Back to Top

Author Archives: Janet Mullany

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

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?

There’s a lot of discussion around the web on the issue of e-publishing and its role in the romance industry. I feel a little overwhelmed by it all, and if you have not become overwhelmed yet and are interested in future trends of the publishing business and literacy, start here.

So I thought I’d talk about the issue of living in an age of rapidly-changing technology with mind-boggling choices of receiving and disseminating information and finding entertainment. I’m talking, of course, about the Regency.

Georgian England was known for its high literacy level. There was an audience for reading and paper prices dropped at the end of the eighteenth century; at a guess, it’s because the amount of cotton manufacturing rose, and in an era where everything had its price, there were more rags around to convert into paper. By 1800, every town had its own printing press and there were 250 periodicals in print. Periodicals and newspapers were handed on to other readers an average of seven times per copy.

The first circulating library opened in Bath in 1725; this specifically English phenomenon for the well-heeled, with membership costing about 1 gn., had expanded by 1800 to 122 circulating libraries in London, and 268 in the provinces.Libraries accounted for 400 copies of a book’s average print run of 1,000.

To give an idea of the print life of a best seller of the Georgian era, this book (probably not in the genteel circulating libraries) was first published as a pamphlet between 1710 and 1716, and was in its fourth edition by 1718. Between 1718 and 1788, it had gone through eighteen editions, with the eighth and ninth printings selling more than 12,000 copies in a few months. Each edition grew, with additional salacious material: testimonials, requests for advice, and the author’s response to print rivals and attacks. The fourth edition contained 88 pages; the 15th edition (1730) had quadrupled in size.

This evolving conversation in print clearly struck a chord with the eighteenth-century reading public, an audience that both delighted in the moral instruction and refinement available in The Tatler and The Spectator and made sexy or scandalous fiction like Delarivier Manley’s The New Atalantis (1709) and Love in Excess by Eliza Haywood (1719) early best-sellers–and that continued to read Onania long after popular tastes in fiction changed to favor more refined novels like Samuel Richardson’s Pamela (1740-1) and Haywood’s The History of Miss Betsy Thoughtless (1751). The early eighteenth-century reading audience was one that seemed eager to both read and write back to the literary marketplace, to both absorb and influence the products that marketplace had to offer them. Read more here.


Of course, fiction was suspect from the beginning. It encouraged its audience, predominantly female, to lounge around and daydream, beguiled by narrative seduction. If you weren’t careful, your womenfolk’s experiences might end up as anonymous contributors to the next edition of the bestseller of the 1700s; in 1792, Bon Ton Magazine warned that readers of novels really couldn’t distinguish between reality and fantasy: women of little experience are apt to mistake the urgency of bodily wants with the violence of a delicate passion.

Oliver Goldsmith commented in similar vein: How delusive, how destructive, are those pictures of consummate bliss. They teach the youthful mind to sigh after beauty and happiness which never existed, that despise that little good which fortune has mixed up in our cup, by expecting more than she ever gave.

In 1773, The Lady’s Magazine agonized, There is scarce a young lady in the kingdom who has not read with avidity a great number of romances and novels, which tend to vitiate the taste.

A fictional mother in The Lady’s Monthly Museum complained that her daughter reads nothing in the world but novels—nothing but novels, Madam, from morning to night… The maid is generally dispatched to the library two or three times in the day, to change books. One week she will read in the following order: Excessive Sensibility, Refined Delicacy, Disinterested Love, Sentimental Beauty, etc.

It’s particularly appropriate that we discuss the issues of mass literacy and mass market fiction today, because it’s the birthday of George Orwell, one of my literary heroes, a passionate, clear-sighted defender of clarity and good language use. So I’m ending this long and rambling post with Orwell’s six rules for good writing from his essay Politics and the English Language:

  1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
  2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
  3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
  4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
  5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
  6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

Many questions possible here–do you think, as I do, that we’re a reading audience, to borrow from my quote above, that is eager to both read and write back to the literary marketplace, to both absorb and influence the products that marketplace had to offer them?

If you’re a writer, what do you think of Orwell’s rules?

Do you own an e-reader? How do you feel about it? Do you prefer it to tree products? What do you think of print vs. digital?

Obligatory SSP: Contest on my site. Enter now!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 9 Replies

This time last year we all blogged about Waterloo for a week (I wrote about the ordinary soldiers), and so since June 18 is the exact anniversary of the battle I thought I’d find some material we didn’t cover then.

In 2004 the European community made the decision to restore the battlefield, providing a visitor center and other amenities to honor the site and attract visitors. Like many battlefields, it’s spread out over a large geographic area. Here’s the official Waterloo site.

There’s also a site for the official reenactment of the battle, which takes place every year, with some beautiful photographs, all under copyright and in a flash format, of reenactors–Napoleon and Wellington among them. And yes, this year’s reenactment is going on right now!

If you happen to be going over to London, there’s a celebration at Apsley House, the home of the Duke, with special events this weekend.

And if you’re not planning to travel this weekend, you can play the Battle of Waterloo game (no, I haven’t tried it out, and don’t blame me for the timesuck this undoubtedly is).

Restoration of the battlefield continues, the most recent effort being the restoration of Hougoumont Farm, where a strategically important part of the battle took place. The current Duke of Wellington, now in his 90s, is an enthusiastic supporter of Project Hougoumont. The opening of the Farm is timed for the two-hundred anniversary in 2015.

For a modern perspective on the first Duke and his descendents, Lady Jane Wellesley wrote a book published last year, Wellington: A Journey Through My Family. There’s a review here with this quote:

I reflect on the indiscriminate, humbling power of war, and its aftermath, the way it plays havoc with people’s destiny.

Further proof that there are still treasures to be found hidden away in old houses, the Scotsman reported last year that Walter Scott had done some souvenir hunting at the battlefield:

Larry Furlong, custodian of the trust, said the banners – one French and three British – had been stored in a cupboard between Scott’s study and his library.

It is believed only a handful of people have been aware of their existence since they were brought to Abbotsford.

Have you visited Apsley House or Waterloo, or are you saving pennies for 2015? Do you enjoy reenactment activities, as participant or spectator?

SSP in fine print: New website and contest. Check it out.

It’s the birthday of the great English landscape artist John Constable, born this day in 1776 (died 1837). He was born and grew up in Suffolk, the son of a corn merchant who owned Flatford Mill (now an environmental center), and it was expected that he would take over the family business. But while still quite young he sketched the Suffolk countryside and eventually in 1799 persuaded his father to give him an allowance so that he could attend the Royal Academy.

In 1802, he turned down the position of drawing master at Marlow Military College and around this time seems to have had a breakthrough regarding his art, realizing that his calling was as a professional landscape painter and rejecting the classical conventions of his training:

For the last two years I have been running after pictures, and seeking the truth at second hand. I have not endeavoured to represent nature with the same elevation of mind with which I set out, but have rather tried to make my performances look like the work of other men…There is room enough for a natural painter. The great vice of the present day is bravura, an attempt to do something beyond the truth.

Although he visited the Lake District his first love, and the landscape that spoke most strongly to him, remained that of Suffolk. Unlike his literary contemporaries, he did not seek or find the sublime in “romantic” landscapes. In the words of his biographer, Charles Leslie,

His nature was peculiarly social and could not feel satisfied with scenery, however grand in itself, that did not abound in human associations. He required villages, churches, farmhouses and cottages.

In his lifetime his paintings were far more successful in France than in England although he refused to travel abroad to promote his work.

In 1809 he met his future wife, Maria Bicknell, but her family opposed the match; they considered Constable a poor, unsuccessful artist from an inferior social background. Constable painted this portrait of Maria in 1816, the year they finally married.

During their long engagement, ten months before their marriage, he wrote her this letter:

East Bergholt. February 27, 1816

Let us…think only of the blessings that providence may yet have in store for us and that we may yet possess. I am happy in love–an affection exceeding a thousand times my deserts, which has continued so many years, and is yet undiminished…Never will I marry in this world if I marry not you. Truly can I say that for the seven years since I avowed my love for you, I have…foregone all company, and the society of all females (except my own relations) for your sake.

I am still ready to make my sacrifice for you…I will submit to any thing you may command me–but cease to respect, to love and adore you I never can or will. I must still think that we should have married long ago–we should have had many troubles–but we have yet had no joys, and we could not have starved…Your FRIENDS have never been without a hope of parting us and see what that has cost us both–but no more.

Sadly, Maria weakened by tuberculosis and giving birth to seven children, died in 1828. Constable mourned her for the rest of his life and raised their children alone.

Constable was fascinated by clouds and skies, and if you visit Constable Country you’ll see those same huge skies. He was the first artist to paint oil sketches out of doors, with free, vivid brushstrokes. (Left: Seascape Study with Rain Cloud, painted in 1824 at Brighton, where the Constables had gone for Maria’s health.)

Check out this site from the Tate Gallery, UK, where you can compare modern landscapes with Constable’s interpretations.

And here’s a lovely interpretation of Constable landscapes:

What are your favorite Constable paintings? Here’s a list of paintings worldwide and a link to an exhibit of his huge landscapes that was on exhibit in the US a couple of years ago.

And now, in a blatant burst of self-promotion:
New website and contest at janetmullany.com and a chance to win a signed copy of A Most Lamentable Comedy in Pam Rosenthal’s latest contest.
Plus today I’m blogging over at the History Hoydens about Jane Austen’s letter of June 11, 1799, and talking about Immortal Jane at Austenprose and Jane Austen Today.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 8 Replies