JOHN FENZEL

The Lazarus Covenant: A Snapshot

The Lazarus Covenant

 

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!

 

Author Notes: 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:

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.

Author's Notes: Main v. Impact Character 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!

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.

Author's Notes: Main v. Impact Character 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:

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.

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

 

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.

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

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:

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.

Author's Notes: Overall Story Signposts and Journeys

  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:

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.

Author's Notes: Protagonist's Resolve

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!):

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.

Author's Notes: The Main Character Symptom

 

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…

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