Question M

[Jonetta]

Any other topics you’d like to discuss? Your overall opinion of the story?

[Anita]

I loved how Nils just would not give up on Meg and how he worked so hard to make her take him seriously when he told her he loved her.

[Robin]

I read this book several years ago and loved it. I didn't like it as much this time around because I thought Meg was crazy to try to do everything on her own when she had the FBI and Navy SEALs at her fingertips. I liked Nils. I liked Eve and Amy. But it was Sam and Alyssa that kept me reading.

[Jonetta]

Switching to audio made a big difference for me. I enjoyed it more this time and saw things I missed. I agree, though, that Sam & Alyssa were the highlights with Eve a close second. I liked Nils & Meg but that protracted refusal to accept help wore me out.

[Sharon]

I agree with all of you. If this book was only focused on Nils and Meg, I would have stopped reading. The rest of the team kept me going when I want to yell at Meg "snap out of it."

[Jonetta]

FYI, I found this in a discussion about Meg several years ago. One of our members reached out to Brockmann to ask for her perspective about the character. Here’s her extraordinary response.

“Hey!

Funny, Meg is probably my most disliked female character — and the character who is most like myself! Need to be in control plus those maternal needs you mentioned…

I’ve talked a lot about her with readers — frankly, for many years I was surprised when people remarked on her failure to do something that I would have found impossible — to put her daughter’s life into the hands of other people. She’s been given instructions on how her daughter can/will survive, and the idea that she would trust anyone, particularly since she believes she can get this thing done by herself (with her self sacrifice), is completely alien to me.

Also, she’s a diplomat, and she knows that it’s not in anyone’s best interest to negotiate with terrorists. It’s not going to happen. She, however, cares only about preserving her daughter’s life — she can do what the government cannot. In the present day segments of the book, she’s very brittle (good word!) because she thinks she’s already dead.

Did you ever see BAND OF BROTHERS? I wrote TDH in 2000, before that HBO series came out in 2001, but I loved it, and I was always struck by the attitude of Captain Spears (I think I’m spelling that right — whoops, no I’m not). He was the officer who would just run toward the enemy, seemingly fearlessly, whether it was to charge/attack or rescue a wounded soldier. When asked about it, he said (wait, going to google “capt spears quotes” — aha found it…

Capt. Ronald Speirs: What's your name, trooper?
Pvt. Albert Blithe: Blithe, sir. Albert Blithe.
Capt. Ronald Speirs: You know why you hid in that ditch, Blithe?
Pvt. Albert Blithe: I was scared.
Capt. Ronald Speirs: We're all scared. You hid in that ditch because you think there's still hope. But Blithe, the only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead, and the sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a soldier's supposed to function. Without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All war depends on it.

****

I love that scene. And… That’s actually very close to where Meg is in the present day part of the book. She thinks she's already dead. She expects to die. She has absolutely no hope. (Or she believes she has no hope…) (Love is sneaky that way, and being near Nils reawakens her hope…)

And that’s why I wrote the backstory segment, because how do you allow yourself to fall in love when you’re already dead? I had to let her fall in love with Nils years earlier to make the romance work. (I’ve often found it challenging to fit the stories I want to tell into the “romance novel” mold.)

And yeah, the whole Meg thing doesn’t work for quite a few readers. That’s okay. The S&A story arc seems to have made up for it! :-)

Still, all these years later, it remains interesting to me — I personally find readers lack of understanding of Meg to be as perplexing and strange as many readers seem to find Meg’s actions! And I recognize that I’m probably the weird one here. (Well, Meg and me…) :-) It’s a bit of a lesson (or at least it is for me) in the idea that we don’t all think alike or are wired the same way (or even remotely close to the same way!) — and that’s okay.

I think maybe that’s one of the reasons my books tend to be hero-driven — because I understand men so much more than I understand women!

Here’s a question for you to ponder: If Meg had been Matt and the father of Amy, would the choice not to give up control of his daughter’s rescue have been more believable or acceptable? (And in those TAKEN movies is Liam Neeson perceived as unattractive…?)

Yes, Meg’s skill-set is different, but she uses everything she’s got (brains, languages, will power, inner strength) to try to save her kid.

I’m glad you took the time to write with your question — Please feel free to share this email with your book group! I hope my thoughts and comments ignite passionate discussion! (I’m a big fan of passionate discussion!)

hugs,
Suz”

[Lauren]

It is always interesting to get the author's perspective. Thanks Jonetta!

Some comments on Brockmann's thoughts:

1. The issue for me is not that Meg has trouble trusting others with her daughter's life. This is totally understandable as is her willingness to sacrifice herself for her child. The problem is her stubborn unwillingness to accept help from those she CAN trust, like Nils and the team. This is no longer an issue of self-sacrifice but one of pride and ego.

2. It is interesting that Brockmann mentions Speirs from Band of Brothers. It is clear in the book (based on actual interviews with the members of E Company) and the show that his behavior stems from a death wish. He has a decided lack of empathy and no conscience, which is very problematic. He is a sociopath, not a hero. He is the last person I would model a character like Meg on.

3. Re the Meg/Matt idea - As Meg is not Matt, I cannot honestly say how I would react if a male character did this. I hope that he would irritate me just as much because these actions are non-sensical for any gender.

[Jonetta]

Thanks for adding that insight about Spiers, Lauren. That is extremely helpful for context. I’m puzzled by Brockmann designing Meg as having a death wish. I never saw or felt that after having read this book twice. She just didn’t set her up in a way that the reader would infer or overtly experience that.

I can see, though, how if Meg had been “Matt,” she may have been given more leeway. It’s something I see a lot in romance book reviews…a tolerance for hero behaviors that are intolerant in heroine actions. I can see it here.

Bottom line for me, Brockmann tried to form this character as a mirror image of herself. That’s better handled by biographers and she made some classic errors by leaving out essential background to explain how she got there. I wish she’d take heed from her readers that Meg is her most disliked character and figure out where she went wrong.

[Lauren]

Jonetta wrote: " I’m puzzled by Brockmann designing Meg as having a death wish. I never saw or felt that after having read..."

I agree. That is why I was confused as to why Brockmann indicates she used Speirs as inspiration for Meg's motivation. Weird!

I wish she’d take heed from her readers that Meg is her most disliked character and figure out where she went wrong.

My take from this clarification by Brockmann, is that she is emotionally attached to Meg's character whom she says is a mirror of herself. She seems quite hurt that readers do not appreciate Meg or her action. However, once the book is out, it is the readers who get to have their say about their perception of the characters whether the author likes it to not.

[Jonetta]

Lauren wrote: "My take from this clarification by Brockmann, is that she is emotionally attached to Meg's character whom she says is a mirror of herself. She seems quite hurt that readers do not appreciate Meg or her action. However, once the book is out, it is the readers who get to have their say about their perception of the characters whether the author likes it to not. ..."

It almost sounds like she felt we were rejecting her! Brockmann included one dimension of herself without first leading us to that insight. We went with what she gave us and it just didn’t work. She made Meg a huge, muddled contradiction, which is so far from my experience of Brockmann.

I appreciate what she tried to do with Meg but….

[Sharon]

I agree. It is good to have Brockman's perspective on how she was trying to portray Meg, but she failed, in my opinion. The explanation would make sense, justifying her first attempt at going it alone, but the fact that she didn't stop after her first failure and accept help was ridiculous.

It upsets me a little that she thinks she can't do a woman-hero justice. I think she does any excellent job in the flashbacks. They are often my favorite part of the story.

[Anita]

I didn't get the death wish feel from Meg. I got the feeling she was willing to sacrifice herself to save her grandmother and daughter, if she had to. It always puzzled me why she wouldn't let Nils help. I just thought she believed he wasn't capable enough. Maybe she really did have a death wish and that was why she kept pushing him away.