justice?
November 26, 2012
We're Writers--We Make Stuff Up
From time to time, people argue about whether writers can evoke something they've never experienced. I have friends in the writing community who take classes in how to shoot a gun, sign up to go rock climbing, and (of course) travel to faraway places in order to write realistically about a subject.
We know, though, that writers must also use their imagination to create scenes and characters they can't actually visit: battles are pretty much out for me, as is being a teen-aged boy abandoned by his mother. I have to imagine them, like Shakespeare, who created Juliet without ever having been a young Italian girl.
Loser, the protagonist in KILLING SILENCE, (http://tinyurl.com/a8gyqjd) is homeless, mentally fragile, and living in Richmond, Virginia. I spent time in Richmond, so I have a sense of where things are in the Fan, how far one would walk to get to this place or that. I have, in my lifetime, enough experience with mental stress to imagine being overcome by life's trials. Homelessness was a stretch. I've never in my life been truly hungry, never slept outside, never had to deal with the people (homeless and not) who threaten a woman with no place to hide.
I was asked at a workshop if I had to "dumb down" the dialogue, since Loser is homeless. Hmmm. An assumption that homeless people are all stupid?
Interestingly, I recently met someone who was homeless for some time as a young person. She's intelligent, articulate, and amazingly healthy, physically and mentally, considering the life experiences she's had. As we talked, I found that my imagination had served me pretty well as I wrote Loser and her companions. She mentioned that once she was able to have a normal life again with a home and family, she became, as she termed it, "a control freak." Having had a life that was out of control, she's compelled to make sure everything is right, at least in her mind.
Totally understandable. And in addition, it's going to help a lot with Book #2!
We know, though, that writers must also use their imagination to create scenes and characters they can't actually visit: battles are pretty much out for me, as is being a teen-aged boy abandoned by his mother. I have to imagine them, like Shakespeare, who created Juliet without ever having been a young Italian girl.
Loser, the protagonist in KILLING SILENCE, (http://tinyurl.com/a8gyqjd) is homeless, mentally fragile, and living in Richmond, Virginia. I spent time in Richmond, so I have a sense of where things are in the Fan, how far one would walk to get to this place or that. I have, in my lifetime, enough experience with mental stress to imagine being overcome by life's trials. Homelessness was a stretch. I've never in my life been truly hungry, never slept outside, never had to deal with the people (homeless and not) who threaten a woman with no place to hide.
I was asked at a workshop if I had to "dumb down" the dialogue, since Loser is homeless. Hmmm. An assumption that homeless people are all stupid?
Interestingly, I recently met someone who was homeless for some time as a young person. She's intelligent, articulate, and amazingly healthy, physically and mentally, considering the life experiences she's had. As we talked, I found that my imagination had served me pretty well as I wrote Loser and her companions. She mentioned that once she was able to have a normal life again with a home and family, she became, as she termed it, "a control freak." Having had a life that was out of control, she's compelled to make sure everything is right, at least in her mind.
Totally understandable. And in addition, it's going to help a lot with Book #2!
