A Journey Through My Mess

I woke up this morning inspired to write. I knew my direction but I also felt like I needed to find the notes I took at a session at the 2018 Romance Writers of America convention in Denver. I could not remember the name of the speaker, but it was about writing for your id. It was a great session and gave me permission not to try so hard to break out of the aspects of romance I enjoyed but worried were cliche. I shouldn't be different for the sake of being different. If it feels right to me, it will feel right to my readers.

The problem I have is that I have loads of spiral note books and I use them for all sorts of things. Which one I write in depends on which one I grab when I pack my bag. I do dress sketches for Irish dancing. I take notes on staff meetings. I write outlines and scenes for whatever is in my head that day, no matter what actual project I'm supposed to be writing. It's a mess. Most of the notebooks are half-full but not in any sort of sequential order. Some of them include ten pages at the back. Usually the very act of writing it down means I'll remember and then type it out later, but I don't do this with notes from events.

As I looked through my notes I found such stand alone, with no context at all, statements as:

• 200+ years of rape.
• Bags of seed save the day.
• "I trust you" is the highest honor you can give someone.
• Boob situation/solution?

I found World of Warcraft fan fiction that I'd forgotten about interspersed with teaching notes I never followed up on. The collection of notebooks went back to 2012 and one of the pages includes my attempt to turn the Batman image into Celtic knot work. I found pieces of a chapter based on the characters from Shakespeare and became inspired to work on the that project (something shelved four years ago so I could finish the manuscripts that needed it) then found notes for my actual work in progress that inspired this search through my notebooks in the first place. Thank goodness that got me back on track.

I did what I should have done in the first place and shoved all the book back onto my bookshelf to go through another time when I wasn't in the I NEED TO WRITE NOW mood. But first I took a picture.

The crazy thing is that I know there are more somewhere.

I did a search online after all of the fruitless digging through spiral notebooks and found the answers to all my questions -- but this puts a damper on the sense of urgency I had while looking through years of randomness. The speaker was author Dr. Jennifer Barnes. This post from Eight Ladies Writing summed it up well and gave me the basic list I was looking for. The blog post author, Jilly Wood, wrote that, "Stories or scenes depicting sex, touch, beauty, wealth, power, competition and danger push our pleasure buttons." Wonderful. Question answered. My journey through years of random notes/writing only served to let me know I needed to be more organized.

To Reverance or Not to Reverance

So many historical romance readers are familiar with the curtsy. It is woven throughout period stories and almost is the norm for anything that is olde-timey (<== not a real word). However, just like the value of virginity, it is not true for ALL times. Particularly, not Tudor.

The curtsy is limited to women. It began it's life known as the courtesy which, as the word implies, was meant to show courtesy or respect to a better or peer. The woman would start feet in turn out, one behind the other, and lower themselves at the knee with their back straight. It is an action similar to a plié in ballet.

What we now know as the curtsy evolved from the older reverance. In Italianate Renaissance dancing there is a move called the riverenza. Like a curtsy, it is similar to a plié but with the feet parallel. This dance move marks the start of most of the Italian choreography of the period, and Italian dancing was considered very sophisticated and practiced by the English court. The Italian choreographer, Caroso, uses the riverenza while the French choreographer, Arbeau, uses reverance ( <== real word).

During this same period, the polite response to one's betters or peers was a reverance (often referred to in period pieces as a bow or curtsy, but the period term is reverance). This motion was done both by men and women. Stepping back with one foot, the other foot pointed and forward, the courtier would shift weight to their back leg and bend at the knee, holding the position until signaled to rise. This motion gave men an opportunity to "make a leg" and show off their calf muscles (they were wearing slippers with form fitting silken hose and slops that ended above the knee, their calf was the most exposed body part and consider sexy on a man). Women did the same, but only the toe of the slipper might be seen peeping out from the hem of her skirts.

A curtsy is faster, but a reverance is more elegant. It makes more a spectacle of showing respect. While the word was in existence in the 16th century, it was not the customary action for show of respect until toward the end of the 17th century. It is no longer in use, but it was during the Elizabethan era. Since I do not write in dialect, I try to use a scattering of period, though some are obsolete, words to give the flavor of the era. And, since what a modern reader may think of as a bow or a curtsy is not the same action as a reverance, I decided to stick with it. I deal with the foreign feel of the word by describing the action during the first example of it in each of my books.

When I first started writing fiction set in the Elizabethan era, I looked up the word. I wanted to make sure I was using the historically accurate phrase and action and not just adopting renaissance faire-isms. If you were to Google "reverance," they'd automatically show you results for "reverence."  You have to actually select the small print that says "search instead for reverance" in order to see references to it. They're there, you just have to actually look for them instead of accepting the first Google option that says it's a misspelled word.

I had to fight to keep it in the book and, while it might have been easier to give in to the popular terminology even if they're not right for the period, I'm happy I kept it. I did put due diligence into being true to the era and though I made mistakes, my choice to use use the reverance as the form of polite greeting was not one of them.

Defining Literary Fiction

In jumping the romance ship (sort of) I have to acquaint myself with norms for the much broader umbrella of literary fiction. That said, it seems there are no norms other than telling a good story. Then again, that could be said for any of the genre fiction categories -- the underlying factor that makes them genre is that the bulk of the story meets a certain angle. In my case, romance requires an emotionally satisfying happily ever after. All of my manuscripts meet this romance norm, but the romance between my main characters does not always meet the aspect of fantasy implicit in romance, hence the switch.

Part of my research brought me across "Literary Fiction vs. Genre Fiction," a Huffington Post article by Steven Petit. I agree with much of what he says about the difference between genre and literary fiction except for the distinction that genre fiction is to entertain and literary fiction is an expression of the writer's being. Gotham Writers points out that "literary and genre fiction aren’t exclusive of one another." Every thing I have written has been an expression of my soul and I would argue that many authors of genre fiction put themselves into their books and consider them art, albeit art that entertains. Art is successful when it draws forth an emotional response and I like to flatter myself that my writing does just that (even with a happily ever after). Maybe that's because I am amazing. Sure. Why not? 

I struggle with maintaining the norms of one sub-genre of romance. My historical romances are too  chick lit and historical fiction to have a clear shelf space (and I've heard this from my critique partner, my beta readers, AND industry professionals so it's insane that I'm only now accepting it as truth). My paranormal are too historical and thriller/suspense to even be categorized under romance at all. The only clear genre fiction I have in the works (notice it's not finished) are my contemporary, but contemporary romance in itself is also skirting the boundary of chick lit, so bully for me.

In short, I think good writing is "Literary Fiction is comprised of the heart and soul of a writer's being, and is experienced as an emotional journey through the symphony of words, leading to a stronger grasp of the universe and of ourselves" (Petit).  This description can apply to all genres and gives me hope of being successful as I look into a new pool of agents and publishers.

For now I'll ignore the niggling doubt that reminds me many of the agents I have queried in the past represent more than romance. That said, if they saw something more like literary fiction in my manuscripts, wouldn't they have instigated the change? Or were they looking only for romance norms since that was the description they started with?

Romantically Retarded

I have been boy crazy for as long as I can remember. I also have been horribly insecure about it all. For a long time I could NEVER let someone know I like them because that made me vulnerable. And God forbid that someone like me first- - I would assume something must be very wrong with them and instantly and irrationally dislike them. I had (have) issues and owe a few boys an apology.

The result was the only boyfriends I had were ones who I hunted down and trapped. The couple that pursued me didn't last long and left me feeling creeped out even if their only sin was liking me more than I liked them. My husband doesn't know how close I came to bolting based on pure fear/freak-out after he brought up the idea of marriage before I was ready to talk about it. The thing is, I don't believe in soul mates. I believe you chose your love and then love your choice. The whole idea of something 'meant to be' is anathema to me.

And this is why I shouldn't write romance. In fact, I don't think I do write romance after all. Yet again, like with relationships past, I was forcing something to be something it wasn't.

My love stories are way too practical and involve people deciding they want to be together instead of NEEDING to be together. I lack the magic. I like to read romance and enjoy the love-conquers-all story, but I also enjoy science fiction/fantasy. I guess I see true love and dragons under the same light. No wonder I don't write it convincingly.

I am now researching the possibility of marketing my books as literary fiction with strong romantic elements. That's a different set of norms, industry players, etc...  I'm starting over (only with several books already written) and have a lot of work ahead of me.

Wish me luck.

Stupid Alphas

At the Romance Writers of America conference in San Antonio this summer I attended a workshop titled Deconstructing the Alpha. To be honest, I only attended because Eloisa James was one of the moderators and I have a fangirl crush that leads me to believe everything she touches will be golden (justifiably so).

I have struggled with the alpha male ever since I cracked open my first romance novel. He frequently frustrates me. Usually arrogant and domineering, it doesn't make his personality any more palatable to see that he's right in most instances. As a reader I think one of the factors that makes a book re-read-worthy is that you fall in love with the guy a little. I have a hard time falling for the alpha .

That said, alpha sex is hot (disclaimer: the modern alpha male is no longer the date rapist from the '70s -- I can't even read those plots without gagging. It's one of the only things that will make put down a book unfinished). In the workshop, the authors and editors hosting discussed why the modern woman responds to the alpha. In a world where women are expected to be super mom and super executive and super hot, it's a great fantasy to have that cave man who will carry throw you over his shoulder and be counted on to provide for his woman's every need. Sophisticate that a few notches and you have Gabriel Cross. The uber powerful, ruthless, unattainable, implacable, hard bodied demigod who has a soft spot for that one woman. The alpha is a fantasy in regard to appeal and resources, but also in that the woman tames him (breaks him like a wild mustang, painfully, without a horse whisperer) and, ultimately, she has the power because she has his heart (or other parts as the case may be).

I write about this today because I'm trying to write an alpha. I think my fatal flaw is in including his point of view. Already, I've made him too vulnerable. I went for someone who strategizes and assumes the role needed to win in a Machiavellian vein rather than a straight up confident/arrogant master of the universe. Strategists weigh probability, consider outcomes -- and this is taking me out of alpha territory. Would an alpha care about the outcome? Not really, because he KNOWS he's right. My pseudo alpha might be too human.

This my fifth book and my first attempt at alpha. I chose this course on the advice of a friend. I'm trying to hybrid the sexy hard edges of Sylvia Day with the quirky fun of Kristan Higgins and I think I have to step back and regroup. It may be like trying to cross a tea cup poodle with a Saint Bernard--what could possibly go wrong?

That I'm writing this book at all is a departure for me. Call me a whore in that I'm writing what I think will sell (versus my other books which I wrote because I wanted to tell the story). I'm not prostituting my talent completely though, because I really am invested in this story (now). It's actually the best pre-plotted story I've created so far (pantser!), but I'm worried it's not staying the course (which makes it more organic, a good thing) and who knows how it will end?

Sigh.

Point of this blog post: Do you like alphas? How do you define an alpha? Do you think seeing the alpha's gooey center is a turn off or downplays his power?

Stalking Agents

This will be my third year at the Romance Writer's of America conference and every year I use their spreadsheet of agents hearing pitches to create a stalking list. It's not creepy at all. Well, maybe a little -- I prefer to think of it as being prepared.

I make a list in order based on how well I think we'll fit. I include their picture, a list of clients that I have read and those that seem to be similar in theme/voice, and a quote from their site about what they're looking for. The list has been helpful (even though I remain sans agent)

I write this today, not to creep you out, but to share an epiphany. Year to year I use the RWA area of interest grid to update my prey potential agents and it changes very little. This year I noticed that only half the agents want paranormal romance. Given that I am pitching one paranormal and halfway through a second, I have to curse under my breath. Three years ago they all wanted paranormal. This year they all want contemporary. Did that last year? I don't know, I didn't look for that information because I only had historical and paranormal. This year I'm adding contemporary to the mix and it seems like a smart move.

My point? I was using the grid to see if I'd want them, if I had a chance. It never occurred to me to use the grid to guide what I should write. In a way, the grid acts as a not-so-secret view into the mind of the agent based on what they think they can sell. It is a prediction, if not of future trends, of what IS selling. Of course I wanted to be aware of the market and I did that by looking at the best seller lists, etc... I realize now that RWA gave me a tool, a comprehensive list of things agents actively want. I'm just lucky that this year I have something to offer within that area. 

Where's the Love?

Over a year ago I posted a blog (rant) about a run in with an acquaintance who had such a scathing attitude to the romance genre that it left me reeling. I understand not choosing to read it or just not getting into love stories, but the vitriol dripping from the comment was overwhelming. Any attempt at pleasantries between us was effectively crushed. Honestly, unnamed person, you could have just smiled and said no, then brought up the weather. Social niceties 101.

At the time I assumed this person must read obscure but profound literature. You know, the stuff college professors assign or the titles on your list that you never actually read but plan to some day because the names show up on crossword puzzles. Plus, it's fun to seem like you're smart, right? And, of course, the best way to do that is to make sure everyone else knows you think they're an idiot.

The fact that thinking about it still bothers me shows how sensitive I am. Oh well.

My point, you ask? Well, today I found out that this person reads sci-fi/fantasy and my jaw dropped. Wait, after that absolute slap in the face about the genre fiction I write and love, you read genre fiction too? You mean you deign to waste your brain space on formulaic, commercial tripe? You respond to the hero's journey? Say it isn't so.

Oh, it is.

Don't get me wrong, I love sci-fi/fantasy. My adolescent reading started with mystery and then morphed into sci-fi/fantasy with Xanth trilogy (or so it began) and I kept going from there. I only started on romance ten-ish years ago. I'm not insulting the genre, but I am saying that it is a genre of commercial fiction.

So what makes one genre more elevated than another? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say NOTHING. Within all genres there are good and bad authors and it's entirely subjective. That said, why the disdain? I teach high school and I can't remember even a student being that rude before. Seriously.

Image from HBO's mini-series Game of Thrones, written by George R.R. Martin (and yes, I've read it but not seen the series). High fantasy with a lot of kinda rapey sex.

Agent and Editor Research

Romance Writers of America's national conference is sneaking up on us. They have released the names of agents and editors who will be there and available for pitches. The list is in a handy little table, so I can check for those who represent both historical and paranormal romance. Really, I intend to focus on the ones I have not pitched to yet, so these ones are the unknown. This means research.

As I work my way through the list from Ahearn to Yost, let me mention that I really appreciate agent websites that include details about their client list. I can see what sort of product, at a glance, they represent. Yes, the table RWA provided has 'paranormal' checked, but if everything they have published is vampire series, chances are good I'm not within their scope.  Last year I had this trouble with inspirational agents. They didn't say anywhere that they were only for inspirational (Christian) books, but after looking up each author they had listed and reading about their books, I was able to draw that conclusion. I just wish I didn't have to spend so much time on each one before eliminating them as an option.

As a PRO member (a member that has completed at least one manuscript and gone through the process enough to get rejected) I am able to sign up for pitch sessions on 5/20 (tomorrow!) and this year I am aware that sign up starts at 9am central, not pacific. That was my bad last year. Oh well.

Along with signing up for pitch sessions, I'm using the information to create a stalking file. I go so far as to include pictures of my target agents, but I found last year that I relied much more on the name tags. It's worth it to know who the agents and agencies are and what they represent -- that way neither of us are wasting our time. I like to think that what I'm doing is not creepy and obsessive, but smart. Not weird at all. Okay, fine, last year there was one agent that had a bio mentioning something about riding bikes in Manhattan and I theorized about how I could hook her up with my brother (who also rides his bike in Manhattan -- relationships have been based on less), but I never actually did it.

This year I'll be armed with my one-sheets for four completed manuscripts. I want to be closer to done with my fifth, but even if I take up cocaine or something in order to cram it out, it wouldn't be clean and ready by mid-July. And I'd have a drug problem. Not worth it.

On that note I'm going to refill my coffee and get back to compiling my list. Cheers.

Side note: Don't Google for "Georgia peach" images if your kids are nearby. Just sayin'.

Touched by the Past

Photo by Dimitri Vervitsiotis

I'm off and running with my new project. A lot more planning went into this than any other project. My Elizabethans were set in a period where I was already an annoying font of knowledge (not counting confirming dates of choreography and specifics about the 17th Earl of Oxford's inheritance.) My New Orleans story required some Google Earth and some research into Voodoo, but beyond that, I already had a healthy understanding of the pre-Civil war history of the city and recent experiences there in regard to the vibe of the culture.

Touched by the Past, while based on my childhood experiences on the woodland property of the hotel my family owned in Ireland, has required tons of research. From the native species of flora/fauna, tectonic activity and layers of sediment in coastal, South-West Ireland, limestone sink holes, and seasonal wild flower growth, I've buried myself in unexpected research. I thought I had this one in the bag, that my experiences would give me the knowledge base to write this story, but no, I had no prior knowledge about the stations of rank within the Garda, Ogham script, or the equivalent price of a pint of milk. When we lived there in the 80's we had it delivered in glass pints and had to scoop the cream off the top -- is it still like that? I entered into this project with a false sense of security. Reality was hard to swallow and frustrating; I was ready to be writing and ended up mired in research.

That said, I'm making good progress. Just for fun, here is my first 381 for your reading/critiquing enjoyment. I value any feedback you are willing to give.

Tendrils of blue electricity glowed and crackled, hovering over the misty earth. Reaching with fingers of light, it sought her out. Gillian watched, mesmerized, unsure if she should run away or give herself to the power one more time. Fear and excitement paralyzed her and all she could was watch as the living lightning snaked closer, a pulsing stream of incandescence, kinking and curling as it crawled.

All she had to do was show herself, take two steps into the open, and it would touch her, filling her with its earthy energy and memories, knowledge of things she had no right to know. It was tantalizing and, she shivered, scary. Really, really scary. Whenever it happened, she never knew if she would ever find herself again. Then that last time…

Gillian blinked in the early morning light, the memory of the old dream fading as reality settled in. No longer the thirteen year old girl hiding from some fantastical floating light, she knew better now. Experience of years, too many years, schooled her in the harsh realities of life. There was no magic in the forest and never had been; her dreams were based solely on the over-active imagination of a child.

The last time she’d stood here, holding her breath in anticipation at the lower mouth of the woods on the once paved carriage path of long dead aristocrats, she’d been a child in tears about leaving Ireland. Now, a thirty-five year old widow with a daughter in college, she didn’t feel any different. The wood before her was just as dark and ominous, and lush and beckoning, as it had been all those years ago.

Her Wellingtons squelched as she shifted within the sodden indents of the manicured lawn. She tucked a stray wisp of her blond hair back under the bandanna and straightened her gloves, ready to work. With a resolute nod, she stomped forward through the wet morning into the shade of the trees. She had nothing to fear here. She was an adult, experienced in forestry and ready to respect the biodiversity that lay before her. The forest would be her friend once more, if not on a magical plane, then on a basic, fundamental one.

She came to save it.

This is currently my desktop wallpaper. As I created it, I found myself using more images of landscape than of people. It made me realize how the forest itself is a dominant character.

Touching the Past

It's official. I'm working on my new project.

"But wait," you ask, "haven't you been working on that for a month or so?"

Yes. Sigh. I've been doing the research, laying out my characters, and procrastinating about really starting. Sure, I wrote the first chapter --but I wrote this with the understanding that I probably would end up throwing it out when I got halfway through the project because feedback would finally convince me that I hadn't started the story where the story starts (because I never learn).

What makes me serious now? Well, I know this is silly, but I have a Pandora station all set as my writing soundtrack. I also, finally, know what my male lead looks like. What else? I've finished the research that gives my entire reason for using Ireland as my setting validity, so now I can start applying the story. (Side note: I'm using Pinterest as a mode for collecting my data. It's very visual and much better than my Word.doc cut/paste of URLs.)

And I have! I'm only about 4k words into the manuscript, but the story has everything it needs to grow at this point.

On that note, I should get back to writing. Liam is walking Gillian home, but she really doesn't want him too -- or does she? (she does, but she wishes she didn't, just in case you wondered)

BTW: Touching the Past is a temporary title. I needed something. It had to be sexy/suggestive, but also touch on the mystical elements in the story. 

Naming the Baby

Well, in this case, the new book. It's another paranormal, but the paranormal is a benign force, not helpful nor harmful except in that it drives my main character sort of nuts.

The premise:  Gillian, 35 year old widow with a daughter in college (she was a teenage mother) moves back to her childhood home in Ireland to pursue her education and interns at a historic home, now hotel, to help preserve the wooded property. As she works, memories of strange happenings haunt her -- things she dismissed as her imagination. Eventually she realizes that the images she is seeing come from the memories of the forest itself. The forest, so relieved to have an outlet, bombards her memories, some meaningful, some not (they're trees, they don't classify things the way humans do). The information overload gets worse when the forest jumps into a self preservation mode and Gillian has to figure out what the land is trying to tell her.

I'm working in druids, Vikings, and more mundane menaces, like murders and waste disposal. Along the way, Gillian's uncanny connection with the land makes someone nervous, someone who doesn't want his corruption known. Gillian also discovers the woman she is now, no longer defined by her teenage behavior, and has a journey of self (and some sex -- it is romance).

My initial title was Residual Memory, but that sounds a little Sci-Fi. I need something a little sexy, Irish, and creepy. A friend (just now, as I was typing this blog) suggested the term 'knowing,' which I like. It can be deep and transcendental or have a sexual connotation.

Possessing Karma (the book that is now in edits) is about a woman named Karma who gets possessed, but also about the karma that eventually gets to the cocky, abusive, sexual sadist, pre-Civil war plantation owner ghost. I don't love this title, but it works for now. I do like the double meaning and I think it's got a sexy edge to it (important in romance genre).

As for my sentient trees watching you? Not a clue. Feel free to offer suggestions, silly or serious. Even writing this has been helpful for me getting into a good writing vibe. Maybe inspiration will strike.

Educating Myself on Sexiness

I've been married for fifteen years and born two children. Though not super experimental, I like to think I know what I'm doing when it comes to sexual relations. Given that I write about it and that I don't want every scene to use the same sequence of events, phraseology, etc, I do online research. Yes, I have to be careful NOT to leave certain websites up when my kids are playing Wizard 101.

Some stuff I've read is just plain common sense.Some is ridiculous. Articles that guarantee multiple orgasms invalidate themselves right away. The best stuff is approached with a sense of humor and not pretentious.

For your reading enjoyment and potentially to help improve your prowess, I'm posting links to some I've found interesting. Enjoy.

How to Touch a Woman's Breast.  This one is written with a sense of humor and really deals with the fact that the arousal process is primarily in the woman's mind. Perhaps a little overkill in the nail raking, but still good.  Along this line, you find the funkiest stuff when you do a search for "nipple orgasm." It included this picture. Why hadn't I seen this before? This is within my historical zone, a great reference for... something. Man. I've been missing out.

Clitoral Stimulation Techniques. I found this interesting and learned some new things. Not being a contortionist, I've never really been able to analyze the whole region properly.

Expensive Vibrators. Not that this helped with my writing, but knowing that these exist and people buy them was amazing to learn. This one looks steam punk.

Even more entertaining than information that I can use, is the stuff that I can't but leaves me laughing. I have shared this with friends before, but never in a blog. Here is Cosmo's 44 Most Ridiculous Sex Tips. I think the beer facial one may have happened by accident once, though.

How has your scope been expanded by writing research? Any fun stuff you want to share?

You Have Me At A Disadvantage, Sir

The subject here: male vs. female orgasms.

Reader beware, this post may be crude. Surprised? You shouldn't be. I've never been accused of being too classy.

Female virgins are the norm in my genre. It's a tried and true cliche of the young, untried virgin and the experienced rake who initiates her into the realm of pleasure. Sure, there's deviation from this norm, but even when the woman wasn't a virgin coming into this new and oh-sweet-mystery-of-life-at-last-I've-found-you relationship, she may as well have been. Usually her past sexual experiences were sub-par, which generally meant she had never experienced orgasm.


When it comes to sexual gratification, men have women at a disadvantage. They've been experimenting with their 'doofinky thingy' (thank you Mrs. Manno) since their very first bath. One day, it did something miraculous and that meant daily experimentation. It is really, really easy for men to end sexual encounters with orgasms (whether or not anyone else is involved).

Women don't have it quite that easy, especially virgins. Now I know this is not true for all women, but I feel safe in making the generalization that MOST women don't take matters into their own hands and ALL men do (and the ones that say they don't, they lie).

I have read that the romance genre creates unrealistic expectations in women in regard to sexual encounters. I'll agree that romance novels make female orgasm look incredibly easy to attain. I read a few novels (including some written by Fabio) whilst virginal and, yes, when I had my first encounter, I was expecting something... more. Even following that time, I kept waiting for that something to happen. Was it my fault? Did I not work right? Or was my boyfriend a douche-bag that didn't care about anyone but himself? I'll bet you can guess the answer.

I will agree that women should not use romance novels as a how-to manual when it comes to sex (but guys, the whole seduction idea? Maybe you should read a few. I mean, if women think they're sexy, then maybe you could get some pointers). If you take the stories at gospel, yes, you're going to be disappointed both with yourself and your partner (unless you're Salma Hayek and your partner is Joe Manganiello -- then you're good). But if read it for the fantasy it is, the sexual aspects could be inspiring and leave behind a feeling of hopeful optimism.

When it comes to real life, the statistics about female orgasm are really, really sad. Maybe that's why women enjoy the fantasy of the 100% guaranteed orgasm (or 300% in the case of Fifty Shades). Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women are sitting around all day wishing they were orgasming (at least I don't, I don't know about you), but, when it comes to sex, it would be nice to have the same surety that men do.

It might be funny to write a scene in one of my novels where she does not reach earth shattering heights and assures the nervous guy that everything's all right, it was still enjoyable. Or, she fakes it for his ego's sake. :) Somehow I don't think that would go over well with readers.

I Write What I Know

I am a white, thirty-six year old college graduate. I grew up exposed to western culture. I was raised with middle class values and a firm appreciation of capitalism and the possibility of improving my lot in life. I am a heterosexual woman. My father wanted me to go to a good college specifically so I would meet my future husband amongst the throng of young men set on succeeding in life (I was always a little offended by this). This is my basic background. Since people write what they know, I write about white women (exception of Karma) and their heterosexual relationships. Because I am a history major (in my adequate college, already married) and active in Renaissance faires, I feel comfortable writing about the Elizabethan era. I know what it's like to wear a corset, farthingale, bumroll, and forty pound dress. This is my element.

In a recent blog post on Teach Me Tonight, one of the quoted articles addressed the "ethnocentricism, heteronormativity, and cultural imperialism," of mainstream romance genre fiction. I really enjoyed the author's voice in this and did not disagree, given I've never been a proponent of romance novels as a form of feminism. It did, however, make me think about why I made the character and plot choices I do. It's because of who I am and what I find engrossing. Making the assumption that this is true for all authors, and given my 'brand' of character/plot is not outside the mainstream norm (much),  this issue is more about what publisher's choose to put forth versus what is being written or the writers themselves. Since publishers only publish what they think will sell and heterosexual, western cultural values based novels are being put out there, one could assume that people who want these stories are the people buying the books. So then is it the supply that determines romance norms? Or the demand? My local bookstore is in Temecula, California -- yuppie central. There is an itty-bitty shelf for GLBT literature. There is no erotica section. Romance spans three aisles. I have noticed that most titles in my local store involve white protagonists -- again, I assume this is a result of marketing analysis in regard to what sells given Temecula's demographic.

My point here? Publishers are providing what readers want to buy. All readers? No. Most readers? Yes. Are romance authors shoving their values of what is attractive, honorable, sexy, moral, etc... down reader's throats? No, the readers are choosing to swallow it (take that how you will). If indoctrination is happening, than the readers are drinking the Kool-aid ™ . I have drunk this particular Kool-aid™ hundreds of times and will continue to do so -- but then again, I am the target market.

I write this today because my stories include a message about self worth, about acceptance. I like to think readers would respond to the characters and story and my stories would have a positive impact. I hate to think of my writing as making someone feel worse, make them feel like an outsider looking in, like they were being judged. Then again, chances are excellent that if you are not in the target market for my books (which, for the record, are not published... yet) you won't buy my book, so it will be a non-issue.

Woman vs Lady?

I love historical costuming and fashion design. Love of costume is what led me to study history in college and, ultimately, to write historical romance. My first book, probably unpublishable, was too much a costuming lesson and I have since toned it down. But that doesn't mean I'm not as crazy about it as ever.

I watch the Oscars for the costumes... I mean, designer gowns. Who is she wearing? Vintage? Couture? What does it say about her? What does it say about our pop culture? I love it.

Which is why it was hilarious to me when Jennifer Lopez, one of the most classically beautiful and feminine stars today, quoted Edith Head. "Your dresses should be tight enough to show you're a woman and loose enough to show you're a lady," must be hard to say when your nipple is trying to break free. There is banter back and forth online, but I swear I saw a bit of aureola. Hey, it happens. It's just funny it was happening during that quote.

I'm not judging Jennifer Lopez. She is probably involved in her choice of gown to an extent, but more so are her stylists, PR people, the network, etc... She looked like a goddess, nipple and all. That dress was certainly tight enough to show she was a woman. To tight? Eh -- that's subjective. Would I wear it? HELL NO. Even if I had that body? Ummm, probably not.

Sandra Bullock's dress was not so tight as to question her ladylike qualities, but it was an odd cut with the mini padded shoulder caps, so the result was a very boxy upper body. Classy? Yes. Flattering? No.

 My least favorite has to be the dress worn by Melissa Leo. It looks like one of the billowy shirt's my mother in law wears, only floor length and sequined. Those shirts suit my mother-in-law, but don't belong on the red carpet. This image shows it to have some shape, courtesy of the sash at the waist. I don't think she wore the sash when she presented the awards and that dress was shapeless. If she wasn't showing she was a woman, maybe that means she's an uber lady.


As for positives, I enjoyed Cameron Diaz' nod to old Hollywood glamour. The dress was lovely, but she came across as monochromatic with hair, skin, dress all the same color. I loved Natalie Portman's polka dot gown. Lots of fun. I thought Octavia Spencer's dress was beautiful. It met the standards for the occasion and flattered her figure. My favorite was George Clooney's date, Stacey (whom I have not heard of before). Her dress had that same old Hollywood glamour as Diaz, but with pop. I love how the draping created a rosette. This would be my choice, should I have a perfect body and be invited to the Oscars (both equally plausible), only not in gold. I would look jaundiced. As to woman vs lady, Edith Head would have approved. I was disappointed not to see Kate Winslet or Nicole Kidman-- I don't think  they've ever worn anything I haven't loved.


Overall the silhouettes were streamline. Yes, there were full skirts, but slinky was the word of the day. Very few bright pops of color but a lot of metallics, and very few Bjork-esque risk takers. If the starlets are our aristocracy, our role models, how will this translate into the common woman's fashion? In all, the stars presented a positive body image, recognizing women that were larger than size 2 as worthy of praise. Not too much cleavage or too much leg. I don't recall any short dresses. Most hairstyles were elegant and in natural colors. This was a very safe year in regard to fashion risks. Was this influenced by the economic issues today? Or a growing conservative voice? 

If fashion is a symptom, I wonder what the disease is this time? I would have voted for conspicuous consumption in the past, but now?


And if you think this has nothing to do with my writing process, you are incorrect.

And a Partridge in a Pear Tree

The current background of this blog, courtesy of The Cutest Blog on the Block, is themed after a partridge in a pear tree. The Twelve Days of Christmas is the theme to my second book, Courtly Scandals. I spent quite a bit of time researching the history of the song and how the usage and meanings changed over the years. Courtly Scandals is set over the twelve days of Christmas in 1572-73 at Whitehall Palace in the reign of Queen Elizabeth.

My area of focus for my History BA in college was the Elizabethan Renaissance and the Reformation. After college I continued academic reading for personal enjoyment. I applied this information during my participation in Renaissance faire (I treated it as a living history experience - it's the teacher in me). It is unfortunate that I can no longer cite my sources at the drop of the hat. They all blur. But in all, my knowledge of the social history of the era is better than your average bear's.

In my writing, I make adaptations in order to make the history relatable. Little things. What we spell 'partridge' used to be spelled 'parteridge.' I thought that was a reasonable sacrifice of historical accuracy in order not to annoy the reader, but other than very minor details my history is solid. My first manuscript was requested by an editor at Avon who asked me to make changes and resubmit. I had written all the dialogue in a BBC version of old English (thee, thou, hadst, etc... reasonably understandable to the modern ear). She said it hurt the flow and made it difficult to relate to the character. I changed it - I wasn't sacrificing history, I was choosing my writing style. And she was right. "Say you want me" is much sexier than "Sayest thou doest want me."

I write this because I got (dun dun dun!) another rejection. As rejections go, this was great. It was a thoughtful review that showed me the editor had actually read my ms. She had some input on the story inconsistencies which I will address. The biggest irk, aside from being rejected, is that she questioned my history. She also said the speech read too modern. MAN! There is no winning!

Anyway, it's back to the starting block. I need to finish up Courtly Abandon then rework my query for Courtly Scandals. I will take a break from history for a bit and write my contemporary paranormal, I think, after this. My passion is the historical, but maybe it's time that I start listening to the rejections that have told me that the Elizabethan era is more suited to historical fiction than historical romance.

FUUUUUUUUUU..... DGE!

The other day I missed the last four steps and went straight for the tile. Our staircase turns at a 90 degree angle and 2 of the steps at that point are triangular and then there are 4 more before the ground floor. The shortest distance down the stairs involves cutting in at the narrowest point. I missed. Toe, ankle, knee, then caught myself and lay there for a moment, stunned. I also yelled, in slow motion, the big bad mamajamma of four letter words.

Now I do not swear a lot.  I am a teacher and insist on 'polite language' in my classroom (when students don't realize that bitch is not okay to use casually or that the term faggot is offensive and perpetuates bigotry and hatred, the fact that 'suck' is crude elludes them entirely). As a mother, my kids think 'stupid' is the "s-word." I have never dropped the F-bomb in their presence.  Until last week.

Luckily they were more in a panic by the yell and following groaning on the floor to pay attention to what I actually yelled.  Phew.

As a writer of historical fiction, I have to be aware of the vernacular of the era. In choosing not to include thee, thou, thy, etc... I made a point to give a sense of formality when appropriate and an old world flare by using terminology from the age. Including crass terms. The F-bomb was absolutely a verb for the same action as it describes today, however it had yet to evolve into an adjective (He's f-ing stupid) or noun (that F over there said....). Ass was actually a jackass = donkey. Arse was the word describing the modern day ass and used, mainly, for anatomical purposes verses name calling. When I do use cruder terms, I look up their etymology to make sure they were common place in my era and that I am using them correctly.

X is for Xenophobic

Today people generally are not afraid of foreigners. Technology and communication advances have truly made the oceans between us insignificant. While people may hold prejudices and/or still think their particular country superior, they are usually not afraid of foreigners.

Not so in Elizabethan England.  Xenophobia was thriving.  With political and religious tensions (often from the same roots), foreigners represented different ways of life that appeared threatening. This applied, not only to people from foreign lands, but to Jews and Romany who had lived in England for generations.  To quote the wisdom of the murderous mob in Disney's Beauty and the Beast, "We don't like what we don't understand, in fact it scares us," Elizabethans of every rank held and active dislike and fear of foreigners.

When I have tried to understand it in order to portray it accurately, but in a sympathetic light (considering I am writing from their pov) I pulled from my own experience with people who take a difference of opinion as a personal insult.   If the English people felt that different lifestyles/traditions/opinions/etc were, by their very existence, criticizing their own way of life, they might take umbrage and feel threatened. Again, this is just conjecture.  In the end, I have always minimized xenophobia. All three of my books involved the court of Queen Elizabeth and include the foreign ambassadors.  I treat them with the public respect they would have received (in most cases) and avoided the private derision.  The xenophobic attitude has never been central to my story and, therefore, was not necessary to include.

Today most educated people treat other cultures with respect, but that is not to say generalizations and stereotypes do not exist. I like to think they are good natured (for the most part).  My brother in law is British and pictures my husband in cowboy boots.  To be fair, my husband pictures my brother-in-law with a monocle.  While neither man wear boots or monocles, my British brother in law does own a hat collection and only would wear tennis shoes for tennis.  My husband does drive a full size truck and own a gun safe for his collection of arms.

This video is a far cry from xenophobic attitudes, but it does involve some stereotyping.  I really enjoyed it and plan to ask my brother in law about the significance of the fig newtons.  I hope you enjoy it. :)

You’re watching Landline - Royal Wedding Hangover. See the Web's top videos on AOL Video

M is for Modification

If I ever go back to school for my MA in History, my thesis would be about the evolution of body modification in Western culture as pertains to fashion and social norms.  Everyone thinks about foot binding in Asian cultures or neck rings in Africa -- but extreme body modification happens around us today. Most people do not note it because it conforms with our society's ideal of beauty.  Since when was a 6' tall, size 2, 32 D woman a natural body type? Social norms set unrealistic standards of beauty that are unattainable to the majority of the population, and for those with the ability to acheive those standards, require unhealthy living and plastic surgery. 

The true fashionable ideal is only available to the elite, the wealthy. The working class woman does not have time to dedicate to aesthetic fitness or the money to spend on face lifts, boob jobs, or Prada shoes.  As such what is considered beautiful has created an unspoken but clear class delineation.

This is not new to Western culture. As feudal law gave way to centralized government and a focus on the value of education and culture over brute strength, the distinction between masculine and feminine was made clearer through styles of dress. In the upper classes, the woman's dress greatly limited physical movement.  The practice of corseting took feminine shape and restricted it into something considered more sophisticated, with only the lower classes who did not have servants to dress them or needed to be able to move freely remaining shaped by nature.

Corsets changed shape from era to era, sometimes strictly conical, sometimes hourglass, always modifying the natural shape of a woman's body.  Some eras had more extreme modifications in the name of fashion followed but something more relaxed followed by more layers and stricter binding, always cyclical.  Add to that bustles, hoop skirts, panniers, farthingales, bumrolls, petticoats, push up bras, wigs, ruffs, trains, stilettos, platforms, waxing, breast/bottom augmentation, tummy tucks, cut muscles, color contacts, acrylic nails, perms, weaves, tattoos, or piercings and you end up with generations of well dressed women who probably don't even know what they really look like.

That said, I have pierced ears, a tattoo, and have been dying my hair since I was 18.  I like my bra to give a nice lift, I shave my legs every so often, love pedicures, and like how I look in heels.  I love historical costume and have been an active participant in historical reenactment as a noble of Queen Elizabeth's court, complete with corset, farthingale, bumroll, etc...  I am not criticizing fashion or fashionistas or those who have plastic surgery (though excessive use can be considered a pathology).  I am merely identifying that body modification is alive and well in the modern world and has been growing and changing for some time.

The image below is a time line of fashionable silhouettes. You can really see the changing standards of beauty in regard to body shape.  Notice that after 1820, the male shape stayed more or less the same: functional.

I decided to add this post because I noticed that the majority of my A-Z posts were aimed at comedy and/or for shock value.  During my regularly scheduled posting, while I do indulge my sense of humor, I also like to approach the historical and social aspect of my writing. My stories all stemmed from my love of history and my love of history is directly related to my love of costuming.  

G is for Gardner, as in Gardner's Mutliple Intelligences

My day job is teaching.  For a few years I was a home school facilitator and was really able to help home school parents fine tune lessons to their kids specific learning styles. 

There are 7 9 (they added a couple recently) learning styles:

Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence -- well-developed verbal skills and sensitivity to the sounds, meanings and rhythms of words
Mathematical-Logical Intelligence -- ability to think conceptually and abstractly, and capacity to discern logical or numerical patterns
Musical Intelligence -- ability to produce and appreciate rhythm, pitch and timber
Visual-Spatial Intelligence -- capacity to think in images and pictures, to visualize accurately and abstractly
Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence -- ability to control one's body movements and to handle objects skillfully
Interpersonal Intelligence -- capacity to detect and respond appropriately to the moods, motivations and desires of others.
Intrapersonal Intelligence -- capacity to be self-aware and in tune with inner feelings, values, beliefs and thinking processes
Naturalist Intelligence -- ability to recognize and categorize plants, animals and other objects in nature
Existential Intelligence -- sensitivity and capacity to tackle deep questions about human existence, such as the meaning of life, why do we die, and how did we get here.

Personally, when I test I am a musical, verbal/linguistic, and intrapersonal learner.

You may wonder why I am talking about teaching and learning in a blog about writing romance.  Well, my current main character, Jane, is a bodily/kinesthetic, interpersonal, naturalist.  She thrives on movement and experiences and does better in groups than alone.  She craves companionship and is more at home in nature than in controlled society.  She learns by doing, does not care for reading.  In analyzing how she learns, it helps me consider how she behaves, interacts, and grows.

This is just one of the silly little devices I use to avoid archetypal characters.  I also have run astrological charts on Mary (Courtly Scandals) and Jane (my w.i.p. Courtly Abandon).  A fellow blogger, Nicole Ducleroir, commented that she uses the MBTI personality tests.  Do you have any interesting tricks you use to help flesh out your characters?