The Lord of the Earth - Dirk B. (Page 9 of 50)

Yup, although I'm still trying to find a non-supernatural reason for the suppressed hammering noise. A loud TV or stereo? Good soundproofing? Molten nails from the fireplace pushed through the flesh/wall/joists?

It occurs to me that I have to use different ways of killing the clergy to provide a little variety from crime scene to crime scene. Technically, the killings are supposed to include (apparent) natural causes, suicide, accident and murder. I think I'll save the crucifixion until near the end of book one. Save it for someone special.

I don't want to be gruesome, though, with blood and entrails everywhere, since I want a teenage and adult Christian audience. Admittedly, the Apocalypse is violent, but not gory. I'll hurl a few crows against car windows to make up for it. :-)

My FBI profiling book says there are generally two kinds of serial killers: disorganized mentally ill ones who are usually caught quickly and highly methodical psychopaths like Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy. The book will probably focus on the latter unless I want to throw in a red herring or two.

I'll return to my original plan that two ailing cardinals died of apparent natural causes (no autopsies deemed necessary) before the story opens, and the first actual case is of an apparent suicide by hanging. I envision another case where two bishops sharing a residence are found lying atop their beds with their upper bodies exposed, each with a cross carved across the chest. The rest of the apartment suite is in perfect order.

Any other good deaths?

No, the killer is quite sane (one personality), albeit evil. Everything he does is intentional. He is an organized, highly intelligent killer, smart enough to throw out false herrings to send investigators on a few wild goose chases. Ultimately, though, he wants to be discovered, as long as he controls the circumstances. The reveal happens at the end of book one.

No Stigmata on Netflix and I just ended my trial of Amazon Prime earlier today. Didn't see anything worth paying for. I'll have to see if they'll let me rent movies like they do on Amazon US. They didn't when I last checked.

I did, however, find a scary flick called Open House starring the same actor as the lead in 13 Reasons Why. Good buildup and scary score, but the ending made it a complete waste of time.

I also found the Exorcism of Emily Rose. It's finally available on Netflix. Cue that up for tomorrow, preferably in the daylight. :-)

https://youtu.be/dLgvKwOYniY

Technique question.

My Connor character experiences frequent painful visions. Some are physically painful as he feels the pain of those in the vision, while others are emotionally painful because he has great empathy (one of his supernatural abilities). The visions range from Old Testament violence to Roman Era bloody battles to the Inquisition to gas attacks in WWI and so on. In the spirit of show don't tell, I'm seriously considering showing the visions to the reader as Connor experiences them. He'll narrate the visions. There are enough atrocities throughout history to have one vision per chapter for all three books.

My concern is how disjointed the result will feel. That'll be a lot of page space dedicated to visions that, while connected, won't be revealed as such until the end of the series. The reader will know something strange is going on since the characters will discuss the visions and their possible meaning, but I don't plan to make it easy to figure out before the final reveal.

The reason to have Connor narrate the visions is to create a connection to the rest of the story. For those who saw the original Dune movie, you heard Paul Atreides's thoughts whispered by the actor who played him. Same technique.

Thoughts?

The overall real estate worries me, although there will be few names outside famous ones such as Moses, Caesar, and Hitler. I'll try it your way, with a relatively detailed vision in places where I would normally "tell"a vision.

Apocalypse is too generic.  People will go, 'ho, hum,' another one of those.  Chronicles of the Second Coming is better.

Dirk:  Yes, The Lord of the Earth is a good title.  I presumed it had something to do with Satan, or somebody suitable Satanic when I saw it.  You need to stand out from the crowd, so great that you researched it.  I'm glad that your series will be totally unlike Lord of the World, although since it's a hundred years old and recommended by the Pope, it would probably actually enhance your marketability that there was such a book. 

I'm not super-familiar with Catholic Theology (I know there are 95 errors at least. lol).  My theological background, in descending order of eminence: the Apostle Paul, Augustine, Dr. Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Bishop N.T. Wright, and Reinhold Niebuhr. Wright makes a convincing case that the Apostle Paul believed in a physical resurrection (I suppose it's hard not to believe when you meet the guy in the flesh twenty-five years after he died).  The crux of his trial before the Sanhedrin was the truth of the literal resurrection.  The Pharisees said they could believe that Jesus could be a spirit (ghost) or angel, but not a physical being after death. The crux of Christian morality, for Paul, was based on there being a physical resurrection awaiting Christians that was modeled after Jesus, although there would, in this life, be a spiritual resurrection ("born again") that is metaphorical in nature.  He also points out that the concept of resurrection implies a period of true death (at least three days, lol) and that there was no consensus as to what happens between death and resurrection.  Some at the time believed in going to Heaven, others even in reincarnation.  (There were at least three cases of reincarnation mentioned in the NT--one by Jesus, and two by John of Patmos.  I'm referring to Elijah's reincarnation as John the Baptist and Moses and Elijah's in Revelation. 

LaHaye, who is your chief competitor in this field, makes a persuasive case for Revelation being a future history, although despite what he says, there are clearly metaphorical elements to the book. Most scholars take the woman running in the desert with her child to be a metaphorical reference to Mary and Jesus, and we know that 1/3rd of the stars are not going to be thrown to Earth.  This could mean that they will wink out, go 'unnova,' or a lot of other things, but they won't literally be thrown to the Earth. Even LeHaye ends up taking a part of Revelation in a metaphorical way.  The sign of the beast won't literally be written on one's forehead--instead, it will be a microchip that will be implanted that will allow us to have instant digital trades and be located by the authorities.  A smartphone implant.  Maybe.  But that's not the literal interpretation.

I don't spend a lot of time reading theology.  My chief avocation is to tell the tale of a descendent of a pagan goddess who was twinned at birth, and so lacks full divinity.

Anyway, I look forward to reading your books.

I had to look up dispensationalism, I thought it might be another word for 'belief in the Rapture.'  Turns out it means that Christian historiography should emphasize it as the story of God, and not of the salvation of humanity.  I find it an interesting departure from the early Church (1st century AD). One of the early church leaders (you might say, *the* early church leader) said once, "The law is made for Man, not Man for the law." Dispensationalism was a reaction to modernism and liberalism, but it goes against the whole theme of the gospels--that we have a god who is willing to sacrifice for us and doesn't demand that we sacrifice for him.

Correction: he "sees" auras but "experiences" visions. I'll stick to those terms consistently.

That sounds like it would make sense, especially if different wording is used for each. Also sounds fascinating to read.

I just came across this thread, and yes, it sounds delineated.  Context is all important and if you stick to that, you should be fine.