Something I remember after I finished the first draft of my fifth novel, 'After She's Gone' - how, along the way, something odd occurred. Many, if not all, other fiction writers report it's happened to them too; it's a concept that sounds a little off the wall, a bit wacky, at first. Readers who are not also writers tell me it's hard to understand, and I can see why. I'm talking about the tendency of fictional characters to resist doing what the author wants. Instead, just like real people, they often refuse to do what they're told, developing minds of their own and behaving in very contrary ways! Fiction writers will know what I mean. For others, though, this is a weird notion. 'But you're the author!' they say. 'Aren't you in control? Why not just make the characters do what you'd planned for them?' The answer is, I can't, not always. Let me explain.

As a novelist, I’m an outliner, plotting my books in a fair amount of detail before I write them. As part of my planning, I prepare notes about each character - their motivations, their hopes, their issues, along with a physical description and a precis of their role in the plot. After I've done that, I tell myself I know them quite well, but the truth is, I don't. It's not until I start writing that they take on lives and minds of their own, and sometimes those minds decide to follow a different route through the novel. If this all sounds a bit woo-woo, it is and yet it isn't. In one way, there's nothing mystical about what I'm describing. However carefully an author plots in advance, it's impossible to foresee every eventuality, and it's not until the writing begins that a novelist finds out whether his/her story works. What may appear feasible at the planning stage can unravel once written; inconsistencies and contradictions appear or the plot simply doesn't feel right. The same happens with characters. I'll explain by using Jake Hamilton, a minor player in 'After She's Gone'.

When I plotted the novel, Jake was a poor father, a lousy partner and an all-round deadbeat. As I wrote one particular scene, however, something didn't sit well with me. The storyline would work better, I decided, if I portrayed Jake as flawed in many ways, yet ultimately a man trying to do his best. Someone who regretted his past mistakes. So that's what I did. Nothing woo-woo about that, simply an author recognising that a different approach would suit the novel better. On the other hand, though,  Jake asserting his true character provided a magical moment. It was as if he was shouting at me, trying to get my attention, yelling, 'Hey! You behind the keyboard! You've got me all wrong - I'm more of a nice guy than you give me credit for!'

I hear you, Jake! And once I did, I changed my story accordingly. Characters don’t exist independently from an author's fiction, of course, however real they may become to a writer. The chances are, though, that if a character is pressing to go in a particular direction, then that's the best course for him/her to take. Here's novelist Dianne Doubtfire on the subject: 'Sometimes a character becomes so real that he refuses to do what you have planned for him. When this happens, don't coerce him; it means you have created a real person with a will of his own and this is a marvellous moment in any novelist's life. Hold him on a light rein, as it were, giving him his head to a certain degree but ensuring that he does not stampede you out of your story.' (Dianne Doubtfire, The Craft of Novel-Writing, published by Allison and Busby, 1978). Wise advice, Dianne - thank you! Oh, and a big thank you also to Jake Hamilton - I'm glad I listened to you!

Are you a fellow novelist who's had characters run out of control and do their own thing? Or are you a reader, someone who doesn't understand why authors can't exercise complete authority? Are there fictional characters who you think would have been more convincing if they'd been portrayed differently? Leave me a comment and let me know!  
 
'After She's Gone' is available from Amazon in ebook, paperback and audio formats via this link: After She's Gone.

As readers of my blog will have gathered, I'm an avid Stephen King fan; I'm working my way through all his supernatural thrillers. Apart from 'Nightmares and Dreamscapes' and the rather flat 'From a Buick 8', I've not yet read anything from King I haven't liked. So when I spotted the hardcover copy of 'End of Watch' in the supermarket, I bought it straight away. The novel is the final book in the Bill Hodges trilogy, the other two being 'Mr Mercedes' and 'Finders Keepers'. Here's my review of 'Mr Mercedes';  I didn't post a review for 'Finders Keepers', but I loved that one as well.

The title, one that fits the story perfectly, comes from an American expression for police officers at the end of their working life. Those who retire permanently, or die. Which one will Bill Hodges do? He's certainly an engaging sleuth, although a somewhat stereotypical one: retired police officer, divorced, battling health problems and with a past drinking problem. He's teamed with Holly Gibney, a woman with multiple issues of her own, along with Jerome Robinson, a student and former lawn boy for Bill. Books one and three of the trilogy concentrate heavily on the evil Brady Hartsfield, a mass murderer who's also obsessed with suicide. The middle novel, 'Finders Keepers', diverts to explore one of King's favourite topics, the writing life, although it involves the Brady Hartsfield character as well. Here's the sales blurb for 'End of Watch': ​
 
'Retired Detective Bill Hodges now runs a two-person firm called Finders Keepers with his partner Holly Gibney. They met in the wake of the 'Mercedes Massacre' when a queue of people was run down by the diabolical killer Brady Hartsfield. Brady is now confined to Room 217 of the Lakes Region Traumatic Brain Injury Clinic, in an unresponsive state. But all is not what it seems: the evidence suggests that Brady is somehow awake, and in possession of deadly new powers that allow him to wreak unimaginable havoc without ever leaving his hospital room. When Bill and Holly are called to a suicide scene with ties to the Mercedes Massacre, they find themselves pulled into their most dangerous case yet, one that will put their lives at risk, as well as those of Bill's heroic young friend Jerome Robinson and his teenage sister, Barbara. Brady Hartsfield is back, and planning revenge not just on Hodges and his friends, but on an entire city. The clock is ticking in unexpected ways... Both a stand-alone novel of heart-pounding suspense and a sublimely terrifying final episode in the Hodges trilogy, 'End of Watch' takes the series into a powerful new dimension.' 

Sounds great, doesn't it? And 'End of Watch' delivers the goods. Brady Hartsfield is a wonderfully warped villain, aided by his sidekicks Felix Babineau and Library Al, both of whom end up zombie-fied after Brady invades their minds. Intent on revenge on Bill Hodges, Brady will stop at nothing to achieve his goal, as well as drive thousands of young people to kill themselves.
 
Although his brain was seriously damaged by Holly Gibney, Brady avails himself of new powers, possibly resulting from Felix Babineau using him in unauthorised drug trials. King also hints that the savage head blow dealt by Holly may also have contributed, allowing Brady to access the 90% of his brain that lies dormant in all of us. As his extraordinary powers grow, the deaths begin…
 
Stephen King is a master at creating memorable characters (think Jack Torrance, Annie Wilkes, Jake Epping). 'End of Watch' also has an interesting cast list, one that develops both Bill Hodges and Holly Gibney, more so the latter. Whilst it's not specifically mentioned, Holly is either autistic or has Asperger's syndrome, and the book shows her shedding her coping mechanisms  as the story progresses. It's Brady Hartsfield, though, who receives the full Stephen King treatment, morphing from a catatonic invalid to a mind in motion, capable of transferring into other bodies at will. His evil mission poses a huge problem for Bill and Holly in their race to stop him. They can hardly tell the police what they suspect Brady is up to, after all!
 
I found some aspects of the plot a little far-fetched - the use of obsolete games consoles to facilitate mind control, for example, and the numerical pink fish. Perhaps that's a little unfair, as Brady's opportunities for evil are limited initially, and the use of technology, albeit outdated, fits what we already know of him as a computer expert. Besides, this is Stephen King, creator of Pennywise the Dancing Clown, supernatural cars and telekinetic teenagers. Beside them, digital pink fish seem small fry!
 
King can be verbose at times, but his mastery of words transcends what might grate if coming from a lesser writer. 'End of Watch' rollicks along at a fast pace towards the satisfying, if sad, conclusion. It can be read either as the third book in the 'Mr Mercedes' trilogy, or would work equally well as a standalone novel. If you're a fan of his novels, I suspect you'll love this book.

Have you read 'End of Watch', or any of the other books in the trilogy? What did you think? Leave a comment and let me know!       

This week I'm delighted to welcome crime novelist Andrew Barrett to my blog. Andrew has been writing best-selling thrillers since the mid-1990s, all set in northern England. He’s also written several short stories, and co-written a number of television scripts. His stories focus on the world of crime scene investigators, using his own expertise as a senior CSI to develop his fiction. I recently read the fourth book in his Eddie Collins series, 'Ledston Luck'. OK, let's get going with the questions!

Most writers tend to get going with their stories by asking the 'What If' question. I do too, but with most of my stories, and especially with 'Ledston Luck', first came a couple of scenes.

One scene I latched onto as I drove over a canal bridge, was the sight of a woman’s face just beneath the water’s surface. Of course there was no woman there, I’d imagined it, but it looked very real for a moment, and that stuck with me. I wrote a scene around Eddie pulling her from the water.

The next scene grew in my mind from a small kernel: I saw a naked woman sitting in a stout wooden chair in a dark farmhouse kitchen. The door opened and in stepped two burglars. The naked woman didn’t scream or run away, she reached for the shotgun next to her. Both of these scenes excited me enough to then ask the 'What If' question, and I slowly constructed a story around them.

Eddie Collins is seen by many as angry most or all of the time. But he’s not. He’s just as angry at the man standing next to you in the bus queue noisily chewing on a toffee. What makes Eddie different is that he’s not good at controlling his anger. He’d most likely step away from the toffee-chewer because, if he didn’t, he’d say something that everyone else in the queue would be thinking – and it probably wouldn’t be pleasant. Eddie is not only poor at controlling his feelings, he’s not exactly tactful. He’s an honest, down-to-earth man who really does speak as he sees, and it doesn’t matter if that guy at the bus queue is a street-sweeper, a copper, or Prince Philip, no one is exempt from a Collins tongue-lashing. Eddie is a cuddly bunny if he’s on your side. And all you need in order for him to be on your side is to experience injustice. He hates injustice, whether it’s a victim of murder or someone scratching your car for no good reason. These extremes, and all the other things in between infuriate him; that’s the root of his anger.  

Next for Eddie is a novella called 'The Note'. As with all Eddie’s short stories, I write them in first person because I adore the immediacy of it, the relentless onslaught of thought and action. I don’t think I could sustain that through a full novel, but in short story form, it’s so exhilarating. I adore writing Eddie. And I think that’s because I can relate to him so much; he can say the things I feel and get away with them (I can’t, I’ve tried!), and that alone is a wonderfully refreshing experience, so I’ll definitely write more Eddie books. 

I have tried to work to an outline. And failed miserably. I find the story tends to grow from an initial scene or two. Having said that, I can recollect two books that benefitted from a bit of planning. 'Stealing Elgar' and 'Ledston Luck' both stalled at around the 100k words and 50k words mark respectively. I could see where I wanted to be at the end, but I couldn’t figure out how to get there. So I made myself stop staring at the cursor, and took out a sheet of paper and a pencil. I managed to draw up a list of scenes that could take me there, and plotted from each scene a consequence, incorporating that consequence into the following scenes until I reached my goal. I finished those books remarkably quickly once I knew exactly what came next.

Of course you (I mean me) can’t plan for the unexpected happening while writing a scene, so it’s always good to have written the list in pencil! I wish I could plot a book from page one to page 400 but I can’t. I’ve tried.

It changes depending on my circumstances. I began 'The Third Rule' in 2004 and finished it in 2012. That was because I took a seven year break from it while I chased a dream of writing for television. I wrote and published 'Black by Rose' inside six months. I’m pretty sure I could never do that again though; it damned near killed me! I should say I can easily write a book and a short in a year, but I don’t think I’d want to do more than that because I’m working full-time (about 60 hours a week), and I’m trying to become more normal. By that I mean that I’m trying to be a good dad, and I’m trying to sample life outside in the real world. I quite like some of it, though if truth be told, I feel more at home inside my head where my characters and my story live. 

Great question. I put a lot of thought into names for central characters, but I usually end up just choosing something that sounds right for that person. I began the first crime book with a central character called Jonathan Benedict. I have no idea where that name came from. But after the first book I disliked it; it felt too wimpish, so I changed it to Roger Conniston, and that gave him (in my eyes) a far more purposeful stance; he had more verve. I got ‘Roger’ from Mr Taylor of Queen (I love Queen), and Conniston from the Lake District (with an extra ‘n’). I took ‘Collins’ from the dictionary at my side because it was nice and easy to say and rolled from the tongue pleasantly when combined with ‘Eddie’ – also chosen because it was short, and I think, because it’s a trustworthy name. In Black by Rose, the bad man was called Slade Crosby. I got ‘Slade’ from HMP Slade. Remember Porridge with Ronnie Barker? Yes, that’s where my Slade came from. And I took ‘Crosby’ from Bing; it’s also a friendly-sounding name that I used for a most evil man because ‘friendly’ and ‘evil’ co-habit often. Most of the other names I choose are simply because they sound right rather than coming from a specially selected source; they fir the character’s time-frame and their social standing. ‘Divine Wright’ from Ledston Luck has a certain religious connotation, and how could a woman who was called Divine turn out to be so evil? Her mother, Lisbeth, was a religious woman, and I figured her own parents would have been too, and whether it’s correct or not, I thought ‘Lisbeth’ sounded religious, and it also sounded Edwardian, which is the time frame they would have grown up in. 

Absolutely none. Well, no that’s not entirely true. I do research weapons; I had to for 'Stealing Elgar' and 'The Third Rule', and I did a little more in 'Ledston Luck' because I wanted to get a specific shotgun cartridge manufacturer and the details of their cartridge correct.

If you don’t enjoy it, stop. If you do enjoy it, push everything else aside and do it until your eyes, fingers, and heart bleed. Then do it some more. 

Website: http://andrewbarrett.co.uk
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AndrewBarrettUK
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AndrewBarrett.author
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/andrewbarrettauthor
Amazon.co.uk: https://goo.gl/Hqps9K
Amazon.com: https://goo.gl/nHdV8c

I have been passionate about foreign travel for as long as I can remember. During my twenties  I did various solo trips within Europe, but yearned for more. My first big travel adventure started in 1989, when I embarked on a nine-month journey to Asia, Australia, New Zealand, the USA and Canada. Things were rough at first - nothing could have prepared me for India, my first stop. The noise, dirt, hustle and bustle almost proved overwhelming, especially when I was struck down by dysentery, a horror I hope never to experience again! Throughout the nine months, I grew more travel-hardy and overall had a fantastic trip. Over the ensuing decades I have carried on travelling, having written 'His Kidnapper's Shoes' on a year-long visit to Asia and South America. Since my return I have become a full-time novelist, and in the future I'd like to combine the two great passions of my life by becoming a nomadic novelist. After all, I can write my books anywhere in the world via my laptop. I'm currently planning my next adventure! As part of my 'Five' series, I though it would be fun to examine five other novelists who have been keen travellers, or whose trips have influenced their work. So, without further ado, let's pack our bags and journey to some amazing locations! 

I've blogged before about different aspects of the writing process, including plotting and how I organise my working day. This week I'd like to focus on the editing cycle. As part of my contract with Lake Union, my first novel, 'His Kidnapper's Shoes', underwent revision prior to being republished by Amazon, and that proved a fascinating, as well as novel, experience!
 
When I started my writing journey, I lacked the funds for a professional editor. (They don't come cheap!) Instead, I did the best I could myself. Now I'm with Lake Union, all that's changed, because Amazon pick up the costs. Until now, my editing process has gone as follows. First, I set the manuscript aside for at least a month, so that when I return to it, I do so with a fresh eye. My first drafts are rough, because I prefer to get the story out of my head first and worry about sorting the mess later. In the early stages, I spend a lot of time moving text around, deleting some parts and adding others. Once I have a coherent second draft, I check for correct spelling, punctuation, etc.; I'm a stickler for that sort of thing! I always run my books through Microsoft Word's spelling and grammar check as well, though. 
 
Another tool I use, and love, is Pro Writing Aid. There's a free version, but I use the premium one for its extra features, and have a lifetime subscription. Pro Writing Aid will tell me when I've used the same word too often in close proximity, check for clichés and redundancies, perform a grammar check, and much more.
 
The next step is to tighten and prune my prose. It's scary how many unnecessary words I find! Often I shed several thousand during this stage.  By the time I've done all this, the novel is, with any luck, slimmer and fitter. 

I also run each chapter through a checklist. Does it start with a bang? Will the ending lead the reader to the next chapter and create excitement? Have I included enough (but not too much) description and sensory details? Is the pacing right? I try to view it from a reader's point of view, which is hard for me, as I need to switch hats!
 
At the end of all this, I read the manuscript several times to make sure it's as good as I can make it. This is hard because I can waste lots of time tweaking tiny details - at some stage I need to release the book to my wonderful beta readers! I have several people who provide feedback on what they like and don't like, what works and what doesn't. I implement most of their advice; it's rare for me to reject anything they say. After all, they come to the novel with a fresh eye, whereas by this stage I'm usually jaded!
 
For me, editing is the longest part of the process, but unlike some writers, it's something I love doing. I find great satisfaction in polishing my first drafts (believe me, they really are rough!) into something better. I use Scrivener to organise every step of the way. Scrivener is software designed for writers, and has revolutionised my writing. If I could marry a piece of software, it would probably be this one! 

I'll continue to use this process I've outlined above, because it works well for me, but things worked differently for the two novels I've published with Lake Union. Here's how it's worked so far. Soon after I sent 'His Kidnapper's Shoes' to Sammia, my Amazon contact, she assigned Gillian Holmes as the book's editor. Gillian has over twenty years' experience in the industry and has worked with big names such as Kathy Reichs and Tony Parsons, so I was delighted!

First she emailed me her overall impressions of the book and her main recommendations, along with my manuscript containing her detailed notes. Next Sammia organised a conference call between the three of us. She wanted to ensure I understood the process before I got stuck in, and I appreciated her thoughtfulness. I did wonder what Gillian might want to see changed in the book, not because I'm arrogant and consider it perfect, but because I'm too close to it to be objective. All her recommendations made sense and echoed some of the less favourable reviews I've received. She asked me to tone down the sex and swearing, and make Daniel Bateman a more likeable character. With that in mind, I set to work.

I needed to learn Microsoft Word's 'track changes' feature but my inner geek enjoys stuff like that! It didn't take long to implement Gillian's recommendations. My experience of working with her has been very positive. Once I'd experienced the huge benefits of having a professional editor, I asked Gillian to edit my fiction titles that don't fall under my Amazon contract. I'm keen to make my novels as polished as possible, especially now I've joined the Alliance of Independent Authors, a professional writers' association.

I'm happy to answer any questions you have about how novelists (well, me - I can't answer for everyone) edit their books. Leave a comment and let me know!

In this week's post, I continue my 'Five' series, examining novels that proved highly controversial on their release. I'm a firm believer in adults being able to read whatever they choose. In my view, just because a book offends some people (usually because of sex or religion, those perennially divisive subjects!) it's no reason to deny it to others. The difficulty for this post was, of course, narrowing my selection down to five! Authors have frequently challenged prevailing social attitudes, giving me a deep pool from which to make my selection. Eventually I chose the following novels.

Aldous Huxley wrote 'Brave New World' in 1931, with publication taking place in 1932. From the start, the novel sparked controversy, being banned in Ireland on the grounds of offensive language and anti-religious themes. Not much has changed in the decades since, with the novel becoming one of the most hotly debated books in America. Readers have been infuriated by its sexually explicit scenes and bad language. It has also been banned in India due to its sexual content. As if that weren't enough, in 1982 Polish author Antoni Smuszkiewicz accused Huxley of plagiarism, citing two Polish novels written in the 1920s. According to him, their similarity to 'Brave New World' was so great that Huxley must have poached their plots. It's definitely a controversial book!

Here's a synopsis: Far in the future, the World Controllers have created the ideal society. Through clever use of genetic engineering, brainwashing and recreational sex and drugs all its members are happy consumers. Bernard Marx seems alone harbouring an ill-defined longing to break free. A visit to one of the few remaining Savage Reservations where the old, imperfect life still continues, may be the cure for his distress... Sounds fascinating! I can't believe I've not yet read this classic novel, so it's going on my list.  

'Ulysses' first appeared in serial form and was then published as a novel in 1922 in Paris. Why France, when Joyce was Irish and the serialisation took place in an American journal? Controversial from the start, the book was banned in Ireland, the United States and Britain because it was considered obscene. As well as sexual imagery, 'Ulysses' includes detailed descriptions of bodily functions such as masturbation, menstruation and defecation. The Parisian publishing house clearly wasn't fazed by such matters. The book recounts the various events which befall Leopold Bloom and Stephen Dedalus in Dublin on 16 June 1904, including Bloom's  wife, Molly, committing adultery. Hailed by critics such as T S Eliot yet reviled by others, e.g. Virginia Woolf, the serialised version was the subject of an obscenity trial in the US, leading to the novel being banned in that country. Copies were burned and incoming shipments were seized by customs officials. In the 1930s a US court ruling overturned the obscenity charge, making America the first English-speaking country to allow the book.

What fascinates me is the unusual structure. Joyce divided 'Ulysses' into eighteen chapters called episodes, saying he had "put in so many enigmas and puzzles that it will keep the professors busy for centuries arguing over what I meant".  The characters and theme of each episode correspond to those in Homer's 'Odyssey'. Sounds intriguing - another one for my reading list!  

First published in Italy in 1928, the full version of 'Lady Chatterley's Lover' didn't appear in the UK until 1960. Upon its release, the publishers, Penguin Books, were tried under The Obscene Publications Act 1959, making this an important test case for the new law. The book had become notorious for its story of the relationship between two individuals from different social classes, explicit descriptions of sex and profanity. The verdict, a triumph for common sense and literary freedom in my opinion, was a 'not guilty' one. To twenty-first century readers, the book won't deliver the same kind of shock it did in the nineteen twenties. Back then, the sexual content and swearing held far more power to offend, but I suspect the main reason for the disapproval it generated was the story's crossing of class divisions. The book has also been banned and featured in obscenity trials in Australia, America, Japan, India and Canada.

Here's a synopsis: Constance Reid marries Sir Clifford Chatterley, who becomes paralysed from the waist down after the First World War. Desperate for an heir and embarrassed by his inability to satisfy his wife sexually, Clifford gives the go-ahead for her to have an affair, envisaging she will choose someone from their immediate social circle. Instead, Constance begins a passionate relationship with their married gamekeeper, Oliver Mellors, inciting Clifford's ingrained class prejudices. The story ends with Mellors working on a farm, waiting for his divorce, with Connie, now pregnant, living with her sister. The expectation is that, eventually, they will be together.  

Henry Miller wrote 'Tropic of Cancer' in the early 1930s, and it was originally published in Paris in 1934. The book was banned in the US for more than thirty years because it was considered pornographic. Grove Press published it in America in 1961, leading to more than sixty obscenity trials until (finally!) the Supreme Court ruled it a work of literature in 1964. Other English-speaking countries, such as Canada and the UK, banned 'Tropic of Cancer'. Only smuggled copies of the book were available in the United Kingdom from 1934 onwards. Scotland Yard contemplated banning its publication in Britain in the 1960s, but decided against the move because people like T S Eliot were ready to defend the book publicly. Another victory for literary freedom! 

So what was all the fuss about? Set in Paris in the 1930s, the book is largely autobiographical, featuring a starving American writer who lives a bohemian life among prostitutes, pimps, and artists. Meaning lots of sex - oh, the horror! Miller gave the following explanation of the book's unusual title. "To me cancer symbolises the disease of civilisation, the endpoint of the wrong path, the necessity to change course radically, to start completely over from scratch.” Yet another one to add to my reading list!  

'Lolita' was written in English by its Russian author, Vladimir Nabokov, and first published in Paris in 1955. It seems French attitudes to controversial subjects are more relaxed than those of the US and UK. I can't help noticing how the books I'm featuring in this post often gained acceptance first in Paris. American and English versions followed in 1958 and 1959. The initial reaction was mixed. Graham Greene, in the Sunday Times, called it one of the three best books of 1955, whereas John Gordon, editor of the Sunday Express, dubbed it the filthiest book he had ever read. The Home Office promptly seized all copies entering the UK, and in 1956 France banned 'Lolita' for two years, thus blotting their liberal copybook. The US, however, reacted differently, and the book has never been banned there. A novel about a man who marries a woman so he can embark upon a relationship with her twelve-year-old daughter is bound to be controversial.

The furore rumbles on today; recent sex abuse cases coming to light have ensured the book remains a source of debate. Critics disagree as to whether Lolita was a victim or a willing participant in her sexual relationship with the protagonist Humbert Humbert. Some have interpreted their liaison not as the corruption of an innocent child by a cunning adult, but the exploitation of a weak adult by a corrupt child. Others have labelled Humbert a rapist and paedophile. The book's influence is such that the name Lolita has passed into common usage to describe a sexually provocative young girl. 

Have you read any of the books I've featured in this post? Do any of them offend you? Or perhaps you consider them victims of outmoded thinking? Leave a comment and let me know!    

In this week's post I'd like to examine the stereotype of writers as tortured geniuses. It's a cliché, but one backed up by life. Examples of tormented authors abound; take Sylvia Plath, author of 'The Bell Jar', who was clinically depressed for most of her adult life and committed suicide in 1963. Or Ernest Hemingway, renowned for his hard drinking and womanising, who shot and killed himself. Jack London, Kurt Vonnegut, George Orwell - the list goes on, and it's a long and unhappy one.
 
A recent study found that, with the exception of bipolar disorder, creative types are no more likely to suffer psychiatric problems than anyone else. Apart from writers, that is. We're more disposed, it seems, towards depression and schizophrenia. More prone to committing suicide, too. Here's the link to an NHS report on the study: Study looks at creativity link with mental illness.
 
As someone interested in the workings of the brain, I find this fascinating, and frustrating that the study didn't identify possible reasons. I'm fortunate in that I've always enjoyed good mental health; I've blogged before about how I don't use my fiction as a catharsis for my demons, because those pesky little devils are few and far between. I'm aware, though, that other authors are different. Take my writing idol, Stephen King. I can't find the link, but I remember reading that he uses his fiction, especially his earlier works, to resolve childhood issues. He's also a writer who has battled alcoholism and drug addiction. In addition, at least one writer friend uses her books to resolve personal angst.
 
I suspect certain genres lend themselves as avenues for exploring one's malaise. It's no coincidence that not many emotionally tortured writers have penned light romances or children's books. King's preference for writing horror and supernatural fiction is a great example. My own genre, psychological suspense, certainly lends itself to examining the darker side of life, but (thank God!) the events in my books have never featured in my own experience. If writing is cathartic, though, shouldn't authors be less, not more, prone to mental health issues? Or perhaps, for some people, it helps a little but their issues run deeper than fiction can heal. Who knows?
 
My conviction is that our minds are far more complex than we can understand, at present anyway. And other creative professions, such as art and music, are by no means exempt - Van Gogh and Nick Drake, anyone? Take a recent study conducted by Help Musicians UK, which found that over 60% of musicians suffer some form of mental health issue. Such problems can affect anyone, at any age, whatever their profession. Despite what the survey found, I'm not sure they're linked to creativity.
 
What do you think? Leave a comment and let me know!        

I'm delighted to welcome novelist Patrick Parker, who has written three intriguing novels so far, to my blog. Welcome, Patrick!
 
Thank you, Maggie, for your time and giving me the opportunity to talk with you. 

I retired from the US Army, then worked in the defense industry for fifteen years. My duty assignments took me to Italy, Germany, Panama, as well as the United States. My corporate work took me to Europe, across the United States and England. I am now settled in Texas, writing full time.   I enjoy scuba diving, sailing, going to the beach, and astronomy.       

I picked up a suspense book to read on the plane for a trip. This particular book, by one of the large publishing houses, was hyped as a “must read” and had several endorsements. I thought I couldn’t go wrong. However, I found numerous errors and holes in the plot. In some instances, the story line was not believable. When I returned home, in a conversation, my wife asked how I liked the book. I told her about it, and that I was disappointed. I made an offhanded comment that I could write a better book. She said flat out, “Why don’t you?”

Time passed and I began thinking of her comment, but doubt filled my head. A few travel excursions later, I bought another suspense book and it too, disappointed me. Then I was sent to Panama on a classified assignment. I stopped in at an art gallery hoping to buy a painting as a memento. The owner of the shop was active in the resistance against Manuel Noriega and looked to the United States to rescue her country. She told me at length, about the situation in the country. I found her fascinating. My trip to the isthmus did have many tense and exhilarating moments.   Soon after I returned, in one conversation, my wife asked me again if I was going to write a book. “It is harder than you think,” she said. I think she was just tired of me complaining of the quality of some books. Her comment was all it took. Panama was still fresh in my head and I thought the art dealer would make a very interesting character in a book. The idea took shape and 'Treasures of the Fourth Reich' was born.

Maria Conner is based on a real person in Panama. That person, I’ll call her Mary (not her real name), did own an art gallery. Mary was very vocal in her opposition to the Noriega regime. She intrigued me, although it was a bit frightening. Almost immediately, she asked me if I was going to save them. She began to tell me of the atrocities occurring there. She even told me she and a number of others were organized against the government. Her flat out statements were alarming. If we were overheard, I probably wouldn’t be here. Mary is about the same age as Maria Conner and, probably, much the same personality. Mary did have tragedy in her life as well.   Yes, I did buy a watercolor painting from her.  

Dydre Rowyn is a combination of several women I knew from my work in the defense industry. I took from their personalities, traits, and background. Usually, the protagonist in a book like War Merchant is male. I thought a female would not only be a better twist but also add to the suspense. I didn’t want to have the usual stereotypical book. I knew it would be a challenge to maintain her femininity and it was. This character had to be smart, cunning, attractive, not cower when faced with danger, and deadly. I have known some female soldiers that were tougher than woodpecker lips. A female is more deadly than a male. So, after all that, Dydre came to life.   The excellent reviews and comments on my female protagonist, from women, tell me that I accomplished my goal with her.  

Yes, they have but I don’t want people to think they are war books.   I have been asked many times if some of my characters will return in another story. I would like to bring them back and have a few ideas to do just that. For the time being, I think I will stay in the suspense genre. Yes, that is a broad area and one I like and enjoy writing. I may bring a character(s) back for a crime story or mystery. For now, I have several ideas that incorporate politics, history, and current events. There is so much going on in the world now that you can’t make up. It is ripe for storytelling! 

That is a good question. If you ask my wife, she’ll tell you it infringes too much. I look at it as a full-time job and I am focused on the story at hand. It is time consuming, but if you want a good product, you must devote the time. I do get involved in a story and probably do drive everyone nuts until it is finished.  How do you see your writing career progressing?

The most joyful is getting my books published and reading the reviews. My mother, wife, and daughters are very proud of my accomplishments. That in itself is very gratifying. Some of my old friends and classmates are not only astounded that I am published but elated as well. I guess I just surprised everyone.  

My top three strengths are: I am very tenacious; I have great attention to detail; and I am disciplined. I want to produce quality work. Sometimes my tenaciousness and attention to detail consume too much time.   My three weaknesses are: I get impatient at times; I fret too much over the small things, which I have no control over; and incompetence drives me crazy. I do work on these weaknesses and try to keep them in check.  

Wow, those strengths and weaknesses mirror my own! Want to know more about Patrick and his books? Visit his website at http://patrickparkerbooks.wixsite.com/author       

My fifth novel, 'After She's Gone', has a strong theme of arson throughout the narrative. In my opinion, arson lends itself well to novel plots, as authors can use the crime to cover up other nefarious deeds such as murder. The research I needed to do for my book was fascinating and at times quite unnerving! As part of my 'Five' series, I thought it would be fun to examine five novels that have also used arson or fire as their dominant theme. Here goes! 

A while back, I wrote a post about novels with unusual structures (you can read it here), examining books such as B S Johnson's 'The Unfortunates', which consists of twenty-seven chapters that can be read in any order. As a novelist, I'm fascinated by examples of authors stretching the boundaries of what's possible with fiction. Last week, I picked up from the library another novel with an intriguing premise: Jeffery Deaver's 'The October List'.

What's unusual about it? Well, the story is told in reverse - sounds weird, I know! The index begins with chapter thirty-six, the story working back through time over the last two days to the first chapter. In his foreword, Deaver explains that he became captivated with the idea of reverse chronology after listening to a radio discussion about Stephen Sondheim's musical 'Merrily We Roll Along', which uses the same idea. Deaver says: 'I began to wonder if it was possible for a thriller writer to pull off a backward-told story that was filled with the cliff-hangers, surprises and twists and turns that are, to me, the epitome of good crime fiction. The task of course, is to present the twist before giving the facts that lead up to it and still make the surprise thrilling. It's like telling a joke's punch line first, yet still making the audience laugh as hard as if they'd heard the gag in its proper order.'  

So does Deaver succeed? Yes and no, and that reflects the range of reviews I've read about the book on Amazon. For the majority of the novel I wasn't that impressed. The characters lacked depth, Deaver giving only the barest details about them, and the writing failed to grab me. Along the way, there are surprises, but no major thrills or twists. In addition, the ending of the opening chapter (number thirty-six, which appears first in the book as this is a story told in reverse) would have been weak had the plot been conventionally ordered, not delivering the final punch thriller readers expect. Whoever reviewed the book for The Sunday Times appears to have the same reaction, saying: 'Even halfway through, it seems possible that Deaver has been defeated by the mind-boggling technical challenge of delivering surprises in back-to-front time.'

Towards the end, however, everything changes, and I found myself gripped by the twists that Deaver throws into the mix. So does our friend from The Sunday Times: 'After the reverse journey reaches the couple's first meeting, his (Deaver's) gamble is thoroughly vindicated by a series of twists in which he resembles a conjuror who each time seems to have performed his final trick, but then tops it.'

My reaction as well! The final two chapters are particularly gripping, delivering surprises that perhaps I should have seen coming but didn't.  By the end, the last part of the book left me thinking, 'Wow!', as well as unsure how to sum it up as a whole. 'The October List' is, by its very nature, plot-driven yet that's no excuse for poorly drawn characters or pedestrian writing. Yet I'm filled with admiration for any novelist who attempts such an ambitious task. Could you conceive of writing a novel backwards?! Deaver says in his foreword that 'The October List' was more challenging than anything he'd previously written - hardly surprising!

I'd be interested to hear what other people think. What's your opinion of 'The October List'? Do you, like one five-star Amazon reviewer, consider it 'brilliantly executed' with 'more surprises than you can shake a stick at'? Or do you side with the one-star reviewer who says, cuttingly, 'An intriguing idea wasted'? Leave a comment and let me know!