Our novel THE TRINITY PARADOX throws and anti-nuclear activist back in time to the days of the Manhattan Project in WWII.  Activist Elizabeth Devane wished for an end to nuclear weapons. During a protest, the unthinkable happens: a flash of light and Elizabeth awakes to find herself alone in a desolate desert arroyo almost fifty years in the past: 1944, Los Alamos, New Mexico. The Manhattan Project. Could she—should she—attempt the greatest sabotage in history?

German publisher Atlantis will be issuing the book in translation, and we have made TRINITY available as an eBook for all formats.  Coauthor Doug Beason just finished the following interview for Atlantis.

INTERVIEW WITH DOUG BEASON
for the German Edition of THE TRINITY PARADOX published by Atlantis
Christian Endres
May 2011

Hello Mr. Beason. Can you describe the meaning of Los Alamos for mankind and from your view as scientist, author, and US Air Force Colonel and the modern world in one or two short sentences? (Is there maybe a difference when the scientist and the colonel in you “are answering” this question?)

DB:  I believe that the Los Alamos project only accelerated the inevitable.  That is, I believe that nuclear weapons would eventually be discovered, but it took a forcing function of perceived national survival to make it come to fruition in 1945.

The story of the beginnings of atomic weapons is also a history about great science, incredible progress, military ambitions, and needs of a dark time with war and terror, later about power, international “balance” and even spies! It was a crazy, ambivalent time back then in the 1940s, wasn’t it? It’s hard to imagine that on that hot, dangerous ground such great, but again very ambivalent, inventions were successfully made.

DB: Humans rise to the occasion, regardless of their environment.  It’s tough to imagine people working in conditions other than what they’re used to – but to those in the past, they didn’t know any better, nor could they imagine any other conditions.  They did what they did, regardless of the circumstances.

How did you research all that? Los Almos back then in the 1940s, the environment and surroundings of the Manhattan Project, and all that stuff back then?

DB: Both Kevin and I did an incredible amount of research by reading, as well as visiting Los Alamos on several levels.  I completed my PhD thesis on Los Alamos supercomputers in the 1980’s, and worked in several of the labs and outlying areas.  Kevin worked there for a while as well, and we both hiked the surrounding area.  I had a chance to visit Trinity Site at White Sands with my daughters, where the first device was detonated; I also had performed research at Oscura Peak, a mountain overlooking Trinity on another project, so both Kevin and I were well versed in the Los Alamos wartime-era heritage.

How did you came first in touch with Science Fiction and how had you become a fan of that very speculative fantastic genre?

DB:  I had read the SF classics as a boy  – Heinlein, Asimov,Clarke, etc – and was encouraged by my Mom, a friend of my parents … and my reading was grudgingly tolerated by my teachers.

Do you see yourself more as an author, or more as an scientist? And were those two “souls” in your heart a problem while writing THE TRINITY PARADOX?

DB: I had always dreamed I was going to be a rock star when I grew up.  But my mediocre talent as a musician (exacerbated by the draft during the Vietnam War) took backseat to my talent in science.  So TRINITY allowed me to fulfill both my fascination by the science (which is an incredibly alluring field) and the creativity in exploring the question “what else could have happened” in this world-changing event.

What fascinates you personally as author about alternate history novels? And what do you think it is that readers love about them so much?

DB: It’s the possibility that things might have turned out to be so incredibly different if it wasn’t due to the “flap of a butterfly’s wing.”

Can you describe how the idea of THE TRINITY PARADOX came to life first and how it came to co-writing the book with Kevin J. Anderson?

DB:  I think Kevin came up with the original idea.  We’d met back in 1985 when I was doing a sabattical at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and we’d hit it off, having numerous things in common: an appreciation for good beer, writing, and pontificating about the future.  We decided to collaborate on a short story, and after several collaborations had sold, we decided to write a novel together.  LIFELINE, a story of the survival of our species in space, was our first collaborative novel, based on a short-story we’d sold to David Brin’s SOLAR SAIL anthology.  That led to a 3-book contract, and for the next book after LIFELINE, Kevin got this great idea of writing about this passion we’d both shared: writing about the simultaneous horrifying yet alluring chronicle of the Los Alamos project.  We wanted to show the reaction of a nuclear weapons protestor who was suddenly thrust back in time to the Manhatten Project.  Even more challenging was making the protestor a feminist, and juxtapostioning her modern sensibilities in a WWII male-dominated society.

What are the advantages and what are the difficultues in writing a book with another author?

DB:  Collaborating is a 110% effort.  I initially went into our collaboration thinking I’d only do 50% of the work – but I ended up brainstorming, negotiating, and re-writing to produce a product that although was a lot harder to do, was instead much, much greater than what either of us could have done alone.

How do we have to imagine the co-working-process of you and Kevin J. Anderson? How did you write the book together? Who’s job was what and so on?

DB:  It helps that Kevin and I are friends.  We’re definitely not clones, and that’s great, because Kevin is an incredibly energetic, bright, and motivated writing partner – one of the most amazing people I’ve known.  But although it takes 110% of the effort, a collaboration is always a 50-50 responsibility, each person having equal say in how the book turns out. So when we plan a book, we start with an idea, then expand on it – usually by poking holes in each other’s thesis, while coming up with a singular path for a compelling story.  Then we start chopping up the parts to discretize our story.  Afterwards, we lay out the parts and decide who will write which parts: one of us may take a single character all the way through, or one of us may write a specific location.  I know for TRINITY that Kevin had an affinity for the German scenes, so he wrote those and I wrote most of the Los Alamos scenes.  But it doesn’t always work that way.  Basically we do whatever seems right and we change it to make the best product in the end.  So if either of us has a problem with any of the scenes, paragraphs, or words, we change it at will: a true example of “the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.”

Where there some real noteworthy arguments or problems that occur because of working together on a novel?

DB:  No, I don’t think so.  We always got along and managed to negotiate.  I think we both realized that the end product was more important than our individual contribution.

How do you think the novel would be different if it had not been written by two _American_ authors?

DB: I would hope that the sense of urgency for national survial might not be lost.  That’s why we wrote this in the first place.  Remember, when TRINITY was published, the US was going through a great angst against our use of nuclear power and nuclear weapons.  Kevin and my thesis was that people responded to the times, and to their perception of the most likely future that would result if they didn’t do anything – and at the time, that was world dominace by Hitler and Japan.  The US first established the Los Alamos project because of Albert Einstein’s warning of Germany’s dominance in nuclear physics, and the consequences of Hitler misusing that dominace.  As an aside, I was on a cruise-ship last year and an English gentleman, upon learning that I had worked at Los Alamos, thanked me for saving his life.  In 1945 he had been ordered to invade Japan with his countrymen, and the allies expected 1 million allied deaths during the invasion.  But because Japan surrendered after the 2 nuclear attacks, his life, as well as his allies, had been spared.  And after 55 years he thanked me.  In 1945 he was responding to the times, and he was not trying to second guess what other paths the allies might have taken.  So by writing TRINITY, we tried to show both the horrors and the thankfulness that resulted from developing nuclear weapons – for hopefully – their last and only use.

The tragical events in Japan earlier in 2011 show the danger not only from atomic weapons, but from atomic energy in general. What do you think about that whole “green planet” and “alternate energy” discussion?

DB:  Nuclear power is only one but many options for clean, efficient power.  It should be part of a holistic approach, and not ruled out simply because of unfounded fear.

Are you aware of the differences in that [political] discussion and topic between the USA and Europe?

DB:  Yes – but I would welcome any constructive engagement, as I believe both the US and Europe have end-states of peace, plentiful power, and prosperity in common.

You wrote a fact book about the future of the war and how the American e bomb will affect it. Would it be correct to call modern atomic weapons – first of all – as leverage? Or are we maybe nearer to atomic war-actions than we all believe? Maybe nearer than while the cuba crisis? I have the feeling people “get used to” the news about some crazy dictators having nuclear weapons or that they just don’t care …

DB: World interactions are evolving, and aknowledging the existence of nuclear weapons and their threat are only a portion of the calculus required to fully live in peace.  For example, even the irradication of small pox showed that a quantum of the virus had to be maintained in order to fight against future outbreaks.  In the same manner, even in a hypothetical “nuclear-free world,” arguably some expertise must be maintained to detect, understand, deter, and negate any future nuclear threats by those who don’t subscribe to nuclear disarmament.  My book THE E-BOMB shows a new facet of interaction – but no solution is all-encompassing, for there will always be counter-threats.  A combination of technology, political, and even innovative social solutions are required in our ever-changing world.

Anything left you want to share with your German readers?

DB: Writing TRINITY was one of the most exhilarating experiences I have had, both on a professional and personal level.  Although not everyone has the same world view as I – even Kevin and I disagree – I hope TRINITY will continue to fuel intellectual debate on the history and existence of nuclear weapons.

Thank you for your interest, and all the best!

THE TRINITY PARADOX is available for Kindle, Nook, and other eBook formats.