Back to Top

Monthly Archives: July 2009

For some women, it’s height; for others, broad shoulders. For still others–sometimes the heroines at the start of our books, although certainly not by the end–it’s wealth.

For me, it’s the voice. That one essential element to finding someone attractive, without which it’s a dealbreaker. I’ve only realized it recently, while watching actor Ed Burns try to be confident in Confidence. He wasn’t. And it was because he hasn’t got a sufficiently deep, raspy voice; his voice is a tenor, unconvincing because it was just too high. I just didn’t believe what he was saying, despite his posturing.

There’s a trainer at my gym who is, by job definition, totally cut and happens to be really good-looking on top of it. But I just can’t find him attractive because his voice doesn’t appeal to me (too high–sense a trend here?). Conversely, I swooned over former NY Knicks coach Jeff Van Gundy after particularly tough games, because his voice got all raspy and jagged after 48 minutes of yelling. I know it’s weird. But I cannot deny my attraction (the fact that he is so intense is appealing, too, but that is a post for another time).

And I think, although I would like to blame my inherent Anglophilia for it, is why I find so many British men ridiculously attractive; there’s something about the way they speak that I find devastating. Clive Owen has a supremely sexy voice, as does Sean Bean. Richard Armitage is off the charts in terms of how damn sexy his voice is. Listen to a sample of him reading Georgette Heyer‘s Sylvester.

Oh, goodness. (By the way? If my husband doesn’t pick up on copious hints to get this for my birthday next month, he might need a Clue Intervention).

So if a hero has a deep snarl, or a husky rasp, or a low-throated growl, I’m sold.

(And, yes, my husband has a fantastic voice, especially when he’s really worn out.)

That, I’ve realized, is my dealbreaker. What’s yours?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 21 Replies

Yesterday was the anniversary of Shelley’s death (1792-1822) and today is the birthday of Barbara Cartland (1901-2000) so I thought I’d blog about them both. And yes, there is a connection.

Shelley first: Anarchist, heretic, idealist, fugitive, sponger, love-rat, twentysomething corpse: Percy Shelley was surely the romantic’s romantic … more.

Even his death was unconventional and appropriately mysterious. He drowned in a boating accident, and allegedly foresaw his own death. When his body was cremated his heart did not burn, and Mary Shelley kept it for the rest of her life. (Eeew.)

And now onto Dame Barbara. She wrote some romance novels (which is like saying Shelley was a great poet). But did you know she was also a recording artist? In 1978, she joined up with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra to produce her first and (thankfully) only album, Barbara Cartland’s Album of Love Songs.

Now, whatever your opinion of her as a writer (I’m saying only that it’s a taste I have yet to acquire), the lady can’t sing. Not many people in their 70s can, even if they could before. And the songs–helping upon helping of silken strings, swelling harps, throbbing woodwinds, angelic back up vocals; as the musical spouse commented, “Vaughan Williams in a whimpering mood.”

Each song is sandwiched by Cartland’s “poems”–stuff like this:

A woman must seek all her life until she finds in one man the complete perfect love which is both human and divine. Any sacrifice is worthwhile when one knows the ecstasy, the glory, and the irresistible fires of love.

And if you think her breathless, posh voice for the spoken word is bad, just wait until she sings. What was her arranger thinking? All that I could stand to listen to was way out of her range (if she even had one). How Deep Is the Ocean is particularly bad. Yes, these songs are available for your download and listening pleasure at WFMU, with a review that is less than polite (and with some entertaining typos).

So what do Shelley and Cartland have in common? A lot to answer for, in my grumpy opinion. Shelley made it okay for male writers to behave badly; and Cartland left romance writers an unfortunate legacy. In other words, the cult of the writer-as-personality. But with Shelley it wasn’t just image (Byron, now, is another matter)–he was a passionate, visionary, uh, nutter, who honestly believed in free love and radicalism. Yet his callous horndogginess certainly had repercussions–none of the women with whom he was involved escaped with heart, or even life, intact.

Whereas the Cartland legend–all that pink, pink, pink, the glamorous trappings, big hair, lapdog optional–it’s still with us. I think the Internet has made it even worse–here we are, all over the place, feeding out bits about ourselves on Twitter (yes, I do), Facebook (no), blogs (here I am), and so on… and I’m wondering how much promotion is too much promotion, and how fascinating our lives as writers and all round nice people really are.

What do you think Barbara Cartland or Shelley would have done with the Internet if they’d had access to it?

Meet (most of) the Riskies for more opinionated rants on Saturday, July 18 at 4:00 at Harry’s Pub at the Wardman Park Marriott, and, yes, I will have these buttons available on my other favorite rant topic–the pebbled nub.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 8 Replies

Next Sunday our guest author is none other than NYT Bestseller and RITA winner, Mary Jo Putney! What a treat!

I can credit Mary Jo Putney with helping me forge my love of Regency Romance. The Rake and the Reformer (re-released as The Rake), recommended to me by my friend Helen, was the very first traditional regency I read. I loved that book! (How many times does The Rake and The Reformer appear on lists of favorite historicals?) The Rake and the Reformer began my love affair with the Regency era and sparked my voracious reading of traditional regencies and as many of Mary Jo’s books I could get my hands on.

Mary Jo gave me many wonderful reading experiences. I fell for her Fallen Angel series. Shattered Rainbows first got me interested in Waterloo. And Thunder and Roses had a perfect level of sensuality. I loved the premise of The Bargain and greatly admired The Bride Series, especially The China Bride with its rich recreation of Regency era China.

I could go on and on…

But I was also lucky enough to get to know Mary Jo through Washington Romance Writers. One of my first WRW meetings was a synopsis workshop given by Mary Jo. Mary Jo had invited members to read her latest book (can’t remember which one it was now) ahead of time and to write a synopsis of it for the workshop. Being highly motivated, I came to the meeting with my synopsis, only to discover I was one of two people who had done so.

We were invited to read our synopses to the crowded room. The other member read hers, which turned out to be merely chapter summaries. I read mine and was applauded. Wow. I’d done it right!

(By the way, the member who had done the synopsis all wrong was Catherine Asaro. Catherine, of course, went on to become a super-mega star author of sci fi and fantasy and a Nebula winner.)

Also about this time, I read Mary Jo’s essay “Welcome to the Dark Side” in Dangerous Men Adventurous Women, an early (1992) defense of the Romance genre, another “Aha!” moment about how to craft a Romance hero.

It took me awhile to gain the courage to write a Regency Historical, to aspire to join the likes of Mary Jo. Gasp! But try I did. I had a chance to discuss an early draft with Mary Jo at a Washington Romance Writers Retreat. I remember it so clearly, standing in the lobby of Hilltop House with Mary Jo and then editor Gail Fortune, explaining my story. Mary Jo gave me some excellent advice, which I took wholeheartedly, but mostly her interest helped me to persevere with the book—which eventually became The Mysterious Miss M.

Recently, of course, Mary Jo invited us to discuss The Diamonds of Welbourne Manor on the Word Wenches Blog, which was great exposure for the book.

And yesterday Mary Jo let me know that The Diamonds of Welbourne Manor was reviewed in The Baltimore Sun.

So, really, look what it has done for my writing life to have a Mary Jo Putney in it!

I’m delighted we at Risky Regencies can help get out the word about Mary Jo’s latest book, Loving a Lost Lord, her return to the Regency era (Yay!). Come back next Sunday July 13 to read her interview and comment for a chance to win a copy of Loving a Lost Lord.

What is your favorite Mary Jo Putney book?
Do you have a favorite Mary Jo Putney moment?

*

“We hold these truths to be self-evident . . .”

Happy Official Holiday for the Fourth Of July, Even Though It’s Only The Third!

There are certain inviolable rights that we take as Life Assumptions; I’m talking, of course, about knowing–and owning as part of one’s self–certain pop culture touchstones. Recently (i.e. yesterday), I was reminded of a truth I’d suppressed: That Carolyn Jewel, our newest Risky, had never seen North And South, the BBC mini-series based on an Elizabeth Gaskell book. It’s not set in the Regency (it’s Victorian), but it is otherwise perfectly suited for a historical romance fan.

Because, you know, it’s set in a historical period and is a romance.

Anyway, Carolyn will doubtless rectify that gap in her life soon, thanks to pressure from me and many other N&S fans who are on Twitter, but it got me to thinking about pop culture assumptions, and then into the Venn Diagram of romance novel assumptions. There are some people who grew up without TV (like me), and I don’t have that common vernacular of forty-somethings who grew up on a diet of ’70s television. There are romance readers who’ve never read Nora Roberts (also like me), or Lord of Scoundrels (NOT like me), or seen Romancing the Stone (me, again), or liked Ghost (guilty), or any of a countless other shared experiences that weren’t so shared after all. Just like we all know Farrah Fawcett, and Michael Jackson, and Watergate, and chia pets, and Frankie Says Relax, we all assume we’ve read Nora, or seen certain iconic romantic movies or share the same opinions and assumptions about our books (for example, I am always startled when someone doesn’t love Lord of Scoundrels; I can accept it, but it stuns me for a minute or two).

What Romance Pop Culture Touchstone have you never experienced? Which of your Romance Pop Culture Touchstones are inviolable when it comes to discussing romance with others?

And happy Truth-Holding Day!

Megan

*See how concerned Richard Armitage is that Carolyn hasn’t viewed his John Thornton-ness?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 9 Replies

I am Everard Dominic Benedict Ashford Alexander Artichoke FitzGrennan, Duke of Hawkraven, known and feared as Satan’s Elbow, but you may address me as…Cuddles. Top Ten Things, Rules of Gentility

Part X, because this is something we write about again and again–how to find names for characters that don’t sound hideously 21st century, that somehow represent a quality of the character, and lend themselves to different forms of address. How would your hero’s mother, sister, mistress, best friend, etc. address him? (Other than as “sir,” of course.)

This is something on my mind at the moment because I’m considering changing the hero’s name in a book that’s pretty much written. For one thing, his nickname, a shortened version of his title, is a sort of fish. And yes, he’s a retired naval officer, but even so… His first name is pretty much nonedescript because no one ever uses it. Everyone close to him uses his nickname, even the heroine. As far as fish names go, I can think of better ones–Hal, short for Viscount Halibut–but there are also minor characters called Henry and Harry. Not that he has to have a fish name–I’m trying to get away from the fish motif, you understand. And it bothers me that somehow, in not having the right name, I don’t have the proper handle on the character. Eeek.

So I did a bit of research on favorite names and it’s a small but level playing field in the 18th-19th century: lots of Johns and Williams. There’s a list at thinkbabynames.com but I’m not sure how accurate it is in relation to usage then or or now, and some are specific to the US. For a list of popular English girls’ names in the eighteenth century, there’s some good information in Female Names over the Centuries.

I like old-fashioned interchangeable male/female names like Evelyn and Joslyn. (Did you know that John Wayne’s real name was Marion Michael Morrison and he adopted the nickname Duke in his youth?)

The book Bad Baby Names by Michael Sherrod and Matthew Rayback,was reviewed in the NY Times by John Tierney:

By scouring census records from 1790 to 1930, Mr. Sherrod and Mr. Rayback discovered Garage Empty, Hysteria Johnson, King Arthur, Infinity Hubbard, Please Cope, Major Slaughter, Helen Troy, several Satans and a host of colleagues to the famed Ima Hogg (including Ima Pigg, Ima Muskrat, Ima Nut and Ima Hooker).

The authors also interviewed adults today who had survived names like Candy Stohr, Cash Guy, Mary Christmas, River Jordan and Rasp Berry. All of them, even Happy Day, seemed untraumatized.

A contest that followed the review for the worst modern name came up with this winner:

Iona Knipl. The judges chose it because, in addition to being an embarrassing pun, it also set up an inevitable reply from people imagining they were being wittily original. I called up Miss Knipl and asked her how many times she had heard someone meet her and reply, “I own two.”

As for names that seem to have implicit meaning, if you read Chuck Shepherds’s News of the Weird, you’ll know that the name Wayne has unfortunate connotations and the column has regular Wayne updates.

So I won’t be renaming my hero Wayne.

Here’s a short story I wrote in 2001 at the writing site Toasted Cheese, all about the different forms of names and what they can say about characters.

The hero in A Most Lamentable Comedy is called Nicholas Congrevance, because I like the first name and his surname is a French Arthurian name I came across that seems suitably foreign and exotic. The heroine was originally named Mary, which I found a very stultifying good girl name (although her first appearance in The Rules was as a very bad girl indeed) so I changed it to Caroline, and she took off. The book is released July 23 and you can order it with free shipping from bookdepository.co.uk. And don’t forget the contest at my website!

Compulsory promotion over, what are your favorite names in fiction and in real life? Is there an interesting story behind a character’s name in one of your books?