Back to Top

Monthly Archives: May 2007

Can we talk about food? Honestly, I don’t know how our heroines aren’t big as houses–most of the lifestyle books I’ve read about the Regency suggest that butter was big, and vegetables weren’t. Plus dinners were long, drawn-out events with course upon course upon course.

If I had lived during that time, I would be challenging Prinny to a weight-off.

Why am I talking about this? Because, like a lot of women, my eating is psychologically motivated. My agent is in the midst of submitting my Regency-set historical, Lessons In Love, and so far I’ve gotten three [very nicely-worded] rejections. My immediate response has been to head for the cookies. My next response has been to think about how I’m getting older (I’m 42; here I am in one of my favorite vintage dresses. It hides a lot.), the metabolism seems to be slowing, working out is hard enough without carrying extra poundage, and really, eating cookies is such a silly reaction. So I settle for a rice cake or iced coffee or something. I’ve still gained a few pounds, but at least it’s not more than a few pounds.

I’m guessing some of the more expertish of Riskies know exactly what the ladies did back then to keep from expanding like the universe–constantly. There was all that needlework, the occasional sidesaddle horseback ride, walking around the gardens, changing clothes, writing letters, etc., etc. No elliptical for those women.

I am guessing that some of you, as well as my fellow Riskies, also have “bad” reasons for eating; what do you do to stave it off? (And why does eating have to be “good” or “bad”?) What’s your favorite ‘me time’ indulgence? How do you think our heroines kept their slim, girlish figures?

Megan

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 8 Replies

I found out some exciting news last week–my Avon book, The Rules of Gentility, is being released a month early, in August.
(Another excuse to post my gorgeous cover!) So I’ll be a beach read! (OK, that’s my quota of exclamation points used up.)

But there’s a reason, and lest you think I’m going to talk entirely about myself, here’s why: Becoming Jane opens in the US August 3, and the publishers want to take advantage of the Jane-mania that will accompany the movie.

Becoming Jane has just opened in England and in case you haven’t heard about it, it’s a very fictional account of Jane’s formative years and her short-lived engagement to Tom Lefroy. Anne Hathaway and James McAvoy star in a cast that includes Julie Walters, Maggie Smith, and Ian Richardson. The reviews I’ve read indicate that it’s a gorgeous movie–shot on location in Ireland–but with a rather weak story line.

Find out more at Becoming Jane’s official website and there’s also some interesting info at the filmfactory.co.uk (with less fancy downloads and some reviews).

Of course we’ll all rush to see this movie, but tell me what you think of the casting (here’s James McAvoy in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe!). And do you think the storyline is too inevitable to justify two hours worth of film, however gorgeous? Who would you have chosen to play Jane Austen?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 13 Replies

R&W

Rest and Writing, that is.

Neither of which has happened much this week, which started with one of my kids getting an ear infection. For those of you who don’t have children, or are fortunate enough not to have gone through this, ear infections generally mean interrupted sleep for everyone until enough violently pink bubble-gum smelling antibiotic has been slurped.

Needless to say, progress on my Mess-in-Progress has been painfully sloooowwww.

The good news is this weekend it’ll be my turn for a retreat. Each year a couple of writing buddies of mine and I get away to a lakeside cottage, bringing laptops, notebooks, inspiring music, munchies, wine and chocolate. During the days we focus on solitary writing, breaking only for meals or the occasional thinking walk (or paddle, depending on whether a canoe is available). In the evenings we chat and watch romantic movies–this year it’s the newest adaptation of JANE EYRE which I’ve been dying to see.

Anyway this retreat could not come at a better time. It’s been a tough winter for writing and this latest ear infection felt like the universe telling me I should give it up. But I won’t. I’ve got friends who won’t let me, for one thing! For another, I know that all I need is some decent sleep and a good shot of writing time to get the mojo flowing.

So my Risky friends and visitors, when you’re at the brink of despair, what pulls you back?

Do you go on retreats and what sorts?

Elena
www.elenagreene.com


We haven’t talked about covers recently, have we?

For me, that’s one of those eternally interesting topics.

There have been so many styles of Regency covers over the years…

Over the decades, rather!



Different publishers have their different styles…

And these vary year by year, too!

I can think of at least three very distinct styles that Fawcett had, for example, and a lot of variations within each.

And some publishers, like Avon, changed their look so much at some point that they were really unrecognizable.

Some covers seem to emphasize the period style…

And some, the romance.

Some Regency covers seem to be shouting FUNNY! BOOK! NOT! SERIOUS!

(For me, most of Harlequin’s long-defunct Regency line falls into this category.)

On some books, the illustration takes up the whole front cover.

On others, the illustration is in a little box.


And then of course, there were Zebra’s last-minute experimental covers, which appeared right before Zebra quit doing Regencies.

These tended to not have a single distinct style (which, as far as I can
tell, is extremely rare in the history of Regencies), but rather to give each author her own unique cover style — the way publishers usually do with single-title books.

I know some people thought these covers were the best thing to ever happen to Regencies — and some thought them a very bad idea.

(I adored them myself. What did you think?)



Almost all covers have had one or both of the main characters as the central feature of the cover illustration, but even that isn’t an absolute rule.

Avon’s covers at one point were impressionistic pastel compositions, often showing landscapes or cottages or meadows, with little people somewhere in the picture.

This
Kate Moore cover is an example of that — though in many of the covers during Avon’s Impressionist Period, the characters are much less noticeable than they are here!

So…which of the covers pictured here do you like?

Or hate?

Do you like a Regency imprint to have a distinct style?

What do you think of less realistic covers (like the Heyer cover here, or cartoon covers?)

Do colors matter to you? Do you like pastels, or brights, or the muddy greens and browns Signet favored for many years?

Do historically inaccurate costumes or backgrounds bother you? If so, how much?

All opinions welcome!

Cara
Cara King, author of MY LADY GAMESTER — which has a cover that gave her some joy, and some eye-rolling

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 13 Replies