My Photo

My Photo Gallery

  • Robley Rex and John Fenzel
    Here are a few photos from the Photo Gallery that you can find on my website. More to come, so stay tuned! www.JohnFenzel.com

Our Support Network

RSS Feeds

  • AddThis Feed Button

June 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

Notable People

  • Gary Heidt
    John's Literary Agent
  • Ciri Fenzel
    Ciri is the founder of Breathe Marketing, specializing in brand communication and solutions at retail.
  • Donatella Lorch
    A war correspondent who humanizes the cost and politics of war
  • Seth Godin
    Seth is a writer, a speaker and an agent of change.
Blog powered by TypePad
Member since 11/2006

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    Remembrance Day

    Asiago

    Dispossessed voices on vast crossed and starry fields,

    Of Luxembourg, Brookwood, Gallipoli, Fort Vaux.

    Solaced whispers mingled with tears and convulsed despair.

    Final letters sealed before a slow and anxious dawn,

    In Shiloh, Le Cateau, El Alamein and Iwo Jima.

    Sons and daughters far from home in hushed prayer.

    Shrill screams of rockets flying low to high,

    Through, Guadalcanal, Inchon, Khe Sanh, Fallujah.

    Terrible noise and dust, blood and tears, searing air.

    Echoes of Taps voice remembrance of courage and sacrifice

    At Antietam, Bastogne, Kandahar, Saratoga

    Old men’s souls sit alone—silently, painfully aware.

     

    -John Fenzel (2009)

     

    Photograph of a WWI cemetery produced by Rocco of the Military Cemeteries on the Asiago...

    June 05, 2009

    Shelly Palmer on the Army Strong Experience....

    The Army Strong Experience: MediaBytes June 5, 2009

    Posted using ShareThis

    May 25, 2009

    In Flanders Fields

    Flanders_fields 

    In Flanders fields the poppies blow
    Between the crosses, row on row,
    That mark our place; and in the sky
    The larks, still bravely singing, fly
    Scarce heard amid the guns below.

    We are the Dead. Short days ago
    We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
    Loved and were loved, and now we lie
    In Flanders fields.

    Take up our quarrel with the foe:
    To you from failing hands we throw
    The torch; be yours to hold it high.
    If ye break faith with us who die
    We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
    In Flanders fields.

     gif
    John McCrae (1915)

    May 17, 2009

    The Lazarus Covenant: A Snapshot

    May 13, 2009

    The Lazarus Covenant

    TLC (2) 

    Download The Lazarus Covenant Presentation

    Here is a presentation to supplement the marketing and media kit for my novel, The Lazarus Covenant.  Click the link above and wait for the presentation to load (it will take about 30 seconds or so).  Then, click "Slide Show" on your power point menu, and turn up the volume.  It's driven manually, by clicking each slide. 

    Enjoy!

     

    April 30, 2009

    On this Day in History...

    1789: George Washington is inaugurated as the first president of the United States at Federal Hall in New York City.

    April 29, 2009

    A (Probable yet Contrived and Distilled) White House Situation Room Conversation about Pandemic Flu

    SITROOM

    With all of the news media coverage about Swine Flu, here is my own take on how the conversation is likely to have gone between principal cabinet members and the President this week...

    President:  "Good morning, everyone.  CDC, thanks for your update on the Swine Flu situation.   Like all Americans, I'm concerned.  While I don't want to contribute to a growing panic, it's our responsibility to prepare.  I'd like to get your thoughts and recommendations for the way ahead."

    National Security Advisor:  "Mr. President, it appears the Swine Flu virus is spreading across international borders rapidly.  With limited travel restrictions in place, we can expect an exponential rise in cases around the world--more illnesses and more deaths.  Many more."

    Council of Economic Advisors:  "Imposing any travel restrictions at this point would render any chances of an economic recovery slim at best.  Restricting travel is synonymous with restricting commerce.  Without free commerce, our current recession will surely slide into a depression."

    Treasury Secretary: "It would be devastating."

    Commerce Secretary:  "Until we have further resolution on the threat we're facing from Swine Flu, I don't believe I can overstate the risk of overreacting here...."

    The President:  "None of us want to overreact, and we won't.  The decisions need to be well thought-out. The risk of under-reacting may be just as great, so we have to strike the right balance in our response."

    Acting HHS Secretary:  "Developing an immunization for Swine Flu will take time.   We've reached out to the current producers of vaccine and they have already begun researching and testing vaccines to determine which will be effective.  Ultimately, vaccine production is accomplished by injecting flu virus into eggs.  That takes time.  I might add, vaccine is also expensive.  So, priority of vaccine will go to first responders and hospital workers and then to high risk populations.  In the meantime, we are releasing stockpiles of Tamiflu to hospitals where clusters of Swine Flu have popped up to help mitigate the effects and hopefully help slow the spread of the virus."

    White House Chief of Staff:  "We are developing an interagency task force to deal with a potential pandemic, Mr. President.  We'll meet every day and update you as required."

    Secretary of Homeland Security:  "Our goal is to keep our hand on the pulse of the country as we progress through this emergency.  We have the means to do that in our operations center on Nebraska Avenue."

    National Security Advisor:  "Internationally, we'll do that through CDC and here in the SITROOM.  Continuity of operations plans are being implemented."

    The President: (Nodding) "We'll, frankly, I'm worried.  All of us are susceptible to this virus.  As you know, I shook hands with a gentleman in Mexico who died of the disease the next day.  If you look at this objectively, we really haven't progressed much further than when the world faced a similar situation during the flu pandemic of 1918.  We still grow vaccine in eggs, for God's sake!  The most effective means to address an epidemic or pandemic is by isolating the virus.  Closing schools.  Closing convention halls and cancelling public events.  Restricting travel.  Eventually, we'll have to implement those measures.  It won't be business as usual.  But right now, I don't want to start a panic." 

    (Pausing, looking around the table)

    "For all of us here on these 18 acres, we're human too.  It's apparent that this will get worse before it gets better.  We're going to be faced with some pretty dire reports in the weeks ahead and we'll have to react to them, so taking passive measures alone won't be sufficient.   We need to dust off and update our contingency plans.  As a federal government, we need to be in constant contact with our state and local counterparts as we deal with this emergency.  A government needs people to operate effectively, so take care of yourselves and your families.  Take care of one another.  If you're sick, seek help.  I need you." 

    April 24, 2009

    Visiting Orange County Chopper on their 10th Anniversary



    Visiting Orange County Chopper on their 10th Anniversary



    Visiting Orange County Chopper on their 10th Anniversary



    Visiting Orange County Chopper on their 10th Anniversary



    Visiting Orange County Chopper on their 10th Anniversary



    Visiting Orange County Chopper on their 10th Anniversary


    April 22, 2009

    Author Notes: Impact Character Issue

    Impact character issue

    In most novels, the main character is offset by an "impact character."  Aptly named, the impact character must have a pervasive effect through his/her decisions or actions--positive, negative, or both.  Defining an impact character requires first establishing a foundation of values for that person.  In my novel, The Lazarus Covenant, Sandy Evenson is the Impact Character.  I defined her thematic issue in one word:  "doubt."  Here are some of my early notes in defining Sandy Evenson's Impact Character Issue:

    John Fenzel Banner

    Evenson initially doubts the impact she can possibly have in making a difference in the ambush investigation or in Bosnia at all and wants to leave the country.  Even when she agrees to stay, she initially doubts Lyons' methods because she too is an investigator who sees the holes in Lyons' approach.  She initially doubts Lyons' association with Celo because she is a very ethical person.

    April 18, 2009

    Andre Rieu - Il Silenzio (Maastricht 2008) DIGITAL TV

    April 11, 2009

    Author's Notes: Main v. Impact Character Synopsis

    Synopsis

    After days and weeks...even months of researching and jotting down notes about your main and impact characters--about their problems, their solutions, symptoms, resolve, approach, growth, etc.--the day will finally come when you need to pull all of it together in a somewhat coherent way.  ...In a way that at least your characters can understand.  The "Main v. Impact Character Synopsis" is therefore nothing more than an extended description of the relationship between these two vital personalities that drive your story.  It's helpful to write this description quickly--without conscious regard to the plot or the story.  You can clean it up later.  Much of what you write in this synopsis may well not be included in your novel.  It's all character/relationship development--and it provides texture to your story and animates your characters as you begin to write your novel.   So, in stream-of-consciousness form, here's how I did the Main v. Impact Character Synopsis for my novel,  The Lazarus Covenant.  It's rough--and be warned--there are some plot spoilers!

    Banner

    Mark Lyons has always been driven to evaluate situations, environments for what the truth really is.   He applies logic, but does not entirely trust it on its face-value.  Understands that people are driven by agendas and motives.   He has applied his evaluative technique in all of his activities as an SAS operative, and as a policeman in Northern Ireland...as he does in investigating the ambush.  His "fault" is that he is not satisfied when the answer is easily provided to him, and so he does not quit even when threatened or told to desist.

    Lyons evaluates the details of the U.S delegation's "mine" "accident" and determines that it was in fact a ambush, and discovers there was an eye witness; as a result, he finds himself in a number of threatening situations with Sandy Evenson; his investigation leads him to other facts that US officials seek to hide from public view (eg, WMD in Bosnia); his evaluation of the threat facing the US and EUFOR,  places him in conflict with a number of powerful players with resources greater than his own; he evaluates the advantages and disadvantages of employing Celo and placing him further at odds with officials and with Evenson, who leaves him (temporarily) as a result of that association.

    Lyons' problem, however, is that his drive toward evaluation does not extend to his personal life.  He has not done any self-evaluation...and is therefore (according to Evenson) living a perpetual mid-life crisis.  Ultimately, Evenson makes him realize that to solve the immediate WMD problem, he must reevaluate his past and confront his estranged brother.  What he discovers is that it is precisely this self-evaluation that constitutes the larger problem Lyons' faces to achieve the peace of mind he desperately wants.

    Lyons doesn't really understand that his proclivity to violence was the result of a very traumatic even in his younger years;  that the violence that he directed was not so much a quest for justice as it may have been a displaced quest for Blood Vengeance; based on the execution of his wife by terrorists.  Evenson makes him understand that the difference between he and Celo is that Mark always focused his efforts on establishing a foundation of justice rather than cold retaliation.  Lyons remains unsure until he finally speaks to Celo.  They collectively reevaluate what happened at the Dam site twenty years prior, and come up with some parallel, but mostly conflicting conclusions.  Celo points out to Mark that they are really not that different:  Celo's father was executed in front of him, Mark's wife was executed in front of him, etc.;  Mark reevaluates his wife's death and determines that he has been running away from any intimate relationship with a woman...sees that Evenson is the only person he's found who can relate to him based on her own adventurous past in war zones.

    Inaction is also defined by Lyon's unwillingness to reevaluate his personal past because it is painful...too complex...and too difficult to reconcile...no one (especially he) can possibly understand because it is beyond the scope of normal human experience.  Only one other person does understand, and he has reevaluated his past:  Celo.  It's just that his conclusions are fatally flawed.  Mark is therefore forced to reevaluate based on his brother's own flawed evaluation and his attempt to transfer that to him.

    Lyons wants to achieve peace of mind.  He believes he can accomplish this by staying in the "arena" (what he's good at), while focusing on peaceful means to do so, in contrast to what he's lived in his past.  He is wrong.  Ironically, the environment he thrusts himself into, leads him in the very direction he is avoiding.  "Change" requires revisiting his past, while also confronting extremely dangerous circumstances that require that he apply all of his abilities-- including those he had sought to abandon.  This dangerous journey will change Mark Lyons, but not in the way he could have expected or predicted.

    Lyons wants to be a Be-er but must continually revert to his primary approach as Do-er.  Avoids conflict, but then lays waste when challenged beyond any other alternative.

    At the beginning of the story, Evenson hypothesises that because she witnessed the ambush, she will be pursued by the same crowd.

    Sandy Evenson is initially driven by her need to leave Bosnia after she witnesses the executions of the US Special Delegation; but after Lyons convinces her to stay to help him investigate the ambush in the interest of justice (inherited from her previous stint in Bosnia during the war and subsequently as an ICTY investigator), she gets to know Mark Lyons, hears about his past (from others more than he), and although she admires him greatly, she also sees the complex  inequities that he manifests-- he refuses to talk about himself, avoids close relationships, until she corners him into finally talking about himself.  "Going Home" finally removes a good part of the veneer, but not all of it.  Talking to her pursuer, Celo, he tells her another piece of it.  Talking to Kate Kamrath, she tells her the Northern Ireland part of the story-- all of which allows her to make the deduction that Mark must reconcile his past for several reasons, for his own internal peace of mind, but also to resolve the immediate external problem that faces them:  Celo's weapon that he certainly will use.   

    Evenson has experience a tremendous amount of stress in her past, which enables her to relate well to Lyons, where no one else can.  She tells him of her enduring pain silently...not crying in the mass graves she investigates ('What good would it do?'), her trials in Vukovar during the seige and mass executions there, losing friends in the UN helicopter crash.

    Evenson seems to be more certain in her assessments, which also tend to be very black and white-- never gray.   Her certainty runs counter to Lyons' more holistic approach that looks at possibilities, causes and effects, motives.  Evenson's certainty in herself allows her to take risks without regarding them as such.  Lyons has difficulty with absolutes, because all theories are flawed and are not entirely failsafe.  Nonetheless he admires Evenson's brand of certainty.  Lyons sees that he is diametrically opposite Celo, whose certainty of the injustices of the past and the potentially disastrous future leads him on a collision course that Lyons feels compelled to halt before it is too late for everyone involved.    Evenson is certain, however, that Celo has the destructive power that Lyons would ultimately be powerless to stop, despite his abilities.  Once Lyons tried to stop Celo by force, it would be too late to prevent the very catastrophe they are trying to stop, from happening.  Conversely, Evenson knows that at this point, Lyons is the only one who can address the Celo problem, using a holistic approach that he is very reluctant to adopt or apply.

    Lyons initially rejects Evenson's assessment that certainty of oneself -- values, past experiences, relationships, etc.-- is an absolute prerequisite to real peace of mind.  She is certain that both brothers must reconcile and face these individually and collectively for what, ironically, is the solution that Evenson advocates:  Potentiality-- requiring Mark to take the risk of meeting Celo despite the odds that the meeting could very well fail and leave both men even more intransigent, resentful and scarred.  Lyons finally agrees when all other options are removed from him, with flashbacks of surrendering to the IRA.

    Lyons' first approach to this threat is to take action, and find who is responsible.  When he finds out who is responsible (ostensibly Celo), Lyons is faced with the challenge of self-introspection-- a challenge his did not anticipate and is not prepared for.

    In spite of the grief over his wife's death, Lyons continues to work harder than he did before...uses even more rash means. 

    His efforts at collaboration are unsuccessful, so he finds himself competing-- and therefore doing what he is best at-- taking control of his environment, fixing problems as they occur.  He is looking for a physical solution for his problem in his external environment (eliminating the WMD threat), but it is the problem in his internal being that is the most immediate and challenging.  Evenson finally exposes his misconceptions, as does Celo (who is also a do-er).

    Lyons' first approach to this threat is to take action, and find who is responsible.  When he finds out who is responsible (Celo), Lyons is faced with the challenge of self-introspection-- a challenge his did not anticipate and is not prepared for, but which Evenson advises him he must face up to.

    Mark Lyons was born in Yugoslavia.  His older step-brother is Goran "Celo" Mescic.  After witnessing a mass execution with his cousin, where Lyons fires at the executioners,  moves with his mother to Ireland to escape retaliation from the Serbs.   His uncle tells his Aunt Maja that they will follow when there is more money.   Based on the events at the Dam site, the family is torn asunder, and neither boy sees one another again:  Very shortly after he and his mother depart Bosnia, his uncle is executed by Tito's Army as blood vengeance because they know his son were involved.  Celo witnesses the entire scene but does nothing to stop it when his father motions--orders-- him to go away.   His father sacrifices himself for Celo.  Maja hears what has happened and is informed that her son is missing, so in an act of desperation, she changes their name to Lyons.    Maja eventually tells Mark about the fate of his father and brother, and Adrian blames himself.  ja raises Mark well and keeps his Serbo-Croatian fluent by speaking it at home.  All the while, Mark witnesses several IRA bombings, assasinations that are endemic to Northern Ireland.  Adrian rejects religion in his life, regarding it as one of the prime causes of war, and for the death of his father and brother.  He gravitates toward the life of a soldier, and becomes a very well-known SAS operative after intercepting several IRA attacks, and capturing/sometimes killing  those IRA terrorists responsible.  He marries a woman who he desperately loves, but she asks him to quit the SAS because he is "not one of them...."  He responds that he is not really Irish either, but he does as she asks of him, and uses his popularity to become a  police detective in Northern Ireland, and he becomes even more famous-- infamous on the Catholic side.  His argument is that as a 'transplant' he is as objective as he can possibly be.  The reality is different, however, and in a very public kidnapping spectacle, that is televised nationally, the IRA threatens to execute Adrian Lyons' wife publicly unless he gives up.  He knows better and is ordered by his boss that the SAS will handle it.  They arrive and an SAS Commander by the name of Captain Ian Rose take their positions.  Mark follows the developments, suddenly does not like what he sees and tells Rose to withdraw.  Rose refuses, so Mark goes against all doctrine and surrenders himself to the IRA.  The IRA sees the SAS move...lots of shouting...by all sides, but the end result is that the terrorists kill his wife.  The SAS kill the terrorists in a lightning attack.  Lyons lives, but of course, he does not forget.  He immediately goes back to work on his personal (and very violent) crusade against the IRA, and in a very short time completely disrupts their operation.  But he takes no prisoners.  In spite of the grief over his wife's death, Lyons continues to work harder than he did before...uses even more rash means consistent with the Balkan vengeance motive he was indoctrinated with as a child, but has never employed up til then.   In short order, Lyons is a national British and Irish hero...he is also respected by the Catholics because of what happened to his wife, but also because he does maintain his objectivity toward them.  Ultimately, he fights to make his wife's death meaningful, so he publicly denounces violence as a means to political ends and becomes a proponent of aggressive negotiations with Sein Fein.  His results are substantive and constructive for both sides, and he gains a global reputation.  On the eve of another Balkan War, Mark is called in to head the International Police Task Force in Bosnia because he is regarded as the only one who can apply his Irish strategy to the powder keg in B-H. 

    Sandy Evenson is a New York City native, a graduate of Columbia University Medical School and Vanderbilt Law School.  After graduating from Columbia, she worked for Doctors Without Borders during the Balkan War.  She conducted mass grave exhumations as a Forensic Pathologist in Cambodia's killing fields and in Guatemala.  Based on her experiences in Cambodia, Rwanda and Guatemala, she returned to attend Columbia.  She was an Assistant District Attorney in Denver, and was hired by the Justice Department to work as a Human Rights Lawyer.  Soon thereafter, she was selected as one of only three lawyers to be Prosecutors for the second Balkan International Criminal Tribunal based on her previous work in the region and her forensic expertise. 

    Her knowledge of the Balkans although well-developed, is extemely biased, based on regular confrontations with Serb, Muslim and Croat officials and soldiers throughout the war.  Her efforts became extremely aggressive when she learned the hard (tragic) way that any other way leads to atrocities and death.  She has seen situations get out of control, is familiar with what war looks and feels like.  In the process, she has become a true International citizen more than an American-- although she vehemently denies this when Lyons mentions it to her.  Her experience has shown her that to achieve any kind of justice in as an extreme environment as war (and especially when you're not a combatant with a weapon), you must be sure of yourself, know what you're doing is right, and above all know yourself-- "...even if later you realize that you're full of it!"

    Evenson is an extrovert:  32 years old.  Assertive.  Acerbic Wit.  Messy, unconcerned, careless, disorganized, and when pushed, stubbornly rebellious and defiant.  She possesses a tough exterior.   She can be unpredictable, but is extremely intelligent, possessing remarkable insight into people and situations.  She is nonetheless a linear (male mental sex) thinker.  An idealist of sorts and a pacifist.  Independent. (Independence challenged by growing dependence on Adrian).  Headstrong.  Intense and vocal.  Not afraid of confrontation (Blockade-Runner).  Suspicious-- like Mark, didn't like what she was becoming and then her friend (Canadian Colonel with her in Vukovar who died in a helicopter crash) made her realize.  Ran away from a previous relationship and continues to resist intimacy.  Although she is "single" again,  she is not very happy.  Focus of first Subplot Turning Point:  As she resists Mark Lyons, she grows closer and depends upon him, clearly falling in love with him.  Unrequited for a while, but she doesn't give up on him.  She wants to go back to a normal life with a house in Cape Cod, and someday travel to Tibet.

    Mark Lyons and Sandy Evenson's personal histories are very different in their younger years, and begin to converge in terms of the difficulty of personal circumstances as their adulthood progresses.  They both see the effects of war on the human condition, see what people are capable of doing to one another, and see how widely divergent the values of foreign civilizations are in times of war (and peace).  Lyons' experiences in Northern Ireland are essentially those of a combatant, however;  while Evenson's experiences in Bosnia are those of a doctor and humanitarian.  Gradually, though, after Lyons' wife is killed, he assumes the role of peacekeeper-- a role more in sync with Evenson's role as humanitarian and war crimes investigator when the two do meet following the US Delegation ambush.  Notwithstanding the similarity of roles between the two, Lyons' proclivity toward the grey areas (and correspondingly questionable means) conflicts dramatically with Evenson's more black and white methods and confrontational approach.

    Sandy Evenson's deduction that Adrian must confront his past psychologically and his brother, physically is bolstered by her inductive solution that based on her own mother's influence on her, both men should see their mother ("Hell, it wouldn't hurt!") and let them explain themselves to her...she also induces that their mother is all they have left in common besides some very painful memories.

    In the end, based on these experiences, Lyons goes from being the conflicted and capable (if reluctant) warrior to a contributing, focused, very self-aware leader and peacekeeper-- promoted to Deputy UN High Representative in the Balkans.

    April 10, 2009

    Author's Notes: Main v. Impact Character Backstory

    Backstory

    Behind every story is a "story"--that is, how the main character comes to intersect with the story problem.  The backstory is provides the necessary detail for the author (not necessarily the reader) to understand the direction of the story, and importantly, the connective tissue that brings together the main character with the rest of the characters in the novel.  Backstory can be provided in the form of prologue, flashbacks, flashforwards or dialogue.  Here are my early notes on the backstory between the main and impact characters in my novel, The Lazarus Covenant:

    Banner

    Mark Lyons and Sandy Evenson's personal histories are very different in their younger years, and begin to converge in terms of the difficulty of personal circumstances as their adulthood progresses.  They both see the effects of war on the human condition, see what people are capable of doing to one another, and see how widely divergent the values of foreign civilizations are in times of war (and peace).  Lyons' experiences in Northern Ireland are essentially those of a combatant, however;  while Evenson's experiences in Bosnia are those of a doctor and humanitarian.  Gradually, though, after Lyons' wife is killed, he assumes the role of peacekeeper-- a role more in sync with Evenson's role as humanitarian and war crimes investigator when the two do meet following the ambush.  Notwithstanding the similarity of roles between the two, Lyons' proclivity toward the grey areas (and correspondingly questionable means) conflicts dramatically with Evenson's more black and white methods and confrontational approach.

    April 09, 2009

    Author's Notes: The Main vs. Impact Character Solution

    Solution

    The first step in any problem-solving process is defining the problem.  In writing a novel, you must also identify one issue or characteristic that will help solve the main v. impact character problem.  The Main v. Impact Character Solution is a crucial element in developing your story.  In my novel, The Lazarus Covenant, “Certainty” was the Main v. Impact Character Problem.  I determined that the Solution for the problem was “Potentiality.”  Potentiality became the one element that could restore the relationship between the main and impact characters.  Here are my early notes on that topic as I developed the story for The Lazarus Covenant:

     Banner

    Lyons initially rejects Evenson's assessment that certainty of oneself -- values, past experiences, relationships, etc.-- is an absolute prerequisite to real peace of mind.  She is certain that both cousins must reconcile and face these individually and collectively for what, ironically, is the solution that Evenson advocates:  Potentiality-- requiring Mark to take the risk of meeting Celo despite the odds that the meeting could very well fail and leave both men even more intransigent, resentful and scarred.  Lyons finally agrees when all other options are removed from him, when Evenson meets with Celo first and Rose's raid fails.

    A Country Boy Can Survive

    April 08, 2009

    Author's Notes: The Main vs Impact Character Story Problem

    Main v impact

    Personal change typically requires altering one's point of view first.  In a novel, the most important change is effected through the impact character toward the main character, or protagonist.  The spark of that change is a problem.  The author's task, therefore, is to define the main vs. impact character problem.  Many aspects of the story will influence the main vs. impact character problem--past and present circumstances, deadlines, personal histories, views, external forces, internal pressures, etc.  But a good "problem statement" between the main and impact characters is a good start.  In my novel, The Lazarus Covenant, the dynamic of certainty is the main source of friction between Mark Lyons (the main character) and Sandy Evenson (the impact character).  Here are my early notes as I devised the main v. impact character problem for the The Lazarus Covenant:

    Banner

    Evenson seems to be more certain in her assessments, which also tend to be very black and white-- never gray. Her certainty runs counter to Lyons' more holistic approach that looks at possibilities, causes and effects, motives. Evenson's certainty in herself allows her to take risks without regarding them as such. Lyons has difficulty with absolutes, because he believes all theories are flawed and are not entirely failsafe. Nonetheless he admires Evenson's brand of certainty. Lyons sees that he is diametrically opposite Celo, whose certainty of the injustices of the past and the potentially disastrous future leads him on a collision course that Lyons feels compelled to halt before it is too late for everyone involved. Evenson is certain, however, that Celo has the destructive power that Lyons would ultimately be powerless to stop, despite his abilities. Once Lyons tried to stop Celo by force, it would be too late to prevent the very catastrophe they are trying to stop, from happening. Conversely, Evenson knows that at this point, Lyons is the only one who can stop a massive Balkan conflagration, using a holistic approach that he is very reluctant to adopt or apply.

    April 06, 2009

    Author's Notes: Overall Story Signposts and Journeys

    Bourne-ultimatum-big1  Writing a novel is never a linear process--nor is a plot linear in its progression. Turning points are critical elements to an effective story, and are called "Signposts." With each signpost, comes a journey--a way your protagonist grows from that turning point experience. Done well, each signpost and journey builds upon the ones previous to it.   (Censoring plot spoilers,) Here's how I created the Overall Story Signposts and Journeys for my novel, The Lazarus Covenant:

    Banner

    Overall Signpost 1:  Gathering Information

    A very young Lyons and Cello witness Tito's mass executions at Brinisi Dam, causing them to lose their innocence.

    Thirty years later, Lyons returns to Bosnia where he grew up as a child before moving abroad, but does not really explore why he returns until pushed by Sandy Evenson, who poses that question to him ("why did you come back?"), without knowing any of the circumstances of his past.  She learns that Lyons is a rare breed--extremely capable, not at all risk averse, engaging and brilliant--but also very conflicted.  She wants to help him, but to do so, she must know why...and Lyons is extremely hesitant to tell her. 

    The focus for the objective story, however, is to learn who is behind the ambush of the US delegation and why-- what are his motives?  What else is in store?  Lyons learns through Evenson that Celo was possibly behind the ambush.  Following Lyons' investigation, the powers that be learn that the attack was not a Serb attack...but that the Bosnian Muslims or Croats could be responsible.

    Overall Story Journey 1: Gathering Information to Doing

    Lyons learns of Celo's presence at the Oborci ambush.  Thorpe learns of Lyons' presence in Bosnia as the Deputy Commissioner of the European Union Police Mission, and of his involvement in the situation, and makes a special effort to find him and talk to him clandestinely.  Thorpe tells him that he's learned of an even greater threat, and believes he can address it, but needs time.  Thorpe promises to give him all the resources he needs.  Tells him that he will try to control Rose's crowd, but that may be problematic.

    Rose's surveillance of Celo (as a Black Listed Indictee) tips off EUFOR, who learn of his link with Lyons and begin preparations for an organized attack.  Lyons learns that Rose's attack is imminent and he frantically tries to stop it because he knows it is a trap and that more is at stake-- but to no avail.  Celo has learned of the attack, and Rose's commando's are all killed in the ambush he sets for them.  The President and British Prime Minister agree that between the two alternatives:  withdrawing or digging in, they must choose the latter...or appear weak, NATO failure, etc..  They personalize the conflict by identifying Celo as the main enemy and the administration directs DOD to begin hunting him down.

    Overall Story Signpost 2:  Doing

    When Thorpe hears of the administration's directive, he immediately tells the President that it is a mistake to personalize the problems they are having in Bosnia, and that conducting a  manhunt is a gamble at best.  Airstrikes are considered, but not immediately directed.   The CIA and State Department suggest neutralizing him and keep the ambush covered up officially as a mine "accident."   The President wants to neutralize Celo.  Thorpe tells them that they should wait until all the facts are in so they have a complete picture, rather than jump to conclusions.  So he proposes a third alternative:  engaging Celo with Lyons, to see if he can convince him to give himself up to the Hague, before they go in again with guns blazing. The President agrees to go along with that COA to prevent further bloodshed.

    Overall Story Journey 2:  Doing to Obtaining

    Lyons takes Evenson to Zvornik.  Some flashbacks.  Celo acknowledges that he was in the vicinity of the ambush-- but was not responsible for it.  His counterpart in the RS was responsible.  Celo tells him he was trying to stop it from occuring-- but will defend himself if his men come under attack as the SAS chose to do the other night.  They want to talk more, but then Mark sees a surveillance party and their meeting is cut short.   Celo realizes that they've been monitored and are therefore exposed-- he narrowly escapes. 

    Lyons tells Thorpe that he believes he can solve the situation with Celo if they do not push Celo's capture.  Thorpe reluctantly agrees, but tells him the barbarians are at the gate.  Also tells him to be careful of Warner and Rose's agendas.

    Overall Story Signpost 3:  Obtaining

    Lyons tells Thorpe that he believes he can solve the situation with Celo if they do not push Celo's capture.  Thorpe reluctantly agrees, but tells him the barbarians are at the gate.  Also tells him to be careful of Warner and Rose's agendas.

    Overall Story Journey 3:  Obtaining to Understanding

    Events begin to move very quickly.  Rose and the administration continue to jump to conclusions, and the problem personalization process seems to mestacisize. 

    Kate Kamrath is killed.  Lyons obtains information that help them understand who is behind it, and the Oborci Ambush.

    Overall Story 4:  Understanding

    Evenson understands that Celo's mother, Lyons' aunt-- is really the missing link to their collective past.  Lyons is guided to the Vatican...to Papa Voyo -- the same man who was at Brinisi Dam 20 years ago, and the same man who killed their father.  He was responsible for the ambush and made it look like a Muslim attack.  Lyons is pointed to the production facility in the Bosnian mountains--realizes that it is a nuclear weapons construction project.  Celo meets him at a church in Stolac, and shows him the evidence of Papa Voyo's involvement in the Oborci ambush and hands him two duffle bags full of money.  Lyons now understands fully what he's up against.

    April 05, 2009

    Author's Notes: Protagonist's Resolve

    Change (2)

    Novels are about change.  Change can either be sought after or resisted--but the main vehicle through which change is conveyed is almost always through the main character--or protagonist.   It's a subjective determination:  is the protagonist resolved to change or to resist change in order to solve his/her problems?   In my novel, The Lazarus Covenant, Mark Lyons is determined to change his circumstances by avoiding his past; but soon he realizes that he must confront the turbulent events of his childhood if he is to successfully resolve the current world crisis and advance himself personally...he must conquer himself.   Here are my early notes as I developed the Mark Lyons character (some plot spoilers are censored!):

    JohnFenzelBanner_1[1]

    Lyons wants to achieve peace of mind.  He believes he can accomplish this by staying in the "arena" (what he's good at), while focusing on peaceful means to do so, in contrast to what he's lived in his past.  He is wrong.  Ironically, the environment he thrusts himself into, leads him in the very direction he is avoiding.  "Change" requires revisiting his past, while also confronting extremely dangerous circumstances that require that he apply all of his abilities-- including those he had sought to abandon.  This dangerous journey will change Mark Lyons, but not in the way he could have expected or predicted.

    Reverting to his past skills come incrementally...first at the ambush site, with the switch in identities at his reunion with Celo, then with the investigation of Kamrath's murder, at the mass grave in Stolac/NATO airstrikes; the WMD Raid;  then finally with the intervention in Medjugorje.

    In the end, Lyons goes from being the conflicted and capable (if reluctant) warrior to a contributing, focused, very self-aware leader and peacekeeper.

    April 03, 2009

    Balkan Redux?

    Stari most, bosnia                      Stari Most, Mostar, Bosnia

    If the past can ever accurately serve as prologue, current events in the Balkans portend what could soon become a recurrent clash of civilizations for Europe and the United States.  Recently, to reinforce that nightmare scenario, Dennis Blair, President Obama’s newly appointed Director of National Intelligence, warned that current events in Bosnia represent the greatest threat to stability in Europe today.  

    Throughout my own peacekeeping experiences in Bosnia commanding all special operations forces in the British and U.S. sectors, I recall the haunting feeling that we were simply placing a finger in the dike while flood waters approached.  I did not base my opinions on diplomatic initiatives or power sharing arrangements.  More compelling and disturbing to me were my own observations as I travelled the countryside and talked to the people.  I saw Bosnian teachers and parents filing children past mass graves, being told “never forget.”  I saw Serbs moving into homes in Srebrenica previously occupied by Bosnian Muslims.  And I saw Bosnian Croats rioting to prevent other ethnic refugees from resettling in “their” towns.  All were victims.  All continued to perpetrate the same divisive, often violent, behavior.

    Most troubling was that these events occurred as the United States was reducing its presence in Bosnia. 

    Twelve years later, Blair is reporting that tensions [in Bosnia] have reached the “highest level in years.”  He recently warned Congress that Bosnia’s ability to survive as a single, multi-ethnic state is in grave danger. 

    We hear about restoring the “dream of Dayton” as if Dayton were a cure-all for an elusive disease.  But today, the problem is Dayton.  Over a decade later, the virus of ethnic hatred, economic turmoil and political entrenchment has mutated in Bosnia--the youngsters who were paraded by those mass graves fifteen years ago are adults today.  If Dayton is to serve as an effective “vaccine,” it needs to be updated to account for both the progress that's been made, and those tasks that remain to be achieved. 

    Dennis blair                 Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence

    Blair’s assessment focuses on political problems in the Balkans.  To be sure, rather than focusing on reconciling differences and rebuilding, Bosnia’s leaders have instead chosen to fan the flames of ethnic prejudices. Haris Silajdzic, Bosnia’s Muslim co-president in the Dayton-directed power sharing arrangement has advocated for the Serb Republic in Bosnia to be abolished.  In turn, the Bosnian Serb prime minister, Milorad Dodik is calling for all-out secession from Bosnia.  All present zero sum solutions to complex variable-sum problems.

    Lessons from the last war during the Bush and Clinton Administrations should offer stark lessons to the Obama Administration. One dynamic remains constant:  when traditional family homes and gravesites risk permanent loss, security and stability become elusive and negotiable.  If one region of the Balkans secedes, a secession of any kind, in any location, would be certain to result in a “domino effect” in the region.  Bosnian Croats would make their bid to unify with Croatia. Violence in Kosovo between the Albanian-majority in the south and a Serb-majority in the north would re-erupt.  Referendums for independence would spill over in countries like Montenegro and Macedonia.  Swept up in the sheer momentum of events, Croats in the Vojvodina region of northern Serbia would demand their independence. 

    The spread of the radical version of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia, Wahabism, is another substantive concern in Bosnia. Tremendous infusions of Saudi money since the war over a decade ago have contributed to rebuilding large mosques and homes throughout the country.  During a recent visit to Bosnia, I noticed a dramatic increase in the number of young men sporting long beards, and women wearing black head scarves—far more than I had seen immediately after the war.

    To improve any war-ravaged state, it is the economic ties that bind. And yet, this connective tissue is all but non-existent in the former Yugoslavia.  Rampant organized crime, massive unemployment (roughly 40% and increasing), scant foreign investment, and high foreign debt define Bosnia right now.   As a vestige of the Ottoman Empire, Bosnia truly is today the “Sick Man of Europe.”

    It would be easy to focus elsewhere.  After a decade long commitment to Bosnia and Kosovo, “Balkan Fatigue” is understandable.  Ultimately, however, Bosnia may be the canary in the mineshaft.  During the worst economic downturn since the 1920s, Bosnia is approaching a breaking point.  Abraham Maslow taught us after World War II that when an entire population is reduced to a base struggle for survival, the outcome is likely to be both widespread and catastrophic.  Bosnia’s breaking point could rapidly become Europe’s faultline.

    Compounding that struggle and perhaps accentuating it are subterranean hatreds that linger between Bosnian “ethnicities:” the Serbs, Croats and Muslims.  That enmity creates a far more worrisome picture for Bosnia’s future.  Memories of the past war evoke volatile emotions.  Those emotions cloud judgment and obstruct substantive dialogue.  

    The last Bosnian War taught us the costs of delay, risk aversion and equivocation.  Comprehensive solutions require courageous leadership from the United States.  Deliberately addressing the growing crisis in Bosnia now is the only way that the Obama administration can stop a bad situation from getting far worse.  Political and economic solutions notwithstanding, confronting the undercurrent of hatred in Southern Europe is a long-term project that we must collectively undertake with Europe if our goal is to see an enduring culture of peace take hold in the Balkans. 

    April 01, 2009

    Author's Notes: The Main Character Symptom

    3010_large  

    We’ve all heard the saying, “Treat the disease, not the symptoms.”  If you’re a doctor, that’s wise counsel.  But if you’re a writer, it’s exactly the wrong advice—because your novel would be very short indeed.  Every problem, disease, or challenge has its associated symptoms.  In writing a novel, your protagonist also has his or her symptoms—everything he does, he does for a reason.  In deciding how your characters will react to a statement or situation, your challenge as a writer is made far easier if you know their “symptoms.”  What is a character symptom?  In short, it’s what a character perceives his problem to be.  Is your main character an optimist or a cynic?  Does he hold himself responsible or does he blame others for his problems?  Your main character’s symptom is defined by how he deals with the effects of his problems, not the cause.  And it’s your main character’s symptoms that will keep your readers turning the pages of your novel.  As a writer, symptoms must be your primary focus.

    In my novel, The Lazarus Covenant, main character Mark Lyons’ symptom is summed up in one word: Inaction…the fear of inaction.  Here are my notes that I made as I thought about Mark Lyons’ symptoms…

    JohnFenzelBanner_1[1]

    Inaction also defined as the wrong solutions.

    Direct approach (ineffective)  Vs. the Indirect Approach (more effective)

    Inaction also defined by Lyon's unwillingness to reevaluate his personal past because it is painful...too complex...and too difficult to reconcile...no one (especially he) cannot possibly understand because it is beyond the scope of normal human experience.  Only one other person does understand, and he has reevaluated his past:  Celo.  It's just that his conclusions are fatally flawed.  Mark is therefore forced to reevaluate based on his cousin's own flawed evaluation and his attempt to transfer that on himself.

    Photo Credit: Chad Burkey

    March 26, 2009

    Meeting Robley Rex....

    Today, I had the privilege of meeting 107 year old World War I veteran Robley Rex in Louisville, Kentucky. It's difficult to adequately convey in words what it's like to meet someone like Robley because, quite simply, there are no others even remotely like him. Now on the verge of his 108th birthday, Robley Rex is a Kentucky native who still retains his distinct Kentucky accent and southern gentleman charm. At the moment I met him, I was struck by how remarkably vivacious Robley is today. We came in our Army Combat Uniform (ACUs), and I could immediately see Robley sit up straight in his chair with his white dress shirt and bow tie.  His eyes brightened, and a broad smile covered his face. He extended his hand to us, and I immediately felt a large strong hand firmly grip my own--at that moment, I immediately knew Robley Rex was in very good health for his age. What I was not fully prepared for was the total recall this exceptional man had--of his experiences, acquaintances, and historic details from his life--as far back as 95 years ago!

    "What is your last name, again?" he asked. "Fenzel," I answered.

    "F-E-N-Z-E-L," Robley spelled, and then pointed at his forehead. "That name rings a bell with me," he said. "I knew a Fenzel."

    I explained to him that my grandfather had fought during World War I, along with his brothers.  Robley Rex deployed to Brest, France in the waning years of World War I as an 18 year old military intelligence Soldier who translated German documents and radio intercepts into English. I explained to him that my grandfather and his brothers were from Indiana, lived in Chicago before they deployed to France to fight in the war as well. 

    "I think I may have known one of them!"

    "Did you ever meet General John J. Pershing," I asked?

    To my surprise, Robley nodded enthusiastically. "Yes!" he said. "And not just to shake his hand in passing, but to stand beside him on a few occasions and talk to him! And Oh, what a spit-and-polish general he was!"

    Rex paused for a moment, seemingly caught by a fleeting memory. "And you know one of our most decorated Soldiers of the time? It was MacArthur!" He said right away, answering his own question. "Pershing told young Captain Macarthur he was a hero, but he was putting too much at risk because, as The Blackjack [Pershing] told MacArthur, 'you have a bad habit of charging the front line beside your troops--and that cannot work well for long,'" Rex said with a scolding index finger, reenacting Pershing's faux reprimand.

    Rex then turned to us, "Do you know MacArthur refused to carry a rifle on the front lines? He only carried his swagger stick!" Robley Rex shook his head, "And do you know what MacArthur told Pershing?" he asked, eyebrows raised. "He said, 'Sir, no bullet made has had my name on it yet!'"

    I asked Robley what his best memory was from World War I? Again, Rex became lost in his thoughts for just a moment. Watching him closely, I realized I was witnessing a phenomenon I might never again see: someone retreating 90 years in the recesses of one's mind to pick a dominant positive memory from a traumatic time in our history.

    Suddenly, Rex was looking me level in the eyes, but smiling brightly. "It would have to be the absolute discipline we all had as Soldiers," Rex answered. "You see, if a corporal told you to do something...to pick something up...to deliver something, you didn't delay! You did it right away! That was our culture. It was expected!"

    Robley Rex remembered his company commander, Captain Lawrence, by name. "Captain Lawrence went to West Point and was classmates with Eisenhower and MacArthur," he explained. "And if Captain Lawrence called for you, you better be there quick!" Rex said, smiling.

    I asked Robley how he was feeling at 107? Without hesitation, Robley answered, "I feel really good!"

    At that moment, I was struck by something approaching a revelation. "Sir, you always smile, don't you?"

    Rex nodded. "I have nothing to complain about." If there were any secrets to Robley's longevity, I was sure of at least one:  Robley Rex is an eternal optimist who loves people and has a perpetual zest for life. Politeness and a welcoming smile are his trademarks. He's also an exceptional listener--even with a hearing aid in each ear. When he misses a piece of the conversation, he habitually nods, and smiles, and says, "Thank-You!"

    We did not stay long, but I asked Robley if we could join him for his 108th birthday in May. His eyes lit up--"I'd be honored!"

    We collectively shook our heads. "No, Mr. Rex, the honor would be ours." I looked back at Robley Rex as we left him.

    He was saluting us.

     Meeting Robley Rex....

    March 06, 2009

    The Lazarus Covenant: A Snapshot...

    Book 360 

    At Stake: The greatest threat to world stability in history.

    The Story: One man's journey of profound personal transformation in the midst of extreme international crisis.

    The Title: The Lazarus Covenant

     

    Publisher of The Lazarus Covenant 

    BREATHE Press
    Publication Date: March 2009
    488 pp. 6 x 9
    ISBN: 978-0-9822379-0-8
    Hardcover
    $24.95

    PRE-ORDERS ACCEPTED NOW! 

    Get Your Copy of THE LAZARUS COVENANT First!

    ORDER A COPY DIRECT FROM THE PUBLISHER HERE
    Pre-Orders for The Lazarus Covenant can be made direct from the Official John Fenzel website!

     

    The Book in One Sentence: 

    In a race against time across the European Continent to the Oval Office, THE LAZARUS COVENANT explores the scourge of religious extremism, nuclear terrorism and war in an unforgettable tale of friendship, faith and forgiveness