Back to Top

Tag Archives: Uncategorized

Today, the Riskies are delighted to present an interview with one of our own, Diane Gaston. Her newest book Gallant Officer, Forbidden Lady is out now. A random commenter on today’s post will win a copy of Diane’s new book!

Welcome, Diane! Tell us about Gallant Officer, Forbidden Lady:

Gallant Officer, Forbidden Lady is the first book in my Soldiers Trilogy. Three soldiers—an ensign, a lieutenant, and a captain—share a ghastly and distressing experience after the battle of Badajoz, an experience they agree to keep secret. It affects the rest of their lives.
Battle-weary soldier turned brooding artist, Jack Vernon, is hired to paint London theatre’s newest sensation, Ariana Blane. As this stunningly beautiful actress ignites feelings Jack thought destroyed in battle, another man has Ariana in his sights.

You’ve got such a deft touch with your historical details; just how many research books do you have?
Omigosh, I’ve never counted them. I estimate I have about 700. I would love to catalogue them and organize them better. For Christmas I want this BOOKCOLLECTOR software!

What inspired the story?
When I was groping for story ideas my friend Julie suggested I watch the 1935 Gary Cooper, Franchot Tone movie, Lives of the Bengal Lancers, a story about three soldiers who go through hardships and adventures together in British India (Julie loves watching old movies!). What I took from the movie was the idea of three soldiers sharing an experience during the war, something that affects the rest of their lives. I also took from the film a tough Colonel (although I made him a General) who has a weak son under his command. This formed the basis of the trilogy.

What did your editor say when you said you wanted to write about two people, neither of whom had titles?
This is my niche at Harlequin Historical. They want me to write about the seamier side of the Regency, or, as they wrote on the back cover copy of my first book, The Mysterious Miss M, “The Regency Underworld- sex, scandal and redeeming love.”

How hard was it to be a virtuous actress at that time? How many actresses went on to get titles and make their way into Society?
I think it must have been very hard to be a virtuous actress during the Regency. I imagine women in the theatre would expect to become some man’s mistress. They’d hope to attract the attention of a wealthy man to supplement their income, so to speak.
One actress managed to marry a man with a title. Elizabeth Farren, who has a lovely portrait by Sir Thomas Lawrence in the Metropolitan Museum, married the Earl of Derby in 1797. Because she had the patronage of the Duke of York (one of the king’s sons), she managed some sort of acceptance in Society. There may have been other actresses who made good, but I can’t think of any at the moment.

It’s easy to really feel for what Jack went through; what true accounts, if any, did you read to get the feel of Badajoz and Jack’s subsequent PTSD?
I bought a book (to add to the 700), Badajoz 1812: Wellington’s Bloodiest Battle by Ian Fletcher, and pored through the brazillion Napoleonic War books I already own, as well as looking online. As for Jack’s PTSD, I just transferred what I knew about the diagnosis into how a soldier during the Regency would experience it.

What risks did you take with this book?
I thought the artist hero was a risk, because it was a challenge to keep him “hunky.” For the whole series, I think it is a risk to begin each book with the same scene. The challenge is to make the same scene different in each of the books.

Did you learn anything new?
I learned a lot about paint! (I bought a book about that, too – Techniques of the World’s Great Painters by Waldemar Januszczak). I learned to paint in oils while still in elementary school, but that was a long time ago. Not long enough to be similar to the Regency, so I had to learn about paint before it came in tubes. For example, I learned that Gainsborough used a pure white pigment called Cremora White. So Jack did, too.

Thanks, Diane! And congratulations on Gallant Officer, Forbidden Lady‘s release. What questions do you have for Diane? And don’t forget to visit her website at DianeGaston.com.

Recently, I returned to writing a story that is just so much fun, way sillier and more delicious than my usual stuff (closer to my posts here, I suppose). The thing is, I am trying a new way of writing, working with a relatively final synopsis as a plot guidepost as I write rather than flying into the mist.

Have I mentioned I am a curmudgeon when it comes to change? A long time ago, I had this quote hung up in my kitchen, just to remind myself:

“Change is, by definition, unsettling.”

So anyway. Changing my process is deeply disturbing to me, yet necessary.

I’ve got a sort-of working synopsis now, and a first chapter, but am stumped as to where to go from here. Let me lay out my options:

1. Heroine spies totally foxy hero from across the ballroom.
2. Totally Foxy Hero (TFH) is unimpressed with heroine. But bored. And doesn’t like it when someone else makes fun of her. So decides, maybe, to make her his project for the Season.
3. Heroine has secret identity. TFH will not discover secret identity until way later in the book, causing the all-important black moment.
4. Heroine has to work on secret identity work.
5. TFH and Heroine have to run into each other, even though he is Man About Town and she is a girl on her third Season.

So what do I do? How do I get them together? I don’t want to lay out all the mundane details of her secret identity life–it involves writing, of all boring to describe things–and I want to get them all hot and bothered as soon as possible. I wrote a scene where her Horrid Mother demands Heroine at least try to get betrothed, but it’s not sitting right in my brain.

Got any ideas? Apologies for the lackluster post, this and the state of my kitchen floor is about all that’s in my head right now. And you didn’t need to read about mopping.

Megan

The DVD for the 1981 version of Sense & Sensibility has been sitting on my dresser since January, when my husband had his stroke. Once in a while, I’d notice it and think about sending it back to Netflix and lowering our service to 1 DVD a month, but I kept hoping to get a chance to watch it.

Anyway, last week I finally got my chance. My younger daughter decided to reuse the Felicity (American girl) costume I’d made for her older sister a few years ago, which was nice. But the older one wanted to stay in theme and go as Abigail Adams. See, Megan has the cool kid, while mine are nerdy, though in a cool way, I think. 🙂

Hoping to save time, I bought an old prom dress at Salvation Army, telling myself that changing the sleeves and shortening the hem would be easier than sewing a new gown. Ha! Not only did I have to make new sleeves, I had to redo the bodice and since I wanted to preserve the ruffle at the hem, I had to detach the bodice from the skirt, etc… Well, you get the picture. I was up late sewing for a few nights before Halloween and decided the S&S DVD would help me stay awake.

I’m pretty much an Austen adaptation ho—there are few versions I don’t like. Unfortunately this is one of the few.

The script was clunky, IMHO, showing little of Jane’s wit or liveliness. There were scenes with minor characters that seemed thrown in for no obvious reason (I don’t remember if they were in the book). The pacing was slow, except for the rushed ending in which we were gypped of seeing the resolution of Marianne and Colonel Brandon’s romance.

To my mind, the worst problem was with the characterization of the two sisters. The differences between the two sisters were exaggerated to the point that they became one-dimensional: Elinor coldly robotic, Marianne spoiled rotten. When Marianne gets overly dramatic about her feelings on leaving Norland, Elinor is almost cruel in dismissing the real emotions underlying her sister’s dramatics. I really couldn’t care much about either of them.

It seems to me that some of the Austen adaptations of this period, though they seem to be attempting to be painstakingly accurate, are so busy hallowing Jane that they miss out on wit and vitality of her work and characters. They seem to carefully eschew anything that might look like sexual attraction. Some subtle sexual tension would be very much in the spirit of the books, IMHO. I think some of the more recent adaptations work better, even if they don’t follow the books as slavishly.

One thing I did like about this version is the simple look of the interiors and the clothing, which seemed like what the Dashwood girls could afford rather getting a glamorized Hollywood treatment.

But overall, I prefer either the Emma Thompson or last year’s BBC version to this one. I’d recommend it only if you are like me and feel compelled to see every Austen adaptation out there.

So has anyone else seen this version? What did you think? What approach to Austen film adaptations do you like best?

Elena
www.elenagreene.com