Happy Saturday, everyone! I’m very excited, because after a few weeks of work the New Look of my website is ready to go. Check it out here! (It’s still a WIP, so any comments/suggestions are most welcome)

And so, last week was the finale of The Bachelorette. I admit I don’t usually watch a whole series of Bachelor/Bachelorette. I go on enough boring dates in real life to not want to sit through it on TV! (Plus it’s Monday, Gossip Girl is on!) Yet there is something about the finale that pulls me in. The cheesy, faux-romantic sets! The tears and angst! The copious picking up and twirling around! Despite the Bachelorette DeAnna’s slightly surprising choice of the “shredding” snowboarder Jesse over predictable Jason, it was kinda sweet and enjoyable.

But I’m always struck by the difference in tone between the Bachelor and Bachelorette, aka the difference between what happens when the men have to chase the woman vs. when the women chase the man. The Bachelor tends to end with awkward hugs and vows of ‘getting to know each other better.’ The Bachelorette seems to end in declarations of soulmate-dom, of True Love Forever. (I sometimes get the sense that the Bachelor, after being wildly pursued by 20 beautiful, and often tipsy, 24-year-olds, feels that he is far hotter than he actually is, and thus why should he settle down with just one? Whereas the Bachelorette is a rare prize to be fought over).

And speaking of women chasing men and vice versa, on this date in 1543 Henry VIII married his sixth and last wife Catherine Parr. Poor Catherine–no final roses or fantasy dates in the Bahamas for her! She had already been married twice to much-older men, and Henry was gouty, crazy, and immensely fat, and in need of a devoted nurse (having dispatched 5 wives already). Catherine, despite being in love and nearly betrothed to the handsome, dashing, but in the end wildly idiotic Thomas Seymour, had no choice. She married the king at Hampton Court, in a quiet ceremony with 20 witnesses.

But she was not just a devoted nurse of elderly husbands. She was deeply interested in the reformed Protestant faith, and her scholarly achievements were impressive (her 1545 book Prayers and Meditations, was the first work ever published by an English queen under her own name. Another book, The Lamentation of a Sinner, was published after Henry’s death). She was also a devoted stepmother, both to the children of her second husband and to Henry’s 3 children, Mary, Elizabeth, and Edward, personally supervising their education.

It was her interest in the Protestant faith and encouragement of study within her household that nearly led her to the block in 1546. The conservative faction at Court had never been happy about her marriage, and the fact that she and her ladies were known to have banned books, the possession of which was grounds for arrest and execution on charges of heresy. The warrant was accidentally dropped, and seen by someone loyal to Catherine, giving her time to go to the king and claim that she only discussed and argued issues of religion with him so she could take his mind off his troubles. Playing to Henry’s ego was always a good thing, and she was spared from being the third queen executed.

After the king’s death in 1547, she married Seymour (a bad decision), and in 1548 died in childbirth at the age of 37. She was buried at her home at Sudeley Castle, with another of her young proteges, Lady Jane Grey, as chief mourner.

So, did you watch Bachelorette? What did you think of the ending, or of the Bachelor franchise in general? Any favorite wives of Henry VIII? (Catherine Parr is actually tied with Katherine of Aragon as my second-fave, behind number one Anne Boleyn!)

One can study history, and read memoirs and letters, and devour historical novels by the bushel…and yet I find there are still some aspects of how people really lived and thought which it is hard for a modern person to really thoroughly understand.

Oh, one can have an intellectual understanding — but I mean a gut understanding, a real “feeling” for the way people lived, and thought — an ability to mentally step into their shoes, and see through their eyes.

A few areas that I think are particularly difficult for a modern person to truly grasp:

1) Just how different the attitude toward STUFF was. Nowadays, we have far too much stuff — we’re inundated by it, our homes overflow with it, we complain our kids have way too much junk… We have Jane Austen action figures and joke mugs just for the heck of it, our kids get cheap toys in cereal boxes and at the doctor, charities and realtors send us free notepads and coins and calendars and bumper stickers and postcards…

So how can we truly grasp a world where stuff actually cost money? Where things were used and reused and reused again? Where the Artful Dodger could hang for stealing a handkerchief, because handkerchiefs were actually worth something?

2) And how can a modern person raised in a democratic, multi-ethnic society ever entirely comprehend the mindset of a person who never (or rarely) met anyone who wasn’t a supporter of monarchy, whose whole society believed that men were smarter than women, that aristocrats had superior blood and brains to commoners, that people’s abilities were determined by their race and national origin?

3) And how do we, living in a world with good contraception, where women can support themselves (and their children, if need be) by working as a lawyer or doctor or police officer or computer programmer — a world that has heard from Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan and Oprah and Jennifer Crusie and The Joy of Sex — how do we get into the mindset of people who thought a woman’s chastity, modesty and “virtue” were her crown jewels, and who thought a woman’s duty was to obey her husband in the same way her husband obeyed the king?

Anyway, these are three areas that occur to me right off. Which of these seem hardest to you? Or what other things do you think are particularly hard to grasp?

All answers welcome!

Cara
Cara King, whose brain isn’t hampered at all by its common blood

CONGRATULATIONS, flchen1!!!

You have won a copy of A MOST UNCONVENTIONAL MATCH by Julia Justiss.

Please email riskies@yahoo.com to claim your prize.

The Riskies

Risky Regencies: Welcome to the blog, Julia! Tell us about your July release, A Most Unconventional Match

Julia: Thanks for inviting me! A Most Unconventional Match is about finding yourself–and love–after suffering tragedy and heartache. As the story opens, Elizabeth Wellingford Lowery has lost her husband, an older man who placed her on a pedestal and took care of all the details of everyday life so she could pursue her painting. Suddenly left with no one to help her, as all her family is abroad, she is floundering when Hal Waterman pays her a call.

Possessed of a demanding, Society leader/Diamond of a mother, Hal has always carefully avoided Beauties, particularly Elizabeth Wellingford, siste-in-law of his best friend Nicky. He had an instantaneous attraction to her when they first met 7 years ago. But with her family absent at the time of her husband’s death, Hal feels obligated to stop by and offer his assistance. He intends to help Elizabeth settle her financial affairs and make a quick exit–until he meets her little boy, desolate with a grief Hal, who lost his own father as a child, recalls only too well.

So cautiously begins the dance of attraction between a gruff “man’s man” and a china-doll beauty who seem to have nothing in common–but come in time to realize they’re each other’s perfect complement! I hope readers will agree.

RR: How did you get started writing Regency-set books? What draws you to the period? And is there any other historical period you love and would like to write about?

Julia: I’ve loved the Regency since I read my first Georgette Heyer in college! Her humor, her exacting eye for the foibles of human nature played out against the backdrop of this exciting period immediately hooked me on the era. The wit and elegance of the language, the large number of unusual and interesting personages and events that give those years their characters continue to fascinate me. And of course, one day after reading a book that disappointed, I thought “I could write a better one!” So the challenge began…

I enjoy a number of historical periods. I have a Paris-set World War II book I’d love to do, another set during the Regency featuring the family of an emigre forced by the Revolution to flee France. I’d also like to do a contemporary suspense set in Texas, and a series about strong women in unusual professions that would kick off with a story about a female Navy fighter pilot.

RR: What was the research like for A Most Unconventional Match? And what are some of your favorite research sources overall for the Regency?

Julia: Since Hal is an expert on business and finance, I needed to find out more about how capital was invested and how the canal system was developed. I also needed more details about the Royal Academy, its exhibitions and school. Generally I try to write the draft of the story without doing a lot of detailed research–since research is so fascinating, I could easily get distracted and never go back to the story! As I write, I keep notes on what I need to go back and check, then explore various sources and correct/adjust the draft as needed. Priestley’s The Prince of Pleasure, Bryant’s The Age of Elegance, and Life in Regency England are good general sources, but I find it’s the small pesky details that are hardest to verify. I have a pretty large library of specific sources on everything from carriages to the art of Turner. If those fail, I appeal to the infallible source: the experts on the Beau Monde loop!

RR: We know all about that!!! And what is “risky” about this book?

Julia: Two things I suppose: since it’s as much a story of a woman’s recovering from grief and coming into her own as it is a love story, I risk alienating readers who prefer that the book focus solely on the interplay between hero and heroine. Second, since Elizabeth loved her late husband and is struggling with grief, the physical bond between her and Hal develops slowly. Maybe not the wisest approach in a market where the most popular books focus on hot sex early and often! But I had to do what fit the story best.

RR: I know in your “other job” you teach French! Do you have any French-set books in mind? And do you have any tips for time-management?

Julia: I’d love toi do the two previously mentioned–the Regency England/Restoration France tale, and the WWII Paris one. Beyond that–the heroine of the Regency story has a good friend who escaped the Revolution as a child and survived by doing all manner of things, from picking pockets to smuggling brandy. I’d like to do his story!

Time management–if I ever figure out how to do that, I’ll let you know! 🙂 It seems I’m always behind. Prioritizing, setting aside absolute hours for writing, having a basic schedule and timeline are all good, but no guarantee against the disruption of Real Life.

RR: What is next for you?

Julia: I’m currently working on the story of the third friend featured in my very first book, The Wedding Gamble. Nicky was the hero of that one; his friend Hal is in the current release, and their other friend Ned is now getting his turn. After that, I’ll have a series of 3 unusual ladies who have secrets to overcome. My working titles (which will most certainly be changed!) are The Ruin of Miss Denby, The Redemption of Lady Winter, and The Rescue of Mrs. Gray. I also have a novella coming up, Christmas Wedding Wish in the Harlequin anthology One Candlelit Christmas in November!

Life has been busy at chez McCabe this week! Here is what I’ve been doing:

1) Doing some more political campaign volunteering (though I still haven’t found an occasion for a blue velvet suit and foxtail-trimmed hat, a la The Duchess!)

2) Writing. Lots. (natch)

3) Reading! (This week’s read–The Lady Penelope, a new biography of Lady Penelope Rich by Sally Varlow. It has lots of good info, but not really the “you are there” feeling of bios like Georgiana and Perdita)

4) Getting book title news!! I always like this–it makes the book feel “official,” somehow. Balthazar’s book (out in January ’09, just in time for my birthday!) is now called High Seas Stowaway. Ships, pirates, battles, and, as Anna Campbell put it “Historically accurate nookie!”

And the reissued Christmas novella from Signet, Upon a Midnight Clear, will be in an anthology titled A Homespun Regency Christmas (Regency on the Prairie??). The other 3 novellas are by Carla Kelly, Emma Jenson, and Sandra Heath.

5) And 4th of July-ing! Yesterday, in between eating hot dogs and cupcakes and watching fireworks, I took a friend’s daughter to see Kit Kittredge: An American Girl. We both give it 2 enthusiastic thumbs-up, as did her American Girl doll, Samantha, who accompanied us. (Though she did want to know why Kit got the feature-film treatment, when she, Samantha, got only a cheesy TV movie…)

One of the previews was for the delightfully silly-looking Mamma Mia!. I may have to see this one, if only to watch Meryl Streep singing ABBA songs.

And it just so happens that July 5, 1755 was the birthday of the Regency’s own version of Meryl Streep, Sarah Siddons. I doubt she ever had to sing Dancing Queen, though.

She was born Sarah Kemble, the eldest of 12 children of the actor-manager Roger Kemble (several of her siblings also became well-known actors). She married another actor, William Siddons, in 1773, and had her first professional role as Belvidera in Otway’s Venice Preserved. Things went a bit downhill from there–she was dismissed from Drury Lane, in her own words, “banished from Drury Lane as a worthless candidate for fame and fortune.” But after a very succeseful five-year run in Bath, starting in about 1778, she went back to Drury Lane.

Her appearance as Isabella in Garrick’s version of Southerne’s Fatal Marriage in October 1782 was a triumph. She soon took on her signature role, Lady Macbeth, as well as Desdemona, Ophelia, Volumnia, and the title role in Queen Catherine. For over 20 years she was queen of Drury lane, the greatest tragic actress in London, and a cultural icon.

In 1812, her farewell performance at Covent Garden, as Lady Macbeth, brought down the house. The audience refused to let the play go on after the sleepwalking scene. After this, she appeared only once in a while for special performances, making her last appearance in 1819.

She had 7 children, though only 2 outlived her, and ended up informally separated from Mr. Siddons. She died in 1831. I only have one book about her in my library, but it’s a good one with lots of pics–Robyn Asleson’s A Passion for Performance: Sarah Siddons and Her Portraitists.

So, happy birthday, Mrs. Siddons! And happy weekend to all of you. How have you spent your holiday? Seen any good theatrical performances lately?