|
Book
Club Discussion
If your local bookstore
doesn't carry "Threads", just ask them to order it.
The
Story Behind
"Threads: The Reincarnation of Anne Boleyn"
December 30, 2007
I haven’t said anything up until now because I’ve been fascinated by the
feedback I’ve received from readers. I didn’t want to spoil things by
telling them how I wanted them to interpret Threads, or what I expected them
to get from it. The emails I receive all focus on different aspects of the
story and quote different passages as having meaning to the reader, indicating
that people are seeing it differently and getting different things from it.
That’s exactly as it should be. Once I put it out there I shouldn’t
interfere with the reader/book relationship.
Now that I’ve compiled enough emails and reactions, though, I’ve decided
to be a bit more forthcoming. First of all, its genre is
"Visionary Fiction", which comprises books of a meditative nature
that contain a message or a lesson, and which usually employ a spiritual or
paranormal vehicle to tell it. Examples of the genre include, "The Five
People You Meet in Heaven", by Mitch Albom, "What Dreams
May Come", by Richard Matheson, and "The Celestine Prophesy",
by James Redfield. So it's a little different, and its intended audience
is people who like a complex story with challenging, thought provoking
concepts that require some introspective examination. (If you prefer
sirens and car chases, try, "The Di Vinci Code.")
I wrote the book in layers. I’ve heard from
people who saw all of them (Bravo!), and people who saw one but not the others. I also
read the reviews and could make that distinction pretty easily.
And I wrote it with two opposing timelines. The main story is in past tense,
and progresses forward in time. The secondary story - the
"other-worldly" one with Anne's past
lives - is in present tense, and progresses backward. Each past life presents her with and emphasizes a
point or a lesson Anne needs to learn about the situation she just examined in
her lifetime as Anne Boleyn.
In
addition, as I constructed the story, I played on the tapestry theme, and wove
the "threads" of little sub-stories from beginning to end throughout
the lifetimes, and the book. If you skip or skim the beginning or the middle of a sub-story, you
won’t understand or even notice its conclusion, or will miss clues that give
you insight into some of the background relationships. For that reason, fortunately
or unfortunately, Threads demands your undivided attention – or may require
a second reading, if you'd like to catch everything.
The story contains ample foreshadowing, so you should have a pretty good idea
of where it's heading when it ends. The ending isn't an ending at all; it's a
continuation because in order to effectively follow the reincarnation theme,
the story can have no ending, just more up ahead.
Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII are incidental to the story, which I could have
written about any dysfunctional couple faced with forgiving (or committing) the unforgivable.
I just liked the pair of them and the explosiveness of their relationship, and
did my best to make their known history accurate. Their history in Threads is a melding
of five notable biographies. None of them agree on what happened in Anne's
life, so I was as careful
as I could be, and listed the instances at the end of the book where I
knowingly changed the facts.
Nevertheless, the story isn’t about Anne and Henry. It isn’t even about
reincarnation. Those are just two of the layers – and many people have
liked, or even loved the book without looking past them. Threads in its
entirety is about spiritual evolution in one lifetime or many, and about how
difficult the growth process is. It’s about good and bad, right and wrong,
and learning the difference. It’s about personal accountability and
obligation. It’s also about love – each of the characters in the book
represents a different aspect of love – and how it never dies, even when it
disguises itself as hatred.
All of my life I’d been exposed to truisms, just as everyone else has. These
come in a number of forms, most frequently in timeworn sayings, such as
“Don’t judge a book by its cover,” or “Power corrupts.”
Other times the truth
comes to us in books with eye-opening morals, such as “To Kill a
Mockingbird,” or in books with haunting beauty and hope in the face of
obscene ugliness, like “Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl.”
Millions of people read books or watch movies that have the potential to
inspire or teach. Millions of people proclaim themselves devout followers of
this religion or that, and can repeat the teachings of those religions
verbatim without prompting. Everyone hears, and can recite, the timeworn
sayings. It is NOT as if people aren’t thoroughly exposed to these truths
and these morals.
What bothered me was how infrequently people actually listened to these
truisms, and actually lived their religions, and actually learned from the
morals of the stories they’d read. Even though everyone can quote,
“Don’t judge a book by its cover,” for instance, most people don’t
believe it. They still judge people by their shoes or their hairstyles or
their clothing or their careers. They care about the kinds of cars they drive.
They value that cutthroat, embezzling Wall Street broker and his millions of
dollars (provided he doesn’t get caught – which immediately turns a
“winner” into a “loser”, and nobody likes a loser) more than the
teacher, or the woman whose endless patience got that autistic child to speak,
or the man who serves food to the homeless in a soup kitchen. Given a choice,
they’ll take money over friendship, without even taking the time or making
the effort toward any internal soul searching. They judge and dismiss and
ridicule and condemn, see themselves as good people with value, and make value
judgments about everyone else based on superficial things. They use a
measuring stick of “success” and gauge the worth of the people they meet
by how popular they are, how pretty, how much they earn, and how enviable
their situations are.
I
saw this, and lived it, and experienced it and got tired. In short, I lost
patience with people when they acted like jerks and wrote a book. In
writing that book I reminded myself and came to terms with the fact that
we're, each of us, a work in progress. It was a cathartic effort.
I
found a philosophy, reincarnation, which makes those truisms and morals real.
Whether or not you believe in the mechanics of reincarnation, its
philosophical viewpoint uses a measuring stick that is very closely aligned to the underlying
message of every major religion and every basic moral code. It makes adhering
to those truths and messages a tangible thing with tangible consequences. For
that reason, it was a useful literary device in the story I wanted to tell.
In essence, Threads is a reminder to everyone using the
measuring stick of “success” that, when you use a DIFFERENT measuring
stick – probably the same one your religion uses – you have less reason
to feel smug and self-satisfied because of material things…or, as the case
may be, to feel like a failure.
The
book doesn't preach; it just offers up another way of looking at life.
If
you’re reading Threads the way I hoped you would and keep that measuring
stick with you at all times until you’re finished, you will catch the
message. If you aren't and don’t, it’s still a nice story about the
reincarnation of Anne Boleyn.
Thanks to all of you who
have written! I LOVE hearing from you!!!
Nell
|