Is it deje vu, evolution, or frankly just, well, beating a dead horse *misty cracks her whip* woopah!

Sometimes I swear that if one more of my characters "glances" at another one more of my characters, I will just scream (quietly in my mouth) or, I don't know, change the word "glance" to something even more lame like "gaze."

But I think this stuff gets smoothed out in editing.  So even though it grates on the nerves at times and makes me feel completely uninspired and unoriginal, I think the important part is just getting the general idea down before it slips the mind--because stuff that slips the mind just never comes back (trust me), and you can always think of a better turn of phrase later on.

What brings this to the forefront of my mind today is the early work of Janet Evanovich.  I've read a few of her pre-Plum novels and they all seem to have elements of her current Plum characters.  Specifically, in The Rocky Road to Love, which I just read this week, Steve Crow is the homo erectus (hey, I didn't name it) of Joe Morelli. Their identical dogs are both named Bob (does Janet think this is a funny name for a dog like I think Kevin is a funny name for a cat?) and they both purchase an SUV to haul Bob around in.  Because, you know, dogs have to go places like people do.  Both men stare at their shoes until they get control of their tempers, but the homo sapiens version, Morelli, does it a lot better with more hotness.  Daisy Adams drives a trash car and winds up accepting the loan of an expensive black sports car.  Sound familiar, Ranger fans?

 I kind of saw this once on a documentary about dinosaurs, and it occurred to me that all the neato factoids about dinos were just precursers to all the neato things about homo sapiens, like the biological equipment necessary for breathing and stuff.

And well, I guess Janet can steal from her own self, but at what point does the minimal deja vu and the acceptable evolution of writing style and skill just become plain old overkill?

But don't misconstue my words.  Despite her publication of manuscripts that might have been better left as rough drafts (and honestly, I am not here to judge, only to meet a sufficent word count for this blog post) and her frequent sacrifices of decency for cheap laughs (which I laugh at--hard), I love Janet's work.

And since I have now questioned the all-powerful Evanovich (please don't hurt me), I will do her a good turn (not that she needs me to) by posting a link to the trailer for the movie, which comes out early next year, that is based on her One For the Money, the masterpiece *misty kisses her fingers* that started it all, or rather, finished it all.  And just by way of information, there are 6 swears in this trailer, 4 instances of partial nudity, and references to sex ( can you belive that in a clip rated for appropriate audiences?).  Not that I'm blaming the great and mighty Evanovich (please don't strike me down dead).