Mary Reed and Eric Mayer have been enchanting historical mystery fans with their series about John The Eunuch, Lord Chamberlain to Emperor Justinian I for several years. With their unusual setting in the exotic, decadent Byzantium of the 6^th century, teasing plots and well drawn characters they are something different to the norm. Below is an interview with these authors, giving insight into what goes into crafting such an impressive series.

Eric: I wanted to be a novelist practically as soon as I graduated from picture books. Only I never did much about it. I'd write a chapter and get discouraged at the enormity of the task. I actually became a novelist (or half of one) only when I stopped wanting to be a novelist and started wanting to write a novel. Once I focused on the goal of just seeing the whole task through to the end, without worrying too much about the results, I was able to complete a practice book and then we went ahead and wrote our first John the Eunuch mystery. I suppose you have to think like a slow marathoner. Forget about your time -- just finishing is enough of a challenge.

Mary: I began with a more modest, general aim and so my family still pulls my leg about my declaration at about age eleven (inspired by the shining example of Jo March) that when I grew up I wanted to be a writer and live in a garret. It took some years and a detour through the non-fiction field but eventually I began to write fiction -- although the closest I've lived to a garret is when residing at various times near the tops of hills.
 

Rachel A Hyde: Writing with a partner must have its own joys and pitfalls - what are these? Have either of you written solo?

Eric: We had both published solo work before we started to collaborate. Mary had sold some fiction and non-fiction and I had sold a lot of nonfiction -- articles and essays to newspapers and magazines, both local and national, on a wide variety of topics from quilting to running. So for me, one joy of writing with a partner is that my deficiencies in certain areas of fiction writing don't prevent me from publishing the sort of fictional writing I am good at, because we prop each other up in certain aspects of the writing.

One of the more difficult things, I think, is trusting your co-writer. There is sometimes a tendency -- well for me, anyway -- to fail to recognize where my strengths end and where I should be depending more on Mary's.

Mary: For example, one of us is pretty good at dialogue and the other does description better -- although we both tackle each on occasion, of course. Our blended writing style works very well and somehow contrives to be seamless, which is rather surprising since individually we have very different and very distinctive ways of writing. But working with a writing partner also means you sometimes need a robust sense of humour -- and the ability to keep lively discussions down to a dull roar! Also, it's important both writers are willing to take out scenes dear to one or the other's heart if the work in progress demands it. Our method has long been to agree that if either of us feels very strongly that a particular scene should be included -- or cast forth into the outer darkness -- the other accepts this and it stays, or is mercilessly slung out, as the case might be.
 

Rachel A Hyde: One For Sorrow is the first book in the series about John but he appeared before that in short stories.  Where can readers find these?  What else have you written?

Mary: There's a handy list on our website at http://home.epix.net/~maywrite/fiction.htm giving publication details for (and a few details about) the short stories concerning John as well as those involving our other series character, Inspector Dorj of modern-day Mongolia. We've also written a handful of stand-alone short stories, most of which appeared in anthologies with a few in Ellery Queen's Mystery Magazine, and information about those is also listed on that page.
 

Rachel A Hyde: Which authors have influenced you the most and why?

Eric: I can't say I've been directly influenced by anybody but I have always enjoyed French literature, albeit in translation. John is definitely more in the mold of Maigret than any American detective I can think of. John's a deep thinker, somewhat somber perhaps. You won't find him wisecracking like some American sitcom character. I would think that anyone who deals time and again with murder, if they have any degree of sensitivity or philosophical tendencies, won't be so prone to flip
remarks as many detectives seem to be.

I've also enjoyed reading Alain Robbe-Grillet (author of The Erasers, a rather odd detective novel), Louis-Ferdinand Celine and Voltaire, among others. For that matter I love the essays of Montaigne. A lot of the French literature I've read seems less prosaic, more eccentric, more imbued with a touch of the fantastic, than English literature. From my reading I can only suppose that French readers, generally speaking, must have more of a taste for, or at least a tolerance of, the offbeat. I suspect that John might go over quite well in France. But I still hope the French film version of John's adventures doesn't star Jerry Lewis!

Mary: My co-author is better read in French literature although I will say that I really enjoyed Les Miserables (in translation!) when I finally got around to reading it. In fact, I would have been quite happy if it had been a lot longer! I don't think I've been consciously influenced by any particular authors but suspect there may well be traces of favourites in what I write -- Ray Bradbury's autumnal vein springs to mind, for example, or the lurking menace in M. R. James' ghost stories. My favourite mysteries tend to be Golden Age books and I also love locked room puzzles. Then too, to me one of the joys of reading mystery fiction is trying to deduce the solution before everyone is assembled in the drawing room and The Guilty Party Is Revealed. So I do like to try to keep the solution hidden in plain sight for as long as possible, bearing in mind that writers of mysteries should always play fair with their readers.
 

Rachel A Hyde: Why did you select to write a whodunit, and what made you choose this particular place and time?

Eric:  Mary's pulled us into the mystery genre. She'd already sold some short stories to Ellery Queen's Mystery Magazine and is much better read in the genre than I am. I'd made sporadic attempts at writing science fiction and fantasy over the years so when we started co-writing I was more than happy to try something different. But I chose the early Byzantine period for our setting. I'd always been fascinated by the Roman Empire's survival in the east, long after its supposed "fall" in 476 AD. It was like the premise for a fantasy novel -- what if Rome had survived? But, of course, it really had! I didn't know much about the period but a few years before, while dabbling in comics, I'd worked on the script for a comic book set during the time. The super-hero was, like John, a secret pagan, but unlike John he was occasionally helped out by some of the gods in the old pantheon. So I had enough background to get started.

Mary: And from there we began our research into this fascinating and truly alien time and culture, neither eastern nor western but something in between.

Rachel A Hyde: Where do you find the inspiration for your stories, and in particular the character of your protagonist?

Eric: John was conceived because we were casting about for a protagonist for a four page twist-ending story we'd been asked to write for one of Mike Ashley's historical mystery anthologies. The story contained no actual characterization but, for plot purposes, we needed a secret pagan who was also someone to whom Emperor Justinian would turn to handle a highly sensitive matter. Since Mithraism had been Christianity's major competitor, although by Justinian's time it was proscribed, our character became a Mithran.  Then, since the Lord Chamberlain served as a sort of personal advisor to Byzantine emperors and had varied and flexible duties, we decided to appoint our detective to the job.

Mary: It turned out that many Lord Chamberlains (not to mention a general or two) had in fact been eunuchs and thus was John the Eunuch born. Of course, at the time we wrote that first short story we weren't really looking to the future and all its ramifications and so we had absolutely no idea that John would become the protagonist in a series of short stories and then go forth in novels. As for his dreadful injury, we've had to struggle with that, just as he has, and have tried to deal with it in as matter of fact a way as possible. Although his experience left him with a very dark streak -- which does not surface often, but when it does he is a very dangerous man indeed -- he has retained his dignity as a human being and also is plainly no less "manly" than before, being able to defend those he loves or wield the blade to great effect if circumstances compel it.
 

Rachel A Hyde: 6th century Byzantium is not a period depicted very often in novels.  Was there a struggle to get a publisher to accept it? What advice do you have for writers who have novels set in unusual places and times?

Eric: We were fortunate indeed since our editor Barbara Peters (as it turned out) had been thinking it would be interesting to see a book set during that time. The publishing industry in general, or at least according to what I've learned since, seems a bit dubious. In fact, whoever reviewed Two For Joy for Publisher's Weekly said the book probably didn't have much sales potential since the period was not well-known to mystery readers in general. The concept that presenting readers with something new and original is undesirable from a sales point of view is one I find depressing. It certainly is contrary to the reasons why I read and write. On the other hand we've had excellent reactions from readers. My advice for writers who have novels set in unusual places and times is not to let the corporate bean counters discourage you. There are still plenty of smart, curious readers around looking for something different. On the other hand, if you want to make a million dollars, it would be better to buy a lottery ticket.

Mary: In brief, and based upon our own experience, I would say be persistent in your efforts to find a publisher. Whatever you do, don't take rejections to heart -- just send your manuscript out again as soon as you can get to the post office. You'll need patience, of course, and the aforementioned sense of humour is going to be handy. However, if I'm limited to just comment, it would have to be Don't Give Up!
 

Rachel A Hyde: What future books do we have to look forward to? Can you tell us anything about your next novel?   Do you have any plans for different books?

Mary: The fortune-telling nursery rhyme from which the John novels take their titles runs to seven, which is said to be for a secret never to be told. After that we've threatened to make up more lines as needed, but we still have four novels to go before we get to that point! At the moment we're thinking of Four (traditionally for a boy, by the way) as a prequel revealing how John earned his freedom by undertaking a very delicate investigation for Justinian, and it will also relate how he first met some of the recurring characters. Then if all goes according to plan, Five (for silver) will return to the current timeline. And we still hope to get Dorj into novel length one day. When all depends, as is the case for most working schmoes, on finding enough time to do the writing.
 

Rachel A Hyde: When readers enjoy a book set in a particular period they often want to read others.  Can you recommend any other books about this period of history?

Eric: Before we began our Byzantine novels I'd not read any mysteries set during the Roman period. Afterwards, out of curiosity, I read one novel each by John Maddox Roberts and by Lindsay Davis and one of Steven Saylor's short stories. However, we are very careful to avoid reading Roman mystery fiction in case it might influence us. We don't want to unconsciously steal something from another writer, nor do we want anyone to think we did. However, one possibility I'd like to note is the afore-mentioned Secret History by Justinian's contemporary, Procopius - it's much more scandalous and a lot wilder than anything in our novels!
 

Rachel A Hyde: Justinian and Theodora are not presented in a very sympathetic light, whereas their rule is often thought of as the high point of Byzantine history and Theodora in particular is often featured as something of a heroine.  What is behind this portrayal?

Eric: It is partly literary necessity.  A protagonist needs some worthy opponents and the high court position to which we appointed John makes him so powerful that there would be few who could really threaten him, apart from the emperor and the empress. But it's partly also, I guess, because I have a deep mistrust of authority. I subscribe to the old saw about power corrupting and absolute power corrupting absolutely.

Historically, like all rulers, Justinian and Theodora did shed a lot of blood in pursuit of their goals. Historians like to cite achievements -- in Justinian's case the codification of the laws, reconquests of parts of the empire, commissioning great architecture -- but the bloodshed, the suffering of common, anonymous people, is overlooked. One might say that murder mysteries are diametrically opposed to histories. Histories look at the large effects of conflicts over time. The historian is interested in who won the battle, but unless an important general was killed, none of the individual deaths are of interest. To the detective the individual life, and death, is of prime importance -- else why spend the whole book trying to bring an unknown murderer to justice?

Also, although perhaps not entirely trustworthy as a historian, Procopius, who chronicled Justinian's reign in his Secret History, considered the emperor a demon in human form and his opinion of Theodora was, if anything, even worse. So our portrayal of Justinian, if not Theodora, is really more sympathetic than that of a contemporary observer.
 

Rachel A Hyde: John and some of his friends are Mithrans and are shown in a more positive light than the Christians.  Can you tell us something of Mithraism, and your choice for a Mithran protagonist?

Eric: We absolutely don't mean our writing to be anti-Christian.  Again, from a literary standpoint, it's more interesting to set the protagonist, especially one holding such a high position as John, at odds with the powers that be -- at least it is to me. Since the Eastern Roman empire was officially Christian our protagonist has to find himself, to an extent, at odds with Christianity.

But in a lot of ways, the two religions shared similar values. If you consider John's actions, he is a very "Christian" person, not a man set on vengeance for the terrible wrongs he has suffered, nor an advocate of violence or intolerance. So perhaps it is not so much Christian beliefs that are being criticized as the tendency of organized religions to ignore their own tenets.

Mary: We made John, a former mercenary, a Mithran (if secretly so) since it was the faith of many military men. It's an austere religion and what we find interesting is that Mithrans were required to practice virtues countless non-Mithrans also value -- chastity, loyalty and obedience, for example. As Eric mentions, Mithraism had beliefs in common with Christianity, for example, sacred meals, heavenly judgement of the souls of the faithful and holding that Mithra was born on December 25th. One big difference, however, was that women were excluded.

Then again, John's elderly servant Peter is a devout member of the Christian church and also a very sympathetic character who, despite his strong disapproval of John's beliefs, is devoted to -- and endlessly worries about -- his pagan master.
 

Rachel A Hyde: Do you have any final words for your readers, and how can fans contact you? Do you have a website?

Eric & Mary:  We very much appreciate their interest and hope they'll continue to accompany us along the road to see what lies in wait around the corner for John, Felix, Anatolius and all the others. There are many tales still to be told, and if readers enjoy perusing them as much as we love writing them, then we're happy indeed.

Our website (which has an email link) can be found lurking about at http://home.epix.net/~maywrite/  and we hope folks will drop by and visit now and then.

Book Review

This is the long-awaited third entry in the popular historical crime series featuring the (mis)adventures of John The Eunuch, Lord Chamberlain to Justinian I, emperor of Byzantium. This time the unconventional sleuth and his friends are put through their paces once again as a house party at John's rich and eccentric old uncle Zeno goes horribly wrong in classic murder mystery style. Zeno is entertaining the Empress and a pair of 8-year-old royal twins, hostages as the emperor's General Belisarius is conquering Italy. During a banquet one twin is killed and the Empress's favorite performer the dwarf Barnabas goes suspiciously missing. Theodora hates John and sees the opportunity to send him off to find out whodunit - his head on a platter if he fails…

Fortune-telling goats on a sacred island, a one-armed inventor and his automatons, a whale and lots of court intrigues make this book sing. The splendor and squalor of Byzantium are all here, for these authors are adept at depicting a place where promotion or a horrible death depend not on one's prowess but on the whim of the emperor or empress and a strange time when the ancient world is giving way to the modern and thus embodies something of each. Mithrans and Christians exist uneasily side-by-side, and it is usually the Mithrans who come out on top in this series although this does allow a look at how Christians were perceived by pagans in the early days of the church. The faint whiff of fantasy only adds to the period flavor and nobody is too modern in their outlook, a fault of many protagonists of historical novels. Book two badly needed editing but this novel fairly skips along with barely a plot sag although at times it does get a bit repetitive; I didn't count how many descriptions there were of Hero in his workshop making automata but I felt that there were several too many. John is a very engaging character though and I look forward to reading about his fourth adventure.