Back to Top

As I mentioned before, I’ve recently read Beau Brummell by Ian Kelly. I’m not going to attempt a review; it’s the first Brummell bio I’ve read and I haven’t the credentials to critique it from an academic standpoint. I found it a good read, both fascinating and depressing in places and would recommend it to anyone interested in this part of social history. Someone here said it went on rather long. I think the fact that nearly equal space was devoted to Brummell’s decline and death of syphilis as to the height of his popularity, what we usually see depicted in Regencies, made it hard work to read to the end. But that was his life, and a sobering story it is.

Anyway, to the tidbits.

One thing that always puzzled me was whether to spell his name with one or two l’s. Two l’s always looked more English to me but I’d seen it both ways. The Author’s Note explains that Brummell’s first French biographer in the 1840s used a single l, but that his birth record has two l’s and that is the way he signed it. So I feel vindicated.

Brummell never sat for a full length portrait and I’ve never known how he really looked. The plate of miniatures and etchings in this book is not much help, which Kelly himself admits. Look at these guys! They don’t even look related, although I think the one on the middle right is hot. I like the sideways glance and the humorous quirk to his mouth. Right or wrong, this is how I’ll picture Brummell at his best.

So what do you think? Which of these pictures best reflects your idea of the Beau? And do you prefer two l’s or one?

Elena
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 7 Replies

It’s Friday, the Friday before Mother’s Day, which means I can look forward to a weekend where I don’t have to do quite as much as usual.

Happy Mother’s Day to all you moms out there. Sleep late for me.

And, unlike in many of the weeks prior to this one, I actually wrote. So yay!

[SPOILER ALERT–I tried to work the font so you wouldn’t be spoiled, but it’s so not working, so be warned]

Now onto some reading commentary; I started reading Eileen Dreyer’s Never A Gentleman because of a review HeroesandHeartbreakers.com (the site I work for) posted. And, OMG, she breaks one of the most cardinal rules in romance novels:

Her hero has sex with another woman after marrying the heroine.

And Dreyer makes it work. I am loving this book, and it breaks some other rules, too; the heroine is nearly six feet tall, plain, with a limp. Of course, being a romance novel, you think she’s going to get transformed into some statuesque beauty with the clever application of clothing, cosmetics, make a haircut; yes, she is made more attractive by some better clothing, but she is still plain–which the hero acknowledges after falling in love with her. And he is still very much attracted to her because of her mind, her wit, her honor.

I personally love it when authors stand conventions on their head. I know the spoiler above is a total deal-breaker for most readers, but in this context, for me, it worked.

What are other deal-breakers? Who’s the author who breaks convention the most?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 7 Replies

Today we welcome multi-pubbed author Delle Jacobs back to the Riskies, here to talk about her latest release LADY WICKED and offering one free download as a prize.

Lady Wicked is not only a wonderful romance, it’s also a fantastic mystery. As this compelling novel goes on from hysterical scenes to dramatic ones, all while developing a captivating romance, readers may well wonder if Jacobs has created a Mr. Darcy for this generation. RT Book Reviews, four and a half starred review.

Welcome, Delle! Tell us about Lady Wicked.

Thanks, Janet and all you Riskies for inviting me! I love dropping by one of my favorite blog sites. I think the easiest way to describe LADY WICKED in with a short blurb:

Returning home to redeem his wasted life, Viscount Savoury rescues a lady in distress, only to learn she is the abandoned wife of his worst enemy. Despite the mutual enmity, need and attraction turn into friendship and trust. Then Davina discovers she must make a horrible choice: Savoury’s destruction, or hers. How can she choose?

I think we tend to forget how powerless women could be when a marriage went wrong in the Regency. Why did you choose this theme?

I love a story that’s full of drama, danger and adventure, and I love strong heroines. While for most heroines of Regencies, marriage to the love of their life is the desired outcome, that wasn’t always the way it worked out in real life. The plight of a woman caught in a disastrous marriage in the early 19th century is only rarely mentioned in romance fiction, but there are few situations in that period of time that could potentially present so much danger to a woman.

My favorite question is always, “But, what if…?” What is the supposed, ordinary, logical, even fairy-tale outcome? “But- what if that expected Happily Ever After- isn’t happy? What if something goes wrong? From that point on Davina surfaced and told me her story. She is a woman who would never see herself as strong, only as putting on a strong, willful face that keeps the predators at bay. She knows how scared and lonely she really is, but knows she can’t let her secret out. Lord Savoury, a total rascal who is down on his luck, is the last man she should ever trust. But he’s all she’s got. And he has to find the man he really is in order to be the man she needs.

Was this a hard book to sell?

Many risky stories don’t succeed, and that’s kind of sad. But a story that must reach beyond the ordinary cannot play it safe. If you take a big risk and it pays off, that’s great. But if it takes ten years of rejections, near misses and disappointments, yet it’s still the one story you just can’t give up on, that’s something else again.

Some stories are just that compelling for their authors, and LADY WICKED was that way for me. I think its biggest risk is in the hero and heroine, who are not standard fare for most successful Regency stories. Both of them are Beyond the Pale for the Ton in general, and Davina is considered an adulteress who has been cast aside by her husband, despite her innocence. Heroes can be rakes, but they really need to be successful ones, and Lord Savoury has, shall we say, not found his true self. He believes himself to have no morals, but in fact what he has are so deeply ingrained that they consistently surface in spite of himself. He is, as Davina characterizes him, a knight in tarnished armor. For bot h of them, outcasts of society, their ballroom days are over. But to me, this is what makes them so beautiful. When it comes to triumphing over adversity and growth of character, those who must struggle hardest for it are the heroes and heroines I love most.

The book has such a vivid sense of place. What locations inspired you?

Ah! An easy question! When I was looking for a walled manor of medieval age, a friend suggested Haddon Hall, so I checked it out. Other than the lack of a portcullis, it fit almost perfectly, so I began research that expanded into a total fascination with the place. I collected books, engravings and photos. I read about its history and studied its layout. Then in 2004, I made my first trip to England, with Haddon Hall as my top priority. I can’t express adequately what a thrill it was to walk over the stones of the courtyard, up the worn stone steps in the hall, seeing what I had written, feeling the ambience I was sure was there. I think it was when I saw a small leather child’s shoe that had been found on the grounds and knew it was the very one I had transformed into the one my hero found while going through ancient rubbish that I felt I had been there before. My research had indeed become real to me.

Who would you cast in the movie version?

It took me a bit to cast this one. Most of the actors I usually love to watch are either too old now or are not a good fit for my two unusual characters. But then I remembered Henry Cavill, who played Henry VII’s best friend Charles Brandon in The Tudors. I think it’s his way of showing humor, but also his ability to portray a man such as my Viscount Savoury, who discovers a depth of courage he never knew he had.

Both Natalie Portman and Penelope Cruz could play Davina well. Davina is a very strong woman, extremely independent, and has a hard edge to her public face that keeps people at bay and protects her frightened, soft inner person. She is very complex and contradictory, and I think it would take an actress of unusual skill to really capture her. It would be so easy to simply play her according to the stereotype she attempts to show to the world, and never catch her in the lies that hide her true essence.

What are you working on now?

I have too many projects! I’m doing a lot of cover art these days, and it really keeps me busy. I’m planning on indie-publishing two paranormal historicals this summer, and one Regency Historical. I’ve had such great success with the backlist I’ve published on Amazon and Smashwords, I’m going to try two original, unpublished works. The first, SIREN, is a novella length sea fantasy, told entirely from the hero’s point of view. The second, FAERIE, is a paranormal with a real kick-ass heroine in a medieval world where the beliefs and superstitions of the age are real. I’m probably going to release two more Regency historicals in the fall, one a backlist and the other an original unpublished story.

I’ve also been invited to do a novella length Regency romance based on a letter that is life-changing for one of the characters. Since I already had the perfect story half-finished, I’ll be working to meet that deadline too.

Delle will drop by to chat and answer questions; your comment or question today will enter you into the drawing for a prize of a free download of LADY WICKED.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 17 Replies
First, an announcement:
The winner of Isobel Carr’s book is
Dtchycat


Dtchycat – email me with your mailing information at carolyn AT carolynjewel.com

In other news

My Next Historical is done and turned in and now titles Not Wicked Enough. The book that follows will be Not Proper Enough.

I leave you with this picture because in the post deadline haze it’s all I’ve got:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 5 Replies

Happy Tuesday everyone! I promised opinions on the weekend’s Big Wedding, and of course I have them (if I can remember what they are, after spending the weekend wearing tiaras, drinking tea, eating cake, and critiquing hats with like-minded friends! Why don’t we wear more hats over here anyway???). But here is basic outline of what I thought:

1) Kate looked like absolute perfection for the event. Regal, elegant, and classic. (I doubt anyone will look at these images in 20 or 30 years and say “what was she thinking??” like with Diana), but also young and beautiful. Just like a royal bride should look.


2) I seriously, seriously covet Pippa Middleton’s bridesmaid dress (which also comes in red!). If you have an extra one of these just lying around the atelier, House of McQueen, send it my way pretty please?

3) And those children are the absolute definition of total adorable-ness. Makes me want to get married just to have a passel of attendants just like them. Plus a dress like Pippa’s. And a carriage to ride around in. And a chance to make all my friends wear hats.


4) Amid all this elegant appropriateness, someone needs to bring the Crazy. So thank you, princesses of York! We can always count on you.

And thank you, Victoria Beckham, for showing us the latest in maternity wear–8 inch heels for the 7 months pregnant lady. (She looks fab as always, though. Definitely the most glamorous one there next to the bridal party…)


And can I just say how disappointed I was in the American news coverage?? I don’t get BBC America on my TV or I would have watched them. I did get to watch ITV until they got cut off, and I loved their snarky comments on all the arrivals. The American newscasters didn’t even know or care who anyone was, and had no snark in them at all. Ah well. I still had fun.

Speaking of dating and romance and all those fun things–I thought I would turn to the Arbiter of All Things, Jane Austen herself, to see what her view of these events would be. If I lived in JA’s time, of course, I would be firmly on the shelf and gathering dust, no wedding in my future, but honestly I think I would have quite liked that. Better than having 20 kids and a passel of unruly servants to oversee. Now–well, who knows? Let’s ask Aunt Jane.

“This sensation of listlessness, weariness, stupidity, this disinclination to sit down and employ myself, this feeling of everything’s being dull and insipid about the house! I must be in love” –Emma

“I am always in love with every handsome man in the world” –Juvenilia

“There was a scarcity of men in general, and a still greater scarcity of any that were good for much” –Letter to Cassandra

“The more I know of the world, the more I am convinced that I shall never see a man whom can I really love. I require so much!” –Sense and Sensibility

“I think I could like any good-humored man with a comfortable income” –The Watsons”

“But there are certainly not so many men of large fortune in the world as there are pretty women to deserve them” –Mansfield Park

“Is not general incivility the very essence of love?” –Pride and Prejudice

Also, this weekend I will be headed to Kansas City to see the Princess Diana exhibit (which includes her wedding gown! Wish they could fly in Kate’s to display right next to it)–more info and pics to come next week. And my novella, “Snowbound & Seduced” in Regency Christmas Proposals is nominated for a Readers Crown award! Let me know if you’re planning to be at RomCon in Denver this August and look for me there.

What is your own favorite Austen quote on love and marriage? What did you like best (and least) about the royal wedding? And what kind of hat would you wear to my wedding???

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 11 Replies
Follow
Get every new post delivered to your inbox
Join millions of other followers
Powered By WPFruits.com