For my new book I have temporarily left behind the period of
1066 and taken up a new subject in the guise of an alternative history story
based upon the popular ‘what if?’ premise. I did not start out with the
intention of writing an alternative history it is just that this genre proved
to be a very suitable vehicle for the story that I want to tell. There is still
a considerable amount of research to be carried out in the name of
authenticity, just as with Historical Fiction. It may be an alternative account
but that does not mean that I can abandon everything prior to the moment in
time when actual and fictional history diverge, if I did that then really it
would be a fantasy novel but what I want is something with a bit more relevance
to the real world and I think that fantasy might lack the kind of bite I am
looking for.
Once I had chosen the genre and did the preparatory research
I started writing and it all came together very quickly. I had already
assembled a team of beta readers and it did not take me very long to provide
them with the prologue and opening chapter for them to read, digest and
critique. One of the more interesting responses to come out of the early stages
of the read was that there was a lot of anger behind the text.
Now this observation came from someone who knows me very
well and has done so for many years. I think that the relationship we have with
each other has allowed them an insight into my writing that most of the other
beta readers lack, which is not a bad thing as it clearly gives a different
kind of perspective on my work.
The other point to perhaps to consider is that I am writing
about some of the subjects from a genuine point of experience; some of these
things happened to me! I call my new novel ‘Eugenica’ and it examines what
might have happened if Britain, the birthplace of modern Eugenics, had gone
done down the path of eugenics based social and health policies in the 1930’s.
Other countries actually took this route, Norway,
America, Canada and, perhaps most notoriously, Germany
for example. The results were usually devastating upon the individuals who
suffered under these systems.
Although Britain,
if we return to the ‘real’ timeline, did not take the path that most
commentators of the early 20th century expected it to being a
disabled person in this country is not an easy existence. I know because I am
disabled!
In many respects I have had it easy compared to other
people, some of whom have been treated appallingly and still are sadly. From my
formative years I was the subject of medical investigation because I have a
very rare muscle condition; Becker’s variant Myotonia Congenita, which was
first identified in the same year that I left school. My symptoms are severe
and I suffer impaired mobility, which is pretty obvious to most observers.
Recently the current government waged a very effective
propaganda war against the disabled prior to dismantling the benefit system
that supports them. It was clearly a move to win over public sympathy from the
cripples to the politicians and it worked. The government won hands down and
the majority of society seem to have a so what attitude to the outcome.
This, I believe, was the starting point of the story that I
wanted to write. Clearly life in Britain today is nowhere near as bad
as it might have become if the country had fully embraced eugenics, there’s no
suggestion of forced segregation and sterilisation for example, or state
enacted euthanasia for that matter. Nevertheless I feel angry about the
treatment that some disabled people have been subjected to, not just by
politicians or the media or an apparently uncaring society but also by the
medical fraternity. You might not believe some of the things done to me in the
name of medical research?
They say that the best writers concentrate on the subjects
that they know and I can see the logic in that. I am writing a book that,
amongst others, examines the treatment of the disabled, admittedly in an
extreme social setting, and I have an axe to grind, which is probably why I am
writing angry, is this a good thing?
I think that it is. My reader expressed concerns that some
people might find it a little uncomfortable, objectionable even, that it might
stir things up. I understood what they meant but my immediate reaction was ‘so
what?’ Eugenica has discrimination and prejudice as two of its core themes,
they are thorny subjects. It also has dehumanisation to facilitate the war on
the weak as a major theme, not a topic that you can deal with using kid gloves.
There are some more positive themes in there as well but it is the ones just
mentioned that are the tinder lit by my own personal experiences that in turn
ignites my anger I suppose? I ask that question because here’s another
observation, entirely subjective, I had not realised that I was writing angry!
I am now very curious to see what they other beta readers
made of my early work on this project. I want to see if they come to a similar
conclusion about the element of anger already suffused into the text. It is
going to be interesting to see if they recognise it and if I am going to
continue writing angry now that I have been made aware of something that I
seemed to have been conducting unconsciously?
