Hey Sen! I really loved the timeline in the Manacled (circling back to it). I’m yet to re-read it flashbacks first to compare but I am curious what made you choose to go with a non-chronological order of events?
That's the way that it occurred to me, to be honest. But, additionally, my first story also involved memory loss. In that story, near the very beginning Hermione get obliviated and loses her memories of a day, and then there's seven chapters of her trying to figure out what's going on, where the reader knows exactly what she's missing and she doesn't, and people were so pissed off at her for not figuring out this thing that she had no information to be able to divine on her own without her memories. And so, I felt like Manacled had to be told starting in the middle because if readers knew more than Hermione did, they'd get angry at her for not figuring things out faster, and so I really felt like readers had to only be allowed to know as much as Hermione knew. Also, I felt like reading the story as a war/espionage story and then having the twist in the middle of the Order losing, everyone dying, Hermione becoming a surrogate, Draco having to rape her and act like he doesn't know or care about her, would be too much for people, they needed to know right from the start the worst things that were going to happen in the story, rather than when they were halfway in. However, I did write Manacled intentionally so that it could be read in both chronological or published order. Which is why there's a fair bit of repetition in the beginning flashbacks, the story really does start over a bit there because I wrote both sections as if they were the beginning of the story.