Q&A with Josh Lanyon discussion

ns wrote: "Calathea wrote: "I’m late to the discussion of but I’ll try to word my opinion of the book. That’s not easy because I feel quite..."

Part of this might be the fact that it was intended to be the first in a series, and so -- at least this is the way I look at it when I'm writing -- the characters can't be full realized in the first book. And if they are fully realized, they have to be sufficiently flawed for there to be a growth arc through the course of the series.

My thought was we identified most with Henry and that means Dingo is the largely unknown one. They both should have significant growing to do. Both personally and within their relationship.

That's the challenge of starting a new series. You have to leave enough room for filling in blanks but you still have to give the reader *enough* that she/he wants to follow that journey.

Josh wrote: "Part of this might be the fact that it was intended to be the first in a series, and so -- at least this is the way I look at it when I'm writing -- the characters can't be full realized in the first book. And if they are fully realized, they have to be sufficiently flawed for there to be a growth arc through the course of the series. "

If the flaws that made me dislike Dingo were intended as a starting point to a character growth arc throughout the (possible) series, it's done great. I would absolutely like to read a sequel to see if and how he overcomes these things and how Henry deals with him in future encounters.