PJ O'Brien

It could be considered either or both. The Sanctuary series began in 2001 as a spontaneous open-ended story told electronically to a very small group of people. It was meant to be soporific: a grown-up version of bedtime tales during a time of chronic insomnia-producing anxiety. I added to it for over ten years, weaving in requests and responses as any bedtime storyteller would. Over time, readership expanded beyond those I knew, and emailing new installments in response to requests was no longer practical. I experimented with a variety of ways for new readers to have access to what went on before and settled on dividing it into separate books when printed versions were still an option. But when I ultimately put the whole set of stories to bed years later, I tied all the major subplots together, so it could be considered an integrated narrative. I wouldn't try to read it all at once, though.

This is the question I’m asked most often, along with a similar one: are you in a group marriage? The answer to both is no. The series was not intended to promote anything other than a good night’s sleep and ways to discuss divisive issues in a different way.

I heard frequent arguments about what a marriage or family should be when I was first telling the stories, so these questions became part of the culture and setting when mapping out how Sanctuary would be different from any other nation or culture that I knew of. Marriages of multiple spouses are uncommon, and those where both genders are represented with equal numbers and equal power are even more so. And while there are certainly cultural and economic pressures to marry in the modern world, I didn’t know of any location where there was a legal requirement to be married, with a forced assignment made to spouses if one refused. (Sadly, forced marriages probably do take place in some parts of the world even today, but I suspect it’s a cultural pressure and no longer in the legal code. I am open to learning more about that, however.) Once I had the bare outlines of a unique approach to marriage, I could see how it might under-gird a society where there were few resources, but a determination to maintain peace among people and their families.

The Sanctuary marriage model necessarily leads to family alliances and collaboration that shift over time. A lot of drama naturally emerges, but tenderness and comic relief do, too. Even if it doesn’t inspire musing as to why one’s cultures and perspectives evolved the way they did – and what the reader’s life might be like if things were totally different – my hope is that it might provide a distraction from everyday worries and entertain with something a little off the beaten path.