Peg Herring, Mystery Author

Almost everyone liked the cover with the two figures on it best. I can't show it to you yet in final form, because I asked the cover artist to do a little touching up, which she confided this morning is driving her crazy. (Better her than me!) I don't like the messiness around the girl's left hand, and since I have no idea how much work it is to smooth that out, I asked. Apparently it's a lot. Anyway, I should have that cover soon, so the first two Dead Detective books can be re-issued by the end of June. Don't buy them again if you've already read them. I mean, you can if you want to...   :) I talked to a fan who thought she liked Book #3 (DEAD FOR THE SHOW) better than Book #1, so she went back and re-read the first one. Now that's dedication! I almost never re-read books, except of course for editing and re-editing and re-re-editing. By the time mine are published, I'm tired of them. It was interesting, therefore, to read the first 2 DD books se

The Dead Detective Agency will soon be re-released, since I got the rights to the series back from the original publisher. I must choose new covers, and these are some options the cover artist sent me. I'd love some feedback. This is Book #1, where Tori finds out she's dead and on the ship that takes people to the Afterlife.  .

At my signing on Saturday, a reader asked about the next Simon & Elizabeth book. Sometimes I feel like I neglect them, but it's mostly because my publisher accepts the manuscripts and then sets a date for release 20 years in the future. Okay, maybe not 20. Five Star is an excellent publisher, and they have a large number of authors who keep writing more books, so each submitted manuscript is put into a queue. I sent them the fourth in the series in late 2013 and got June 18, 2015, for my release date. Once I've done the work they require, editing, writing cover copy, etc., that leaves me with well over a year to forget the book exists. So if I haven't mentioned my historical series lately, that's why. Book #4 is called HER MAJESTY'S MISCHIEF. Elizabeth is now queen, (hence "Her Majesty") and she wants Simon to go to Scotland and form an honest appraisal of Mary, Queen of Scots. The "mischief" in the title might refer to Mary and her plo

 Facebook was the instigator, as usual. Someone posted a map of waterfalls in the UP, and I mentioned to JC there were some we hadn't seen. That led to plans for a weekend of waterfall hunting. It isn't difficult to find waterfalls within a day's driving distance of us. We just head north, and no matter which direction we take from the Mackinac Bridge, we'll find them. This time we went through Sault Ste. Marie and into Canada, up Highway 17 all the way to Wawa. Most of the falls we'd seen before, but there's always a thrill for me at the powerful pulse of water in the springtime. Magpie Falls (above) is one of my favorites, but we climbed up to see Crystal Falls from above, and that was impressive too. It turned out the map wasn't very accurate, leaving out several good falls (like Magpie) that John knew about from his travels in the area. We were surprised at how much ice is left along the eastern shore of Lake Superior, but it is, after all, Ontari

I'm a staunch defender of correct grammar, but there are some things we could do to make our language easier to use. 1. Allow ain't. The reason we have so much trouble with it is that some subject-verb connections are done with the adverb not added to the verb: you aren't, he isn't, etc., and some require us to attach the verb to the pronoun and let not trail behind: I'm not, you're not. The simplest fix would be to let all pronouns use ain't for the negative: I ain't, you ain't, he ain't. Yes, it sounds wrong to those who paid attention in English class, but simple works, and in a generation, maybe less, it would be fine. 2. Forget whom and whomever . They sound stuffy and no one knows when to use them anyway. Once an editor tried to "fix" my usage, and I had to explain that "to whoever made the phone call" is correct. 3. Find a plural for you . I dislike yous , but I think I could live with y'all or even si

                                                                                                                                             One of my favorite poems by Carl Sandburg (see the full poem here http://www.poetry-archive.com/s/grass.html ) came to mind on Saturday as a group of us cleaned up the cemetery at the Grand Rapids Home for Veterans. Neat rows of white markers stretch across a wide space. Some are detailed, providing rank, unit, and field of service; some have only a name and a date of death. It makes one think about the grass. There we were, working above ground. There they were, lying below it. Between us was the grass. It will be there when we, too, are underground. It will hide what we were, how we felt. There will be only a name and a few details. So why do we get so upset about things?

Which Are the Good Ones? I've read a lot of books, but we probably won't agree on which were the best ones. Why? Because each book speaks to us as individuals: where we come from, what we value, and how we want our leisure activities to go. Reading requires commitment: time for sure, concentration (some books more than others), and a degree of background preparation. The ability to read is the most basic level, but requirements build after that. For example, a person isn't likely to enjoy a book about modern immunology if she doesn't understand the vocabulary used or a book about WWII if she doesn't know or care who Winston Churchill was. Reading serves different purposes. Many people read to escape from hum-drum, daily stuff. They want to escape reality, and they don't mind how wild the plots get as long as they're entertaining. Others demand that their fiction be realistic, with characters who could be real and plot-lines that might actually happen.