J.M. Mitchell's Blog
May 9, 2024
Migrations of Butterflies and Lies
A tease for my next novel, Migrations of Butterflies and Lies:
An archeologist disappears in New Mexico and Ranger Jack Chastain must find him, but the trail becomes clouded by lies and conspiracy theories intended to turn the world against him, and to keep him from—or lure him into—the search for gold hidden two hundred years before by a forgotten Spanish explorer.
Scheduled for release on January 15, 2025, the ARC is now out for review, and it's gotten several good ones already. My publicist, Mary Bisbee-Beek, has copies of the ARC and she'll also be setting up readings for me in bookstores in various parts of the country. Suggestions on where we should go?
An archeologist disappears in New Mexico and Ranger Jack Chastain must find him, but the trail becomes clouded by lies and conspiracy theories intended to turn the world against him, and to keep him from—or lure him into—the search for gold hidden two hundred years before by a forgotten Spanish explorer.
Scheduled for release on January 15, 2025, the ARC is now out for review, and it's gotten several good ones already. My publicist, Mary Bisbee-Beek, has copies of the ARC and she'll also be setting up readings for me in bookstores in various parts of the country. Suggestions on where we should go?
August 14, 2019
Killing Godiva’s Horse
And a couple more reviews:
"Ranger Jack Chastain of the National Park Service is an intriguing and welcome series protagonist. Truly refreshing, this novel contains plots that involve Western lands rebellion, Kenya, rhino horn poachers, and life in New Mexico. Perhaps those elements make this book unwieldy but bless J.M. Mitchell for trying. He has taken on a big, international, action-packed plot and it works."
- ROUNDUP MAGAZINE, April 2019 (Western Writers of America)
"... an intriguing story about ranger Jack Chastain, who was caught in the intersection - as many of us have been - between resources protection and politics. ... full of interesting characters. This is a fun book to read. Mitchell develops his characters fully so the reader can understand their motivations and anxieties. The plot is believable because it mirrors much of what is happening today. I'm glad I read it."
- RANGER, the Journal of the Assn. of National Park Rangers
"Ranger Jack Chastain of the National Park Service is an intriguing and welcome series protagonist. Truly refreshing, this novel contains plots that involve Western lands rebellion, Kenya, rhino horn poachers, and life in New Mexico. Perhaps those elements make this book unwieldy but bless J.M. Mitchell for trying. He has taken on a big, international, action-packed plot and it works."
- ROUNDUP MAGAZINE, April 2019 (Western Writers of America)
"... an intriguing story about ranger Jack Chastain, who was caught in the intersection - as many of us have been - between resources protection and politics. ... full of interesting characters. This is a fun book to read. Mitchell develops his characters fully so the reader can understand their motivations and anxieties. The plot is believable because it mirrors much of what is happening today. I'm glad I read it."
- RANGER, the Journal of the Assn. of National Park Rangers
Killing Godiva’s Horse
"Do you like books that hit the ground running and pull you into multiple plot lines that will converge, 200 pages later, in a heart-thumping climax? Then this week's SunLit excerpt is right in your wheelhouse. J.M. Mitchell, who formerly worked for the National Park Service, brings that experience to bear in the thriller Killing Godiva's Horse. In the excerpt, he deftly frames his storylines involving rhinos, wild horses, politics and dead bodies in scenes from Kenya to Washington, D.C. And in the SunLit interview, he explains how his years in the parks inspired him to pursue this genre."
-COLORADO SUN, SunLit, July 26, 2019
https://coloradosun.com/2019/07/26/ki...
https://coloradosun.com/2019/07/26/j-...
-COLORADO SUN, SunLit, July 26, 2019
https://coloradosun.com/2019/07/26/ki...
https://coloradosun.com/2019/07/26/j-...
Killing Godiva’s Horse
Two bits of Award news for Killing Godiva’s Horse:
-Colorado Book Awards Thriller Finalist, 2019
-Colorado Authors’ League Award Winner, (Contemporary) Western, 2019
-Colorado Book Awards Thriller Finalist, 2019
-Colorado Authors’ League Award Winner, (Contemporary) Western, 2019
June 11, 2015
Award for The Height of Secrecy
The Height of Secrecy received the Colorado Authors' League 2015 Award for Mainstream Fiction.
From the Judges: "An engaging mystery with strong characters and a wonderfully authentic setting in the Southwest. Keep your eye on this nascent series."
From the Judges: "An engaging mystery with strong characters and a wonderfully authentic setting in the Southwest. Keep your eye on this nascent series."
September 21, 2014
The Height of Secrecy
My second novel, The Height of Secrecy, will be released October 15, 2014. The mystery continues in the canyons of New Mexico, with Jack Chastain--having saved a man from the pueblo--being pulled into a secret he cannot be allowed to learn.
Reviews:
"Loved it. A mystery with strength and realism. Mitchell's background leads to a blended masterpiece of plot, setting and characters complete with insider authenticity. He's got a good series going." - BETTY PALMER, Events Coordinator, Moby DIckens Bookshop, Taos, NM
"What Grisham does for law and the courtroom drama, Mitchel does for national parks and the politics of land and preservation. His behind the scenes knowledge of the subculture creates a believable setting that blends seamlessly with the story." ISAAC MAYO, Developmental Editor
"...This was a fun read. The characters are believable, the rescue and fire scenes ring true, and Mitchell worked for the agency long enough that he knows how things can go bad..." RANGER Magazine.
Scheduled readings : BOOK PASSAGE, San Francisco, November 6; BOOK WORKS, Albuquerque, November 16; and MOBY DICKENS BOOK SHOP, Taos, November 19 (it'll be the reading for their Mystery Book Club).
Reviews:
"Loved it. A mystery with strength and realism. Mitchell's background leads to a blended masterpiece of plot, setting and characters complete with insider authenticity. He's got a good series going." - BETTY PALMER, Events Coordinator, Moby DIckens Bookshop, Taos, NM
"What Grisham does for law and the courtroom drama, Mitchel does for national parks and the politics of land and preservation. His behind the scenes knowledge of the subculture creates a believable setting that blends seamlessly with the story." ISAAC MAYO, Developmental Editor
"...This was a fun read. The characters are believable, the rescue and fire scenes ring true, and Mitchell worked for the agency long enough that he knows how things can go bad..." RANGER Magazine.
Scheduled readings : BOOK PASSAGE, San Francisco, November 6; BOOK WORKS, Albuquerque, November 16; and MOBY DICKENS BOOK SHOP, Taos, November 19 (it'll be the reading for their Mystery Book Club).
May 3, 2012
To start this blog, I asked a few readers of Public Trust if they had questions when finished. Here are some:
"The fire scenes are tense. They seem pretty realistic. Do you have a lot of fire experience?"
Yes. I chose to use fire because it creates tension, and focus. I'm hearing from reviewers /readers that Public Trust is a page turner and that's good. I used fire to draw you in, and get you turning those pages. Most people have never fought a wild land fire, so I wanted to slip the reader into Jack Chastain's shoes, facing risk, uncertainty, and decisions that are not clear-cut.
I did not, however, seek to write a fire novel, and you will see that it's not. Fire was used for a purpose. My future novels use other types of action, for purposes that serve those plots.
"In Public Trust, you allude to a previous incident, at another park, where Jack Chastain got into a great deal of trouble. He gets moved to a new park. Did you intend to leave that incident as an uncertainty for the reader?"
Hmmm, could it be déjà vu? All over again.
(That question was from Gary Colliver, owner of Windows on the World Books and Art, in Mariposa, CA, on the way to Yosemite. He's a great guy. Stop by, I think you'll enjoy his bookstore. I also like his website.)
"Did you need your wife's permission to write the skinny-dipping scene?"
As long as the water was warm, she was fine with it.
"Why did you write Public Trust?"
The age-old advice is to write what you know. Pondering that, I thought about some of the ironies I had observed during my career and thought I could craft an interesting story, maybe even give society some things to chew on.
"Tell me about some of those ironies, and why are they interesting."
I tried very hard not to telegraph that most important irony used to craft the story. I don't want to delve too precisely into it now (for those who haven't read Public Trust) but it has to do with rhetoric. How it's used, and how people respond to it. What it does to effect the honest process of discourse. What is at stake for those who respond to it on principle but don't think it through.
We are all wired differently, and we respond to messages in a way consistent with our wiring, but through years of engaging the public I have come to believe that we're not all that different in our values. Those who come up with the rhetoric are pushing your buttons, getting you to do what they want you to do, but their motives may be different than yours.
When the reader finishes Public Trust, I hope they are rewired a bit, to think, 'I should understand this better. I should ask a few questions.'
"How can people avoid being a part of other people's agendas? (I wish there was an app/detector for that.....)."
Very good question, and a tough one. I'll answer with questions I ask myself:
- Is this person showing any objectivity at all, and do they acknowledge other sides to the issue.
-Have they shown any sign that they are willing to participate in an exchange of ideas?
- Do they appear willing or unwilling to give the other side any benefit of the doubt?
- Messaging is needed at times, but do they attempt to paint a picture that serves only their own interests, precluding any attempt on your part to really understand what makes the other side tick.
-Do they appear to make assumptions about motives and present them as fact? Will they help you check things yourself, or do they expect you to accept their version of the 'truth.'
- Do they present themselves as an authority on a subject or position for which they themselves do not subscribe? [I tell my daughter that you don't learn about Catholicism from a Southern Baptist, and you don't learn the beliefs of Southern Baptists from a Catholic. Likewise, you can't understand conservatives by listening to a liberal, and vice-versa.]
"Two characters are obviously evil, and you made no attempt to hide that from us. Why?"
Before Public Trust ends, you'll find yourself disliking lots of people. When you get to the end of the book, I want you to know exactly why you are disappointed in some characters. As a writer I am developing my chops, and I wasn't confident in my own ability to deliver you there--disappointed but understanding the circumstances surrounding certain characters--without letting you in on the secret, early on, about those two other characters.
In reality, it's hard to know. Public servants work with shades of gray. Sometimes the biggest jerk in the room is the person you can trust the most, and the one being most friendly has ulterior motives. You need to give people some benefit of the doubt, and just hope they return the favor, but it's not their job to do so.
"Is the story in Public Trust something that actually happened? Are the characters based on real people?"
No, Public Trust is not an account of something that actually happened. (Or did it?)
I did not take an incident from my life and use it as the basis for Public Trust. Jack is not me, and the characters are not people I encountered during my career. They represent composite personalities undoubtedly shaped by my experiences over the course of a career. Regarding the events, there were times I felt I'd seen it all, and yes, I've seen shades of every type of happening that occurs in Public Trust, but Public Trust is not a true story, nor shaped around an issue I worked on during my career.
"Are you trying to defend government?"
It may come across that way, but that was not my intention. I admit my assumption that 'there is a need and role for government.' I tried not to go beyond that.
There is an irony here that I tried to write around: Sometimes the people who need us most are the ones most critical of us. I've been in public meetings with someone very critical of the government, trying to get their way on something, failing to notice that I might be their only friend in the room. Instead, they treated me like the enemy, and because of how they treated me, none of the other publics helped them.
I also find it ironic how many people are oblivious to the fact that public servants are largely idealistic, and dedicated. People toss out words that become--in some cases--self-fulfilling prophesy as they help jade otherwise idealistic public servants.
"Did you have a tough career?"
No, quite the opposite. I had times as tough as those in the book, but they did not define my career. I had the great privilege of working with very good people, both in the public and as coworkers. I was better trained and more prepared to deal with controversy than Jack Chastain. I understood what I was witnessing, but it's stressful if you are not prepared for it.
"Did the act of writing this book change or enhance your reflections on your career, in retrospective?"
No, I don't think so--not yet. I did draw from emotions and experiences, but I've not yet allowed myself to do that kind of reflection. I have wondered if it will become harder--as I get further into my retirement--to draw from those emotions.
"Will we see Jack Chastain in another novel?"
Yes. He will return in Public Affairs.
Yes. I chose to use fire because it creates tension, and focus. I'm hearing from reviewers /readers that Public Trust is a page turner and that's good. I used fire to draw you in, and get you turning those pages. Most people have never fought a wild land fire, so I wanted to slip the reader into Jack Chastain's shoes, facing risk, uncertainty, and decisions that are not clear-cut.
I did not, however, seek to write a fire novel, and you will see that it's not. Fire was used for a purpose. My future novels use other types of action, for purposes that serve those plots.
"In Public Trust, you allude to a previous incident, at another park, where Jack Chastain got into a great deal of trouble. He gets moved to a new park. Did you intend to leave that incident as an uncertainty for the reader?"
Hmmm, could it be déjà vu? All over again.
(That question was from Gary Colliver, owner of Windows on the World Books and Art, in Mariposa, CA, on the way to Yosemite. He's a great guy. Stop by, I think you'll enjoy his bookstore. I also like his website.)
"Did you need your wife's permission to write the skinny-dipping scene?"
As long as the water was warm, she was fine with it.
"Why did you write Public Trust?"
The age-old advice is to write what you know. Pondering that, I thought about some of the ironies I had observed during my career and thought I could craft an interesting story, maybe even give society some things to chew on.
"Tell me about some of those ironies, and why are they interesting."
I tried very hard not to telegraph that most important irony used to craft the story. I don't want to delve too precisely into it now (for those who haven't read Public Trust) but it has to do with rhetoric. How it's used, and how people respond to it. What it does to effect the honest process of discourse. What is at stake for those who respond to it on principle but don't think it through.
We are all wired differently, and we respond to messages in a way consistent with our wiring, but through years of engaging the public I have come to believe that we're not all that different in our values. Those who come up with the rhetoric are pushing your buttons, getting you to do what they want you to do, but their motives may be different than yours.
When the reader finishes Public Trust, I hope they are rewired a bit, to think, 'I should understand this better. I should ask a few questions.'
"How can people avoid being a part of other people's agendas? (I wish there was an app/detector for that.....)."
Very good question, and a tough one. I'll answer with questions I ask myself:
- Is this person showing any objectivity at all, and do they acknowledge other sides to the issue.
-Have they shown any sign that they are willing to participate in an exchange of ideas?
- Do they appear willing or unwilling to give the other side any benefit of the doubt?
- Messaging is needed at times, but do they attempt to paint a picture that serves only their own interests, precluding any attempt on your part to really understand what makes the other side tick.
-Do they appear to make assumptions about motives and present them as fact? Will they help you check things yourself, or do they expect you to accept their version of the 'truth.'
- Do they present themselves as an authority on a subject or position for which they themselves do not subscribe? [I tell my daughter that you don't learn about Catholicism from a Southern Baptist, and you don't learn the beliefs of Southern Baptists from a Catholic. Likewise, you can't understand conservatives by listening to a liberal, and vice-versa.]
"Two characters are obviously evil, and you made no attempt to hide that from us. Why?"
Before Public Trust ends, you'll find yourself disliking lots of people. When you get to the end of the book, I want you to know exactly why you are disappointed in some characters. As a writer I am developing my chops, and I wasn't confident in my own ability to deliver you there--disappointed but understanding the circumstances surrounding certain characters--without letting you in on the secret, early on, about those two other characters.
In reality, it's hard to know. Public servants work with shades of gray. Sometimes the biggest jerk in the room is the person you can trust the most, and the one being most friendly has ulterior motives. You need to give people some benefit of the doubt, and just hope they return the favor, but it's not their job to do so.
"Is the story in Public Trust something that actually happened? Are the characters based on real people?"
No, Public Trust is not an account of something that actually happened. (Or did it?)
I did not take an incident from my life and use it as the basis for Public Trust. Jack is not me, and the characters are not people I encountered during my career. They represent composite personalities undoubtedly shaped by my experiences over the course of a career. Regarding the events, there were times I felt I'd seen it all, and yes, I've seen shades of every type of happening that occurs in Public Trust, but Public Trust is not a true story, nor shaped around an issue I worked on during my career.
"Are you trying to defend government?"
It may come across that way, but that was not my intention. I admit my assumption that 'there is a need and role for government.' I tried not to go beyond that.
There is an irony here that I tried to write around: Sometimes the people who need us most are the ones most critical of us. I've been in public meetings with someone very critical of the government, trying to get their way on something, failing to notice that I might be their only friend in the room. Instead, they treated me like the enemy, and because of how they treated me, none of the other publics helped them.
I also find it ironic how many people are oblivious to the fact that public servants are largely idealistic, and dedicated. People toss out words that become--in some cases--self-fulfilling prophesy as they help jade otherwise idealistic public servants.
"Did you have a tough career?"
No, quite the opposite. I had times as tough as those in the book, but they did not define my career. I had the great privilege of working with very good people, both in the public and as coworkers. I was better trained and more prepared to deal with controversy than Jack Chastain. I understood what I was witnessing, but it's stressful if you are not prepared for it.
"Did the act of writing this book change or enhance your reflections on your career, in retrospective?"
No, I don't think so--not yet. I did draw from emotions and experiences, but I've not yet allowed myself to do that kind of reflection. I have wondered if it will become harder--as I get further into my retirement--to draw from those emotions.
"Will we see Jack Chastain in another novel?"
Yes. He will return in Public Affairs.
