Author Archives: Cara King

Read a Regency!!!! (part 2)

Updated on February 1, 2013 by Cara King

A week ago, I challenged all brave people to read five highly-recommended Regencies (that is, highly recommended “traditional” Regencies). I know you’re all hugely busy this time of year, but if any of you have any progress to report, I’d love to hear it! Megan, Nicole, Janet, Todd, and Laurie all accepted the challenge, in whole or in part — and who knows, maybe we have some more willing readers, lurking about!

Megan has already talked about one book she’s read (thanks, Megan!) How about the rest of you? Which books have you chosen? Have you read any yet? What are you liking about what you read?

For more suggestions of what Regencies count as “highly recommended” — here’s a list of all the Regencies that have won the prestigious Rita Award:

2005 — A Passionate Endeavor by Sophia Nash
2004 — Prospero’s Daughter by Nancy Butler
2003 — A Debt To Delia by Barbara Metzger
2002 — Much Obliged by Jessica Benson
2001 — A Grand Design by Emma Jensen
2000 — The Rake’s Retreat by Nancy Butler
1999 — His Grace Endures by Emma Jensen
1998 — Love’s Reward by Jean R. Ewing
1997 — The Lady’s Companion by Carla Kelly
1996 — Gwen’s Christmas Ghost by Lynn Kerstan and Alicia Rasley
1995 — Mrs. Drew Plays Her Hand by Carla Kelly
1994 — Deirdre and Don Juan by Jo Beverley
1993 — An Unwilling Bride by Jo Beverley
1992 — Emily and the Dark Angel by Jo Beverley
1991 — The Sandalwood Princess by Loretta Chase
1990 — The Rake and the Reformer by Mary Jo Putney
1989 — Brighton Road by Susan Carroll
1988 — Sugar Rose by Susan Carroll
1987 — Lord Abberley’s Nemesis by Amanda Scott
1986 — The Beauty’s Daughter by Monette Cummings
1985 — The Lurid Lady Lockport by Kasey Michaels

Have you read any of these? Which did you particularly like? Are there books by some of these authors that you like better than the ones which actually won the Rita? Are there any other Regencies you’d particularly recommend for beginning Regency readers? Please share! All opinions welcome!

Cara
Cara King — www.caraking.com
My Lady Gamester — out now from Signet Regency!

Posted in Reading, Regency | Tagged Regency Romance | 17 Replies

Read a Regency!!!!

Updated on January 31, 2013 by Cara King

There are far too many people in this world who’ve never read a “traditional Regency.” (Ooh, hate the name. Do you think it’s the name? I think it might be. “Traditional” — who wants to read a “traditional” anything?)

Actually, once upon a time our genre was just called “Regency” — and that’s the name it had for decades. But then the historicals came along, and eventually the Regency historicals were part of it….and one day some readers of Regency historicals (were they mischievous? ignorant? or possibly the forefront of an alien invasion?) started calling the books they read “Regencies” — and ever since, we’ve been stuck with the awkward designation of “traditional Regency.” Not a great name for a genre.

So I’m just going to call them “Regencies,” because that’s the better name, the name they went by for decades, the name that doesn’t scream “old-fashioned” without meaning to.

As I was saying…far too few people read Regencies anymore. In fact, some of the Risky Regency authors themselves, from what I can tell, rarely read Regencies! Now that’s just sad. Really sad. Little-kid-whose-ice-cream-dropped-on-the-ground sad.

So I challenge you: read a Regency! In fact, read more than one. Go read five highly-recommended Regencies, and see if you don’t fall in love with the genre! Oh, Regency historicals are all very well, but they can’t do everything. They can’t be everything. (When’s the last time a Regency historical washed your car for you??? Huh???)

Who will take the challenge? Is there anyone brave enough? Tough enough? After all, I’m asking you to read five Regencies. Wow. That’s a lot of books. And who likes books? Oh, you do? Great! Then take the challenge! Read five highly-recommended Regencies, and see if you aren’t won over to be a dedicated Regency reader! When you’re done, come back here, and tell us if you liked them, and why! (And yes, I’m extending this challenge both to readers of this blog, and to the authors on it too! You know who you are…)

So, what makes a Regency highly recommended, you ask??? Good question. Winning the Rita counts. (If people want, I could post a list of all the Regency Rita winners.) Having friends tell you “you have to read this book!” counts. And I also have a list here of books that I heartily recommend. (There are of course far far more great Regencies, including many books by my fellow bloggers….) I went mostly with older books, now out of print (but available in any good used book store), some of which are recognized classics of the genre, and some of which are hidden gems…in chronological order.

Clare Darcy: LADY PAMELA (1975)
Joan Smith: ESCAPADE (1977)
Joan Smith: IMPRUDENT LADY (1978)
Joan Smith: TALK OF THE TOWN (1979)
Joan Smith: SWEET AND TWENTY (1979)
Patricia Veryan: NANETTE (1981)
Joan Smith: PERDITA (1981)
Kasey Michaels: THE RAMBUNCTIOUS LADY ROYSTON (1982)
Patricia Veryan: MARRIED PAST REDEMPTION (1983)
Sheila Simonson: LADY ELIZABETH’S COMET (1985)
Kasey Michaels: THE PLAYFUL LADY PENELOPE (1988)
Carla Kelly: MRS MCVINNIE’S LONDON SEASON (1990)
Barbara Metzger: AN EARLY ENGAGEMENT (1990)
Carla Kelly: LIBBY’S LONDON MERCHANT (1991)
Barbara Metzger: MINOR INDISCRETIONS (1991)
Alicia Rasley: POETIC JUSTICE (1994)
Karen Harbaugh: THE VAMPIRE VISCOUNT (1995)
Gail Eastwood: THE LADY FROM SPAIN (1997)
Nonnie St. George: THE IDEAL BRIDE (2003)

And if any of you are enthusiastic Regency readers, please comment here and suggest your own recommended reads!!!

Cara
Cara King, www.caraking.com
MY LADY GAMESTER — out now from Signet Regency!!!

Posted in Reading, Regency | Tagged Regency Romance | 19 Replies

Laugh-out-loud Regencies

Updated on January 31, 2013 by Cara King

Which are your favorite laugh-out-loud Regencies?

Here are ten of mine, listed in approximate chronological order of publication:

— PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, by Jane Austen
— NORTHANGER ABBEY, by Jane Austen
— THE CONVENIENT MARRIAGE, by Georgette Heyer
— FRIDAY’S CHILD, by Georgette Heyer
— IMPRUDENT LADY, by Joan Smith
— SWEET AND TWENTY, by Joan Smith
— THE PLAYFUL LADY PENELOPE, by Kasey Michaels
— AN EARLY ENGAGEMENT, by Barbara Metzger
— MINOR INDISCRETIONS, by Barbara Metzger
— THE IDEAL BRIDE, by Nonnie St. George

Which funny Regencies do you like? Which do you think are the funniest?

Which funny Regencies do you think succeed the best as novels (or romances)???

By the way, here are four very different covers for Georgette Heyer’s FRIDAY’S CHILD! (Aren’t covers weird???)

Cara
Cara King, www.caraking.com
MY LADY GAMESTER — in stores now!

Posted in Reading, Regency | Tagged funny Regencies, humor | 7 Replies

Regency Shakespeare

Updated on January 31, 2013 by Cara King

I find Shakespeare fascinating. Shakespeare has been hugely popular on British stages almost non-stop since his own time, and the Regency was a high point for Shakespeare in many ways. Of course, the Regency Shakespeare wasn’t exactly like our Shakespeare….and certainly it wasn’t Shakespeare’s Shakespeare…

Here we have two pictures of the reconstructed Theatre Royal, Covent Garden — where John Philip Kemble produced and starred in many of Shakespeare’s greatest works. Kemble’s sister, Sarah Siddons, was one of the theatre’s biggest draws, and had a following so passionate it was almost religious. (After the theatre pictures, we have two pictures of Kemble, one of Siddons, and one of Kean.)

What fascinates me most are the differences in the Shakespeare plays in the different periods. When I researched my workshop “The Regency Joy of Sex (Drugs & Gaming Hells)” for this year’s Romance Writers of America national conference, I was most intrigued by the changes made to Shakespeare’s text in the period — and the changes that weren’t made. In other words, what parts of Shakespeare they found taboo (or, in Regency parlance, “indelicate”), and which were acceptable for a theatre audience comprising men, women, and children drawn from all classes.

So what was acceptable? When John Philip Kemble edited Shakespeare’s text, here are some words he left in: virgin, adultery, fornicatress, naked, damned incest, bosom, virgin-violator, bastard, deflowered maid. (However, in one passage, “virginity” was changed — implying the word “virginity” was more shocking than “virgin”, which at the time didn’t necessarily have the purely sexual meaning we attach to it.)

So what was taken out? The most common change I found was the invariable changing of the word “body” to the word “person.” It seems the Regency folk didn’t really mind sex, or talk about sex, but some words they found too gross, too vulgar, too indelicate — and “body” was one of them. (Versions of the Bible in this period also took out the word “body” and similar words.)

In one passage, “virginity” becomes “honour.” The word “lechery” becomes “wenching.” One passage from “Measure for Measure” was cut and rearranged thus:

SHAKESPEARE’S ORIGINAL: Why, what a ruthless thing is this in him, for the rebellion of a codpiece to take away the life of a man!
J. P. KEMBLE’S VERSION: Why, what a ruthless thing is this in him, to take away the life of a man for–

Ah, yes, the telling “trailing off” trick. (Too true!)

Is anyone else fascinated by Regency Shakespeare? Any questions? Comments? Favorite plays? Plays you wish you could see the Regency versions of? Or any comments on the topic of bowdlerism in general? (Though the term did not yet exist, and Bowdler was only getting started in our period…)

Cara
Cara King, MY LADY GAMESTER — out now!!!
for more info on Regency theatre, see http://caraking.com/Theatre.html
for more info on Regency private life, see http://caraking.com/PrivateLife.html

Posted in Regency, Research | Tagged Shakespeare, Theatre | 11 Replies

How much does accuracy matter?

Updated on January 29, 2013 by Cara King

How much does historical accuracy matter to you?

I ranted a bit on the subject yesterday…but now I’m calmer, and I’d like to know what everyone else thinks.

At the Austen movie exhibition at the Museum of Costume in Bath, they argued about the EMMA costume shown here, “Gwyneth Paltrow’s green and white dress, with its large, chocolate bow on the bodice, has none of the subtlety of the fabrics that other designers have used… In a way, the pattern looks more like a textile design from the 1970’s… This is just what Hollywood requires: simple dresses, simple messages.” So: does this dress bother you? Is it too anachronistic, or do you like the way it captures Emma’s “princess” role in her community? How accurate do you think fabric and cut need to be? Is having an accurate outline enough?

Or how about hair, and bonnets? Does it bother you that Emma goes outside throughout the movie with the hairstyle shown above, and no hat or bonnet? Or how about Keira Knightley’s Elizabeth Bennet, who skips a bonnet, and also has her hair down? Is that too ahistorical for you?

How about Greer Garson, in the 1940 PRIDE AND PREJUDICE movie? It is commonly said that in this film, they gave the men Regency styles, and the women the styles of a decade or two later….but doesn’t this dress also look very 20th century? Does it bother you that the women aren’t wearing dresses that are remotely Regency? And does Garson’s non-period hair bother you?

Here we have two shots of Embeth Davidtz playing Mary Crawford in the recent movie of MANSFIELD PARK. This, in my opinion, is the most anachronistic dress of all, but it does convey Mary Crawford’s slinkiness, and sophistication. Does this dress drive you bats? (I wish I could also find a photo of Miss Bingley’s sleeveless dress — I don’t believe one exists on the internet! But here’s her other dress, which is less wrong, but still odd.)

How about accuracy in books? When Heyer talks about the Little Season during the Regency, though it didn’t yet exist, does that annoy you? When another author’s hero runs away at eighteen and purchases a commission in the navy, do you shout at the book? When Sir William is also Sir Barton, and Lord Brighton is also Lord George, do you throw the book against the wall? Or are all of these annoyances minor to you (if indeed you notice them at all)?

What kind of inaccuracies bother you most? Easily checked facts, such as title, distances between towns, how fast a carriage could go? Or the mindset of the times? Or the rules of society?

Please share!

Cara
Cara King, www.caraking.com
MY LADY GAMESTER — Signet Regency, out now!!!