could i build up tension in telling the story with its narrative if i followed barbara tuckman's rule. when i described to somebody what i wanted to try to do, i recall -- this is maybe ten years ago -- the said, so, you plan to write a thriller? on the constitution? it seemed to improbable. i tell you, when people now say to me, ask me, i hear you've written a book, what it's about and, say it's on the constitution, they say maybe i'll read the next donna leeown book. i have a better once now. this is after some of the reviews came out. michael mcnon the "wall street journal" said it was gripping story. and brooke hauser said it was engrossing. so now i have my answer when they say what's your book about, i say, i wrote a thriller on the constitution. you can make your own judgment on that, but at least they don't roll their eyes. also, the subject was important, and as soon as any hole in the story of american history is identified, that's standing invitation for the likes of people like me to jump in and get to work. i had also heard or knew of, i guess, james maddison's statement