The reviews are coming in for Silent Witness and - huge sigh of relief here - they're all good so far. Several reviewers have said that it's the best book in the series. That's wonderful. I hear that and I do a Snoopy Dance knowing that I've got something right. It's my favourite in the series too.
But…
What exactly is it that makes one book better than another? I know some people prefer Agatha Christie to Henning Mankell … but what makes one Agatha Christie better than another Agatha Christie? I know some people prefer Columbo to Morse … but what makes one Morse better than another Morse? A faster pace, a more involved plot, more interesting characters? I suppose it's a combination of those things but I don't really know.
What has made people say that Silent Witness is the best yet? My main character, private investigator Dylan Scott, is the same in each book. The Lancashire setting is the same in each book. My voice, style, call it what you will is the same in each book. It's a puzzle. And as I'm busy trying to write the next, I'd dearly love to know the answer!
The weekend whizzed by, didn't it? For me, Saturday was tidying up and then going to watch the football. Sunday was a walk round Hollingworth Lake - wait for it - in the sunshine! I also got some reading in. My current read is The Pyramid, a Kurt Wallander mystery, by Henning Mankell and I'm loving it!