I wonder if the Urban Peasant has any good game hen recipes.
I'm thinking again of how every book is different from every other book, and wondering if there are writers for whom that isn't true. (I suspect there are. I suspect that if a writer's books are all rather alike to read (which is not necessarily a bad thing--I am massively addicted to Lillian Jackson Braun's "Cat Who" books, which are somewhat interchangeable, but soothing.) then they must all be more or less alike to write.
Certainly Scardown is turning out to be much like Hammered (although much easier, as I've proven to myself that I can handle this kind of a fragmentary narrative and please at least my first readers with it--still waiting for The Professional Opinion (grin) (hello, Professional Opinion, if you're checking in....) ) (parenthetical today) in the writing sense--the going back and forth, the backfilling of the missing elements of a complex narrative when it later becomes evident that they're needed, the sense that the story is going in its own direction and I'm just a hand on the reins.
On a conceptual level, it's much different, because Scardown is a book with a much grander scope than Hammered, although they are, really, two halves of the same narrative arc. But Hammered was a book about personal growth, and this one is a book about political necessity.