Back to Top

Category: Rant

I used to be a software engineer by profession, but I have to confess even then I had this love/hate relationship with technology. Even though I learn pretty quickly, I resent the time it takes to figure out how new stuff works. I’d rather be writing! You would not have believed how much I was cussing when I helped my daughters set up their new laptop, which uses Windows 8. What brilliant soul invented a FOUR STEP process just to power off?

I’m also cheap and I don’t care if other people have shinier gadgets, as long as my own gadgets meet my needs.

But I’ve made some progress recently. After over a year of successfully self-publishing e-books, I now actually own a Nook reader myself. I really do like it, especially the ease it brings to taking LOTS AND LOTS of books with me on a plane.

However, my recent trip to Florida showed me another thing I need to upgrade. My father-in-law passed away last year and my mother-in-law not only discontinued their internet service but also threw away all their maps. Since our poor old cell phones aren’t good for anything but phone calls, there was no good high or low tech way of figuring out how to get places we wanted to go on the spur of the moment. OK, maybe we do need to upgrade from what my daughters tell me are “loser phones.”

regencyshower

If I lived in Georgian times, would I be so averse to new technology? Perhaps my cook would resist using one of the new closed stoves, but I can’t imagine that I would resist advances in personal hygiene, like the invention of the shower. Even though it did recirculate the same water… Here’s a cool article from Jane Austen’s World on Regency showers.

Are you a technophobe or do you embrace new technology? What do you rely on now that you never dreamed of needing a decade ago? What would you miss most going back in time?

Also, in the spirit of upgrading, I have a shiny new mailing list. If you don’t always have time to get here to the Riskies but would like to know the big stuff—new releases and special deals—please sign up here.

Elena
www.elenagreene.com
www.Facebook.com/ElenaGreene

Posted in Rant, Research | 3 Replies

Megan and I are at the RWA New England Chapter Conference this weekend.  We will be celebrating Romance Writers (mostly women) of the 21st century.  We’ll also be hanging out with Romance Writers of the 21st century and going to some great workshops, including a master class with Julia Quinn on dialogue (at which she is, indeed, a master).  While we’re going to workshops with women writers of the 21st century, I thought it might be nice to give you a glimpse of women writers of the 18th and early 19th century.

Chawton House

Chawton House

Chawton House Library was founded in 1996 by Sandy Lerner in the home owned by Jane Austen’s brother, Edward Knight in Chawton England.  After years of  restoration, it became the home of a extensive library of women’s writing in English 1600 to 1830.

According to the site, “Writers whose work is held in the collection include Penelope Aubin, Aphra Behn, Frances Burney, Maria Edgeworth, Eliza Haywood, Charlotte Lennox, Hannah More, Sydney Owenson, Ann Radcliffe, Mary Robinson, Mary Shelley, Frances Sheridan, Charlotte Smith and Mary Wollstonecraft, and many more both well-known and lesser-known writers, as well as a significant number of anonymous works.”

Fortunately for us, Chawton House Library has made many of these texts available on line and continues to add to their digital collection.  You’ll find the Georgian/Regency era represented among the novels available.  If you’d like to visit the library in person, it is open to the public.  Anyone may apply for a reader’s pass.

In addition to this extraordinary resource, Chawton House and its farm has been restored to its 18th century condition using traditional methods.  The farm is also run on 18th century methods.  It is an easy walking distance to Chawton Cottage, Jane Austen’s last home and the site of the Jane Austen;s House Museum.  If you’re in the area (and don’t we wish we were?), Chawton House Library  offers a wide variety of events that illuminate the period in which we read and write.

It’s well worth a virtual visit.  Enjoy.

I am reading Paradise Lost (from which the title line is a quote) and enjoying many of the ideas in it, along with the erratic spelling and punctuation. Things like “smoak” for “smoke” and the use of apostrophes for pluralizing certain words. And Milton isn’t even consistent within his own work, as in the phrase I quoted. I’ll forgive Milton anyway! In the 17th century English certainly wasn’t as standardized as it is now.

But what’s our excuse? Here are a few notices I’ve seen while running errands over the past month:

“Attention, Patient’s. The office will now be open on Monday’s and Wednesday’s….”

“Parking for ACS Customer’s Only”

I have even (gasp) read notices from teachers to the effect, “Parent’s, please have your children bring a bag lunch on the day of the field trip.”

Apostrophes are used to make plurals ONLY in very specific cases. The rule used to be that they were used to pluralize acronyms, numbers and letters, but the most recent guides say they should only be used with lower-case letters. I won’t freak if someone writes “ABC’s” or “1990’s” since these are common forms and recommended in older style guides. I’ve probably used them myself, so anyone who freaks about them is obviously taking things too far. 🙂

But for every other plural, please stop the madness! Save the apostrophes!!!!

OK, the heat has addled my brain. But I think I was upset about this even before the heat wave. Do you have any grammar and punctuation pet peeves? What are they?

Elena
LADY DEARING’S MASQUERADE, Winner 2006 Golden Quill, Best Historical Romance
www.elenagreene.com

Posted in Rant | Tagged | 13 Replies

Hi, everyone! As if four days of power outage weren’t enough disruption, a few days later my main computer gave up the ghost. It’s the motherboard. For anyone that is not techie, this is Bad News. I need a new computer and there’ll be that annoying phase of getting everything working again. In the meantime I’m going to try to keep up with the Riskies (more or less) via the kind offices of the local public library.

Things could be worse, of course. My writing resides on an old laptop that is perfectly functional for word processing but is so old it’s not compatible with what my Information Services Dept (also known as dear husband) would need to do to connect it to the Internet.

It’s not really that primitive. It is annoying to have to go to the weather channel or newspaper rather than get onto weather.com. When I was missing an ingredient in my usual marinade for tuna steaks, I couldn’t go on foodtv.com to find an alternate recipe. I had to wing it. Well, that’s what the Regency folk would have to do. (For weather, I guess they’d ask some elderly curmudgeon of a gardener or countryman how his bones felt.)

The tough thing is the isolation when one is used to going online for email and blogging several times a day. As I am writing this my 1-hour time limit on this computer is ticking away. I’m not used to that! But think about it. Regency ladies might visit daily with local friends and relatives, and I imagine some did, but they also wrote lots and lots of letters.

Enough whining. I am trying to see some blessings in this. This week is the first of the three weeks this summer my kids are at day camps, and so far it’s been a productive one writing-wise. I can’t make excuses to go “look something up” on the Internet or compulsively check email and/or the blog. For a while, I’m free of hearing market news, etc…, that could raise those hideous inner writing demons that make me doubt whether what I’m writing is marketable this instant.

Still, I seem to be an web junkie. Withdrawal has me just a tad jittery. How about you? Anybody else go through web withdrawal? How do you cope?

Elena, hands shaking a bit as she types this post

LADY DEARING’S MASQUERADE
Romantic Times Reviewers’ Choice for Best Regency Romance of 2005
http://www.elenagreene.com/

Posted in Rant | Tagged | 7 Replies

I just read this article in the American Chronicle:

“Our Flirtations with Regencies”
, by Sonali T. Sikchi, and I can’t decide whether to be amused or annoyed. No, it’s annoyed.

This thing is full of the most ridiculous broad generalizations about Regency Romances: what could be culled from reading several Barbara Cartlands and assuming the rest are exactly the same.

A few examples:

“…Regencies rarely make even a pretense of incorporating historical events and elements in their stories.”
“The women in the Regency Romance stories are always young girls in their late teens or early twenties.”
“The women gorgeous and unique, sexually innocent and passionate; the men striking and arrogant, sexually experienced and passionate.”
“The stories follow a formula…”

OK, so here are some of my favorite counter-examples, in no particular order:

LOVE’S REWARD, by Jean Ross Ewing (Napoleonic war hero, espionage/intrigue plot)
THE CONTROVERSIAL COUNTESS, by Mary Jo Putney (espionage/intrigue, unconventional heroine)
THE RAKE AND THE REFORMER, by Mary Jo Putney (older heroine who is too tall, with mismatched eyes! alcoholic hero)
THE CAPTAIN’S DILEMMA, by Gail Eastwood (French POW hero)
AN UNLIKELY HERO, by Gail Eastwood (adorable virginal hero)
THE VAMPIRE VISCOUNT, by Karen Harbaugh (paranormal)
KNAVES’ WAGER, by Loretta Chase (unconventional heroine)
SNOWDROPS AND SCANDALBROTH, by Barbara Metzger (another great virginal hero)

In my own September book, LADY DEARING’S MASQUERADE, the plot revolves around London’s Foundling Hospital (gasp–a real historical institution), the heroine is in her thirties and not a virgin, and the hero is sexually inexperienced. (But he catches on fast.)

But the author of this article seems to be implying we’re a bunch of hacks cranking out endless stories according to a prescribed formula. Grrrr….