Announcing my next stand-alone!

Announcing my next stand-alone!

I know, I know, book 1 in my new series just released. But in this industry, we’re always working years ahead of what you see to guarantee more fun reads in the future. =) And I’m so excited to announce that I’ve just signed a contract for a stand-alone that will come after my Secrets of the Isles series is complete, before a new series begins!

If you’ve read The Codebreakers, you may have been a bit curious about one of the other cryptographers I mention in the series–Remington Culbreth, who gets progressively more serious and somber as the books go on. Well, I planted him there on purpose, mwa ha ha ha, because I already had a story in mind for him. 😉 Let me tell you a little about it.

Way back in 2004, I’d just graduated college. It was summer, and for the first time in four years, I didn’t have a job. My husband was working in Baltimore and commuting from Annapolis, which meant he was out early in the morning and got home just in time for dinner. Our goal had always been that he would work and I’d write and raise the kids, so that summer was kind of our practice run.

One night I woke up with a story idea. Now, I have never in my life gotten out of bed to go write, but I did lie there awake for an hour or two as this story idea crashed over me. I got up when David did, grabbed my laptop, and started writing. It was a contemporary story about a young man from the DC area, whose family was wealthy and important, and a young woman of mixed race born and raised in the Outer Banks of North Carolina, whose grandmother was a cleaning woman and whose mother owned an inn. Louisa had big dreams but gave them up to help her family. She and Rem fell in love one summer, but then life happened and took them apart, and when he reenters the scene years later, nothing’s simple anymore. He wants to give Louisa back some of her dreams when he sees what a bad decision of his had cost her, but she’s afraid the dream itself is too costly now.

Sunrise over the Atlantic Ocean on Ocracoke Island, Outer Banks, North Carolina

In the course of three days, I wrote 150 pages of this book. It consumed me. A few years later, when I’d learned SO much about writing and publishing, I did a complete overhaul of the story, and yet again it consumed me. I rewrote the entire book in two weeks. I showed it to my agent, who loved it. I pitched to a few editors at a conference and it went to committee but didn’t get a contract.

Then I got contracts for historicals, and this contemporary got pushed into my file of finished stories that may or may not ever see the light of day.

But every single year, when my family goes to the Outer Banks on vacation, those characters come back to me. I imagine Louisa standing on the porch beside me. I see Rem jogging toward the waves. I couldn’t let them go.

Springer’s Point Beach on Ocracoke

Well, a couple years ago, my best friend Stephanie said, “Oo, oo! I know what you need to do! Set your OBX story in the 1920s!”

Cue Roseanna gasping in that “Why didn’t I think of that???” way. So over the last couple years, I’ve spent my vacations toying with how best to reset Louisa and Rem into the world of 100 years ago. In the contemporary version, Rem had been an analyst for the CIA…so naturally, in the historical version, he would have been a cryptographer. I mentioned to my editor at Bethany House that I had this idea for a stand-alone at the time when I pitched The Codebreakers, and he wisely said, “Sounds like a great story, but we wouldn’t want it to feel like a tagalong to this series, so let’s put some other books between them.” But I put Rem in Room 40, so he was already in the world. And I kept thinking. And thinking.

Last September as we were strolling the empty beaches, I was thinking how unfair it was that all the really interesting things in the Outer Banks happened not during the First World War, but rather during the Second. And I had this flash of inspiration. A timeslip! Louisa and Rem set during WW1, and then a second line with another character I’d already thought up, in WW2! YES!!!!!!

After I turned in the manuscript for my second Secrets of the Isles book in January of 2021, I sat down and hammered out how this would work. Yet again, the idea COMPLETELY consumed me. And it all came together more perfectly than I’d ever imagined it could. I was so excited. So. Very. Excited. My usual way to pitch a project to Bethany House is to write a synopsis, but instead I found myself planning out each scene and how the two timelines would interact. I ended up with a detailed 20-page outline of the book, plus a manageable synopsis for the team to review, LOL.

I fell in love with the gorgeous, sprawling live oaks in the maritime evergreen forests on the island.

To my utter delight, the pub board at BHP was excited about the idea too! So, 19 years after I came up with the idea, Yesterday’s Tides will be published! The title may change (though I LOVE this title, and it fits it perfectly, so hopefully not), and the story has so many new elements, but I’m more in love than ever. Because not only do we get Louisa and Rem and Ocracoke…we get Room 40. We get themes of how the First World War shook the world in ways that triggered the Second World War a generation later. I get to explore how Yesterday’s Tides really do affect today’s currents. All the things, y’all! ALL THE THINGS.

So last week, my family took a semi-spontaneous trip to Ocracoke for research. There’s a memorial service each year to commemmorate the sinking of a British ship off the coast during the early years of WW2, which will be where my book begins, so we wanted to catch it. And while we were there we did a lot of exploring and research, both general and specific.

I still have book 3 of the Secrets of the Isles to finish writing, which is fun and I’m enjoying it–but then I’ll get to dive into this one! I can’t wait! You can expect it to release around Jan-Feb of 2023.

 Are you a fan of timeslip stories with dual timelines?

Word of the Week – Gyro

Word of the Week – Gyro

Let me start by saying that gyroscopes are cool. Right? I’ve always been intrigued and impressed by the mechanics of them. Circles and spheres working with gravity…yep, very cool indeed.

Now let’s jump to the county fair last summer, which didn’t run entirely thanks to covid, but did have some of the food booths set up. We wanted to support it so went out to see what they had. We ended up at a truck we’ve never visited before, and as we stood in line forever, we got to watch them preparing the food. We were especially intrigued by the rotating spits of meat that the servers shaved, seasoned, and nestled into soft pita. Yeah, I’d never had a gyro before, but we tried them that day and fell in love.

In a conversation a few weeks ago about this lovely meal (and whether the Arby’s version would be as good), we were naturally fumbling over how to pronounce it–there are so many variations! My husband decided, “I’m going to pronounce it like ‘gyroscope.'” We looked at each other, that Word of the Week expression on both our faces, as a light bulb went on. They’re related! OF COURSE they are! They’re both all about that rotation, right?

Right! I looked them up just to be sure, and both the food and the device do both come from the Greek gyros, which means “a circle.” Gyroscopes were first invented and hence named in the 1850s. Gyre has been in the English language since the 1560s to describe “a rotating motion” and the sandwich, traditionally of roasted lamb, got its name in the 1970s. The word was first applied to the meat rather than the sandwich itself, because of the spinning roasting method.

I love it when we’re right. 😉 (And also, the Arby’s version is pretty tasty! We just tried them out yesterday, LOL.)

How about serialized reads?

How about serialized reads?

I’ve been giving some thought lately to serialized content and wanted to get the input from you, my darling readers…since it would be all for you anyway. =)

To explain a bit what I’m thinking, when I say “serialized reads,” I have in mind episodic fiction, based in my fictional world. Each “episode” would be round about a chapter-length. Access to these reads would be a subscription. So you’d pay a very small monthly fee, but that would give you access to ongoing, perpetual, new, and exclusive content.

Would you be interested in something like this? If so, would you take a minute to fill out this form, so I can begin thinking about what stories everyone would most enjoy and what “small fee” would be reasonable? Thanks!

If you’re having trouble viewing the form below, please fill it out HERE.

Word of the Week – Evolution

Word of the Week – Evolution

In The Nature of a Lady, my heroine, Lady Elizabeth “Libby” Sinclair, is a naturalist. She not only loves nature–as in, being out in it and enjoying it–she loves studying nature. Her most prized possession is a microscope, and she spends much of her holiday on St. Mary’s in the Isles of Scilly out collecting specimens to study under magnification, or sketching the flora and fauna she sees.

One thing that causes her no small amount of anxiety is the fact that the world she sees–orderly, following rules, and capable of adaptation–seems at odd with the world of faith as it’s been taught to her–that the world is “mysterious,” and that scientists who suggest that aspects are capable of changing and adapting on their own are sacrilegious. Of course, leading the debate in that day and age were the works of scientists like Charles Darwin. It’s interesting to note that he was awarded the highest scientific honor in England…and that immediately upon publication, his theories split the church. Some thought they didn’t contradict the Bible at all, others thought his theories were of the devil. By the point of my story, it was still a hot topic, but most of the Church had decided that Darwin and his theories were ungodly.

Today, I simply want to take a look at the word most closely associated with him: evolution.

Did you know that evolution literally means “to unroll”? It’s from the days when a book (or more accurately, a scroll) was literally unrolled or unfurled to reveal more of itself, and hence more information, dating from around 1620. By the 1660s, it was used in mathematics and medicine to mean “a growth to maturity in an individual.” The word was first applied to species in 1832, by Charles Lyell.

What’s really fascinating is that Darwin only ever used the word ONCE. That’s right, one time, in the closing paragraph of The Origin of Species. He preferred the much clunkier phrase, “descent with modification.” I find it so interesting that the word that in our modern minds equates with Charles Darwin was a word he didn’t even like, LOL. It was other biologists who followed Darwin who began to use the word to describe changes within or between species.

Have you ever read The Origin of Species? I did in college, and I was surprised to learn that the controversial theories Darwin is known for aren’t actually present in his most famous work–those came later in other works. The Origin of Species talks mostly about evolution within a species (micro-evolution), which most people have no problem with.

Science and Faith

Science and Faith

The following is a short article I wrote as part of my Science and Faith page. You can find this, a discussion on the topic with three other writers, book recommendations, and online resources on the main page here: https://www.roseannamwhite.com/science-and-faith.

Science, Faith, and Us

 

In The Nature of a Lady, I have a heroine who is a naturalist, studying the nature all around her. If you’ve read many of my books, then you’ll know I’ve also featured chemists, nurses, mathematicians, physicians, mechanical geniuses, and more. I’m no scientist—but my liberal arts education did include three years of scientific study and four years of math, covering everything from biology to the beginnings of quantum physics, from geometry to astronomy to calculus. More than learning each fact, we were taught how to engage with scientific discovery, how to value it for what it has right and how to ask questions about what doesn’t seem right in a way that will lead to the next discovery. It’s a way of thinking that I’ve attempted to maintain in the years since my college education came to an end, because it’s one of the most valuable things I’ve ever learned.

As a homeschool mom, I’ve come across quite a lot of debate about how science and faith interact. I’ve heard other mothers get angry when an old-universe timeline was assumed in a class taught to our local kids—so angry that the facilitators issued an official apology and assured us that this teacher would not be asked back. I’ve heard moms talk about protecting their kids from harmful philosophies like evolution. I’ve heard, over and over, that a biblical worldview must be protected.

And I’ve recoiled from this. Because my education has taught me that the truth doesn’t need to be protected. The truth simply is. And anything else discovered cannot contradict it. It can only challenge our understanding of it. Philosophies may be right or wrong, but learning about them isn’t harmful—so long as one’s foundation is firm.

I operate from the understanding that God is Creator, God is omniscient, God is omnipotent, God is omnipresent. God existed before and outside of time. He reveals himself through the Bible, but also through the world. The Bible, however, was never intended to be a scientific treatise—it was meant to show us how God interacts with man. This means using words. Meeting us where we are. In the ancient days, that didn’t include an understanding of quanta or the speed of light or astrophysics. This is not a failure of the Bible. And it certainly isn’t a failure of God. But trying to put both God and the Bible into a box of my own understanding…that is a failure. That leads to contradictions and often ridiculousness, as we try to cling to understanding that is clearly faulty.

I approach both science and faith from the standpoint that neither can ever disprove the other. Faith tells me that God is, that God has done these things. Science can help me understand how. And if science shows me something that doesn’t seem to fit with the Bible, then it’s not the science or the Bible that’s wrong—it’s my reading of it. I am the weak link here. I am the one who is limited, who is finite, who is biased. God certainly isn’t—and He doesn’t need my ignorant defenses, either. He does not need me to bend over backwards, trying to dismiss new discoveries or rewrite them to jive with passages from the Bible. God did these things however He did them. He doesn’t have to explain himself to me. And He doesn’t have to apologize either. What if the days in Genesis are literal? What if they’re metaphorical? This does not change my faith, either way. What if He used a Big Bang to get the universe started? What if He spoke it into being exactly as we see it now? What if He chose to use evolution to move the animals from sea to land to air? What if He created each species distinctly, never to cross? The answers can be whatever they are—because whatever it is, that’s how God did it, and that makes it good. Because He is a God without limits, and He is our definition of good.

Science as we know it today actually got its start because godly men believed that our Lord is a God of order—that He created a universe that is not chaotic, but which has rules. It was this belief, this understanding, that inspired them to start looking for that order and trying to understand those rules. But of course, over the centuries, lines were drawn. There came those who tried to use science to disprove God. And there were those who rejected science because discoveries didn’t line up with their understanding. This is a tale as old as time. But it doesn’t need to be our story. We can instead say, “My faith will not be defined by my own limited understanding.” We can say, “I will not put God in the box of what I can comprehend.” We can say, “Nothing we can learn can ever actually contradict His truth.”

I’m not a scientist. And I’m not a theologian. But I’m a thinker. And more, I’m someone who wants my kids to understand that they can seek, they can learn, they can discover…and that whatever they find through observation, it’s okay. Because it’s part of the world God made, and maybe He did it this way…or that way…or some other way. Believing one method over another does not negate one’s faith. God is bigger than our understanding, bigger than our doubts, bigger than our questions. He created a beautiful, orderly, complicated world.

And trying to figure out how, trying to understand His methods…well. That can be a form of worship. As long as we remember that He is at the heart of it all.