Recognizing When Your Plot Is Drifting Off Course

About nine months ago, I wrote a blog post about the planning method we used to write Dead, Without a Stone to Tell It. In that post, I discussed that instead of using our usual detailed-to-within-an-inch-of-its-life outline, Ann and I attempted something different — more of a freeform approach where we planned the beginning in detail and left the specifics loose to allow for a little more creativity, while still having a rough idea of where we wanted to go. When it came to writing A Flame in the Wind of Death, the second book in our series, we used a similar plan. The beginning of the book was well planned out and we knew the details of the murders and who was committing them, but we left ourselves some room to explore as we wrote.

Every book is different, and where that freeform style worked well for Dead, I knew last week that I was having problems with Flame. The first 60% of the book was written and I know exactly how the last 25% was going to fall. The issue was the section in between. Not knowing exactly how to link those two parts of the story together was slowing me down. The plot line I was seeing for that part of the case was simply too straightforward for a mystery. I knew the waters needed muddying, but I wasn’t sure how to do it. It wasn’t that I had writer’s block, but I knew uncertainty was getting in the way of the words flowing.

So what do you do when your plot seems to be drifting away from you?

• Stop spinning your wheels: If what you’re doing now isn’t working, stop and step away from your manuscript. The longer you bang your head against it and the more frustrated you become, the less likely you’ll be able to figure out the real problem.

• Reread from the beginning: Go back and a review what you’ve written. It’s amazing the details you can forget in even a few short weeks. Makes notes as you go to strengthen your manuscript and be open to any plot points that leap out at you. The answer to the issues that blocked you may be contained in sections you’ve already written.

• Brainstorm with a crit partner: If you’ve got a crit partner who is willing to help out, bounce your plot and some potential ideas off them, and then be open to consider their suggestions.

• Go back to the outline (if you have one), re-outline if necessary: If not having a roadmap paralyzes you, go back and fill in the blanks in your outline. Sometimes it’s easier to deal in bullet points than scenes and chapters. When you can see where the plot is going directly, you can often see the holes in it.

• Up the stakes: Sometimes you’re not feeling the love for your manuscript because there’s simply not enough at stake. If you’re bored with your vanilla plotline, just imagine how a reader will feel. Remember that tension and conflict drive plot, so go back and crank up those aspects of your storyline.

• Re-evaluate character priorities: Do your characters’ motives seem out of sync with their own personalities? The disconnect you may be feeling with your storyline may simply be your subconscious recognizing that you’re not being true to your characters. Make sure that their actions and motives seem genuine and won’t yank your reader out of your prose simply because of out-of-character behaviour.

• If all else fails, give yourself a break from the project: Sometimes the best thing you can do for your own work is give yourself some perspective on it. Often the best way to do that is to put it away for a few weeks, if not longer. Sometimes we’re simply too close to our own writing to see its flaws and distance is wonderful for allowing you to view your own work with a critical eye.

So how did I get past this block in my work-in-progress? The first thing I did was stop writing new material and then I spent last week-end rereading the 60,000 words we already had down. A few things leapt out at me right away simply from that exercise. But then Ann and I went back to basics and really nailed out the last third of the book. We spent some time brainstorming and building off each other’s ideas. Together, we worked out the kinks and outlined the final section of the book. Now it’s full steam ahead and we should have the first draft completed within a few weeks.

For the writers in the group, how do you manage when your plot starts to drift or you lose the thread? I’d love to hear your suggestions in the comments.

Photo credit: bigcityal

Forensics 101: Victim ID Based On Antemortem Fractures

A few weeks ago, Ann broke her ankle in a mishap with her two large and loveable dogs – she was walking in the yard while the dogs were out playing; she zigged, they zagged, and they all ended up in a pile. Her tibia and fibula were fractured in several places, requiring surgery and the use of three screws to stabilize the healing fracture. But because we’re crime writers, the very first thing that occurred to both of us upon seeing her x-rays was a blog post on the possibility of skeletal identification based this type of injury.

Antemortem fractures are fractures that occur before the time of death (‘ante’ – before; ‘mortem’ – death) as opposed to perimortem (‘peri’ – at or near the time of) or postmortem (‘post’ – after) fractures. Usually, antemortem fractures are completely healed, but even well-healed fractures leave traces. When the healing process begins, the cells within the bone start to produce cartilage which forms a preliminary fracture callus between the broken pieces of bone. Shortly thereafter, that cartilage mineralizes first into weaker woven bone and then later into strong lamellar bone. If the break is well set, once healing is complete the resulting bony callus is only visible by x-ray.

Below are the bones of an adult male. The remodeled remnants of the bony callus can be seen mid-shaft in the left humerus:

If victim identification is required, post mortem x-rays can be compared to antemortem x-rays in patient medical files to confirm the location of known fracture points.

However, sometimes a fracture requires additional stability to heal, simply because of the type or location of the break. In that case, orthopedic implants may be used. Some common implants are pictured below:

Orthopedic implants also have the added advantage of often being inscribed with a serial number, allowing investigators to trace the implant directly to the hospital and patient in question. Victim identification can come from that single piece of information alone. But even if there is no specific information on the implant, the type and positioning of that implant will assist with identification.

Armed with this information, a forensic anthropologist can make or strengthen the case for victim identification based on these individual characteristics.

A special thanks to Ann for generously sharing her personal x-rays with us. Talk about taking one for the team!

Photo credits: Ann Vanderlaan, museumoflondon and MacQ

Forensic Case Files: 147 Years After The Battle of Antietam, A Union Solider Finally Comes Home

The young man was killed at the Battle of Antietam on the bloodiest day of fighting in American military history. Not yet out of his teenage years, he was struck down in Miller’s corn field on September 17, 1862, one of 23,000 men killed during a mere twelve hours of fighting. Hastily buried the next day, it was intended that his remains would be properly interred as befitting a soldier who died fighting for his country. But four years later, when the dead were collected and moved to the Antietam National Cemetery, his resting place at the edge of the corn field was missed. He lay undisturbed for another 142 years until his remains were discovered in October 2008.

It was a ground hog that made the discovery. As he tunneled under the corn field, he found human bones lodged in the earth and promptly removed them from his path. Luckily, a sharp-eyed visitor to the Antietam National Battlefield spotted a human jaw bone mixed into a pile of loose dirt beside the ground hog hole. Upon investigation, the National Parks staff discovered several more bone fragments, some scraps of leather and a Civil War era button in the same area. At that point, they knew they’d found an unmarked burial.

National Park Services’ archeologist Stephen Potter was called in to excavate the site.

Unfortunately, the ground hog had badly damaged the soldier’s bones as he gnawed on them for their calcium content. But along with the bones, Potter and his team found several items that provided crucial information about the missing soldier: A handful of buttons marked the solider as a member of one of the New York Regiments that fought at the battle of Antietam, and a cracked and tarnished belt plate bearing the stamp ‘U.S’ reinforced his identify as a Union soldier.

 

Forensic anthropologist Doug Owsley, head of the Division of Physical Anthropology at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, examined the recovered bones. Based on an impacted wisdom tooth in the jaw, lack of extensive dental wearing and an open suture in the skull, he judged the solider to have been between 17 and 19 years of age. But even for so young a man, he was clearly a veteran – mixed in among the New York regimental buttons were several general issue Union buttons, indicating that he’d been in the army long enough to require the generic replacement of his original buttons.

In the end, a final identification was not possible. Between the infantry, artillery and cavalry, 86 units from New York were present at Antietam that terrible day. Even when the list was narrowed to the 24 units fighting in the area of the corn field where the remains were discovered, there were simply too many men still listed as missing-in-action for a definitive ID.

He was brought back to New York in 2009. On September 17, 2009, on the 147^th anniversary of his death, he was laid to rest at the Saratoga National Cemetery with full military honours. His identity lost forever to time, he is now simply the Unknown Soldier, ‘known but to God’.

 Photo credit: The Washington Post and Bill Schaaf

Forensics 101: Victim Age Determination Based on the Adult Pelvis

In one of my earlier Forensics 101 posts, I gave an overview of the different ways to determine the age of a skeletal victim. This process is much easier in children and teens as most of the major skeletal changes that occur during growth are ongoing until the early 20s. However, there are several ways to estimate age at death in an adult, and one of the most reliable is analysis of the pubic symphysis.

The pubic symphysis is the joint where the two halves of the pelvis meet at the centerline of the body, joined by a layer of fibrocartilage.

The bony symphyseal surface that faces the cartilage changes over time, starting at about age 20 and continuing past the age of 65.

The below sketch, based on the Suchey-Brooks method of identification, outlines the changes that take place over those 45 years. There are minor sex differences between males and females; the below sketch outlines the progression of an adult male over 5 – 10 year intervals and progressing through 6 phases:

Young bone is very robust, with a series of horizontal ridges and grooves. Over time, the bone changes from ridged and furrowed to flat and smooth with a fine grained texture. Margins build up at the edges to form a rim and a plateau develops in the center of the symphyseal surface at approximately age 35 (phase IV). After this, the surface erodes to become pitted and porous, and the shape becomes irregular. For the majority of the population, these changes occur at predictable age ranges, allowing an osteologist to estimate the age of an adult victim at the time of death.

The photo at the top of this post illustrates the extreme differences in the symphyseal surface over time. The bone on the left is from a young person of approximately 20 years of age. The bone on the right is from an older person of over 60 years of age.

After the recovery of skeletal or badly decomposed remains, basic markers such as age and sex are crucial to victim identification. Pubic symphysis analysis is simply one way a forensic anthropologist can determine victim age. If a full set of remains are recovered, it is preferable to analyze additional adult characteristics such as skull sutures and medial rib ends for a more accurate estimation.

Next week, I’ll be back with a new Forensic Case File– the story of a Union solider, quickly buried after the Battle of Antietam and lost to history for 146 years until his remains were uncovered by an overly ambitious groundhog. I hope to see you there…

Photo credit: Medscape and J.M. Suchey

Guest Post - Cozy Mystery? Huh?

This week we've got a treat for you. Agatha award winner and agency sister Amanda Flower has a new book out tomorrow - 'Murder in a Basket', the second installment in her India Hayes series. As the cozy mysteries Amanda writes are so different from our forensic thrillers, I asked her to explain what a cozy mystery is. Take it away, Amanda...

****************************************

Invariably when people find out I’m an author they ask the question, “What do you write.”

“Cozy mysteries,” I reply.

Outside of the world of mystery fiction this response is rewarded with a frown, a confused expression, or blank stare because “cozy mystery” is one heck of an oxymoron.

“Don’t characters die in your books?” They may ask.

“Yes, they do. Sometimes more than one person per book.”

“Then how is that cozy?” The confused person asks. “Death doesn’t remind me of a cuddly blanket, which is what I think of when I picture cozy.”

That’s a great point, which is why I’m sharing the characteristics of cozy mysteries, using illustrations from my new mystery Murder in a Basket, the second in the India Hayes series.

The Characteristics of a cozy mystery

1) The death takes place off page. The novels include little violence. The heroes or heroines may be in jeopardy during the climax, but for the most part, they are not in any real danger.

In Murder in a Basket, India discovered the dead body of basket weaver Tess Ross. Tess has been dead for a short time when India finds her. The description of Tess’s body is minimal. India is in danger during the climax, but that’s all I’ll tell you about that. I can’t give the ending away!

2) The protagonist has an occupation other than police officer or private detective. The protagonist may be anything from a chef to an actor to a student.

India is a college librarian and aspiring painter. Her occupations couldn’t be farther from law enforcement.

3) The protagonist is pulled into the mystery because of his/her relationship with the victim or the accused. The protagonist is generally reluctant to solve the crime.

India becomes involved in the murder investigation because Tess is the mother of one of the student workers in the library. He asks for India’s help. India agrees, but she’s not particularly enthusiastic about it.

4) Minor characters (friends, family, coworkers) from the protagonist’s own life play significant roles in the plot.

Ahh well, I have many minor characters who like to take over my India Hayes stories from India’s hippy parents to her Irish-centric landlady to her super-mom older sister. They all help and hinder India’s investigation in their own special way.

Of course, these are just guidelines and not hard and fast rules. That’s what makes writing fiction fun. Guidelines are meant to be bent if not broken all the way through.

Jen, thanks for letting me stop by Skelton Keys!

********************************************************************************

Amanda Flower writes the India Hayes Mystery Series. The first novel in the series, MAID OF MURDER, was nominated for an Agatha Award. The sequel, MURDER IN A BASKET, releases February 8, 2012. A PLAIN DEATH, first in a new Amish mystery series, releases July 2012. To learn more visit Amanda online at http://www.amandaflower.com/. You can also follow Amanda at http://www.facebook.com/authoramandaflower and http://twitter.com/aflowerwriter.

The End of a Personal Era

Tomorrow marks the end of an era for me. After working for over twenty years at the university and over nineteen years with my current supervisor, my job is ending due to lack of research funds. It’s difficult financial times for funding currently, and many labs are downsizing in extreme ways. From a lab that consisted of twelve to fourteen staff and students for many years, mine will now be reduced to simply two.

There’s two ways to look at this opportunity. One is negative ― I’m out of a job, which was never part of my long term financial plan. But the other is twofold and purely positive: 1) this is an opportunity to try something new within my field, and 2) while I’m looking for a new position, I’ll have the luxury of being able to write full time.

If I’m honest, it’s the second option that gives me the most pleasure. Family responsibilities dictate that I go back to the working world, at least for now while I’m early in my writing career, but, if money wasn’t an issue, what I’d really love to do is write full time. The thought of being able to buckle down and work exclusively on my WIP brings me great joy. Instead of completing the first draft in three or four months, I could likely have it completed in six weeks, maybe less. I’d also like to spend more time cultivating my craft ― reading more widely, reading more craft books, and simply having the time to let the creativity flow instead of shoehorning it into free minutes and forcing its appearance. I think the quality of my writing will improve given more time to simply breathe. I’d also like to take some time for me and will use this opportunity to be more active, something I’ve had to sacrifice for my writing time for too long.

I’ve worked the same job for twenty years, so the thought of doing something different, while a little scary, is also refreshing. What will the future hold? I’m not sure. But there’s something to be said for an interesting and varied journey.

Photo credit: hpaich

Tools of the Trade - Scrivener

Up until a few weeks ago, I’ve always used Microsoft Word for both writing and editing. One of the things I like most about Word is the track changes function that allows me to incorporate edits from Ann, Nicole or my crit team with relative ease. I think Word will continue to be my go to program when it comes to late stage editing, but I’ve found something new that works much better in the drafting stage – Scrivener.

Scrivener is software specifically designed for writers by Literature & Latte. It comes with templates already set up for fiction, non-fiction and scriptwriting, or you can start with a blank project and build your own template. The program includes a very comprehensive tutorial to teach you in under an hour how to use every function in the program (it’s a self-lead tutorial, so if you just want the basics, you can cut the tutorial down to about 15 minutes).

While I was only a few chapters into my current WIP, I thought it would be a good time to try out the 30-day free trial. So I imported my .doc WIP file into Scrivener and then started to play with it. And I have to say, I really love it.

There are a lot of really great things about Scrivener, but, for me, the highlights of what makes it different from Word for drafting are:

• Having everything in one place: Scrivener allows you to import pictures, links, documents and papers right into the program so they are right at your fingertips. In subfolders under ‘Characters’ I have a detailed profile for each person; under ‘Research’ that same character has a folder with information on workplaces, houses, hobbies etc. complete with links and pictures. I don’t have to search through other Word or .pdf documents as I’ve always done before. It’s all right there. The below screen shot from my WIP is collapsed and only a portion of what it will look like by the end as I’m only a quarter of the way in, but it shows the organizational set-up. Another added feature is that you can drag and drop documents into the Document References section for each scene, so that relevant materials are right where you need them.

• Split screen: You can split the main desktop screen into two sections, either horizontally or vertically, keeping your writing window active in one section while displaying relevant research material (a document or picture) in the other. No more flipping between documents while you’re writing.

• Keywords for sorting: This is going to be a big one for me. As my series is written in the third person with two main points of view, I can catalogue each scene as I’m writing it for characters present, location, storyline aspect and POV. If I then need to evaluate how my split between the two POV’s is weighted, I can simply search for that keyword and those particular sections are selected. When I rewrote a good portion of Dead to balance out the POVs, determining who did what meant a lot of time-consuming flipping through pages in Word. This would have been MUCH easier.

• Use of the corkboard for quick review: One of the ways Scrivener allows you to view your document is as cards on a corkboard. From the Scrivener tutorial, we can see the first three ‘chapters’:

For the fiction writer, each card can be a chapter. If the icon in the top left corner of a card is clicked, that card will open into any cards lower on the hierarchy – i.e. scenes. For instance, under Part 1: Basics, are these three cards:

In a fiction document, these would be scenes within that particular chapter. At a quick glance, you can find any scene you’re looking for. The corkboard view is also very useful in synopsis writing because the corkboard is essentially a bullet point list of your plotline.

• Navigation is child’s play: In Word, if I wanted to get to the second scene in Chapter 7 from somewhere else in the document, I’d have to first find Chapter 7, and then scroll through to the second scene. In Scrivener, it’s a single click to the second scene in Chapter 7.

• The price: Scrivener is available for both Windows and Mac platforms for only $40 USD. For a program that a does so much from both a word processing and an organizational standpoint, this seems extremely reasonable to me.

For those who might be concerned about the fact that you don’t have your document in Word format to send to beta readers or your editor or agent, there is a very easy export function to export your document out to several different formats, Word included.

I know there are several writers in my circle that are just starting to use it or are thinking about trying it out. For those who haven’t tried it yet, I’d definitely recommend giving it a look. The thirty day trial period will certainly give you time to see if it suits your writing style. Setup can take a little while to get all your keywords set etc., but from that point on, you can really settle in and work on your word count. For those that are using it, what are your favourite aspects of the program?

*****

My apologies to anyone who had trouble with the commenting system last week. I had a few messages that readers were unable to post comments, and I also had intermittent problems with it. I've been working with Disqus and hopefully everything is back to normal now. If you have any issues, please don't hesitate to let me know.

One Scientist's View of 'The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks'

When I first started this blog, I have to admit that I never thought to do book reviews. While the material I tend to talk about has more to do with forensics, science and history, this particular review came as a suggestion by one of my crit team members. Following the post on the recovery of Tsar Nicolas II and his family, Jenny and I had a discussion about The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, the narrative non-fiction retelling of Henrietta Lacks’ life and the immortal cell line, HeLa, that arose from her cervical tumor. Jenny was curious about my impressions of this book, both from the standpoint of someone who writes science for the layperson, but also as someone who has personally worked with HeLa cells. I was happy to take up her challenge.

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks was one of the top non-fiction books of 2010 and was awarded the 2011 Best Book Award by the National Academies of Science. It tells the dual-track stories of Henrietta Lacks through the 1940s and 1950s, and her family through the 1990s and early 2000s, mostly through the experiences of Henrietta’s youngest daughter, Deborah.

Henrietta was born in 1920 to poor parents in Roanoke, Virginia. After her mother died in 1924 while giving birth to her tenth child, Henrietta and her siblings moved to Clover, Virginia, where they were split up amongst different members of the family. Henrietta was raised by her grandfather, alongside David Lacks, her first cousin. Henrietta and David had their first child together when Henrietta was 14 and they later married when she was 21. They had five children together, the last being born only four months before her diagnosis.

Henrietta was diagnosed with cervical cancer at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore when she was only 31 years old. She underwent the current cancer treatments of the day, but, in the end, they proved unsuccessful. Henrietta died on October 4, 1951, a scant eight and a half months later. An autopsy performed following her death showed that her very aggressive cancer had metastasized to practically every organ in her body.

The book documents a fascinating tale of historic doctor-patient relationships and ethics. While Henrietta was unconscious, about to undergo her first treatment where radioactive radium was packed into her vagina to deliver ionizing radiation directly to her cervix, two dime-sized slices of tissue were excised from the tumour and sent to the lab of Dr. George Gey. In the 1950s, patient consent was not required for sample collection or use, so it’s doubtful that Henrietta ever knew about the extra procedure.

From the point of view of a scientist, this is where the book really became interesting to me. I’ve worked with HeLa cells for twenty years; they’re a staple in any cellular biology lab. More than that, from a personal research standpoint, they played a crucial role in discovering how HIV infects human T-cells, opening up the possibility of treatments and vaccines based on that information. In a scientific world where everything arrives at the lab as sterile-packed and disposable plastic, the challenges of culturing cells in 1951 were fascinating. Up to that point, no one had been able to produce an immortal human cell line (cells that can live long-term outside the host; most died in only a few days), and all cell culture was done using autoclaved glass dishes and equipment. There weren’t even any commercially available culture media; Dr. Gey created his own, and had to regularly visit slaughterhouses to collect chicken serum for his homespun recipe.

Henrietta’s cells did something that no other human tissue cultures had done before ― they not only survived the culture process, but they grew and thrived. The cell line established from these cells was called HeLa, based on the first two letters of Henrietta’s first and last names (something that would never be done today as it violates patient confidentiality). In an effort to further scientific discovery, Dr. Gey sent samples of the cells to anyone who requested them. In very short order, HeLa was a worldwide phenomenon.  

HeLa has been used for some of the most important biological research of the past 60 years. In the 1950s, Dr. Jonas Salk used HeLa cells to test the first polio vaccine. Much later, HeLa cells were used in cancer research to discover telomeres, the repetitive sequences on the ends of chromosomes that in a normal cells shorten with each division and, when gone, signal cell death. Telomeres are maintained in cancer cells, allowing for out-of-control growth of those cells. HeLa cells have been used to determine the damaging effects of radiation, to establish procedures for in vitro fertilization, and were even sent into space to determine the effects of zero gravity on human cells. The HeLa cell line has been a crucial part of the scientific community since it was established, outliving Henrietta by twice her own life span so far.

Henrietta’s family was not aware that samples had been taken in 1951 and that her cells were still alive decades later. In 1976, after an article was published in Rolling Stone about the cells, they became aware that a part of Henrietta was still alive, 25 years after her death.

Ms. Skloot spends a large portion of the book detailing the family’s struggles with the existence of the cell line. While companies were selling the cells for hundreds of dollars a vial (current price is $279 USD from the ATCC), the Lacks family lived in poverty and couldn’t afford health insurance. It caused an immense amount of stress for the family once Henrietta’s name was released to the public, leading to ill health and finally a stroke in Deborah. To date, the family has received no compensation for any profits made from Henrietta’s cells.

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is a fascinating read. For me, the most interesting part of the book was the early days of cancer treatments, tissue culture, and the scientific progress that came from the cell line. In discussions with other scientists, I’ve seen a consensus of opinion ― that in long sections in the last third of the book, the storytelling dragged a bit when it centered around Henrietta’s family and their struggles. But I suspect for the non-science crowd that might be the part of the story they’d really connect with. Ms. Skloot does an excellent job of explaining the science of cell culture and research for the layperson, but kept the level advanced enough that those of us in the field stayed interested and involved.

There are some very complex issues that are brought to light in the book. Was it ethical to take Henrietta’s cells without her consent? Does the fact that these cells have been crucial in progressing scientific knowledge negate the fact the cells were taken without her knowledge or that her personal and family medical details were released as public information? Should the family receive compensation considering the current commercial value of the cells? It was many decades before consent was required for human sample collection, but ownership of those samples is now in question. So far, the courts have decided that once the sample is removed from a patient, it is simply medical waste and that a patient has no right to it or any monies that might arise from it. They are complicated issues in many shades of grey that even the highest courts still struggle with.

For those non-science based readers who have read The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, what did you think? Were the scientific aspects of the book hard slogging and was the emotional struggle of the Lacks family the heart of the book for you? For any science-oriented readers, what was your favourite part of the book?

Photo credit: Nikon and the University of Arkansas

Forensic Case Files: Murder of a Colonial Servant

The Chesapeake Bay area was a hotspot of colonization in the 1600’s, giving rise to colonial settlements such as Jamestown, Virginia and Providence, Maryland. People journeyed from England in droves, leaving overcrowded Europe in hopes of a new life in the New World. Those who could afford it became landowners. Those who couldn't ― 70 to 85% of all immigrants ― were forced to take posts as indentured servants.

The life of an indentured servant in the colonies was hard. A contract was signed with a landowner, pledging seven years of service carrying out all the heavy work on the farm ― hauling, butchering, construction, harvesting and drying tobacco. In exchange for this labour, the landowner paid the servant’s way from Europe, and then provided food and shelter during the term of the indenture. At the end of the term, the servant was released from the agreement, given fresh clothes, several farm tools, three barrels of corn and the right to purchase fifty acres of their own land. For those that had nothing, indenture was the chance to become an independent landowner.

Archaeologist Dr. Al Luckenbach is the founder and director of the Lost Towns Project, a group dedicated to discovering and excavating lost Colonial towns of the 17^th century. In 2003, Luckenback’s project involved a small tobacco plantation owned by William Neale, built in 1662 and abandoned in 1677, following Neale's death. The footprint of the house still survives in the soil stains left from wooden posts driven into the ground, marking the foundation. But it was in the basement of this structure that the most startling discovery was made ― a carelessly and hastily dug grave.

The grave was dug using a broken pottery milk pan (a wide mouthed dish used to separate milk from cream in Colonial times), which was later discarded on top of the deceased and buried with him. Clearly no care was taken with the grave, not even ensuring the grave was long enough to lay out the body. Instead, the body was folded into the grave, bending the legs to fit it into the available space.

There were several possible explanations for the body in the basement. Funerals were expensive and landowners were poor. A law passed in 1661 prohibited the inappropriate burial of servants, so landowners were legally responsible to pay for a proper burial, and a clandestine burial would avoid those costs. However, another possible explanation for a secret burial is the concealment of a murder.

Luckenbach called in forensic anthropologist Dr. Doug Owsley to examine the remains. Those bones told the real story, a story of hardship and harsh abuse. The remains were those of a fifteen- or sixteen-year-old boy, so young that the epiphyseal fusion on his arms and legs was incomplete. The muscle attachment points in his arms and shoulders were very robust, indicating a life of hard manual labour with a lot of heavy lifting and carrying. There was a healed break in his right elbow. Multiple vertebrae in his spine were deformed by Schmorl’s nodes (depressions in the body of the vertebra, caused by compression trauma). His spine also showed signs of the early stages of tuberculosis. Nineteen of the boy’s thirty teeth had significant cavities, some large enough to obliterate the crowns of several molars; absesses from these cavities certainly caused severe pain and, likely, blood poisoning as well.

Worst of all, his right arm spoke of his death. One of his metacarpals, the narrow bones that connect the carpals in the wrist to the phalanges in the fingers, was fractured. A second fracture was found in the radius, one of the two bones in the lower arm. It was a longitudinal fracture that radiated down the shaft of the bone from the wrist, exactly lining up with the fractured metacarpal. Those combined breaks tell a sad tale of a sick and weakened servant who was likely beaten by his master, attempting to block a blow with his right arm, breaking both his hand and arm in the process. Owsley suspects that this altercation lead to directly to the boy’s death. In an attempt to hide the murder, the landowner buried the body in his basement, where the remains would lie for over three hundred years before coming to light.

This excavation, as well as many others from the Chesapeake Bay area, are currently on display at the Smithsonian Institution Natural History Museum as part of 'Written in Bone - Forensic Files of 17^th-Century Chesapeake', on display until January 6, 2013.

Photo credit: Chip Clark, Smithsonian Institution

Ode To A Keyboard

Just before Christmas, my laptop keyboard died. For months leading up to December, my ‘s’, ‘e’ and ‘r’ keys would only work once the laptop had warmed up. But when other keys suddenly stopped working altogether, I suspected the end was near.

Before breaking down and ordering a new keyboard, my computer-guy husband wanted to take one last crack at this one. He took it completely apart and individually cleaned and reset every key (let’s not talk how dirty the inside of that keyboard was, okay?).

It was two hours of patient work with tweezers and isopropyl alcohol soaked Q-tips, picking off bits and cleaning off gunk. And when it was all snapped back into place... it still didn’t work. A+ for effort, but it was still dead in the water. I ordered a new keyboard that day.

But it made me a little nostalgic. I bought this laptop with my husband’s blessing at a time when he was in school upgrading his certifications and we were running our family of four on only my income from the lab. I’d been writing for about 15 months at that point, but was starting to get really serious about it. About that time, I received a 50% off coupon from Dell. I was ready to walk away from it, but my husband wouldn’t hear of it. We weren’t really in a place to afford a luxury like a dedicated laptop for me, but he encouraged me to make the leap because he understood my need to write and wanted me to have the tools to be successful. So I bought this laptop in July 2008.

Looking back over the 3 ½ years I’ve had it, it’s been the most important possession I own, and certainly the most used. I work on it in the morning before work, on my lunch hour, after work and in the evenings. It goes back and forth to work daily, and on every car or air trip I’ve taken since its arrival. It’s even been dropped twice when my laptop bag strap snapped, and, miraculously, never blinked at the abuse.

But when I consider my writing, its importance really shines. Ann and I were still writing casually when I bought it, but over the years, it’s been a critical tool as we’ve moved from writing for us and our readers to writing with an eye towards traditional publication. I’ve logged about 700,000 words of fiction on this keyboard, not including revisions or deleted scenes and chapters. I’ve written almost a year’s worth of blog posts and just over 25,000 emails. When I look at it that way, I think it’s time for this keyboard to retire gracefully. It’s certainly served me well!

My new keyboard arrived and I installed it right away, being happy to give up the external keyboard I’d been using until it arrived (an external keyboard on a laptop makes it a LOT less portable, let me tell you). And suddenly my dependable old laptop feels brand new again.

New year, new keyboard, new opportunities. Let the fun begin! 2012 is going to be awesome!

Skeleton Keys Is Named A Top Forensics Blog

We were thrilled to find out yesterday that Skeleton Keys was named by ITSGOV as one of the top forensics blogs on the Web. ITSGOV is a comprehensive crime scene investigation resource, and they have compiled a list of the top blogs that cover forensic science in its many forms. From the point of view of anyone who writes mystery or crime fiction, it’s a terrific resource on multiple levels.

We were thrilled to be included in such an impressive list of coroners, criminal profilers, lawyers, and bioarcheologists as well as forensic scientists, pathologists, psychiatrists, artists and anthropologists. Their list of top forensic science blogs can be found here, where they describe Skeleton Keys as ‘the blog of Jen J. Danna, a Canadian forensic crime fiction author, who shares some remarkable insights in her musings.’

On behalf of myself and Ann, the partner behind the writer here on the blog as well as in our fiction writing, thank you to ITSGOV for including us!

Forensics 101: Epiphyseal Fusion

Last week, in an overview of how to determine the age of a skeletal victim, I mentioned a process called epiphyseal fusion. We’re going to delve into that topic in more depth today.

In the picture above, forensic anthropologist Dr. Bill Bass holds two bones ― an infant and an adult human femur. How do tiny infant bones mature to an adult size that could be as much as five or six times bigger? The answer lies in long bone growth.

Long bones have three distinct sections ― the diaphysis, or shaft; the metaphysis, or the flared end of the shaft; and the epiphysis, or end cap of the bone. Long bone growth takes place at the epiphyseal or growth plate, located between the metaphysis and epiphysis. In the picture below, all three sections of bone are clearly visible in a knee x-ray of a young person. All three bones, the femur above, and the tibia and fibula below, show the gap where the growth plate still exists.

The growth plate itself is made up of a scaffold of cartilage. Osteoblasts, the fibroblast-like cells responsible for bone creation, are laid down on this scaffold. The osteoblasts produce a collagen matrix that is then mineralized to become new bone. If growth is still ongoing, more cartilage is laid down on that bone as the growth plate moves farther away from the center of the shaft, and the process repeats. When maturity is finally reached, growth stops and the epiphysis and metaphysis permanently fuse together. The x-ray below shows a normal adult knee. As you can see, no trace of the growth plate remains and epiphyseal fusion is complete.

The key to epiphyseal fusion in a forensic setting is the information it can give about a victim’s age at the time of death. Each bone has a predictable age range when long bone fusion occurs; in fact, different ends of the bone each have their own individual range. The table below gives examples of five different long bones and the expected age where epiphyseal fusion occurs. Until that point, the end of the bone is a distinct and separate piece from the shaft.

As you can see from these examples, age determination is not an exact science. Ranges of fusion can span five, or even ten, years. If a full set of remains is available, a forensic anthropologist will use multiple bone markers to make his best age estimation; if only partial remains are available, then the best estimate possible will be made based on whichever bones are present. If the victim is an adult and even the medial clavicle ― the very last fusion point ― is fused, then an alternate method of aging must be used. We’ll look at one of those different techniques in our next Forensics 101 post.

Ann and I are going to be taking a few weeks off from blogging to enjoy the chaos of the season and to hopefully take advantage of the time to concentrate on our writing. But we’ll be back on January 3, 2012 with our first new blog post of the year.

From both of us to all of you, happy holidays!

Forensics 101: Determining Age of a Skeletal Victim

In our last few Forensics 101 posts, I covered two aspects of victim identification: time since death and sexing a victim based on the skull or the pelvis. In this post, I want to open the discussion on age determination of skeletal remains. This is a complicated topic so we’ll start with an overview first and next week we’ll start to get into the specifics.

A forensic anthropologist can use multiple skeletal characteristics to determine the age of a victim at the time of death. Some characteristics can only be used to determine the age of pre-pubescent victims, some apply to adult victims.

Let’s look at these two groups:

• Pre-pubescent: The skeletons of children and teenagers are in a constant state of flux.
  1. Infant fontanelles close with the union of cranial bones.
  2. Long bones are constantly growing, allowing for increased limb length.
  3. The growth plate of long bones is constantly laying down new bone until maturity is reached; at this point, the end of the bone fuses to the shaft, terminating growth.
  4. Teeth are lost and new teeth form and erupt in their place.
• Adult: Due to the lack of growth in the post-pubescent years, age determination of adults is slightly more difficult, but there are several very valuable characteristics.
  1. The surface of the pubic symphysis (where the two halves of the pelvis meet at the front of the body) changes significantly over time, with those changes continuing into the senior years.
  2. Similar changes are seen at the auricular surface of the ilium (the hip bone).
  3. The medial rib ends (at the center of the body, where the ribs join with the sternum) also change with age, both the surface of the bone as well as the shape.
  4. The sutures in the skull and palate finally fuse, and, with time, become completely obliterated.

All the above changes tend to occur at relatively predictable ages. Based on these characteristics, or, ideally, based on multiple characteristics combined, a forensic anthropologist can accurately estimate the age of a victim at the time of death.

Next week, we’ll look epiphyseal fusion in children and teens, showing how the fusion of the bone end to the shaft as maturity is reached can reveal the age of a young victim.

Photo Credit: fruity monkey

Thanking Those Who Inspired Us

Last Friday, StoryCorps was promoting a National Day of Listening where they encouraged participants to tweet their thanks to any teacher who’d been a significant inspiration in their lives. One particular teacher immediately came to my mind, but 140 characters didn’t seem sufficient to convey the impact she had in my life.

I was at a career crossroads in Grade 13 ― whether to follow the rest of my Bachelor of Arts-oriented family to study the oboe and orchestral music, or to follow my interest in maths and sciences toward a Bachelor of Science degree. Then I had the good fortune to end up in Miss Potts’ Grade 13 biology class.

Miss Potts was a bit of an odd duck, but her students loved her for it. She had two somewhat quirky scientific loves ― sperm cells and mitochondria. If she could find a way to work either into the lesson, she would. During most classes, one or both structures would end up on the black board, usually including five or six feet of wavy sperm tail. She even had a stamp similar to the one illustrated above. If the ‘Beautiful!’ mitochondrion appeared on your test or paper, it was the sign that you’d done exceptional work. Most of all, her passion for biology shone through clearly, and we eagerly absorbed her enthusiasm. Coming to her class always guaranteed an interesting and entertaining lesson. And, through it all, her genuine interest in her students and her love of teaching marked her as the very best kind of teacher.

Miss Potts not only set my feet in the direction of science, but she also made me think seriously about teaching as a profession. In the end, bench research was my calling, but I can thank her for solidifying my career decision, eventually leading to twenty years in the field of HIV research.

So, to Miss Potts, thank you. For all the hours at the bench or at the hood, trying to beat a pathogen that still ravages the planet, destroying lives and families, and leaving millions of children orphaned, thank you. For the second career that developed, taking my love of science and turning it into a professional career writing crime fiction, thank you. It’s unlikely that either would have happened if you hadn’t entered my life.

Who was the teacher or adult who had the most impact in your life? I’d love to hear about how he or she made a difference for you.

Writing Habits – Music or Silence?

We writers are a funny bunch when it comes to our habits. For some, strict habits are a necessity ― this spot, at that time of day, in these particular conditions. Sometimes such habits are born of necessity ― ie. the writer who works full time and needs to write in the early morning or late at night when the rest of the family is asleep. Other writers have the flexibility to write wherever and whenever suits them. Some other habits may seem more random but can be just as important ― beverages and snacks of choice, or music required for writing. It is this last point that I want to look at today.

For some, strict silence is the only way to go. But for many, myself included, music is an integral part of the writing process. As writers, we can pull from the emotional aspect of music and build it into our own prose. Playlists can be useful for this process ― extended lists of music with a particular mood to help keep us in the right headspace.

Soundtracks are my mainstay. Lyrics tend to distract me, and I don’t need words to convey the emotional impact; the music can do that all on my own. So I have a large library of film music. My brothers, Jeff and Mychael Danna are a big part of that. Having scores that range from big orchestral to Celtic to ethnic, there’s something for whatever mood I need. Other top composers for me are John Williams, James Horner, Hans Zimmer, Mark Isham, Patrick Doyle, Harry Gregson-Williams and Nicholas Hooper.

At this time of year, Mychael’s The Nativity Story score is a popular one for me. If the mood is right, I often find myself falling back on The Shepherd’s Gift, which may be one of my favourite tracks from a movie soundtrack ever (it’s gorgeous!).

Habits like this are not solely for writers, but for many other creative artists as well. So, as writers or other creatives, do you rely on music to give your craft an emotional boost? If so, what are your preferences?

Photo Credit: OAndrews

Forensic Case Files: The Murder of Tzar Nicolas II and his Family

Nicolas Alexandrovich Romanov, better known as Nicolas II, the last Emperor of Russia, was murdered with his family on the night of July 17, 1918.

Tsar Nicolas had abdicated following the February Revolution of 1917, marking the end of Imperial Russia and the three-hundred year Romanov Dynasty. Following his abdication, Nicolas and his family were placed under house arrest in three locations over the following year to protect them from those involved in the Russian Revolution. Their final destination was the house of a military engineer in Yekaterinburg. At 2 a.m. on July 17, 1918, the family was awakened and was told to dress and go to the basement. They were led to believe that this was for their own protection as anti-Bolshevik forces were approaching Yekaterinburg. Instead, Nicolas, Alexandra and their children Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia and Alexi as well as four members of their household staff were gunned down by an assembled firing squad.

Nicolas was the first to die and was shot multiple times in the chest. The women of the family, clothed in gowns stitched with precious gems that afforded some protection from the first round of bullets, were finally bayoneted and shot in the head.

The bodies were taken to a nearby mine, where all their clothes and previous jewels were removed, and then the mine entrance was sealed with grenades. But the secret location of the Tsar’s resting place was leaked by several of the executioners, so the bodies were uncovered shortly thereafter and transferred to an alternate location. The Russians attempted to burn two of the bodies, but when this proved time consuming and difficult, they simply buried the remaining victims after dousing them with sulfuric acid to hide their identities. The bodies lay undiscovered for over sixty years.

In 1989, the news broke that the suspected remains of the Tsar and his family had been discovered ten years earlier, but those who knew the location had not come forward. Dr. William Maples, a forensic anthropologist from the University of Florida, offered to put together a team to examine the remains. Once in Russia, Dr. Maples was quickly able to identify the remains ― The Tsar by the shape of his face and a deformed pelvis from so many hours spent on horseback; the maid from her worn joints due to countless hours of manual labour; the Tsarina by her expensive platinum dental work; three of the four daughters by their bayonet wounds as well as pelvis maturation. Later, in 1993, with the advent of new DNA techniques, Maples’ initial results were confirmed. On July 17, 1998, the remains of the Tsar and his family were interred at St. Peter and Paul Cathedral in St. Petersburg, exactly 80 years after their execution.

But two bodies were missing, those of Tsarevich Alexei and Maria. In 2007 a small burned area was discovered in the Ural Mountains, overgrown with nettles and holding the remains of a teenaged boy and a young woman. DNA testing confirmed that the missing children had been found and the mystery of the Romanovs was finally solved.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

Forensics 101: Carbon Dating

In a Forensic Case File a few weeks ago, we talked about how a French scientist concluded in 2007 that the remains discovered in Paris in 1867 were not those of Joan of Arc. One of the tools he used to determine that the remains were actually those of a 1400-year-old mummy was C-14 analysis, more commonly known as ‘carbon dating’. But what is carbon dating, and how can we use it to measure the age of historic samples?

Carbon is one of the six major building blocks of life, along with nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, phosphorus and sulfur. But all carbon is not created equal. Nearly 99% of elemental carbon is carbon-12 (C-12), which means that the carbon atom contains 6 protons and 6 neutrons. But there are several alternate forms of carbon; it is C-14 (a carbon atom containing 6 protons and 8 neutrons) that is crucial in carbon dating.

The most available source of carbon for living things is through the atmosphere. Plants respire, taking in CO₂ and using that carbon to grow. When we eat plants (or eat other animals that eat plants), those building blocks are transferred to us. As long as we continue to eat, fresh carbon gets built into our bodies. But the moment we die, we stop taking in new carbon and that’s when the C-14 clock starts ticking as it slowly starts to break down.

C-12 is stable form of carbon, but C-14 is unstable and ultimately breaks down into nitrogen and hydrogen. Using C-14's known half-life of 5,730 years, scientists can calculate when the organism being tested died. To do this, a small amount of organic sample (bone, wood, shell, peat etc.) is pulverized and burned, producing CO₂ containing a mix of both C-12 and C-14. When the sample C-12/C-14 ratio is compared to the current atmospheric C-12/C-14 ratio, scientists can estimate the age of the sample. In the case of Dr. Philippe Charlier, he was able to determine that his remains were too old to possibly be those of Joan of Arc.

Carbon dating is a valuable tool for discriminating  archeological samples from potential forensic discoveries. It has been used to date remains discovered at construction sites, confirming that a modern forensic investigation is not required, and allowing the remains to be returned for proper reburial to the Native American tribes originally populating the area of discovery.

Photo credit: tantek

Writing For The Love Of It

When we first start to write, we write for the sheer joy of it, for the love of storytelling and being creative. To a certain extent, that changes when we start to write professionally. Then we no longer write just for ourselves. Now there are genre and grammar rules that must be followed and other people to satisfy ― our agents and editors, our readers. Also, as much as we love to write, at that point it begins to compete with the business aspect of an author’s career. And with that come the distractions of what is now expected of an author ― social networking on multiple platforms and marketing. For many of us, it can become a crushing pressure to do all of this on top of maintaining a 40-hour workweek to put food on our tables.

Ann and I are currently working on a new proposal. As with any new project, the front end tends to be heavily loaded with technical aspects and the research that is required for proper planning ― locations, character creation, details of involved agencies, new scientific details etc. It’s easy during this period to forget why we loved to write because, well, we aren’t writing yet.

Last week I was really feeling it. There’s a lot going on in my life right now between work, family and writing, and I knew I needed to find an outlet. I sent out the request, and Ann was immediately on board. When we started writing together years ago, it was just for us, so we took a short break to go back to where we started. It’s been a long time since we were able to do this and I have to say it really felt great. It was different than before ― learned craft is now involuntary, and bad habits like passive voice and head hopping are now mostly non-existent (or are caught and edited out) ― but there is something freeing in just writing for the sheer joy of it. And if no one saw it but us, it would still be worthwhile.

How often do you take some time to just write for you? Or, for other creatives, to just sing or paint or draw, just for you? Does it refresh you to go back to your professional craft, remembering why you love it so much?

Photo credit: hpaich

The Art of the Shocking Plot Twist

*Warning* ― Contains spoilers for books and movies included in the discussion.

An unforgettable plot twist can leave a reader slack jawed and blinking in disbelief at the page. It can make the story more compelling and, depending on the timing, can up the stakes and intensity, or take the story in a completely different direction. But this isn’t a device for books alone; it can happen in any form of storytelling. M. Night Shyamalan stunned viewers when his final act of The Sixth Sense revealed that Bruce Willis’ protagonist had been killed in the opening scene and that the only real interactions in the movie took place with the small boy who stated that ‘he could see dead people’. Willis was a ghost.

When I was a teenager, years before the Young Adult category of books even existed, I moved from reading children’s books to reading many of the classic mystery novels around the house ― Arthur Conan Doyle, Earl Stanley Gardner, Agatha Christie and the like ― and there were two distinct times in my memory when Dame Christie left me gaping at the written page with her plot twists.

• The Murder of Roger Ackroyd ― A Hercule Poirot novel, told from the first person perspective of Dr. John Sheppard, Poirot’s assistant during this case. Following the suicide death of a wealthy widow who admitted to killing her husband, the man expected to marry her is found murdered. The numerous suspects include the victim’s family members, the household staff and the victim’s neighbours, but, in the end, Poirot accuses Dr. Sheppard, the narrator, of committing the crime. This was my first experience with an ‘unreliable narrator’ and it left me stunned. It was an interesting literary device ― using omission and evasion on the part of the narrator to hide the fact that he was, in fact, the murderer.

• And Then There Were None (also published as Ten Little Indians in the U.S.) ― A group of strangers are invited to an isolated island off the coast of Devon, England. During their first dinner together a gramophone is played, accusing each of them of the crime of murder. Over the course of the next several days, the guests are killed off one by one, each in accordance with a verse in the poem ― The Ten Little Indians ― found framed in each guest’s bedroom. Nine guests die and then the final guest, exhausted and overwhelmed with guilt, finds a noose hanging in her room and kills herself. Later it is revealed that Judge Wargrave, the sixth victim, staged his death with the help of one of the other guests, who he then killed as the seventh victim. Once everyone on the island was dead, Wargrave ingeniously took his own life to resemble his original ‘death’, leaving the police with a truly mindboggling puzzle. The judge’s confession and explanation is later found as a message in a bottle, revealing the details of his nefarious plan. The conclusion to this story caught me totally off guard. Essentially, it is sleight of hand ― once Wargrave is declared dead, the reader discounts him as a suspect, and, at least for me, the possibility that any of the deaths might be questionable never occurred to me.

These are only two examples, and certainly not an exhaustive list. As a reader, what are the most memorable twists that you can remember?

Photo by CarbonNYC

Forensic Case Files: The Lost Remains of Joan of Arc

Forensic science can be used for so much more than victim identification or determining cause of death in criminal cases. One such alternate use is shedding light in historical venues. An example of this was the modern day examination of the putative remains of Joan of Arc, originally discovered in 1867. Were they real? Forensic science was able to reveal the truth.

Joan of Arc (1412 – 1431) was a French peasant girl who claimed that she had visions of several saints telling her to drive the invading English from her country. Four years later, she appealed to the Dauphin to allow her to lead the army into battle, saying that God himself had instructed that she do so. As the French were at a very low point in the war, the Dauphin gave his permission.

Joan’s accomplishments during battle are still under discussion, but it is believed that she was a successful strategist and tactician, allowing the French to win many crucial battles and helping to turn the tide of the Hundred Years’ War. What is generally agreed upon, however, is that Joan used her position to turn the conflict into a religious war.

Joan was captured by the English in May of 1430, and was tried for heresy and witchcraft based on her statements that God had commanded her to lead her army into battle. She was found guilty and was burned at the stake on May 30, 1431 at 19 years of age. After death, her body was burned twice more until it was reduced to ashes. Then her remains were cast into the Seine to prevent their recovery by the French.

In 1867, a dusty glass jar was discovered in the attic of a Paris pharmacy. Labelled ‘Remains found under the stake of Joan of Arc, virgin of Orleans’, the jar contained what appeared to be a charred human rib, a chunk of burned wood, a swatch of linen and the thigh bone of a cat (it was common practice in the 14^th century to throw a black cat on the pyre of an accused witch to burn with her). The Roman Catholic Church believed these artifacts to be real and included them in a museum that was part of the Archdiocese of Tours.

Dr Philippe Charlier, a Parisian forensic scientist, wanted to subject the remains to modern science to prove their validity. After receiving approval from the Church, he conducted a series of tests. The black residue that covered the rib bone was discovered through mass spectroscopy to be a vegetal and mineral matrix consistent with embalming materials used by the Egyptians centuries before the Common Era. Carbon-14 analysis of the relics dated them between the third and sixth centuries B.C.E. Odour analysis of the remains detected a vanilla-like scent. As vanillan is produced by decomposing remains, this only strengthened the argument that the remains had not been cremated. In the end, Dr. Charlier concluded that the remains were from an Egyptian mummy, dead for centuries before Joan lived. His results were published in the journal Nature in April 2007.

The Church accepted these results as fact, declaring that it is now likely that Joan’s remains are lost forever.

Painting of Joan of Arc, artist unknown, circa 1485.