Word Wenches

Race and Religion, Oh My!

Pat Rice here—

My mind wanders many curious byways while I’m writing, or procrastinating, as the case usually is.  I might be writing about a hero attempting to deal with a recalcitrant mule and wondering what kind of foul language he might use during the 1790’s, or what he’d edit himself into saying if the heroine is around, and my mind will stray to another character who happens to be of a different race or religious persuasion and how he would speak to the mule. And then all these other intricate byways open up, maybe related to current events like the Imus foofaraw  and suddenly, there’s a giant unexplored cave before me.

The cave to explore today is race and religion in historicals. Once upon a long time ago, I used to write books about the American south and had to deal with the language that would have been used at that time. I perused newspapers of the period and headlines would read “Escaped Nigger—Reward Offered,” so I know perfectly well what was acceptable then. And I equally know it’s not acceptable now—if only because of those dreadful historical headlines and their connotations. 

So what is a historical author supposed to do? Ignore the facts of history to be politically correct ? That’s a loaded question, you realize, because a lot of people despise the theory of political correctness. They want to call a spade a spade and to heck with the fact that it was once an offensive reference to color. But I write books for people to enjoy and find it offensive to offend. At the same time, I want to present the issues and their historical foundations. That leaves me right in the middle of the road, waiting for a semi to knock me flying.

Race is the most obvious stalactite in this cave, but religion  is far more pervasive, if not as obtrusive.  The original colonies were founded on religion  because people in Europe couldn’t agree on it. Religion has driven wars and brought down kingdoms. Religion has divided Ireland for centuries and driven Jews to wander. But if we try writing about any of this, the reading public runs, horrified, in the other direction.

It’s no wonder we can only write Regencies these days!  If we stick to a ten year time period and a homogeneous class of people, when the wars were political and not religious or racial, we don’t have to trouble ourselves with nasty little “issues” unless we deliberately choose to do so.

I’m beginning to understand why fantasies about monsters have become so popular. They give us a chance to explore discrimination without offense.  We can see the darker side of human nature without applying it to ourselves.

Does this mean we may be willing to explore real “issues” someday soon? Or that we’re still sitting around with our heads in the sand and big bullseyes on our rears?  Or do issues have no place in genre fiction?

And how do I get out of this cave before I bang my head against the stalactites and knock myself out?

Joan Wolf, HWW!

The Word Wenches would like to thank JOAN WOLF for being our guest! A fabulous interview, with kudos to Joan and Mary Jo both!

We're honored that Joan Wolf gave us her time, and in gratitude (being the well-bred Wenches that we are), we'd like to present her with this award and a little gift... 

~Joan, you are officially an Honorary Word Wench! Now you can add HWW after your signature, with suitable flourish of course

~Please feel free to return to Word Wenches any time, and comment to posts, or promote your new books if you like!

As a sincere token of our appreciation and admiration for your wonderful books, please accept this stunning Virtual Fan and Bouquet. May it always remind you of your special day in Wenchland....

~love from the Seven Wenches and the Whipster

Wench Alerts

Loretta's interview at the Risky Regencies blog is Sunday, April 29.  Drop by for a visit at http://riskyregencies.blogspot.com/ and read Loretta's interview in conjunction with the release of Not Quite a Lady.

And Jo is the Guest Author at Romantic Times' "Ask an Author" from now until May 13.  Pop over to RT via the following link and see what they're talking about for the next few weeks:  http://www.romantictimes.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=45

Don't run away, now!  Scroll down to the next post and find out who won Loretta's excerpt contest.

Loretta's Excerpt Contest Winners

Great news!  Loretta likes ALL the excerpts that were submitted in her excerpt contest, so each contributor wins a book!  That makes ten winners in all:  Janga, Gillian, RevMelinda, MaryK, Francois, Maureen, Meardaba, Ingrid, Nancy, & Simone.  We've notified all the winners but one, whose e-mail  address we don't have.  Meardaba, please contact me privately at [email protected]

Congratulations to the winners, and thanks to all of you who participated with comments and excerpts.  This was so much fun we may have to do it again!

(In the meantime, don't forget to read Joan Wolf's interview, below.  Feel free to leave a comment if you wish.) 

An interview with Joan Wolf

Joan Wolf’s first romance was published was published in 1980, and she has been one of the most respected authors in the genre ever since.  She made a name for herself with her marvelous Signet Regencies, then moved into historical romance.  She has also published contemporary romances, pre-history romances, and medieval mysteries along the way.  Countless readers have enjoyed her wonderful characters, and her wonderful horses as well.    ( http://joanwolf.com )

The Word Wenches are honored to have Joan with us today for an interview timed to coincide with the May reissue of one of her most beloved stories.  Joan, how did you start writing?

Joan Wolf:   I actually wrote my first book when I was about 10. I wrote it with a friend who was as horse-crazy as I was.  I remember that it was about a wild stallion in the west and the girl who tames him.  As we had never been west of the Bronx, or ridden anything other than the trail horses at our local public stable, we obviously violated the first rule of writing – write what you know.  But it kept us busy and out of trouble for one whole summer.   

I always liked writing.  I actually loved doing term papers.  I was the obnoxious person who had her paper done a week before it was due. However, I never really thought about writing fiction until I retired from teaching high school English to stay home with my new baby.  New baby.  New town.  New state.  I was very lonely.  My plan had been to write my Ph.D. dissertation (on Shakespeare), but we didn’t have enough money to pay a babysitter so I could go up to the Yale library to do research.  This was the time when romance was just starting to become popular, so I decided to try my hand at writing a romance novel while my son napped.  I have never regretted not writing that dissertation.

MJP: What drew you to writing romance and historical novels?

JW: I had always adored Georgette Heyer’s books and when I came to write a book of my own, I found I really knew quite a lot about the regency period from reading her. I wrote regencies for quite a while (it was what my editor wanted), but then I branched off into other areas of history.  I have always adored history.  I get that from my dad.  I do not exaggerate when I say that we used to sit at the dinner table and go through the list of the Plantagenet kings from Henry II to Richard III.  (Come to think of it, I wonder why I never wrote a book about the Plantagenet kings?)

MJP: That will be great if you do it, Joan!  What was your first book, and how well do you think it characterizes your latest work?  How has your work changed, and what has stayed the same from the beginning?

JW:  My first book was called The Counterfeit Marriage.  I have never ever re-read it.  It was so sappy.  Drippy, actually.  Fortunately, Hilary Ross, then editor at NAL, thought it was publishable and she bought it from me – along with a contract to do two more regencies. By the time I did the fourth one – A London Season – I think I hit my stride.  Anyway, that’s certainly the first of my books that I would recommend anyone to read. 

The change in my books from then to now is a progression of ‘cleaning up’ my writing.  As I went along, my prose became sparer and clearer.  When I think of the profusion of adjectives that litter my first books, I am horrified.

What has remained the same is my belief that character is the most important thing in a novel. A book can have the most exciting plot in the world, but if the characters don’t come to life and grip the reader, then the book is not for me.

MJP:  What was the biggest mistake you made when you first began writing?

JW:  My biggest mistake was to stay with my first agent and my first publisher for so long.  There was a window of time when I think I could have jumped my sales considerably if I had been given the right push. Ah well.  “Of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these, ‘it might have been.’”

MJP:  Staying too long seems to be a common mistake among long term career writers.  But now for the fun stuff!  In May, Chicago Review Press is reissuing The Road to Avalon, Joan's Arthurian novel that was first published in 1988.  Almost twenty years later, it’s still being read and loved.  Can you tell us something of how you came to write The Road to Avalon? 

JW:  I fell in love with King Arthur when I was in high school and went to see Richard Burton in Camelot on Broadway. I cried my little teenaged eyes out at the end of that play, and after that I began to read everything I could on Arthur.  The whole time that I was writing regencies, and short contemporaries, and straight historicals, I was planning to write a book about Arthur.  I just wanted to make sure that I was ready, that the book would do him justice. 

I think it may have.  Certainly the response to The Road to Avalon has been amazingly enthusiastic. Even after all these years I have new people writing to tell me that they have discovered the book and that they absolutely loved it.  I even had a whole class of high school students (who had to read the book for school) write to Oprah and ask that she make it one of her recommended books!  I’m absolutely delighted that it is being re-published.  Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s going to be available in most stores.  People are probably going to have to order it over one of the Internet sites – Amazon or Barnes and Noble.  ( http://tinyurl.com/2lqhse  or   http://tinyurl.com/3xh5xj  The new cover is shown on the right; the old cover is above.)

MJP:  I read The Road to Avalon when it came out, and even twenty years later, the story and characters were vivid in my mind when I reread the new edition.  There are many Arthurian books.  What do you think makes The Road to Avalon so special?  Would you share some thought on Arthurian stories, which are collectively known as the Matter of Britain?

JW:  One of the things that struck me as I read the literature about Arthur was that the king was rarely the central character in any of the books or poems that were supposedly about him.  The books often featured Lancelot and Guinevere, or Merlin, or Gawain, or anyone except Arthur. Even in T.H. White’s marvelous book The Once and Future King, Arthur appears rather like a little old man in bedroom slippers.  I began to think about why this was so, why Arthur never seemed to be made the hero of his own story, and I came up with an answer.

It’s very hard to make a great hero out of a man whose wife prefers another man.  Arthur, in short, is a cuckold –hardly a heroic position to be in.  And the Lancelot-Guinevere love affair is too integral a part of the story not to include it.  It’s essential to the legend.

I got around this problem by giving Arthur a great love of his own.  And I used another Arthurian character who was very much at hand – Morgan le Fey – to do this.  I must say, I think it worked out very well.

The book about Arthur that I like the most is Rosemary Sutcliff’s Sword at Sunset.  I read this when I was in college, and I loved the way she set Arthur in the historical time in which he probably lived – shortly after the Romans had pulled out of Britain.  This is the time period in which The Road to Avalon is set.

MJP:  Which book, if any, was the most difficult for you to write, and why?

JW:   The most difficult books for me were the last three books that I wrote: White Horses, To the Castle, His Lordship’s Desire.  I have suffered all my life from migraine headaches and, while I was trying to write those books, the medications I had been taking for years ceased to work and I had a headache every single day.  I wrote all three of them with cardboard taped over my left eye because of the knife-like pain that constantly stabbed behind it.

It was truly a horrible time.  I was hospitalized for ten days at the Michigan Institute for Head and Neck Pain (to no avail),  and I underwent disc replacement surgery in my neck to see if that would help. (It didn’t)  I was so drugged up I could hardly stand.  Really really bad time.  If people were disappointed in those books, there was reason to be.

I’m happy to report that the headaches are now gone – due to a massage technique called trigger point therapy. (I highly recommend the book – Trigger Point Therapy Workbook by Clair Davies).   I am enjoying writing much more now that I am healthy again.  (Note from MJP: other authors have also reported great results in controlling pain with the techniques found in this book.)

MJP: What do you consider key elements of a great story?

JW: For me, it’s character.  When I think of a book I love, I always think of the characters.  If an author can make a character come alive and live in your brain as if she was a real person – that’s a good book.  This is why I enjoy getting mail from readers asking me questions about my characters, or asking me if I’m going to write a book about one of my secondary characters. It makes me feel as if I’ve done my job.

MJP: Are there any trends you hope to see in romance in the next few years?

JW: I find the present-day insistence on frequent sex scenes in a romance to be a problem for me – and for any other historical writer, I should think.  Well-bred young women who lived before the 20th century did not have sex before they were married.  Many of my old regencies dealt with the growing relationship between the hero and the heroine.  They fell in love because they were the right people for each other.  Each filled an emotional need the other had. This growing love is finally expressed in marriage and sex.

The problem with writing historical romances is: if you’re writing a novel about two people who aren’t married, how do you keep getting them into bed, as seems to be required?  I have to confess, I haven’t figured it out yet. 

MJP:  What is the best part about being a writer?  The most frustrating?

JW: The best part of writing is when you have a day when everything has gone well and you can look at the scene you’ve written and say, YES!!!

The most frustrating part of writing today for me is the necessity to write specifically ‘for the market.’ The market has a series of niches which editors want their books to neatly slot into – for example, it’s a given truth in today’s publishing world that that all romances must be ‘hot.’ Georgette Heyer wouldn’t have a prayer today.  Her characters don’t even kiss until the last page – even if they’ve been married for the whole book!

It’s getting more and more difficult to sell a book that doesn’t fit into the parameters set by ‘the market.’ If I sent The Road to Avalon out today I’d probably be told that ‘the last book we did on Arthur didn’t sell very well.  It’s been over done.  Sorry.’

Unfortunately, thus is the way of the publishing world today, and a writer either conforms or doesn't get published.

I want to thank Mary Jo Putney and the Word Wenches web site for giving me this opportunity to talk to you. It’s been extremely enjoyable to babble on about myself.  And now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go back to my latest book and try to figure out where I can fit in some sex.

MJP:  Your thoughts on publishing are in line with some discussions we’ve been having here, Joan. Thanks so much for visiting us today! 

Comments and questions for our guest?  Memories of your favorite Joan Wolf story?  (That's a tough choice, but I have a particular fondness for an outrageously delicious Valentine's novella she once wrote.)  And order your copy of The Road to Avalon today!  You won’t regret it. 

Mary Jo

Total Litiots

I know people, and I even like some of them, who don’t read books.

Yes. True. They just don’t read books. Now, these folks are literate. They read newspapers and advertisements, and the occasional magazine. But they don’t read books, fiction or non-fiction.

I can’t understand it. But so it is.

What’s worse though, in my opinion, are those who do read books – but only those they see in reviews in the NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER and other influential magazines, or those books being touted on TV. These readers are in the same class as people who belong to book clubs and only read what’s assigned to them. Goes without saying that these misguided folk don’t read any genre fiction unless it’s being touted by their Literary Authorities - they are only reading so that they can talk about what they read and be considered intelligent.

For all they read, I don’t think any of these people are literate in the truest sense of the word. They’d never walk into a bookstore and just look around, browsing through all the aisles, glancing at covers, reading blurbs and bits, seeing what might interest them. That idea would just be alien to them. Read something they haven’t heard about? A book their friends, or the people they look to as notable, aren’t reading? Be seen with a book no one that they know reviewed? Or buy a paperback, especially an unknown one with a sexy or lurid cover? These readers will never do that. They sneer at such books.

I have to giggle when I see such former paperback romances reissued in hardcover when the author gets famous and on the bestseller list, and these same people reading books they wouldn’t have touched in the original. (As to that - while they say hot covers make it easier for romance readers to identify their faves that way, its still arguable whether or not those covers, while holding on to their fan base, ever bring in new readers, and will ever let romance readers and writers be taken seriously. Discuss among yourselves.)

Still, to only read the already read and approved? Bah, fah, and humbug. To me, the thrill of discovery is part of the literate experience. Finding an unknown author in any genre and then falling in love with the style and enjoyment of the writing is a delicious experience. Those folks will never know that thrill of discovery.

Of course I read romances and historical novels; I adore them. But I read everything that looks interesting, no matter the genre. I love fantasy, and mysteries: police and P.I., historical and modern, serious and funny ones. Science fiction, I teethed on those and love the good ones even now. I’ve even tried erotic, exotic, experimental and mainstream fiction too. (Although not horror. I’m too impressionable and always hear things that go bump in the night anyway.)

For example, I discovered Terry Pratchett’s first Discworld novel in paperback, and it in paperback - with a silly cover as well. But it intrigued me and I bought it, and was utterly enthralled, and became hooked on his books. A CIVIL CONTRACT got me fascinated with Miles Vorkosigan, and started my reading Louise McMasters Boujold (albeit backward, from CC, the last book written, to the first in the series.) I’ve found many other authors by browsing: some who became famous, some who didn’t; some who never lived up to the promise although they published again.

I must admit I have tossed some of these randomly selected books before finishing them. But when I hit a winner, I so enjoy the adventure of finding it on my own that I don’t mind the occasional disappointment.

Book browsing and gambling on new authors or those new to you is fun. It’s a thing, I fear, that many people I know will never ever know, no matter how much they read. Have you ever picked up a book you didn’t intend to buy, never thought to buy, and been seduced by something - anything about it? And then found yourself with a new writer you adore? Only then, are you, in my estimation, truly literate. Congratulations.

Lucky Charms

  April 23rd is Saint George’s Day in England ~~ so Happy St. George’s Day! 

Well, so the day isn’t celebrated with quite the exuberance of St. Patrick’s Day in Ireland and America, but still it must bring good luck for the English. St George has long been regarded as the patron saint and spiritual protector of England, winning out over native English saints like Edward the Confessor--who was quite a hair-shirt-watered-wine dullard of a king, not one to inspire good luck or protection. St. George first caught the imagination and loyalty of the English during the Crusades, when he was said to appear in the clouds above crusading troops during the Battle of Antioch, protecting them against the Saracen army. Edward III declared St. George the patron saint of England when he established the Order of the Garter in the 14th century...and after the Battle of Agincourt, when the cry “For God, King Harry and Saint George!” inspired the English troops to another victory, St. George’s reputation for special protection increased.

And there was that dragon...though that’s not my point today. I posted a St George and the Dragon blog in March, which for the curious is available in our Word Wenches Archives, along the right-hand bar....

As a model of chivalry and knighthood, St. George was a revered, if mostly fictional, hero during the Medieval and Renaissance eras in England and elsewhere. As the supreme and original Chivalric Guy, saving a damsel from a dragon (and in some versions allowing her to lead that dragon away on a leash, while in another version marrying the princess, and in a lesser known version, getting her pregnant first, then marrying her), St. George is the original chivalric archetype for a wide range of historical romance heroes from early medieval through nineteenth century. Chivalry was alive and well for centuries beyond the days of armor and jousts...and it’s still alive now, let’s give credit where credit is due.

So it seems to me that St. George’s Day should be a holiday for historical romance writers too. He could be our patron saint as well–just imagine that hero of all Heroes appearing in the clouds above a romance writer’s conference, inspiring us and spurring us on to victory at the awards ceremonies...or privately appearing in a vision as a writer takes yet another walk or a pass digging in the garden as she tries to work out a plot and the character development of a hero in her head....maybe we should all fly the red-cross banner above our desks or as decals on our computers to bring us luck and give us protection and inspiration as we head out into the mad fray of writing, creativity, publishers, reviewers, and market competition. It would be great to have that sort of divine protection and intercession!

Which brings me to my final point: most of us like a little extra luck, some protective and inspirational items that we keep nearby as we work. Maybe not a statue of St. George and the dragon...but something. What do you keep on your desk or in your workspace that you feel brings you luck and gives you a sense of protection and inspiration?

I have a few things on my desk and in my office that I like having around, and I like to think they bring me luck.  For example, on my desk and around my office I have:

~ an angel on the desk, and a few others on bookshelves (okay and all around my house, I’ve collected angels for many years, and now I have so many that I have to pack them away and rotate on a regular basis)

~a postcard of St George & the Dragon on the bulletin board

~a few historical Barbies (very inspiring)

~a couple of little quotes taped to the monitor (including “We can do no great things, only small things with great love.” --Mother Teresa)

~a triple spiral, the Celtic good luck symbol associated with Brighid, the goddess of creativity

~and a basket to one side of the desk where I toss everything that gets in my way and distracts me (I figure it’s good luck if I can find anything in there at all)...

Do you keep good luck charms around you for protection, inspiration, or any other reason?
What do you always keep on your desk or with you when you’re working, writing, reading?

And does anything particularly help? I could sure use some good luck!  ;)

Susan Sarah

Joan Wolf Interview Friday!

It's interview time again!  This Friday, 4/27, Mary Jo will interview Joan Wolf.  http://www.joanwolf.com/

Joan has written 45 books over a 30-year span, including medieval mysteries, contemporary romances, Regency and historical romances, including prehistorical romances, and Dark Ages Britain.  One of her most popular books (with a foreword by  Mary Jo!) is The Road to Avalon.  http://www.joanwolf.com/coming.html  This book is being reprinted and due for release next month. If you are a fan of the King Arthur legend, you'll want to read The Road to Avalon, which has gotten consistently good reviews ever since its original release.  This is the Arthurian legend with a fresh and unique view.  Again, the interview is Friday, 4/27.  Hope to see you all there!

In the meantime, there's still time to enter Loretta's excerpt contest, below, so hurry and submit your favorite excerpts and you just might win a Loretta Chase book!

 

The excerpt contest

       From Loretta:
      Brace yourself for a long post today--but since it’s got a bit of a book in it, I hope you’ll indulge me.
      To celebrate the forthcoming release of NOT QUITE A LADY--we’re having an excerpt contest.  But first, the usual authorial yammering.
      As I’ve explained previously, my leisure reading time is extremely limited.  Not a lot of time for experimentation, alas.  When I go book shopping, I usually know ahead of time exactly what author or book I’m looking for.  When I’m debating about trying out a new author, I do what a librarian friend, years ago, told me she did:  She opens the book near the middle.  Her thinking was, the beginning has probably been polished more than any other part of the book, to hook the reader.  But to find out if that level is maintained, open to the middle--for many authors, the hardest part of the book to write.
      I opened NOT QUITE A LADY to the middle, and found a scene between the heroine, Lady Charlotte Hayward and the hero, Darius Carsington:
      “You are out of sorts, I see,” he said.  “Perhaps it is the menses.”
      She shot him one of her I-must-kill-you-now looks.
      A promising sign.
      “Many women become weakened during the menses because of the loss of blood,” he said.  “That would account for your lightheadedness.  The imbalance this loss of blood causes to the bodily system no doubt explains the irritability that is so often a symptom as well.”
      She gazed at him for a long moment.  “Have you any idea,” she said, “how aggravating you are?”
      She was definitely recovering her spirits.
      A weight lifted from his.  “I should like to know how I could fail to have an idea of it,” he said, “since everyone in my family tells me, repeatedly.  My grandmother in particular.  She says that of all the aggravating men in the family--and that includes Rupert, she always takes care to remind me--I am the most aggravating.  That, according to her, is my most remarkable achievement.”

     I lucked out on finding an excerpt I could post here.  I might have hit a place that gave too much of the story away-a SPOILER. Or one that needed an introduction, in order to make sense.
     For those of us who peek in the middle or those who peek at the beginning and those--I know you’re out there--who peek at the end, these glimpses can determine whether or not we want to take a book home with us.
      For an author, choosing the right excerpt can be a challenge, especially if the author’s trying to decide, as I am, on excerpts from earlier books, to tempt and tantalize visitors to my website.
      It could be fun as well as challenging.  But I don’t have time to re-read my books, looking for the perfect excerpt!  I’m busy trying to write THE NEXT BOOK.
      So I’m asking your help.
      Pick one of my books--or two or three, if you’ve the time and energy--and choose what you think is the perfect excerpt for me to post on my website.
      If it’s a few lines, like the above, go ahead and quote the whole thing.  If you think a longer excerpt works, that’s fine, but remember that our Comments column is narrow, and people will be scrolling down and scrolling down...  So it’s OK to describe the scene instead of quoting it, or to give us a few lines and a little summary.  And a summary alone is all right, too.  But you will need to name the book and tell me what page to turn to, and recommend where to start and where to stop.
      If I agree that your selection should go up on the BOOKLIST page of my website, you’ll get a free, autographed Loretta Chase book of your choice.  If several people choose the same excerpt, I’ll do the usual and let our blogmistress Sherrie pick the names out of a hat.  You’ve got until 11PM PDT on Tuesday 24 April--the day NOT QUITE A LADY goes on sale--to offer your suggestion(s).  Sherrie will announce the winners on the following weekend.
      And now, for your further consideration, here's another excerpt from NOT QUITE A LADY:
      Mr. Carsington’s amber eyes slanted toward her father, who had turned away to say something to Lizzie.
      The gaze shifted back to Charlotte.  This time she saw in his unusual eyes the same teasing expression he’d worn when he quizzed her about her hat.
      “But I believe we’ve met before,” he said in a rumbling undertone.  Though he stood a proper distance away, the words felt like a secret breathed in her ear.  Her skin prickled.
      “I think not,” she said, flashing him a warning look.
      He lifted his eyebrows.
      She lifted hers.
      She thought, Utter one word of what happened and I’ll wrap my hands around your throat and choke you dead.
      She knew no one could read minds.  He must have read something, though, because the quizzical expression disappeared and he blinked.
      She watched his mouth curve slowly into a smile.  “Have we not?”
      Under that lazy smile, something inside her seemed to unfurl, like flower petals opening under the sun.
      But that’s what rake’s smiles did, she reminded herself:  They made women soft and malleable.
      “No,” she said.  She glanced at her parents.  The rector and his wife had claimed their attention.
      “Perhaps you have a twin sister,” said Mr. Carsington.  He made a show of looking about the drawing room.
      “No, I do not,” she said.
      “How strange,” he said.
      “It is not at all strange not to have a twin,” she said.  “It is more common not to have one.”
      “I could have sworn that we met, only a few hours ago, by a pond at Beechwood,” he said, still in the We-Have-a-Secret undertone.  “You were wearing--or rather, not wearing--a wonderfully frivolous hat.”
      He had teased her with the hat as a little boy might do, and for a moment she had wanted to play.
      Experience came to her rescue.  The mischief in his eyes was no more boyish than it was innocent.  What she saw in those changeable amber eyes was a rake’s guile.
      “A lady and a gentleman may not know each other unless they have been properly introduced,” she said coolly.  “If they do not know each other, they cannot have met.  Since we were properly introduced only a moment ago, we cannot have met previously.”
      “What a madly contorted logic that is,” he said.
      “It is a rule of behavior,” she said.  “It needn’t be logical.  There may even be a rule that rules of behavior must be illogical.”
      His eyes lit.  At first she thought what she saw there was amusement, and she cursed herself, because she did not wish to entertain him.  But then his gaze drifted from her face to her neck and downward, lingering upon her bosom before it swept down to the toes of her silk slippers.  It came up again so swiftly that she hadn’t time to get her breathing back to normal.  She could hide that, but not the rest of her reaction.
      Her face was hot.  Everywhere was hot.  Meanwhile her tattletale skin was announcing the fact, she knew, spreading a blush over her neck and the extensive area of shoulders and bosom her gown revealed.
      He was enjoying her agitation.
      Anger crackled inside her.
      Once, only once, she would like to do something, instead of silently enduring a man’s insolent examination.
      But a lady must pretend not to notice when a man disrobed her with his eyes.
      It was not fair.
      When a man took offense at something, he was allowed to react.  He was expected to react.
      If she were a man, she could push him into a piece of furniture or black his eye.
      But she wasn’t a man and she could not summon another man to do the job for her.  Creating a scene would be disastrous as well as ridiculous.  She was not a child.  She was a woman of seven and twenty, a nobleman’s daughter with eight Seasons behind her.  She was expected to possess complete self control.  She was expected to handle difficult or unpleasant situations with poise and courtesy.
      She must not get even or punish him.
      She must ignore it...and he knew she must, the beast.
      She simmered helplessly for a time.
      But Lady Charlotte Hayward was nothing if not resourceful. Even while she was fuming, her mind was working.  She had dealt with scores of men.  She could deal with this one, too.
      ***
     And for those who are not in the mood/don’t have the books or the time to hunt for excerpts, here’s the quiz:
      Do you like excerpts or do they annoy you?  Would you rather have the whole thing than be tantalized by tidbits?  Where do you stand on excerpts?

Tentacles in my genre?

Here's Jo! And yes, this topic is far too racy for Cabbage Patch Kids.

That's my only picture. it's from my first historical and it's the closest I've ever been to a cover that could be rape. And that's the book that has the closest to a rape in it, but it's a wedding consummation, and there are reasons. It's still not a comfortable situation, and I don't think any reader would have been thrilled by it.

Yes, right after sex, we have… rape. Rape, whipping, or any other kind of highly undesirable behaviour on the part of the hero toward the woman who's suppose to become the loving love of his life. There is actually a term – “heroic rape” -- back from the dark ages of the true bodice ripper. The time when I stopped reading romance.

There’s been a lot of debate around the web recently about a book in which the “hero” imprisons and rapes the heroine. I don’t want to name it or get into it because I haven’t read the book so that would be unfair. What is bothering me is an idea that’s floated to the surface during this furore – that rape and abuse is okay in a historical romance, but not in a contemporary romance.

Huh? Does that strike you as badly as it does me?

One explanation is that, well, men didn’t know any better in the past. What?

Certainly some men back then thought they had a right to any woman they fancied, especially a poor one, or one they came across in the wrong part of town. That doesn’t happen now?

There were men who thought once they had a woman she didn’t get to leave until they said so, so if she didn’t want sex, that was too damn bad. That doesn’t happen now?

There have been all kinds of reasons that men in the past raped women, including as part of hostilities, but all those reasons happen today. The thing is, with the probably exception of warfare, few of those men would think it was okay, and few of their fellow men would if they knew about it. No more than today, at least.

And unless the woman was the man's wife (those marital rights) it was a crime. A serious crime. If the victim was poor the law might not work as keenly as if she were rich. If her virtue was soiled, the offence might be seen as less vile than if she were virtuous. If the rapist was powerful, he might not be pursued, or at least might have good lawyers. But that doesn’t happen now?

An extension of the men not knowing any better, is the very peculiar idea that an author has no choice but to have her historical romance hero whip, imprison, rape etc, because all men were like that back then. Nonsense. One thing I know, and I remind myself of it as I write, everything I put in a book, everything, is a choice I make. I don't get to say that history made me do it. If I don't like what a particular aspect of history involves, I won't go there.

Then someone said that a hero harming a heroine was understandable because he was a duke.

Boggle.

Is it that being an aristocrat, especially a duke, makes morals and self control impossible? The poor 6th Duke of Devonshire. You'd never guess what wickedness lurked, would you?

There are too many dukes in historical romance. Way too many, but...

Ah, that's the explanation! We’ve run out of reasonable ones and are now getting transmogrified alien dukes from the planet Ugh, where they truly don’t know any better. And anyway, we all know aliens are instantly smitten with lust for Earth women and just can’t help themselves.

Hey, keep those slimy tentacles to yourself, your grace!

But seriously, I don’t like the idea that historical romance is a suitable place for fantasies that readers couldn't take in contemporaries. What do you think?

Come to think of it, are there already contemporaries with these sorts of situations?

Jo

Bring Sexy Back

By Susan/Miranda

As any romance reader worth her frequent-buyer card can tell you, there are a LOT of racy books out there these days.  Not only have the love scenes in historical romances grown in number and explicitness, but the sub-genre of erotic romances has taken off in a big way, in fancy trade paperbacks with come-hither-soft-focus photographs on the covers and prices to match. 

The line between a really hot romance and erotica is a wavering one at best, and lately it’s so wavering that it’s nearly invisible.  One woman’s steamy romance is another’s filthy trash.  For every reader who enjoys following the hero and heroine into the bedroom, there’s another who skips That Part, or dismisses the same book altogether as little better than pornography. Hot sex, like beauty, truly does seem to be in the eye of the beholder. 

And while we often are hearing readers vocally declare it’s not their cup of tea, a good many others must silently be voting with their MasterCards.  This seems to be one romance-trend that’s thriving, as all of us Wenches who’ve been asked by editors to turn up the heat can attest.

I’ve read a bunch of scorchin’ books in the last year or so.  Some have come to me for contest-judging, some from my editor, and some –– I’ll be honest –– I’ve picked up myself.  For research purposes, mind you. The Countess of Castlemaine, heroine of my next historical novel, Royal Harlot, is, well, a harlot.  Barbara Villiers was a lady by birth as well as the mistress of King Charles II.  Her contemporaries and later historians branded her a great many less flattering names that ranged from “the great whore of Babylon” to a “wicked, avaricious nymphomaniac”. (I know, I know, not standard heroine material, but I like a challenge.)  For obvious reasons, sex plays an enormous part of who Barbara was as a woman and in her relationship with the King, as well as the basis for the power she held in his Court.  Therefore sex had to be a big part of my book, too.  With that in mind, I was curious to see how other writers beyond my usual favorites were handling sex and love.

Like all books, these vary widely in writing, imagination, characters, and emotion.  Some are well written, and others are about the same level as the letters to Playboy Advisor.  Some rely on a vocabulary that is, let us say, blunt, while others go in for flowery euphemisms that still manage to leave little to the imagination.

But there’s one thing that far too many of them have in common: for books filled with sex, to me they’re surprisingly unsexy.  A list of body parts and contortions, grunts and squeals of ecstasy just aren’t enough to indicate passion or even real desire, especially when the action begins on page one and continued with dutiful, predictable regularity for another 300 pages or so.

It’s not that I’m turned off by the sex itself.  It’s the lack of much else to support the sex that sadly makes so many of these books mediocre.  As a reader, I want to know how and why these characters are doing what they’re doing. I want to know if they’re acting on impulse, or wracked by guilt. I want something to be at stake, some risk being taken or commitment made.  I want all my senses engaged, including that all-important sense of humor.  I want to know what makes this particular encounter special to these particular characters, because if I don’t care about them as people, then I might as well be reading a textbook on animal husbandry.

I’m reminded of that old joke about how to seduce a woman, versus how to seduce a man.  For the woman, the advice is many paragraphs long, a prolonged and careful wooing through witty conversation, flowers, dinner, chocolate, champagne, soft lighting, and sweet  nothings.  But for a man, it’s only two words: get naked.

Maybe that’s the difference for me.  Just getting naked isn’t sexy.  I want all the rest that leads up to the grand finale.  I still think that the simmering tension in Gone With the Wind between Rhett and Scarlet before he carries her up that long flight of stairs is infinitely more satisfying –– and more sexy ––  than any number of naked bodies grappling behind the credits of contemporary movies. 

As Bruce Springsteen sang, “Can’t start a fire without a spark.” If you really want me to feel the heat, then show me the sparks, and the tinder, and maybe even a puff or two from the bellows before we get to the red-hot flames. 

Or, to quote Justin Timberlake: “Bring sexy back.”  Please!

So what did I do with the Countess of Castlemaine and King Charles?  You’ll have to wait until Royal Harlot is published in July, and tell me if I succeeded or not.  But how do you feel about the books you’re reading now?  Do you think there’s too much sex in books today, and not enough passion?  What do you believe is essential to a good love scene –– and what would you rather never have to read again?

SUPERSTITION

Pat Rice in the room---

As my  debut blog under the new regime, it was just too obvious to give me Friday 13th.  I must assume the Fates decreed that I actually research my subject for a change. Wikipedia  gives the dull boring theories as to the origins of the Friday the 13th superstition. One must wonder how the paranoid determined what day it was that Adam bit into his apple since there were no calendars before there were scientists to study the stars, but fear is always marvelously illogical.

Personally, I prefer the tales of clashes between Christian and pagan religions for the origins of the  superstition .  By Roman times, we at least had a calendar to mess with, and if sex goddesses dominated Friday (Romans worshiped Venus at the end of the week, and when the Norse adopted their calendar, the day of the week that is now Friday was named after their goddess of love, Freya),  I can just see the pagans celebrating  week's end with a good old fashioned drunken roll in the hay in celebration of Venus and Freya and those old priests cursing the day. So Friday already had a bad rep going for it before the 13th came into play.

The 13th part of the superstition has any number of sources, starting with the 13 people at the last supper (Jesus and his twelve apostles with Judas arriving last), the 13 months in the pagan lunar calendar, and the 13 months of the human menstrual cycle—making the number female, mysterious, and thus evil to male-dominated religions. Makes one wonder if we’ve wandered as far from primitive times as we thought.

Anyway, the story that truly fascinates me is about the  Knights Templar , which kind of sealed the deal for Friday the 13th. Killing off an entire company of enormously wealthy, powerful, Christian warriors on a single Friday the 13th with such methodical madness is sufficient to give any day a bad name.

I imagine, in the way of human nature, that all these various events, curses, and tales combined and generated coincidences that fueled the fear.  I’m sure, if one looks hard enough, there are plenty of disasters related to Fridays and the number 13 (look at the Apollo 13, for instance) to reinforce the superstition. And according to psychologists, the mind can be so strong that people make their own disasters out of their fears--thus, if you believe today is bad, it's gonna be bad, so go back to bed.

It’s rather obvious that the fear of Friday the 13th is a superstition (defined by Wikipedia as  “the irrational belief that future events are influenced by specific behaviors, without having a causal relationship.”).  But determining the boundaries of superstition is a little tougher. Astrology attempts to predict future events, but does it have a causal relationship? Astrologers would argue that the planets have a magnetic or energy affect on events, but scientists would scoff. It may be irrational to believe that by moving red objects and wind chimes and so forth into the proper sectors of your house according to the ancient Chinese belief in the forces of feng shui will produce the positive future effect you hope to achieve, but how do we know for certain that there isn’t a causal relationship if we actually produce that effect?

We can, of course, also carry this into our religious beliefs, since rationally, we cannot prove that any god exists or that the heavens have any effect on our lives.  Call me superstitious, but I’m a believer in things I can’t see. I can’t see gravity, but I haven’t fallen off the planet yet.  So why can’t I believe in God and astrology and feng shui as well? Or ghosts. And the power of Love.  That’s a big one for me, although there are cynics who shrug off Love as a female affectation and the aftereffect of strong sex.

So where do you draw the line at superstition? And how do you justify that line?  I’m off to set a little angel in my Fame sector to see if that affects the fate of this blog…

What is this thing called love?

By Mary Jo

I once read an article that asked how many of your friends' husbands you could imagine yourself with.  It was an interesting question, because I realized the answer is “practically none.”  Don’t get me wrong—my friends have great husbands, men who I enjoy and respect and value.  But can I imagine myself with them?  Mostly, no.  And I’m sure the reverse is also true—they might like me, but see me as a mate?  Not hardly.

So what is love?  What is going to make one man the person we want to spend our lives with?  What combination of personality, physical appeal, and position in life is going to make a potential mate irresistible?  (Note: Though I’m aiming this toward females, of course the pronouns can all be changed.) 

As mature adults, we tend to have a good idea of what works for us or what doesn’t, whether it’s clothing choices or potential partners.  When we’re young, things aren’t so clear.  A chicklit novel that I particularly enjoyed played with this as the heroine meets a variety of eligible men, and each one is at least briefly considered.  Is this The One? 

By the end of the book, the heroine has found her keeper, but in the course of the story, she meets a variety of possible mates.  Pairing off with any one of them would take her along a different path. 

When we’re young, life is full of possibilities.  Just choosing a college can take you in unknown directions.  I chose my university because everyone in the family went there (and they offered a full tuition scholarship.)  I didn’t know that in my junior year, I’d discover industrial design, change my major from English, and end up becoming a professionala designer.  Few colleges have industrial design programs, so going somewhere else would have changed my career path for sure. (I still might hand ended up a writer, but many, many other things, including my romantic life, would have been different.) 

Which college you  go to makes a huge difference romantically because you’re meeting a whole different pool of potential partners.  Go to State and maybe you’ll  meet and marry a clever, banjo playing biology grad student and spend your summers at the laboratory at Woods Hole, Massachusetts. (This is not a bad direction. <g>)

Go to a small religious run school and maybe you’ll end up a minister, or a minister’s wife, and spend a life oriented to spirit and service.  (And have whole congregations judging your housekeeping and your childrearing.)  Go to law school, and you may collect a lawyer as well as a law degree.  (This can mean a great house in a great neighborhood, but also some fiercely analytical arguments for the rest of your days!) 

In early adulthood, the mating instinct is tremendously strong and absorbs huge amounts of time and mental energy.  The hunt may manifest as going to bars and trolling for sex, or trying to sit next to that cute bearded guy in Victorian lit, or endlessly analyzing a boyfriend’s potential while knitting late at night with one’s girlfriends.  The search for a lasting mate is one of the enduring aspects of life, and fiction.   

I mustn’t forget the pheromones, those hormones that ring our chimes.  There are some people who really appeal, and a lot more who don’t.  I think back to college, when the mating hunt was at its height,  There were so many unrequited passions where one person wanted another who didn’t want them as much (or at all) that it amazes me that any two people ever manage to get married. <G> 

Of course, historically marriage was a clearly defined social contract designed for the survival of one’s self and progeny.  I once read of a late Victorian working class woman who said that she had a good marriage because “’e give me ‘is paycheck every week and ‘e don’t beat me.”  And he’d probably say he had a good wife because she fed him well, raised their kids, and maintained a comfortable household.  The criteria were clearer in those days!

Now we want it all—a partner who is sexy, affectionate, a great companion, loyal and reliable, and a reasonably good provider.  No wonder the divorce rate is high! 

This may all seem a wee bit digressive <g>, but it’s leading me toward the heart of the romance genre: writing characters who seem utterly right for each other.  I don’t find books where the romance is purely hormonal to be terribly satisfying.  It’s all very well to see someone across a crowded room and think, “That woman there.  I must have her!”

This can happen in real life in real life, of course.  It even happened to me once—a man did indeed see me across a crowded room and decide he had to meet me.  The subsequent relationship was brief, but it was fun while it lasted, and it’s nice to know that at least once, a man reacted to my rather average appearance that way. <G>

In the romance genre, pheromones are very important, producing many stunned meetings where someone, usually the hero, is entranced by his first sight of the heroine.  This is great fun to read, and female readers like to feel that feminine power of being able to generate fierce attraction in a man.  But four hundred pages of  “He/she is so hot!  I gotta jump his/her bones RIGHT NOW” is limited, to say the least. 

Attraction is just the beginning of the romance.  Next comes the hard part.  How do these people talk to each other?  Even though they might seem very different, are they on the same verbal wavelength?  Do they share a sense of humor?  (Kissing might not last, but laughter can.)  Humor is essential in Georgette Heyer romances—look at Venetia, Black Sheep, Faro’s Daughter, just for starters.  ( http://georgetteheyer.com/ )  In all of those stories, humor (or rather, humour <g>) is the unexpected bridge that connects to disparate people who on the face of it aren’t at all right for each other. 

Beyond humor, what about this hero is unique and utterly captivating?  What distinguishes him from every other tall, dark, cranky duke?  What about this heroine makes her stand out from all the other feisty maidens with kissable lips and heaving bodices? (That's Elizabeth Bennett and Mr. Darcy to the right, in case you haven't seen this version of Pride and Prejudice.  I love the tenderness of that image.)   

I could pick up books by any of the Wenches and show passages where true love is demonstrated beyond all doubt.  (That’s why we’re all romance writers, after all. <g>)  In my book Uncommon Vows, which I think of as my ‘subversion of the captivity  fantasy’, it becomes clear that the obsessive, possessive hero truly loves the heroine when he allows her to leave him because he recognizes that if she won’t stay of her own free will, she’ll never truly be his. 

I remember a romance where the heroine was a mining engineer, and the hero loves her blunt nails and work hardened hands because they illustrate the kind of smart, competent woman she is.  Or Jennifer Crusie’s delightful Bet Me, where the hero loves to eat and encourages the heroine to enjoy food rather than try to force herself to be skinnier than nature intended.  ( http://www.jennycrusie.com/ )

It’s the particular that makes a romance memorable—the uniqueness of the characters, the specifics of their relationship.  What romances do you love because the characters seem so utterly right for each other?  What kinds of details make them seem in harmony, capable of bonding forever and beyond?  Or what makes you think they’ll split up ten minutes after the book ends?!  I’d love to know!

Mary Jo, showing two lovers from the San Diego zoo.  (If you have a moment, click on the image to enlarge it.  They're really sweet.)

Every Dog and Cat has His Day.

Its Edith, hoping you had a happy holiday!

Im writing this with a dog standing on my lap.  So forgive please any typos.  See, Miss Daisy, my foundling, stork-legged, wasp-waisted black and white spotted muttsky, likes to climb upon my lap whilst Im working.  She'll stand there, two legs balanced on my lap, and two on the chair handle, and looks out in to the garden, making sure its squirrel free.  She weighs 43 pounds, by the way, but balances so deftly, I scarcely feel it.  Right now, I have to rest my check on her flank, and shift her slightly, and peer under her tail (not to get a wrong idea its a long thin tail that waves under my nose like a mustache) - to see the keys.  Every now and then she snakes her head around and buries her cold wet nose in my neck and tries to kiss me. 

Why do I put up with this?  Because of love.  And because shes the best writing partner a woman could have.  I dont need a critique group or a fan club.  Ive got Daisy.  She listens carefully to my chapters, and appreciates them.  Her opinions are always right, and its downright eerie how often she agrees with me.  When Im blocked, shes always willing to go for a nice long ride in the car with me so I can write in my head on the way.  She reminds me when its lunchtime, and wont let me work past Judge Judy and before-dinner snack time.  And Id definitely grow moss on my north side if it werent for her insisting that, rain, snow, or shine, I get outside for a good walk every couple of hours.

Dogs are essential writers assistants, helpers, critics and company.  (Cats are too, except for the walking around the block bits.) 

Our pets fit so neatly into our lives that we often dont give them enough credit.

Ive only had a few dogs in my books.  LADY OF SPIRIT and two novellas I wrote about magical Christmas puppies immediately come to mind.  (Hound of Heaven and Dogstar).  This is because I find they steal the scene so completely they distract me from the rest of the story. 

Now, April 10th is a ASPCA special wear orange for Adoption day. 

If you haven't, I urge you to discover the joys of pet ownership too.  Adopt a mutt.  Adopt an elder dog or cat.  They give us everything, and ask for nothing but affection, a bowl of water, and some kibble or fish treats.

I love animals, and of course, I love animal stories.  I teethed on Albert Payson Terhune, and still weep at the mention of Old Yeller.  I even loved Beethoven.

Do you have a favorite book about an animal?   Even better, have you got a story to tell about how a pet has enriched and enabled your life?

Pray tell!

And the Winner is ...

KATHLEEN NITSCH, of Sarasota, Florida!

Wow, did we ever have fun with our "guess the book cover" contest!  We received lots and lots of entries with correct guesses, so we put the names in a hat and drew a winner.  Congratulations, Kathleen!  Watch your mailbox for a positive deluge of autographed Wench books!

We'd also like to thank the rest of you for entering the contest.  Judging by the feedback, everyone had a blast hunting down book titles and matching them with the authors' names.  We have more fun and games planned for you in the future, so keep an eye out!  (Hint:  next month is our one year anniversary!)

Here are the book covers, along with a link to the Wench Web site for each book:

(kiss) The Return of the Earl by Edith Layton
http://tinyurl.com/2ly3px

(ancient) Seduction of an English Beauty by Miranda Jarrett
http://tinyurl.com/2n4djn

(eyes) A Most Unsuitable Man by Jo Beverley
http://tinyurl.com/2jnbef

(hands) Stealing Sophie by Sarah Gabriel
http://tinyurl.com/22noo9

(hat) Small  Town Girl by Patricia Rice
http://tinyurl.com/2wwxku

(pearls) The China Bride by Mary Jo Putney
http://tinyurl.com/2oo9qv

(Vneck) Mr. Impossible by Loretta Chase
http://tinyurl.com/345kaa

And hey, wasn't that fun?!!

But don't run away, now!  Be sure and check out the post below.  Loretta does it again!

Loretta Does it Again!

There's no stopping the woman!  The Easter Bunny just told me that Loretta's Not Quite a Lady is a Top Pick in the May 2007 issue of the Romantic Times Book Club magazine. http://www.romantictimes.com/home.php 

What a great way to debut a new book!  But wait, there's more.  On April 29 Loretta will be interviewed over at Risky Regencies http://riskyregencies.blogspot.com/ in conjunction with the release of Not Quite a Lady, and then on May 11 and May 18 Susan Miranda will also interview Loretta here at Word Wenches.  Congratulations, Loretta!  I hope the Easter Bunny leaves you some extra marshmallow Peeps in your basket!

Time Flies

Tempus fugit.
– Ovid
Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana.
–Groucho Marx

Susan Sarah here...I love our new rotating schedule! It gives us Wenches more time to get our blogs done, and gives you all more time to read and jump into discussions.
So here I am...with a few thoughts about time.

It's interesting that we often refer to reading in terms of time (it being a temporal occupation on one level)-- I flew through that book, we’ll say. Oh I crawled through that book. Oh I had no time to finish it, oh I have lots of time for reading this weekend (I wish!!).

This also applies to writing the books--mostly I crawl through writing the first half, and fly through the second half racing the deadline. Authors can spend months, even years, writing a book, and some readers can speed through that story in an afternoon. So there's the time we take to write them, and the time we take to read them. And there's the time that the story itself takes, which is where I'm heading today: the time frame covered in the story.

Romances in general seem to be getting shorter. I'm asked to wind a story up in under 95,000 words now, shorter if possible. Ten years ago my books were around 120,000 words -- lots more time (so to speak) to develop the story, so it's an interesting challenge when the book itself has to be shorter. This is happening more often--paper costs as well as the hours readers realistically have to devote to reading, along with a bit of the fast-food mentality applied to reading. We speed through reading books like we speed through so many things-–speed dial on the phone, drive-throughs, HOV lanes, speed checkout lanes, 15 Items or less; computers are faster, and now that I have wireless internet in my house, if it goes out, I have little patience for the dial-up dinosaur that I thought was so cool only a few years ago.

That subtle shift in society and mindset is affecting fiction and romance too, I think. Many romances, possibly most, that I read lately seem to cover a time frame of a few weeks, even a few days. I know this is sometimes true in my own stories–-there have been times when I’ve told my editor, but it’s only a few days, or under two weeks! That’s okay, she says. That’s good. We don’t want the hero and heroine apart for too long.

I remember reading big hefty juicy romance reads where the stories took months, a year, even years to develop between hero and heroine. But the genre continues to develop and change, and is never stagnant. Fiction itself, whatever the form, is not a stagnant art, it keeps altering and morphing its shape. Is it an improvement in romance to have the hero and heroine meet quickly, jump each other’s bones quickly, fall in love (in whatever order), resolve all differences and live happily ever after in a matter of, say, ten days?

It might seem unrealistic--though I will bet it's happened many, many times to people who fall in love. Love at first sight, for example, together with a strong conflict--how much time does that fictional couple need to get to a resolution? Not much, really. A fast time frame can add real immediacy and a sense of urgency to a story, which heightens other tensions in the book, which helps us sit on the edge of our seats, and fly through a book. The time frame is brief and to the point, and the story is focused.

Just now I’m revising my December Avon, To Wed A Highland Bride, which has a time frame of about a month. I had to stretch that out--it could have been two weeks, easy. I established an earlier meeting for the hero and heroine, a couple of months prior to the action of the book. Often a previous meeting or encounter years earlier can help set up a conflict and an attraction that will ignite and carry through the rest of the book. For this particular book, the story didn't need a long time frame, and that helps focus the lens of the romance, that hyper-focus that centers on the H & H.

True, there isn’t much room for extraneous subplots and characters when the manuscript itself needs to be short, and the time frame of the story is brief. But the story doesn't need to drag on to pad in more time to make it "believable." Once a story gets rolling–-which is hopefully right off the bat–-we want it to keep going at a good clip, so that we can roll right along with it.

So time flies in lots of romance. The technique works better with some storylines than others, of course, such as love at first sight. What a short time frame needs, besides an intense, passionate attraction–-real chemistry at work between two potential lovers--is intense conflict to balance that potential happiness. We love romance, but happiness is boring. Give us contrast, challenges surmounted, impossibilies conquered! And then we can have happiness.

What’s also interesting, I think, is that often a romance author does not make that time frame clear. The ticking clock that works so well in other genres-–mystery, romantic suspense, thriller and horror, for example--isn’t essential in the main plot of a romance. Yet a bit of ticking-clock tension helps give the conflict some added fuel and helps keep the story moving along toward an exciting, adventurous, passionate, satisfying conclusion. But where a thriller author will make sure you see that clock, even noting it scene by scene, sometimes blurring it in romance works best.

A sense of the passing calendar can distract the reader, or give attention to a non-essential part of the story. The thrust (ahem) of the story is the romance, and the process and stages of falling in love and overcoming great odds to do so, whether it's on the dramatic, paranormal, or humorous side. And partly we don't wave that clock or calendar around in historical romance because...well, it can be a bit of a stretch to accept that a couple could meet, be thrown together in sometimes extraordinary and at the least challenging circumstances, while at odds with one another over some key conflicts..and for that couple to fall into each other’s arms, fall into bed, fall in love while resolving said conflicts...and all, often, in a week or two of the real time of the story.
But that’s the fun of it--that speed, that heady rush, that delirious experience of falling in love and conquering the odds, climbing that virtual personal mountain, to get there.

I also write mainstream historical fiction, where the time frame is just the opposite. A story may cover several years, decades, even a lifetime for the main character. The writer has to cover long lengths of time, with some events seen so close up that they encompass whole chapters, and others covered in a few sentences. It’s a delicate balance. The reader could fall asleep, or feel bored, or simply put the book down and not come back. Even while covering forty years, that story has to keep moving at a good clip. And often, the writer has a page length similar to romance; my first mainstream fiction came in at a little over 100,000 words, and covered decades.

But, time being what it is, constantly rolling forward (though there is that concentric theory, everything happens at once, and sometimes it feels that way...) --I have to get back to my revisions!!

What do you all think of the shorter time frames in historical romance novels now, and the fast pace of the shorter books that we are seeing more often in the genre?  How do you feel about larger historical novels that cover great gobs of time – do you lose interest, do you feel satisfied or not, do you stick with it or let it gather dust? Or do you notice one way or the other?

~Susan Sarah

p.s. The final cover isn't finished yet for my next Sarah Gabriel novel, To Wed A Highland Bride, and I'll show you that as soon as it's ready...but here's a wee peek at what promises to be a gorgeous cover!

Imaginary letters

From Loretta:
      I spend a lot of time, when I’m not actually writing, composing letters in my head.  Every day, for instance, my brain produces a new letter to the editor of the Worcester Telegram & Gazette, noting some egregious typo, such as--in a headline--Dcotor for Doctor.  I’m thinking, Hey, you’re an actual newspaper.  Don’t you have any actual proofreaders?  Or have they gone out of fashion, along with putting real news on the front page, rather than a story about someone’s missing dog or cat or the strange case of the Vanishing Reservation Book.  No, I'm not making that up.  It was a front page story:  A local restaurant’s reservation book disappeared, then reappeared with all the pages of reservations for Mother’s Day & college graduation weekends torn out.  News, yes:  Strange little crimes like this intrigue me, and it’s fun to ponder motives.  But on the front page, when we’ve got wars all over the place &, you know, crazy stuff in Washington, DC to fill up that space?  What's the Local Section for, anyway, then?
       Then there’s the April issue of REAL SIMPLE magazine.  On page 197 begins an article offering “26 easy ways you can help save the planet.”
      Along with the usual tactics most of us know about--e.g., not letting the water run while you brush your teeth--they advise us not to wash clothes unless they stink...  Um...eeew.  But...O...K.  I mean, this is the Earth Day issue, right?
      Then on page 225, they offer their “road test” of cleaning wipes.
      Let me see if I understand this.  I should save water by wearing dirty clothes but it’s OK to clean my house with cloths made out of an artificial material impregnated with cleaning chemicals, which I’ll use once and throw away, to add to the mountains of garbage in landfills.
      Not to badmouth wipes.  My being environmentally aware does not mean all my consumer choices are ecologically virtuous.
      It’s the contradiction that gets me.  At least for the Earth Day issue, maybe someone could have found a product a bit more Earth-friendly to rate?  Like, I dunno, brands of recycled paper or something.
      So I compose a letter in my head.  Which wouldn’t be my first to this magazine.  I even write and mail some of them, like the one about how impossibly difficult and complicated and time-consuming I have found it, trying to get REAL SIMPLE to send me scent-free magazines.   Or the hoops you have to jump through to register for the online version if you're not on AOL.
      But most of the time I merely amuse myself with my witty observations about how someone is doing something wrong or foolish or dumb.  I don’t actually write the letters.  Who has time?
      Which brings me to sex.
      The New England Romance Writers conference was held this past weekend, and I joined some friends for our annual post-conference dinner.  As often happens when women gather, the talk turned to sex.  How much is necessary, how much is too much, when it works, when it doesn’t.
       I mean sex in books.  Romance writers, remember?
      This got me thinking about my reading choices, and made me realize that I write letters in my head to book publishers, too.  And so, very likely, did all the other women sitting at that table with me.
      For instance:  We’ve got nothing against sexy books, but it would be nice if the sex had something to do with the stories and the characters.  And maybe could we up the sexual tension and reduce the Slot A into Slot B details?
      But it isn’t just the sex.  As comments here on the blog have made plain, some of us could write impassioned letters about bringing back the traditional Regency.  Others long for denser and intenser historical novels, in wild and exotic settings.  There are plots we want to see more of and some we want to see less of.  Character types we loathe and types we love.
      Some would write about what covers should or should not look like.  Some would ask why we can’t have larger print--not as in LARGE PRINT edition, but as in not-so-teeny type.  Some would ask if proofreaders are an extinct species.  Some would object to character names or anachronisms or language misdemeanors.
      What about you?  Has something you’ve read lately made you want to write a letter--positive or negative--to a publisher? But maybe instead of writing or thinking about it, you ranted or raved about it to a friend?  If you could influence a publisher with your message, what would you say?
         

      

New Schedule

Greetings!  We have a new schedule that we think you'll like, and a brand new contest to start us off (see post directly below this one).  Effective Monday, April 2, we will move to a Monday/Wednesday/Friday posting schedule.  This will give our posts more air time before the next one goes up, and it also allows a little breathing room for us as we juggle conferences, writing, blogging, speaking engagements, deadlines, families, and Life.  The weekends will be reserved for announcements, but you never know when a Wench might drop by with a joke or an impromptu blog on a frivolous subject just for fun.  We hope you like the new schedule.  Now, scroll down for the contest!

Sincerely,

The Wenches

New Contest

Do you recognize any of these snips from book covers? Can you name the author and title? Here's one hint -- they're all books written by Wenches. But you probably guessed that. So what's the deal? A great one. To start our new schedule on a grand note, one lucky winner will win SEVEN books. Yes, a book from each Wench. All you have to do is identify the author and the book title of each snip and send your answers to Sherrie at [email protected]. If you don't recognize the covers straight away, go to our web sites and look around. The covers are there somewhere. Some are new, some are older. Some of these should be easy. A couple may challenge you a bit, but that adds to the fun. Next Sunday, April 8th, at 10am Pacific time, Sherrie will see who's won. If more than one person gets all the right answers, she'll draw a name and announce the clever winner. We're not allowing comments on this post to stop any of you absentmindedly sending your answers to the whole world. Here we go, in no particular order. Have fun!

Welcome, April!

This is Mary Jo, not Edith, and that's for real, not April's Fool's Day.  As of tomorrow, WordWenches will have a new schedule--our faithful whipmistress, Sherrie, will post more about that later.  So Edith is off frolicking in spring flowers, and I'm doing a short joke post, assuming I'm capable of writing short. <G> 

If you're interested in the history of April Fool's Day, visit Wikipedia:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fool%27s_Day   Note that even though the underlying premise of Wikipedia is that visitors can create and modify posts, that's blocked for this particular entry because April 1st was bringing too many joke changes. <G>

This particular joke came without attribution over the internet so I hope I'm not stepping on any copyright toes, but it's too much fun not to share: 

*** The British are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist
threats that have raised their security level from "Miffed" to
"Peeved".  Soon though, security levels may be raised yet again to
"Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross".  Londoners have not been "A Bit
Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out. 
Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody
Nuisance".  The last time "A Bloody Nuisance" was noted was during
the great fire of 1666.***

Humor is a  great aid in difficult times, and the British are particularly good at that.  As you can tell from the Wenches' publication lists, we're great Anglophiles (and lucky to have one genuine, certifiable British/Canadian Wench among us!)  So here's to wry humor even on the hard days--and may April bring you fun and flowers!

Mary Jo, adding that for our south-of-the-equator readers, April will bring the color and exhilaration of autumn instead.  (The picture at right is one that I took in May 2005 in the Drakenburg Mountains of South Africa.)