I recently read a book called A Broom of One’s Own: Words on Writing, Housecleaning, and Life by Nancy Peacock. Though I’ve never read one of her novels, on the strength and entertainment value of these essays I’m going to buy one immediately!

Peacock talks about both the life of the writer, the artist, and her old ‘day job’ of housecleaning, what she learned from the work and the people whose houses she cleaned. (I must say, the chapter on the Hamiltons made me feel much better about my own lackluster housekeeping! At least I always put my candy wrappers and used Kleenex in the trashcan). She says several things I could identify with in my own weird odyssey of writing books.

From page 20, on writing full-time for a year: “…I did miss having something in my life besides writing. Writing itself had not become a strong enough foundation yet, and without the foundations of regular work I felt like an emotional mudslide. I was caving in on myself. Living alone, probing a fictional world for six hours a day, was making me feel a little weird…I was discovering, in fact, that writing full-time was inefficient. I found that I could write effectively for two or three hours each day. After that, time spent at the desk was time spent mucking up my characters’ story. I’d lost the ability to listen to them.”

From Amanda–I’ve never cleaned houses for a living (see above, those lackluster cleaning skills–no one would pay me to do that!), but I do work a “day job”, working in a library/archives and doing an occasional newspaper story. I relish holidays, when I have long stretches of time where I can stay home and really get ahead on a book, but I’m never too sorry to go back to work, either. I dream about being a full-time author, but the truth is I need the structure of the day job. It makes my writing time more precious, more efficient. I have to get right to the point of the story every day when I sit down with my pen. And it keeps me from watching soap operas and sitting around in Hello Kitty pajamas all day!

From page 53, on publishing one’s work: “I think that in the beginning of my writing life I believed that writing, publication in particular, could, besides making me rich, also make me invulnerable. It might have been the stupidest thought I ever had, because there is nothing, with the exception of love, that has ever made me feel more vulnerable than writing and publishing.”

From Amanda–amen to that! I think that writing (the world of romance publishing especially, perhaps) sets up a sort of “magic door” way of thinking. Once we sell our work, all will be wonderful! I may have thought that once. But publishing just opens up a whole new world of concerns and, yes, vulnerabilities. I’m not magically more self-confident because my book now has a cover and sits on a bookstore shelf; in fact, I am less. Ack! It’s making me nervous just thinking about it all!!!

From page 72–73: “Writing is so crazy. There must be a million things to do that are saner than writing…It feels a little like living a double life. It feels secretive. If one of my characters suddenly dies, and I am moved to grief, or even tears, I can’t share that with anyone.

“I think this is why I thrive on routine. I like for the real life, the one that involves going to work and cooking dinner and being in the physical world, to be somewhat predictable, because there are enough surprises in the alternate life.”

From Amanda–okay, so this is why I have a much harder time writing when my routine is messed up! (When it’s Christmas, for instance, or there’s an illness in my family, or I’m helping my brother’s fiancee get ready for their wedding in May). My alternate world keeps getting interrupted. And it is an alternate world. I may appear to be grocery shopping or cooking a pot of pasta, but in reality I’m trying to figure out how to unravel my latest plotting problem, or trying out bits of dialogue aloud…

And on page 23: “I think there are two things writers love more than anything else. One is solitude and the other is gossip. In the housecleaning trade I got both, but in all the jobs I worked before housecleaning there was too much gossip and not enough solitude. These jobs exhausted me.”

From Amanda–LOL! My last job involved a great deal of inter-personal conflict (not with me–between other co-workers, but they always wanted to tell me all about it). This current job suits me very well. Most of the work is on my own, but sometimes people in the offices next door come by and chat, and I eat lunch with them. This gives me time to think, to let my stories percolate in my mind, but keeps me from going bat-crazy. And there is always something interesting going on here! I like to take breaks a couple times a day to check in with the Riskies and other blogs.

What about all of you? Do you have a “day job”? How does it help/hinder your writing? What is your perfect balance of solitude and gossip?

And don’t forget! On April 6, I will be blogging at Unusual Historicals, with a chance to win a copy of A Sinful Alliance! It’s on shelves now, and my mother says it is very good. 🙂

“The perilous action and the elegance of the writing…allowed me to thoroughly enjoy an unusual and fascinating story of an intriguing era” —Romance Reviews Today

Amanda (standing in as RR): Why, hello, Amanda! Such a surprise to see you here, at your own computer and all. Tell us about A Sinful Alliance! How does this fit into the “Renaissance Trilogy”?

Amanda (as herself): I’m so glad you asked! I am soooo excited about this book. The hero Nicolai (who was a KISS–Knight in Shining Silver–in the April RT, so yay him! I think he’s the first of my characters to win their very own award) was the hero’s friend in A Notorious Woman. As so often happens with these pesky secondary characters, I hadn’t actually intended to write a whole book for him (though he was a hottie). But I really fell for him, and I found a very beautiful, but troubled and lonely, heroine, who really needed his kind of magic–Marguerite Dumas, a French spy.

Trouble was, she once tried to kill him. Bit of a rocky start there. They meet up a few months after this little incident at the court of Henry VIII at Greenwich, still on opposite sides of ever-shifting political alliances. This event was a real historical happening, a meeting in early 1527 between King Henry and a French delegation seeking a marriage between young Princess Mary and King Francois’s younger son. This weeks-long meeting was filled with lavish banquets, balls, jousts, and masques, with specially built theaters and banquet halls. England’s old alliance with Spain is faltering, thanks to Henry’s new infatuation with Anne Boleyn and Katherine of Aragon’s loss of influence, so it made the perfect setting for an illicit, dangerous affair. And also some really great clothes! (Stay tuned next week for more research info on this stuff)

And it’s the second of the trilogy. The third (which I’m just finishing!) is about Balthazar Grattiano, who is now a ship’s captain in the Caribbean!

A as RR: Did you run across anything new or interesting while researching this story?

A as A: Tons! Besides the actual events of this English/French meeting (the Spanish were there, too–never count out the Spanish!), I researched Tudor clothes, tennis, jousts, hunting, Greenwich Palace (plus Fontainebleau Palace, for one scene), sword fighting, theater, fashion. It was way too much fun!

A as RR: Have you always been interested in this time period?

A as A: When I was a kid, I loved watching old movies with my grandmother. One afternoon we watched a Tudor marathon–Anne of the Thousand Days and A Man For All Seasons. I loved them, and immediately started reading all I could about the Tudors! Anne Boleyn particularly intrigued me. The juxtaposition of such splendor and luxury with such terrible danger and intrigue really interests me, and hopefully I brought all that into A Sinful Alliance.

(And hopefully, judging from the popularity of The Other Boleyn Girl and Showtime’s weird The Tudors, other people are intrigued, too!)

A as RR: What was the biggest challenge of this story?

A as A: The challenge was also the part I enjoyed the most–the history! There was so much going on in this short space of time, and I didn’t want to let it overwhelm the characters and their romance. Luckily for me, Nicolai and Marguerite were strong characters, and they basically ran with their own story. I had a clear picture of them in my head (they looked a lot like Heath Ledger and Abbie Cornish, though not so modern as in this pic, of course!), and they had such complex pasts and personalities that made them perfect for each other. I just created the historical backdrop, and let them go! 🙂

A as RR: Okay, we always have to ask–what’s ‘risky” about A Sinful Alliance???

A as A: Well, the setting is pretty risky! You don’t find 1527 England on the shelf everyday, but I hope there is interest in it. It’s a fantastic time period. And the fact that the hero is Russian, and the heroine is a French spy. But so far Harlequin hasn’t told me “you can’t do that” on anything, so yay!

A as RR: What’s next for you?

A as A: I’m just finishing up Balthazar’s story now! Then it’s on to the third (and last) of my Regency-set The Muses of Mayfair trilogy (watch for them next year!). Then an Elizabethan story inspired by Dancing With the Stars (which just proves inspiration can strike anywhere!). And in 2010, the first of my “Daughters of Ireland” series with Grand Central Publishing! Now, I have to go get to work…

BTW, if you don’t win the autographed copy of A Sinful Alliance here, I will be visiting a few other blogs! On April 2, I’ll be at the Romance Vagabonds; April 4 at the Romance Bandits; and on April 6 at Unusual Historicals. Please drop by and leave comments, so I won’t feel too lonely! And visit my website to read an excerpt…

Let’s talk about–pacing. Not the sort I do on a treadmill (or should be doing–that 10 pounds won’t lose itself before RWA!). The kind that moves stories along. It all sounds dull, doesn’t it, especially compared with hunky heroes and sparkly dialogue, but it’s vital. Without the right pacing, Mr. Hunk is mired in the quicksand. When it’s ‘on’, hopefully the reader doesn’t notice it at all. They’re too busy skipping happily through the engrossing story. When it’s off–well, readers can feel caught in the quicksand, too.

Here is what made me think about it–movies. Two of them. I was watching the DVD of The Holiday. Amanda and Iris (aka Cameron Diaz and Kate Winslet) switch houses for Christmas, to get away from disastrous relationships, etc. Kate goes to Cameron’s fab mansion in L.A., Cameron to Kate’s ramshackle (but probably vastly expensive) cottage in Surrey.

There’s quite a bit I like in this movie. The two women are appealing characters, their stories interesting enough–I wanted them to find love and be happy! And, let’s face it, the Jude Law character is like my Ideal Man. He’s English, a book editor, has a terrific London house and 2 adorable daughters, and is funny and emotionally aware on top of it. Kate’s story involves a bit more wheel-spinning and a purported sort-of romance with Jack Black, of all people, but I like her. So far–good.

But, let’s talk editing. This movie tries to tell two stories, and yet the set-up alone takes nearly half an hour. We see what jerks the respective ex-boyfriends are (repeatedly), how neurotic Amanda is and how insecure Iris is (again, repeatedly). There are long scenes about the on-line house swap, driving to the houses, etc. I ended up fast-forwarding a bit here, and still had no trouble following the story at all. The set-up could have taken, oh, about ten minutes, and we would have gotten to Jude Law, I mean the rest of the story, sooner.

Contrast this with a gem I saw in the theater last weekend, Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day. The roles, every one of them, were perfectly cast. From the leads (Amy Adams and Frances McDormand), to the so-called villain (the wonderful Shirley Henderson), to the men (2 Jane Austen film vets, Ciaran Hinds and Mark Strong, and the Pie Maker, er, Lee Pace. I knew from Pushing Daisies he was cute–now I see he’s sexy, too!). Every scene is vital to moving the story forward. Not a line of dialogue is wasted. The world of late ’30s London is beautifully built through sets and costumes. The actors can just be let loose into the story, and it all falls into sparkly (and ultimately very emotionally moving) place.

This pacing thing is something I really worry about as a writer. Where should the story even start? There’s always backstory a reader needs to know, but we don’t want to bore the snot out of them in Chapter One, and thus prompt fast-forwarding (like I did with The Holiday). Without a strict word count and some deadline structure, I do tend to meander a bit. I’m working on my Balthazar/1530s Caribbean book right now. I did lots of research for this one, on ships, life in the islands, nautical charts, pirates, etc. In addition, the characters have rather, um, complicated pasts (and personalities!) that are important to their relationship now.

How much of all this do I put in? When? What’s really important, and what’s just my half-hour set-up? I struggle a bit with this these days. But I do get a great deal of inspiration from looking at images like this one of Orlando!

So, I need your help. What do you like to see in stories? What can you do without? What makes you fast-forward through movies or books? And have you seen The Holiday or Miss Pettigrew (I recommend both, BTW!)??

Happy Easter, everyone! Save me some Cadbury Caramel eggs. And a Godiva chocolate bunny. (Oh, and Keira informed me that A Sinful Alliance is now being shipped from Amazon! Yay! Next Saturday join us for a chance to win an autographed copy–but if you can’t wait…)

Happy Saturday, everyone! St. Patrick’s Day is not actually until Monday, of course, but I’m off to the St. Patrick’s Day Ball tonight (with my black and white dress, plus a green chiffon shawl and a big fake emerald ring–thanks for the accessories advice last week!). Plus I got an early St. P’s Day present this week. I sold a trilogy to Grand Central Publishing!!!

Now, how does this fit in with the Shamrocks and Slip Jigs theme? The series, tentatively called “The Daughters of Ireland,” is set in Ireland and London around the events of the 1798 Rebellion. I’m very excited to get to tackle a book set in Ireland amid so much drama and upheaval–Ireland is very big in the McCabe Family. It seems like a place just meant for romance and passion.

Book One, called Countess of Scandal (but which will probably be something different later) comes out sometime in 2010. It features the first of the three Blacknall sisters, Elizabeth (Eliza). She is a young, rich widowed countess, the daughter of a wealthy Anglo-Irish family. But she has a secret–she writes seditious pamphlets for the United Irishmen, and hides fugitives in the cellars of her vast Dublin townhouse. She’s devoted to Irish freedom, but a serious problem pops up in the person of her childhood sweetheart, Will Denton, the son of her family’s equally wealthy neighbors. He left her when she was young to join the Army and go off to the West Indies, breaking her heart. Now he’s back–and he’s Major William Denton, sent to Ireland to quell the growing unrest. He knows Eliza is up to something dangerous, and is just as determined to stop her as she is to fulfill her mission. If they can keep from falling hopelessly in love all over again.

I am very excited about this series! Of course, now I have to actually get to work and write them…

And, in the spirit of All Things Irish, here are a few facts I found about Guinness (to go with your corned beef and cabbage):
–Arthur Guinness started brewing the famous stout in Dublin in 1759, having purchased a dormant brewery with 100 pounds from his godfather’s will. He signed a 9000 year lease on that brewery, with an annual rent of 45 pounds (still in effect, I would think)
–10 million glasses of Guinness are drunk every day around the world
–A pint of Guinness Draught has fewer calories than a pint of 2% milk or a pint of orange juice
–The Guiness Storehouse in Dublin is one of their most-visited tourist attractions, with over 750,000 visitors every year

So, Cheers to everyone this St. Patrick’s Day! I’m so happy to share my news with all the Riskies! What are your plans for the holiday?

A few weeks ago, I saw a list of “new classics” issued by Entertainment Weekly. It’s movies released since 1983 that they consider to be, well, new classics (is that an oxymoron?). You can see the list here.

I love lists like this, mostly because I enjoy arguing with them! This list inevitably includes some movies I don’t like (Pretty Woman); some I just don’t think will be remembered enough to be “classic” (Speed, Gladiator); some I like but am also not sure they’re “classic” (Office Space, Napoleon Dynamite). And then there are some I totally agree with (Room With a View, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Lost in Translation, This is Spinal Tap, Moulin Rouge). And, of course, some glaring omissions (no Shakespeare in Love? No Princess Bride? No Babe??)

Anyway, it made me think–what would a list of the “classics” of romance novels look like? What would be the criteria? I suppose there could be books that sort of defined the genre (Heyer, natch; The Flame and the Flower, Whitney My Love). There could be books readers still remember and talk about, long after they first read them. Ones that help break out new sub-genres in a bigger way (like paranormal, or chick-lit). It could be anything, really, and every reader’s list would be different. Just like lists of “classic” movies.

My own list would be not only the books I keep, but ones I re-read and think about long after my first encounter with them. Some of these would be:

Loretta Chase’s Lord of Scoundrels
Laura Kinsale’s For My Lady’s Heart and Shadowheart
Lisa Kleypas’s Dreaming of You
Mary Balogh’s Thief of Dreams and Christmas Bride
Taylor Chase’s Heart of Deception
Judith Ivory’s Sleeping Beauty and her Judy Cuevas book Dance
Carla Kelly’s Mrs. Drew Plays Her Hand
Mary Jo Putney’s Shattered Rainbows

I do re-visit all of these, despite my TBR mountains. I guess that makes them my own “classics” of the romance genre.

What would your classics be?