Murder She Writes

My youngest daughter that is. She moved out two years ago almost to the day with her cockatiel, Tequila, her clothes, and her bedroom furniture. She was kind enough to leave her boxes of collectable dolls and a sundry of other things she could not live without but not at her new house.

She’s back now, but this time, she not only brings home the cockatiel with a ‘tude the size of California, but a dog, Chopper, a hyper Rhodesian Ridgeback who wants to play. All of the time. Her clothes, her plants, luckily no furniture (it’s in storage). But my kid brought something else home with her. Her fiancé. That is, after my husband built a sturdy two foot high wooden bed separator, then designated which side of the bed the fiancé was allowed to sleep on, with the warning; if he so much as looked over the separator at our daughter, the alarm would go off, which would really piss hubby off. And so we were all settled in.

Or so I thought. The first morning I woke up to verbose barking at 6 a.m. because Chopper decided he wanted to play with Brit, my Rotty, who is pushing ten years old and is in no mood for a whipper snapper like Chopper. Now the reason Chopper is outside is because my two little girls, Coco and Zoe, (shih-tzus) can’t stand the bugger. He’s too friendly. They don’t like that. His abundance of exuberance scares them. My cat? He is so not amused. So at the crack of dawn, Chopper starts barking. He wants to play chase with Brit. She doesn’t and barks back. Loudly. Then I hear the shrill rattle of a bell from downstairs. Ah, the kid forgot to cover Tequila who likes to announce to the world when the sun is about to rise. So, I, who did not come to bed until 4 a.m. because I have a thing called a deadline, get up, put Chopper in the garage with a big chewy, cover Tequila, then trudge back up to bed. It’s 6:30 now, and I know future son-in-law has to get up soon. So I lie awake in bed to make sure he gets up in time to go to work. The time he is supposed to get up comes and goes. Sigh, out of bed I get, and nearly run into him in the hallway. He greets me, then goes into the bathroom.

Ok, kid is awake and going to make it to work on time. I snuggle back into my warm soft flannel sheets and just as I’m drifting off to sleep, I hear what sounds like a flock of honking geese fly by my room. It’s future son-in-law blowing his nose. Once. Twice. Three times. I am not amused. Coco and Zoe are traumatized and start barking. Hubby is grumbling beside me, and by now I know there is no way I’m going back to sleep. So I get up, let the little girls out, make the coffee and hit the computer. I do have a book to write after all.

That was Sunday night into Monday morning. We have rinsed and repeated every night since. I’m wondering if maybe they can close on that house a wee bit sooner…

Sigh, on one hand I’d love for them to hurry up and close. But more than that, I’m enjoying my daughter being home again, getting to know my future son-in-law better, and even liking the luvable lug, Chopper. I’m glad the kids feel comfortable enough to come home, and I’m glad I’m not one of those parents who make their kids feel like a burden.

Life is good, chaotic, and well, there are days, like today when I wish I could just go to a hotel and write and have room service. Oh, and sleep past 6:30 a.m..

How about you? Have your kids ever come home again? Or have you ever gone home as an adult? And how did that work out?

1  1

Last night hubby and I went out to dinner to celebrate 4 weeks on the NYT list (the last three on the extended list, but hey! I’ll take it!) So we didn’t get home until late, and now it’s time to get the kids off to school. Usually on days like this where I don’t write my post the night before, I come back home and write something up, then go to Starbucks to write. But today . . .

. . . I’m going to the gym. At 9 am there is a “Quickfit” class and my trainer (yes, I now also have a trainer) said it’s the best class for losing weight and suggests I go three days a week. So I’m doing it. I’ve already lost 10 pounds and my goal is to lose a total of 40. So no time to blog!

However, this brings up something about me that I noticed. When I started seriously writing, I told people I was writing a book–not everyone in the world, but my husband, my mom and my best friend Trish. As I finished manuscripts, I started telling other friends: “I wrote a book. Now I’m trying to find an agent.” Why? Because once I started telling people, I felt I HAD to stay committed and not get scared of the rejections, keep learning, keep improving. Sometimes, when our dreams and goals stay secret, we have a hard time staying focused. It’s easier to lie to ourselves. (I don’t have the time, I’m no good, I’ll do it later, yada yada.)

So now I’m serious about losing weight. As serious (okay, ALMOST as serious) as when I started writing. I got my doc to prescribe appetite suppressants, I’m going to the gym twice a week so far (with the goal of 4 times a week) and I’ve lost ten pounds–an average or two pounds a week. Slowly but surely, I’m getting there. So I’m telling you all . . . because by publicly announcing “I’m going to do this,” it’s harder for me to lie to myself that I’m too tired, have too much to do, or any other excuse to not go to the gym. I mean, if I fail . . . you’ll all know.

My trainer said I have dense muscles so might not lose the poundage I expect, but she thinks I can trim up and tone. So that’s my focus . . .

What about you? What do you do to help keep you focused on your goals?

Sorry for the post delay, folks. I’ve been up to my armpits in alligators and they’re still chomping BIG TIME. That said, and my brain in total mush mode, the only thing that came to mind for today’s post was a bit of news I heard today….

It seems Oprah’s done it again. First a talk show that hits the super charts, then her own magazine, radio network, schools, huge charitable foundations, and now…her first brick-n-mortar store in Chicago, Il. Love her or hate her, there’s no denying that Oprah Winfrey appears to be unstoppable, and she continues to grow larger than life.

According to different news reports her store, called “O,” will sell everything from $5 underwear decorated with pastel O’s to $300 Ferré ankle boots and a good share of the profits from that store will go to Oprah’s Angel Network. I applaud the woman’s success, and I’m sure her giving nature is one of the biggest reasons why she continues to grow and prosper.

After hearing about Oprah’s store opening and thinking about all her successes, I couldn’t help but wonder how a writer might create a character like that for a story. Everyone’s read rags to riches stories, but Oprah’s is so over the top that creating a plausibility link between her rags and this mega-riches level dang near seems impossible for a mainstream novel. If anything, it would probably fall more in line with fairytales and fantasy, right there beside knights on white horses and genies in magic lamps.

Something else comes to mind as well….what next? When you already have it all, what do you aim for next? You know, come to think of it, the only thing I think Oprah hasn’t tackled is marriage. This, of course, makes me wonder—money aside, how would any man handle being married to a woman that powerful and public? He’d immediately become Mr. Oprah Winfrey, then get swallowed up in her shadow, don’t you think?

Sometimes, late at night when I’m supposed to be sleeping, and instead my mind is running a hundred miles a minute, I think about some pretty weird things. And one of those things tonight, when I SHOULD be sleeping and instead am blogging, is “Could you kill?” What would it take to make you take the life of another human being?

This, of course, is not me plotting some random murder (FBI people take note: I am A WRITER. I write about this stuff. I promise, I do not ever DO IT.). But rather, I am in dark suspense mode right now, as I work on THE TIES THAT BIND for St. Martin’s, and it leads me into some places–dark, slightly frightening spots in my brain that others would be alarmed to know exist–where I might otherwise choose not to go….

Tonight’s question is, COULD YOU KILL? I know for me, I could kill in defense of my children. Don’t try to harm one of my offspring, and you will find yourself minus a body part or possibly your life, because that is what a mother does.

Evolutionary psychologist Dr. David Buss, author of the book, The Murderer Next Door: Why the Mind is Designed to Kill, believes that killing is fundamentally in our nature.

Dr. David Buss, an evolutionary psychologist at The University of Texas at Austin and author of the just-published “The Murderer Next Door: Why the Mind is Designed to Kill” has conducted an unprecedented set of studies investigating the underlying motives and circumstances of murders, from those of serial killers to the perfectly friendly next-door neighbor who one day commits murder. He examined FBI files of more than 400,000 murders, conducted a highly detailed study of nearly 400 murders, and led, with his collaborator Joshua Duntley, the largest homicidal fantasy study ever conducted.

“Killing is fundamentally in our nature because over the eons of human evolution murder was so surprisingly beneficial in the intense game of reproductive competition,” Buss said. “Our minds have developed adaptations to kill, which is contrary to previous theories that murder is something outside of human nature—a pathology imposed from the distorting influences of culture, media images, poverty or child abuse.

I found this article, and Buss’s theories, fascinating because he touches on something that we, as suspense, mystery, and horror fiction writers cover extensively: WHY do people kill? How do they kill and get away with it, often for years, such as in the case of serial murderers.

This statement really stood out to me:

“Though we may like to think that murderers are either pathological misfits or hardened criminals,” he added, “the vast majority of murders are committed by people who, until the day they kill, seem perfectly normal.”

We all want to think there are clues, little quirks, red herrings… SOMETHING that lets us know when someone is a killer, just waiting to be triggered. But what if there ARE no clues? I mean, I’ve met some pretty weird people, and more than one who I thought had it in them to be a killer. Years ago, I worked with a guy I fully expected to walk into the newsroom one day and just shoot it up. He had those weird eyes and creepy habits like peeping through keyholes at women using the restroom, and he would stand in the middle of rooms at parties and loudly proclaim how he was going to kill himself because no one would talk to him. He never shot anybody up, and he’s still alive and well, too. I heard he was working with a shelter that rescues border collies, and he’s married with two kids. I didn’t see that one coming. I have no idea if he is still peeping. But he isn’t a homicidal maniac… Yet. I think.

Do I really know? No. But if Buss’s theories are true, a whole lot more people than we realize could be ticking time bombs. Because Buss believes we are pre-wired to kill.

Buss led the largest homicidal fantasy study ever conducted, using 5,000 people, 375 who were actual murderers. The study looked into why people have homicidal fantasies and the specific circumstances in which they contemplate killing. The research team discovered how homicidal fantasies are used to build and work through scenarios of killing, how they help channel murderous intentions into other means of seeking redress, how they can also be used to simulate and rehearse carrying out murder and how particular passions come into play in evaluating whether or not to turn fantasy into reality.

Buss’s homicidal fantasy research revealed that 91 percent of men and 84 percent of women have had at least one vivid fantasy—often intense and astonishingly detailed—of committing murder.

“As with most instances of homicidal fantasies, few thoughts are translated into deeds,” Buss said. “Most people work through cost-benefit calculations, figure out alternative means of solving the problem and decide that the costs of killing are too high.”

Did you catch that? AN ASTONISHING 91 PERCENT of men, and 84 PERCENT of women have had at least ONE vivid fantasy of committing murder.

Is that why we write suspense, mystery and horror fiction? Is that why people READ it? Are we living vicariously? I mean, who HASN’T cheered in an intense movie where the hero kills the bad guy?

Are we wired to kill? Have any of you had a fantasy of killing someone, at least that you are willing to own up to?

Because I am a woman who believes in miracles, I dragged myself to the gym a couple mornings this week.

I keep hoping to chisel off fifteen pounds and fifteen years. I KNOW that isn’t going to happen, but I can’t seem to kill off the hope.

Frankly, the best I can hope for these days is damage control.

But anyway, I went to the gym and walked an endless loop on the treadmill. I spent much of that time praying that I wouldn’t catch the disease that had the guy next to me trying to hack up a lung and not fall off the treadmill at the same time.

To block out the coughing and wheezing, I watched the morning show on TV. They were discussing an “experiment” on the 20/20 Show:

ABC News recruited six couples and asked them to pretend to cheat on their mate in front of an unsuspecting best friend.

They thought it would be fascinating to find out what people would do as an experiment. Would they tell?

So I started thinking, what would I do?

Well, for starters, if I was “set up” to be on that kind of a TV show by a friend, I’d have one less friend in my life. Friends don’t do that. Friends might play jokes, and I’ve done my share, but they don’t put them in difficult situations as an “experiment” for a stupid TV Show.

If I saw the spouse of someone I cared about obviously cheating, I’d be upset. I would agonize about the right thing to do because I care about my friend.

What would I do about it? I don’t know. That would be a tough call. I would think long and hard before I told my friend. Just knowing would kill me though. Those things tend to be a no win situation.

So tell me what you think. Is it okay to set a friend up like this for a TV show’s social experiment?

And have you ever seen someone obviously cheating in a restaurant? What did you do?

P.S. I can totally see some great story ideas in this scenario!

So, I know when I’m writing and trying to make deadlines it’s bad enough. Hell, even when I’m not on deadline but totally immersed in my writing, I’m in my own little world. And Lord help anyone who bugs me. But now, there’s another one of me in my house! After much goading and encouragement, the hubster has officially caught the writing bug. Ack! And he’s driving me crazy!

He has always dabbled in writing here and there, and he’s a great off the cuff poet. I mean throw a subject at him and he can cough up a ditty like nobody’s biznass. He writes great technical articles and letters. He has the gift of eloquence. And yes, he has kissed the Blarney Stone. Hubby started writing a book, a cop book, many years ago. It got shelved. Where that original writing is, I have no idea. Last year he dabbled with a few fresh chapters. He’s been bugging me to help him plot. I’ve been avoiding him. Finally when he wouldn’t stop bugging me, I brought in the big guns a few weeks ago. And now, he has a loose plot, and ever since, he has been a man on a mission.

Like me, he doesn’t get out of his sweats until late afternoon. Like me, he drinks several pots of coffee a day, like me, he ignores everything around him, and like me, he gets very irritated when his creative juices are flowing and he is interrupted.

Personally, I think one obsessed writer in the house is quite enough. So do the dogs, the cat, and the kids. Just ask them.

I will admit, I’m a bit envious. He has some really solid experience to draw from. I always have to ask him about my cop stuff. He lived it. Since he’s been retired for a few years now, technology in police work has changed. It’s been really fun, and interesting listening to his side of phone conversations with his buds who are still on the job as they update him on the current procedures, tactics, equipment, and best of all: gossip. They are all excited for him, and of course want to be featured in his book. Too funny.

Hubby has a great sense of humor. He can make a rock laugh, and well, I’m amazed at how he can have his protagonist at the bottom of his emotional and professional barrel and insert some bittersweet humor into the scene.

Of course, I don’t like to have to be continuously running up and down the stairs to answer his grammar or formatting questions. We have begun to IM quite frequently. He asked me to read for him the other day. I flat out told him no. Not until he had three solid chapters. And that does not include the reworking of the four he wrote last year. As is quite usual with new writers and even old hacks, he began his story in the wrong place. Me and the goils set him straight on that. So he needs three fresh chapters to catch up to the ones he has.

As a coach, I’m hoping he listens to his own advice: Practice makes perfect. I hope when he gets his first rejection letter he has the thick skin to soldier on. I hope when he gets his first revision letter he doesn’t throw it up in the air and say he likes his story just the way it is. I hope when he gets his first contract, and it’s ten times bigger then mine was, he says, “C’mon, baby, let’s go play!”

So, while I’m grumbling about the monstah I’ve created, I have to say: I’m pretty damn proud of the guy. How cool would it be if we could write a book together? We could be like McMillan and Wife but in print.

So this brings me around to my question for today: If you could work that closely with your significant other, would you want to? And could you?

PS. I sent my editor the list of title suggestions everyone came up with last week, and added a few of my own. I’ll let y’all know if she picks one.

1  1

Yesterday at the Fog City Divas, I blogged about ideas and posted a question, what would you ask an author? Published author Terry Odell commented that it depended who the author was, but she was interested in whether to write a series or connected books and how that really works. I answered her question, but it interested me enough that I think it deserves a full blog post of the pros and cons and considerations of each.

1) Stand Alone Novel: A novel that is wholly contained with original, non-series characters and a complete story arc. Examples: Michael Connelly’s THE LINCOLN LAWYER; Nora Roberts single title romantic suspense (HIGH NOON, BLUE SMOKE); Stephen King (THE STAND, DUMA KEY, et. al.); Jennifer Crusie romances like WELCOME TO TEMPTATION (still one of my all-time favorite books.)

Many connected series start as a stand alone novel. Some authors are known for their one big book every year. New characters, new story, new setting. The plus is that these stand alone books can be very big. They tend to get reviewed more, they often have fresh and original hooks, and they also give the author an opportunity to try something completely new. Many authors don’t want to revisit their characters. Those characters have one story to tell, not a series of stories. There are really no drawbacks in writing a stand alone novel EXCEPT that as with everything, the industry has trends and right now series is the big trend. This isn’t to say you can’t sell a stand alone. I think publishers are always looking for that strong book. But because the industry is tight, marketing a series is easier (and cheaper) than marketing a stand alone.

I originally wrote THE PREY as a stand alone novel. I was asked by my publisher to connect it to a trilogy. Many loosely connected series (like Suzanne Brockmann, Catherine Coulter and Roxanne St. Claire) can be read as stand alones, so I think it’s important for writers to really understand what their goal is and how to achieve it. I intentionally made the prison break trilogy as three stand alone novels connected primarily by theme (earthquake under San Quentin.) The reason why I talk about further below.

2) Traditional Series: A continuing set of complete stories featuring the same character(s). This is most common in mysteries/thrillers, and the protagonist is usually as well known as the author. (Janet Evanovich/Stephanie Plum; Lee Child/Jack Reacher; Robert Crais/Elvis Cole & Joe Pike; Tess Gerritsen/Maura Isles & Jane Rizzoli.) There are very few continuing series in romance. The best known is JD Robb’s IN DEATH series with Eve and Roarke. Eileen Wilks also has a series with the same hero and heroine in all the books. Both are in the mystery/suspense vein. Straight up mysteries like Natalie’s dance series are common and expected in the genre.

If you can catch on with a series, you will be doing very well. Readers will connect with your characters and when the series takes off, it takes off. You can be writing it forever . . . which can be a drawback if you get tired of your characters. I’ve heard from a variety of mystery authors that book five is the pivotal book–if you don’t take off by book five, you need to create a new series.

A series will always have a complete story, though there may be sub plots that thread through all books. In the IN DEATH series, for example, Eve and Roarke’s past is a continuing thread as they learn more about where they came from and how they got to where they are. Some books it plays a bigger role, especially if someone from the past comes to New York City. Some books it’s downplayed. Characters grow within a series (or should) and when the reader comes into the new book, they should feel like they’re meeting up with old friends. Series are often comfort reads because the characters ARE familiar. But each book should have a complete story (usually a mystery in these type of books) so that when the reader gets to THE END they are satisfied–even if there is a subplot that hasn’t been completely resolved. And, if you’re really hot like Janet Evanovich, you can get away with the occasional cliffhanger like in book seven where Stephanie opens the door and you don’t know if it’s Ranger or Joe, but you KNOW she’s going to sleep with whoever it is.

Now, I called this a traditional series simply because they have the same protagonists. But the truth is, “traditional” doesn’t really mean what it used to. it’s how you spin the series that will give it legs–so Tess Gerritsen having two protagonists and switching back and forth keeps her “series” fresh with the feeling of stand alones, but the comfort of meeting up with old friends. So think about ways you can make a traditional series a little new or different.

So to recap: a series should take off by book five or you should rethink your series; and the biggest drawback to series writing is author fatigue–getting tired of your characters.

3) Connected series: Romance’s answer to the series. A connected series features a separate hero and heroine for each book, but characters return in varying degrees of importance. In a connected series, you essentially have a lot of world-building–all these people exist in your world–and you need to obey the rules of your world. Sherrilyn Kenyon, Catherine Coulter’s FBI series; Suzanne Brockmann; JR Ward; Roxanne St. Claire; and yours truly. Often a connected series will have a common theme, such as Roxanne’s “bulletcatchers” where the hero (usually) is in a protective bodyguard role. Connected series may be loosely connected, such as Roxanne’s and my books, or tightly connected such as JR Ward’s books. But the key to the connected series is that every book will fit into the puzzle that makes up your world. You wouldn’t have a stand alone where there are absolutely no characters that haven’t come from at least one or more books.

I get a lot of questions from unpublished authors who say they have a connected series idea and how should they pitch it. I always say this: Tell the agent that you have a 100,000 word romantic suspense (or whatever genre) that can stand alone or be a part of a connected/continuing series. Why pigeon hole yourself? What if suddenly there is a glut of connected series and the publisher wants you to do something completely different?

Connected series are hot, hot, hot right now. Just go to amazon and you’ll see things like “book five of the XYZ series” or for Kenyon, “A Dark Hunter Novel.” This is branding, and readers know what to expect when they pick up a Dark Hunter novel or a JR Ward Brotherhood novel. Some are loosely connected, some tightly connected, but they all have recurring characters, the same world (whether contemporary, historical, or paranormal), and they all have complete story arcs.

The biggest problem with some connected series, IMHO, is to develop it in such a way that if a reader picks up book 3 they are lost. Connected series (and traditional series) often don’t take off until book 2 or 3, so you want to make sure that new readers aren’t turned off by not knowing what happened in books 1, 2, 3, etc. Janet Evanovich is a master at giving you a quick summary of important plot points from past Plum novels without 1) boring her regular readership and 2) confusing her new readership.

But while connected series are hot now–remember that with everything in publishing there are ebbs and flows. You can’t predict trends, so my advice is always: WRITE WHAT YOU LOVE. If you want to do a traditional series, a connected series, or even a stand-alone–do it. If you sell, you may be wedded to that series or genre for years to come.

4) Trilogies: Three stories connected through characters and theme. Trilogies may or may not have an overarching story (a plot point that begins and book one but isn’t resolved until book three.) Some trilogies are so tightly connected that you have to read them in order to understand the story and the characters (i.s. Tolkein’s LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy); some are connected that you should read them in order because they have an overarching story (Nora Robert’s Three Sisters and Garden trilogies, for example); some are loosely connected that you really don’t have to read them in order, but you probably would want to because characters will be recurring (my NO EVIL trilogy.)

The hottest thing right now are trilogies. You see the deals all the time on Publishers Marketplace. Publishers love them because marketing is cheaper, and the rewards are potentially greater–think of it this way: you have three books published close together that have the same look and feel (branding) and you can cross-market them in your ads. Each book in a trilogy usually does better than the last, and backlist sales are generally strong when people “discover” you with book 3. It’s easier to get bookstores to keep a trilogy on the shelf, especially when they know books 2 and 3 will be coming in four months or less.

Readers love trilogies. They often don’t want to invest in another series (many avid readers are reading dozens of series) in order to try new authors. They get to have that same comfort feel of recurring characters, while having a full and completely story. I–personally–don’t like trilogies where the PRIMARY story continues through all three books but with different characters in the lead role. I don’t mind a continuing mystery (and Nora is the best at this) as long as I have a complete and fully satisfying story with each book. Roxanne St. Claire’s upcoming trilogy starting with FIRST YOU RUN is in that vein. There is an over-arching mystery related to something that happens in the past, and each book is a key to that puzzle. But each book stands alone with its own bigger mystery, it’s own romance, and they feel like a full story.

I wasn’t the first author who did a back-to-back trilogy. Kay Hooper had her WHISPERS trilogy; Mariah Stewart with her DEAD trilogy; Nora Roberts with her (many) trilogies. I believe I was the first debut author with a back-to-back, which is why I get a lot of questions on this subject.

For me, they worked. My publisher gave the books great packaging and distribution and they did well in the marketplace. But there is a point where you plateau–not everyone reads as much as we all do here. Many people only read a book a month, if that. Back-to-backs (or any tight publication schedule) help from a marketing and sales standpoint, but there comes a time where they stop being a benefit. And we all want to continue to grow readership.

I think back-to-backs are great, but if the first book is a dud it’s really hard to recover from it. There’s not stopping the other two books, which have been printed before the sales figures come back on the first. Back-to-backs are a huge risk for publishers, but at the same time they are really work to launch an author, or to take a solid midlist author to the next level.

There is a trend I’m noticing lately–there are a lot of back-to-backs coming out this year and next. I’m in a wait and see mode right now–at some point, I believe that the consecutive trilogies will lose their benefit. Not that they will be a negative, but that eventually there will be so many that they won’t stand out as new and different. I may be wrong–it’s just something I’m watching.

I like that my publication schedule is every four months. I think 3-4 months is a great window for a trilogy and I can still write three books a year. Even six months works. Trilogies by their nature should be published close together, particularly in commercial fiction. Close meaning no further than six months apart. After six months (and sometimes after four) you risk losing shelf space for your backlist, which does hurt if people can’t find the first book of the trilogy.

And again, just because a trilogy is closely published doesn’t mean it has to be tightly linked. You can connect the trilogy by a variety of means–family, setting, theme, overarching mystery,etc.

Sequels: Some people have called the second and third books of a trilogy “sequels” but I think that is a misnomer. A sequel continues the same story with the same characters and can be distinguished primarily because major plot points were not resolved in the first book. It’s essentially a bigger story that is broken down because few people want to read 1,000 page books. The problem with sequels in romance is that you don’t have a complete romantic story arc in the first book. However, some authors have successfully brought back favorite couples and put them as leads in a different story which *may* be considered a sequel (Linda Howard, Jayne Ann Krentz are the two that come to mind.) Consider this: the first PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN was a fully contained story. We knew it was part of a trilogy, but it stood beautifully alone. The second PIRATES was essentially the beginning of the longer story that also consisted of the third movie. In essence, the second movie ended on a cliffhanger. I would not advise doing this in a book.

Now, one other comment about recurring characters . . . when you introduce someone, be prepared for people to become attached to your characters. When I wrote the NO EVIL series, I only planned on three Kincaid books (Carina, Connor and Dillon.) The big Kincaid family was important in that it helped form their character, and gave me loyal people to help my main characters in the story. Then, in FEAR NO EVIL, I introduced Jack and knew I had to write a book with him. Authors get attached, too . . . but I’ll tell you, the one character I have received more reader mail on than any one is Patrick Kincaid. And yes, some day, Patrick will also get his story.

So, this was a longer post than I planned! Sorry it’s up late, this is my veg day. I’m done with my book (YEAH!) and am just planning a day of reading (research for Jack Kincaid’s book.) What are your thoughts on the variety of series, the pros and cons of each from the reader’s point of view?

1  1

Because I work so closely with the dead in funeral homes and autopsy suites, I make sure to keep up with the latest diseases by reading the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s publication, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. It’s the only way I know to get the real scoop on the contagion level of certain ‘bugs’, after death. In the latest report, however, I found something so odd and heart-wrenching, I felt it necessary to share it with you, especially those who have preteens and teens living at home…..

Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
February 15, 2008 / Vol. 57 / No. 6

Unintentional Strangulation Deaths from the “Choking Game”
Among Youths Aged 6–19 Years — United States, 1995–2007

The “choking game” is defined as self-strangulation or strangulation by another person with the hands or a noose to achieve a brief euphoric state caused by cerebral hypoxia. Participants in this activity typically are youths. Serious neurologic injury or death can result if strangulation is
prolonged. In recent years, news media reports have described numerous deaths among youths attributed to the choking game. Because no traditional public health dataset collects mortality data on this practice, CDC used news media reports to estimate the incidence of deaths from the choking game. This report describes the results of that analysis, which identified 82 probable choking-game deaths among youths aged 6–19 years, during 1995–2007. Seventy-one (86.6%) of the decedents were male, and the mean age was 13.3 years. Parents, educators, and healthcare providers should become familiar with warning signs that youths are playing the choking game (2).Death certificates lack the detail necessary to distinguish choking-game deaths from other unintentional strangulation deaths. Therefore, CDC identified probable choking game deaths from 1) a LexisNexis* search in November 2007 of newspaper reports since the 1970s and 2) reports on two choking-game–awareness websites, which were created in 2005 and 2006. Deaths of children listed on the two websites but not matched by LexisNexis newspaper reports were included in the assessment only if subsequent Internet searches located news media reports (e.g.,from television stations) of the incidents confirming that the deaths met the case definition. For consistency, case characteristics were obtained only from news media reports.

In this study, few of the parents of children who died had been familiar with the choking game. Parents, educators, and health-care providers should learn about the choking game and be able to recognize any of the following warning signs in youths: mention of the choking game (or
the game by its other names); bloodshot eyes; marks on the neck; frequent, severe headaches; disorientation after spending time alone; and ropes, scarves, and belts tied to bedroom furniture or doorknobs or found knotted on the floor. Medical examiners and coroners should be aware of the choking game as a possible explanation for deaths from self-inflicted strangulation in this age group that otherwise might be miscategorized as suicides. In addition, better mortality surveillance is needed, and more research should be conducted (e.g., questions on youth behavior surveys regarding awareness of and involvement in the choking game) to determine prevalence, risk factors, and protective factors that will lead to effective interventions aimed at reducing or eliminating the choking-game.

Man-oh-man, can you imagine a child’s need to do this? And some states want to eliminate the game of “Tag” from school yards because they consider it ‘too aggressive’? Whew, are we ever looking in the wrong direction . ..

1  1