Dear Bernard Cornwell, Apologies for another long message, but I am afraid your books, including the forewords, are just too engaging and demand a reaction! I have started re-reading the Sharpe books in chronological order, rather than the order in which I bought them, which was my first approach. I would love, at some time, to explore the books in detail to discover, if possible, how you fit the jigsaw puzzle together when you write books that fit into gaps in the series. How do you keep track of all the details and maintain consistency? In the afterword to Sharpes Company, you refer to the great love story of Harry and Juana Smith who met at Badajoz. Have you read Georgette Heyers account of their story The Spanish Bride? Very different style from yours, but solidly researched. She also wrote a novel about Waterloo, called An Infamous Army from Wellingtons comment (I dont know what they do to the enemy, but by God, they terrify me!) Interestingly, she uses a substantial fictional plot (or subplot), unlike you, and recounts in more detail the experience of the civilians in Brussels before and during the battle. Clearly you must have used common primary or secondary sources, writing about 50 years apart (or more), because some of the language used by Wellington and other historical figures and quite minor events such as Wellingtons use of the map in the Duke of Richmonds library at the ball, appear in the work of both of you.
I have just re-read Sharpes Sword and loved it again, but as I did the first time I have a tiny problem with the willing suspension of disbelief. Your narrative is almost always convincingly realistic, but with this novel I really struggle to believe that Sharpe could have drawn his sword from his scabbard, to use your term from the foreword, both in the literal and figurative senses, so, um, efficaciously, a month after he had a bullet lodged in his groin. Still I suppose that is why it is called fiction. I really enjoy your readers comments and questions what an interesting and varied lot we are! Recently, readers have asked you about sex and death in your novels. I have a couple of comments and questions. First, I think your balance between bodice-ripping (your term) and battle is about right. The bodice ripping takes place off stage and provides a subplot, and human interest, as well as a diversion for poor Sharpe, without interfering with the main plot. Those who want more bodice-ripping will find enough elsewhere. Second, in relation to death, youve talked about killing off characters and particularly your regret at killing off Hakeswill. As far as Hakeswill is concerned, although I sympathise with your authorial loss of a brilliant and personal villain, he had to die at Sharpes hands after he (Hakeswill) killed Teresa. The fact that it was in a military judicial setting, and by the rifle, was absolutely appropriate. So try not to regret Hakeswills loss. I think it was right. Some characters die because that is what happens in war, especially if you are young, like the poor young midshipman working the telegraph in Sharpes Gold. I think it is very effective the way you personalise some of the otherwise impersonal deaths in battle, for example with the bunch of dried violets and the grey feather in Waterloo or the portable chessboard in Sharpes Battle. Other characters, like Hogan, die randomly, either because bad stuff happens, or because as an author it seems right to you or perhaps you have got sick of the character (though I was very sorry to see Hogan die). On the other hand, villains generally die because that is justice in fictional terms, eg the master of the workhouse/foundling home where Sharpe was a child, Ducos and Gibbons and of course, Hakeswill. Again, this is why it is called fiction. Good triumphs over evil. However, I really think you gave Lord John Rossendale a disproportionately horrible death. He was a foolish, selfish and greedy man and, yes, he took Sharpes wife or rather Jane left Sharpe for Rossendale. But compare his death with Hakeswills, his villainy with Hakeswills, and does it seem proportionate? I read Sharpes Waterloo first of all your Sharpe novels, and was appalled by Rossendales manner of death, but didnt have the background. After I read the precursors, I thought you were unkind to Rossendale, given that Jane was the prime instigator. Do you have any comment on this? Anyway, I still love your story-telling. Many thanks. Elizabeth Smith