Hi! I’m just back from Maine (authors of risky Regencies need relaxing vacations). So what do I think is a risky Regency? To me, it’s a story that has some element that may seriously upset some readers.
Before I started writing Regencies myself, I didn’t realize that there were some readers with rigid expectations of the genre. I’d read books ranging from Georgette Heyer (and endless imitations) to unusual stories like Karen Harbaugh’s VAMPIRE VISCOUNT, Gail Eastwood’s THE CAPTAIN’S DILEMMA (hero is a French POW), Mary Jo Putney’s THE RAKE AND THE REFORMER (an alcoholic hero, a non-virgin heroine) and didn’t see a problem with any of this glorious variety.
When my own books started coming out, I was startled by some of the comments on Amazon, both rants and raves. I never intended to upset anyone, but a couple of things did set some readers off:
1) Sex. One reader even insisted that “Regency women didn’t do that”. Um, have sex with their husbands? Where did the Victorians come from, then? But I understood her point: she just didn’t want to know about it.
2) Heroines who are desperately seeking something, even if they don’t know what it is, and make mistakes or misbehave in pursuit of that something.
My next book, LADY DEARING’S MASQUERADE, has both those risky elements and more. Ah well… I’m braced for mixed responses. At least I don’t think I will bore anyone!
BTW I can’t wait to read Cara’s book; Atalanta sounds like my kind of heroine. If heroes can be rakish and tortured, why can’t the heroines cause some trouble, too?