Dr. Nat Tanoh
I am quite delighted with MediaDiversified's review of my novel - ‘The Day of the Orphan.’ The review demonstrates a great combination of telescopic and panoramic literary sensibilities. The blend and cross integration of topicality, themes, story and characters are teased out quite nicely. And certainly, even the faintest comparison to a literary masterpiece such as ‘The Pilgrims Progress’ is high praise indeed.
The review's assertion of 'present-day relevance’ is indeed something I sought to convey. There is far too much going on in this world that requires our attention. Thus, like Saga in my novel and his band of young Orphan warriors, we must have the courage of our convictions, rally similar minded folk and stand up against the so many wrongs that are being perpetrated with such impunity in the name of security and stability in almost all societies today. The 'Our Lives Matter Movements' which the review mentions is an excellent case in point. Maybe I am also permitted to give MediaDiversified a thumbs-up?
The review depicts the novel as a possible 'blueprint for revolution.' 'Revolution' is a mighty word indeed with immense historical connotations. Mention of the French Revolution or Russian Revolution, for example, makes us sit up and think sweeping, epoch-shaping, cataclysmic history. But if we qualify the meaning of the word 'Revolution,' then The Day of the Orphan could indeed be viewed contextually as a blueprint for reversing the harrowing fortunes within a given society; Revolution in a microcosm. In actual fact, it came as a bit of a shock to me that the very prescription I devised in the novel for Saga and others to be rid of tyranny was almost exactly what happened in Zimbabwe last year to restore democracy when Robert Mugabe was removed from power. It literally happened just as I had written, prior to its actual occurrence in real life. Does such breathe some life into MediaDiversified's contemplation of 'blueprint' as well as a tiny bit of life imitating fiction?
Coming back to things one wishes to convey, I believe authors strive to write whatever they wish to share, satisfactorily. They must to some extent satisfy themselves first that what they seek to depict or share is satisfyingly presented in their view. This is not an attempt to play with words. Satisfying yourself as an author and satisfying your readership can be viewed as intrinsic and extrinsic sides of the same coin that evolves in an interactive dynamic. To my mind, they are not mutually exclusive; they are interwoven, no matter how subtly so.
I salute MediaDiversified with great enthusiasm.