In thirty-five years as a writer, and as an editor, I have never found a time when a semicolon was the best choice in fiction. Almost every last time, it means the writer wrote a poor sentence, and tried to fix it with a semicolon.
Few, if any, semicolons are planned before the sentence starts. The writers starts writing, realizes at some point that the sentence either doesn't say what he wants, or doesn't say enough, slaps on a semicolon, keeps writing, and Bob's your uncle.
This is a lousy way to write good fiction.
I can't remember a case where a rewrite wouldn't be better than a semicolon. But writers don't really want to rewrite. Grammatically speaking, the semicolon is in the right place, so it must be fine. It almost never is.
Do yourself a favor, do readers a favor, and when you find yourself using a semicolon for any reason, go back and read the sentence again. I'd be willing to bet you can write a much, much better sentence that includes whatever came after the semicolon, if it needs to be there, which it may or may not. Usually not.