Last week, I talked about word-of-mouth and two books that topped the AAR Annual Poll. So, as promised, last week I started to read If His Kiss Is Wicked by Jo Goodman.

So now my mind is blown. I’m on page 152–152!!–and the hero and heroine have not had any sexual contact, not a kiss, even!

AND Jo Goodman has a few sections that seem to be in double point-of-view at the same time, in other words, you can hear both sides of the h/h’s brain. Double Mind-Blowing!

Common wisdom, by which I mean every single writers’ workshop, says the current trend is to have sex, or a sexual encounter, within about the first ten pages. Also, agents and editors and writers will all warn about multiple POVs, following it up with the Nora Caveat, by which they mean “Nora Roberts has multiple POVs, but she can do it, you can’t.”

And this book got tied for the Best Romance in 2007?!? Yow! I don’t argue as to its merit, it is excellent, and compelling, and has intriguing characters and a great set-up, etc., but I am amazed that a book that broke two of the most steadfast Romance Writing Rules won.

So, yay! Yay for Rule-breakers! Yay for Adventurous Readers! And for you Adventurous Readers, what rule do you like to see broken? For Adventurous Writers, what rules do you like to break?

As hinted at (if by hinted you mean COMPLAIN VOCIFEROUSLY) a few weeks ago, I am in the throes of moving. Which means writing, reading, etc., has been tossed out the window.

BUT that doesn’t mean you have to suffer (but if you want to, could you just pick that box up over there? Thanks.)

So let’s talk about books, shall we? Specifically, very good books. The All About Romance poll (I used to review for them a long time ago, I am a big fan of the site) just released its results for 2007, and the Best Romance for 2007 was . . . a tie! Between If His Kiss Is Wicked by Jo Goodman and The Serpent Prince by Elizabeth Hoyt.

Did you notice that both were historical novels? Goodman’s is Regency-set, whereas Hoyt writes Georgian. I’ve read the Hoyt–which I liked, although not as much as I liked her Raven Prince–and I have the Goodman in my bag right now.

It’s pretty obvious now, but worriers who wanted to ring the death knell for historicals have been denied. The vamps did a good job at rattling historical’s cage, but historicals refuse to go away. Something about those feisty heroines . . . anyway.

I had the Goodman because various reader bloggers had raved about it, and I stuck it in a past Amazon order. I put it in my bag because of the poll, which leads me to some questions–besides reading every single word all of us Riskies have penned, how else do you find your books? Would you be inclined to read a Best Romance, even if it were in a genre you don’t normally read? Do you rely on the author quotes on the front? How the cover looks?

And the eternal question, what other time period besides Georgian/Regency piques your interest?

Thanks, and I’d say to wish me luck on the move, but I’ll be griping about it next week. Make sure to tune in.

Megan
PS: That last pic has nothing to do with nothing. Thanks to Abby for it.

April might be the cruelest month, but February freaking stinks. Bye, February, don’t let the door hit you on the way out!

I hate February–my dad and I used to talk about “The Februarys,” that glum malaise that hit both of us after a long winter. This February hasn’t been too awful because it hasn’t been that cold, and it’s been busy, but I am so ready for Spring.

And, since I’ve been so busy (see above), I haven’t been able to write, which is doubtless adding to my glumosity. And I haven’t been able to find time to read! Which really stinks.

So what do you do when you are down in the (February) dumps?

Here are some things I do:

Look forward to Spring flowers

Find out what movies have come out on DVD. Watch them.

Buy a new nail polish.
Anticipate books by favorite authors

Plan short-sleeve outfits
Eat dark chocolate in tiny amounts

What do you do? Besides mock my inability to make my posts look nice, that is.

Happy March!

Rather than writing lately, I’ve been involved in finishing up major renovations to a house my husband and I bought last May. LAST MAY. We are still living in our rental, but the reno is finishing up, as is our patience with paying rent and mortgage, so the plan is to move in during the last week of March.

What, you ask, does this have to do with the Regency?

Well, Ms. Smarty-Pants, it’s that I am breathlessly anticipating such modern marvels as a washer/dryer, a dishwasher, a temperature-controlled refrigerator, a non-running toilet, and a brand new stove that has the output of Hephaestus in a temper (for the record, the last non-rental I lived in was in 1976; the rental we moved to had a broken window in the bathroom, which we plugged up with an Incredible String Band record album. Yeah, I was raised by hippies/wolves).

Which made me think of modern innovations, and how essential–and how much we take them for granted–they are in our modern life.

Depending on their station in life, some of our Regency heroines (the governesses, companions, poor relations, et al), might have had to wash some of their clothing by hand. Ugh. And even if you had someone to do your wash, there was no guarantee things would come clean. Indoor toilets were around, but hardly ubiquitous; stoves and ovens were huge, beastly hot things that required careful handling. If you had frizzy or limp hair you had to live with it. Forget about cell phones, iPods and DVR; you had to be at the local musicale to hear it, and that was it.

So if you could choose one modern convenience to bring with you as you embark on your time traveling journey of a Regency lady’s life, what would it be? A dishwasher? Eyelash curler? Blow dryer? Vacuum cleaner? Toilet? A ballpoint pen?