Imagining Jefferson's Monticello in 2024
Author Interview with Self-Published Heidi Matonis
In her second novel, Heidi Matonis builds a familiar and frightening world of domestic terrorism, political upheaval, and metaphoric and literal idealogical imprisonment. Imagining Monticello is a smart political thriller—our hero is not a Chardonnay-drunk social media addict. Instead, she is beleaguered with grief at the loss of her son in a targeted bombing. When the architects of the bomb come for her, she begins to let go of her daily life, finding solace in the simplicity of life as a captive, falling deeply into Stockholm Syndrome. When certain news that her kidnapper, is indeed, the brainchild of the bomb that killed her son, she devises a clever (and stinky) plan to escape.
Inspired the current political climate, Matonis’s narrative dances on parallel lines between the 19th century and today. You’ll be drawn in to her persuasive world in just the first pages. Be sure to buy your copy here.
Rachael: This is your second novel. How long have you been writing novels? Have you always been a writer? What was your career before becoming a novelist?
Heidi: I took some writing seminar classes in college and loved them. After college I got a masters in Publication and Design. I focused my efforts in putting together a copywriting portfolio. I worked very briefly as a copywriter. But to answer your question, no, I have not always been a writer and didn’t envision myself as such. I’ve had a vegan food company for the past ten years. I started writing during the pandemic on a whim and never stopped.
RW: You mention in your acknowledgements that Greg Jackson, podcaster from History That Doesn’t Suck, gave you the “seed” for this book. How so? Was it a particular episode that inspired you, or a story he told on the podcast? And why Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and not two other historical figures?
HM: So, I love history. And yet I had a resistance to learning about American History. I Googled around and found the podcast “History that Doesn’t Suck.” I was completely hooked by the “legit, seriously researched, hard-hitting survey of American history through entertaining stories.” One day I was running, listening to the episode about the election of 1800 between the incumbent John Adams and his vice president Thomas Jefferson. I actually stopped in my tracks and thought, Am I listening to the news? The similarities between the election of 1800 and the 2020 election was astounding. Both included violence, vitriol and fake news.
RW: Throughout the narrative, you provide us with the first person accounts of the protagonist, Sara, and her deceased son, Johnny. You didn’t, however, give us the firsthand insights to Thomas, Sara’s captor. Why not?
HM: I was very interested in having a female protagonist who slowly discovered the charismatic personality of her captor.
RW: We know right away that the protagonist, Sara, lost her son, Johnny, in a domestic terrorist attack. The alternating narrative with Sara’s is Johnny’s, which is a bold choice that reads remarkably plausibly. How and why did you decide to use a dead narrator to mirror the living one’s?
HM: I researched what is left of a human body after it explodes. The answer: very little. The body is mostly water molecules that vaporize. The most significant and enduring element is nitrogen. Nitrogen atoms can exist in the same form for billions of years. I imagined Johnny existing in the form of skin cells, hairs, and fingerprints left behind.
RW: You self-published this book. Tell me about that experience, why you decided not to pursue a “traditional” publishing path and the benefits you’ve had controlling the creative process. Would you recommend this path to other emerging writers?
HM: I have an agent and my book is professionally edited; however, my agent was unable to sell the book to a traditional publisher. Traditional publishing has been eviscerated by self-publishing. The margins are minuscule, and publishers are reluctant to take risks; they need to know a book will sell. My advice is to try the traditional route via agent and publisher but know that is not the end all. Everyone now has access to publishing.
RW: There is a big debate amongst the writing community whether an author needs “a platform,” or not. As an author without a social media platform, how do you promote and sell your book? How would you assuage those of us who have a small or non-existent social media presence?
HM: Well, to be very honest, I have not done a good job promoting and selling my book. I am just ramping up now. I have had stickers with scannable QR codes put on my frozen vegan packages. I am hatching an egg using my body and posting on social media. Both these efforts relate to my first book, Hatching Love. I hope to promote Imagining Monticello by parlaying onto a lively political landscape with the 2024 election.
RW: One aspect I particularly loved about this book is the parallel from history to modern day politics. In Chapter 4, you write “But the explosion at Go-Go Gourmet was unique because it, inadvertently, blew up the Constitutionalists’ biggest donor, Richard Thibaut.” I assume this is Peter Thiel. Am I correct?
HM: Yes, you are correct. I had a lot of fun orchestrating Peter Thiel’s death in Go-Go Gourmet! On one hand, it’s comforting to know that we are living through trauma our nation has withstood in the past, and on the other, it’s a reminder that the best predictor of the future, is, indeed, the past.
RW: Would you say your message has more to do with today’s current state of politics or where we come from as a nation?
HM: By drawing parallels between the politics of 1800 and now, I am trying to show that we’ve been through periods of divisive party politics. That being said, I do feel the period we’re in is unique. We cannot discount the power of social media and the easy access to guns.
RW: What is your writing process? Do you outline, draft, revise? Or do you draft, revise, draft, revise as you go? And what does your revision process look like?
HM: I write absolutely every morning. I am not an outliner. I have a rough idea where I’m going but I stay very open to possibilities. I am my first reader and I like to surprise myself! It takes me about eight drafts before I’m ready to show my work to the editor. After I get my first round of feedback, I write 2-3 more drafts. As the work takes shape, I change the font color from red to green to blue, to black. When a page is all black, I format it.
RW: As Sara begins building trust with her captor to afford her more freedoms, like not wearing a blindfold or earplugs, she also develops trust of him, ultimately experiencing Stockholm Syndrome. Writing about a condition one doesn’t have (assuming you are hopefully not a victim of Stockholm Syndrome) can be a tricky subject. How did you address Sara’s condition honestly and with sensitivity? Was there valuable research to guide you?
HM: I read about Patty Hearst and watched the movie. I also read about Elizabeth Smart and watched the movie. They were shockingly similar. I also read The Diving Bell and the Butterfly. It’s a book about a man who suffers from locked-in syndrome.
RW: What is one thing you want readers to walk away from having read this book?
HM: I want readers to walk away with a feeling of empowerment. One of the themes I played with was brains vs. brawn. Sara ultimately overcomes her captors by being clever and patient. I also want readers to walk away with a sense of enduring love of family, even when a member appears gone, they are with us.
