It’s over a year since Book One was published, and nearly as long since I did a Q&A (check out Part 1 here).
So, with Book Two already out now, and Book Three on its way, here we go again!
THE HERRENHAUS FORFEIT is the second in the CHASING MERCURY series, but is it necessary to have read THE BORODINO SACRIFICE first?
I touched on this in the last Q&A, but back then the second book hadn’t even been finished, so here’s an update. As it says in the Note About The Series at the front of THE HERRENHAUS FORFEIT, “it is designed to stand alone as a separate novel, as well as being a continuation of the story. While certain key plot points may be recapped here, there is no requirement to have read the first book before starting this one.”
I think this stands. You’d probably get more out of them by reading them in order, but it isn’t essential, by any means.
The trickier question is whether the same is true for Book Three. Oh look…
What about Book Three? When’s it coming? What’s it about? Is it the conclusion of a trilogy and will it still be a standalone story as well?
These are questions I get asked a lot. Often by myself! So, briefly…
Book Three is going to be called THE SAFEHAVEN COMPLEX (that’s 99% certain now) and it’s due out sometime this year. I can’t yet be more specific as I only finished the first draft this week (that’s right! yay!) and there’s an indeterminate amount of redrafting, editing and preparation to be done. Ideally no later than the end of August.
What’s it about? Good question! Here’s the concept behind it: if CHASING MERCURY BOOK ONE involved Bradley being sent to chase down MERCURY (Mila), and in the sequel it happened again-but-different, then this time it’s really different. This time Bradley and Mila are teamed up from the start, and it’s everyone else who’s chasing them.
This is where the standalone story question comes in. Because this is the conclusion of the trilogy and it does try to wrap everything up even more than the previous books did. So once again there are recurring characters, some of whom were in the second book – but a few haven’t been seen since THE BORODINO SACRIFICE.
Would it be better to have read the first two books before embarking on this one? Yes, more so than with THE HERRENHAUS FORFEIT.
Is is essential, or could you just start with THE SAFEHAVEN COMPLEX? That was my intention, and it’s certainly designed to function in that way, but I’m not sure yet whether I’ve pulled it off. That’s one of the considerations for the next draft.
What I can tell you is that this one is a full-on chase across continents, bringing in the Mafia, the CIA, a whole host of scheming Soviet spies and spy-catchers, some nasty Nazi renegades again, and even unexpected African entanglements.
Haven’t you milked the immediate post-war period enough?
Bit cheeky… but hardly! As I’ve said before, the mid-1945 to mid-1948 period in which these books are set is frequently neglected, falling as it does between the monoliths of the Second World War and the Cold War (taking the Berlin Crisis of 1948 as the first big superpower confrontation in Europe). That, and the fact that for much of this time everything is in flux, makes it very appealing to me as a setting.
But there’s the other factor, which is the way these stories range geographically. I never wanted to be the sort of spy/thriller writer who focused on one city, one milieu. I love those books, but I’m also inspired, as you know, by the more ‘cinematic’ multiple locations of an Alistair MacLean, a Bond or a Modesty Blaise. So the first book moved between Paris, Berlin, Dresden, Prague and the mountains of the northern Sudetenland, and the second between the different Occupation Zones of Germany (with forays into New York City and the Thames Estuary, among others). The third is going to cover even more ground and feature new areas in which East and West are trying to overturn the board or redraw the map.
Added to which, these books have always had personal family connections for me – be those SOE, Czechoslovakia and the struggles of everyday existence in ‘Year Zero’ Germany or, as in THE SAFEHAVEN COMPLEX, the postwar antics of ‘Lucky’ Luciano and the activities of the Springbok Legion... It’s my period because I grew up with people who were there or knew people who were there. Their stories are wound into mine.
“Spy adjacent” or “Kalashnikov Kid”?
Hmm. Two terms I’m not keen on.
For the uninitiated, “spy adjacent” is a so-so term used by purists to fit spy fiction into pigeonholes. I have a whole blog post about it here (which is well worth reading, honestly!) but in essence if the story is not focused primarily on the activities of spies or spy-catchers, if instead these form part of a wider story that might get it put on the Crime shelf or the Thriller shelf, it’s “spy adjacent”. So yes, mine are that, OK?
“Kalashnikov Kid” is a very snooty term (like “Dad fiction”) reserved by some for those books in the espionage genre that go heavy on action, in particular gunfights. And sure, I get it. Some spy stuff wanders too close to military thriller territory or other supposedly “male” genres – all assuming that there are zonal boundaries here with watchtowers and searchlights, WHICH THERE AREN’T you wannabe VoPos! But I particularly resent the snide implication that spy thrillers with action in them are some kind of lesser form (one is reminded, once again, of Holly Martins, writer of pulp Westerns, in that “spy adjacent” film The Third Man…) And not least because I’ve read a few lately that could do with livening up.
Anyway, the Avtomat Kalashnikova may be known as the AK-47 but it wasn’t introduced until 1948, after my period (I like to get the historical facts right). So there!
I have other questions… is there some way I can come and ask them in person?
It’s funny you should mention that…
I have just confirmed that for the second year running I’ll be attending my local(ish) book fair, the Wirksworth Book Festival, on Saturday 26th April. Bit of a stretch if you’re not within easy reach of Derbyshire, UK – but well worth it if you are!
Maybe see you there?