Back to Top

Category: Reading

Posts in which we talk about reading habits and preferences


So, tomorrow is Father’s Day, and I still haven’t found a gift for my dad. He is the hardest person in the world to shop for–he already owns every electronic gizmo there is, plus every DVD and CD he might want he’s already bought for himself. I wonder if people in the Regency had this problem? Oh, yeah–they didn’t HAVE Father’s Day then. Lucky them. 🙂

Besides scanning the Internet for possible gifts, I’ve been trying to decide on a good theme for this post. In college, I once wrote a paper on fathers and daughters in Shakespeare. To borrow from that idea, here is a selection of fathers from Jane Austen:

From Mansfield Park, there is the uncle/father figure Sir Thomas Bertram. Now, he benevolently takes Fanny in and raises her alongside his own offspring, but Sir Thomas is really pretty distant in her life, a fearsome figure of authority. He is not outwardly affectionate, and is definitely highly concerned with outward appearances, but in the end he does acknowledge that he should have really spent more time overseeing his children and not left them to his lax wife and crazy Mrs. Norris.

From Pride and Prejudice, of course there is Mr. Bennet. He spends most of his time reading and hiding out in his study, which really who can blame him, but he also comes across as a bit careless to his family’s ultimate fate. With Elizabeth he is concerned and loving, but with his three younger daughters he lumps them together as the “silliest girls in England” (and again, who can totally argue with him?)

From Sense and Sensibility, I guess you can say there is Mr. Dahswood, who dies at the beginning. Yet it appears he loves his wife and daughters and wants to provide for them, hence he makes his son promise to take care of them. That the son breaks that promise isn’t really his fault, I guess…

From Emma, there is Mr. Woodhouse, the invalid. It’s said “she loved her father, but he was no companion to her.” He sees no fault in his daughter, and they spend a comfortable life together indulging each other in their whims and self-delusions.

From Northanger Abbey, we see Mr. Morland, a respectable, well-enough-off clergyman, with “considerable independence, besides two good livings.” But he is not much of a presence, probably because he has two livings and ten children. His wife appears equally distracted, leaving Catherine lots of time to do stuff like roll down hills and read horrid novels.

There is also General Tilney. He is very wealth-obsessed, boasting, annoying, and preoccupied with himself (when not meddling in his children’s lives). I sometimes wonder how Catherine is going to handle having him for an in-law…

And, from Persuasion, Sir Walter Elliott. He spends all his time reading the peerage and probably looking in the mirror. He loves his daughter Elizabeth, who is like a reflection of him in female form, but is quite indifferent to Anne and probably to Mary. “Vanity was the beginning and end of his character.”

And that is my thumbnail sketch of fathers to be found in Austen. They’re kind of a pitiful lot when looked at like that, aren’t they? 🙂 I thought of many other things that could go into this post–fathers in romance novels, fathers in the real-life Regency (btw, the picture is George III, Queen Charlotte, and their Six Eldest Children by Johann Zoffany. Thanks for the tips on uploading pics to Blogger!). But I really do need to get to the shops and find a gift for my own dad, who luckily is no Mr. Elliott or General Tilney. What are some of your favorite examples of fathers in books or histories? Or comments on Austen fathers, either fictional or Rev. Austen himself?

Happy Father’s Day!


First off, may I just be so bold as to say “great minds think alike?” Amanda has a post on her blog about Bloomsday, also, although the smarty-pants actually finished the darn thing.

Me, I made it to the second page.

Elena had a post awhile back about giving up on books–I think most of us agreed that we didn’t used to, but time was too short, and there were too many books to read, to waste time on a book that wasn’t grabbing you. I think Joyce’s Ulysses is just too smart for me (I really admire, however, the premise behind Bloomsday: Ulysses recounts a modern-day traveler’s odyssey through Dublin on June 16, so Bloomsday celebrants relive Ulysses’s progress. Here in New York City, Symphony Space hosts a 12+-hour event to celebrate. So happy Bloomsday, everyone!)

But back to where I was attempting to go with this, albeit in a most Framptonian circuitous manner. I gave up on a book recently, one much less erudite (with less crudity) than Joyce’s because it was too slow. Was it me, or the book? The book was published in 2002, which means the author wrote it sometime in 2000 or so. I think that in that time, readers have come to want a different style in their romances. Instead of long, descriptive narrative, now most top-of-the-charts romances have tons of dialogue. Instead of love stories that take at least six months to begin and culminate, we’ve got stories that can take place over the course of a few days to a month. Is our attention span that much shorter?

Personally, I like the dialogue-heavy books. And I have a theory about how this sea-change happened: Julia Quinn. Julia Quinn writes amazing dialogue, light, witty banter that reveals loads about the character speaking, and she doesn’t spend a lot of time on description. Her books are a breath of fresh air.

Are the newer romances an improvement over the slower ones? Do you value dialogue over narrative? Which authors would you like to see stretch out their prose? What do you think of my theory?

And is this post itself too long?

Megan
www.meganframpton.com

Posted in Reading, Writing | Tagged | 9 Replies

I’ve kept thinking about our discussion last week’s post about Prinnyworld vs. the real Regency, also about news I had that a particular publisher was looking for “dark” stories, and it’s led me to wonder what dark means to different people.

“Dark” requires torture, but what sort?

The first darker books I read were some of Mary Jo Putney’s, stories like PETALS IN THE STORM (heroine raped by the men who just killed her father) and THE RAKE (alcoholic hero). Later, I discovered Laura Kinsale, whose stories are usually dark: FLOWERS FROM THE STORM (hero a stroke victim put into an insane asylum), SHADOWHEART (hero raised by his father to be an assassin). What some authors do to their poor characters…

My own darkest book was LADY DEARING’S MASQUERADE, the dark elements being the grim reality of the lives of foundlings and the bad first marriages of the hero and heroine. I put in a lot of lighter elements, though, this is “Little League” dark compared to Putney or Kinsale.

So there’s the sort of “Real World Dark” that draws upon real world elements, like poverty or war or sexual abuse. Things we still read about in the news.

My other darker book was SAVING LORD VERWOOD, in which it seemed everyone wanted to kill the hero. It was dark in a Gothic sort of way: deranged villain, eerie setting (north coast of Cornwall, where there are so many cliffs to throw people over). Despite the attempted murder plot, this book felt lighter to me than LDM. I think “Gothic Dark” is somehow less grim than “Real World Dark”, just because these elements are further removed from our lives and everyday news.

Then “Gothic Dark” shades over into “Paranormal Dark”, which often taps into the angst of the accursed and those who love them. My favorite paranormal Regency is Karen Harbaugh’s THE VAMPIRE VISCOUNT. This sort of story provides a delicious roller-coaster of emotion, a thrilling touch of horror. It’s so different from our ordinary lives that I think it is more escapist.

There end my musings… These flavor categories are just for fun, and I don’t mean to imply any of them is better or worse than the others. What do you think? Have I missed some flavors? Do you have favorites? Which authors do dark better than anyone else?

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

Well, here I am in Regency dress at last weekend’s signing! (I’m not sure why the picture’s so blurry — sorry!) On the down side, I never got my hair right — it looks totally non-Regency (the curl fell out — surprise surprise).

On the up side, I found some cool gloves at the last minute (though they really ought to extend to above the elbow, of course, which they don’t — in fact, they almost look like wrist-length gloves here, they’ve slid down so far) and my nice fan (which Todd painted for me, also at the last minute). Kind chapter-mates in LARA (Los Angeles Romance Authors, my local RWA chapter) tied me into my dress. And also bought some of my books. I love LARA!

There were eight other authors signing, and it was a lot of fun! We chatted and bought each other’s books and joked about copy-editing mistakes and had a great time. And the signing went by so fast that before I got a chance to buy everyone’s books that I meant to, everyone had gone! (Well, that’s what I get for spending too much time fussing with my pens and chocolate and gloves and hair, and trying to fish out the bobby pins that kept falling down my bodice.) 🙂

If you look closely at the photo, you’ll see some little rectangles lined up next to my book — those are the Regency chocolates that I gave away. Okay, they aren’t actually Regency chocolates — such did not exist, after all! — they’re Hershey’s Miniatures, covered with Regency pictures. Todd designed them, and they turned out fantastic! Milk chocolate bore the picture of my heroine’s face, dark chocolate had her playing cards, and the other two flavors had miscellaneous Regency-era pictures.

So, here are today’s questions:

1) If you’re an author, and someone asks you to sign your book for them, do you write something inane in the front of it, wishing you could think of something clever to write? Or do you write something clever? Or what? Or are you too experienced or too sensible to worry about these things??? (Is it just me???)

2) If you’re a reader (and we’re all readers, even those of us who are also writers), have you ever met an author you admire and said something inane while trying to say something clever? (Or is it just me???) 🙂

Cara
Cara King, author of MY LADY GAMESTERfinalist for the Booksellers’ Best Award for Best Regency of 2005

Posted in Reading, Writing | Tagged | 13 Replies


Several weeks ago when I had the good fortune to join Risky Regencies, I prosed on forever about Regency heroes, fictional and those appearing on cover art (not to mention GB). It is time I spoke about Regency heroines.

When I conceive a story in my head it almost always starts with the hero. Heroes are so much easier for me. Apart from the obvious reason that I love to fantasize about dishy Regency guys, I think it is because the men in those times were able to lead such interesting lives, while the women had very few options, unless they were willing to risk social ostracism or give up on respectability altogether and live in the demimonde.

In some ways I love to explore women who were willing to risk being shamed (Morgana running a courtesan school in A Reputable Rake, for example; Emily gambling in The Wagering Widow; or even Maggie, a total imposter, in The Improper Wife ). I like even more to imagine what life would be like for those women outside of respectable society (Maddie, the ruined girl, in The Mysterious Miss M). My next Mills & Boon features a singer as the heroine, and in my next Warner–now called Hachette–the heroine is a con artist.

All of these heroines require a mindset quite different from today’s woman, and it is sometimes hard to find that point where the modern reader can identify with the Regency woman’s predicament. Why be afraid you are going to wind up a prostitute? the modern woman might say. Why not just get a job?

The reality was, the Regency woman could not just get a job. She had to have references, even for such lowly positions as house maid or shop girl. And once ruined, any respectable employment was denied her.

There are plenty of weak, victim-like Regency heroine stereotypes – governesses, servants of any sort, impoverished vicar’s daughters, ladies companions, abused wives – but I think today’s reader wants the heroine to be strong, not a victim. I truly believe there have been strong women in every era of history, certainly in the Regency as well. I like to explore how women of the time period rose above their constaints and refused to be victims.

You know what else? It is hard finding reasons for Regency heroines to engage in “intimacies” with those hunky Regency men. I think the Regency woman’s mindset about sex had to be quite different from our own. She’d worry about pregnancy each and every time, no doubt. No respectable man would want a society girl if she went and had sex with another guy first.

I’m rambling because I need to write proposals for my next two books and I don’t know who the heroines will be! My next Mills & Boon has a marquess for the hero and the next Hachette will be Wolfe’s story. I want to devise strong heroines for these two men, both of whom I know down to the birthmarks on their—
(nevermind)

So! What kind of Regency heroines do you all like the best? Which ones are you tired of? Do you want that sexy read or doesn’t it matter?

Cheers!
Diane

Posted in Reading, Regency, Writing | Tagged | 16 Replies