Interview: Maureen Lang

Today’s guest is Maureen Lang, whose book I recently reviewed. Her book sparked my imagination so much that I was full of questions when I was done reading. She was kind enough to answer them.

The two timelines mesh so well in this book. They're independent stories, and yet they reflect each other. I'm curious as to how you wrote it. Did you get one story done completely before you started on the next, or did you write back and forth between them?

I had an idea (a rather vague idea, actually!) of both stories before I even began. I’m the typical seat-of-the-pants writer, who has a sort of destination but the journey along the way is full of surprises. I wrote the book pretty much as it appears, alternating stories one chapter after another. I did have to go back and re-read the previous chapter with the same characters, just to make sure the flow was working. But I thoroughly enjoyed going back and forth — there’s no room for wandering attention, sagging middles, or unnecessary rabbit trails. My favorite kind of book to read, and the easiest to write!

I’ll also say that with this story, as with any story I write, there is a theme. Something the reader will (hopefully) remember and associate with that book. For The Oak Leaves it was unconditional love, for On Sparrow Hill it’s servanthood. For my previous books it was loyalty and patriotism, (Pieces of Silver and Remember Me) and for the book I’m working on right now it’s forgiveness (My Sister Dilly, due out later this year from Tyndale). If a book has two storylines, the theme is what holds it all together — it’s what makes it sensible to have two storylines instead of just one inside the same cover.

In the historical thread, Berrie teaches mentally handicapped children. You did an excellent job in describing conditions such as Down Syndrome and Autism that they wouldn't have had the names for back in 1852. Tell me a bit about your research. Were you able to look at hospital records?

First, some of my research comes with my own every day life, living with my son who is cognitively challenged. And, since I’m part of the disability community, I’ve met a larger number of people with disabilities than most people are privileged to meet. A lot of my descriptions of the students at Berrie’s school came from hanging around my son and the other kids he goes to school with. (Which can be a great joy, actually!)

And secondly, as far as the historical research, I read many books about institutions of that time. There was a great philanthropic movement during the Victorian age, and helping the handicapped was emerging as one of the new areas of attention. Up to that point such people were often shut away with criminals and paupers, wherever they could find room in prisons or workhouses. History holds so many sad facts, but this attention was a true step forward in dealing with the mentally infirm.

Some of the books I read did include student records, but they weren’t the actual hospital records. Such books talked about various patients, their treatments, challenges, legalities, and so forth. I found it all fascinating and tried to fit in as much as I could, but of course the story comes first so much of my research is still unused in my notebooks!

I love researching historicals. I can get lost in libraries and, thankfully, my local research librarians are extremely helpful! I normally prefer books to online research, since the books have been scrutinized for authenticity (more so than online sources). But I use the Internet for visuals. For example, the inspiration behind the historic Hamilton/Hollinworth Estate in On Sparrow Hill was taken from a picture of an existing estate in England that I first found in a travel book and then looked up online.

I was horrified to see that Berrie had to answer to something called the "Lunacy Committee". They probably didn't see much difference between being insane and having a disability. So were they able to distinguish between different types of mental disabilities, or did they lump them all together?

According to the research I did, persons with mental retardation were generally looked upon as a result of some sin or wrongdoing by one or both of the parents (but usually they blamed the mother!). Some of my notes indicate that for older people who developed problems (such as those who, as an older child or adult might develop a bi-polar condition) they sometimes blamed the person’s own sin or sometimes the environment (especially if it was considered a sinful environment!). In Victorian times, they were just beginning to understand the possibility of genetics.

One report I read tracked the legitimate versus illegitimate offspring of one highly respected and influential man, and his illegitimate offspring had a much higher percentage of producing children with some sort of deficiency. Sometimes this was due to lack of nutrition or to excessive drinking (what we understand today to be fetal alcohol syndrome), while the legitimate offspring had many more opportunities and were in general more healthy due to the environment.

Initially one of the differentiations made for persons with cognitive disabilities were by age at the onset of problems. They would consider whether or not a person was “sane” at one time and then became “insane”. This was the difference between the legal terms “lunatic” which stood for those who were once sane but “lost” their sanity, or an “imbecile,” someone who never had a mind to lose. Admittedly, when I first came across these terms I chafed. They have such a horrid connotation now. But it occurred to me that our language is always evolving, and one of the reasons is because of the negative uses that develop over the years. Calling otherwise healthy people an imbecile has made that term derogatory, the same way calling someone “retarded” who is otherwise healthy today carries the same insult. So we think of new ways to label the same old condition.

The only other differentiation made during the Victorian times, in general, was whether or not a person was dangerous, to himself or to others.

It was all fascinating to study, but as a parent of a child who is considered profoundly mentally handicapped, I was so grateful to be alive now rather than a hundred and fifty years ago!

You’ve mentioned your son a couple of times now. It wasn’t until reading the author’s note that I learned of your very special inspiration to write The Oak Leaves and On Sparrow Hill. Tell us a bit about how having a son with Fragile X syndrome changed your life.

Thank you for asking! Yes, my son is the inspiration behind both of these books. I had no idea I was a carrier for Fragile X Syndrome, the leading cause of inherited mental retardation. He was the first to exhibit any limitations in my family, even though I’m one of six kids and I had at least a dozen healthy nieces and nephews before he was born. When I spoke to a geneticist he told me the sad statistical truth was my son had only a 10% chance of being born as severely affected as he is. The message was very clear: God wanted my son to be born exactly as he is.

And let me tell you, there are some blessings. He’s very happy, he’s easy to please, and is generally a pleasure to be around if you don’t mind a bit of noise and the occasional diaper change!

But so few people have ever heard of Fragile X, I knew I would write a book about it. I thought it would be something I’d do when I was more comfortable about the whole thing, once I could say thank you to God for this and really mean it. But I felt nudged to write these books before I had it all “together.” And I can honestly say they’ve helped me to put things into perspective. I searched for — and found — many things to be grateful for, to appreciate about living with this challenge. I honestly cannot picture my son any other way than how he is, and with his near constant smile I’m just not sure how I’d react if he were any other way. Not that I wouldn’t accept a cure in an instant; he’s missing out on so much, and I ache for him because of that. But I know, in Heaven, we’ll sit down and talk (something he can’t do here) and we’ll have a great time finally communicating!

Any other thoughts you'd like to share about this book, or writing in general?

I consider myself first and foremost an avid reader. I just write whatever it is I feel like reading. With The Oak Leaves and On Sparrow Hill, (especially with The Oak Leaves) I used some of my own experiences to tell a story.

If you have an event or life experience you think just has to be told, I encourage you to put it in a book. My own choice would be to fictionalize it rather than a memoir, if only because fiction is so freeing. You’re free to imagine and heighten things that would enhance your story, to draw others in more easily and not be bound by what actually happened, but have the freedom to explore what realistically could have happened. Fiction based on fact can be very compelling, especially when we, as the author, are so passionate about the subject. I’ve learned one of the most important things about a successful book is the passion an author brings to the book. If s/he is passionate, it’s easier for others (like agents, editors, sales staff and finally other readers) to get excited about it, too!

In case anyone would like to see a book trailer for On Sparrow Hill, they can visit my website (www.maureenlang.com), scroll down to the first book cover on the homepage, and click on that to play. It’s fun!

Thanks very much for having me, Tina!

And thank you so much for your time. It’s been a pleasure.