Back to Top

Monthly Archives: June 2011

Happy Tuesday, everyone! What have I been doing this week, since I am free of deadlines (free, I tell you!), at least for the moment? Well, I have been sitting around watching season 3 DVDs of True Blood, trying out some kickboxing classes (and trying to figure out how to write an awesome kickboxing Regency duchess heroine–I’m pretty sure that won’t work out though), starting to get ready for RWA (less than three weeks away now, ack! At least I did remember to take my gown to the tailor), going to the movies, and getting caught up on reading. More on that later.

I was also thinking about Janet’s post last week about reviews, and about various things I’ve been seeing around on-line concerning yet more thinly-veiled misogyny masquerading as high-brow readership (Ew! Romance! Only old ladies and stupid people read those!). (for example, see this great post on AAR, Top Ten Cliches About Romance Novels I Never Want To Hear Again). I’ve been reading and writing romance for a long time, and bad reviews and snarky comments mostly roll off me by now (no time for them–deadlines and all that), but they still can piss me off when I take time to think about it (so I try not to).

One of the books I was reading this weekend was Tina Fey’s Bossypants, and she had this to say, which struck me as great advice for women no matter what artistic or business endeavor we’re pursuing. (Sorry for the long excerpt, but she says it way better than I could!):

“…whenever someone says to me “Jerry Lewis says women aren’t funny,” or “Christopher Hitchens says women aren’t funny,” or “Rick Fenderman says women aren’t funny…Do you have anything to say to that?”

Yes. We don’t f****** care if you like it.

I don’t say it out loud, of course, because Jerry Lewis is a great philanthropist, Hitchens is very sick, and the third guy I made up.

Unless one of those men is my boss, which none of them is, it’s irrelevant. My hat goes off to them. It is an impressively arrogant move to conclude that just because you don’t like something, it is empirically not good. I don’t like Chinese food, but I don’t write articles to prove it doesn’t exist.

So my unsolicited advice to women in the workplace is this. When faced with sexism or ageism or lookism or even really aggressive Buddhism, ask yourself the following question: “Is this person between me and what I want to do?” If the answer is no, ignore it and move on. Your energy is better used doing your work and outpacing people that way. Then, when you’re in charge, don’t hire the people who were jerky to you.

If the answer is yes, you have a more difficult road ahead of you. I suggest you model your strategy after the old Sesame Street piece “Over! Under! Through!” (If you’re under forty you might not remember this film. It taught the concepts of “over” “under” and “through” by filming toddlers crawling around an abandoned construction site. They don’t show it anymore because someone has since realized that’s nuts)…

Again, don’t waste your energy trying to educate or change opinions. Go “Over! Under! Through!” and opinions will change organically when you’re the boss. Or they won’t. Who cares? Do your thing and don’t care if they like it.”

So yeah, this book is hilarious and you should totally read it (though how can someone not like Chinese food??). Also she’s right, and that is now my new motto. Over Under Through. (Plus a cynical laugh and knowing look when someone tries to disparage romance fiction seems to work wonders)

What have you been doing with your time this week?? What is your strategy for dealing with annoying people?

Happy Endings! I finished Leo’s Story in time and sent it to the editor (who gave me 5 extra days which I sorely needed). So I am breathing a sigh of relief.

It is always hard to know how exactly to bring a story to the end. There are things I want my endings to have and I’m not always sure they do until the readers read them.
Off the top of my head, here is a list of “must-haves” for endings.
1. They must be logical. The reader should think they make sense.
2. Even though they make sense, they should also have some element of surprise
3. Little clues should occur earlier in the book so that, at the end, the reader sees why it couldn’t end any other way.
4. Loose ends should be tied up. The reader should know what happens to all the characters.
5. In romance, the ending should be happy. Or “satisfying” as RWA now defines it. Mine are always happy for the hero and heroine. Not for me to have the hero and heroine find love, then the hero goes out sailing and drowns.
My husband and I just watched a movie on Netflix that had one sort of ending that I hate. I don’t know the title of the movie, but it was all about the hero trying to rescue the heroine from a coven of witches who want to have her as a human sacrifice on winter solstice. Everything he tries doesn’t work but he does get to her in time right when the sacrifice is going to happen. Instead of the hero saving her, though, it turns out that the whole thing was a set-up and the hero becomes the human sacrifice. Then you see the heroine set up the next fellow in the exact same way.
Horror movies often have this sort of ending. Just when you think all is well, you find out it is just going to start all over again.
I’m not saying these sorts of endings are wrong. Only that I don’t like them. I much prefer the happy ending of a romance novel.
What elements to you think are important in story endings? What kind of endings do you like? What kinds don’t you like?
Thanks to all in our “Risky Community” who have been with me these last few weeks while I’ve lamented and obsessed about needing to make my deadline. I have felt very supported!
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 9 Replies

Welcome back Sally MacKenzie, who is getting Naked for the last time, alas! Sally is taking over the whole blog today because I’m still swamped. The nice thing is, she’s giving away one signed copy of The Naked King to one lucky commenter chosen at random. Here’s Sally!

–Diane

Hello, Riskies! It’s wonderful to be visiting again. Diane, who I believe is in a bit of deadline hell, invited me to talk about The Naked King, my next and (for now, at least) last Naked novel, as well as the Naked experience in general.

Maybe the first thing to know about the Naked Nobility series–seven books and two novellas–is that it didn’t arise from some grand plan. I sold the first book, The Naked Duke, somewhat by accident in a two book contract. I was over-the-moon excited, but now I had to write a second book. Ulp. It had probably taken me four years or so to write the Duke; my editor was expecting “Historical Romance #2” a bit more promptly than that. What the heck was I going to do?

I turned to the Duke in desperation–fortunately, the hero has two friends. One friend became The Naked Marquis and the other…well, fortunately again the Duke sold well. I got another two-book contract, and the second friend got his story, The Naked Earl. But…there was that fourth book to write, and now I’d run out of heroes. Never fear, the Marquis’s heroine had a sister. And the earl in The Naked Earl had a friend–who had five brothers and sisters! (I wasn’t going to get caught short again.)

Which brings us to The Naked King…are you still with me?

The Naked King is Stephen Parker-Roth. (Not Prinny–that would be horror rather than romance.) Stephen’s first mentioned in the fourth book, The Naked Gentleman. He’s one of that hero’s brothers. By the time I was writing the sixth book, The Naked Viscount–Stephen’s sister’s story–I knew Stephen would get the seventh–and last contracted–book. But what could I call it? “The Naked Gentleman #2” would never do, and I couldn’t just drop a title on Stephen’s head–Regency readers wouldn’t stand for that. Plus we (marketing included) wanted to end the series on a high (in all respects) note. So somehow Stephen had to be a king…

Aha–a nickname! I made the ton call Stephen the “King of Hearts.” He says it’s for his prowess with cards, but the ladies believe it’s for other skills ;).

When The Naked King opens, Stephen is slightly inebriated and in a mud puddle in Hyde Park, having been bowled over by the heroine’s dog. Why is he tipsy? He’s been trying to drown his sorrows. With his brother and sister both married and reproducing, he knows his mama will make him her next project. And, truth be told, he doesn’t want to spend the rest of his life as merely “Uncle Stephen.”

Lady Anne Marston has been dragged to the park by Harry, her family’s large dog. She’s a spinster with a Secret who’s been dumped in London by her father and his wife to organize her half sister’s come out. She’s read about Stephen in her papa’s The Gentleman’s Magazine (Stephen is a plant hunter) and, yes, in the newspaper gossip columns, too. She’s half fallen in love with him, even though she knows she has no business harboring such dreams. But in a brief moment of insanity, she lets him kiss her…in broad daylight…on the front step of London’s premier gossip, Lady Dunlee (who will be familiar to Naked readers). Of course, a sham engagement ensues–with her sister making her come out, Anne can’t afford any scandals–but Anne knows she must find a way to end the betrothal when the Season ends. The serious mistake she made many years ago involving the Marquis of Brentwood is a mistake from which there is no recovery.

I enjoyed bringing Stephen and Anne together and watching them fall in love, and I had great fun with my secondary characters–Anne’s half sister and twin half brothers, her eccentric aunt, Stephen’s parents and younger brother. I even got the opportunity to look in on many of my other Naked people. It’s a fine line to walk, making a book stand alone for new readers while offering dedicated Naked fans a glimpse of past characters, but it’s a balancing act I find I like.

Now I’m starting a new series for Kensington, the “Duchess of Love” stories–a novella and three novels about a matchmaking mother and her sons. I’m going to miss the Nakeds. I’ve had fun with them, and readers seemed to enjoy suggesting new folks to get Naked. And as I start from scratch with a new set of characters, I’m realizing how much the next Naked novel was percolating in the back of my mind as I worked on the one before it. But I think it’s time for a new challenge.

And there are still a few other Parker-Roths…I might “get Naked” again some day.

Now here’s my question for the Risky readers: I discovered as I wrote the Naked books that some readers won’t start a series until they can get all the books at once. Are you one of those or do you just jump right in? What series have you really enjoyed? (And if you’re already a Naked reader, which Naked book–or Naked character–is your favorite?)

Comment for a chance to win a signed copy of The Naked King.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 39 Replies

My recent posts about Beau Brummell and Harriette Wilson (Part I and Part II) have made me think about the similarities between the two. Both were leaders within their particular social circles. (Yes, I know courtesans were not accepted in the haut ton but they lived the high life and had their own milieu, which included some of the wealthiest and most influential men of their times.)

From what I’ve read, I don’t get the impression that either was intentionally cruel by nature, yet they could be snarky, as in Brummell’s famous “Who’s your fat friend?” in reference to Prinny. Harriette says she didn’t think about hurting Lord Ponsonby’s young wife when she took up with him, and she enjoyed taking pokes at Wellington:

“My old beau, Wellington, is going on famously, thanks to the fineness of his nerves, and his want of feeling, and his excellent luck. I do not mean to say he has not a good notion of commanding an army; for, though I do not understand things, I am willing to take it for granted that this is the case.”

For a time, any gentleman aspiring to appear fashionable had to gain Brummell’s approval and enjoy Harriette’s favors. Both were the “cool kids” of their period. In the end, their fame didn’t save them from the consequences of their lifestyle. I think I’m not guilty of schadenfreude (a cool word I discovered recently that basically means enjoying the suffering of others) because ultimately, reading these books made me feel sad for them. But it did make me think about how being an “It” person was no guarantee of a happy ending.

Romance novels frequently acknowledge that. Heroes and heroines are often loners or wallflowers. Sometimes they have a more established spot in their local social circles, but even then, they’re generally not the mean sort who establish who’s in and who’s out. That is usually left to a minor class of villains.

One story I read stands in contrast: AIN’T SHE SWEET? by Susan Elizabeth Phillips. The heroine, Sugar Beth, was a bona fide mean girl before life roughed her up and changed her. Phillips did an amazing job getting under Sugar Beth’s skin. So much that I caught myself rooting for her, even though I’m exactly the sort of person she would have picked on in school.

What do you think about cliques and snarky characters in stories? Any that you’ve read that were done particularly well?

Elena

Follow
Get every new post delivered to your inbox
Join millions of other followers
Powered By WPFruits.com