Liz, you are very welcome back to my Writers Chat series. This time we’re discussing your debut novel Aftershock (Turas Press, 2025), which Lisa Harding has described as “relevant and shocking.” I had so many questions for you that I have divided this Chat into two parts so that we might cover most of the areas I was interested in exploring. Writers Chat: Part 1 covers the background to writing the novel, the structure, as well as dipping into the themes of personal/ political and gender/ marriage.
SG: Like all good historical novels, Aftershock not only brings us right to the heart of love, power, and ambition in 18th – century Lisbon, it also speaks to our times about the brutality of power. Can you tell us about how you came to write about All Soul’s Day, November 1st, 1755 a day when both an earthquake and a tsunami almost destroys Lisbon and threatens to shatter the beliefs of the city’s inhabitants; what was the genesis of your interest?
LMcS: Thank you, Shauna. I came to this subject by way of a radio interview I heard with a historian called Mark Molesky, about his book This Gulf of Fire. It was about the 1755 earthquake that destroyed Lisbon and was so fascinated that I sat down to listen. I already had an interest in Portugal – I studied Hispanic Studies at university, which included Portuguese – and had spent some time in Lisbon as a student, so I was keen to find out more about the subject. When I started reading about the earthquake, I became fascinated by the politics of the time, in the lead-up to and in the wake of the disaster – and especially in the character of the man who would become the Marquis of Pombal. He both rescued and enslaved the country, and I found this an irresistible paradox to unravel.
SG: And this paradox snakes throughout the novel.
“At last, the earth is still.” What a great opening sentence that immediately grabs the reader. The sense that stillness can be vast runs through the novel – in relation to the land, the city, and, in our protagonist Dom Sebastião:
“For this man’s stillness deceives. It is a stillness that absorbs everything, understands everything, forgets nothing.”
Was this always the opening sentence of Aftershock?
LMcS: I am glad you find it so arresting! That is what we want, isn’t it! But in fact, that was not always the opening sentence. I had originally planned to start the novel with a dramatic event that occurred a few weeks after the earthquake and in fact wrote what I thought would be the opening chapter around that. But as with so many things in writing, things change. As I had the title from a very early stage, the opening you mention soon superseded my original idea. In a way, it was the title that gave me my opening sentence – which, as you mentioned, plunges us into the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, seen through the eyes of the person who would become the main focus of the novel. I think that quite often, the beginning of a piece – be it a novel, story or poem – sometimes emerges through a process of discovery, in a sense, reveals itself. I do find myself rewriting beginnings – almost as though the start of the story reveals itself.
SG: Aftershock is filled with ambitious characters who strive for what they want within a tightly structured society and clear political rules around church, state, and subjects. I found the conflict between individual desire and ambition (both personal and political – power) and the greater immediate good, to be in sharp focus in the exceptionally well-developed complex character Dom Sebastião. How did you hold the personal and the political within the writing and research?
LMcS: The tension between the private and public selves you mention in many ways is at the heart of the novel and one of the themes which drew me in. I find it both fascinating and shocking how far public events, national policies, can be influenced by the private ambitions and preferences and relationship of the actors. I am sure we can think of many contemporary examples of this. I suppose I should not be surprised, as the leaders who influence or seem to direct historical events are human beings, just like us, with all the foibles and insecurities we all share.
In relation to Aftershock, as I was researching the political events of the time, I became aware of the extent to which the impact of the personal relationships and aspirations of the individual actors were intertwined with what would become historical events. It therefore seemed to make sense to try to inhabit the perspectives of the different actors, to understand why they did what they did. Hence the multiple points of view which carry the narrative.
When I was researching the subject, I found I started with the public events – the earthquake, the measures that were put in place to support the survivors, the part played by other countries (this was one of the first disasters that attracted an international relief response) – and from there, found my way into the lives of the various actors. Their ambitions, as you point out, were often both personal and political. In a way, that made the intertwining of the personal and political both logical and necessary.
SG: Aftershock has an interesting four-part structure that both keeps us with the character-narrator and within the time. I liked your use of chapter titles – “Unwelcome News and a Request Rebuffed” – that hint at what’s in the chapter and, combined with an indication of the date, time, and place, serve to keep the reader knowing where they are in this vast detailed narrative whilst also reminding us of 18th-century letters. Was this a structure you began with or did it emerge as you wrote?
LMcS: To some extent, the structure emerged as I wrote. I had originally envisaged a three-act structure, and at a fairly late stage realised that the action and the characters needed more room to breathe. This resulted in some rearranging and expansion. So the four-act structure was a development of my original plan.
SG: Again, such a skill in being able to grow original plans as the text develops! One of the themes running through Aftershock is that of the role of gender and marriage in high society – the often-conflicting views of church and state and how they hold power over women. Power, it seems, is not only inherited but also given; Dom Sebastião has the ear of the king (“the king’s favourite. His most trusted advisor”). The king is romantically entwined with the powerful Távora family and Father Malagrida believes he “answers to a higher authority than the king” and therefore can influence the king to stop at least this extra-marital relationship.
Early in the novel we have glimpses of the internal lives of Dom Sebastião’s Austrian wife, Eleanor; Princess Maria (in line to be queen) resents the conversations about finding her a match and Dom Sebastião’s influence over the family. She is aware that for her to be queen her father will have to die and only then will Dom Sebastião “face a bitter reckoning.” After the disasters, Queen Mariana Vitória realises that “Even at this terrible time, her husband’s thoughts are elsewhere.”
Aftershock makes it clear that the women – even those in powerful positions – are seen as useful to obtaining influence and keeping power. Can you comment on this?
LMcS: Yes, this was one of the themes that was of great interest to me. All the women in the novel – Dom Sebastião’s wife, the queen, her daughter, the marchioness of Távora, the young lover of the king – have a very significant influence on his life, for good or ill. And they all have – up to a point – significant agency in their own lives. But only up to a point, for they are all – at least, this is my interpretation – either used, or discarded (or worse) in the service of his ambition. For example, Dom Sebastião’s access to the high aristocracy was due almost entirely to his two very advantageous marriages: his first wife, who died, was a Portuguese noblewoman and his second wife, Dona Eleanor Von Daun came from one of the noblest families in Europe. So those were women with influence who contributed enormously to his ascendency. On the other hand, there is the Marchioness of Távora – a very imposing matriarch from one of the most powerful dynasties in Portugal, who disdained and mistrusted Dom Sebastião – and greatly underestimated him. For which she paid the ultimate price.
But in some cases, this is a matter of interpretation. One interesting source I came across was a novel about Dona Teresa de Távora, who was the lover of the king, which adulterous affair was thought by some to have been the catalyst for much of the tragedy that followed. This novel, by a contemporary Portuguese writer, presents Dona Teresa as a kind of proto-feminist, who was in charge of her own destiny and making bold choices. I saw her rather as a rather naïve woman who found herself swept along by events she could not control. Which shows how similar sources can produce very different interpretations!
SG: Oh that’s very interesting. You’re so right about interpretation and similar sources. Thanks for your generosity in answering these first set of questions, Liz. I look forward to Writers Chat: Part 2 which focuses on the language of the novel, the parallels of Dom Sebastião and Father Malagrida and Lisbon-as-character and we conclude with some light quick answer questions.
Shauna Gilligan Writer 