Lynn Flewelling's Blog, page 14
July 11, 2012
Guest Author: David Coe/DB Jackson!
Today I'm delighted to introduce a good friend of mine, David Coe . . . er, DB Jackson. Well, both. David is the proud papa of a brand new, wonderful (I know because I blurbed it) historical fantasy novel, Thieftaker under the name DB Jackson. I'll let him explain.
It takes a pretty geeky guy to set a historical fantasy in the pre-Revolutionary period of American history. I mean, it’s one thing to set a book or series in the years of the Revolutionary War, or the Civil War, or some other war. Wars are glitzy, they’re violent and tragic and filled with tension -- they are the perfect setting for any sort of fiction. But the years before the war? Really?
To which I have to answer, “Yes, really.” Now, I freely admit that I am, in fact, pretty geeky. How geeky? Well, I have a Ph.D. in history, so I’m thinking that makes me pretty darn geeky. But I had compelling reasons for setting my new book Thieftaker, book I of the Thieftaker Chronicles, in 1760s Boston.
The idea for the Thieftaker series was sparked by a footnote that I read in Robert Hughes’ history of Australia, The Fatal Shore. (Yes, a footnote in a history book. Told you I was a geek.) The footnote described the life of London’s most famous thieftaker, the notorious Jonathan Wild. Wild was a brute and criminal who was responsible for nearly all the thefts that he “solved” as a thieftaker. He or his henchmen would steal goods, and then those things that Wild couldn’t sell for great profit he would turn around and return for a fee. He made a fortune, and all the while was hailed for his uncanny ability to recover stolen goods. And I thought “What a great idea for a book character!” I modeled my lead character’s nemesis, Sephira Pryce, after Wild. It might be the first time I had a book idea present itself to me in the form of an antagonist rather than a protagonist.
In its first incarnation, Thieftaker was set in an alternate fantasy world. After discussions with my editor, however, I decided to shift it to a real world historical setting. My editor suggested London, but I have to admit that I balked at this. So many books are set in London, and I really don’t know the city very well. I know, I know -- research would be a great excuse to travel there. But I feel no connection to London. On the other hand, having studied U.S. history, and having spent a good deal of time visiting Boston to see my older siblings, all of whom went to college there, I felt that Boston would be a perfect backdrop to the story.
In the 1760s, Boston was somewhat rundown, even seedy. Not long before, it had been the leading city of Colonial North America. But economic troubles had taken away some of its luster. Her sister cities, New York and Pennsylvania, had surpassed her in both population and financial prowess. I liked the idea of setting the Thieftaker books in a city like this. That sense of a town past its prime worked well with the noir feel I was searching for as a I wrote the first book. And I felt that Boston’s fall from grace created nice parallels with my lead character, Ethan Kaille, a conjurer and thieftaker, who is also past his prime and down on his luck.
In addition, Boston in the mid-1760s was becoming the hotbed of colonial protests against British authority. This was a place and time fraught with anxiety and uncertainty. Most colonists in the 1760s still considered themselves loyal subjects of the British Empire, but they were also starting to perceive that there was something unique about their status as Americans. For a character like Ethan, who is trying to find his way in the world after serving nearly fourteen years in prison, this added uncertainty seems a perfect complement to his personal struggles. And nowhere were the ambiguities of colonial status more stridently argued than in Boston. By setting my book there, I was able to weave into my story such colorful figures as Samuel Adams, James Otis, and Thomas Hutchinson, and to use the Stamp Act riots of August 1765 as the backdrop for the murder mystery that forms the core of Thieftaker’s plot. In short, once I decided to recast Thieftaker as a historical fantasy, pre-Revolutionary Boston quickly emerged as the perfect setting for the book.
The biggest challenge I faced lay in creating a magic system that would blend as seamlessly as possible with that colonial backdrop. Fortunately, Boston and the surrounding countryside already had a longstanding relationship with the supernatural. The Province of Massachusetts Bay had seen witch scares going back nearly a hundred years, including the Salem Witch Trials of 1692, which saw over one hundred and fifty people jailed and twenty executed. In Thieftaker, conjurers and witches are not the same thing. Witches are creatures of myth and nightmare; preachers rail against witchery and black magick in their sermons. Conjurers like Ethan, on the other hand, are quite real. They can cast spells that heal, that reshape matter, that even can control the actions of others. But while witches don’t actually exist, fear of them is constantly conflated with fear of conjurers. Ethan and others of his kind must keep their abilities secret, lest they be hanged as witches.
By connecting my imaginary magic system with the true historical phenomenon of witch scares, I was able to find that seamless blending of the fantastic and the historical I was after. The paranormal aspects of my story wound up reinforcing the sense of time and place that are so important to the book. And, in return, the historical references to something with which most readers are familiar -- that age-old fear of witches -- made the magic system seem that much more “real.”
Of course, one doesn’t have to tie a story so closely to historical events in order to make historical fiction work. What I’ve described here was just my approach for this series. But I have to admit that with every new connection I was able to make between my imagined characters, worldbuilding, and narrative on the one hand, and the historical events I was reading about on the other, the process of writing the book became that much more exciting. In the end, the choice of Colonial Boston as the setting for the book worked out better than I had ever dreamed it would.
*****
D.B. Jackson is also David B. Coe, the award-winning author of a dozen fantasy novels. His first book as D.B. Jackson, Thieftaker, volume I of the Thieftaker Chronicles, will be released by Tor Books on July 3. D.B. lives on the Cumberland Plateau with his wife and two teenaged daughters. They’re all smarter and prettier than he is, but they keep him around because he makes a mean vegetarian fajita. When he’s not writing he likes to hike, play guitar, and stalk the perfect image with his camera.
http://www.dbjackson-author.com
http://www.dbjackson-author.com/blog
http://www.facebook.com/dbjacksonAuthor
http://twitter.com/dbjacksonauthor
http://www.goodreads.com/dbjackson
http://amazon.com/author/dbjackson
It takes a pretty geeky guy to set a historical fantasy in the pre-Revolutionary period of American history. I mean, it’s one thing to set a book or series in the years of the Revolutionary War, or the Civil War, or some other war. Wars are glitzy, they’re violent and tragic and filled with tension -- they are the perfect setting for any sort of fiction. But the years before the war? Really?
To which I have to answer, “Yes, really.” Now, I freely admit that I am, in fact, pretty geeky. How geeky? Well, I have a Ph.D. in history, so I’m thinking that makes me pretty darn geeky. But I had compelling reasons for setting my new book Thieftaker, book I of the Thieftaker Chronicles, in 1760s Boston.
The idea for the Thieftaker series was sparked by a footnote that I read in Robert Hughes’ history of Australia, The Fatal Shore. (Yes, a footnote in a history book. Told you I was a geek.) The footnote described the life of London’s most famous thieftaker, the notorious Jonathan Wild. Wild was a brute and criminal who was responsible for nearly all the thefts that he “solved” as a thieftaker. He or his henchmen would steal goods, and then those things that Wild couldn’t sell for great profit he would turn around and return for a fee. He made a fortune, and all the while was hailed for his uncanny ability to recover stolen goods. And I thought “What a great idea for a book character!” I modeled my lead character’s nemesis, Sephira Pryce, after Wild. It might be the first time I had a book idea present itself to me in the form of an antagonist rather than a protagonist.
In its first incarnation, Thieftaker was set in an alternate fantasy world. After discussions with my editor, however, I decided to shift it to a real world historical setting. My editor suggested London, but I have to admit that I balked at this. So many books are set in London, and I really don’t know the city very well. I know, I know -- research would be a great excuse to travel there. But I feel no connection to London. On the other hand, having studied U.S. history, and having spent a good deal of time visiting Boston to see my older siblings, all of whom went to college there, I felt that Boston would be a perfect backdrop to the story.
In the 1760s, Boston was somewhat rundown, even seedy. Not long before, it had been the leading city of Colonial North America. But economic troubles had taken away some of its luster. Her sister cities, New York and Pennsylvania, had surpassed her in both population and financial prowess. I liked the idea of setting the Thieftaker books in a city like this. That sense of a town past its prime worked well with the noir feel I was searching for as a I wrote the first book. And I felt that Boston’s fall from grace created nice parallels with my lead character, Ethan Kaille, a conjurer and thieftaker, who is also past his prime and down on his luck.
In addition, Boston in the mid-1760s was becoming the hotbed of colonial protests against British authority. This was a place and time fraught with anxiety and uncertainty. Most colonists in the 1760s still considered themselves loyal subjects of the British Empire, but they were also starting to perceive that there was something unique about their status as Americans. For a character like Ethan, who is trying to find his way in the world after serving nearly fourteen years in prison, this added uncertainty seems a perfect complement to his personal struggles. And nowhere were the ambiguities of colonial status more stridently argued than in Boston. By setting my book there, I was able to weave into my story such colorful figures as Samuel Adams, James Otis, and Thomas Hutchinson, and to use the Stamp Act riots of August 1765 as the backdrop for the murder mystery that forms the core of Thieftaker’s plot. In short, once I decided to recast Thieftaker as a historical fantasy, pre-Revolutionary Boston quickly emerged as the perfect setting for the book.
The biggest challenge I faced lay in creating a magic system that would blend as seamlessly as possible with that colonial backdrop. Fortunately, Boston and the surrounding countryside already had a longstanding relationship with the supernatural. The Province of Massachusetts Bay had seen witch scares going back nearly a hundred years, including the Salem Witch Trials of 1692, which saw over one hundred and fifty people jailed and twenty executed. In Thieftaker, conjurers and witches are not the same thing. Witches are creatures of myth and nightmare; preachers rail against witchery and black magick in their sermons. Conjurers like Ethan, on the other hand, are quite real. They can cast spells that heal, that reshape matter, that even can control the actions of others. But while witches don’t actually exist, fear of them is constantly conflated with fear of conjurers. Ethan and others of his kind must keep their abilities secret, lest they be hanged as witches.
By connecting my imaginary magic system with the true historical phenomenon of witch scares, I was able to find that seamless blending of the fantastic and the historical I was after. The paranormal aspects of my story wound up reinforcing the sense of time and place that are so important to the book. And, in return, the historical references to something with which most readers are familiar -- that age-old fear of witches -- made the magic system seem that much more “real.”
Of course, one doesn’t have to tie a story so closely to historical events in order to make historical fiction work. What I’ve described here was just my approach for this series. But I have to admit that with every new connection I was able to make between my imagined characters, worldbuilding, and narrative on the one hand, and the historical events I was reading about on the other, the process of writing the book became that much more exciting. In the end, the choice of Colonial Boston as the setting for the book worked out better than I had ever dreamed it would.
*****
D.B. Jackson is also David B. Coe, the award-winning author of a dozen fantasy novels. His first book as D.B. Jackson, Thieftaker, volume I of the Thieftaker Chronicles, will be released by Tor Books on July 3. D.B. lives on the Cumberland Plateau with his wife and two teenaged daughters. They’re all smarter and prettier than he is, but they keep him around because he makes a mean vegetarian fajita. When he’s not writing he likes to hike, play guitar, and stalk the perfect image with his camera.
http://www.dbjackson-author.com
http://www.dbjackson-author.com/blog
http://www.facebook.com/dbjacksonAuthor
http://twitter.com/dbjacksonauthor
http://www.goodreads.com/dbjackson
http://amazon.com/author/dbjackson
July 10, 2012
July 9, 2012
Today's Best Typo
"They hate a simple breakfast." Well, who doesn't?
July 8, 2012
Slow Sunday Morning
This morning is taken up with planning our vacation in Maine next month. We have four people with job schedules, one on a different coast in a different time zone, dogs and house to provide care for, arrgggghhhhhhhh! But it will be a glorious two weeks once we get there! The Maine coastin August is superb.
July 7, 2012
Alec's Birthday Winners!
Thanks to all who posted felicitations for our favorite fair haired boy. Here are his picks. He'd have given everyone a bookmark, but alas, supplies are limited.
If you find your name in the following list, please do the following:
a. Email me your address at: lbflewelling@roadrunner.com
AND
b. Put LJ WINNER in the subject line
Without further ado:
1. Zncttc
2. 2b_nika
3. springstermatic
4. Cassie_black
5. fendassor
6. stormphyre
7. puzzlepiece
8. ohgollygeedamn
9. westmoor
10. drgaellon
11. levyn
12. wikdsushi
13. beth noir
14. alecismyhero
15. celtic twinkie
16. butterflygirl_3
17. snakewhissperer
18. KnightAngelo14
19. marco24a
20. padfootie
21. ladykaren330
If you find your name in the following list, please do the following:
a. Email me your address at: lbflewelling@roadrunner.com
AND
b. Put LJ WINNER in the subject line
Without further ado:
1. Zncttc
2. 2b_nika
3. springstermatic
4. Cassie_black
5. fendassor
6. stormphyre
7. puzzlepiece
8. ohgollygeedamn
9. westmoor
10. drgaellon
11. levyn
12. wikdsushi
13. beth noir
14. alecismyhero
15. celtic twinkie
16. butterflygirl_3
17. snakewhissperer
18. KnightAngelo14
19. marco24a
20. padfootie
21. ladykaren330
July 4, 2012
Happy Birthday America and Alec!
Yes, I chose the fourth for Alec's birthday so I could remember it. So in honor of that, I am giving away 21 signed bookmarks. Comment by midnight PST tomorrow to win!
June 28, 2012
Today's Buddhist Thought
"Want less, suffer less."
Bumper sticker on my car.
Bumper sticker on my car.
Mug Shot
I ordered a few items from the Nightrunner Emporium on Zazzle to check the quality and was very pleased with the results. The quality of the mugs is excellent. Much better than my attempt to photograph them.
June 27, 2012
Time Waits For No Muse, or Momento Mori
As I may have mentioned elsewhere, when I'm sick I crave horror movies and horror books. No idea why. So I spent the last couple of days rereading Ira Levin's Rosemary's Baby (1967) and then the long-awaited sequel I totally missed in 1999, Son of Rosemary. The original book is brilliant, foundational, a delight to rediscover after so many years. I was so happy it held up well when so many beloved books don't. But the sequel? It was awful, in so many bad writing ways. Oh, there was enough to keep me turning the pages, wanting to see if he was really going where I thought he was going, but even the "twist" at the end was hackneyed, infuriating, really, that I couldn't get those precious hours of my life back.
But I'm not here to badmouth Ira Levin. The man did amazing, great work, better than I will ever turn out. No, this isn't a book review or a rant.
No, this is a thoughtful moment for me as a writer. This reading experience brought home to me— by no means for the first time— that writers do write themselves out, run out of good ideas, but sometimes keep going anyway. I'm not going to name names. I'm sure you can all think of an example or two. Some stop before it happens, either tired and out of ideas and they know it, or maybe their agents don't return their calls anymore? I don't know. Or they die.
I know some readers thought this might be the case with Shadows Return. The initial reception for the book was crushing, and really shook my confidence, although it, and its sequel, have found a following since and are still selling. That said, I stand by those books. Right or wrong, they are exactly the books I set out to write. Maybe Ira felt the same way about Son of Rosemary. Or maybe he just wanted one more grab at the shiny brass ring. I can certainly empathize with that.
The response to Casket of Souls has been a huge relief, really. I love that book, feel great about it, rejoice that people tell me how much they like it, even when qualified with comparison to those other books. At least I'm not written out, at least not yet. Or maybe I am. Maybe that was the last bright squib of my roman candle. I almost wish Casket was my last book, so I could go out feeling like a winner.
But I'm not ready to quit. The itch is still there, strong as ever. And there is one more Nightrunner book, one more chance to succeed or fail. For those of you who want to become a writer, please take heed. Succeeding with one book is no guarantee that you will succeed with another. Every single one of the damn things is a crap shoot. Even some Big Names I Won't Mention write some real stinkers. I can't think of any writer who hit every single one over the fence. You want to. Holy hell, do you want to! We're only human.
I generally can't help reading with a writer's eye, and reading Son of Rosemary was no exception. There were so many moments when I winced for the writer, thinking "Can't you see that doesn't work? Can't you tell anymore?" But he must not have. How else to explain him allowing it to see the light of day? Or maybe he did and had his reasons. Either way, my heart aches for a fellow scribbler.
In the Tarot, the Wheel is always turning for good or ill, turning turning turning. From a Buddhist standpoint, all things change, all things fall away, or at least change to something else. When the great teachers couch that in examples like seeds changing into plants or babies growing up, that's lovely and life affirming and only half the picture and completely not the point. They also have meditations in which you picture your loved ones dead and decaying from meat to rot to bone to dust to whatever comes after dust. It's not even two sides of the same coin. There is no coin, only process. Part of my practice is accepting that illness, aging, and death are inevitable and not to be feared because fear comes from clinging and attachment to the idea that it could be otherwise if only . . . if only. Believe me, that's a work in progress. And the same goes for creativity. One way or another, it's finite. The question rears its ugly, scaly, fraught-with-attachment head: will I know the difference when the time comes? Because I'm not ready to quit yet.
I guess I hear the deathwatch beetle clicking away today, and my Muse turns uneasily to look. Momento mori indeed.
But I'm not here to badmouth Ira Levin. The man did amazing, great work, better than I will ever turn out. No, this isn't a book review or a rant.
No, this is a thoughtful moment for me as a writer. This reading experience brought home to me— by no means for the first time— that writers do write themselves out, run out of good ideas, but sometimes keep going anyway. I'm not going to name names. I'm sure you can all think of an example or two. Some stop before it happens, either tired and out of ideas and they know it, or maybe their agents don't return their calls anymore? I don't know. Or they die.
I know some readers thought this might be the case with Shadows Return. The initial reception for the book was crushing, and really shook my confidence, although it, and its sequel, have found a following since and are still selling. That said, I stand by those books. Right or wrong, they are exactly the books I set out to write. Maybe Ira felt the same way about Son of Rosemary. Or maybe he just wanted one more grab at the shiny brass ring. I can certainly empathize with that.
The response to Casket of Souls has been a huge relief, really. I love that book, feel great about it, rejoice that people tell me how much they like it, even when qualified with comparison to those other books. At least I'm not written out, at least not yet. Or maybe I am. Maybe that was the last bright squib of my roman candle. I almost wish Casket was my last book, so I could go out feeling like a winner.
But I'm not ready to quit. The itch is still there, strong as ever. And there is one more Nightrunner book, one more chance to succeed or fail. For those of you who want to become a writer, please take heed. Succeeding with one book is no guarantee that you will succeed with another. Every single one of the damn things is a crap shoot. Even some Big Names I Won't Mention write some real stinkers. I can't think of any writer who hit every single one over the fence. You want to. Holy hell, do you want to! We're only human.
I generally can't help reading with a writer's eye, and reading Son of Rosemary was no exception. There were so many moments when I winced for the writer, thinking "Can't you see that doesn't work? Can't you tell anymore?" But he must not have. How else to explain him allowing it to see the light of day? Or maybe he did and had his reasons. Either way, my heart aches for a fellow scribbler.
In the Tarot, the Wheel is always turning for good or ill, turning turning turning. From a Buddhist standpoint, all things change, all things fall away, or at least change to something else. When the great teachers couch that in examples like seeds changing into plants or babies growing up, that's lovely and life affirming and only half the picture and completely not the point. They also have meditations in which you picture your loved ones dead and decaying from meat to rot to bone to dust to whatever comes after dust. It's not even two sides of the same coin. There is no coin, only process. Part of my practice is accepting that illness, aging, and death are inevitable and not to be feared because fear comes from clinging and attachment to the idea that it could be otherwise if only . . . if only. Believe me, that's a work in progress. And the same goes for creativity. One way or another, it's finite. The question rears its ugly, scaly, fraught-with-attachment head: will I know the difference when the time comes? Because I'm not ready to quit yet.
I guess I hear the deathwatch beetle clicking away today, and my Muse turns uneasily to look. Momento mori indeed.
