An event which happens once in a hundred years? How do writers of fiction handle this? Do we write something which happens at a crucial time in history, a millennial event? Or should our kitchen sink dramas have dowdy Mavis bringing down the blinds when the deluge is just starting?

Actually numbers are used loosely. We all know (or should) the 100 Years War was fought over a much longer period, and we know the battlefield wasn't paid for in advance for the Thirty Years War. Humanity tries to make sense of events by naming and numerating, as our old friend Milton reminds us in Paradise Lost.

But back to the question, should writers use coincidences liberally? Unless we are in absurdist territory or in the realms of fantasy high or low, should we not construct a credible world within whatever limits we've set ourselves?

My thinking has been brought about by the recent events in the Atacama region of Chile. There have been floods so fierce that, sadly, they have even resulted in deaths. This is not a matter for levity but who would have thought of rain in a desert, let alone floods, and rain so heavy it causes flooding.

When I wrote my screenplay for Atacama which led to my current novel I actually gave much thought – as you do – to the landscape, the culture and the climate there and how it might affect my narrative. And an important issue was on whether it should rain in the novel. What was my conclusion. I'm afraid you'll have to read the novel; you may wonder, you may very well wonder but I couldn't possibly comment!