Request for written retraction.
Re: A "review" by "Scott," referencing "FN M249s shooting steel-jacketed wadcutters at 70 rounds per second" and "[a] certain gun (don't recall which) shooting 7.62x5.56mm ammo[.]" Scott called attention to "these glaring inaccuracies" which "jumped out at me and pulled me out of the story constantly."
Scott, please be advised concerning Phoenix: The Complete Action Series, that the references you cited exist nowhere in the five-book Phoenix series digital publication. The phrase "steel-jacketed wads" was retained from the original text, but here the word "wads" is clearly a metaphorical term for bullets, projectiles, pellets, etc., fired from a weapon, and in no way, shape or form can be viewed as a technical descriptor. In context, it preserves the integrity of the classic Phoenix writing style. Also retained are phrases such as "steel-jacketed death," "steel-jacketed lightning," "steel-jacketed manbusters," etc., for the same reason. Again, be advised that the word "wadcutter," which is a generic name for a specific category of bullet, exists nowhere in the text relevant to your citation.
This is not to state that wadcutter bullets do not play their part in the roster of weapons featured in the Phoenix saga. They certainly do -- but in ways consistent with the manner in which such ammunition might conceivably be present in a post-nuclear landscape.
Rest assured, however, that if you can indeed locate the passages you've cited in your review of Phoenix: The Complete Action Series (such as "FN M249s shooting steel-jacketed wadcutters at 70 rounds per second") you are invited to reference them in an email to: firstname.lastname@example.org for further attention. Please also take note of the fact that the only current version of the Phoenix series recognized by the author is the digital edition titled Phoenix: The Complete Action Series; the print editions are out of print and as such, defunct.
The Phoenix series is more over-the-top than anything I've read. What were some of your thoughts while you worked on each volume - were you just constantly trying to top yourself, to see how far you could go? What scenes/volumes stand out most in your mind?
I approached writing the Phoenix books in a deliberate manner. Principally, I set out to create what might be called a post-nuclear apocalypse noir series; something considerably different from a "science fiction" approach -- and tried to work out how the elements of noir might function within the framework of what I'd set out to accomplish.
To address the second part of your question, I don't really have permanent favorite parts of anything I've written. I might find myself idly reflecting on this scene or that, or this paragraph or that, from time to time, with appreciation or odium, or I might like or dislike some parts as I re-read an earlier effort, but that's pretty much the extent of it.
Phoenix #5 ends on a cliffhanger, with Magnus Trench still searching for his family. Why did the series end with this volume? Have you considered wrapping it up with a final installment?
I'd done an outline for what would have been a final story in which Trench and his family were (in some way, shape or form) reunited (probably with some wicked twist, such as wife and child having become Contams by this point). I've from time to time over the years considered various more permanent wrap-ups as well. One thing this suggests is the way a character, or group of characters, once created, can tend to powerfully and lastingly root themselves to an author's consciousness. It's a phenomenon that's been commented on by writers other than myself, too, I believe.
-- Interview excerpts
From the Back Cover
"Nobody, and I mean nobody, knows as much about future militarytechnology and the impact on past and present strategic issues ontomorrow's conflicts as does David Alexander. And nobody has the provenability and unique flair necessary to put that knowledge and insightinto the pages of some of the best thriller fiction going. DavidAlexander ranks among the most original, bold and thought-provokingauthors ever to make a bid for recognition in the challenging arena ofthriller fiction." -- Brian Condon, Book Reviewer