I spent the weekend in Cincinnati at Lori Foster’s Get Together, hanging out with people like Laura, Rhonda, Amelia, Annicats and others whom I’ve met before, and also making new friends. I got to see some writers friends I almost never get to talk to, like Jody Wallace. I also spent a lot of time with our lovely agent, Laura Bradford, Megan Hart and Lauren Dane. In short, it was a blast.
It’s funny how I don’t even need to be talking about writing in order to be re-energized to work on my WIP. I just need to be around other writers. Yesterday I chomped at the bit to settle down and write and was able to get out 4k. That’s a lot more than I’m usually able to write in one day. I’m looking forward to doing the same today.
I have pictures posted over on my blog, if you’d like to check them out.
In other news, I’m reading a book I picked up in the goodie room at RT called Seduced by a Spy, by Andrea Pickens. I believe this is the second book in her series, but I don’t think you have to read them in order. This one seems pretty stand-alone. I used to love historicals and lately have acquired a taste for them again (I’m not the only one, looking at reading trends within the romance genre).
This book is set in the Regency period and is chock full of spies, action, and espionage. The premise is intriguing. The heroine comes from a school called Mrs. Merlin’s Academy for Select Young Ladies. All the ladies are orphans taken from London’s slums and taught not only how to comport themselves in society, but also how to spy, wield weapons and seduce. Oooh…cool! I’m so there!
Is the premise historically accurate? Probably not. If it is, please correct me, but I think that if there had really been such a school in real life, learning about it would have kept me awake more often in history class. I’m sure many people have dismissed the series because it’s not true to history, but my attitude is this–it’s fiction I’m reading here. It’s not a history book. I’m reading to be entertained and I am very capable of suspending my disbelief as long as the story is good. Give me interesting characters with depth and a well-written, well-executed plot and I’m more than happy. You can give me the hero, Alexandr Orlov, while you’re at it too. I think I’d forgive him anything. Yum. In any case, so far I’m really enjoying the book.
Do you enjoy historical romance? What are some favs if you do? (Lord of Scoundrels, by Loretta Chase is probably my absolute favorite) And how about that historical accuracy thing? Do you need it, or can you suspend your disbelief enough to leave it?
June 10th, 2008 at 8:14 am
the best historical romance I have read is Julie Garwood’s I love her scottish rogues and they never get old reading them over and over again. she brings a real flare to her books that make them timeless, Jude Deveroux ohh bad mis spell! but she is really timeless too.
June 10th, 2008 at 11:44 am
I love historicals! I enjoy those by Lisa Kleypas, Christina Dodd - I’ve read a few by Jude Devereaux (sp for me too!) - and… a few by Julia London. Oh - and all those Amanda Quick books too.
Historical accuracy… I feel like if it’s obvious, then the book should have it right [order of monarchs, years for wars, etc.] Or like- no fax machines in regency England. (Obviously not *that* bad - but… otherwise, I feel like I’m pretty lenient.)
June 10th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Hi Anya!
I tend to favor paranormal and urban fantasy, but will read historical romance if it is recommended by a friend. I admit that I’ve read a lot of people really really love Loretta Chase’s Lord of Scoundrels, so I will eventually read that one.
History was most likely my least favorite subject in high school, so I’m definitely lenient on the accuracy thing. LOL Mostly because I wouldn’t know otherwise! LOL OKay that’s a pretty lame answer. But sadly true.
I read The Spymaster’s Lady by Joanna Bourne earlier this year and loved it. The sequel, My Lord and Spymaster comes out soon and I’m looking forward to that.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
I love historical romances but I prefer wallpaper in most cases. I love Lisa Kleypas and Christina Dodd for instance - both have strong voices but I never feel like I’m drowning in details I just don’t want to know when I read them.
June 11th, 2008 at 6:14 am
I’m a bit strange. A historically inaccurate premise, based on the female being more/stronger than she should have been for the time? Bring it on. Use a word that wasn’t in existance yet or didn’t have that meaning yet? I’ll put the book down forevah!
I’m with ya on the Lord of Scoundrels and everyone else with the Jude Deveraux. (Oh, how I miss her historicals.) Plus I lurve me some Julia Quinn.
June 11th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I’m with you, Anya, interesting characters, showing emotions and great dialog and plot, and I’m there. I’m not such a history buff, so minor inaccuracies aren’t that important to me, may not even be noticed - I just want to enjoy a great romance story that engages me.
Some of my favorites - Lord of Scoundrels, The Spymaster’s Lady, As You Desire by Connie Brockway, Dreaming of You by LIsa Kleypas, Winter Garden by Adele Ashworth.