Back to Top

Tag Archives: Uncategorized

My reading this year has been largely colored by what is going on in my life. As many of you know, my husband suffered a severe stroke in January. So I’ve had less time to read than I would like, though I still read over breakfast and in waiting rooms, etc… I could not live without the solace of books!

Of necessity, I’ve read a number of books on stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI). A few of these stand out as fascinating, not just to those whose lives are affected by TBI, but to anyone interested in how our minds work. I’ve already mentioned MY STROKE OF INSIGHT, by Jill Bolte Taylor, the story of a brain scientist who suffered a stroke and recovered to write about it. It has a lot about the interaction of the left and right brain functions and insights into how to live a more “balanced-brain” life. BRAIN, HEAL THYSELF, by Madonna Siles, is the story of a woman whose friend and roommate suffered an aneurism that left her somewhat zombie-like after conventional rehabilitation ran out. Siles found creative ways to help her friend and their story is not only a page turner but full of useful advice for caregivers. THE BRAIN THAT CHANGES ITSELF, by Norman Doidge, deals with neuroplasticity—the brain’s ability to rewire itself. Doidge writes about recovery from brain injury, but also topics such as overcoming learning disorders, including a chapter on maintaining mental acuity as we age. The key, friends, is not only to stay active but to always be learning something new. Something I think we Riskies and friends are into anyway. 🙂

As for fiction, I feel a bit guilty to say that it’s been hard to read romance. If I were not a writer, I’d be gulping down romance novels as an escape. As it is, I find it hard to read romance without feeling the pangs of wanting to write again.

So for a time, I concentrated on reading my children’s favorites. One that stands out is the Percy Jackson and the Olympian series by Rick Riordan. It’s sort of like Harry Potter but with Greek mythology rather than magic as a backdrop. I say this just as shorthand, not to imply there is anything about this series that is not fresh and funny and delightful. I hear there’s a movie coming out in February and can’t wait to take my kids.

I’ve also read some general fiction. I was thrilled to read the published version of my friend Therese Walsh’s THE LAST WILL OF MOIRA LEAHY, which I’d already critiqued in several earlier incarnations. I also finally caught up with THE SECRET LIFE OF BEES, one of those books I’d always felt I ought to read. It is a beautiful book. Has anyone seen the movie and did it do justice?

I haven’t avoided romance entirely. I read one historical in which I felt the author aimed for a Kinsalean level of hero angst and fell short. I just wanted him to get over himself! But that is just my opinion; many readers loved this book. Since then, I’ve stuck mostly with authors who rarely disappoint and who inspire me to want to get back to my own stories. My favorites of this year are older books, so you may have already read them. One of them is BEAST by Judith Ivory–I was totally intrigued by what Ivory did with her complicated, beautiful, scarred hero. I would like to see Johnny Depp play him.

I mentioned a while back that Laura Kinsale’s FLOWERS FROM THE STORM helped me hold onto hope during the dark early hours of my husband’s stroke. Since there are long gaps between her books (though they are well worth waiting for!) I have been hoarding them. This year I dove into the last one, SEIZE THE FIRE. I loved her characters, the historical background that made their angst feel so very real, and the essential goodness that helps them survive.

I allowed myself to read SEIZE THE FIRE because (hurrah!) Laura Kinsale has a new book coming out in February, LESSONS IN FRENCH. And she’s going to be our guest at the Riskies on February 7th.

So here’s looking forward to much happy reading and blogging in 2010!

Elena

I ran across this bit whilst reading Northanger Abbey with my budding Janeite:

“Although our productions have afforded more extensive and unaffected pleasure than those of any other literary corporation in the world, no species of composition has been so much decried. From pride, ignorance, or fashion, our foes are almost as many as our readers. And while the abilities of the nine-hundredth abridger of the History of England, or of the man who collects and publishes in a volume some dozen lines of Milton, Pope, and Prior, with a paper from the Spectator, and a chapter from Stene, are eulogized by a thousand pens–there seems almost a general wish of decrying the capacity and undervaluing the labour of the novelist, and of slighting the performances which have only genius, wit, and taste to recommend them.”

And I thought of it again at my friend Therese Walsh’s booksigning, where I found myself in an amicable debate with a stranger on the question of whether Jane Austen wrote literary or popular fiction. The other lady argued that of course Jane was literary, while I suggested that Jane was writing popular fiction of her time. Our discussion was pretty lively but we realized we didn’t have a good definition for what was literary versus popular, one that didn’t do injustice to one or the other.

I can’t remember all the ground we covered (I was drinking wine and enjoying myself) but here are some ideas I’ve seen or heard on the web and elsewhere. Please note I don’t necessarily agree with these definitions. Many are silly and I can come up with all sorts of counterexamples. Anyway, let’s see where Jane’s work fits.

The quality of writing is better in literary versus popular fiction.

I don’t necessarily agree, but by this rule Jane’s work is LITERARY.

Literary authors write for art’s sake; authors of popular fiction write for money.

I remember reading that Jane was glad that her earnings helped her family financially; on the other hand, profit wasn’t her sole motive. I’d say this test is inconclusive.

Literary novels are meant to elevate the mind; popular novels are meant to amuse.

Well, here’s another quote, from a letter Jane wrote to Mr. Clarke, librarian to the Prince Regent.

“I could not sit seriously down to write a serious romance under any other motive than to save my life; and if it were indispensable for me to keep it up and never relax into laughing at myself or at other people, I am sure I should be hung before I had finished the first chapter.

By this rule, I’d say Jane’s work is POPULAR.

Literary novels are good for you (like cod liver oil). Popular novels are what people actually want to read.

Easy answer here—Jane’s work is POPULAR.

Popular fiction is written to fit specific genre expectations, e.g. romance, horror, mystery. Literary fiction has no such constraints.

This is about the most sensible delineation I’ve seen anywhere. But back when Jane was writing, I think novels were novels and not pigeon-holed into genres the way they are now. And as the Northanger Abbey quote indicates, they weren’t as well-respected as other literary forms. So this test is inconclusive.

So much classic fiction fits well into modern genres. Novels by Jane Austen and the Brontes (romance/women’s fiction), Edgar Allen Poe (horror), Jules Verne (science fiction) are a few that come to mind. Which gets me to the next “rule”.

Literary fiction stands the test of time; popular fiction is ephemeral.

Not that I think this will be true (for instance, I think Harry Potter will endure) but in Jane’s case, this is a no-brainer. By this rule, her work is LITERARY.

So anyway, in this totally un-scholarly analysis, it comes to a tie. What do you think? Is Jane Austen’s work literary or popular? Or does her work transcend such categories?

Happy Birthday, Jane, and thanks for the hours of “extensive and unaffected pleasure”!

Elena

I’m glad I’m starting to see less of a certain reality TV couple on the newsstands and the grocery store. I haven’t watched Jon & Kate Plus 8, before or after the scandal. I was put off by the commercials which always seemed to feature screaming kids. I’ve been there, done that with two and have no desire to see it multiplied fourfold, you know? And I’m not much into reality TV, unless you count makeover shows. So I haven’t watched other shows featuring large families like Table for 12 or 18 Kids and Counting.

But they’re clearly popular. Maybe because most families are smaller now, people are just curious. Maybe people like the idea because they feel that in a large family one would never be lonely. (I’m not so sure.) But definitely there’s lots of room for chaos and conflict, never a dull moment. Personally, there are many times I *long* for dull moments when I could sit down with a cup of tea and a book! Although I love my family, I also really like being alone sometimes, so being part of a large family isn’t a personal fantasy of mine.

When talking about historical romance series, large families are historically accurate. While some couples went their separate ways after the production of the “heir and spare” or had small families for other reasons, many couples wanted large families. A wealthy lord might hope not only for an heir but also other sons who might (with his help) become generals, admirals, bishops, diplomats or MPs and thus extend the family’s influence. Daughters might make strategic alliances or at least be a comfort to their parents.

Amongst the fifty women studied in one of my favorite references books, In the Family Way by Judith Schneid Lewis, the mean number of children was 7.5. The most prolific lady studied, the Duchess of Leinster (1731-1814), had eighteen children by the Duke, went on after his death to marry her sons’ tutor and had three more children, for a total of 21 children in 31 years. Whew! It sounds exhausting, even with nursery staff, governesses and tutors to help.

Many readers love historical romance series featuring large families. Personally, I’m OK with them but prefer when they aren’t too closely linked. I never have as much time as I’d like to read, so it’s nice that I can enjoy individual books, like those in Jo Beverley’s Malloren series, without committing to reading all of them on time and in order. I know, that violates the whole marketing concept, but I am not a typical reader.

I’m OK with romantic couples being depicted, in an epilogue, surrounded by a large and growing family. I can imagine that with the right household help, and with the hero being more involved as a father than most men of his time, it could work. But I don’t need to see a huge brood–or any children at all, for that matter–to believe the couple are happy.

Do you enjoy stories of large families, whether modern or historical? Why or why not? Do you have any favorite romance series featuring large families? What sorts of endings do you like to see for romantic couples?

Elena

My interview went up a bit late yesterday so today I thought I would just do a commercial (Ha! bet you thought it would be an Addendum!)

Like Sarah Palin, I’m going on a book tour, but my tour is virtual, my schedule less demanding, and my visitors, undoubtedly, fewer.

Here’s my schedule:

Dec 9 Interview on Harlequin Historical Authors Facebook page
Dec 9 Article on Regency Art on Harlequin Historical Authors MySpace page

Dec 11 Article on Regency Theatre at Romance Dish
Dec 16 eHarlequin’s Holiday Open House
Dec 27 Interview at Romantic Crush Junkies

I hope you all stop by!


I was lucky enough to have Megan and Carolyn come up with questions for my interview yesterday. Weren’t they creative asking how many research books I own? I really think they thought I would go upstairs, trip over the boxes and other junk, and count every last one of those books. Not me! I did Math. I estimated.

When I have to make up questions I lack such creativity, though. So my challenge for you today is to tell us what questions you want us to ask our guest authors. If you want me to answer any of these questions I will, but mostly I want to know what you want to know!

Don’t forget to leave a comment on yesterday’s interview blog for a chance to win an autographed copy of Gallan Officer, Forbidden Lady. I’ll choose a winner after midnight tonight.