The moment I've been waiting for could wait a moment longer.

For those of you who are published authors and have been down this road before, I ask for some indulgence of my wide-eyed innocence.

Before Freezer Burn was published, it was read by lots of people, in bits and pieces. Agents looked at it; so did editors, publishers, and other writers. I listened to the critiques carefully, applied the rule of three when I wasn't certain about a change (get the same comment from three independent sources), and tried to lock my ego in the cabinet when someone's opinion rubbed me like sandpaper.

Now that my work is done and between covers, I feel confident that I've told a fun story in an entertaining way. Could it be improved? Probably. Is there truly a book out there without flaw? (Let's leave sacred writings out of that question, for tolerance's sake.) My philosophy is this: If you like my book, read it. If you don't, put it down. And God grant me the serenity to ignore the reviews.

Which brings me to my wide-eyed ignorance:

You see, I already have some pre-release copies of my book, a few of which I've sent to people for favorable blurbs (I've already told them that, if they don't like my book, silence is golden - please don't try to spin, "it made me want to throw up in my mouth" into glowing praise). In addition, although I'm having a launch party in July, some of my friends want to read the book ahead of the party, so I've been selling them copies.

There's my problem. I heard from one of my friends, who hasn't finished my book, but who knows two other friends who did. She said the other two thought it was funny that I never described Peri in the book.

Huh?

On page 12, she bends her tall frame to look into a freezer, remarking that it's 50 years old, like her. On page 28, she fluffs her Nordic blonde hair. On page 186, she points to her freckled arm and describes her parents as very blond and Viking… I could continue, but you see what this did to me? I was certain that I had described enough of Peri to make her flesh and blood, and equally certain that no one else ever mentioned that before.

But it gets worse. My friend then relayed the information that one of the other gals "had notes." Notes?

"She's very literary," my friend said. "Don't you want to know how to make your next book stronger, if you plan to make a living doing this?"

Good thing I subscribe to WWPD?* I knew just how to reply.

"No. I know where to go when I want a critique. All I want from friends and family is adulation. If you read it and like it, tell me. If you read it and don't like it, shut the hell up. If you don't want to read it under those conditions, don't read it at all."

Too harsh?

I spent the rest of the day in a foul mood, wondering why some people think it's their unsolicited business to improve the way I do things.

I was still trying to shake it off when I got this email from Gordon Kirkland, one of my reviewers, an author who has won Canada's Stephen Leacock Award of Merit for Humour three times, and a writer I respect:

"I just finished reading an advance copy of Gayle’s first novel, Freezer Burn, a mystery with Gayle’s unique comedic voice spread all over it. It brings together a rather odd group of characters, with a couple of strange bodies thrown in for good measure.

I won’t give the plot away, other than to say it twists and turns like a highway designed by a drunken surveyor.

It makes a great summer read!"

In case you're wondering, we had a little online chat last night, where he told me he truly did like my book, mentioned a couple of the subplots in particular, and had no notes for me. So if nothing else, I learned yesterday not to read reviews, and that Gordon likes me! He really likes me!

*WWPD? = What Would Peri Do?