Anne here, and today I'm going to answer some questions I was recently asked about the research I do for my books.
1) When you write your first draft, do you do all of your research first then begin writing? Or do you write your first drafts whilst you research facts?
It's a bit of both. My process is different every time, and the research depends a lot on the story and the setting. Some stories are inspired by browsing through history books—for instance Tallie's Knight which was inspired by an old woodblock print of aristocrats being carried in litters by hearty local peasants over the Swiss Alps. That was a "grand tour" story, so before I started writing I did a lot of research about the "grand tour."
Similarly with books set in non-English settings — for instance To Catch a Bride (which was set partly in Egypt) and Bride By Mistake, (which was set partly in Spain) I've had to do a lot of research beforehand. Strangely the Egyptian research was much easier than the Spanish. There were plenty of English people present in Egypt for the time I set the story in, so I was able to find journals and letters and sketches and all kinds of helpful sources.
But Bride By Mistake was set in post-Napoleonic Spain — the war was only just over, and though Spain was experiencing internal turmoil, as various factions squabbled over the future of the country, there was not much available in English, and what there was, was all about the politics, whereas I wanted information about the state of the countryside, particularly in the north, and the ordinary people living there.
In the end I found a historical novel written in the 1930's and some general histories, and hoped they'd be enough to go on. My main solution was to keep the hero and heroine together, not interacting very much with other people. Most of the research I did for that story was about the journey they made. And for some of it I simply imagined myself into the scene.
Many of the books set in London or Bath require limited specific research. I have a good general knowledge of the Regency period and some personal experience of the settings —that's my own photo on the left — and most of the time I don't need to do much research, only the small things along the way.
For instance I might need to look up the clothes in fashion that year, describe the interior of a house, check a street map of the time, or look up the flowers or vegetables in season and the dishes that might be served. I sometimes research that kind of thing when I'm writing, but more often I'll do it much later. I simply write XXXX and keep writing. Then when I've finished the rough draft, I'll go back and find the details I need. I learned that little trick early on, after I once did a lot of research for a particular scene — and later deleted it from the story.
But sometimes the direction of the story will depend on some fact or historical situation, and those I have to research on the spot before continuing. If I know that before I start the novel, I'll look it up, but I'm an organic writer and don't pre-plot my books in detail, so often a situation will arise that I hadn't expected. So then I have to stop writing and research.
2) How do you manage to stop yourself procrastinating and 'research' forever.
The trouble is, research is always so fascinating, and you can really dive down a rabbit-hole for hours if not days. I remember I once researched men's toiletries and scents for ages, it was so interesting. It ended up as only one or two lines in the book, but that's usually the way. Research is like an iceberg — in the final book you only ever see a tiny amount, and the rest is invisible.
But there are these things called deadlines, and in the end, I have to compromise between doing what's practical and doing the amount of research I'd really like to do. And often I really can't find the information I need, so I have to write around it.
3) Have you ever got it wrong? 
Yes, several times, I'm embarrassed to say. Mostly the mistakes I've made were when I was so sure I knew something I didn't bother to check — like when I said in The Accidental Wedding that the heroine's mother had made a pilgrimage to Lourdes — 70 years before St Bernadette had her vision. Catholics from all over the world wrote to point that one out to me, and all I could say was mea culpa. I thought I knew it, so didn't look it up.
Another time I changed a location in a hurry, just before sending off the finished manuscript, meaning to check it afterward when the copyedits came back. But I forgot. That was Marry In Scandal — and some English readers certainly spotted the error.
Another error was a smaller thing, where in The Perfect Kiss I had a lemon tree growing in Shropshire and an English reader wrote and told me that it just wasn't possible. The plot didn't depend on it at all, it was just a passing mention, but . . .
However readers sometimes think things are wrong when they aren't. As Grace Burrowes once said, "Readers are often in error but never in doubt." Years ago I was roundly criticized on a reader loop by an Italian speaker who said the Italian phrases I'd used in Tallie's Knight were "rubbish". Another author put us in contact, and I showed the lady my sources — which were letters written by an Irishwoman in 1802. She said "OMG you used proper 19th century Italian — how wonderful!" But she never withdrew her criticisms from that reader loop, or corrected the impression she'd left. <g>
All I can say is that I do my best to get things right, but I don't always manage. I also have to learn to live with those mistakes — with traditional publishing (ie big publishers) there is no possible way for me to correct them, no matter how much I want to. By the time a book is published it's completely out of my hands.
So, what about you — what kind of errors throw you out of a story? Are there mistakes and historical bloopers you just can't forgive? Or that drive you bonkers? Or can you occasionally forgive and just keep reading? And if you have further questions about the research process, feel free to ask.
If it is a good story, I’ll overlook almost anything. I remember reading the book with the Lourdes error. Being a Catholic, I noticed it right away. I just smiled and finished the book anyway.
I’m not a scholar of the Regency era, so there might be many errors in language usage that I wouldn’t even notice.
One thing that I do notice are heroines that are so blatenly feminist that you would think that they had been born in 1978 rather than 1798. Strong women have been around since the beginning of time. And believe me, I have no problem with strong women. But when they seem oblivious to the mores of the times it is hard to swallow. But I am a pretty forgiving reader. If the characters are well written and I can love them as much as the author wants me to, I will forgive it.
Great post.
If it is a good story, I’ll overlook almost anything. I remember reading the book with the Lourdes error. Being a Catholic, I noticed it right away. I just smiled and finished the book anyway.
I’m not a scholar of the Regency era, so there might be many errors in language usage that I wouldn’t even notice.
One thing that I do notice are heroines that are so blatenly feminist that you would think that they had been born in 1978 rather than 1798. Strong women have been around since the beginning of time. And believe me, I have no problem with strong women. But when they seem oblivious to the mores of the times it is hard to swallow. But I am a pretty forgiving reader. If the characters are well written and I can love them as much as the author wants me to, I will forgive it.
Great post.
If it is a good story, I’ll overlook almost anything. I remember reading the book with the Lourdes error. Being a Catholic, I noticed it right away. I just smiled and finished the book anyway.
I’m not a scholar of the Regency era, so there might be many errors in language usage that I wouldn’t even notice.
One thing that I do notice are heroines that are so blatenly feminist that you would think that they had been born in 1978 rather than 1798. Strong women have been around since the beginning of time. And believe me, I have no problem with strong women. But when they seem oblivious to the mores of the times it is hard to swallow. But I am a pretty forgiving reader. If the characters are well written and I can love them as much as the author wants me to, I will forgive it.
Great post.
If it is a good story, I’ll overlook almost anything. I remember reading the book with the Lourdes error. Being a Catholic, I noticed it right away. I just smiled and finished the book anyway.
I’m not a scholar of the Regency era, so there might be many errors in language usage that I wouldn’t even notice.
One thing that I do notice are heroines that are so blatenly feminist that you would think that they had been born in 1978 rather than 1798. Strong women have been around since the beginning of time. And believe me, I have no problem with strong women. But when they seem oblivious to the mores of the times it is hard to swallow. But I am a pretty forgiving reader. If the characters are well written and I can love them as much as the author wants me to, I will forgive it.
Great post.
If it is a good story, I’ll overlook almost anything. I remember reading the book with the Lourdes error. Being a Catholic, I noticed it right away. I just smiled and finished the book anyway.
I’m not a scholar of the Regency era, so there might be many errors in language usage that I wouldn’t even notice.
One thing that I do notice are heroines that are so blatenly feminist that you would think that they had been born in 1978 rather than 1798. Strong women have been around since the beginning of time. And believe me, I have no problem with strong women. But when they seem oblivious to the mores of the times it is hard to swallow. But I am a pretty forgiving reader. If the characters are well written and I can love them as much as the author wants me to, I will forgive it.
Great post.
I was reading a murder mystery set in early Victorian times and the detective and his helper foundthe victim’s body – a young maid servant – but could see no visible cause of death so they undressed her!! very unlikely I thought but then kept reading and found they re-dressed her in about 5 minutes! This was so ridiculous – men would have no idea how to dress and undress a woman with all the buttons etc. and certainly not in 5 minutes and would not have done that anyway. I threw the book in disgust and have never read anything by this author again.
An excessive reaction I guess but it certainly made me angry.
I was reading a murder mystery set in early Victorian times and the detective and his helper foundthe victim’s body – a young maid servant – but could see no visible cause of death so they undressed her!! very unlikely I thought but then kept reading and found they re-dressed her in about 5 minutes! This was so ridiculous – men would have no idea how to dress and undress a woman with all the buttons etc. and certainly not in 5 minutes and would not have done that anyway. I threw the book in disgust and have never read anything by this author again.
An excessive reaction I guess but it certainly made me angry.
I was reading a murder mystery set in early Victorian times and the detective and his helper foundthe victim’s body – a young maid servant – but could see no visible cause of death so they undressed her!! very unlikely I thought but then kept reading and found they re-dressed her in about 5 minutes! This was so ridiculous – men would have no idea how to dress and undress a woman with all the buttons etc. and certainly not in 5 minutes and would not have done that anyway. I threw the book in disgust and have never read anything by this author again.
An excessive reaction I guess but it certainly made me angry.
I was reading a murder mystery set in early Victorian times and the detective and his helper foundthe victim’s body – a young maid servant – but could see no visible cause of death so they undressed her!! very unlikely I thought but then kept reading and found they re-dressed her in about 5 minutes! This was so ridiculous – men would have no idea how to dress and undress a woman with all the buttons etc. and certainly not in 5 minutes and would not have done that anyway. I threw the book in disgust and have never read anything by this author again.
An excessive reaction I guess but it certainly made me angry.
I was reading a murder mystery set in early Victorian times and the detective and his helper foundthe victim’s body – a young maid servant – but could see no visible cause of death so they undressed her!! very unlikely I thought but then kept reading and found they re-dressed her in about 5 minutes! This was so ridiculous – men would have no idea how to dress and undress a woman with all the buttons etc. and certainly not in 5 minutes and would not have done that anyway. I threw the book in disgust and have never read anything by this author again.
An excessive reaction I guess but it certainly made me angry.
I remember reading a book which supposedly took place before the 15th century, (i can no longer remember) but the maidservant was keeping up a regular correspondence with the villain of the piece and putting her missives into the castle mailbag. That was so preposterous I could not help but laugh. I mean the mail! The literate maid! I cannot recall if I finished the book, ut the author was permanently banned from my reading list and by now cannot recall who she was.
I remember reading a book which supposedly took place before the 15th century, (i can no longer remember) but the maidservant was keeping up a regular correspondence with the villain of the piece and putting her missives into the castle mailbag. That was so preposterous I could not help but laugh. I mean the mail! The literate maid! I cannot recall if I finished the book, ut the author was permanently banned from my reading list and by now cannot recall who she was.
I remember reading a book which supposedly took place before the 15th century, (i can no longer remember) but the maidservant was keeping up a regular correspondence with the villain of the piece and putting her missives into the castle mailbag. That was so preposterous I could not help but laugh. I mean the mail! The literate maid! I cannot recall if I finished the book, ut the author was permanently banned from my reading list and by now cannot recall who she was.
I remember reading a book which supposedly took place before the 15th century, (i can no longer remember) but the maidservant was keeping up a regular correspondence with the villain of the piece and putting her missives into the castle mailbag. That was so preposterous I could not help but laugh. I mean the mail! The literate maid! I cannot recall if I finished the book, ut the author was permanently banned from my reading list and by now cannot recall who she was.
I remember reading a book which supposedly took place before the 15th century, (i can no longer remember) but the maidservant was keeping up a regular correspondence with the villain of the piece and putting her missives into the castle mailbag. That was so preposterous I could not help but laugh. I mean the mail! The literate maid! I cannot recall if I finished the book, ut the author was permanently banned from my reading list and by now cannot recall who she was.
Anne,this is pretty much what I do: lay a research foundation at the beginning, look up things when required along the way, and pray I didn’t make and really big errors! There will always be some errors, I’m sure–one can but try!
Anne,this is pretty much what I do: lay a research foundation at the beginning, look up things when required along the way, and pray I didn’t make and really big errors! There will always be some errors, I’m sure–one can but try!
Anne,this is pretty much what I do: lay a research foundation at the beginning, look up things when required along the way, and pray I didn’t make and really big errors! There will always be some errors, I’m sure–one can but try!
Anne,this is pretty much what I do: lay a research foundation at the beginning, look up things when required along the way, and pray I didn’t make and really big errors! There will always be some errors, I’m sure–one can but try!
Anne,this is pretty much what I do: lay a research foundation at the beginning, look up things when required along the way, and pray I didn’t make and really big errors! There will always be some errors, I’m sure–one can but try!
In a spoof, I am forgiving of ALL errors. The more serious the writing, the more important accuracy is to me. But I do not expect any book to be perfect, so an error or two doesn’t bother me. (Ben Frankline said: If you wait for the perfect book nothing will be published!)
I have the same reaction to huge errors as did the other readers who have responded before me. If writing in a period rather than the immediate present,the flavor of the must be kept period alive, or I do not read anything else written by that author!
In a spoof, I am forgiving of ALL errors. The more serious the writing, the more important accuracy is to me. But I do not expect any book to be perfect, so an error or two doesn’t bother me. (Ben Frankline said: If you wait for the perfect book nothing will be published!)
I have the same reaction to huge errors as did the other readers who have responded before me. If writing in a period rather than the immediate present,the flavor of the must be kept period alive, or I do not read anything else written by that author!
In a spoof, I am forgiving of ALL errors. The more serious the writing, the more important accuracy is to me. But I do not expect any book to be perfect, so an error or two doesn’t bother me. (Ben Frankline said: If you wait for the perfect book nothing will be published!)
I have the same reaction to huge errors as did the other readers who have responded before me. If writing in a period rather than the immediate present,the flavor of the must be kept period alive, or I do not read anything else written by that author!
In a spoof, I am forgiving of ALL errors. The more serious the writing, the more important accuracy is to me. But I do not expect any book to be perfect, so an error or two doesn’t bother me. (Ben Frankline said: If you wait for the perfect book nothing will be published!)
I have the same reaction to huge errors as did the other readers who have responded before me. If writing in a period rather than the immediate present,the flavor of the must be kept period alive, or I do not read anything else written by that author!
In a spoof, I am forgiving of ALL errors. The more serious the writing, the more important accuracy is to me. But I do not expect any book to be perfect, so an error or two doesn’t bother me. (Ben Frankline said: If you wait for the perfect book nothing will be published!)
I have the same reaction to huge errors as did the other readers who have responded before me. If writing in a period rather than the immediate present,the flavor of the must be kept period alive, or I do not read anything else written by that author!
I totally get your quandary about when to stop researching, or when to call it quits. Having studied Medical History for years, it is hard to not dive into that particular rabbit-hole. (Would a woman know this, or do I have to give that insight to a male physician, surgeon, or bone setter?) The same with genealogy, I can be stuck for days researching why a certain person was addressed as “Esquire.” Was he a lawyer, or a person in a trusted position? (That one depends on the period and the country he lived in.) If I spent as much time researching, I’d never get reports finished, or finish that story.
I totally get your quandary about when to stop researching, or when to call it quits. Having studied Medical History for years, it is hard to not dive into that particular rabbit-hole. (Would a woman know this, or do I have to give that insight to a male physician, surgeon, or bone setter?) The same with genealogy, I can be stuck for days researching why a certain person was addressed as “Esquire.” Was he a lawyer, or a person in a trusted position? (That one depends on the period and the country he lived in.) If I spent as much time researching, I’d never get reports finished, or finish that story.
I totally get your quandary about when to stop researching, or when to call it quits. Having studied Medical History for years, it is hard to not dive into that particular rabbit-hole. (Would a woman know this, or do I have to give that insight to a male physician, surgeon, or bone setter?) The same with genealogy, I can be stuck for days researching why a certain person was addressed as “Esquire.” Was he a lawyer, or a person in a trusted position? (That one depends on the period and the country he lived in.) If I spent as much time researching, I’d never get reports finished, or finish that story.
I totally get your quandary about when to stop researching, or when to call it quits. Having studied Medical History for years, it is hard to not dive into that particular rabbit-hole. (Would a woman know this, or do I have to give that insight to a male physician, surgeon, or bone setter?) The same with genealogy, I can be stuck for days researching why a certain person was addressed as “Esquire.” Was he a lawyer, or a person in a trusted position? (That one depends on the period and the country he lived in.) If I spent as much time researching, I’d never get reports finished, or finish that story.
I totally get your quandary about when to stop researching, or when to call it quits. Having studied Medical History for years, it is hard to not dive into that particular rabbit-hole. (Would a woman know this, or do I have to give that insight to a male physician, surgeon, or bone setter?) The same with genealogy, I can be stuck for days researching why a certain person was addressed as “Esquire.” Was he a lawyer, or a person in a trusted position? (That one depends on the period and the country he lived in.) If I spent as much time researching, I’d never get reports finished, or finish that story.
I don’t even recall the name of the Regency setting short story, but years later I am still irritated that a major part of the plot involved making “the bad guy” (aka “the hero before he became the hero”) ill, using the same emetic that had been used on the heroine’s horse. The problem with that is that horses can’t vomit (at least not without human assistance and special equipment). Super basic research, in my opinion.
I don’t even recall the name of the Regency setting short story, but years later I am still irritated that a major part of the plot involved making “the bad guy” (aka “the hero before he became the hero”) ill, using the same emetic that had been used on the heroine’s horse. The problem with that is that horses can’t vomit (at least not without human assistance and special equipment). Super basic research, in my opinion.
I don’t even recall the name of the Regency setting short story, but years later I am still irritated that a major part of the plot involved making “the bad guy” (aka “the hero before he became the hero”) ill, using the same emetic that had been used on the heroine’s horse. The problem with that is that horses can’t vomit (at least not without human assistance and special equipment). Super basic research, in my opinion.
I don’t even recall the name of the Regency setting short story, but years later I am still irritated that a major part of the plot involved making “the bad guy” (aka “the hero before he became the hero”) ill, using the same emetic that had been used on the heroine’s horse. The problem with that is that horses can’t vomit (at least not without human assistance and special equipment). Super basic research, in my opinion.
I don’t even recall the name of the Regency setting short story, but years later I am still irritated that a major part of the plot involved making “the bad guy” (aka “the hero before he became the hero”) ill, using the same emetic that had been used on the heroine’s horse. The problem with that is that horses can’t vomit (at least not without human assistance and special equipment). Super basic research, in my opinion.
Thanks, Mary, As I recall the Lourdes reference was a small thing in the heroine’s backstory. I needed her to have lived in France, and when casting about for a reason, thought Lourdes! sigh.
I completely agree with you about heroines that are too blatantly feminist. I suspect the market wants that kind of heroine, but there is a difference between stepping out with modern attitudes (and suffering no social consequences) and being strong. Like many of us, I have some very strong women in my ancestry, and Georgette Heyer wrote some wonderfully strong heroines —eg The Grand Sophy—that were nevertheless perfectly appropriate for the times.
Thanks, Mary, As I recall the Lourdes reference was a small thing in the heroine’s backstory. I needed her to have lived in France, and when casting about for a reason, thought Lourdes! sigh.
I completely agree with you about heroines that are too blatantly feminist. I suspect the market wants that kind of heroine, but there is a difference between stepping out with modern attitudes (and suffering no social consequences) and being strong. Like many of us, I have some very strong women in my ancestry, and Georgette Heyer wrote some wonderfully strong heroines —eg The Grand Sophy—that were nevertheless perfectly appropriate for the times.
Thanks, Mary, As I recall the Lourdes reference was a small thing in the heroine’s backstory. I needed her to have lived in France, and when casting about for a reason, thought Lourdes! sigh.
I completely agree with you about heroines that are too blatantly feminist. I suspect the market wants that kind of heroine, but there is a difference between stepping out with modern attitudes (and suffering no social consequences) and being strong. Like many of us, I have some very strong women in my ancestry, and Georgette Heyer wrote some wonderfully strong heroines —eg The Grand Sophy—that were nevertheless perfectly appropriate for the times.
Thanks, Mary, As I recall the Lourdes reference was a small thing in the heroine’s backstory. I needed her to have lived in France, and when casting about for a reason, thought Lourdes! sigh.
I completely agree with you about heroines that are too blatantly feminist. I suspect the market wants that kind of heroine, but there is a difference between stepping out with modern attitudes (and suffering no social consequences) and being strong. Like many of us, I have some very strong women in my ancestry, and Georgette Heyer wrote some wonderfully strong heroines —eg The Grand Sophy—that were nevertheless perfectly appropriate for the times.
Thanks, Mary, As I recall the Lourdes reference was a small thing in the heroine’s backstory. I needed her to have lived in France, and when casting about for a reason, thought Lourdes! sigh.
I completely agree with you about heroines that are too blatantly feminist. I suspect the market wants that kind of heroine, but there is a difference between stepping out with modern attitudes (and suffering no social consequences) and being strong. Like many of us, I have some very strong women in my ancestry, and Georgette Heyer wrote some wonderfully strong heroines —eg The Grand Sophy—that were nevertheless perfectly appropriate for the times.
Thanks, Donna. Yes, some things just do hit our hot buttons, don’t they? In our AAW discussion of covers the other day I didn’t mention that though I had almost no covers with people on them until recently, I was very grateful to escape the sort of covers where the hero and heroine’s clothes are sliding off them. As they would absolutely NOT have done. LOL
I sometimes thing this kind of historical error, where you dump the book, unfinished, is in the effect of the last straw. Perhaps there were other aspects of the book you weren’t totally engaged with, but that undressing scene was just a corset too far. (wink)
Thanks, Donna. Yes, some things just do hit our hot buttons, don’t they? In our AAW discussion of covers the other day I didn’t mention that though I had almost no covers with people on them until recently, I was very grateful to escape the sort of covers where the hero and heroine’s clothes are sliding off them. As they would absolutely NOT have done. LOL
I sometimes thing this kind of historical error, where you dump the book, unfinished, is in the effect of the last straw. Perhaps there were other aspects of the book you weren’t totally engaged with, but that undressing scene was just a corset too far. (wink)
Thanks, Donna. Yes, some things just do hit our hot buttons, don’t they? In our AAW discussion of covers the other day I didn’t mention that though I had almost no covers with people on them until recently, I was very grateful to escape the sort of covers where the hero and heroine’s clothes are sliding off them. As they would absolutely NOT have done. LOL
I sometimes thing this kind of historical error, where you dump the book, unfinished, is in the effect of the last straw. Perhaps there were other aspects of the book you weren’t totally engaged with, but that undressing scene was just a corset too far. (wink)
Thanks, Donna. Yes, some things just do hit our hot buttons, don’t they? In our AAW discussion of covers the other day I didn’t mention that though I had almost no covers with people on them until recently, I was very grateful to escape the sort of covers where the hero and heroine’s clothes are sliding off them. As they would absolutely NOT have done. LOL
I sometimes thing this kind of historical error, where you dump the book, unfinished, is in the effect of the last straw. Perhaps there were other aspects of the book you weren’t totally engaged with, but that undressing scene was just a corset too far. (wink)
Thanks, Donna. Yes, some things just do hit our hot buttons, don’t they? In our AAW discussion of covers the other day I didn’t mention that though I had almost no covers with people on them until recently, I was very grateful to escape the sort of covers where the hero and heroine’s clothes are sliding off them. As they would absolutely NOT have done. LOL
I sometimes thing this kind of historical error, where you dump the book, unfinished, is in the effect of the last straw. Perhaps there were other aspects of the book you weren’t totally engaged with, but that undressing scene was just a corset too far. (wink)
Oh Yvonne, now that is a real clanger, isn’t it? Seems to me that writer didn’t do her basic background research.
But your story reminds me of when I was in North Wales, staying with friends, and one of them acted as a guide at Caernarfon Castle during the university holidays. She was talking to a couple of tourists who had visited Conwy Castle the day before and they were talking about how crazy it was that they’d built the castle so close to the railway line. LOL Those dumb 13th century builders.
Oh Yvonne, now that is a real clanger, isn’t it? Seems to me that writer didn’t do her basic background research.
But your story reminds me of when I was in North Wales, staying with friends, and one of them acted as a guide at Caernarfon Castle during the university holidays. She was talking to a couple of tourists who had visited Conwy Castle the day before and they were talking about how crazy it was that they’d built the castle so close to the railway line. LOL Those dumb 13th century builders.
Oh Yvonne, now that is a real clanger, isn’t it? Seems to me that writer didn’t do her basic background research.
But your story reminds me of when I was in North Wales, staying with friends, and one of them acted as a guide at Caernarfon Castle during the university holidays. She was talking to a couple of tourists who had visited Conwy Castle the day before and they were talking about how crazy it was that they’d built the castle so close to the railway line. LOL Those dumb 13th century builders.
Oh Yvonne, now that is a real clanger, isn’t it? Seems to me that writer didn’t do her basic background research.
But your story reminds me of when I was in North Wales, staying with friends, and one of them acted as a guide at Caernarfon Castle during the university holidays. She was talking to a couple of tourists who had visited Conwy Castle the day before and they were talking about how crazy it was that they’d built the castle so close to the railway line. LOL Those dumb 13th century builders.
Oh Yvonne, now that is a real clanger, isn’t it? Seems to me that writer didn’t do her basic background research.
But your story reminds me of when I was in North Wales, staying with friends, and one of them acted as a guide at Caernarfon Castle during the university holidays. She was talking to a couple of tourists who had visited Conwy Castle the day before and they were talking about how crazy it was that they’d built the castle so close to the railway line. LOL Those dumb 13th century builders.
Thanks, Mary Jo — I’m glad we have similar methodology. I get annoyed with myself when I make these stupid little mistakes, and I wish I could correct them, but as you know, once a book is published by a big traditional publisher, it might as well be set in stone.
Thanks, Mary Jo — I’m glad we have similar methodology. I get annoyed with myself when I make these stupid little mistakes, and I wish I could correct them, but as you know, once a book is published by a big traditional publisher, it might as well be set in stone.
Thanks, Mary Jo — I’m glad we have similar methodology. I get annoyed with myself when I make these stupid little mistakes, and I wish I could correct them, but as you know, once a book is published by a big traditional publisher, it might as well be set in stone.
Thanks, Mary Jo — I’m glad we have similar methodology. I get annoyed with myself when I make these stupid little mistakes, and I wish I could correct them, but as you know, once a book is published by a big traditional publisher, it might as well be set in stone.
Thanks, Mary Jo — I’m glad we have similar methodology. I get annoyed with myself when I make these stupid little mistakes, and I wish I could correct them, but as you know, once a book is published by a big traditional publisher, it might as well be set in stone.
That’s so true, Sue — spoofs are a whole other thing, and sometimes the errors are deliberate and funny.
I recall a wonderful serious historical novel by an Australian writer (whose name I’ve forgotten) and she was writing about the Spanish Court in the 15th or 16th century (or something like that). And in the background the queen had a cage of little birds — no problem there, only she went a step too particular and called them budgerigars. But budgerigars are native to Australia, and Europeans hadn’t “discovered” (or even named) Australia by then. There was quite a fuss about that little mistake and it overshadowed some of the reaction to the book. It was the kind of mistake I’ve made in the past, where it was a very minor background detail and the idea of looking up the details of such a ubiquitous bird didn’t even occur to the author, because she assumed budgies had been around forever. They have, but not in European cages. Here the wild ones fly in big flocks, a bit like swallows.
That’s so true, Sue — spoofs are a whole other thing, and sometimes the errors are deliberate and funny.
I recall a wonderful serious historical novel by an Australian writer (whose name I’ve forgotten) and she was writing about the Spanish Court in the 15th or 16th century (or something like that). And in the background the queen had a cage of little birds — no problem there, only she went a step too particular and called them budgerigars. But budgerigars are native to Australia, and Europeans hadn’t “discovered” (or even named) Australia by then. There was quite a fuss about that little mistake and it overshadowed some of the reaction to the book. It was the kind of mistake I’ve made in the past, where it was a very minor background detail and the idea of looking up the details of such a ubiquitous bird didn’t even occur to the author, because she assumed budgies had been around forever. They have, but not in European cages. Here the wild ones fly in big flocks, a bit like swallows.
That’s so true, Sue — spoofs are a whole other thing, and sometimes the errors are deliberate and funny.
I recall a wonderful serious historical novel by an Australian writer (whose name I’ve forgotten) and she was writing about the Spanish Court in the 15th or 16th century (or something like that). And in the background the queen had a cage of little birds — no problem there, only she went a step too particular and called them budgerigars. But budgerigars are native to Australia, and Europeans hadn’t “discovered” (or even named) Australia by then. There was quite a fuss about that little mistake and it overshadowed some of the reaction to the book. It was the kind of mistake I’ve made in the past, where it was a very minor background detail and the idea of looking up the details of such a ubiquitous bird didn’t even occur to the author, because she assumed budgies had been around forever. They have, but not in European cages. Here the wild ones fly in big flocks, a bit like swallows.
That’s so true, Sue — spoofs are a whole other thing, and sometimes the errors are deliberate and funny.
I recall a wonderful serious historical novel by an Australian writer (whose name I’ve forgotten) and she was writing about the Spanish Court in the 15th or 16th century (or something like that). And in the background the queen had a cage of little birds — no problem there, only she went a step too particular and called them budgerigars. But budgerigars are native to Australia, and Europeans hadn’t “discovered” (or even named) Australia by then. There was quite a fuss about that little mistake and it overshadowed some of the reaction to the book. It was the kind of mistake I’ve made in the past, where it was a very minor background detail and the idea of looking up the details of such a ubiquitous bird didn’t even occur to the author, because she assumed budgies had been around forever. They have, but not in European cages. Here the wild ones fly in big flocks, a bit like swallows.
That’s so true, Sue — spoofs are a whole other thing, and sometimes the errors are deliberate and funny.
I recall a wonderful serious historical novel by an Australian writer (whose name I’ve forgotten) and she was writing about the Spanish Court in the 15th or 16th century (or something like that). And in the background the queen had a cage of little birds — no problem there, only she went a step too particular and called them budgerigars. But budgerigars are native to Australia, and Europeans hadn’t “discovered” (or even named) Australia by then. There was quite a fuss about that little mistake and it overshadowed some of the reaction to the book. It was the kind of mistake I’ve made in the past, where it was a very minor background detail and the idea of looking up the details of such a ubiquitous bird didn’t even occur to the author, because she assumed budgies had been around forever. They have, but not in European cages. Here the wild ones fly in big flocks, a bit like swallows.
Thanks, Pamela — the “esquire” question is a tricky one, because as I understand it, some men just added it to their signature whether or not they were entitled to it. I had a scoundrel in my current wip sign himself esquire — then I took it out, put it back in, and finally decided to leave it off.
And since most historical novelists love history, historical research is too tempting for words.
Thanks, Pamela — the “esquire” question is a tricky one, because as I understand it, some men just added it to their signature whether or not they were entitled to it. I had a scoundrel in my current wip sign himself esquire — then I took it out, put it back in, and finally decided to leave it off.
And since most historical novelists love history, historical research is too tempting for words.
Thanks, Pamela — the “esquire” question is a tricky one, because as I understand it, some men just added it to their signature whether or not they were entitled to it. I had a scoundrel in my current wip sign himself esquire — then I took it out, put it back in, and finally decided to leave it off.
And since most historical novelists love history, historical research is too tempting for words.
Thanks, Pamela — the “esquire” question is a tricky one, because as I understand it, some men just added it to their signature whether or not they were entitled to it. I had a scoundrel in my current wip sign himself esquire — then I took it out, put it back in, and finally decided to leave it off.
And since most historical novelists love history, historical research is too tempting for words.
Thanks, Pamela — the “esquire” question is a tricky one, because as I understand it, some men just added it to their signature whether or not they were entitled to it. I had a scoundrel in my current wip sign himself esquire — then I took it out, put it back in, and finally decided to leave it off.
And since most historical novelists love history, historical research is too tempting for words.
Thanks, Rosemary — and that’s the kind of basic detail that IS vital, isn’t it — when the plot depends on it. I suspect horsey people often end up grinding their teeth at some horse mistakes made by writers.
Thanks, Rosemary — and that’s the kind of basic detail that IS vital, isn’t it — when the plot depends on it. I suspect horsey people often end up grinding their teeth at some horse mistakes made by writers.
Thanks, Rosemary — and that’s the kind of basic detail that IS vital, isn’t it — when the plot depends on it. I suspect horsey people often end up grinding their teeth at some horse mistakes made by writers.
Thanks, Rosemary — and that’s the kind of basic detail that IS vital, isn’t it — when the plot depends on it. I suspect horsey people often end up grinding their teeth at some horse mistakes made by writers.
Thanks, Rosemary — and that’s the kind of basic detail that IS vital, isn’t it — when the plot depends on it. I suspect horsey people often end up grinding their teeth at some horse mistakes made by writers.
I wouldn’t worry about the occasional gaffe – the kind like those you mention, which come from thinking one knows something that one doesn’t actually know, and not remembering or having the opportunity to fact check later. You’ll get some letters perhaps but people will still buy your books and the world won’t stop turning. It is not as though you were deliberately spreading misinformation.
Every once in a while I will read something and wonder if the dates are quite right or the historical events are in the right order. I do very much appreciate an author’s note telling what artistic license she took with events so that I don’t unconsciously retain wrong information.
I understand it’s not possible to fix errors in print copies, but could you amend them in the ebook versions if you wanted to?
I did resent reading about that one now famous romance author who said she never did research because her book was just a romance and that audience didn’t care about history. I believe she found out different 🙂 But I think of that remark every time I see one of her titles and I’ve never bought one since the first.
I also believe that if you are telling a terrific story readers will forgive almost anything. Edith Layton’s first regencies had some absolute howlers in them (for instance, it was not possible to choose the heir to your title — unless you offed all the others who came before him in the ranking), but they are such wonderful stories by such a dear lady that I flat out don’t care; they go into my mental file of alternate universe regencies and I still reread them.
I wouldn’t worry about the occasional gaffe – the kind like those you mention, which come from thinking one knows something that one doesn’t actually know, and not remembering or having the opportunity to fact check later. You’ll get some letters perhaps but people will still buy your books and the world won’t stop turning. It is not as though you were deliberately spreading misinformation.
Every once in a while I will read something and wonder if the dates are quite right or the historical events are in the right order. I do very much appreciate an author’s note telling what artistic license she took with events so that I don’t unconsciously retain wrong information.
I understand it’s not possible to fix errors in print copies, but could you amend them in the ebook versions if you wanted to?
I did resent reading about that one now famous romance author who said she never did research because her book was just a romance and that audience didn’t care about history. I believe she found out different 🙂 But I think of that remark every time I see one of her titles and I’ve never bought one since the first.
I also believe that if you are telling a terrific story readers will forgive almost anything. Edith Layton’s first regencies had some absolute howlers in them (for instance, it was not possible to choose the heir to your title — unless you offed all the others who came before him in the ranking), but they are such wonderful stories by such a dear lady that I flat out don’t care; they go into my mental file of alternate universe regencies and I still reread them.
I wouldn’t worry about the occasional gaffe – the kind like those you mention, which come from thinking one knows something that one doesn’t actually know, and not remembering or having the opportunity to fact check later. You’ll get some letters perhaps but people will still buy your books and the world won’t stop turning. It is not as though you were deliberately spreading misinformation.
Every once in a while I will read something and wonder if the dates are quite right or the historical events are in the right order. I do very much appreciate an author’s note telling what artistic license she took with events so that I don’t unconsciously retain wrong information.
I understand it’s not possible to fix errors in print copies, but could you amend them in the ebook versions if you wanted to?
I did resent reading about that one now famous romance author who said she never did research because her book was just a romance and that audience didn’t care about history. I believe she found out different 🙂 But I think of that remark every time I see one of her titles and I’ve never bought one since the first.
I also believe that if you are telling a terrific story readers will forgive almost anything. Edith Layton’s first regencies had some absolute howlers in them (for instance, it was not possible to choose the heir to your title — unless you offed all the others who came before him in the ranking), but they are such wonderful stories by such a dear lady that I flat out don’t care; they go into my mental file of alternate universe regencies and I still reread them.
I wouldn’t worry about the occasional gaffe – the kind like those you mention, which come from thinking one knows something that one doesn’t actually know, and not remembering or having the opportunity to fact check later. You’ll get some letters perhaps but people will still buy your books and the world won’t stop turning. It is not as though you were deliberately spreading misinformation.
Every once in a while I will read something and wonder if the dates are quite right or the historical events are in the right order. I do very much appreciate an author’s note telling what artistic license she took with events so that I don’t unconsciously retain wrong information.
I understand it’s not possible to fix errors in print copies, but could you amend them in the ebook versions if you wanted to?
I did resent reading about that one now famous romance author who said she never did research because her book was just a romance and that audience didn’t care about history. I believe she found out different 🙂 But I think of that remark every time I see one of her titles and I’ve never bought one since the first.
I also believe that if you are telling a terrific story readers will forgive almost anything. Edith Layton’s first regencies had some absolute howlers in them (for instance, it was not possible to choose the heir to your title — unless you offed all the others who came before him in the ranking), but they are such wonderful stories by such a dear lady that I flat out don’t care; they go into my mental file of alternate universe regencies and I still reread them.
I wouldn’t worry about the occasional gaffe – the kind like those you mention, which come from thinking one knows something that one doesn’t actually know, and not remembering or having the opportunity to fact check later. You’ll get some letters perhaps but people will still buy your books and the world won’t stop turning. It is not as though you were deliberately spreading misinformation.
Every once in a while I will read something and wonder if the dates are quite right or the historical events are in the right order. I do very much appreciate an author’s note telling what artistic license she took with events so that I don’t unconsciously retain wrong information.
I understand it’s not possible to fix errors in print copies, but could you amend them in the ebook versions if you wanted to?
I did resent reading about that one now famous romance author who said she never did research because her book was just a romance and that audience didn’t care about history. I believe she found out different 🙂 But I think of that remark every time I see one of her titles and I’ve never bought one since the first.
I also believe that if you are telling a terrific story readers will forgive almost anything. Edith Layton’s first regencies had some absolute howlers in them (for instance, it was not possible to choose the heir to your title — unless you offed all the others who came before him in the ranking), but they are such wonderful stories by such a dear lady that I flat out don’t care; they go into my mental file of alternate universe regencies and I still reread them.
Thanks, Janice, and the answer is no, I can’t fix the e-book versions either. Sadly, they are as much out of my control as the paperbacks. For some reason large publishers don’t seem to be able to do the things that self-published authors routinely do with ease.
I think general reader awareness of historical accuracy is growing, but I still see the “willing a title to a bastard” in the occasional book. As well, some parts of the market are driving historical romance into areas that IMO are less historically accurate. It will be interesting to see where it all goes.
Thanks, Janice, and the answer is no, I can’t fix the e-book versions either. Sadly, they are as much out of my control as the paperbacks. For some reason large publishers don’t seem to be able to do the things that self-published authors routinely do with ease.
I think general reader awareness of historical accuracy is growing, but I still see the “willing a title to a bastard” in the occasional book. As well, some parts of the market are driving historical romance into areas that IMO are less historically accurate. It will be interesting to see where it all goes.
Thanks, Janice, and the answer is no, I can’t fix the e-book versions either. Sadly, they are as much out of my control as the paperbacks. For some reason large publishers don’t seem to be able to do the things that self-published authors routinely do with ease.
I think general reader awareness of historical accuracy is growing, but I still see the “willing a title to a bastard” in the occasional book. As well, some parts of the market are driving historical romance into areas that IMO are less historically accurate. It will be interesting to see where it all goes.
Thanks, Janice, and the answer is no, I can’t fix the e-book versions either. Sadly, they are as much out of my control as the paperbacks. For some reason large publishers don’t seem to be able to do the things that self-published authors routinely do with ease.
I think general reader awareness of historical accuracy is growing, but I still see the “willing a title to a bastard” in the occasional book. As well, some parts of the market are driving historical romance into areas that IMO are less historically accurate. It will be interesting to see where it all goes.
Thanks, Janice, and the answer is no, I can’t fix the e-book versions either. Sadly, they are as much out of my control as the paperbacks. For some reason large publishers don’t seem to be able to do the things that self-published authors routinely do with ease.
I think general reader awareness of historical accuracy is growing, but I still see the “willing a title to a bastard” in the occasional book. As well, some parts of the market are driving historical romance into areas that IMO are less historically accurate. It will be interesting to see where it all goes.
The copy editor in me always balks at factual or tonal errors, but I can forgive small misses in an otherwise good story. However, I really get livid when the title declares the book “a Regency novel” and it’s clear the author had no idea what that means and put no effort into getting it right.
My all-time favorite to hate on was “In the morning, he was pulling the plug on little miss sunshine.”
But for sheer gall, there was one self-proclaimed Regency I couldn’t help stomping on in an Amazon review. By the time I quit the book halfway through, I had to choose about a dozen of the most egregious errors to list, including bloomers, drawers, and “don’t get your knickers in a twist” (look ’em up–I did, just to be sure), as well as the mind-blowing “we’ll take a pantheon to go shopping.”
BTW, I’m a serious paperweight collector, and I can assure you no Regency character would have picked up a glass/crystal paperweight in 1815–they weren’t available until the late 1840s. But that doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the above examples.
The copy editor in me always balks at factual or tonal errors, but I can forgive small misses in an otherwise good story. However, I really get livid when the title declares the book “a Regency novel” and it’s clear the author had no idea what that means and put no effort into getting it right.
My all-time favorite to hate on was “In the morning, he was pulling the plug on little miss sunshine.”
But for sheer gall, there was one self-proclaimed Regency I couldn’t help stomping on in an Amazon review. By the time I quit the book halfway through, I had to choose about a dozen of the most egregious errors to list, including bloomers, drawers, and “don’t get your knickers in a twist” (look ’em up–I did, just to be sure), as well as the mind-blowing “we’ll take a pantheon to go shopping.”
BTW, I’m a serious paperweight collector, and I can assure you no Regency character would have picked up a glass/crystal paperweight in 1815–they weren’t available until the late 1840s. But that doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the above examples.
The copy editor in me always balks at factual or tonal errors, but I can forgive small misses in an otherwise good story. However, I really get livid when the title declares the book “a Regency novel” and it’s clear the author had no idea what that means and put no effort into getting it right.
My all-time favorite to hate on was “In the morning, he was pulling the plug on little miss sunshine.”
But for sheer gall, there was one self-proclaimed Regency I couldn’t help stomping on in an Amazon review. By the time I quit the book halfway through, I had to choose about a dozen of the most egregious errors to list, including bloomers, drawers, and “don’t get your knickers in a twist” (look ’em up–I did, just to be sure), as well as the mind-blowing “we’ll take a pantheon to go shopping.”
BTW, I’m a serious paperweight collector, and I can assure you no Regency character would have picked up a glass/crystal paperweight in 1815–they weren’t available until the late 1840s. But that doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the above examples.
The copy editor in me always balks at factual or tonal errors, but I can forgive small misses in an otherwise good story. However, I really get livid when the title declares the book “a Regency novel” and it’s clear the author had no idea what that means and put no effort into getting it right.
My all-time favorite to hate on was “In the morning, he was pulling the plug on little miss sunshine.”
But for sheer gall, there was one self-proclaimed Regency I couldn’t help stomping on in an Amazon review. By the time I quit the book halfway through, I had to choose about a dozen of the most egregious errors to list, including bloomers, drawers, and “don’t get your knickers in a twist” (look ’em up–I did, just to be sure), as well as the mind-blowing “we’ll take a pantheon to go shopping.”
BTW, I’m a serious paperweight collector, and I can assure you no Regency character would have picked up a glass/crystal paperweight in 1815–they weren’t available until the late 1840s. But that doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the above examples.
The copy editor in me always balks at factual or tonal errors, but I can forgive small misses in an otherwise good story. However, I really get livid when the title declares the book “a Regency novel” and it’s clear the author had no idea what that means and put no effort into getting it right.
My all-time favorite to hate on was “In the morning, he was pulling the plug on little miss sunshine.”
But for sheer gall, there was one self-proclaimed Regency I couldn’t help stomping on in an Amazon review. By the time I quit the book halfway through, I had to choose about a dozen of the most egregious errors to list, including bloomers, drawers, and “don’t get your knickers in a twist” (look ’em up–I did, just to be sure), as well as the mind-blowing “we’ll take a pantheon to go shopping.”
BTW, I’m a serious paperweight collector, and I can assure you no Regency character would have picked up a glass/crystal paperweight in 1815–they weren’t available until the late 1840s. But that doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the above examples.
Anne – As a former librarian, I love doing research, and I can absolutely understand how an author can get caught up in it. I read lots of historical as well as contemporary romance. One thing that always bothers me is anachronisms, whether in inappropriate language or behavior. I can’t think of a particular example, but there have been too many regency-set or historical romances where I’ll be reading along and am stopped mid-sentence by some anachronistic behavior, especially by the heroine in thought or speech. BTW – regarding the lemon tree in Shropshire issue – couldn’t a lemon tree survive in a hothouse? I just recently read an historical where one character asks another if there are lemons in the hothouse…BTW2 – the romance writers I respect and always read as well as re-read, not only do splendid research- but I often learn things I didn’t know when I pick up their work. I don’t mind admitting that many things I’ve learned have been gleaned from my romance reading habit. Just sayin’…
Anne – As a former librarian, I love doing research, and I can absolutely understand how an author can get caught up in it. I read lots of historical as well as contemporary romance. One thing that always bothers me is anachronisms, whether in inappropriate language or behavior. I can’t think of a particular example, but there have been too many regency-set or historical romances where I’ll be reading along and am stopped mid-sentence by some anachronistic behavior, especially by the heroine in thought or speech. BTW – regarding the lemon tree in Shropshire issue – couldn’t a lemon tree survive in a hothouse? I just recently read an historical where one character asks another if there are lemons in the hothouse…BTW2 – the romance writers I respect and always read as well as re-read, not only do splendid research- but I often learn things I didn’t know when I pick up their work. I don’t mind admitting that many things I’ve learned have been gleaned from my romance reading habit. Just sayin’…
Anne – As a former librarian, I love doing research, and I can absolutely understand how an author can get caught up in it. I read lots of historical as well as contemporary romance. One thing that always bothers me is anachronisms, whether in inappropriate language or behavior. I can’t think of a particular example, but there have been too many regency-set or historical romances where I’ll be reading along and am stopped mid-sentence by some anachronistic behavior, especially by the heroine in thought or speech. BTW – regarding the lemon tree in Shropshire issue – couldn’t a lemon tree survive in a hothouse? I just recently read an historical where one character asks another if there are lemons in the hothouse…BTW2 – the romance writers I respect and always read as well as re-read, not only do splendid research- but I often learn things I didn’t know when I pick up their work. I don’t mind admitting that many things I’ve learned have been gleaned from my romance reading habit. Just sayin’…
Anne – As a former librarian, I love doing research, and I can absolutely understand how an author can get caught up in it. I read lots of historical as well as contemporary romance. One thing that always bothers me is anachronisms, whether in inappropriate language or behavior. I can’t think of a particular example, but there have been too many regency-set or historical romances where I’ll be reading along and am stopped mid-sentence by some anachronistic behavior, especially by the heroine in thought or speech. BTW – regarding the lemon tree in Shropshire issue – couldn’t a lemon tree survive in a hothouse? I just recently read an historical where one character asks another if there are lemons in the hothouse…BTW2 – the romance writers I respect and always read as well as re-read, not only do splendid research- but I often learn things I didn’t know when I pick up their work. I don’t mind admitting that many things I’ve learned have been gleaned from my romance reading habit. Just sayin’…
Anne – As a former librarian, I love doing research, and I can absolutely understand how an author can get caught up in it. I read lots of historical as well as contemporary romance. One thing that always bothers me is anachronisms, whether in inappropriate language or behavior. I can’t think of a particular example, but there have been too many regency-set or historical romances where I’ll be reading along and am stopped mid-sentence by some anachronistic behavior, especially by the heroine in thought or speech. BTW – regarding the lemon tree in Shropshire issue – couldn’t a lemon tree survive in a hothouse? I just recently read an historical where one character asks another if there are lemons in the hothouse…BTW2 – the romance writers I respect and always read as well as re-read, not only do splendid research- but I often learn things I didn’t know when I pick up their work. I don’t mind admitting that many things I’ve learned have been gleaned from my romance reading habit. Just sayin’…
I read fiction for entertainment and relaxation, but if it improves my knowledge so much the better, as long as it is accurate. For some historical fiction, like Phillipa Gregory’s work for example, where the author is a historian with a PhD in 18th century literature, much historical detail is skillfully blended into the novel, but for others like Julia Quinn for example it is the characterization humor and plot that dominate so that the period setting fades into background. If the story engages me I can overlook even obvious factual errors and dismiss inappropriate behavior as eccentricity. For me the story and characters are king!
I read fiction for entertainment and relaxation, but if it improves my knowledge so much the better, as long as it is accurate. For some historical fiction, like Phillipa Gregory’s work for example, where the author is a historian with a PhD in 18th century literature, much historical detail is skillfully blended into the novel, but for others like Julia Quinn for example it is the characterization humor and plot that dominate so that the period setting fades into background. If the story engages me I can overlook even obvious factual errors and dismiss inappropriate behavior as eccentricity. For me the story and characters are king!
I read fiction for entertainment and relaxation, but if it improves my knowledge so much the better, as long as it is accurate. For some historical fiction, like Phillipa Gregory’s work for example, where the author is a historian with a PhD in 18th century literature, much historical detail is skillfully blended into the novel, but for others like Julia Quinn for example it is the characterization humor and plot that dominate so that the period setting fades into background. If the story engages me I can overlook even obvious factual errors and dismiss inappropriate behavior as eccentricity. For me the story and characters are king!
I read fiction for entertainment and relaxation, but if it improves my knowledge so much the better, as long as it is accurate. For some historical fiction, like Phillipa Gregory’s work for example, where the author is a historian with a PhD in 18th century literature, much historical detail is skillfully blended into the novel, but for others like Julia Quinn for example it is the characterization humor and plot that dominate so that the period setting fades into background. If the story engages me I can overlook even obvious factual errors and dismiss inappropriate behavior as eccentricity. For me the story and characters are king!
I read fiction for entertainment and relaxation, but if it improves my knowledge so much the better, as long as it is accurate. For some historical fiction, like Phillipa Gregory’s work for example, where the author is a historian with a PhD in 18th century literature, much historical detail is skillfully blended into the novel, but for others like Julia Quinn for example it is the characterization humor and plot that dominate so that the period setting fades into background. If the story engages me I can overlook even obvious factual errors and dismiss inappropriate behavior as eccentricity. For me the story and characters are king!
I don’t know much British geography, so errors such as how far you could realistically travel in a day go right over my head. The two things I do notice are anachronistic speech, and flowers or fruits appearing at the wrong time of year.
I don’t know much British geography, so errors such as how far you could realistically travel in a day go right over my head. The two things I do notice are anachronistic speech, and flowers or fruits appearing at the wrong time of year.
I don’t know much British geography, so errors such as how far you could realistically travel in a day go right over my head. The two things I do notice are anachronistic speech, and flowers or fruits appearing at the wrong time of year.
I don’t know much British geography, so errors such as how far you could realistically travel in a day go right over my head. The two things I do notice are anachronistic speech, and flowers or fruits appearing at the wrong time of year.
I don’t know much British geography, so errors such as how far you could realistically travel in a day go right over my head. The two things I do notice are anachronistic speech, and flowers or fruits appearing at the wrong time of year.
Research is dangerous. It’s such fun, and takes you down so many fascinating bypaths that you have trouble getting back to writing. (Deadlines help.)
I don’t get too annoyed at minor factual errors. Most of the time I won’t even notice them. Though there was an author who had her characters going on at length about the beauty of Michelangelo’s Mona Lisa…
The only thing that really annoys me is ignoring the mores of the day, like a young women in 1810 thinking it would be no big deal to have the hero’s baby and raise it by herself. It makes me want to whack her over the head.
Research is dangerous. It’s such fun, and takes you down so many fascinating bypaths that you have trouble getting back to writing. (Deadlines help.)
I don’t get too annoyed at minor factual errors. Most of the time I won’t even notice them. Though there was an author who had her characters going on at length about the beauty of Michelangelo’s Mona Lisa…
The only thing that really annoys me is ignoring the mores of the day, like a young women in 1810 thinking it would be no big deal to have the hero’s baby and raise it by herself. It makes me want to whack her over the head.
Research is dangerous. It’s such fun, and takes you down so many fascinating bypaths that you have trouble getting back to writing. (Deadlines help.)
I don’t get too annoyed at minor factual errors. Most of the time I won’t even notice them. Though there was an author who had her characters going on at length about the beauty of Michelangelo’s Mona Lisa…
The only thing that really annoys me is ignoring the mores of the day, like a young women in 1810 thinking it would be no big deal to have the hero’s baby and raise it by herself. It makes me want to whack her over the head.
Research is dangerous. It’s such fun, and takes you down so many fascinating bypaths that you have trouble getting back to writing. (Deadlines help.)
I don’t get too annoyed at minor factual errors. Most of the time I won’t even notice them. Though there was an author who had her characters going on at length about the beauty of Michelangelo’s Mona Lisa…
The only thing that really annoys me is ignoring the mores of the day, like a young women in 1810 thinking it would be no big deal to have the hero’s baby and raise it by herself. It makes me want to whack her over the head.
Research is dangerous. It’s such fun, and takes you down so many fascinating bypaths that you have trouble getting back to writing. (Deadlines help.)
I don’t get too annoyed at minor factual errors. Most of the time I won’t even notice them. Though there was an author who had her characters going on at length about the beauty of Michelangelo’s Mona Lisa…
The only thing that really annoys me is ignoring the mores of the day, like a young women in 1810 thinking it would be no big deal to have the hero’s baby and raise it by herself. It makes me want to whack her over the head.
If the book draws me in, I usually ignore historical inaccuracies or typos. But when I start to lose interest in a book, I find myself counting the typos and inaccuracies. However, before I start ranting about the historical inaccuracies an author makes, I do a bit of research myself. My thinking I know history has led me down a number of wrong paths, which is irritating because I think I know everything about history.
I will confess I get a lot more irritated with historical costumes in movies/tv than I do with clothing in books.
If the book draws me in, I usually ignore historical inaccuracies or typos. But when I start to lose interest in a book, I find myself counting the typos and inaccuracies. However, before I start ranting about the historical inaccuracies an author makes, I do a bit of research myself. My thinking I know history has led me down a number of wrong paths, which is irritating because I think I know everything about history.
I will confess I get a lot more irritated with historical costumes in movies/tv than I do with clothing in books.
If the book draws me in, I usually ignore historical inaccuracies or typos. But when I start to lose interest in a book, I find myself counting the typos and inaccuracies. However, before I start ranting about the historical inaccuracies an author makes, I do a bit of research myself. My thinking I know history has led me down a number of wrong paths, which is irritating because I think I know everything about history.
I will confess I get a lot more irritated with historical costumes in movies/tv than I do with clothing in books.
If the book draws me in, I usually ignore historical inaccuracies or typos. But when I start to lose interest in a book, I find myself counting the typos and inaccuracies. However, before I start ranting about the historical inaccuracies an author makes, I do a bit of research myself. My thinking I know history has led me down a number of wrong paths, which is irritating because I think I know everything about history.
I will confess I get a lot more irritated with historical costumes in movies/tv than I do with clothing in books.
If the book draws me in, I usually ignore historical inaccuracies or typos. But when I start to lose interest in a book, I find myself counting the typos and inaccuracies. However, before I start ranting about the historical inaccuracies an author makes, I do a bit of research myself. My thinking I know history has led me down a number of wrong paths, which is irritating because I think I know everything about history.
I will confess I get a lot more irritated with historical costumes in movies/tv than I do with clothing in books.
First of all, I am not on a deadline nor am I producing a work for the ages, but I like research just for the heck of it.
So, I can imagine how hard it would be to quit in the midst of a good thread.
I am also not a perfect person. I have made errors in things in my life….look at Mr Wonderful….now that was a mistake. (But, he was too pretty to pass up.)
So, unless I find someone in a Regency using a smart phone, I can overlook small errors. And if it is a good book, I may be so involved with the characters, I never even notice small glitches along the way.
The way I figure it, reading a really good book, gives me joy, why would I want to stop in the middle of that joy to correct someone?
First of all, I am not on a deadline nor am I producing a work for the ages, but I like research just for the heck of it.
So, I can imagine how hard it would be to quit in the midst of a good thread.
I am also not a perfect person. I have made errors in things in my life….look at Mr Wonderful….now that was a mistake. (But, he was too pretty to pass up.)
So, unless I find someone in a Regency using a smart phone, I can overlook small errors. And if it is a good book, I may be so involved with the characters, I never even notice small glitches along the way.
The way I figure it, reading a really good book, gives me joy, why would I want to stop in the middle of that joy to correct someone?
First of all, I am not on a deadline nor am I producing a work for the ages, but I like research just for the heck of it.
So, I can imagine how hard it would be to quit in the midst of a good thread.
I am also not a perfect person. I have made errors in things in my life….look at Mr Wonderful….now that was a mistake. (But, he was too pretty to pass up.)
So, unless I find someone in a Regency using a smart phone, I can overlook small errors. And if it is a good book, I may be so involved with the characters, I never even notice small glitches along the way.
The way I figure it, reading a really good book, gives me joy, why would I want to stop in the middle of that joy to correct someone?
First of all, I am not on a deadline nor am I producing a work for the ages, but I like research just for the heck of it.
So, I can imagine how hard it would be to quit in the midst of a good thread.
I am also not a perfect person. I have made errors in things in my life….look at Mr Wonderful….now that was a mistake. (But, he was too pretty to pass up.)
So, unless I find someone in a Regency using a smart phone, I can overlook small errors. And if it is a good book, I may be so involved with the characters, I never even notice small glitches along the way.
The way I figure it, reading a really good book, gives me joy, why would I want to stop in the middle of that joy to correct someone?
First of all, I am not on a deadline nor am I producing a work for the ages, but I like research just for the heck of it.
So, I can imagine how hard it would be to quit in the midst of a good thread.
I am also not a perfect person. I have made errors in things in my life….look at Mr Wonderful….now that was a mistake. (But, he was too pretty to pass up.)
So, unless I find someone in a Regency using a smart phone, I can overlook small errors. And if it is a good book, I may be so involved with the characters, I never even notice small glitches along the way.
The way I figure it, reading a really good book, gives me joy, why would I want to stop in the middle of that joy to correct someone?
Great topic and wonderful comments by so many.
I am not a history buff so many references I trust as part of the story. Things I notice and question are references to music, nursery rhymes and stories, medicine, plants, distances and where are they; and if I find something that bugs me I research it. I also am a slow reader – and find typos that have been missed. I do not blame the authors as I am sure that if I found them they would have also.
I know, and appreciate, how much research is needed to be consistently correct in a historic story, that I appreciate it. Many times I am cringing as my modern thoughts and life intrude – ie. “Pick up the phone and call.”
Thanks for all the research you do to make the stories we enjoy so pleasing.
Great topic and wonderful comments by so many.
I am not a history buff so many references I trust as part of the story. Things I notice and question are references to music, nursery rhymes and stories, medicine, plants, distances and where are they; and if I find something that bugs me I research it. I also am a slow reader – and find typos that have been missed. I do not blame the authors as I am sure that if I found them they would have also.
I know, and appreciate, how much research is needed to be consistently correct in a historic story, that I appreciate it. Many times I am cringing as my modern thoughts and life intrude – ie. “Pick up the phone and call.”
Thanks for all the research you do to make the stories we enjoy so pleasing.
Great topic and wonderful comments by so many.
I am not a history buff so many references I trust as part of the story. Things I notice and question are references to music, nursery rhymes and stories, medicine, plants, distances and where are they; and if I find something that bugs me I research it. I also am a slow reader – and find typos that have been missed. I do not blame the authors as I am sure that if I found them they would have also.
I know, and appreciate, how much research is needed to be consistently correct in a historic story, that I appreciate it. Many times I am cringing as my modern thoughts and life intrude – ie. “Pick up the phone and call.”
Thanks for all the research you do to make the stories we enjoy so pleasing.
Great topic and wonderful comments by so many.
I am not a history buff so many references I trust as part of the story. Things I notice and question are references to music, nursery rhymes and stories, medicine, plants, distances and where are they; and if I find something that bugs me I research it. I also am a slow reader – and find typos that have been missed. I do not blame the authors as I am sure that if I found them they would have also.
I know, and appreciate, how much research is needed to be consistently correct in a historic story, that I appreciate it. Many times I am cringing as my modern thoughts and life intrude – ie. “Pick up the phone and call.”
Thanks for all the research you do to make the stories we enjoy so pleasing.
Great topic and wonderful comments by so many.
I am not a history buff so many references I trust as part of the story. Things I notice and question are references to music, nursery rhymes and stories, medicine, plants, distances and where are they; and if I find something that bugs me I research it. I also am a slow reader – and find typos that have been missed. I do not blame the authors as I am sure that if I found them they would have also.
I know, and appreciate, how much research is needed to be consistently correct in a historic story, that I appreciate it. Many times I am cringing as my modern thoughts and life intrude – ie. “Pick up the phone and call.”
Thanks for all the research you do to make the stories we enjoy so pleasing.
Hi Anne, I spent some time on that while taking a genealogy principles class earlier this year. I write stories set in the Georgian era/American Revolution. In the United States in 1850, “Esquire” is a style reserved exclusively for lawyers, or used as a styling in USS Foreign Service. Before then, it was rather hit or miss according to the colony/state. It generally was a lawyer, or a man in a trusted position such as a “Justice of the Peace.” The English history of the term’s use is fascinating. This Wikipedia article has a few what I call “throw away” statements that make the genealogist/historian/writer in me sit up and say, “Hmmm.” (Check out the section on “Misuse.”) https://wiki2.org/en/Esquire+Newton
Hi Anne, I spent some time on that while taking a genealogy principles class earlier this year. I write stories set in the Georgian era/American Revolution. In the United States in 1850, “Esquire” is a style reserved exclusively for lawyers, or used as a styling in USS Foreign Service. Before then, it was rather hit or miss according to the colony/state. It generally was a lawyer, or a man in a trusted position such as a “Justice of the Peace.” The English history of the term’s use is fascinating. This Wikipedia article has a few what I call “throw away” statements that make the genealogist/historian/writer in me sit up and say, “Hmmm.” (Check out the section on “Misuse.”) https://wiki2.org/en/Esquire+Newton
Hi Anne, I spent some time on that while taking a genealogy principles class earlier this year. I write stories set in the Georgian era/American Revolution. In the United States in 1850, “Esquire” is a style reserved exclusively for lawyers, or used as a styling in USS Foreign Service. Before then, it was rather hit or miss according to the colony/state. It generally was a lawyer, or a man in a trusted position such as a “Justice of the Peace.” The English history of the term’s use is fascinating. This Wikipedia article has a few what I call “throw away” statements that make the genealogist/historian/writer in me sit up and say, “Hmmm.” (Check out the section on “Misuse.”) https://wiki2.org/en/Esquire+Newton
Hi Anne, I spent some time on that while taking a genealogy principles class earlier this year. I write stories set in the Georgian era/American Revolution. In the United States in 1850, “Esquire” is a style reserved exclusively for lawyers, or used as a styling in USS Foreign Service. Before then, it was rather hit or miss according to the colony/state. It generally was a lawyer, or a man in a trusted position such as a “Justice of the Peace.” The English history of the term’s use is fascinating. This Wikipedia article has a few what I call “throw away” statements that make the genealogist/historian/writer in me sit up and say, “Hmmm.” (Check out the section on “Misuse.”) https://wiki2.org/en/Esquire+Newton
Hi Anne, I spent some time on that while taking a genealogy principles class earlier this year. I write stories set in the Georgian era/American Revolution. In the United States in 1850, “Esquire” is a style reserved exclusively for lawyers, or used as a styling in USS Foreign Service. Before then, it was rather hit or miss according to the colony/state. It generally was a lawyer, or a man in a trusted position such as a “Justice of the Peace.” The English history of the term’s use is fascinating. This Wikipedia article has a few what I call “throw away” statements that make the genealogist/historian/writer in me sit up and say, “Hmmm.” (Check out the section on “Misuse.”) https://wiki2.org/en/Esquire+Newton
Thanks for an enjoyable post, Anne. The Lourdes error and lemon tree would likely go unnoticed by me; however, I’m another who can be thrown out of a book when anachronistic language is used.
Thanks for an enjoyable post, Anne. The Lourdes error and lemon tree would likely go unnoticed by me; however, I’m another who can be thrown out of a book when anachronistic language is used.
Thanks for an enjoyable post, Anne. The Lourdes error and lemon tree would likely go unnoticed by me; however, I’m another who can be thrown out of a book when anachronistic language is used.
Thanks for an enjoyable post, Anne. The Lourdes error and lemon tree would likely go unnoticed by me; however, I’m another who can be thrown out of a book when anachronistic language is used.
Thanks for an enjoyable post, Anne. The Lourdes error and lemon tree would likely go unnoticed by me; however, I’m another who can be thrown out of a book when anachronistic language is used.
Thanks, Mary — clearly we all have our own hot buttons when it comes to historical errors. I have a question for you, though — what is wrong with drawers (meaning underwear not part of furniture) in the Regency era?
Interesting about the paperweights. I’m sure that would be one thing I wouldn’t think to look up. Can’t remember if I’ve ever used it.
Thanks, Mary — clearly we all have our own hot buttons when it comes to historical errors. I have a question for you, though — what is wrong with drawers (meaning underwear not part of furniture) in the Regency era?
Interesting about the paperweights. I’m sure that would be one thing I wouldn’t think to look up. Can’t remember if I’ve ever used it.
Thanks, Mary — clearly we all have our own hot buttons when it comes to historical errors. I have a question for you, though — what is wrong with drawers (meaning underwear not part of furniture) in the Regency era?
Interesting about the paperweights. I’m sure that would be one thing I wouldn’t think to look up. Can’t remember if I’ve ever used it.
Thanks, Mary — clearly we all have our own hot buttons when it comes to historical errors. I have a question for you, though — what is wrong with drawers (meaning underwear not part of furniture) in the Regency era?
Interesting about the paperweights. I’m sure that would be one thing I wouldn’t think to look up. Can’t remember if I’ve ever used it.
Thanks, Mary — clearly we all have our own hot buttons when it comes to historical errors. I have a question for you, though — what is wrong with drawers (meaning underwear not part of furniture) in the Regency era?
Interesting about the paperweights. I’m sure that would be one thing I wouldn’t think to look up. Can’t remember if I’ve ever used it.
Thanks, Binnie. Historically anachronistic behavior is one of the things I might grit my teeth at. I don’t mind if the person is being eccentric or unusual for her time — people have always broken the unspoken rules of behavior and defied accepted mores of the time and had ideas in advance of their time — but it needs to be acknowledged that it is unusual. And there needs to be consequences.
My Shropshire lemon tree was outside and not even in the garden of an aristocrat, I’m afraid.
Thanks, Binnie. Historically anachronistic behavior is one of the things I might grit my teeth at. I don’t mind if the person is being eccentric or unusual for her time — people have always broken the unspoken rules of behavior and defied accepted mores of the time and had ideas in advance of their time — but it needs to be acknowledged that it is unusual. And there needs to be consequences.
My Shropshire lemon tree was outside and not even in the garden of an aristocrat, I’m afraid.
Thanks, Binnie. Historically anachronistic behavior is one of the things I might grit my teeth at. I don’t mind if the person is being eccentric or unusual for her time — people have always broken the unspoken rules of behavior and defied accepted mores of the time and had ideas in advance of their time — but it needs to be acknowledged that it is unusual. And there needs to be consequences.
My Shropshire lemon tree was outside and not even in the garden of an aristocrat, I’m afraid.
Thanks, Binnie. Historically anachronistic behavior is one of the things I might grit my teeth at. I don’t mind if the person is being eccentric or unusual for her time — people have always broken the unspoken rules of behavior and defied accepted mores of the time and had ideas in advance of their time — but it needs to be acknowledged that it is unusual. And there needs to be consequences.
My Shropshire lemon tree was outside and not even in the garden of an aristocrat, I’m afraid.
Thanks, Binnie. Historically anachronistic behavior is one of the things I might grit my teeth at. I don’t mind if the person is being eccentric or unusual for her time — people have always broken the unspoken rules of behavior and defied accepted mores of the time and had ideas in advance of their time — but it needs to be acknowledged that it is unusual. And there needs to be consequences.
My Shropshire lemon tree was outside and not even in the garden of an aristocrat, I’m afraid.
Thanks, Quantum, yes, I agree with you. I really only start to notice historical and other errors and unlikelihoods when they interfere with the story, or when I’m not particularly enjoying the story.
Thanks, Quantum, yes, I agree with you. I really only start to notice historical and other errors and unlikelihoods when they interfere with the story, or when I’m not particularly enjoying the story.
Thanks, Quantum, yes, I agree with you. I really only start to notice historical and other errors and unlikelihoods when they interfere with the story, or when I’m not particularly enjoying the story.
Thanks, Quantum, yes, I agree with you. I really only start to notice historical and other errors and unlikelihoods when they interfere with the story, or when I’m not particularly enjoying the story.
Thanks, Quantum, yes, I agree with you. I really only start to notice historical and other errors and unlikelihoods when they interfere with the story, or when I’m not particularly enjoying the story.
Karin, I have to work so hard at getting flowers and fruits right — being from another hemisphere with opposite seasons. But also so many plants that were in general use actually arrived in the UK or were developed by nurserymen for widespread use after the Regency era. Plants that we take for granted now, might be specially bred in greenhouses, for instance.
As for the travel, it’s not so much knowledge of geography that’s important (though it is) but also how fast and far horses can reasonably travel.
Karin, I have to work so hard at getting flowers and fruits right — being from another hemisphere with opposite seasons. But also so many plants that were in general use actually arrived in the UK or were developed by nurserymen for widespread use after the Regency era. Plants that we take for granted now, might be specially bred in greenhouses, for instance.
As for the travel, it’s not so much knowledge of geography that’s important (though it is) but also how fast and far horses can reasonably travel.
Karin, I have to work so hard at getting flowers and fruits right — being from another hemisphere with opposite seasons. But also so many plants that were in general use actually arrived in the UK or were developed by nurserymen for widespread use after the Regency era. Plants that we take for granted now, might be specially bred in greenhouses, for instance.
As for the travel, it’s not so much knowledge of geography that’s important (though it is) but also how fast and far horses can reasonably travel.
Karin, I have to work so hard at getting flowers and fruits right — being from another hemisphere with opposite seasons. But also so many plants that were in general use actually arrived in the UK or were developed by nurserymen for widespread use after the Regency era. Plants that we take for granted now, might be specially bred in greenhouses, for instance.
As for the travel, it’s not so much knowledge of geography that’s important (though it is) but also how fast and far horses can reasonably travel.
Karin, I have to work so hard at getting flowers and fruits right — being from another hemisphere with opposite seasons. But also so many plants that were in general use actually arrived in the UK or were developed by nurserymen for widespread use after the Regency era. Plants that we take for granted now, might be specially bred in greenhouses, for instance.
As for the travel, it’s not so much knowledge of geography that’s important (though it is) but also how fast and far horses can reasonably travel.
Thanks, Lil, yes, young authors don’t seem to understand just how impossible it would be back then for an unmarried young woman to give birth to an illegitimate child and raise it, with no consequences. Even 30 years ago, it was an issue, and it was not uncommon for babies to be born in secret and adopted out, or the mothers rejected by their families when they decided to raise their child themselves. And it still happens today in some families.
Thanks, Lil, yes, young authors don’t seem to understand just how impossible it would be back then for an unmarried young woman to give birth to an illegitimate child and raise it, with no consequences. Even 30 years ago, it was an issue, and it was not uncommon for babies to be born in secret and adopted out, or the mothers rejected by their families when they decided to raise their child themselves. And it still happens today in some families.
Thanks, Lil, yes, young authors don’t seem to understand just how impossible it would be back then for an unmarried young woman to give birth to an illegitimate child and raise it, with no consequences. Even 30 years ago, it was an issue, and it was not uncommon for babies to be born in secret and adopted out, or the mothers rejected by their families when they decided to raise their child themselves. And it still happens today in some families.
Thanks, Lil, yes, young authors don’t seem to understand just how impossible it would be back then for an unmarried young woman to give birth to an illegitimate child and raise it, with no consequences. Even 30 years ago, it was an issue, and it was not uncommon for babies to be born in secret and adopted out, or the mothers rejected by their families when they decided to raise their child themselves. And it still happens today in some families.
Thanks, Lil, yes, young authors don’t seem to understand just how impossible it would be back then for an unmarried young woman to give birth to an illegitimate child and raise it, with no consequences. Even 30 years ago, it was an issue, and it was not uncommon for babies to be born in secret and adopted out, or the mothers rejected by their families when they decided to raise their child themselves. And it still happens today in some families.
I’m smiling at tour irritation with historical costumes in movies — remember that old black and white film of Pride and Prejudice, with Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier? With their over-the-top Victorian-style frills and flounces?
As for thinking you know history — that’s the attitude that’s made me make the mistakes I have.
I’m smiling at tour irritation with historical costumes in movies — remember that old black and white film of Pride and Prejudice, with Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier? With their over-the-top Victorian-style frills and flounces?
As for thinking you know history — that’s the attitude that’s made me make the mistakes I have.
I’m smiling at tour irritation with historical costumes in movies — remember that old black and white film of Pride and Prejudice, with Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier? With their over-the-top Victorian-style frills and flounces?
As for thinking you know history — that’s the attitude that’s made me make the mistakes I have.
I’m smiling at tour irritation with historical costumes in movies — remember that old black and white film of Pride and Prejudice, with Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier? With their over-the-top Victorian-style frills and flounces?
As for thinking you know history — that’s the attitude that’s made me make the mistakes I have.
I’m smiling at tour irritation with historical costumes in movies — remember that old black and white film of Pride and Prejudice, with Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier? With their over-the-top Victorian-style frills and flounces?
As for thinking you know history — that’s the attitude that’s made me make the mistakes I have.
Chuckling here about Mr Wonderful, Annette. And I agree with you — it’s when you’re not enjoying a book that you start to get picky about the occasional small error.
Chuckling here about Mr Wonderful, Annette. And I agree with you — it’s when you’re not enjoying a book that you start to get picky about the occasional small error.
Chuckling here about Mr Wonderful, Annette. And I agree with you — it’s when you’re not enjoying a book that you start to get picky about the occasional small error.
Chuckling here about Mr Wonderful, Annette. And I agree with you — it’s when you’re not enjoying a book that you start to get picky about the occasional small error.
Chuckling here about Mr Wonderful, Annette. And I agree with you — it’s when you’re not enjoying a book that you start to get picky about the occasional small error.
Margot, typos are a terrible thing — by the time a book goes to print I’ve read and reread it a dozen times — and STILL I can miss a typo. My brain sees what it expects to see. And sometimes a copy-editor will miss a typo, too, and if I spot it, I’m actually pleased because I assume she’s been drawn into the story and has forgotten to read like an editor. But though I would rather have no errors or typos in my books, once they’re published I have to wear it, and know that as long as my publisher retains the rights, I can’t change a thing. So I try to think of my books as Persian carpets, where tiny flaws are a sign that it’s truly been made by hand rather than a perfect and soullesss machine
Margot, typos are a terrible thing — by the time a book goes to print I’ve read and reread it a dozen times — and STILL I can miss a typo. My brain sees what it expects to see. And sometimes a copy-editor will miss a typo, too, and if I spot it, I’m actually pleased because I assume she’s been drawn into the story and has forgotten to read like an editor. But though I would rather have no errors or typos in my books, once they’re published I have to wear it, and know that as long as my publisher retains the rights, I can’t change a thing. So I try to think of my books as Persian carpets, where tiny flaws are a sign that it’s truly been made by hand rather than a perfect and soullesss machine
Margot, typos are a terrible thing — by the time a book goes to print I’ve read and reread it a dozen times — and STILL I can miss a typo. My brain sees what it expects to see. And sometimes a copy-editor will miss a typo, too, and if I spot it, I’m actually pleased because I assume she’s been drawn into the story and has forgotten to read like an editor. But though I would rather have no errors or typos in my books, once they’re published I have to wear it, and know that as long as my publisher retains the rights, I can’t change a thing. So I try to think of my books as Persian carpets, where tiny flaws are a sign that it’s truly been made by hand rather than a perfect and soullesss machine
Margot, typos are a terrible thing — by the time a book goes to print I’ve read and reread it a dozen times — and STILL I can miss a typo. My brain sees what it expects to see. And sometimes a copy-editor will miss a typo, too, and if I spot it, I’m actually pleased because I assume she’s been drawn into the story and has forgotten to read like an editor. But though I would rather have no errors or typos in my books, once they’re published I have to wear it, and know that as long as my publisher retains the rights, I can’t change a thing. So I try to think of my books as Persian carpets, where tiny flaws are a sign that it’s truly been made by hand rather than a perfect and soullesss machine
Margot, typos are a terrible thing — by the time a book goes to print I’ve read and reread it a dozen times — and STILL I can miss a typo. My brain sees what it expects to see. And sometimes a copy-editor will miss a typo, too, and if I spot it, I’m actually pleased because I assume she’s been drawn into the story and has forgotten to read like an editor. But though I would rather have no errors or typos in my books, once they’re published I have to wear it, and know that as long as my publisher retains the rights, I can’t change a thing. So I try to think of my books as Persian carpets, where tiny flaws are a sign that it’s truly been made by hand rather than a perfect and soullesss machine
Thanks, Kareni. I’ve come across some pretty funny modern phrases in historicals. I remember one heroine who was always saying “doh!” in a very Homer Simpson way. And while wordless expressions of frustration are timeless, that just didn’t work for me.
And some wonderful, best-selling historical authors often make mistakes of this kind, using modern expressions, but as had been said before, with a good story and good characterization, I tend to forgive the odd modern phrase.
Thanks, Kareni. I’ve come across some pretty funny modern phrases in historicals. I remember one heroine who was always saying “doh!” in a very Homer Simpson way. And while wordless expressions of frustration are timeless, that just didn’t work for me.
And some wonderful, best-selling historical authors often make mistakes of this kind, using modern expressions, but as had been said before, with a good story and good characterization, I tend to forgive the odd modern phrase.
Thanks, Kareni. I’ve come across some pretty funny modern phrases in historicals. I remember one heroine who was always saying “doh!” in a very Homer Simpson way. And while wordless expressions of frustration are timeless, that just didn’t work for me.
And some wonderful, best-selling historical authors often make mistakes of this kind, using modern expressions, but as had been said before, with a good story and good characterization, I tend to forgive the odd modern phrase.
Thanks, Kareni. I’ve come across some pretty funny modern phrases in historicals. I remember one heroine who was always saying “doh!” in a very Homer Simpson way. And while wordless expressions of frustration are timeless, that just didn’t work for me.
And some wonderful, best-selling historical authors often make mistakes of this kind, using modern expressions, but as had been said before, with a good story and good characterization, I tend to forgive the odd modern phrase.
Thanks, Kareni. I’ve come across some pretty funny modern phrases in historicals. I remember one heroine who was always saying “doh!” in a very Homer Simpson way. And while wordless expressions of frustration are timeless, that just didn’t work for me.
And some wonderful, best-selling historical authors often make mistakes of this kind, using modern expressions, but as had been said before, with a good story and good characterization, I tend to forgive the odd modern phrase.
Thanks, Pamela, yes, that was why I dithered over whether my scoundrel would put esq after his name, because it wasn’t an official title, but one that any man (with a degree of cheek) could give himself to sound more impressive. I’ve left it off for the moment, but may well put it back later when I’m going over the finished manuscript.
Thanks, Pamela, yes, that was why I dithered over whether my scoundrel would put esq after his name, because it wasn’t an official title, but one that any man (with a degree of cheek) could give himself to sound more impressive. I’ve left it off for the moment, but may well put it back later when I’m going over the finished manuscript.
Thanks, Pamela, yes, that was why I dithered over whether my scoundrel would put esq after his name, because it wasn’t an official title, but one that any man (with a degree of cheek) could give himself to sound more impressive. I’ve left it off for the moment, but may well put it back later when I’m going over the finished manuscript.
Thanks, Pamela, yes, that was why I dithered over whether my scoundrel would put esq after his name, because it wasn’t an official title, but one that any man (with a degree of cheek) could give himself to sound more impressive. I’ve left it off for the moment, but may well put it back later when I’m going over the finished manuscript.
Thanks, Pamela, yes, that was why I dithered over whether my scoundrel would put esq after his name, because it wasn’t an official title, but one that any man (with a degree of cheek) could give himself to sound more impressive. I’ve left it off for the moment, but may well put it back later when I’m going over the finished manuscript.
True, drawers was in use by the Regency, unlike the much-later bloomers and knickers, but in a different context from the author’s use of them as a women’s garment. Possibly it was used for men’s underclothing but women mostly didn’t wear anything under their petticoats, and if they did it was not called drawers? It’s been quite a few years since I looked it up, but I know I had a valid complaint at the time.
True, drawers was in use by the Regency, unlike the much-later bloomers and knickers, but in a different context from the author’s use of them as a women’s garment. Possibly it was used for men’s underclothing but women mostly didn’t wear anything under their petticoats, and if they did it was not called drawers? It’s been quite a few years since I looked it up, but I know I had a valid complaint at the time.
True, drawers was in use by the Regency, unlike the much-later bloomers and knickers, but in a different context from the author’s use of them as a women’s garment. Possibly it was used for men’s underclothing but women mostly didn’t wear anything under their petticoats, and if they did it was not called drawers? It’s been quite a few years since I looked it up, but I know I had a valid complaint at the time.
True, drawers was in use by the Regency, unlike the much-later bloomers and knickers, but in a different context from the author’s use of them as a women’s garment. Possibly it was used for men’s underclothing but women mostly didn’t wear anything under their petticoats, and if they did it was not called drawers? It’s been quite a few years since I looked it up, but I know I had a valid complaint at the time.
True, drawers was in use by the Regency, unlike the much-later bloomers and knickers, but in a different context from the author’s use of them as a women’s garment. Possibly it was used for men’s underclothing but women mostly didn’t wear anything under their petticoats, and if they did it was not called drawers? It’s been quite a few years since I looked it up, but I know I had a valid complaint at the time.
Anne, I adore that Victorian P&P for its awful, wonderful over-the-topness. Bold plaids! Mother from hell! (But, okay, just doing her job.) Also The Scarlet Pimpernel from the same era, but nothing approaches that P&P!
Anne, I adore that Victorian P&P for its awful, wonderful over-the-topness. Bold plaids! Mother from hell! (But, okay, just doing her job.) Also The Scarlet Pimpernel from the same era, but nothing approaches that P&P!
Anne, I adore that Victorian P&P for its awful, wonderful over-the-topness. Bold plaids! Mother from hell! (But, okay, just doing her job.) Also The Scarlet Pimpernel from the same era, but nothing approaches that P&P!
Anne, I adore that Victorian P&P for its awful, wonderful over-the-topness. Bold plaids! Mother from hell! (But, okay, just doing her job.) Also The Scarlet Pimpernel from the same era, but nothing approaches that P&P!
Anne, I adore that Victorian P&P for its awful, wonderful over-the-topness. Bold plaids! Mother from hell! (But, okay, just doing her job.) Also The Scarlet Pimpernel from the same era, but nothing approaches that P&P!
Lovely carpets they are indeed. So true finding the few leftover errors in a book is kind of fun – for me.
Lovely carpets they are indeed. So true finding the few leftover errors in a book is kind of fun – for me.
Lovely carpets they are indeed. So true finding the few leftover errors in a book is kind of fun – for me.
Lovely carpets they are indeed. So true finding the few leftover errors in a book is kind of fun – for me.
Lovely carpets they are indeed. So true finding the few leftover errors in a book is kind of fun – for me.