Murder, She Barked

            A recent post here on SleuthSayers was a paean to the significance of cars in mystery writing.  I admit the connection was a bit thin, but I’m on much firmer ground with this topic, the importance of dogs. 

            When I was trying to get my first novel published, I struggled with a few key plot points, until I got an actual dog of my own, and all was solved.  I simply wrote him into the book and everything fell into place.     

            When my son was a little kid he had an imaginary friend named Eddie Van Halen. 

Samuel Beckett and what's his name

This is inscrutable, I know, but it seemed right to give my fictitious dog the same name.  Eddie became the most popular character in the books, to which I owe his inspiration, the aforementioned actual dog we named Samuel Beckett.  Sam was a Wheaton Terrier, and everyone who knew him claimed he wasn’t a real dog, but some other version of cognitive being.  One of my wife’s friends said we shouldn’t worry about leaving him home alone.

“He’s busy working on a screenplay.”

Dog people know what I mean by this.  Every once in a while, an exceptional one trots into view.  Aware, but peripherally involved.  More perceptive than their human companions, yet challenged in conveying their thoughts and feelings.  Thus they become perfect foils in crime stories.  And even if they’re just amusing side characters, or comic relief, like Myrna Loy and William Powell’s Asta, worth the price of entry.  There are so many examples in the genre of sidekick dogs, heroic dogs, villainous dogs (The Hound of the Baskervilles comes to mind), dogs solving crimes, etc., that there’s no point in mentioning any here (this is what Google is for).  We all have our favorites. 

For a writer, dogs have limitless utility.  Sam kept me company when I wrote on the front porch, on the ferry, or in the cockpit of a sailboat, at any number of household workstations and never once asked to review the work.  He defended me from intruders ringing the doorbell, squirrels, waterfowl, and other passing dogs, took me on walks when the writing seemed to stall, followed me on coffee and pee breaks, waiting patiently for me to get my ass back in the chair. 

Robert B. Parker and Pearl

I often point out that you don’t have to invent characters, you just have to hang around the Village of Southampton and talk to people.  That’s where virtually all mine were born.  This task is immensely facilitated by having a dog, especially one as handsome and engaging as the existentialist Beckett.  By the same token, his fictional counterpart Eddie Van Halen was merely a close description of Sam himself. 

Sam liked his routines, Lord knows. But he also loved to mix things up, in a way far more reminiscent of a practical joker than a habituated, monotony-loving house pet.  I’d heard him howl exactly twice, both times on a corner in Southampton as a fire truck passed by with its siren blaring. He stuck his head out the window of a moving car exactly once, for reasons we both tried to figure out.  A dog who’d shown nothing but distain for conventional chew toys, suddenly became enamored with a polyester possum and spent the greater part of Christmas morning eviscerating the poor thing. 

Sometimes, very infrequently, he’d walk up to me, look me in the eye, and issue one, loud, imperious bark.  I’d say, “What!?”  He’d bark again, and then walk away, disgusted.  I know these exchanges meant something to him, but I’ll be damned if I knew what they were.

However, I was way ahead on the deal.  I got to have a character I could switch over to whenever imaginative flagged, who was simply the transposition of my day-to-day experience, whose only compensation was a concentrated scratching around the ears, a walk into town and an occasional cigar.  

Asta

Security Alert

Today's post is short, but important if you own an older Linksys router. The unusual element in this story is the warning comes from the FBI. (PDF)

A fair amount of tech literature drops in my box, keeping me fairly up to date about cyberattacks and vulnerabilities. Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t recall a previous FBI interventions. Without reverting to field literature, I hazard affected models have a known weakness that, because the manufacturer has discontinued said models, are especially susceptible to exploitation.

Affected models can be used for Man in the Middle attacks, Evil Twins, data theft, and weaponizing your machine as a zombie bot to attack others.

What do we do?

If you have an older Linksys device, compare it to the following list, which also contains one Cisco unit. If the model doesn’t show on the front or back, it will be identified with a label on the bottom.

Don’t confuse routers with modems. The modem will be fed by a cable coming in from the outside. Next in line, the router will be attached to the modem. Wi-fi modems will have one, two, or three antennae. Linksys gadgets will be either near-black or more traditionally, a vivid ‘IBM blue and grey’.

Is my obsolete model useless?

• In theory if you can disable your machine's remote admin, you could continue using it.
• You could probably convert it into a wired ‘switch’, but if your internal network is that extensive, you’ll likely want newer, faster, safer equipment.
• Otherwise, donate it to your local recycler.

The Dirty Dozen

Here’re the dangerously obsolete models. Stay safe.

Compromised Routers

Linksys E1000	Linksys E2500	Cisco M10
Linksys E1200	Linksys E3000	Linksys WRT310N
Linksys E1500	Linksys E3200	Linksys WRT320N
Linksys E1550	Linksys E4200	Linksys WRT610N

5Socks

The Old Genre Switcheroo

One of the main topics of interest lately, at least for short-story writers, has been the sad decrease in the number of markets for short mystery fiction. To put it more simply, we no longer have as many places to sell our stories.

I'm still writing those mystery stories--I probably couldn't stop if I wanted to--and I'm still submitting them pretty regularly to those half-dozen good publications still available. But I also have, for the first time in a long time, a pile of completed mystery-story manuscripts sitting around waiting to be submitted. (The only other choice is to overload the submission queues of the few remaining markets, and I try not to do that.) Back in the old days, I never had to do that kind of stockpiling. I always sent those kids out into the world as soon as they graduated, to try to make something of themselves. Now my sad little story pages are hanging around home, aging like tobacco leaves.

So I'm making a few changes. One is, I'm writing some of my stories in other genres.

That kind of writing, especially SF/fantasy and Western, isn't new to me--I've always come up with those stories now and then, and so far I've managed to sell them all to places I like and respect. But I never took them very seriously. After each of those little joyrides, I've always found myself coming back to my greatest love, which will always be mystery/suspense. It's what I read most so it's what I write most.

Even so, I am now writing more SF/fantasy stories than ever before. I recently wrote and sold one within a few days, and I just finished another, a 12,000-word fantasy/horror story that was great fun to plot and put together. I also wrote two more Westerns last month, one shorter and one longer, and thanks to recent streaming series like The English, Godless, American Primeval, 1883, Bass Reeves, and The Abandons (I watched 'em all), I think there might now be more Western fans out there than was the case several years ago. A bonus, there, is that my Western short stories always include crimes, so they can rightly be considered cross-genre, and thus appeal to wider range of publications. More on cross-genre in a minute.

My point is, fiction is fiction, and all of us know there are a ton of science fiction fans out there in the world--far more of them than mystery fans. I'm one of them. As for fans of SF shorts--yes, I realize those fans are fewer in number, but there are still plenty of them as well. I think it's safe to say that anyone who likes those old episodes of Twilight Zone and One Step Beyond and Outer Limits will also like short stories in that genre. And who doesn't like Twilight Zone?

Think about it: While we mystery writers love to talk about the legacies of Ed Hoch, Conan Doyle, Raymond Chandler, Cornell Woolrich, Agatha Christie, etc. (as we should), there were also some great SF-fantasy writers who write short: Ray Bradbury, Richard Matheson, Charles Beaumont, Isaac Asimov, Fredric Brown, and so on. My bookshelves are full of them.

On the subject of mixed- or cross-genre writers, I'll refer again (as I did two weeks ago, here) to Joe R. Lansdale. He writes wonderful mystery.fantasy novels and short stories, and I can think of a few of his that could be called mystery/fantasy/Western/horror. As for mystery/Western, just look at the recent success of the series Dark Winds.

Sometimes changing things up a bit can't hurt.

What about you? How do you feel about all this? If you're a writer, how often do you write in genres other than mystery/crime/suspense? Have you even tried writing SF, or fantasy, or Western, or romance, or horror? How about mixing them up?--cross-genre stories can be great fun to write. And even though I've probably mentioned this before, some mystery markets, few though they are, will surprise you: I've occasionally sold Westerns and SF stories to AHMM and to so-called crime anthologies as well. Just stick a crime in there and you're on solid ground.

More questions: What's your strategy/solution, on weathering this current downturn in the number of short mystery markets? Take a rest and wait for more anthology calls for crime stories? Write and stockpile your mystery stories as I mentioned earlier, so that when/if more markets emerge, you'll be ready? Self-publish your stories? Find publishers for story collections? Switch completely to other genres? Write cross-genre stories as a way to ease into that? I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

Meanwhile, whatever it is that you write, whatever your approach is, keep at it. And good luck!

The Strange Case of Charles Guiteau

Recently, I read Candice Millard's Destiny of the Republic, the long, strange tale of how James Garfield, who reluctantly went to the 1880 Republican National Convention, gave a speech, and accidentally got himself nominated for president. Meanwhile, a professional deadbeat named Charles Guiteau ingratiated himself with the Republican Party in New York in an effort to secure himself a consul position, "preferably Paris." Garfield won the election. Guiteau, believing it was all his doing, kept showing up at the White House for his reward. After all, he believed he had secured the White House for Garfield. Nobody from Garfield rival Samuel Conkling to Secretary of State James G. Blaine to Vice President Chester Arthur seemed to recall that happening.  

Guiteau was a strange man in a very strange time. Republicans were fractured three ways between Secretary of State John Sherman (younger brother of war hero General William Sherman), James G. Blaine, and former president Ulysses Grant. Sherman turned to Ohio Congressman James Garfield to make his nomination speech. And had Sherman not asked him, he'd have stayed home on his farm in Mentor, Ohio. By the time it was over, he clinched the nomination despite pleading with the convention not to do this. 

Charles Guiteau

Meanwhile, Charles Giteau made plans. He wanted the consul position in Paris. After all, it was his speech that got Garfield elected. (In reality, twisting Roscoe Conkling's arm got Garfield elected. That was more Blaine and John Sherman than anything else.) Once Garfield was ensconced in the White House, all Guiteau had to do was show up at the White House to collect the spoils.

Only...

Until McKinley was assassinated, presidents did not have Secret Service protection. And the White House was not as locked down as it is now. Ulysses Grant often sat in a hotel lobby for some quiet time. Once, while walking back to the White House, a pedestrian fell in step with him and struck up a conversation. The stranger mentioned he did not think much of President Grant. Grant agreed and said he never that much of him, either. This was the world in which Garfield became president. On the downside of this, anyone could drop by the White House and ask to see the president. Guiteau felt this would get him the office he sought.

Only Garfield implemented some controls over the system, limiting hours and having his personal secretary act as gatekeeper. Frustrated, Guiteau felt God's will was being thwarted. Then it occurred to him that maybe God wanted him to kill the president.

So he found himself at a train station as Garfield prepared to leave town, briefing Blaine and War Secretary Robert Todd Lincoln as he made his way toward the train. Giteau shot him in the back.

Here's where Guiteau differs from other presidential assassins and would-be presidential assassins John Wilkes Booth clearly killed Lincoln. Leon Czolgosz put a gun in McKinley's belly. Conspiracy theories aside, Oswald sat in that book depository. And John Hinkley? He'd just like to forget shooting Reagan. But if any of them denied shooting the president, they would say they it was someone else. Guiteau? He said he didn't kill Garfield. His doctors did. He was right, but he pulled the trigger. However, if Reagan had been shot in 1881, he'd have been a goner. The technology needed to save him was either too new or not invented yet. Garfield in 1981 would have been back to work in a couple of days. Not the least reason that doctors in the 1980s took germ theory as a given. The problem was Dr. DW Bliss appointed himself Garfield's doctor and rolled over other physicians, one because he was Black (despite having a far better reputation and track record) and another because she was a woman. Bliss insisted on sticking his finger in Garfield's wound, compounding the infection. Garfield did not die of a bullet wound. He died of sepsis. (I've had sepsis. Not fun.)

So no, James Garfield need not have died for Charles Giteau's sins. One quack doctor the a massive ego and an inability to try anything new (He even flubbed Alexander Graham Bell's new metal detector by limiting him to the wrong side of the body.) killed the president. Bliss's reputation and practice never recovered. Flash forward 20 years. William McKinley might have lived, but the technology was bleeding edge. Would the X-Ray machine hurt him? (Having had several, I can say no from personal experience) How would electric lights interact with the ether of the operating theater? So things we now take for granted had too many question marks. Harding would die of natural causes. Kennedy would die by a Marine marksman's bullet (all conspiracy theories aside.) Reagan benefitted from modern medicine and a near hermetic bubble presidents have traveled in since JFK died. And the shooters? Booth actually had a plan going in, and more importantly, a day job. He was the only "smart assassin" among presidential killers, and I include John Hinkley's failed attempt. On any other day, Charles Giteau, Leon Csolgosz, Lee Harvey Oswald, and John Hinkley would be hitting you up for change on a street corner. They just blundered through the net. 

And Booth might have been tactically smart, planning a decapitation strike on the government at a time when security was a polite suggestion. From a strategic point of view, he managed to commit treason against both the United States and the Confederacy before getting shot in Mudd's barn. Good job, Johnny. How'd that work out for you? Oh. Right. The Army shot him when they found him. His co-conspirators were hung, and Andrew Johnson flailed his way through four years, becoming the first president to get impeached. How'd that help the South again, since they'd already lost the war? 

 

Ripped From the Headlines of Science Digests!

Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as a Venatrix.  (And the rest of you, get your minds out of the gutter!)

The newly analyzed drawing, on a third-century mosaic, shows a huntress fighting a leopard with a whip, i.e., a venatrix.

In the Roman Empire, beast hunters put on shows in arenas, where they would battle wild animals, such as boars and bears. Unlike gladiators, they fought beasts rather than people. Like the female gladiators, it seems female beast hunters would "always fight topless, with bare breasts, because [otherwise] spectators from the stands would have had problems to notice that they were actually women, and [to] arouse an erotic effect on those spectators, to excite them sexually, was one of the aims sought by their performance."   (LINK)  

BTW, Romans approved of gladiators and beast hunters because the games reinforced essential cultural values: "martial courage, stoicism in the face of death, and the superiority of Roman power."  And the people loved it because it was exciting, stimulating, exciting... and they got fed for free, thanks to aristocrats and rich folks who were always jostling for popularity.  

Bad news for the permanent space stations:

Turns out that sperm cells, egg and embryos all like gravity. "This human, mouse and pig study, published Thursday (March 26) in the journal Communications Biology, revealed that sperm became disoriented, mouse eggs had fewer successful fertilizations, and pig embryos experienced developmental delays, all due to microgravity.

The findings have big implications for building a lasting human presence off Earth. The long-term settlements planned for the moon and Mars depend not just on keeping astronauts alive but on whether people can eventually reproduce there."  (LINK)

And another shock in the world of biological reproduction:

So if you can't produce your own offspring, clone them!  EXCEPT:

"You can't clone yourself forever, 

You can't make yourself all the time.

At some point you mutate, 

Especially vertebrates,

You can't make yourself 59 times."  

Seriously, the limit is 58 successive clones.

Michael Lynch, an evolutionary biologist at Arizona State University in Tempe, who was not involved in the study: “In any kind of animal breeding, once you have the optimal genome, the best way to keep it is by cloning — except for this mutation problem.”  

Cats Can't Taste Sugar - this doesn't mean that your cats will never go after your chocolate, or knock it down onto the floor. It just means they can't taste it.  

The weird part (to me) of the study of taste in animals is that “The super-tasters among the animal world are goldfish,” says Finger. “Goldfish and catfish have way more taste buds than anybody else.” They have poor vision, and their taste buds, including those on their whiskers, could help them sense their way to a meal in murky water, he adds. (LINK)

Goldfish?  Goldfish?  So now I'm pitying all the goldfish swimming in their bowls, getting the same damn fish food day after freaking day... I'm amazed they don't leap out of their bowls and go for the hand that feeds them.

Little Mysteries From Science: WARNING:  Solutions have not yet been found for all.


Why are humans the only species with a chin? (LINK)


Why can't you tickle yourself? (LINK)


What's the deal with blushing?

Charles Darwin described blushing blushing as "... the most peculiar and most human of all expressions."

“Man is the only animal that blushes. Or needs to.” Mark Twain

"Blushing may be a part of the automatic arousal you feel when you are exposed and there is something that is relevant to the self," lead study author Milica Nikolic said. (LINK)

Why do animals have different pupil shapes? (LINK)

The Ig Nobels are moving to Europe! 😭😭😭

Winners have for the past 35 years traveled to the United States to collect their prizes — and be showered with paper airplanes. Last year, winners included a team of researchers from Japan studying whether painting cows with zebralike stripes would prevent flies from biting them. Another group from Africa and Europe pondered the types of pizza that lizards preferred to eat.

The year’s winners, honored in 10 categories, also include a group from Europe that found drinking alcohol sometimes improves a person’s ability to speak a foreign language (as well as Pure Gibberish) and a researcher who studied fingernail growth for decades.

But four of the 10 winners last year chose not to travel to Boston for the ceremony. In previous years, the ceremony has taken place at Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University.

And so... off to Zurich it goes! (LINK)

Ig Nobels, we barely knew thee...

LIPS!

Back on March 9, I participated in my own scientific medical experiment regarding the swelling of lips, specifically my bottom lip.  Here's the deal: during an examination my ENT physician found a papilloma in the back of my throat.  Did a biopsy.  Squamous tissue, i.e., we've got to take it out because it might become cancerous if we don't.  So, on March 9 they did, having wisely given me total anesthesia (I have a kick like a mule), using a (portable) laser.  

Anyway, all went well, I came home that night feeling like a zombie, and the next morning I got up, looked at my face, and said, "What the hell...?"  Now in order to get the laser down where it needed to be, they had to hold my bottom lip down with something (I really don't want to know with what), and this was the result:  Basically, I got a not-so-free non-filler Mar-A-Lago filler job on my bottom lip.  

It lasted for about a week.  During this time I reached the strictly scientific conclusion that anyone who has this done on purpose is certifiably insane.  For one thing, it turned meal-times into an adventure, because the lip simply would not behave itself.  It was just there, and not happy about being used, because it hurt.  And since I wasn't 6 months old anymore, I no longer enjoyed the feeling of food spilling down my face.  Also, it completely blew up the trope that the hero (or in my case, heroine) can get in a fist fight (or a surgery) and then have deep  passionate kisses afterwards.  I certainly couldn't:  it hurt.  

I'm back to normal, and I am happy to announce all was benign.  And that I will never pursue the Mar-A-Lago look on a permanent basis.  I'd rather be a female gladiator any day.

Bright Bay Babbles

Last time I promised (or threatened, if you prefer) to provide my favorite quotations from Left Coast Crime, held in February in San Francisco.  With no further ado...

"Sometimes I think I write books in order to research." Connie Berry

"You cannot know a city until you know it from the sidewalk up." - Rochelle Staab

"A short story is like a quick jab to the nose." - Vera Chan

"All good plans go to hell, don't they?" - Lori Rader Day

"Scottish marriage counseling: He'll do. Shut up." - Catriona McPherson

"The last ten pages of all my books I wrote the day they were due." - Wendall Thomas

"My second biggest fear is that I might spill food on myself, because I always thought in case of a famine I could boil my clothes." - Sara Paretsky

"My low expectations have been fulfilled." - Paul Levine

"This is book eight in a trilogy." - Catriona McPherson

"When I'm bored with a character I murder them." - Gordon Jack

"I'm a historical crime novelist and I also write historical crime novels." SJ Rozan

"It's very satisfying to sit at a passive-aggressive meeting and think 'I could take you down.'" - Vera Chan 

"My character's name is Joy because she's utterly joyless." - Susan Sherman

"In revision you take out everything that isn't the book." - Hank Phillippi Ryan

"A short story is finished when you cash the check." - Michael Bracken

"My finishing school was a waste of money."  - Catriona McPherson

"I thought [Saul] Bellow's writing would have been better if he ever had a real job and didn't have women supporting him all his life." - Sara Paretsky

"If you have a resolution it's commercial. If you don't it's literary." - Vera Chan

"I was amazed at how similar the social dynamics are between retirement homes and high school."  Gordon Jack

"Taxidermy is always funny." - Catriona McPherson

"You should imagine sending your story to the editor one sentence at a time." - Tom Andes

"Since I'm last I'm told I can talk as long as I want, right? Chapter One..." - Jennifer van der Kleut

"The smart money is always on Goliath." - C.R. Foster

Oh, and chag Pesach sameach to those who celebrate. 

Some Great New Books

Books. Books. Books.

I read a lot. Last year, for instance, I finished more than 200 published books (and many short stories and unpublished novels and short story manuscripts). One thing I enjoy as much as reading is telling people about books I love. And since today, March 31, is the last day of the first quarter of 2026, this seems a good time to talk about my favorite mystery/crime books published in the last three months. 

 

 Finlay Donovan Crosses the Line

Elle Cosimano's wonderfully funny and fresh Finlay Donovan series is back with its sixth book, Finlay Donovan Crosses the Line. I think it's the best one since we were first introduced to Finlay and her nanny/best friend/unintentional partner in crime, Vero (short for Veronica), in Finlay Donovan is Killing It. The series begins with Finlay--a romantic-suspense author and single mom juggling two small kids, an annoying ex-husband, money problems, and a book deadline--being mistaken for a hit woman. 

Each book is madcap and fun, this newest one especially. It has Finlay, Vero, and friends trying to clear Vero of charges that she stole a lot of money that her old college sorority raised from illegal poker games. The story is engaging, with tons of twists, strong characters, a great voice, and clever, interesting writing. I laughed out loud often. If you haven't checked out this series yet, don't wait. The first novel is being adapted by Tina Fey for a TV series on Peacock. Take my advice: read the books first. While you could start with the sixth book, you'll get much more enjoyment by reading them in order. 

 The Bookbinder's Secret 

There are a bunch of books with this title. I am talking about the one written by A. D. Bell. This is a debut novel, but it doesn't read like one. It is set in England at the start of the twentieth century. The main character, Lily, is an accomplished bookbinder (she is technically an apprentice but it is in name only). While repairing a book, she finds an old letter hidden in the binding, and it leads her to a dangerous mystery that she is compelled to investigate. 

This novel has wonderful characters, a well-drawn setting, and an intriguing story. The voice is melodious, and the writing is strong. Plus you get an inside look at bookbinding. What reader wouldn't like that? I did have a quibble: Lily didn't quickly figure something out that seemed obvious to me. But a book needn't be perfect to be recommended, and I definitely recommend this one.

  

Murder Will Out

This is another debut, and I have to thank Kristopher Zgorski for talking about it recently and thus bringing it to my attention. Jennifer K. Breedlove's Gothic-ish novel, set on an island off the coast of Maine, won the Mystery Writers of America/Minotaur Books First Crime Novel Award last year, and I see why. 

The story opens with Willow returning to the island where she spent summers as a child. She has come back to attend the funeral of her beloved yet long-estranged godmother, Sue. It turns out that Sue recently inherited a mansion (a haunted mansion--but it's not scary-haunted), and her death--occurring the day before she was supposed to get married--looks awfully suspicious to Willow. With the help of new friends, including a resourceful librarian and a smart, brave, charming corgi, Willow is determined to find out what happened. 

This book has strong writing and an engrossing, complex story. The author makes great use of the setting, especially the house and the ghosts. I appreciate how the main character grows by the end and finds her place in the world. And of course I love the dog. I did find the large cast of characters a little hard to follow at times. And I have a problem with a legal issue affecting the plot that the author (and her editor) overlooked. It could have been resolved with an additional sentence or two. Nonetheless, this is a book I enjoyed and recommend.

A Field Guide to Murder

The final book I'm recommending is also a debut. Written by Michelle L. Cullen, A Field Guide to Murder has two main characters, Harry--a sixtysomething anthropologist who's no longer traveling the world thanks to his broken hip--and Emma, his twentysomething nurse. When one of Harry's neighbors calls him begging for help right before she dies (murdered, of course), no broken hip is going to keep him from finding out whodunit. And Emma, dissatisfied with her life, is happy to help him. 

I enjoyed how both characters grow throughout the book. And I loved watching them learn to lean on each other as they investigate, developing a sweet father/daughter type relationship. The book has a slow start and a lot of characters, but once I got into it, I was invested in the mystery and especially in Harry and Emma. The writing was good and, at times, funny. A solid debut. 

 

Overall, all four of these books are recommended. As I said, the Finlay Donovan series is up to book six, and the other three books are the first in their series. I'm looking forward to the next book from all of these authors. I hope they are released sooner than later.

Before I go, I don't usually mention here the release of books I edited. But today happens to be the publication date of Let Nothing Astonish You by Lauren Opper. This intricate whodunit is set in part in a Gothic mansion in small-town Connecticut. It is Opper's first novel, and it comes with a blurb from none other than Meg Gardiner: "A lively mystery rich with atmosphere, a vivid cast of suspects, and some delicious twists. Enjoy!" I couldn't say it better myself. 

Happy book birthday, Lauren! May your writing career be long and bright.