Odds and Ends

I'm done with the semester and on to the summer work--the last stretch before I finish my MA and start the PhD. Despite the hectic past few weeks of reading/writing I managed to get some romance reading in.

Oh, who am I kidding. I lost it about half-way through my Madame Bovary/Theodor Adorno paper and decided to go on a Susan Elizabeth Phillips binge. I read all my favorites. It Had to Be You, This Heart of Mine, Nobody's Baby But Mine, Dream a Little Dream, Kiss an Angel, and Ain't She Sweet-- all consumed in the space of two weeks. And I still managed to get two papers written. And (to gloat a little) got an A on one of 'em (the Persuasion paper; I'm less optimistic about the Flaubert).

Re-reading the SEPs reawakened my dormant urge to write a contemporary, and I woke this morning to a vivid half-sleeping dream in which the first scene and basic plot of a novel spooled through my head. In fact, lots of imaginary people have been talking to each other in my head since I started bookmooching authors' backlists like a fiend in January. There's also a new historical that I'm thisclose to starting.

Which brings me to my current writing problem: Oh Mistress Mine, why are thou sucking? I've been "working" on you for two years now, and you're not getting much better--or much longer. How much of this is grad school malaise and how much is a book that's not working? When do you decide to plow through and when to jump ship? (Forgive the mixing of agricultural and nautical metaphors, but writers block will drive one to it) I ditched one novel at about 40,000 words when I first started writing and don't regret it, but I sometimes wish I could have finished that book. I still like Aimée and Gregory, but they don't haunt my head like my new characters do. Just a case of grass-is-greener?

To close, before heading to the gym and trying to write a few pages (and reading some 18th-century treatises on smallpox inoculation for my thesis):

I finished my last Laura Kinsale this morning. I had saved Midsummer Moon for about four years, because I just wasn't ready to have none of her books left to look forward to. But to celebrate the end of the semester, I read it and loved it, and now I'm feeling satisfied and a little sad and more than a little tempted to go on a Kinsale binge...which I really can't afford after my last three days of leisure.

And finally, an excellent procastinatory tool. I haven't laughed so hard in quite some time. Anyone with a passion for correct punctuation and a healthy appreciation of the absurd will enjoy.

Shaking Those Moody Blues

Why can’t I concentrate? Why can’t I write brilliant, passionate prose?

The sad fact is that I’m too busy worrying about my day job.

Ah, the joys of being a young teacher. My school district finds itself in a bit of a levy bind… which means, if the taxpayers aren’t feeling generous in a few weeks, I can kiss my job goodbye. It’s a little thing we like to call “reduction in force,” (RIF) and in my neck of the woods it’s done entirely by seniority. Merit doesn’t matter. It’s a slap in the face to realize that I’ve been working my butt off for nothing. The disillusioned tenure jockey who hates children and flunks a third of his class? Totally safe from budget cuts… and he already makes $10,000 a year more than I do. But I’m young and idealistic, so I’m toast.

I know that every cloud has a silver lining. Truly, I do. I think if I lose my teaching job I won't wear myself out looking for another one. I’ll substitute, I’ll ponder my graduate school options (hello, history PhD program!), and I’ll write. It might actually end up being better for my long-term ambitions.

So what's the problem? I guess I’m just generally depressed, because many people in my community have been responding with such vitriol to the whole levy discussion.

Yeah, I’m a bleeding-heart teacher type. I’d gladly open my meager pocket book so that we can keep things like librarians and art in our schools (call me crazy, but I think librarians are important). At the same time, I can appreciate any reasoned and respectful viewpoint, even if it’s different from my own. Some people planning to vote no have articulated valid reasons for their choice. That’s great; that’s democracy.

But unfortunately, reactionary cruelty seems to be our general modus operandi… at least when it comes to online discussion. This is typical of many of the bloggers in my community (here responding to the prediction that the levy will pass): “how can it be the NO voters r in the minority? Gosh must be teachers counting the votes wrong? Folks will vote yes when Johnny can read and add! There is a very OLD saying out there, people whom can do people whom can't teach, seems nothing has change this last 20 years!”

I could focus on the misquoting of the old adage, which is actually, “Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach." Or I could focus on the irony of someone failing to use proper grammar while they bemoan “Johnny’s” inability to read and add correctly. I could also ask how cutting funding and mocking teachers is going to enable (or inspire) anyone in the education system to do a better job than they’re doing right now. Call me crazy, but I’m not motivated by punishment and derision.

Still, I’m not going to focus on any of those things. I’m just going to ask: why do some people think that it’s okay to abandon common courtesy when they’re commenting online? And why do teachers get so much flak? I know there are lousy teachers out there (see tenure jockey, above). But there are lousy people in every profession. That’s no reason to sneer at a whole group!

I just want to say to some of these bloggers, “I respect that your vote may render me unemployed. But please do me the same courtesy. Respect that, while I have my job, I’m honestly doing the best I can to teach your child. I am a highly capable person and I chose this profession. Let me have some dignity.”

Am I alone in thinking we could use a little online etiquette? And just how do I get my mind off things I can’t control? Let me know what you think!

Going For Broke or An Unconventional Approach to Curing Writer's Block

Being an aspiring writer in New York City can be wonderful: inspiration in the air, the publishing industry easily accessible, fantastic research institutions nearby. It can also be debilitating: the constant sense of not writing enough, successfully enough, and quickly enough and the constant stream of distractions outside the writing room (or couch, in my small-apartment-style life) have done as much damage to my writing mojo as my grad school commitments.

But I will fear no longer, for I believe I have found a surefire way to block out the city's relentless thrills and rededicate myself to scholarly and literary pursuits--namely, my poverty. You see, my husband and I are the brand-new, not-even-truly-closed-upon-yet owners of a two bedroom apartment in Park Slope, Brooklyn, and I will never be able to afford to do anything in this city again.

I do think this (exciting!) event will be beneficial to my writing. I'm leaving Manhattan and I'm going to have to cut down on my social life a bit, for financial reasons, but that will help me find additional writing time. We'll have a second room to use as an office, as least until we have kids in a few years. A dedicated writing/studying space should help me with my focus in both areas, something I've been struggling with mightily this last semester. I'm a person very much affected by my environment, and I can't help but think that having a home that's truly mine, that I can paint and love and make beautiful, will help me feel creative and productive.

Of course, all the time and energy it will take to move there won't help my writing this summer. Nor will the immense effort I need to put into writing my MA thesis and studying for my comps. But there's always something to keep you from writing. I've let that be my excuse for too long.

(Photo is the main sitting room in my pretty new apartment. Love the bay window and working fireplace just out of the shot).

Honeymoon, or Getaway?

Dear reader, you must be wondering if I'm ever going to get back to posting about writing and/or reading. Rest assured that I have not abandoned these pursuits entirely! However, I do so enjoy putting forth the occasional wedding plan poll, and I might as well take advantage of the opportunity while I can!

So. Today's question is about romantic getaways. The Fiancé and I decided long ago that we would take vacations at least four times a year (once a season). Sadly, we're only averaging about once a year... and I would like to step things up to the original plan! We have also decided to spend four nights on the Oregon coast. This could be a progressive honeymoon (start at the southernmost point of interest, and work our way back up to Washington) or we might just stay in one place and relax. Some of our favorite things to do on any vacation include:

• Behaving in an utterly mushy and romantic manner
• Sleeping in--comfortable rooms a must!
• Eating very good food and drinking fantastic beverages
• Spoiling ourselves at a spa
• Doing a wine-tasting, if at all possible

With that in mind, the following options are up for the honeymoon. Take a virtual tour! Help us decide where to go! Or, if you happen to be an Oregon Coast Aficionado, tell me about the hidden little gem of a town/hotel I've forgotten in my search.

The Edgefield - Troutdale, Oregon
Okay, so it's not on the coast. But it does have many lovely options for food and drink--including a winery out back! Ooh, pretty! And tasty! Ooh, and a spa! Check out the website. Isn't it cool? I love McMenamins, and this is supposed to be their best hotel. I mean, who wouldn't love to spend the night in a converted poor farm? Woohoo! Well, perhaps this might be good for a quick weekend vacation later in the year.
The Inn At Spanish Head - Lincoln City, Oregon
Apparently, it's the state's only resort hotel built right on the beach. Floor-to-ceiling windows, balconies, and full kitchens in many of the rooms (not that I plan to cook on my honeymoon!) Amenities include: oceanfront restaurant and bar, outdoor heated pool, ocean-view spa, a short elevator ride to the beach. Although... I couldn't find a link to the spa. Could anyone else?

Hecata Head Lighthouse - Florence, Oregon
This bed and breakfast is a converted lighthouse keeper's cottage. You get to wander around the grounds (including the lighthouse). Amenities include: gorgeous decor, a decadent seven-course breakfast every morning, and a chance for Kate to feel like Anne of Green Gables. There is no spa on the lonely cliff (go figure), but the Overleaf Spa is close by in Yachata.

Cannon Beach, Oregon
Squee! The spa! How lovely. Whenever you tell anyone that you're going to Oregon for a romantic reason, they say "Go to Cannon Beach." I have no idea where we'd stay, though. I looked at links for The Ocean Lodge or The Stephanie Inn. They both look nice. What does everyone think?

All right! I would love your thoughts--we're going to try to book our honeymoon this week!

Meme: Six Things You May Not Know About Me

In a startling confluence of events, I was hemming and hawing about what to blog about. Then, Alyssa tagged me for the "Six Things You May Not Know About Me" meme. Yay! Problem solved, although I'm not sure what juicy tidbits I have yet to reveal in previous memes.

From Alyssa, here are the rules:

1. You link back to the person who tagged you.
2. Post these rules on your blog.
3. Share six unimportant things about yourself.
4. Tag six random people at the end of your entry.
5. Let the tagged people know by leaving a comment on their blogs.

Without further ado, my six unimportant items:

1) I don't like pork as a dinner entrée, but I love bacon or sausage at breakfast.

2) I've been in the play A Midsummer Night's Dream twice. The first time, I was the equivalent of a chorus person. The second time, I played Puck.

3) My preferred drink at Starbucks is a Grande Nonfat Cinnamon Dolce Latte with whipped cream. I've also been to the Oracle of Starbucks to see what my drink type says about my personality. Fun!

4) My spice cupboard is out of control. Because I like to cook all kinds of ethnic food, I've got everything from dried mint leaves to Garam Masala. The one spice I don't currently own (but desperately want to) is saffron.

5) One of The Fiancé's many nicknames for me is "Garden Gnome" (long story). Because of this, I've been getting hideous garden gnome gag gifts from his family at Christmas.

6) I agree with the American Film Institute when they say, "deeply principled and idealistic attorney Atticus Finch (portrayed by Gregory Peck), from To Kill a Mockingbird, was chosen as the greatest hero in 100 years of film history."

And the six people I am tagging:
Shelli
Anissa
Sam
Samantha
LadyTink
RomanceLover

Just Call Me Doctor

Interrupting our usual D Scrib fare for a bout of shameless self promotion:

I'm getting a PhD! (trumpet fanfare)

I just received my first acceptance from a doctoral program in English. Still waiting on a few others (and on the funding details for this one), so I can't say for certain where I'll be next year. But I can say that I'll be studying 18th and 19th century British literature.

I'm totally psyched to know I'll be working toward this degree that's been a dream for so long. I'm a little nervous about what this will mean for my already delayed writing career. But those doubts can wait...at least a day!

Wedding Wear

For those of you who haven't lived through a winter in the Pacific Northwest, let me assure you: it's dreary. We don't have anything as exciting as snow. Sure, we get patches of black ice and the occasional late start school day. But generally speaking, November through February is a morass of gray days, persistent drizzle, and perpetually cold, damp feet.

As you may imagine, it's hard to picture summer during such dreary weather. It's even harder to feel all romantic and wedding-plan-y. However. Today was the first sunny day in forever. Not coincidentally, it's also the Sunday of my midwinter break... meaning I'm not feeling grim and resigned about going back to work tomorrow. I have two more days off, people! I'm getting lots of sleep. I'm cooking/baking lots of food made with love and care (as opposed to exhaustion and spite). And I'm finally starting to get excited about wedding planning again.

Why am I telling you? Because I'm zeroing in on my dress for the maid of honor, and I've got it narrowed down to two. I tried to have the maid of honor make the choice, but she's as conflicted as I am (and she'd look great in either dress). So... which do you like better... the Nordstrom's (first picture), or the J.Crew dress (second, pictured in blue, but we'd order in black)? Either way, it's going to be accessorized with a bouquet of light blue hydrangea. Keep that in mind.

And also keep in mind that this is a backyard ceremony--so no stilettos to go with the dress, unless we want her sinking into the lawn. Plus, this is the Pacific Northwest, people: in other words, the Land o' Dress Jeans. We're not insanely formal out here. Finally, the maid of honor is a brilliant veterinarian with many benefit dinners in her future--I'd love for her to be able to wear the dress again.

So. I'd love your vote on the dress... Nordstrom's (1) or J.Crew (2, blue)? And if anyone out there has a line on a cheap place for wedding invitations, I'm all ears! (Yes, I know this post has nothing to do with writing... does that tell you where my focus is lately?)

Just Sing (La, la, la, la)

I popped over to Julia Quinn's website the other day to check out what's on her agenda (new series drops in 'o8, woohoo!) and found this tempting nugget: soundtracks for each of her novels. I loved reading her insightful and entertaining reasons for picking each of these songs--songs she listened to while writing the books, songs that remind her of her own plots and characters, and even songs that inspired the writing of certain of her novels. To quote Carrie Bradshaw, I couldn't help but wonder what a soundtrack for my own works in progress would look like. JQ gets all high tech (and famous writer-y) and actually has iTunes lists to match her books. I am not so gifted. Nor do I even listen to music while writing (I prefer the sounds of the Second Avenue bus stopping outside my window, thank you very much). But in an effort at seeking inspiration wherever it may come, I decided to play dj for the night. The results follow.

Then Comes Marriage:

"Chapel of Love" My first (and...um...only) completed novel begins and opens with weddings, so I have to pick this old chestnut. I think it fits Calla at the beginning of the novel really well: simplistic, totally confident and optimistic, ready for a fall.

"Dancing in the Dark" The old jazz standard not the Bruce Springsteen song. Calla and Peter do dance in the dark, and I've thought about titling the book after the song. The line "Looking for a new love to brighten up the night" fits the book well.

"Heart of Life" (John Mayer) This song fits Calla's situation so well-- beaten down by losing her husband and the life she always thought she'd live, but restored by the "circle of her friends" and her new love for Peter. It's such a sweet, beautiful song with a touch of sadness. I think it fits the mood of the book.

"Something to Talk About" I like to think of Calla and Peter being down with this song by the novel's end. They're both ready to stop letting other people's opinions dictate their lives and just live already (and make a little mischief, too).

O, Mistress Mine:

I'm only 1/3 into the writing of this book, but I already have a few ideas:

"The Song is Ended" This is one of my very favorite songs (I'm a huge cabaret/Great American Songbook geek) and fits this story of a love affair cut short perfectly. Gregory and Aimee's memories of their affair are like a lingering melody for both of them, despite their different reasons for entering into it.

"No Matter What" (Badfinger) This is totally Gregory's song. He's ready to take on the world to be with Aimee at the beginning. I think once I reach the end its resonance will have changed-- more that he's ready to accept all the different parts of her, as different and confusing as they may be.

"Maxine" (John Legend). The song's about a cheating lady, but the refrain "She may not be you...but she looks just like you" exemplifies Gregory's confusion over Aimee/Genevieve's identity (which doesn't really go away, even when he figures out the truth behind her past). John Legend has such a great voice.

Finally: I'm absolutely determined to write a book based on the ridiculous, very entertaining song "Rhode Island is Famous for You" (as sung by the glorious Nancy LaMott). Any song with the lines "They know mink where they grow mink in Wyomin(k)" and "A camp chair in New Hamp(chair)" is a well-spring of inspiration. I can see it now...a driven doctor/knitter...a dashing naval pilot...a date with punny destiny!

To Read, or Not to Read?

That is the question.

Because something momentous is happening on February 21, 2008: they're releasing a prequel to Anne of Green Gables. That's right, you heard me: a prequel. Before Green Gables comes out this year to commemorate the hundredth anniversary of the original book. A Canadian children's author (Budge Wilson) was commissioned to write it; and it's been approved by L.M. Montgomery's heirs. So part of me is very excited because, let's face it, I'm a rabid fangirl of all things Avonlea... and this is something new to obsess over.

Well, I'm a fan of almost all things. Let's be clear. I own all of L.M. Montgomery's books. I desperately enjoy most of them (we won't speak of Mistress Pat). I think I may have The Blue Castle memorized. And Gilbert Blythe is officially my Ur-Crush.

Then there's the adaptations for television and film… I have the first two Sullivan Entertainment Anne movies memorized. It's on my list of goals for 2008 to begin acquiring Road to Avonlea on DVD. And though Gus Pike is a totally made-up character (not original to L.M. Montgomery's books at all), I love him dearly.

And yet… and yet, I fear what might happen with this adaptation. For one thing, Anne: The Continuing Story has taught me to be wary. (We will not discuss that movie. As far as I am concerned, it never happened.) For another thing, the prequel years will, by their very nature, be something of a downer to read about. After all, our dear Anne was in the early twentieth century version of foster care. It wasn't pretty. It wasn't happy.

And there was no Gilbert.

So here's my question: am I ordering the book or not? Am I reading it obsessively the day it comes out, or pretending that it doesn't exist? Decisions, decisions. I need your help!

Move over Potter

Looks like we're all YA all the time here at Damned Scribbling Women this week. While Kate awaits the delivery of her now two weeks late "advance" copy of The Sweet Far Thing, I can't spill too much about the book. Having finished the read at 3 am yesterday however, I am moved to give a little teaser about my thoughts and feelings (I was also moved to post a fawning fangirl note on Libba Bray's livejournal at 3 in the morning, but that's neither here nor there).

Anyone mourning the loss of Harry Potter needs to pick up this series now, because--much as I love the Pott--Libba Bray kicks JK Rowling's ass. This is how you finish a series. This is how you take all the amazing work on character/plot/mythology that you set up in previous books and ratchet it up a notch. I thought the conclusion to the Potter series was fine, but Bray's just a much braver writer than Rowling. Her concerns are so much larger, more significant, more meaningful, and the lessons her character learn or try to learn are much more painful and more important. Truly, I'm in awe over this series and wishing desperately I'd been the one to think of it.

This isn't meant to be a diss against J.K. Rowling. I think she's great and love her work. It's more a public service announcement about how unbelievably wonderful I think Libba Bray is.

More substantive comments (including my very few reservations) to follow in a dialog once Kate gets a chance to read the book.

Delicious Anticipation

With the hectic rush of Christmas/New Year's, travel, and grad school application filing, I managed to lose track of one of my most eagerly anticipated releases of 2007: the conclusion of Libba Bray's Realms trilogy. Hearty thanks to whichever good angel inspired me to check out her livejournal (a favorite writer's blog of mine) the day after the new book was released. I'm now a proud owner of The Sweet Far Thing.

But all things must come in their own time, etc, etc, etc. I had other books in the queue and order must be maintained. When one's working days are filled with 1,500 page 18th-century novels, one's holidays become rather excessively devoted to reading (and writing) romance.

Perhaps its for the best. I've waited this long to learn what will become of Gemma, Kartik, Felicity, Pippa, and the rest. I can wait a little longer. I know this book won't disappoint, so the expectation will only make it all the sweeter.

Expect my thoughts sometime next week...

Newest Production

No, not mine. I haven't been silent for the last few months because of pregnancy, but because of the end of the semester. But I wanted to introduce everyone to my new niece, Sophia Madelyn. Isn't she cute? You've now seen as much of her as I have, as she was born yesterday afternoon while my husband and I were winging our way from New York to Santa Fe to spend Christmas with my family. We can't wait to see her when we get back home on the 26th...a late Christmas present for us!

In other "baby" news, the semester is finally over, which means it's time to return to "Oh Mistress Mine." When last I left them, Gregory and Aimee were on the verge of a rather explosive confrontation. They've been waiting months now to have this chat. Will I remember them? Will I remember how to write sentences that don't begin with "Furthermore" or "As Burney clearly demonstrates"? Stay tuned...

What Makes a Hero?

As some of you know--generally speaking, to your own shame and mortification--I keep a quote book. Recently I was rummaging through it, and I came upon the following exchange from my graduate school days:

Kate: Tortured soul sex? Oh, yeah!

Shannon: That's a place we don't need to go, Kate.

Oh, Shannon. Perhaps we don't need to go there during a Masters in Teaching program. But in a romance novel manuscript? We are all about the tortured soul sex.

Take me, for instance. I was fairly certain that my hero was pretty simple: dependable and devoted, Jude St. John is the original Mr. Nice Guy. Then I realized that, while this might make for a lovely man in real life, it's not too interesting for a novel. We don't want to read about human golden retrievers. There's no conflict there.

So. Jude's a nice guy. There's no way around that. And he's carried a torch for the heroine for almost a decade. But then I realized that he's also smothered a good deal of resentment--she left town to pursue big dreams, he was stuck caring for his dysfunctional family. A little bit of lust, a little bit of jealousy--more interesting, no? And part of that caring for family involved getting in the way of an alcoholic with a knife, and now he has a lovely scar on his right bicep. Since making this discovery, I've been trying to figure out ways to make him shirtless throughout the novel. Shirtless while wearing his toolbelt, if possible. Good times!

In terms of Tami Cowden's archetypes, I'd say Jude is two-thirds "best friend" and one-third "lost soul." He grew a lot more interesting... and problematic... once I darkened his general outlook on life. But it's a slippery slope... I want an interesting, complex hero. But I don't want a moody jerk, or someone who makes my readers skeptical about the HEA ("I give it two years, tops, before he goes all crazy axe murderer").

Maybe I wouldn't want to marry my own heroes, but I should at least want to go to dinner with them. I think I've walked the line with Jude--given him some intriguing, sexy "crunch" (as Jennifer Crusie would call it), without turning him into a muscled misanthrope.

So this is what I want to know: how do you prefer your hero? (a) happy-go-lucky (b) mildly mysterious (c) convincingly complex or (d) deeply disturbed? How are your ideal heroes different from the partners you prefer in real life--and would you date your favorite romance hero?

Love in the Time of Hogwarts

J.K. Rowling revealed that Dumbledore's gay. Hurray! Another reason to email my gal pals and analyze the Harry Potter series yet again. Part of our e-conversation below… please feel free to join the discussion with your comments!

* * * * *

Sam: I don't think I was surprised, particularly about the Grindelwald thing. I do, however, think it's sad that none of Rowling's characters seem to be able to get past their first loves and move on. If I let my first unrequited love be the driving force in my life...well, no comment, but it would be a sad life indeed.

The wizarding world seems to be somewhat less forward-thinking, socially, than the more liberal countries of our world. So maybe having gay relationships is Just Not Done, andif Dumbledore wanted to retain his post at Hogwarts, he had to keep his deep, passionate love for Ron's grandfather a secret.But of course, that's not what Rowling said. She said he never got over Grindelwald, and how upset he was when his One True Love turned out to be Wizard Hitler. And since I believe in authorial intent, I have to say that I find this tendency of her characters immature.

Kate: About the first love thing: in terms of our three main characters, it makes sense for them to end up with characters we've met. The romantic readers among us craved such an ending. It would have been a total cop-out if Rowling mentioned in the epilogue that Hermione broke up with Ron and met a lovely man at Wizard Grad School. That's just lame.

And Harry's parents had to have a shared Hogwarts history in order for their son to have plenty of "dead parent moments" at school. It's easier to build a connection between Harry and his parents if they have lots of places and people in common.

Snape and Dumbledore, both transformed eternally by their first love? Doesn't surprise me. After all, by Book Seven they parallel each other in a weird way.

I guess I'm also reassured because I sense back stories for some of the characters. I totally think Sirius was a big fan of loving and leaving the ladies. I wouldn't be surprised if Lupin had a relationship in his past that he thought was scarring but eventually got over. And you just know Trelawney did some kinky hoohah in the name of divination.

But you're right. If Cho Chang is our one example of a wizarding relationship that doesn't work out, that would be pretty darn lame.

Jaime: Also--and I know I've said this before--you have to remember that being a wizard is like being an Orthodox Jew in Memphis. Your community is very small, and dating outside the community it is difficult to meet people and frowned upon, and there are other communities but they're far away. Realistically, Ron and Harry's cohort is pretty small. There are around 70 Gryffindors at any time, so 280 Hogwarts students, and first years don't date seventh years. If you date only one gender, you've got maybe 120 people to choose from. If you refuse to date Slytherins, you're down to 90. So like the orthodox, you date less and marry young.

Also, as to Snape, his whole ridiculous double-crossing life is built upon Lily and makes it super hard to meet girls (all of whom think he's double-crossing.) Quite possibly he now has the hots for Narcissa or Tonks, but really, how could he woo either without betraying his principles? And Snape's a man of principles.

I still think Dumbledore was getting it on with Fawks, if anyone--and I can see how it'd be better to say "I never got over Grindy" than admit the bestial truth.

In the Family Way

Recent events in my own life (read: marriage) have had me thinking about a topic I've never considered in depth before, the importance of family in romance. Attempting to calculate what desserts I'll actually have time to make on Thanksgiving day that will hold up on the hour-long drive from my parents' in PA to my in-laws' in NJ will do that to you (because, yes, we're trying to visit both families on the same day. We'll see how it goes).

Families are so important to our real-life romances. I feel like my husband has married my whole crazy clan. Considering the fact that he's known my youngest sister (now twenty) since she was twelve, he really is a brother to her. And I wouldn't be as excited about our married life together if I didn't know that I love spending time with my husband's family and really do want them in my life for better or for worse.

But how many romances make use of this element of the marriage story? Off the top of my head and entirely unscientifically, I'd say not many. Or not enough. Think about it: the numbers of orphaned governesses out on their own (ripe for the seducin'), or lonely dukes who inherited it all after their cruel father croaked. Or wretched fathers forcing their children to marry where their hearts don't lie. Doesn't it seem that those sorts of stories outnumber the one-big-happy-family kind, at least in the historical genre? In contemporaries there may be more, but there are still rarely supportive, loving parents, even while sibling sagas threaten to take over the world.

We know that happy families can work great in romance, whatever Tolstoy had to say about them. The Bridgertons are a prime example: those books would lack so much without the B's hanging out together as a clan. In fact, the one B book I really didn't care for (Francesca's story) missed the mark for exactly that reason, too little family interaction.

But I'm guilty of not practicing what I preach. My first book: heroine, estranged from family; hero, mourning loss of brother and father (though he did have a mother, sister, and brother-in-law around to torment him). My current WIP: heroine, an orphaned only child; hero, estranged from his rather large family. If we're supposed to write what we know, I'm afraid I've broken that rule.

Is it intimidating to write about family life? Is it too close to our (my?) hearts to delve into right away. Or are the dramatic possibilities inherent in the gal/guy-on-her/his-own plots too tempting to pass up? Whatever the case, I've got to get over those qualms soon. The heroine of my next WIP is the oldest of thirteen children. And they're ALL making an appearance.

While I'm trying to sort that out, why don't you chime in: Is romance (real and fictional) better when it includes family? Why do so many authors cut the family out of the plot? What's your favorite family in romance?

Note added: check out the review of Lisa Kleypas' Mine Till Midnight at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books here to get Sarah's take on the topic.

From Friends to Lovers

Recently on Romancing the Blog, Daniela L. posted about a strange, sick trend on Grey's Anatomy. I speak, of course, about the relationship between Izzie and George.

This is especially interesting to me because the Izzie-George tangle is TV's latest attempt to cash in on the "friends to lovers" storyline. This happens to be one of my favorite set-ups in a novel, so it's perhaps not surprising that it's also the set-up for the romance I'm writing. As such, I'm super-sensitive to when it works, and when it doesn't.

Izzie and George don't work, for a number of reasons. First of all, there's the adultery thing. Maybe I'm a prude, but I don't like the glorification of adultery in our media. Secondly, their hook-up corresponds to an unfortunate flattening of the characters from complex and likeable to whiny and somewhat inconsistent. Third, there's the fact that we didn't see a real build-up to this relationship. There was no sexual tension. And is Izzie really over Denny? Is George really over Meredith? Finally, you just don't get the sense that these characters could ever have an HEA. What do they actually do for each other? How do they complement and complete one another? Very, very unclear.

But despite this specific romantic trainwreck, I'd like to think that the "friends to lovers" storyline is one of the most powerful around. Just think about the legendary shenanigans of Rachel and Ross. Even if the constant back-and-forth of their relationship annoyed you, you've got to admit that the initial build-up was fabulous. Think about it: he always had a thing for her, but his underlying character traits made it impossible for him to say anything. You have a little time and distance built into their backstory--both characters went on to find other loves, but at the opening of the show it's clear that Ross's feelings are back, full-strength. The strong friendship between them is one of the attraction points, but it's also one of the conflicts (maybe this is too weird, do I dare risk the friendship, etc). Friends, I feel, also did an absolutely fabulous job of involving the (nosy, delightful) secondary characters in their romance.

Of course, the grand-mommy of all friends-to-lovers relationships would have to be Anne Shirley and Gilbert Blythe. Who didn't love their courtship in Anne of the Island? I'd say that Anne and Gilbert were my first romance. To use a friend's phrase, Gilbert's my ur-crush. Don't be surprised if Anne and Gilbert get their own post sometime in the near future!

So, what do you think? Does "friends to lovers" work, or am I crazy? If it does work, what are the necessary ingredients--what do you like? What do you hate? And what are amazing examples of the past (movies, books, and TV shows) that you'd recommend to the rest of us?

Autumn Musings (and TV)

Don't you just love autumn? As Tom Hanks said in You've Got Mail, "It makes me wanna buy school supplies. I would send you a bouquet of newly sharpened pencils if I knew your name and address. On the other hand, this not knowing has its charms."

This is the time of year that I feel most nostalgic for New England. I miss being able to stare at beautiful foliage as I walk to a class I'm not teaching, kicking the hem of my long wool coat as I admire the pumpkins on various Colonial and Victorian porches (sadly, the ranch ramblers and strip malls out here just don't have the same charm).

Of course, there are plenty of autumnal pleasures to be enjoyed indoors, as well. I'm speaking of television premiere season! It's always fun to hunker down for a new season of old favorites. Then, of course, there are all the new shows.

This year, I'm watching Life and Pushing Daisies. I like both of them thus far. For Life, it's mainly because I look at the protagonist and I think, "Yay! Dick Winters! Oh, wait. This is not Band of Brothers." And then I look at Alan Alda and think "Yay! Adam the Alaskan gourmet chef! Oh, wait. This is not Northern Exposure." But I love those two actors and I can't wait to see what they come up with together.

I'm not worried about that show at all. Procedurals are hot right now; Life should find a mainstream audience.

Pushing Daisies, though... well, it has several strikes against it.

(1) It's quirky (and network execs these days don't seem to like quirk).

(2) The Fiancé and I both like it (always a kiss of death).

(3) The cinematography is Technicolor taken to a deliciously lush extreme... I can't imagine that's cheap to film.

I am going to keep my fingers crossed, though. The show feels Tim-Burton-y, it's narrated by Jim Dale, and the supporting cast includes a West Wing alum and an aging, one-eyed synchronized swimmer. What's not to love?

Speaking of love, I want to know what you're enjoying these days. What do you love about fall? What do you think of the new fall line-up? Talk to me, people.

Of Rakes and Heroes

Currently, for my graduate class on the 18th-century novel, I'm slogging my way through Samuel Richardson's Clarissa. For those of you who have not had the pleasure of this pithy little 1,500 page monster, a brief summary: Boy meets girl. Girl's family tries to force her to marry a gross other guy. Boy tricks girl into running away with him to escape said family. Boy rapes girl. Girl dies. Fun times.

Despite its length and verbosity, the novel's actually much more entertaining than that dismissive description would suggest. The "Boy" himself, Lovelace, in particular, is a fascinating portrait of a clever, humorous, charming man with all his wits bent toward some rather unscrupulous ends.

As I'm reading, I find myself marveling at the way Lovelace conforms quite neatly to the image of your typical romance alpha hero. Commanding, brilliant, handsome, rich, titled: how is that not exactly the description of 6/8th of the heroes in historical romance? He feels certain he knows Clarissa's true desires better that she does. He plans to help her unlock the hedonism that surely lies in her seemingly virtuous soul (rape is sort of a last resort, if you will). He vows revenge on her family for attempting to keep them apart. Even contemporary romance makes use of the "lying to her for her own good" trope.

This is not meant as yet another excoriation of the anti-feminist backwardness of romance, by any means. I like a good alpha hero! Done well, they can be sympathetic, appealing, exciting, and sexy as hell. I even like Lovelace, when he's not crowing about how much sweeter the rake's victory feels when he wins it from an unwilling woman. (In this I'm not alone, as Richardson's 18th-century readers were so taken by Lovelace that they begged for him to be reformed by the love of Clarissa, and for the book to end in marriage rather than deaths--yeah, he dies too, in a duel).

I'm just wondering where we draw the line: in the books we read and in our own fiction. What separates the villain from the hero? I think I write pretty "good guy" heroes for the most part, maybe even beta men, and I often feel obligated to make them...a little meaner. As though, if they don't occasionally insult the heroine or go off and fight someone or get drunk, they're not "real" romance heroes.

Readers, please weigh on on where you stand. When does a hero become a villain? When can a villain become a hero? Where's your invisible line between redeemable and wretched?

Finding "The One"

Guess what? I found the dress!

Yeah, I know this blog is supposed to be focused on all things writerly... but I couldn't resist sharing with y'all. And anyway, what could be more romantic than a wedding dress? (Certainly not the sad state of my revisions...)

I'm including some pictures of the "almost rans" in my post. If you want to see the real deal, leave me a comment and I'll email it to you.

This is what I've discovered about shopping for important apparel. The correct method includes the following:

(1) Gather together a clique of delightful female relatives (it helps if one of your relatives is an incredibly stylish salon owner).

(2) Have dinner beforehand at a cute bistro.

(3) Make sure that dinner includes wine. Get slightly snockered.

(4) Don't wear hideous granny panties while you're trying on dresses (the lines, I've discovered, are very unflattering).

(5) Try on the veil, even if you think you'll hate it...

(6) ... but stick to your conviction that tiaras are definitely not "you."

(7) Revel in satisfaction that the dress you first saw in the magazine really is the one you wanted after all.

(8) Approach with a sense of humor. It is entirely possible that you will get stuck in a dress. It is entirely possible that total strangers will have to pull you free. And at least one of the dresses will make you feel like an organza-covered hippo. Apparently someone out there craves that look. Go figure.

Ultimately, I spent one two-hour trip and found the dress. It was faily hassle-free, and I really enjoyed spending time with my mother and aunts. Knock on wood--I'm sure the insanity's just a few short months away...

Character Crushes

Have you been over to Naughty 'n Spice lately? The ladies over there are having an excellent discussion about celebrity crushes--and there are posts where you can discuss your tingly feelings for both male and female Hollywood hotties.

Of course I posted. In a world that gave us Gerard Butler and Salma Hayek, how could I not? And yet... to be perfectly frank, I don't often lust after movie stars. There was, of course, the Summer of Crowe. But that's another story and definitely needs its own post.

The truth is, though, that my lust isn't usually aimed at Hollywood stars. It's aimed at characters. Movie, book, TV... doesn't really matter. If they're fictitious and slightly twisted, chances are I like them.

Just consider Spike, from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Every time he tilted his head and gave one of his trademark smirks, I felt myself getting a little melty. Then he'd cause mayhem, with leather coat billowing, and I'd think, "Hot. Goth." He was complicated and powerful, capable of both great evil and great loyalty. The best part? He was also insanely witty.

Frankly, he'd be a great romance novel hero.

So. I had a thing for Spike. I didn't quite want to have his evil, soulless babies... but I thought he'd make an absolutely fabulous mistake.

And this is what I'm wondering now: does anyone else in Blogland possess this little quirk? And if so, who is/was your character crush? (As always, feel free to link back to this post.)