Religion and Magic

Hheroineregencybluema137218800015
Back in April I wrote a blog mentioning political correctness in romance, and our readers popped up with a number of intriguing questions asking how we deal with the sticky issue of religion in historicals. I’ve run a quick search and Typepad isn’t turning up any wenchly blog answering these questions (although the search function is much trickier than my poor mind), so I thought I’d consider some of these idiosyncrasies now while I’m pondering how to deal with my Mystic Isle’s religious beliefs.

Maureen asks: I know religion has always played a part in people’s lives.  I’m wondering if that’s a tricky thing to address in order to make the book appealing to everyone.
Jane asks: how do successful writers balance their beliefs/conscience with the real or perceived demands of the market?   

Personally, I invent my own religion. <G>  But as I’m discovering, even that is tricky. I have a strong personal faith and part of that faith believes in obeying the Ten Commandments. So even cursing becomes a problem for me. Attempting to avoid the vernacular so I don’t take the name of the Lord in vain becomes difficult in historicals as well as contemporaries since people throughout time invariably invoke the name of the deity in times of trouble, and seldom in prayer.  I thought I could avoid that in my new series by giving my Mystic Isle characters several deities and referring to them in general as “the gods.”  As I progress further into the series, though, real religious issues are popping up, and I’m desperately backpedaling, attempting to determine if I need to be talking about the Gods and They, capital letters, to offer respect even if they’re made up gods, or if religious readers would be offended by my offering respect to pretend gods. Pcreligion

If I can waffle over just capitalization, can you imagine what I go through when my Catholic and Protestant protagonists run up against my Mystic people?  Just dealing with wedding ceremonies has my eyes crossing. Worse yet, the French government pretty much abolished the church during the period about which I’m writing, and many so-called “enlightened” people became agonistic. So in my second book, I have my agnostic heroine thrown up against my high priest from the island.  Who wants to argue their beliefs for me? 

So to answer Jane and Maureen, considering political correctness would make me even crazier than I Blibrary
am. I simply write my characters as they need to be.  I always love a good argument, and even I can argue with myself about religion, so proselytizing my faith isn’t going to happen either. My books are stories I have to tell about a time and place in history, and characters I want to explore. If those characters have feelings about religion, that’s fine, because religion expresses a great deal about a culture and time period.  I won’t pull punches because of the market, but on the other hand, unless religion is part of the book’s conflict, it won’t take a major place in my story. In romance, that generally means religion will have a role along with history, costumes, and customs. I have no more difficulty writing about it than I do about garments like farthingales and knee breeches.

I know there are people who have objected to the Harry Potter books because they have some idea that “magic” is sinful.  Since I don’t believe in magic any stronger than the magic of a baby’s cry or a124
dramatic sunset, I don’t understand their rationale and don’t concern myself with it.  The characters in my Magic and Mystic books go to church, believe in their religion, and just happen to have “gifts” beyond the normal. That they’re God-given gifts is completely reasonable to them, and to me.

Now, if you want to start a discussion about the gender of God, we may be in trouble…

I think I owe Maureen and Jane a book. If you’d drop me a line over at my website at patriciarice.com or drop Sherrie, our whipmistress a note, and give me your address, I’ll sail off MYSTIC GUARDIAN or another book of your choosing if I have it available.

And for anyone interested in the writing life, I’m still slogging away over at  patriciarice.blogspot.com  . Come ask questions, drop a line, or forever listen to my brainless monologue.

And for today’s test questions: Does reference to "magic" offend your religious beliefs? Do you think authors ought to avoid "hot topics" like religion and politics in romance? Or do you enjoy reading between the lines, attempting to discover if an author has any specific "message"?

150 thoughts on “Religion and Magic”

  1. I am about as non-religious as a girl who was raised Catholic can be (which means there is still a little part of that Catholic girl there), however magic is not something that bothers me. I believe that magic in writing is fantasy (ie not reality) so don’t have issues with it. I don’t like religion in fiction – if it is part of the message of the book. I read for escapism, so really don’t want the prosyletizing. I got enough of that from a former co-worker that I find it offensive. OTOH, if it is part of the history (ie Philippa Gregory’s Tudor series) then it really must be there, I do deal with that.

    Reply
  2. I am about as non-religious as a girl who was raised Catholic can be (which means there is still a little part of that Catholic girl there), however magic is not something that bothers me. I believe that magic in writing is fantasy (ie not reality) so don’t have issues with it. I don’t like religion in fiction – if it is part of the message of the book. I read for escapism, so really don’t want the prosyletizing. I got enough of that from a former co-worker that I find it offensive. OTOH, if it is part of the history (ie Philippa Gregory’s Tudor series) then it really must be there, I do deal with that.

    Reply
  3. I am about as non-religious as a girl who was raised Catholic can be (which means there is still a little part of that Catholic girl there), however magic is not something that bothers me. I believe that magic in writing is fantasy (ie not reality) so don’t have issues with it. I don’t like religion in fiction – if it is part of the message of the book. I read for escapism, so really don’t want the prosyletizing. I got enough of that from a former co-worker that I find it offensive. OTOH, if it is part of the history (ie Philippa Gregory’s Tudor series) then it really must be there, I do deal with that.

    Reply
  4. I am about as non-religious as a girl who was raised Catholic can be (which means there is still a little part of that Catholic girl there), however magic is not something that bothers me. I believe that magic in writing is fantasy (ie not reality) so don’t have issues with it. I don’t like religion in fiction – if it is part of the message of the book. I read for escapism, so really don’t want the prosyletizing. I got enough of that from a former co-worker that I find it offensive. OTOH, if it is part of the history (ie Philippa Gregory’s Tudor series) then it really must be there, I do deal with that.

    Reply
  5. I am about as non-religious as a girl who was raised Catholic can be (which means there is still a little part of that Catholic girl there), however magic is not something that bothers me. I believe that magic in writing is fantasy (ie not reality) so don’t have issues with it. I don’t like religion in fiction – if it is part of the message of the book. I read for escapism, so really don’t want the prosyletizing. I got enough of that from a former co-worker that I find it offensive. OTOH, if it is part of the history (ie Philippa Gregory’s Tudor series) then it really must be there, I do deal with that.

    Reply
  6. I’m an atheist in pretty much any circumstances, including reading habits. However, I really don’t mind that much which way things go in fiction because hey it’s fictional! Magic and fantasy makes things more interesting, unpredictable and definitely better escapism. I’m including religion under magic/fantasy here, since it is all the same to me.
    If the book is factual and a belief in religion/magic is standard at the time, then that’s fine with me too. I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.

    Reply
  7. I’m an atheist in pretty much any circumstances, including reading habits. However, I really don’t mind that much which way things go in fiction because hey it’s fictional! Magic and fantasy makes things more interesting, unpredictable and definitely better escapism. I’m including religion under magic/fantasy here, since it is all the same to me.
    If the book is factual and a belief in religion/magic is standard at the time, then that’s fine with me too. I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.

    Reply
  8. I’m an atheist in pretty much any circumstances, including reading habits. However, I really don’t mind that much which way things go in fiction because hey it’s fictional! Magic and fantasy makes things more interesting, unpredictable and definitely better escapism. I’m including religion under magic/fantasy here, since it is all the same to me.
    If the book is factual and a belief in religion/magic is standard at the time, then that’s fine with me too. I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.

    Reply
  9. I’m an atheist in pretty much any circumstances, including reading habits. However, I really don’t mind that much which way things go in fiction because hey it’s fictional! Magic and fantasy makes things more interesting, unpredictable and definitely better escapism. I’m including religion under magic/fantasy here, since it is all the same to me.
    If the book is factual and a belief in religion/magic is standard at the time, then that’s fine with me too. I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.

    Reply
  10. I’m an atheist in pretty much any circumstances, including reading habits. However, I really don’t mind that much which way things go in fiction because hey it’s fictional! Magic and fantasy makes things more interesting, unpredictable and definitely better escapism. I’m including religion under magic/fantasy here, since it is all the same to me.
    If the book is factual and a belief in religion/magic is standard at the time, then that’s fine with me too. I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.

    Reply
  11. “I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.”
    I think phrases like “if God wills it”, “praise God” etc would have been more frequently used (along with exclamations like “God’s Blood! and “By the Holy Rood!), but that didn’t mean that people always went around being devout/superstitious, and the nobility frequently acted in accordance with the dictates of honour/politics.
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs?”
    No. One would have to avoid the Arthurian legends, many chivalric romances and most fairytales if one did want to avoid all magic.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid ‘hot topics’ like religion and politics in romance?”
    It’s probably easier in historicals because the politics is probably less likely to offend any readers (depends, of course, on the context, since some historical conflicts still have repercussions today). I’m interested in politics so I tend to enjoy it if romances include politics, but it does depend how it’s done. Someone plonking a party manifesto in the middle of a chapter, or including a heavy-duty propaganda session in the novel will annoy me and if the characters hold opinions which I consider immoral/offensive I won’t enjoy that, however well-written the book is. For example, Heyer’s characters are quite often snobbish and racist, and to enjoy the books I have to skip those bits.
    “do you enjoy reading between the lines, attempting to discover if an author has any specific ‘message’?”
    Yes, I usually like trying to read between the lines. It means I can enjoy the book on more levels.

    Reply
  12. “I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.”
    I think phrases like “if God wills it”, “praise God” etc would have been more frequently used (along with exclamations like “God’s Blood! and “By the Holy Rood!), but that didn’t mean that people always went around being devout/superstitious, and the nobility frequently acted in accordance with the dictates of honour/politics.
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs?”
    No. One would have to avoid the Arthurian legends, many chivalric romances and most fairytales if one did want to avoid all magic.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid ‘hot topics’ like religion and politics in romance?”
    It’s probably easier in historicals because the politics is probably less likely to offend any readers (depends, of course, on the context, since some historical conflicts still have repercussions today). I’m interested in politics so I tend to enjoy it if romances include politics, but it does depend how it’s done. Someone plonking a party manifesto in the middle of a chapter, or including a heavy-duty propaganda session in the novel will annoy me and if the characters hold opinions which I consider immoral/offensive I won’t enjoy that, however well-written the book is. For example, Heyer’s characters are quite often snobbish and racist, and to enjoy the books I have to skip those bits.
    “do you enjoy reading between the lines, attempting to discover if an author has any specific ‘message’?”
    Yes, I usually like trying to read between the lines. It means I can enjoy the book on more levels.

    Reply
  13. “I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.”
    I think phrases like “if God wills it”, “praise God” etc would have been more frequently used (along with exclamations like “God’s Blood! and “By the Holy Rood!), but that didn’t mean that people always went around being devout/superstitious, and the nobility frequently acted in accordance with the dictates of honour/politics.
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs?”
    No. One would have to avoid the Arthurian legends, many chivalric romances and most fairytales if one did want to avoid all magic.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid ‘hot topics’ like religion and politics in romance?”
    It’s probably easier in historicals because the politics is probably less likely to offend any readers (depends, of course, on the context, since some historical conflicts still have repercussions today). I’m interested in politics so I tend to enjoy it if romances include politics, but it does depend how it’s done. Someone plonking a party manifesto in the middle of a chapter, or including a heavy-duty propaganda session in the novel will annoy me and if the characters hold opinions which I consider immoral/offensive I won’t enjoy that, however well-written the book is. For example, Heyer’s characters are quite often snobbish and racist, and to enjoy the books I have to skip those bits.
    “do you enjoy reading between the lines, attempting to discover if an author has any specific ‘message’?”
    Yes, I usually like trying to read between the lines. It means I can enjoy the book on more levels.

    Reply
  14. “I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.”
    I think phrases like “if God wills it”, “praise God” etc would have been more frequently used (along with exclamations like “God’s Blood! and “By the Holy Rood!), but that didn’t mean that people always went around being devout/superstitious, and the nobility frequently acted in accordance with the dictates of honour/politics.
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs?”
    No. One would have to avoid the Arthurian legends, many chivalric romances and most fairytales if one did want to avoid all magic.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid ‘hot topics’ like religion and politics in romance?”
    It’s probably easier in historicals because the politics is probably less likely to offend any readers (depends, of course, on the context, since some historical conflicts still have repercussions today). I’m interested in politics so I tend to enjoy it if romances include politics, but it does depend how it’s done. Someone plonking a party manifesto in the middle of a chapter, or including a heavy-duty propaganda session in the novel will annoy me and if the characters hold opinions which I consider immoral/offensive I won’t enjoy that, however well-written the book is. For example, Heyer’s characters are quite often snobbish and racist, and to enjoy the books I have to skip those bits.
    “do you enjoy reading between the lines, attempting to discover if an author has any specific ‘message’?”
    Yes, I usually like trying to read between the lines. It means I can enjoy the book on more levels.

    Reply
  15. “I think Jane Aiken Hodge made a good point about this in “The Private World of Georgette Heyer” – that Heyer’s medieval books were essentially flawed because she couldn’t imagine/write the all-permeating everyday belief in God/superstition that existed in Medieval times.”
    I think phrases like “if God wills it”, “praise God” etc would have been more frequently used (along with exclamations like “God’s Blood! and “By the Holy Rood!), but that didn’t mean that people always went around being devout/superstitious, and the nobility frequently acted in accordance with the dictates of honour/politics.
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs?”
    No. One would have to avoid the Arthurian legends, many chivalric romances and most fairytales if one did want to avoid all magic.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid ‘hot topics’ like religion and politics in romance?”
    It’s probably easier in historicals because the politics is probably less likely to offend any readers (depends, of course, on the context, since some historical conflicts still have repercussions today). I’m interested in politics so I tend to enjoy it if romances include politics, but it does depend how it’s done. Someone plonking a party manifesto in the middle of a chapter, or including a heavy-duty propaganda session in the novel will annoy me and if the characters hold opinions which I consider immoral/offensive I won’t enjoy that, however well-written the book is. For example, Heyer’s characters are quite often snobbish and racist, and to enjoy the books I have to skip those bits.
    “do you enjoy reading between the lines, attempting to discover if an author has any specific ‘message’?”
    Yes, I usually like trying to read between the lines. It means I can enjoy the book on more levels.

    Reply
  16. Lud! I’m afraid I’m one of those cafeteria people who samples what works for them and leaves the rest behind.I’m not literal about much of anything and feel we’re just poor, dumb humans who have no hope of understanding God’s purpose, and that includes the religious scholars who cobbled together our current Bible translations. That said, I’m really a good person, LOL!
    When the Harry Potter books came out, I read three of them aloud to a fourth grade class, with no parental objection.But I know so many parents who think the books are bad for kids. I’m hard-pressed to think of many classic children’s books that don’t feature elements of magic or mystery. Religion is the driving force of so much good and evil in the world that it’s only natural it pop up in fiction. If a character’s religious conviction is integral to the story, that’s fine, but I don’t want to feel like I’m in Sunday School again (and yes, I used to teach it).

    Reply
  17. Lud! I’m afraid I’m one of those cafeteria people who samples what works for them and leaves the rest behind.I’m not literal about much of anything and feel we’re just poor, dumb humans who have no hope of understanding God’s purpose, and that includes the religious scholars who cobbled together our current Bible translations. That said, I’m really a good person, LOL!
    When the Harry Potter books came out, I read three of them aloud to a fourth grade class, with no parental objection.But I know so many parents who think the books are bad for kids. I’m hard-pressed to think of many classic children’s books that don’t feature elements of magic or mystery. Religion is the driving force of so much good and evil in the world that it’s only natural it pop up in fiction. If a character’s religious conviction is integral to the story, that’s fine, but I don’t want to feel like I’m in Sunday School again (and yes, I used to teach it).

    Reply
  18. Lud! I’m afraid I’m one of those cafeteria people who samples what works for them and leaves the rest behind.I’m not literal about much of anything and feel we’re just poor, dumb humans who have no hope of understanding God’s purpose, and that includes the religious scholars who cobbled together our current Bible translations. That said, I’m really a good person, LOL!
    When the Harry Potter books came out, I read three of them aloud to a fourth grade class, with no parental objection.But I know so many parents who think the books are bad for kids. I’m hard-pressed to think of many classic children’s books that don’t feature elements of magic or mystery. Religion is the driving force of so much good and evil in the world that it’s only natural it pop up in fiction. If a character’s religious conviction is integral to the story, that’s fine, but I don’t want to feel like I’m in Sunday School again (and yes, I used to teach it).

    Reply
  19. Lud! I’m afraid I’m one of those cafeteria people who samples what works for them and leaves the rest behind.I’m not literal about much of anything and feel we’re just poor, dumb humans who have no hope of understanding God’s purpose, and that includes the religious scholars who cobbled together our current Bible translations. That said, I’m really a good person, LOL!
    When the Harry Potter books came out, I read three of them aloud to a fourth grade class, with no parental objection.But I know so many parents who think the books are bad for kids. I’m hard-pressed to think of many classic children’s books that don’t feature elements of magic or mystery. Religion is the driving force of so much good and evil in the world that it’s only natural it pop up in fiction. If a character’s religious conviction is integral to the story, that’s fine, but I don’t want to feel like I’m in Sunday School again (and yes, I used to teach it).

    Reply
  20. Lud! I’m afraid I’m one of those cafeteria people who samples what works for them and leaves the rest behind.I’m not literal about much of anything and feel we’re just poor, dumb humans who have no hope of understanding God’s purpose, and that includes the religious scholars who cobbled together our current Bible translations. That said, I’m really a good person, LOL!
    When the Harry Potter books came out, I read three of them aloud to a fourth grade class, with no parental objection.But I know so many parents who think the books are bad for kids. I’m hard-pressed to think of many classic children’s books that don’t feature elements of magic or mystery. Religion is the driving force of so much good and evil in the world that it’s only natural it pop up in fiction. If a character’s religious conviction is integral to the story, that’s fine, but I don’t want to feel like I’m in Sunday School again (and yes, I used to teach it).

    Reply
  21. While I have serious problems with organized religion (sorry, RevMel!), I find religion a fascinating topic, and the philosophy of how it has affected the entire world’s history can and has filled books. I would love to be able to do more with it, but not in romance.
    Good points, Laura. I suspect whatever time period we address, there will be people who mindlessly accept whatever religion they’ve been exposed to, and others who question everything. But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!
    Interesting about Heyer. I’ll admit, I’ve read some, but I’ve never been a raving fan, so I haven’t caught the snobbery. I like writers with minds broad enough to see beyond such things, but I guess that’s a lot to ask for.

    Reply
  22. While I have serious problems with organized religion (sorry, RevMel!), I find religion a fascinating topic, and the philosophy of how it has affected the entire world’s history can and has filled books. I would love to be able to do more with it, but not in romance.
    Good points, Laura. I suspect whatever time period we address, there will be people who mindlessly accept whatever religion they’ve been exposed to, and others who question everything. But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!
    Interesting about Heyer. I’ll admit, I’ve read some, but I’ve never been a raving fan, so I haven’t caught the snobbery. I like writers with minds broad enough to see beyond such things, but I guess that’s a lot to ask for.

    Reply
  23. While I have serious problems with organized religion (sorry, RevMel!), I find religion a fascinating topic, and the philosophy of how it has affected the entire world’s history can and has filled books. I would love to be able to do more with it, but not in romance.
    Good points, Laura. I suspect whatever time period we address, there will be people who mindlessly accept whatever religion they’ve been exposed to, and others who question everything. But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!
    Interesting about Heyer. I’ll admit, I’ve read some, but I’ve never been a raving fan, so I haven’t caught the snobbery. I like writers with minds broad enough to see beyond such things, but I guess that’s a lot to ask for.

    Reply
  24. While I have serious problems with organized religion (sorry, RevMel!), I find religion a fascinating topic, and the philosophy of how it has affected the entire world’s history can and has filled books. I would love to be able to do more with it, but not in romance.
    Good points, Laura. I suspect whatever time period we address, there will be people who mindlessly accept whatever religion they’ve been exposed to, and others who question everything. But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!
    Interesting about Heyer. I’ll admit, I’ve read some, but I’ve never been a raving fan, so I haven’t caught the snobbery. I like writers with minds broad enough to see beyond such things, but I guess that’s a lot to ask for.

    Reply
  25. While I have serious problems with organized religion (sorry, RevMel!), I find religion a fascinating topic, and the philosophy of how it has affected the entire world’s history can and has filled books. I would love to be able to do more with it, but not in romance.
    Good points, Laura. I suspect whatever time period we address, there will be people who mindlessly accept whatever religion they’ve been exposed to, and others who question everything. But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!
    Interesting about Heyer. I’ll admit, I’ve read some, but I’ve never been a raving fan, so I haven’t caught the snobbery. I like writers with minds broad enough to see beyond such things, but I guess that’s a lot to ask for.

    Reply
  26. Wench Pat, I must side with you (with apologies to my dear friend RevMelinda) and say that I, too, have serious problems with organized religion. The bloodiest of wars lay at the church’s collective doorstep. Shameful when the message is to be one of redemption not condemnation.
    As to your questions…
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs? “ No. Magic is our word for it. Jesus called them miracles and He taught his disciples how to access the Power so they could do the same.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid “hot topics”…” No. A story is a safe place for the mind to test current believes while considering others. The 4400, anyone? Lord of the Rings? Chronicles of Narnia? The Matrix? A good story presents not the “right” side of the argument, but all sides so the reader can tests his/her current beliefs. Tricky, to say the least, but the only beliefs worth holding are the ones that can withstand the fires of doubt. Hitler was known for saying ‘What luck for rulers that men do not think.’ And he was right. Men (and women) don’t think in the absence of new ideas–one of the reasons why he burnt the books.
    As for reading between the lines…. I love doing this, but I don’t necessary attribute a message found to authorial intent. Many times it has more to do with the phase of life that I am in.
    Great topic, Wench Pat! And, I’m loving your “writer’s life” blog.
    Nina

    Reply
  27. Wench Pat, I must side with you (with apologies to my dear friend RevMelinda) and say that I, too, have serious problems with organized religion. The bloodiest of wars lay at the church’s collective doorstep. Shameful when the message is to be one of redemption not condemnation.
    As to your questions…
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs? “ No. Magic is our word for it. Jesus called them miracles and He taught his disciples how to access the Power so they could do the same.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid “hot topics”…” No. A story is a safe place for the mind to test current believes while considering others. The 4400, anyone? Lord of the Rings? Chronicles of Narnia? The Matrix? A good story presents not the “right” side of the argument, but all sides so the reader can tests his/her current beliefs. Tricky, to say the least, but the only beliefs worth holding are the ones that can withstand the fires of doubt. Hitler was known for saying ‘What luck for rulers that men do not think.’ And he was right. Men (and women) don’t think in the absence of new ideas–one of the reasons why he burnt the books.
    As for reading between the lines…. I love doing this, but I don’t necessary attribute a message found to authorial intent. Many times it has more to do with the phase of life that I am in.
    Great topic, Wench Pat! And, I’m loving your “writer’s life” blog.
    Nina

    Reply
  28. Wench Pat, I must side with you (with apologies to my dear friend RevMelinda) and say that I, too, have serious problems with organized religion. The bloodiest of wars lay at the church’s collective doorstep. Shameful when the message is to be one of redemption not condemnation.
    As to your questions…
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs? “ No. Magic is our word for it. Jesus called them miracles and He taught his disciples how to access the Power so they could do the same.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid “hot topics”…” No. A story is a safe place for the mind to test current believes while considering others. The 4400, anyone? Lord of the Rings? Chronicles of Narnia? The Matrix? A good story presents not the “right” side of the argument, but all sides so the reader can tests his/her current beliefs. Tricky, to say the least, but the only beliefs worth holding are the ones that can withstand the fires of doubt. Hitler was known for saying ‘What luck for rulers that men do not think.’ And he was right. Men (and women) don’t think in the absence of new ideas–one of the reasons why he burnt the books.
    As for reading between the lines…. I love doing this, but I don’t necessary attribute a message found to authorial intent. Many times it has more to do with the phase of life that I am in.
    Great topic, Wench Pat! And, I’m loving your “writer’s life” blog.
    Nina

    Reply
  29. Wench Pat, I must side with you (with apologies to my dear friend RevMelinda) and say that I, too, have serious problems with organized religion. The bloodiest of wars lay at the church’s collective doorstep. Shameful when the message is to be one of redemption not condemnation.
    As to your questions…
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs? “ No. Magic is our word for it. Jesus called them miracles and He taught his disciples how to access the Power so they could do the same.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid “hot topics”…” No. A story is a safe place for the mind to test current believes while considering others. The 4400, anyone? Lord of the Rings? Chronicles of Narnia? The Matrix? A good story presents not the “right” side of the argument, but all sides so the reader can tests his/her current beliefs. Tricky, to say the least, but the only beliefs worth holding are the ones that can withstand the fires of doubt. Hitler was known for saying ‘What luck for rulers that men do not think.’ And he was right. Men (and women) don’t think in the absence of new ideas–one of the reasons why he burnt the books.
    As for reading between the lines…. I love doing this, but I don’t necessary attribute a message found to authorial intent. Many times it has more to do with the phase of life that I am in.
    Great topic, Wench Pat! And, I’m loving your “writer’s life” blog.
    Nina

    Reply
  30. Wench Pat, I must side with you (with apologies to my dear friend RevMelinda) and say that I, too, have serious problems with organized religion. The bloodiest of wars lay at the church’s collective doorstep. Shameful when the message is to be one of redemption not condemnation.
    As to your questions…
    “Does reference to “magic” offend your religious beliefs? “ No. Magic is our word for it. Jesus called them miracles and He taught his disciples how to access the Power so they could do the same.
    “Do you think authors ought to avoid “hot topics”…” No. A story is a safe place for the mind to test current believes while considering others. The 4400, anyone? Lord of the Rings? Chronicles of Narnia? The Matrix? A good story presents not the “right” side of the argument, but all sides so the reader can tests his/her current beliefs. Tricky, to say the least, but the only beliefs worth holding are the ones that can withstand the fires of doubt. Hitler was known for saying ‘What luck for rulers that men do not think.’ And he was right. Men (and women) don’t think in the absence of new ideas–one of the reasons why he burnt the books.
    As for reading between the lines…. I love doing this, but I don’t necessary attribute a message found to authorial intent. Many times it has more to do with the phase of life that I am in.
    Great topic, Wench Pat! And, I’m loving your “writer’s life” blog.
    Nina

    Reply
  31. Fascinating topic, Pat.
    I agree that some sort of religion is part of any time and place. Even now, regardless of our personal beliefs it would be hard to get through a day without hearing about religious issues that are very important to other people, if not ourselves.
    Religious observance was often extremely important, even imposed by law, and many people did believe in some aspect of God and their immortal soul. So it sort of comes up, I find, even if only in not traveling on a Sunday in the Regency, or attitudes to profanity.
    Laura, interesting, but I find the people in the middle ages very conscious of religion. There were a lot of legal aspects, of course, but also a general sense of heavenly judgement to come. People choking on the host, for example, presumably simply because they believed despite claiming they didn’t.
    Anyway, clearly something that interests me. And I do like it at least mentioned in historicals where appropriate. It is part of their world.
    Jo

    Reply
  32. Fascinating topic, Pat.
    I agree that some sort of religion is part of any time and place. Even now, regardless of our personal beliefs it would be hard to get through a day without hearing about religious issues that are very important to other people, if not ourselves.
    Religious observance was often extremely important, even imposed by law, and many people did believe in some aspect of God and their immortal soul. So it sort of comes up, I find, even if only in not traveling on a Sunday in the Regency, or attitudes to profanity.
    Laura, interesting, but I find the people in the middle ages very conscious of religion. There were a lot of legal aspects, of course, but also a general sense of heavenly judgement to come. People choking on the host, for example, presumably simply because they believed despite claiming they didn’t.
    Anyway, clearly something that interests me. And I do like it at least mentioned in historicals where appropriate. It is part of their world.
    Jo

    Reply
  33. Fascinating topic, Pat.
    I agree that some sort of religion is part of any time and place. Even now, regardless of our personal beliefs it would be hard to get through a day without hearing about religious issues that are very important to other people, if not ourselves.
    Religious observance was often extremely important, even imposed by law, and many people did believe in some aspect of God and their immortal soul. So it sort of comes up, I find, even if only in not traveling on a Sunday in the Regency, or attitudes to profanity.
    Laura, interesting, but I find the people in the middle ages very conscious of religion. There were a lot of legal aspects, of course, but also a general sense of heavenly judgement to come. People choking on the host, for example, presumably simply because they believed despite claiming they didn’t.
    Anyway, clearly something that interests me. And I do like it at least mentioned in historicals where appropriate. It is part of their world.
    Jo

    Reply
  34. Fascinating topic, Pat.
    I agree that some sort of religion is part of any time and place. Even now, regardless of our personal beliefs it would be hard to get through a day without hearing about religious issues that are very important to other people, if not ourselves.
    Religious observance was often extremely important, even imposed by law, and many people did believe in some aspect of God and their immortal soul. So it sort of comes up, I find, even if only in not traveling on a Sunday in the Regency, or attitudes to profanity.
    Laura, interesting, but I find the people in the middle ages very conscious of religion. There were a lot of legal aspects, of course, but also a general sense of heavenly judgement to come. People choking on the host, for example, presumably simply because they believed despite claiming they didn’t.
    Anyway, clearly something that interests me. And I do like it at least mentioned in historicals where appropriate. It is part of their world.
    Jo

    Reply
  35. Fascinating topic, Pat.
    I agree that some sort of religion is part of any time and place. Even now, regardless of our personal beliefs it would be hard to get through a day without hearing about religious issues that are very important to other people, if not ourselves.
    Religious observance was often extremely important, even imposed by law, and many people did believe in some aspect of God and their immortal soul. So it sort of comes up, I find, even if only in not traveling on a Sunday in the Regency, or attitudes to profanity.
    Laura, interesting, but I find the people in the middle ages very conscious of religion. There were a lot of legal aspects, of course, but also a general sense of heavenly judgement to come. People choking on the host, for example, presumably simply because they believed despite claiming they didn’t.
    Anyway, clearly something that interests me. And I do like it at least mentioned in historicals where appropriate. It is part of their world.
    Jo

    Reply
  36. “But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!”
    It probably depends a lot on which period the novel’s set in, because during much of the Middle Ages, when people tended to learn their catechisms and prayers by rote, religion wouldn’t be a big source of conflict unless someone came out as a heretic. The infidel were mostly an external enemy, although there were periods when the authorities went on heretic hunts (e.g. the persecution of the Cathars, the Lollards or as a result of the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition at the end of the 15th-century (but at that point it was trying to work out which Jews had really converted and which hadn’t)). I might well be wrong, as I’ve mostly stuck to Castilian history, but I get the impression that religious persecution by Christians of other Christians really got going during/after the Reformation.
    Anyway, overall I suspect that at times when pretty much everyone had the same religion, it wouldn’t be a big issue. There would be different levels of devoutness (and those might intensify in periods of plague, or if someone was getting older and thinking about death) and there would be some people who would worry more about sin and others who would be more worldly (including some of the popes and other churchmen), but I’m not sure it would really be a big source of conflict for most people most of the time. It would, of course, be an issue if the protagonists were a mixture of Jews and/or Muslims and/or Christians.
    Re Heyer, the snobbery comes out in her depiction of “mushrooms”/cits, such as the father of the heroine in A Civil Contract, or the way that the heroine of These Old Shades is somehow recognisably aristocratic in her behaviour, despite her strange upbringing, because of the effect of her noble blood whereas the impostor’s peasant origins are betrayed by his innate interest in farming.

    Reply
  37. “But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!”
    It probably depends a lot on which period the novel’s set in, because during much of the Middle Ages, when people tended to learn their catechisms and prayers by rote, religion wouldn’t be a big source of conflict unless someone came out as a heretic. The infidel were mostly an external enemy, although there were periods when the authorities went on heretic hunts (e.g. the persecution of the Cathars, the Lollards or as a result of the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition at the end of the 15th-century (but at that point it was trying to work out which Jews had really converted and which hadn’t)). I might well be wrong, as I’ve mostly stuck to Castilian history, but I get the impression that religious persecution by Christians of other Christians really got going during/after the Reformation.
    Anyway, overall I suspect that at times when pretty much everyone had the same religion, it wouldn’t be a big issue. There would be different levels of devoutness (and those might intensify in periods of plague, or if someone was getting older and thinking about death) and there would be some people who would worry more about sin and others who would be more worldly (including some of the popes and other churchmen), but I’m not sure it would really be a big source of conflict for most people most of the time. It would, of course, be an issue if the protagonists were a mixture of Jews and/or Muslims and/or Christians.
    Re Heyer, the snobbery comes out in her depiction of “mushrooms”/cits, such as the father of the heroine in A Civil Contract, or the way that the heroine of These Old Shades is somehow recognisably aristocratic in her behaviour, despite her strange upbringing, because of the effect of her noble blood whereas the impostor’s peasant origins are betrayed by his innate interest in farming.

    Reply
  38. “But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!”
    It probably depends a lot on which period the novel’s set in, because during much of the Middle Ages, when people tended to learn their catechisms and prayers by rote, religion wouldn’t be a big source of conflict unless someone came out as a heretic. The infidel were mostly an external enemy, although there were periods when the authorities went on heretic hunts (e.g. the persecution of the Cathars, the Lollards or as a result of the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition at the end of the 15th-century (but at that point it was trying to work out which Jews had really converted and which hadn’t)). I might well be wrong, as I’ve mostly stuck to Castilian history, but I get the impression that religious persecution by Christians of other Christians really got going during/after the Reformation.
    Anyway, overall I suspect that at times when pretty much everyone had the same religion, it wouldn’t be a big issue. There would be different levels of devoutness (and those might intensify in periods of plague, or if someone was getting older and thinking about death) and there would be some people who would worry more about sin and others who would be more worldly (including some of the popes and other churchmen), but I’m not sure it would really be a big source of conflict for most people most of the time. It would, of course, be an issue if the protagonists were a mixture of Jews and/or Muslims and/or Christians.
    Re Heyer, the snobbery comes out in her depiction of “mushrooms”/cits, such as the father of the heroine in A Civil Contract, or the way that the heroine of These Old Shades is somehow recognisably aristocratic in her behaviour, despite her strange upbringing, because of the effect of her noble blood whereas the impostor’s peasant origins are betrayed by his innate interest in farming.

    Reply
  39. “But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!”
    It probably depends a lot on which period the novel’s set in, because during much of the Middle Ages, when people tended to learn their catechisms and prayers by rote, religion wouldn’t be a big source of conflict unless someone came out as a heretic. The infidel were mostly an external enemy, although there were periods when the authorities went on heretic hunts (e.g. the persecution of the Cathars, the Lollards or as a result of the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition at the end of the 15th-century (but at that point it was trying to work out which Jews had really converted and which hadn’t)). I might well be wrong, as I’ve mostly stuck to Castilian history, but I get the impression that religious persecution by Christians of other Christians really got going during/after the Reformation.
    Anyway, overall I suspect that at times when pretty much everyone had the same religion, it wouldn’t be a big issue. There would be different levels of devoutness (and those might intensify in periods of plague, or if someone was getting older and thinking about death) and there would be some people who would worry more about sin and others who would be more worldly (including some of the popes and other churchmen), but I’m not sure it would really be a big source of conflict for most people most of the time. It would, of course, be an issue if the protagonists were a mixture of Jews and/or Muslims and/or Christians.
    Re Heyer, the snobbery comes out in her depiction of “mushrooms”/cits, such as the father of the heroine in A Civil Contract, or the way that the heroine of These Old Shades is somehow recognisably aristocratic in her behaviour, despite her strange upbringing, because of the effect of her noble blood whereas the impostor’s peasant origins are betrayed by his innate interest in farming.

    Reply
  40. “But in certain time periods, you could get yourself hanged if you didn’t profess to support the local church. With this kind of conflict available, it would take a poor author to need to plunk a party manifesto into the pages!”
    It probably depends a lot on which period the novel’s set in, because during much of the Middle Ages, when people tended to learn their catechisms and prayers by rote, religion wouldn’t be a big source of conflict unless someone came out as a heretic. The infidel were mostly an external enemy, although there were periods when the authorities went on heretic hunts (e.g. the persecution of the Cathars, the Lollards or as a result of the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition at the end of the 15th-century (but at that point it was trying to work out which Jews had really converted and which hadn’t)). I might well be wrong, as I’ve mostly stuck to Castilian history, but I get the impression that religious persecution by Christians of other Christians really got going during/after the Reformation.
    Anyway, overall I suspect that at times when pretty much everyone had the same religion, it wouldn’t be a big issue. There would be different levels of devoutness (and those might intensify in periods of plague, or if someone was getting older and thinking about death) and there would be some people who would worry more about sin and others who would be more worldly (including some of the popes and other churchmen), but I’m not sure it would really be a big source of conflict for most people most of the time. It would, of course, be an issue if the protagonists were a mixture of Jews and/or Muslims and/or Christians.
    Re Heyer, the snobbery comes out in her depiction of “mushrooms”/cits, such as the father of the heroine in A Civil Contract, or the way that the heroine of These Old Shades is somehow recognisably aristocratic in her behaviour, despite her strange upbringing, because of the effect of her noble blood whereas the impostor’s peasant origins are betrayed by his innate interest in farming.

    Reply
  41. Too many fascinating ideas and I don’t know where to start. I love Judith Merkle Riley’s take on religion in her books, showing it as an everyday part of life (her heroine glows with the power of God) but with a strong dollop of cynicism about the acts of clergy and churchgoers alike.
    The time periods I study most are all after the Reformation, so I have lots of conflict to draw on. But I have yet to see any single religion that can’t argue within its own confines. Admittedly, in early periods, it wouldn’t occur to poor uneducated peasants to do anything except believe in most cases, but Henry VIII proved it was quite possible for an educated nobleman to blow up a single religion very nicely.
    But it’s the comments on snobbery that really have my gears rolling. Prejudice is one of my very favoritest topics, but the examples mentioned are something I see frequently even in today’s historicals. True, we’re looking at things through the eyes of our characters, but I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features. Still, aristocrats were essentially farmers, so that’s crass snobbery of the finest sort!

    Reply
  42. Too many fascinating ideas and I don’t know where to start. I love Judith Merkle Riley’s take on religion in her books, showing it as an everyday part of life (her heroine glows with the power of God) but with a strong dollop of cynicism about the acts of clergy and churchgoers alike.
    The time periods I study most are all after the Reformation, so I have lots of conflict to draw on. But I have yet to see any single religion that can’t argue within its own confines. Admittedly, in early periods, it wouldn’t occur to poor uneducated peasants to do anything except believe in most cases, but Henry VIII proved it was quite possible for an educated nobleman to blow up a single religion very nicely.
    But it’s the comments on snobbery that really have my gears rolling. Prejudice is one of my very favoritest topics, but the examples mentioned are something I see frequently even in today’s historicals. True, we’re looking at things through the eyes of our characters, but I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features. Still, aristocrats were essentially farmers, so that’s crass snobbery of the finest sort!

    Reply
  43. Too many fascinating ideas and I don’t know where to start. I love Judith Merkle Riley’s take on religion in her books, showing it as an everyday part of life (her heroine glows with the power of God) but with a strong dollop of cynicism about the acts of clergy and churchgoers alike.
    The time periods I study most are all after the Reformation, so I have lots of conflict to draw on. But I have yet to see any single religion that can’t argue within its own confines. Admittedly, in early periods, it wouldn’t occur to poor uneducated peasants to do anything except believe in most cases, but Henry VIII proved it was quite possible for an educated nobleman to blow up a single religion very nicely.
    But it’s the comments on snobbery that really have my gears rolling. Prejudice is one of my very favoritest topics, but the examples mentioned are something I see frequently even in today’s historicals. True, we’re looking at things through the eyes of our characters, but I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features. Still, aristocrats were essentially farmers, so that’s crass snobbery of the finest sort!

    Reply
  44. Too many fascinating ideas and I don’t know where to start. I love Judith Merkle Riley’s take on religion in her books, showing it as an everyday part of life (her heroine glows with the power of God) but with a strong dollop of cynicism about the acts of clergy and churchgoers alike.
    The time periods I study most are all after the Reformation, so I have lots of conflict to draw on. But I have yet to see any single religion that can’t argue within its own confines. Admittedly, in early periods, it wouldn’t occur to poor uneducated peasants to do anything except believe in most cases, but Henry VIII proved it was quite possible for an educated nobleman to blow up a single religion very nicely.
    But it’s the comments on snobbery that really have my gears rolling. Prejudice is one of my very favoritest topics, but the examples mentioned are something I see frequently even in today’s historicals. True, we’re looking at things through the eyes of our characters, but I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features. Still, aristocrats were essentially farmers, so that’s crass snobbery of the finest sort!

    Reply
  45. Too many fascinating ideas and I don’t know where to start. I love Judith Merkle Riley’s take on religion in her books, showing it as an everyday part of life (her heroine glows with the power of God) but with a strong dollop of cynicism about the acts of clergy and churchgoers alike.
    The time periods I study most are all after the Reformation, so I have lots of conflict to draw on. But I have yet to see any single religion that can’t argue within its own confines. Admittedly, in early periods, it wouldn’t occur to poor uneducated peasants to do anything except believe in most cases, but Henry VIII proved it was quite possible for an educated nobleman to blow up a single religion very nicely.
    But it’s the comments on snobbery that really have my gears rolling. Prejudice is one of my very favoritest topics, but the examples mentioned are something I see frequently even in today’s historicals. True, we’re looking at things through the eyes of our characters, but I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features. Still, aristocrats were essentially farmers, so that’s crass snobbery of the finest sort!

    Reply
  46. ‘I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features’
    Ah, makes you wonder if some people still subscribe to the theory of phrenology. There was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/6933269.stm
    Admittedly that’s only one example, but it’s a current one, so it’s what sprang to mind.

    Reply
  47. ‘I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features’
    Ah, makes you wonder if some people still subscribe to the theory of phrenology. There was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/6933269.stm
    Admittedly that’s only one example, but it’s a current one, so it’s what sprang to mind.

    Reply
  48. ‘I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features’
    Ah, makes you wonder if some people still subscribe to the theory of phrenology. There was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/6933269.stm
    Admittedly that’s only one example, but it’s a current one, so it’s what sprang to mind.

    Reply
  49. ‘I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features’
    Ah, makes you wonder if some people still subscribe to the theory of phrenology. There was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/6933269.stm
    Admittedly that’s only one example, but it’s a current one, so it’s what sprang to mind.

    Reply
  50. ‘I know I’ve read about “crude” features as opposed to “aristocratic” features’
    Ah, makes you wonder if some people still subscribe to the theory of phrenology. There was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/6933269.stm
    Admittedly that’s only one example, but it’s a current one, so it’s what sprang to mind.

    Reply
  51. Laura, I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*
    As for class or racial prejudice in modern historicals, I think it’s the one exception I make for sanctioned historical innacuracy…if Pat or any of the Wenches portrayed the English aristocracy as they probably were (having “fashionable” black pages, etc.), we wouldn’t like our heroes much.

    Reply
  52. Laura, I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*
    As for class or racial prejudice in modern historicals, I think it’s the one exception I make for sanctioned historical innacuracy…if Pat or any of the Wenches portrayed the English aristocracy as they probably were (having “fashionable” black pages, etc.), we wouldn’t like our heroes much.

    Reply
  53. Laura, I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*
    As for class or racial prejudice in modern historicals, I think it’s the one exception I make for sanctioned historical innacuracy…if Pat or any of the Wenches portrayed the English aristocracy as they probably were (having “fashionable” black pages, etc.), we wouldn’t like our heroes much.

    Reply
  54. Laura, I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*
    As for class or racial prejudice in modern historicals, I think it’s the one exception I make for sanctioned historical innacuracy…if Pat or any of the Wenches portrayed the English aristocracy as they probably were (having “fashionable” black pages, etc.), we wouldn’t like our heroes much.

    Reply
  55. Laura, I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*
    As for class or racial prejudice in modern historicals, I think it’s the one exception I make for sanctioned historical innacuracy…if Pat or any of the Wenches portrayed the English aristocracy as they probably were (having “fashionable” black pages, etc.), we wouldn’t like our heroes much.

    Reply
  56. I don’t mind religion in novels as long as it’s integral to the story. I have my own religious beliefs (Presbyterian) so I’m not interested in recruitment subtexts.
    Organic, Harry Potter style magic doesn’t bother me, but I don’t like demon-conjuring magic though I’ve read and enjoyed some of the Dresden novels. It’s really demons as “good” protagonists that I object to. Don’t care for angel romances either for the same reason – I believe in angels and demons so I don’t like to play around with their roles much.

    Reply
  57. I don’t mind religion in novels as long as it’s integral to the story. I have my own religious beliefs (Presbyterian) so I’m not interested in recruitment subtexts.
    Organic, Harry Potter style magic doesn’t bother me, but I don’t like demon-conjuring magic though I’ve read and enjoyed some of the Dresden novels. It’s really demons as “good” protagonists that I object to. Don’t care for angel romances either for the same reason – I believe in angels and demons so I don’t like to play around with their roles much.

    Reply
  58. I don’t mind religion in novels as long as it’s integral to the story. I have my own religious beliefs (Presbyterian) so I’m not interested in recruitment subtexts.
    Organic, Harry Potter style magic doesn’t bother me, but I don’t like demon-conjuring magic though I’ve read and enjoyed some of the Dresden novels. It’s really demons as “good” protagonists that I object to. Don’t care for angel romances either for the same reason – I believe in angels and demons so I don’t like to play around with their roles much.

    Reply
  59. I don’t mind religion in novels as long as it’s integral to the story. I have my own religious beliefs (Presbyterian) so I’m not interested in recruitment subtexts.
    Organic, Harry Potter style magic doesn’t bother me, but I don’t like demon-conjuring magic though I’ve read and enjoyed some of the Dresden novels. It’s really demons as “good” protagonists that I object to. Don’t care for angel romances either for the same reason – I believe in angels and demons so I don’t like to play around with their roles much.

    Reply
  60. I don’t mind religion in novels as long as it’s integral to the story. I have my own religious beliefs (Presbyterian) so I’m not interested in recruitment subtexts.
    Organic, Harry Potter style magic doesn’t bother me, but I don’t like demon-conjuring magic though I’ve read and enjoyed some of the Dresden novels. It’s really demons as “good” protagonists that I object to. Don’t care for angel romances either for the same reason – I believe in angels and demons so I don’t like to play around with their roles much.

    Reply
  61. Whee! *jumps up and down* Mystic Guardian for me! I’ll e-mail you right away. Thanks so much for addressing this question. It’s an issue that has much concerned me as an aspiring writer.
    To answer your question, “magic” does not offend me. I’m a Wiccan, a pagan, a witch, and a general no-nonsense woo-woo. However, using language such as “So mote it be” which is obviously Wiccan, and as such is *modern,* causes no offense, but my eyes do roll. In modern pagan terms, magic is, as Dion Fortune put it, “the art of changing consciousness at will.” I am surrounded by magic daily, and it is not dependent upon Elder wands, horcruxes, or other fun fictional stuff.
    As a reader or a writer, it’s all good so long as it’s in service to the story. In any book, STORY is god. I don’t like authorial agendas(except maybe for Vonnegut).
    Unfortunately, the flap over Harry Potter is the result of ignorance. Witchcraft has been indelibly linked with Satan, and somehow the fog has never cleared. Frankly, I think those folks are having too much fun with their mean imaginations to abandon the idea. Because, Satan, the personification of evil, is a Judeo-Christian construct and does not exist in Wicca or in other pagan or goddess religions that involve witchcraft. And there is absolutely no connection between a fictitious magical world such as Rowling’s and the actual practice of religious witchcraft.
    I really like what Orson Scott Card says on the subject of religion in fiction. http://www.writing-world.com/sf/card.shtml
    A contest judge recently said of my entry that I came off as a know-it-all in regard to the occultism and magic in my paranormal entry. I chose to take that as proof I’d done a convincing job, seeing as how I’d made up 98% of it. The rest was informed by unverifiable personal gnosis, (experience).
    Someday I’d like to set a book amongst the colonial Quakers. I find them fascinating. There is a universality to Love, and that’s why I’m attempting to write romance.

    Reply
  62. Whee! *jumps up and down* Mystic Guardian for me! I’ll e-mail you right away. Thanks so much for addressing this question. It’s an issue that has much concerned me as an aspiring writer.
    To answer your question, “magic” does not offend me. I’m a Wiccan, a pagan, a witch, and a general no-nonsense woo-woo. However, using language such as “So mote it be” which is obviously Wiccan, and as such is *modern,* causes no offense, but my eyes do roll. In modern pagan terms, magic is, as Dion Fortune put it, “the art of changing consciousness at will.” I am surrounded by magic daily, and it is not dependent upon Elder wands, horcruxes, or other fun fictional stuff.
    As a reader or a writer, it’s all good so long as it’s in service to the story. In any book, STORY is god. I don’t like authorial agendas(except maybe for Vonnegut).
    Unfortunately, the flap over Harry Potter is the result of ignorance. Witchcraft has been indelibly linked with Satan, and somehow the fog has never cleared. Frankly, I think those folks are having too much fun with their mean imaginations to abandon the idea. Because, Satan, the personification of evil, is a Judeo-Christian construct and does not exist in Wicca or in other pagan or goddess religions that involve witchcraft. And there is absolutely no connection between a fictitious magical world such as Rowling’s and the actual practice of religious witchcraft.
    I really like what Orson Scott Card says on the subject of religion in fiction. http://www.writing-world.com/sf/card.shtml
    A contest judge recently said of my entry that I came off as a know-it-all in regard to the occultism and magic in my paranormal entry. I chose to take that as proof I’d done a convincing job, seeing as how I’d made up 98% of it. The rest was informed by unverifiable personal gnosis, (experience).
    Someday I’d like to set a book amongst the colonial Quakers. I find them fascinating. There is a universality to Love, and that’s why I’m attempting to write romance.

    Reply
  63. Whee! *jumps up and down* Mystic Guardian for me! I’ll e-mail you right away. Thanks so much for addressing this question. It’s an issue that has much concerned me as an aspiring writer.
    To answer your question, “magic” does not offend me. I’m a Wiccan, a pagan, a witch, and a general no-nonsense woo-woo. However, using language such as “So mote it be” which is obviously Wiccan, and as such is *modern,* causes no offense, but my eyes do roll. In modern pagan terms, magic is, as Dion Fortune put it, “the art of changing consciousness at will.” I am surrounded by magic daily, and it is not dependent upon Elder wands, horcruxes, or other fun fictional stuff.
    As a reader or a writer, it’s all good so long as it’s in service to the story. In any book, STORY is god. I don’t like authorial agendas(except maybe for Vonnegut).
    Unfortunately, the flap over Harry Potter is the result of ignorance. Witchcraft has been indelibly linked with Satan, and somehow the fog has never cleared. Frankly, I think those folks are having too much fun with their mean imaginations to abandon the idea. Because, Satan, the personification of evil, is a Judeo-Christian construct and does not exist in Wicca or in other pagan or goddess religions that involve witchcraft. And there is absolutely no connection between a fictitious magical world such as Rowling’s and the actual practice of religious witchcraft.
    I really like what Orson Scott Card says on the subject of religion in fiction. http://www.writing-world.com/sf/card.shtml
    A contest judge recently said of my entry that I came off as a know-it-all in regard to the occultism and magic in my paranormal entry. I chose to take that as proof I’d done a convincing job, seeing as how I’d made up 98% of it. The rest was informed by unverifiable personal gnosis, (experience).
    Someday I’d like to set a book amongst the colonial Quakers. I find them fascinating. There is a universality to Love, and that’s why I’m attempting to write romance.

    Reply
  64. Whee! *jumps up and down* Mystic Guardian for me! I’ll e-mail you right away. Thanks so much for addressing this question. It’s an issue that has much concerned me as an aspiring writer.
    To answer your question, “magic” does not offend me. I’m a Wiccan, a pagan, a witch, and a general no-nonsense woo-woo. However, using language such as “So mote it be” which is obviously Wiccan, and as such is *modern,* causes no offense, but my eyes do roll. In modern pagan terms, magic is, as Dion Fortune put it, “the art of changing consciousness at will.” I am surrounded by magic daily, and it is not dependent upon Elder wands, horcruxes, or other fun fictional stuff.
    As a reader or a writer, it’s all good so long as it’s in service to the story. In any book, STORY is god. I don’t like authorial agendas(except maybe for Vonnegut).
    Unfortunately, the flap over Harry Potter is the result of ignorance. Witchcraft has been indelibly linked with Satan, and somehow the fog has never cleared. Frankly, I think those folks are having too much fun with their mean imaginations to abandon the idea. Because, Satan, the personification of evil, is a Judeo-Christian construct and does not exist in Wicca or in other pagan or goddess religions that involve witchcraft. And there is absolutely no connection between a fictitious magical world such as Rowling’s and the actual practice of religious witchcraft.
    I really like what Orson Scott Card says on the subject of religion in fiction. http://www.writing-world.com/sf/card.shtml
    A contest judge recently said of my entry that I came off as a know-it-all in regard to the occultism and magic in my paranormal entry. I chose to take that as proof I’d done a convincing job, seeing as how I’d made up 98% of it. The rest was informed by unverifiable personal gnosis, (experience).
    Someday I’d like to set a book amongst the colonial Quakers. I find them fascinating. There is a universality to Love, and that’s why I’m attempting to write romance.

    Reply
  65. Whee! *jumps up and down* Mystic Guardian for me! I’ll e-mail you right away. Thanks so much for addressing this question. It’s an issue that has much concerned me as an aspiring writer.
    To answer your question, “magic” does not offend me. I’m a Wiccan, a pagan, a witch, and a general no-nonsense woo-woo. However, using language such as “So mote it be” which is obviously Wiccan, and as such is *modern,* causes no offense, but my eyes do roll. In modern pagan terms, magic is, as Dion Fortune put it, “the art of changing consciousness at will.” I am surrounded by magic daily, and it is not dependent upon Elder wands, horcruxes, or other fun fictional stuff.
    As a reader or a writer, it’s all good so long as it’s in service to the story. In any book, STORY is god. I don’t like authorial agendas(except maybe for Vonnegut).
    Unfortunately, the flap over Harry Potter is the result of ignorance. Witchcraft has been indelibly linked with Satan, and somehow the fog has never cleared. Frankly, I think those folks are having too much fun with their mean imaginations to abandon the idea. Because, Satan, the personification of evil, is a Judeo-Christian construct and does not exist in Wicca or in other pagan or goddess religions that involve witchcraft. And there is absolutely no connection between a fictitious magical world such as Rowling’s and the actual practice of religious witchcraft.
    I really like what Orson Scott Card says on the subject of religion in fiction. http://www.writing-world.com/sf/card.shtml
    A contest judge recently said of my entry that I came off as a know-it-all in regard to the occultism and magic in my paranormal entry. I chose to take that as proof I’d done a convincing job, seeing as how I’d made up 98% of it. The rest was informed by unverifiable personal gnosis, (experience).
    Someday I’d like to set a book amongst the colonial Quakers. I find them fascinating. There is a universality to Love, and that’s why I’m attempting to write romance.

    Reply
  66. “I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*”
    You’re right that that’s why he recognises her, but I think there are other undertones there too, particularly when the comparison is made with the replacement’s looks and behaviour.

    Reply
  67. “I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*”
    You’re right that that’s why he recognises her, but I think there are other undertones there too, particularly when the comparison is made with the replacement’s looks and behaviour.

    Reply
  68. “I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*”
    You’re right that that’s why he recognises her, but I think there are other undertones there too, particularly when the comparison is made with the replacement’s looks and behaviour.

    Reply
  69. “I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*”
    You’re right that that’s why he recognises her, but I think there are other undertones there too, particularly when the comparison is made with the replacement’s looks and behaviour.

    Reply
  70. “I believe Avon recognized Leonie as an aristocrat because she so resembled her father, Avon’s enemy. Now I’m going to have to re-read it. What a hardship.*g*”
    You’re right that that’s why he recognises her, but I think there are other undertones there too, particularly when the comparison is made with the replacement’s looks and behaviour.

    Reply
  71. I find the mention of THESE OLD SHADES particularly interesting, as that’s the book I’m reading aloud to my husband at present (yes, I’ve gotten him hooked on Heyer!). Just past the chapter with Lady Fanny and *her* “fashionable black page…”
    As to Leonie versus the replacement son…yeah, there’s quite a bit of emphasis placed on her “aristocratic features” and how looking at her, you can tell she’s not low-born, etc., etc. And the reverse applying to the replacement son.
    I suppose it’s *possible* you could extrapolate aristocracy from bodily delicacy or fragility…if you’re of the mindset that a peasant of such a structure wouldn’t survive very long under the constant stresses of…what was it…1740s or so France?
    But more than likely…that wasn’t the reasoning behind the description. Her Sainte-Vire resemblance was (and I did have something of a problem with that – that *ALL* “true” Sainte-Vires looked the same? really?). Still and all…Avon is one of my favorite heros. He reminds me in some ways of Rothgar, actually (at least as Rothgar is portrayed up until Devilish) – in such perfect control of himself and every situation in which he finds himself. A powerful, dangerous man. Very seductive, that.

    Reply
  72. I find the mention of THESE OLD SHADES particularly interesting, as that’s the book I’m reading aloud to my husband at present (yes, I’ve gotten him hooked on Heyer!). Just past the chapter with Lady Fanny and *her* “fashionable black page…”
    As to Leonie versus the replacement son…yeah, there’s quite a bit of emphasis placed on her “aristocratic features” and how looking at her, you can tell she’s not low-born, etc., etc. And the reverse applying to the replacement son.
    I suppose it’s *possible* you could extrapolate aristocracy from bodily delicacy or fragility…if you’re of the mindset that a peasant of such a structure wouldn’t survive very long under the constant stresses of…what was it…1740s or so France?
    But more than likely…that wasn’t the reasoning behind the description. Her Sainte-Vire resemblance was (and I did have something of a problem with that – that *ALL* “true” Sainte-Vires looked the same? really?). Still and all…Avon is one of my favorite heros. He reminds me in some ways of Rothgar, actually (at least as Rothgar is portrayed up until Devilish) – in such perfect control of himself and every situation in which he finds himself. A powerful, dangerous man. Very seductive, that.

    Reply
  73. I find the mention of THESE OLD SHADES particularly interesting, as that’s the book I’m reading aloud to my husband at present (yes, I’ve gotten him hooked on Heyer!). Just past the chapter with Lady Fanny and *her* “fashionable black page…”
    As to Leonie versus the replacement son…yeah, there’s quite a bit of emphasis placed on her “aristocratic features” and how looking at her, you can tell she’s not low-born, etc., etc. And the reverse applying to the replacement son.
    I suppose it’s *possible* you could extrapolate aristocracy from bodily delicacy or fragility…if you’re of the mindset that a peasant of such a structure wouldn’t survive very long under the constant stresses of…what was it…1740s or so France?
    But more than likely…that wasn’t the reasoning behind the description. Her Sainte-Vire resemblance was (and I did have something of a problem with that – that *ALL* “true” Sainte-Vires looked the same? really?). Still and all…Avon is one of my favorite heros. He reminds me in some ways of Rothgar, actually (at least as Rothgar is portrayed up until Devilish) – in such perfect control of himself and every situation in which he finds himself. A powerful, dangerous man. Very seductive, that.

    Reply
  74. I find the mention of THESE OLD SHADES particularly interesting, as that’s the book I’m reading aloud to my husband at present (yes, I’ve gotten him hooked on Heyer!). Just past the chapter with Lady Fanny and *her* “fashionable black page…”
    As to Leonie versus the replacement son…yeah, there’s quite a bit of emphasis placed on her “aristocratic features” and how looking at her, you can tell she’s not low-born, etc., etc. And the reverse applying to the replacement son.
    I suppose it’s *possible* you could extrapolate aristocracy from bodily delicacy or fragility…if you’re of the mindset that a peasant of such a structure wouldn’t survive very long under the constant stresses of…what was it…1740s or so France?
    But more than likely…that wasn’t the reasoning behind the description. Her Sainte-Vire resemblance was (and I did have something of a problem with that – that *ALL* “true” Sainte-Vires looked the same? really?). Still and all…Avon is one of my favorite heros. He reminds me in some ways of Rothgar, actually (at least as Rothgar is portrayed up until Devilish) – in such perfect control of himself and every situation in which he finds himself. A powerful, dangerous man. Very seductive, that.

    Reply
  75. I find the mention of THESE OLD SHADES particularly interesting, as that’s the book I’m reading aloud to my husband at present (yes, I’ve gotten him hooked on Heyer!). Just past the chapter with Lady Fanny and *her* “fashionable black page…”
    As to Leonie versus the replacement son…yeah, there’s quite a bit of emphasis placed on her “aristocratic features” and how looking at her, you can tell she’s not low-born, etc., etc. And the reverse applying to the replacement son.
    I suppose it’s *possible* you could extrapolate aristocracy from bodily delicacy or fragility…if you’re of the mindset that a peasant of such a structure wouldn’t survive very long under the constant stresses of…what was it…1740s or so France?
    But more than likely…that wasn’t the reasoning behind the description. Her Sainte-Vire resemblance was (and I did have something of a problem with that – that *ALL* “true” Sainte-Vires looked the same? really?). Still and all…Avon is one of my favorite heros. He reminds me in some ways of Rothgar, actually (at least as Rothgar is portrayed up until Devilish) – in such perfect control of himself and every situation in which he finds himself. A powerful, dangerous man. Very seductive, that.

    Reply
  76. My regrettable memory doesn’t allow me to keep all these juicy comments in mind as I reply, so I have to keep going back to track them down. Has to be a better way!
    Laura says “here was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal:”
    Looks like a lot of Missouri farmers to me. “G” Let’s face it, aristocrats came about because they were ambitious, fought wars, scarfed up land, and did other things not so “civilized” as Heyer might like it. If some of them became effete over the ages, that was out of the prejudice for marryng delicate females, I suspect.
    Maggie, I think some of us have dealt with black pages at some time or another. I regret that we can’t write Civil War books because of the difficulty of dealing with our pasts. It’s there. We can’t ignore it, try as we might like.
    MaryK, I have a problem with demons and angels, too, although not tied to my religious beliefs so much as my feeling that they come in human form. “G”
    Jane, Mystic Guardian it is! I should think your ability to add grounding to paranormals would be extremely useful, although if you get too carried away in the details, you’ll lose the reader who wants to read about the characters!

    Reply
  77. My regrettable memory doesn’t allow me to keep all these juicy comments in mind as I reply, so I have to keep going back to track them down. Has to be a better way!
    Laura says “here was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal:”
    Looks like a lot of Missouri farmers to me. “G” Let’s face it, aristocrats came about because they were ambitious, fought wars, scarfed up land, and did other things not so “civilized” as Heyer might like it. If some of them became effete over the ages, that was out of the prejudice for marryng delicate females, I suspect.
    Maggie, I think some of us have dealt with black pages at some time or another. I regret that we can’t write Civil War books because of the difficulty of dealing with our pasts. It’s there. We can’t ignore it, try as we might like.
    MaryK, I have a problem with demons and angels, too, although not tied to my religious beliefs so much as my feeling that they come in human form. “G”
    Jane, Mystic Guardian it is! I should think your ability to add grounding to paranormals would be extremely useful, although if you get too carried away in the details, you’ll lose the reader who wants to read about the characters!

    Reply
  78. My regrettable memory doesn’t allow me to keep all these juicy comments in mind as I reply, so I have to keep going back to track them down. Has to be a better way!
    Laura says “here was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal:”
    Looks like a lot of Missouri farmers to me. “G” Let’s face it, aristocrats came about because they were ambitious, fought wars, scarfed up land, and did other things not so “civilized” as Heyer might like it. If some of them became effete over the ages, that was out of the prejudice for marryng delicate females, I suspect.
    Maggie, I think some of us have dealt with black pages at some time or another. I regret that we can’t write Civil War books because of the difficulty of dealing with our pasts. It’s there. We can’t ignore it, try as we might like.
    MaryK, I have a problem with demons and angels, too, although not tied to my religious beliefs so much as my feeling that they come in human form. “G”
    Jane, Mystic Guardian it is! I should think your ability to add grounding to paranormals would be extremely useful, although if you get too carried away in the details, you’ll lose the reader who wants to read about the characters!

    Reply
  79. My regrettable memory doesn’t allow me to keep all these juicy comments in mind as I reply, so I have to keep going back to track them down. Has to be a better way!
    Laura says “here was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal:”
    Looks like a lot of Missouri farmers to me. “G” Let’s face it, aristocrats came about because they were ambitious, fought wars, scarfed up land, and did other things not so “civilized” as Heyer might like it. If some of them became effete over the ages, that was out of the prejudice for marryng delicate females, I suspect.
    Maggie, I think some of us have dealt with black pages at some time or another. I regret that we can’t write Civil War books because of the difficulty of dealing with our pasts. It’s there. We can’t ignore it, try as we might like.
    MaryK, I have a problem with demons and angels, too, although not tied to my religious beliefs so much as my feeling that they come in human form. “G”
    Jane, Mystic Guardian it is! I should think your ability to add grounding to paranormals would be extremely useful, although if you get too carried away in the details, you’ll lose the reader who wants to read about the characters!

    Reply
  80. My regrettable memory doesn’t allow me to keep all these juicy comments in mind as I reply, so I have to keep going back to track them down. Has to be a better way!
    Laura says “here was an item on the news today about the Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough), so one of the descendants of someone a Word Wench has written about, and he certainly doesn’t look like the aristocratic ideal:”
    Looks like a lot of Missouri farmers to me. “G” Let’s face it, aristocrats came about because they were ambitious, fought wars, scarfed up land, and did other things not so “civilized” as Heyer might like it. If some of them became effete over the ages, that was out of the prejudice for marryng delicate females, I suspect.
    Maggie, I think some of us have dealt with black pages at some time or another. I regret that we can’t write Civil War books because of the difficulty of dealing with our pasts. It’s there. We can’t ignore it, try as we might like.
    MaryK, I have a problem with demons and angels, too, although not tied to my religious beliefs so much as my feeling that they come in human form. “G”
    Jane, Mystic Guardian it is! I should think your ability to add grounding to paranormals would be extremely useful, although if you get too carried away in the details, you’ll lose the reader who wants to read about the characters!

    Reply
  81. Interesting comments.
    I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves. They were out of fashion by the 1760s when my Georgians are set.
    If they are merely young servants, isn’t it reverse prejudice to flinch at them being black as opposed to white? They all have to work, and children went into service at a young age. Being a page was usually easy work and training for being a footman, which could lead to butler…
    I don’t like too much twisting of past realities to fit modern sensitivities. I’m willing to steer my stories to avoid things that I find difficult, but I don’t want to create a Disneyland version.
    I agree about These Old Shades. The book was spoiled for me when I saw the “blood will out” aspect. But it’s a common theme through time, including stories like the Princess and The Pea, and perhaps even David Copperfield.
    Jo

    Reply
  82. Interesting comments.
    I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves. They were out of fashion by the 1760s when my Georgians are set.
    If they are merely young servants, isn’t it reverse prejudice to flinch at them being black as opposed to white? They all have to work, and children went into service at a young age. Being a page was usually easy work and training for being a footman, which could lead to butler…
    I don’t like too much twisting of past realities to fit modern sensitivities. I’m willing to steer my stories to avoid things that I find difficult, but I don’t want to create a Disneyland version.
    I agree about These Old Shades. The book was spoiled for me when I saw the “blood will out” aspect. But it’s a common theme through time, including stories like the Princess and The Pea, and perhaps even David Copperfield.
    Jo

    Reply
  83. Interesting comments.
    I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves. They were out of fashion by the 1760s when my Georgians are set.
    If they are merely young servants, isn’t it reverse prejudice to flinch at them being black as opposed to white? They all have to work, and children went into service at a young age. Being a page was usually easy work and training for being a footman, which could lead to butler…
    I don’t like too much twisting of past realities to fit modern sensitivities. I’m willing to steer my stories to avoid things that I find difficult, but I don’t want to create a Disneyland version.
    I agree about These Old Shades. The book was spoiled for me when I saw the “blood will out” aspect. But it’s a common theme through time, including stories like the Princess and The Pea, and perhaps even David Copperfield.
    Jo

    Reply
  84. Interesting comments.
    I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves. They were out of fashion by the 1760s when my Georgians are set.
    If they are merely young servants, isn’t it reverse prejudice to flinch at them being black as opposed to white? They all have to work, and children went into service at a young age. Being a page was usually easy work and training for being a footman, which could lead to butler…
    I don’t like too much twisting of past realities to fit modern sensitivities. I’m willing to steer my stories to avoid things that I find difficult, but I don’t want to create a Disneyland version.
    I agree about These Old Shades. The book was spoiled for me when I saw the “blood will out” aspect. But it’s a common theme through time, including stories like the Princess and The Pea, and perhaps even David Copperfield.
    Jo

    Reply
  85. Interesting comments.
    I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves. They were out of fashion by the 1760s when my Georgians are set.
    If they are merely young servants, isn’t it reverse prejudice to flinch at them being black as opposed to white? They all have to work, and children went into service at a young age. Being a page was usually easy work and training for being a footman, which could lead to butler…
    I don’t like too much twisting of past realities to fit modern sensitivities. I’m willing to steer my stories to avoid things that I find difficult, but I don’t want to create a Disneyland version.
    I agree about These Old Shades. The book was spoiled for me when I saw the “blood will out” aspect. But it’s a common theme through time, including stories like the Princess and The Pea, and perhaps even David Copperfield.
    Jo

    Reply
  86. I am writhing around in bliss like a cat in catnip right now. Such a fun topic and so many great points. Jane, I was thrilled to read the Orson Scott Card piece–I’d never seen it before and it so profoundly and clearly enumerated some of my own deepest convictions about religion, culture, and academe.
    You know, I have problems with organized religion too, LOL! The church (in all its forms) is such a flawed institution and drives me nuts with impatience a lot of the time. It’s such a riot that I’m a minister–and a Presbyterian, too, with our reputation for disapproving dullness. Just goes to show that God can call all kinds (my college advisor wrote: “When Melinda told me she was going to seminary it seemed as farfetched as telling me she was running away to join the circus.”).
    Religion and spirituality are fascinating lenses through which to view the world. I enjoy a little spirituality in a book or a character–and really, any well-drawn character will have his/her own “ultimate motivations” or convictions, or a way of interpreting his/her life and the world that helps make sense of it all.
    My own opinion is that historical people had more concern with religion and their immortal souls than we do because death in all its forms was an ever-present companion for them (no antibiotics). We live in an amazing and completely unprecedented age (really, just the last 100 years or so) where children can grow up to be adults without ever having known ANYONE who has ever died.
    I also enjoy magic and paranormal elements, and elements of religions not my own. I’ve had some of my most blinding spiritual revelations in conversation with people of other faiths. I love that place where we can converse about our differences and our truths and learn from each other (and in doing that, learn about ourselves and plumb our own convictions).
    You all here at Word Wenches have been very welcoming to me and I appreciate it. I was afraid, when I first started commenting here, that you might not like me being a “Rev” or that you might find me hanging out here distasteful in some way . . .
    Hugging all of you,
    Melinda

    Reply
  87. I am writhing around in bliss like a cat in catnip right now. Such a fun topic and so many great points. Jane, I was thrilled to read the Orson Scott Card piece–I’d never seen it before and it so profoundly and clearly enumerated some of my own deepest convictions about religion, culture, and academe.
    You know, I have problems with organized religion too, LOL! The church (in all its forms) is such a flawed institution and drives me nuts with impatience a lot of the time. It’s such a riot that I’m a minister–and a Presbyterian, too, with our reputation for disapproving dullness. Just goes to show that God can call all kinds (my college advisor wrote: “When Melinda told me she was going to seminary it seemed as farfetched as telling me she was running away to join the circus.”).
    Religion and spirituality are fascinating lenses through which to view the world. I enjoy a little spirituality in a book or a character–and really, any well-drawn character will have his/her own “ultimate motivations” or convictions, or a way of interpreting his/her life and the world that helps make sense of it all.
    My own opinion is that historical people had more concern with religion and their immortal souls than we do because death in all its forms was an ever-present companion for them (no antibiotics). We live in an amazing and completely unprecedented age (really, just the last 100 years or so) where children can grow up to be adults without ever having known ANYONE who has ever died.
    I also enjoy magic and paranormal elements, and elements of religions not my own. I’ve had some of my most blinding spiritual revelations in conversation with people of other faiths. I love that place where we can converse about our differences and our truths and learn from each other (and in doing that, learn about ourselves and plumb our own convictions).
    You all here at Word Wenches have been very welcoming to me and I appreciate it. I was afraid, when I first started commenting here, that you might not like me being a “Rev” or that you might find me hanging out here distasteful in some way . . .
    Hugging all of you,
    Melinda

    Reply
  88. I am writhing around in bliss like a cat in catnip right now. Such a fun topic and so many great points. Jane, I was thrilled to read the Orson Scott Card piece–I’d never seen it before and it so profoundly and clearly enumerated some of my own deepest convictions about religion, culture, and academe.
    You know, I have problems with organized religion too, LOL! The church (in all its forms) is such a flawed institution and drives me nuts with impatience a lot of the time. It’s such a riot that I’m a minister–and a Presbyterian, too, with our reputation for disapproving dullness. Just goes to show that God can call all kinds (my college advisor wrote: “When Melinda told me she was going to seminary it seemed as farfetched as telling me she was running away to join the circus.”).
    Religion and spirituality are fascinating lenses through which to view the world. I enjoy a little spirituality in a book or a character–and really, any well-drawn character will have his/her own “ultimate motivations” or convictions, or a way of interpreting his/her life and the world that helps make sense of it all.
    My own opinion is that historical people had more concern with religion and their immortal souls than we do because death in all its forms was an ever-present companion for them (no antibiotics). We live in an amazing and completely unprecedented age (really, just the last 100 years or so) where children can grow up to be adults without ever having known ANYONE who has ever died.
    I also enjoy magic and paranormal elements, and elements of religions not my own. I’ve had some of my most blinding spiritual revelations in conversation with people of other faiths. I love that place where we can converse about our differences and our truths and learn from each other (and in doing that, learn about ourselves and plumb our own convictions).
    You all here at Word Wenches have been very welcoming to me and I appreciate it. I was afraid, when I first started commenting here, that you might not like me being a “Rev” or that you might find me hanging out here distasteful in some way . . .
    Hugging all of you,
    Melinda

    Reply
  89. I am writhing around in bliss like a cat in catnip right now. Such a fun topic and so many great points. Jane, I was thrilled to read the Orson Scott Card piece–I’d never seen it before and it so profoundly and clearly enumerated some of my own deepest convictions about religion, culture, and academe.
    You know, I have problems with organized religion too, LOL! The church (in all its forms) is such a flawed institution and drives me nuts with impatience a lot of the time. It’s such a riot that I’m a minister–and a Presbyterian, too, with our reputation for disapproving dullness. Just goes to show that God can call all kinds (my college advisor wrote: “When Melinda told me she was going to seminary it seemed as farfetched as telling me she was running away to join the circus.”).
    Religion and spirituality are fascinating lenses through which to view the world. I enjoy a little spirituality in a book or a character–and really, any well-drawn character will have his/her own “ultimate motivations” or convictions, or a way of interpreting his/her life and the world that helps make sense of it all.
    My own opinion is that historical people had more concern with religion and their immortal souls than we do because death in all its forms was an ever-present companion for them (no antibiotics). We live in an amazing and completely unprecedented age (really, just the last 100 years or so) where children can grow up to be adults without ever having known ANYONE who has ever died.
    I also enjoy magic and paranormal elements, and elements of religions not my own. I’ve had some of my most blinding spiritual revelations in conversation with people of other faiths. I love that place where we can converse about our differences and our truths and learn from each other (and in doing that, learn about ourselves and plumb our own convictions).
    You all here at Word Wenches have been very welcoming to me and I appreciate it. I was afraid, when I first started commenting here, that you might not like me being a “Rev” or that you might find me hanging out here distasteful in some way . . .
    Hugging all of you,
    Melinda

    Reply
  90. I am writhing around in bliss like a cat in catnip right now. Such a fun topic and so many great points. Jane, I was thrilled to read the Orson Scott Card piece–I’d never seen it before and it so profoundly and clearly enumerated some of my own deepest convictions about religion, culture, and academe.
    You know, I have problems with organized religion too, LOL! The church (in all its forms) is such a flawed institution and drives me nuts with impatience a lot of the time. It’s such a riot that I’m a minister–and a Presbyterian, too, with our reputation for disapproving dullness. Just goes to show that God can call all kinds (my college advisor wrote: “When Melinda told me she was going to seminary it seemed as farfetched as telling me she was running away to join the circus.”).
    Religion and spirituality are fascinating lenses through which to view the world. I enjoy a little spirituality in a book or a character–and really, any well-drawn character will have his/her own “ultimate motivations” or convictions, or a way of interpreting his/her life and the world that helps make sense of it all.
    My own opinion is that historical people had more concern with religion and their immortal souls than we do because death in all its forms was an ever-present companion for them (no antibiotics). We live in an amazing and completely unprecedented age (really, just the last 100 years or so) where children can grow up to be adults without ever having known ANYONE who has ever died.
    I also enjoy magic and paranormal elements, and elements of religions not my own. I’ve had some of my most blinding spiritual revelations in conversation with people of other faiths. I love that place where we can converse about our differences and our truths and learn from each other (and in doing that, learn about ourselves and plumb our own convictions).
    You all here at Word Wenches have been very welcoming to me and I appreciate it. I was afraid, when I first started commenting here, that you might not like me being a “Rev” or that you might find me hanging out here distasteful in some way . . .
    Hugging all of you,
    Melinda

    Reply
  91. PS Pat, your Mystic Guardian is just a beautiful book. How I am enjoying your interweaving of fantasy, history, and romance–and the detail and creativity of your Mystic world and characters! The next Mystic book had better be coming SOON. . .

    Reply
  92. PS Pat, your Mystic Guardian is just a beautiful book. How I am enjoying your interweaving of fantasy, history, and romance–and the detail and creativity of your Mystic world and characters! The next Mystic book had better be coming SOON. . .

    Reply
  93. PS Pat, your Mystic Guardian is just a beautiful book. How I am enjoying your interweaving of fantasy, history, and romance–and the detail and creativity of your Mystic world and characters! The next Mystic book had better be coming SOON. . .

    Reply
  94. PS Pat, your Mystic Guardian is just a beautiful book. How I am enjoying your interweaving of fantasy, history, and romance–and the detail and creativity of your Mystic world and characters! The next Mystic book had better be coming SOON. . .

    Reply
  95. PS Pat, your Mystic Guardian is just a beautiful book. How I am enjoying your interweaving of fantasy, history, and romance–and the detail and creativity of your Mystic world and characters! The next Mystic book had better be coming SOON. . .

    Reply
  96. That whole “blood will out” idea seems commonly held at the time Heyer wrote. Agatha Christie uses it as a plot point too – her children of criminals turn out to have criminal tendencies. Still today, I don’t see romance authors IN GENERAL fighting against the idea that the nobility automatically make the best husbands, and the higher up the nobility the better.

    Reply
  97. That whole “blood will out” idea seems commonly held at the time Heyer wrote. Agatha Christie uses it as a plot point too – her children of criminals turn out to have criminal tendencies. Still today, I don’t see romance authors IN GENERAL fighting against the idea that the nobility automatically make the best husbands, and the higher up the nobility the better.

    Reply
  98. That whole “blood will out” idea seems commonly held at the time Heyer wrote. Agatha Christie uses it as a plot point too – her children of criminals turn out to have criminal tendencies. Still today, I don’t see romance authors IN GENERAL fighting against the idea that the nobility automatically make the best husbands, and the higher up the nobility the better.

    Reply
  99. That whole “blood will out” idea seems commonly held at the time Heyer wrote. Agatha Christie uses it as a plot point too – her children of criminals turn out to have criminal tendencies. Still today, I don’t see romance authors IN GENERAL fighting against the idea that the nobility automatically make the best husbands, and the higher up the nobility the better.

    Reply
  100. That whole “blood will out” idea seems commonly held at the time Heyer wrote. Agatha Christie uses it as a plot point too – her children of criminals turn out to have criminal tendencies. Still today, I don’t see romance authors IN GENERAL fighting against the idea that the nobility automatically make the best husbands, and the higher up the nobility the better.

    Reply
  101. Jo, I have no objection to the historical hiring of black pages in general; it’s that they were looked upon as pets or accessories rather than children, much like a Corgi or an alligator bag…but perhaps that’s just my impression from reading fiction rather than non-fiction. Now I feel compelled to do some research, a sure sign I’ve been reading the Word Wenches. I think my point was that superior attitudes towards the “others,” whether they were poor or of color, were simply a matter of course. People is service were taken for granted and easily replaced.Perhaps it’s the same amongst the rich and famous today—I wouldn’t know! *g*
    Everyone is a creature of their time; Agatha Christie comes across today as anti-Semitic when she was reflecting the society around her.I still loved her books.

    Reply
  102. Jo, I have no objection to the historical hiring of black pages in general; it’s that they were looked upon as pets or accessories rather than children, much like a Corgi or an alligator bag…but perhaps that’s just my impression from reading fiction rather than non-fiction. Now I feel compelled to do some research, a sure sign I’ve been reading the Word Wenches. I think my point was that superior attitudes towards the “others,” whether they were poor or of color, were simply a matter of course. People is service were taken for granted and easily replaced.Perhaps it’s the same amongst the rich and famous today—I wouldn’t know! *g*
    Everyone is a creature of their time; Agatha Christie comes across today as anti-Semitic when she was reflecting the society around her.I still loved her books.

    Reply
  103. Jo, I have no objection to the historical hiring of black pages in general; it’s that they were looked upon as pets or accessories rather than children, much like a Corgi or an alligator bag…but perhaps that’s just my impression from reading fiction rather than non-fiction. Now I feel compelled to do some research, a sure sign I’ve been reading the Word Wenches. I think my point was that superior attitudes towards the “others,” whether they were poor or of color, were simply a matter of course. People is service were taken for granted and easily replaced.Perhaps it’s the same amongst the rich and famous today—I wouldn’t know! *g*
    Everyone is a creature of their time; Agatha Christie comes across today as anti-Semitic when she was reflecting the society around her.I still loved her books.

    Reply
  104. Jo, I have no objection to the historical hiring of black pages in general; it’s that they were looked upon as pets or accessories rather than children, much like a Corgi or an alligator bag…but perhaps that’s just my impression from reading fiction rather than non-fiction. Now I feel compelled to do some research, a sure sign I’ve been reading the Word Wenches. I think my point was that superior attitudes towards the “others,” whether they were poor or of color, were simply a matter of course. People is service were taken for granted and easily replaced.Perhaps it’s the same amongst the rich and famous today—I wouldn’t know! *g*
    Everyone is a creature of their time; Agatha Christie comes across today as anti-Semitic when she was reflecting the society around her.I still loved her books.

    Reply
  105. Jo, I have no objection to the historical hiring of black pages in general; it’s that they were looked upon as pets or accessories rather than children, much like a Corgi or an alligator bag…but perhaps that’s just my impression from reading fiction rather than non-fiction. Now I feel compelled to do some research, a sure sign I’ve been reading the Word Wenches. I think my point was that superior attitudes towards the “others,” whether they were poor or of color, were simply a matter of course. People is service were taken for granted and easily replaced.Perhaps it’s the same amongst the rich and famous today—I wouldn’t know! *g*
    Everyone is a creature of their time; Agatha Christie comes across today as anti-Semitic when she was reflecting the society around her.I still loved her books.

    Reply
  106. RevMel, I knew you were the open-minded sort who would fit in so nicely here. We need a wenchly convention where we can philosophize in person. Comments are so limiting!
    And thank you kindly for the praise! An author can never get to much. Mystic Warrior should be out next summer.
    Francois, I hear ya. I can only speak for myself, but I tend to use aristocracy as a symbol of power. Even though my Mystic heroes aren’t aristocrats, they hold their positions because they have greater power than others on the island. Of course, only one of my Ives men in the Magic series had a title, but the heroes all had strengths that gave them some authority over their surroundings. Political power and wealth seemed to go hand-in-hand for many centuries.
    But I grant that the over prevalence of dukes and earls (not so many marquesses because New York can’t pronounce it “G”) in romance would give the impression we’re into aristocracy. I suspect being Americans, we find titles romantic. I doubt that many of us are buying into any theory that aristocrats are a higher life form!

    Reply
  107. RevMel, I knew you were the open-minded sort who would fit in so nicely here. We need a wenchly convention where we can philosophize in person. Comments are so limiting!
    And thank you kindly for the praise! An author can never get to much. Mystic Warrior should be out next summer.
    Francois, I hear ya. I can only speak for myself, but I tend to use aristocracy as a symbol of power. Even though my Mystic heroes aren’t aristocrats, they hold their positions because they have greater power than others on the island. Of course, only one of my Ives men in the Magic series had a title, but the heroes all had strengths that gave them some authority over their surroundings. Political power and wealth seemed to go hand-in-hand for many centuries.
    But I grant that the over prevalence of dukes and earls (not so many marquesses because New York can’t pronounce it “G”) in romance would give the impression we’re into aristocracy. I suspect being Americans, we find titles romantic. I doubt that many of us are buying into any theory that aristocrats are a higher life form!

    Reply
  108. RevMel, I knew you were the open-minded sort who would fit in so nicely here. We need a wenchly convention where we can philosophize in person. Comments are so limiting!
    And thank you kindly for the praise! An author can never get to much. Mystic Warrior should be out next summer.
    Francois, I hear ya. I can only speak for myself, but I tend to use aristocracy as a symbol of power. Even though my Mystic heroes aren’t aristocrats, they hold their positions because they have greater power than others on the island. Of course, only one of my Ives men in the Magic series had a title, but the heroes all had strengths that gave them some authority over their surroundings. Political power and wealth seemed to go hand-in-hand for many centuries.
    But I grant that the over prevalence of dukes and earls (not so many marquesses because New York can’t pronounce it “G”) in romance would give the impression we’re into aristocracy. I suspect being Americans, we find titles romantic. I doubt that many of us are buying into any theory that aristocrats are a higher life form!

    Reply
  109. RevMel, I knew you were the open-minded sort who would fit in so nicely here. We need a wenchly convention where we can philosophize in person. Comments are so limiting!
    And thank you kindly for the praise! An author can never get to much. Mystic Warrior should be out next summer.
    Francois, I hear ya. I can only speak for myself, but I tend to use aristocracy as a symbol of power. Even though my Mystic heroes aren’t aristocrats, they hold their positions because they have greater power than others on the island. Of course, only one of my Ives men in the Magic series had a title, but the heroes all had strengths that gave them some authority over their surroundings. Political power and wealth seemed to go hand-in-hand for many centuries.
    But I grant that the over prevalence of dukes and earls (not so many marquesses because New York can’t pronounce it “G”) in romance would give the impression we’re into aristocracy. I suspect being Americans, we find titles romantic. I doubt that many of us are buying into any theory that aristocrats are a higher life form!

    Reply
  110. RevMel, I knew you were the open-minded sort who would fit in so nicely here. We need a wenchly convention where we can philosophize in person. Comments are so limiting!
    And thank you kindly for the praise! An author can never get to much. Mystic Warrior should be out next summer.
    Francois, I hear ya. I can only speak for myself, but I tend to use aristocracy as a symbol of power. Even though my Mystic heroes aren’t aristocrats, they hold their positions because they have greater power than others on the island. Of course, only one of my Ives men in the Magic series had a title, but the heroes all had strengths that gave them some authority over their surroundings. Political power and wealth seemed to go hand-in-hand for many centuries.
    But I grant that the over prevalence of dukes and earls (not so many marquesses because New York can’t pronounce it “G”) in romance would give the impression we’re into aristocracy. I suspect being Americans, we find titles romantic. I doubt that many of us are buying into any theory that aristocrats are a higher life form!

    Reply
  111. If you’re interested in another Christian’s viewpoint, I’ll add mine.
    First, I’m a live-what-you-believe Christian, NOT a “religious” one. That might not mean anything to some people, but it means a lot to me.
    When it comes to religion in historical books, I simply prefer it to either be left out OR portray whatever the people then really believed… whichever fits the story. If it’s too heavy into “darkness”, yet that’s what people believed then, and I want to avoid it… that’s my choice and my preference… not much different from any other personal reading preference, IMO.
    re: Paranormal (whether it’s modern, historical, or fantasy)… the author can create whatever they want, obviously. Some, I like, others, I don’t. For me, I don’t care for lots of darkness, but that’s my personal preference.
    re: Magic and Witchcraft… There’s a very fine line, in my opinion. I believe that there is a very real demonic witchcraft, as well as real demons and demons in our REAL world. I also, BTW, believe in the supernatural power of God in our day-to-day lives. I’ve seen too much of it to discount. The books that include this that I will read, then, must fall into one of two categories. The first is that they must reflect what I believe is true, and good must triumph over evil. Frank Pereti is an example. But honestly, I don’t prefer to read these kinds of books. My favorite is the second category… completely made up magic that bears no resemblance to what I believe is true, and which simply adds a new fairy-tale element to its world.
    Harry Potter… I’m afraid that they have created a generation of children who will think that the REAL witchcraft that destroys lives is OK. That’s my primary reason for wishing that they were not the phenomenon that they are.
    Anyway, I know that the majority of the world disagrees with me in these thoughts, but since Pat asked, and I have gone through many of the same struggles with my own writing, I thought that you, Pat, might be interested… and this post makes me think that I’ll check out your books! 🙂

    Reply
  112. If you’re interested in another Christian’s viewpoint, I’ll add mine.
    First, I’m a live-what-you-believe Christian, NOT a “religious” one. That might not mean anything to some people, but it means a lot to me.
    When it comes to religion in historical books, I simply prefer it to either be left out OR portray whatever the people then really believed… whichever fits the story. If it’s too heavy into “darkness”, yet that’s what people believed then, and I want to avoid it… that’s my choice and my preference… not much different from any other personal reading preference, IMO.
    re: Paranormal (whether it’s modern, historical, or fantasy)… the author can create whatever they want, obviously. Some, I like, others, I don’t. For me, I don’t care for lots of darkness, but that’s my personal preference.
    re: Magic and Witchcraft… There’s a very fine line, in my opinion. I believe that there is a very real demonic witchcraft, as well as real demons and demons in our REAL world. I also, BTW, believe in the supernatural power of God in our day-to-day lives. I’ve seen too much of it to discount. The books that include this that I will read, then, must fall into one of two categories. The first is that they must reflect what I believe is true, and good must triumph over evil. Frank Pereti is an example. But honestly, I don’t prefer to read these kinds of books. My favorite is the second category… completely made up magic that bears no resemblance to what I believe is true, and which simply adds a new fairy-tale element to its world.
    Harry Potter… I’m afraid that they have created a generation of children who will think that the REAL witchcraft that destroys lives is OK. That’s my primary reason for wishing that they were not the phenomenon that they are.
    Anyway, I know that the majority of the world disagrees with me in these thoughts, but since Pat asked, and I have gone through many of the same struggles with my own writing, I thought that you, Pat, might be interested… and this post makes me think that I’ll check out your books! 🙂

    Reply
  113. If you’re interested in another Christian’s viewpoint, I’ll add mine.
    First, I’m a live-what-you-believe Christian, NOT a “religious” one. That might not mean anything to some people, but it means a lot to me.
    When it comes to religion in historical books, I simply prefer it to either be left out OR portray whatever the people then really believed… whichever fits the story. If it’s too heavy into “darkness”, yet that’s what people believed then, and I want to avoid it… that’s my choice and my preference… not much different from any other personal reading preference, IMO.
    re: Paranormal (whether it’s modern, historical, or fantasy)… the author can create whatever they want, obviously. Some, I like, others, I don’t. For me, I don’t care for lots of darkness, but that’s my personal preference.
    re: Magic and Witchcraft… There’s a very fine line, in my opinion. I believe that there is a very real demonic witchcraft, as well as real demons and demons in our REAL world. I also, BTW, believe in the supernatural power of God in our day-to-day lives. I’ve seen too much of it to discount. The books that include this that I will read, then, must fall into one of two categories. The first is that they must reflect what I believe is true, and good must triumph over evil. Frank Pereti is an example. But honestly, I don’t prefer to read these kinds of books. My favorite is the second category… completely made up magic that bears no resemblance to what I believe is true, and which simply adds a new fairy-tale element to its world.
    Harry Potter… I’m afraid that they have created a generation of children who will think that the REAL witchcraft that destroys lives is OK. That’s my primary reason for wishing that they were not the phenomenon that they are.
    Anyway, I know that the majority of the world disagrees with me in these thoughts, but since Pat asked, and I have gone through many of the same struggles with my own writing, I thought that you, Pat, might be interested… and this post makes me think that I’ll check out your books! 🙂

    Reply
  114. If you’re interested in another Christian’s viewpoint, I’ll add mine.
    First, I’m a live-what-you-believe Christian, NOT a “religious” one. That might not mean anything to some people, but it means a lot to me.
    When it comes to religion in historical books, I simply prefer it to either be left out OR portray whatever the people then really believed… whichever fits the story. If it’s too heavy into “darkness”, yet that’s what people believed then, and I want to avoid it… that’s my choice and my preference… not much different from any other personal reading preference, IMO.
    re: Paranormal (whether it’s modern, historical, or fantasy)… the author can create whatever they want, obviously. Some, I like, others, I don’t. For me, I don’t care for lots of darkness, but that’s my personal preference.
    re: Magic and Witchcraft… There’s a very fine line, in my opinion. I believe that there is a very real demonic witchcraft, as well as real demons and demons in our REAL world. I also, BTW, believe in the supernatural power of God in our day-to-day lives. I’ve seen too much of it to discount. The books that include this that I will read, then, must fall into one of two categories. The first is that they must reflect what I believe is true, and good must triumph over evil. Frank Pereti is an example. But honestly, I don’t prefer to read these kinds of books. My favorite is the second category… completely made up magic that bears no resemblance to what I believe is true, and which simply adds a new fairy-tale element to its world.
    Harry Potter… I’m afraid that they have created a generation of children who will think that the REAL witchcraft that destroys lives is OK. That’s my primary reason for wishing that they were not the phenomenon that they are.
    Anyway, I know that the majority of the world disagrees with me in these thoughts, but since Pat asked, and I have gone through many of the same struggles with my own writing, I thought that you, Pat, might be interested… and this post makes me think that I’ll check out your books! 🙂

    Reply
  115. If you’re interested in another Christian’s viewpoint, I’ll add mine.
    First, I’m a live-what-you-believe Christian, NOT a “religious” one. That might not mean anything to some people, but it means a lot to me.
    When it comes to religion in historical books, I simply prefer it to either be left out OR portray whatever the people then really believed… whichever fits the story. If it’s too heavy into “darkness”, yet that’s what people believed then, and I want to avoid it… that’s my choice and my preference… not much different from any other personal reading preference, IMO.
    re: Paranormal (whether it’s modern, historical, or fantasy)… the author can create whatever they want, obviously. Some, I like, others, I don’t. For me, I don’t care for lots of darkness, but that’s my personal preference.
    re: Magic and Witchcraft… There’s a very fine line, in my opinion. I believe that there is a very real demonic witchcraft, as well as real demons and demons in our REAL world. I also, BTW, believe in the supernatural power of God in our day-to-day lives. I’ve seen too much of it to discount. The books that include this that I will read, then, must fall into one of two categories. The first is that they must reflect what I believe is true, and good must triumph over evil. Frank Pereti is an example. But honestly, I don’t prefer to read these kinds of books. My favorite is the second category… completely made up magic that bears no resemblance to what I believe is true, and which simply adds a new fairy-tale element to its world.
    Harry Potter… I’m afraid that they have created a generation of children who will think that the REAL witchcraft that destroys lives is OK. That’s my primary reason for wishing that they were not the phenomenon that they are.
    Anyway, I know that the majority of the world disagrees with me in these thoughts, but since Pat asked, and I have gone through many of the same struggles with my own writing, I thought that you, Pat, might be interested… and this post makes me think that I’ll check out your books! 🙂

    Reply
  116. “I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves.”
    Most were slaves, and were eventually discarded when they grew too old/tall to be pages. Sometimes they were simply shown the door, and sometimes they were sent back to the West Indies. The proliferation of free blacks in England is a fascinating subject, as well as the twists and turns the law took in regard to their status as freemen or slaves. I HIGHLY recommend the book “Black London: Life Before Emancipation” by Gretchen Holbrook Gerzina. In fact, I have a spare paperback copy that I’m more than willing to give away to anyone who wants to read it. Just email me: kalenhughes@yahoo.com.

    Reply
  117. “I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves.”
    Most were slaves, and were eventually discarded when they grew too old/tall to be pages. Sometimes they were simply shown the door, and sometimes they were sent back to the West Indies. The proliferation of free blacks in England is a fascinating subject, as well as the twists and turns the law took in regard to their status as freemen or slaves. I HIGHLY recommend the book “Black London: Life Before Emancipation” by Gretchen Holbrook Gerzina. In fact, I have a spare paperback copy that I’m more than willing to give away to anyone who wants to read it. Just email me: kalenhughes@yahoo.com.

    Reply
  118. “I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves.”
    Most were slaves, and were eventually discarded when they grew too old/tall to be pages. Sometimes they were simply shown the door, and sometimes they were sent back to the West Indies. The proliferation of free blacks in England is a fascinating subject, as well as the twists and turns the law took in regard to their status as freemen or slaves. I HIGHLY recommend the book “Black London: Life Before Emancipation” by Gretchen Holbrook Gerzina. In fact, I have a spare paperback copy that I’m more than willing to give away to anyone who wants to read it. Just email me: kalenhughes@yahoo.com.

    Reply
  119. “I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves.”
    Most were slaves, and were eventually discarded when they grew too old/tall to be pages. Sometimes they were simply shown the door, and sometimes they were sent back to the West Indies. The proliferation of free blacks in England is a fascinating subject, as well as the twists and turns the law took in regard to their status as freemen or slaves. I HIGHLY recommend the book “Black London: Life Before Emancipation” by Gretchen Holbrook Gerzina. In fact, I have a spare paperback copy that I’m more than willing to give away to anyone who wants to read it. Just email me: kalenhughes@yahoo.com.

    Reply
  120. “I’m not sure (someone please correct me if necessary) that the black pages were slaves.”
    Most were slaves, and were eventually discarded when they grew too old/tall to be pages. Sometimes they were simply shown the door, and sometimes they were sent back to the West Indies. The proliferation of free blacks in England is a fascinating subject, as well as the twists and turns the law took in regard to their status as freemen or slaves. I HIGHLY recommend the book “Black London: Life Before Emancipation” by Gretchen Holbrook Gerzina. In fact, I have a spare paperback copy that I’m more than willing to give away to anyone who wants to read it. Just email me: kalenhughes@yahoo.com.

    Reply
  121. Katie, thank you for thoughts. I think we’re probably on a similar page, although I know people who think I’m a wuss because I can’t get into the dark elements. “G” I really don’t think the majority of the world disagrees with us or we’d have at least some outbreak of hostilities showing up here. It’s good to know I’m not alienating intelligent audiences.
    Oh, and I’m an idiot. Mystic WARRIOR is the manuscript I just turned in. Mystic RIDER is the book that will be out next summer. I’m trying to chase down pretty pictures to give the art department cover ideas.
    Given the cost of media mail these days, Kalen, that’s a very generous offer! I won’t be diving into London anytime soon or I’d take you up on it. I’ve noted the title though. Never know when a good book comes in handy.
    Right now, I’m chasing down books on Somerset in the late 18th century if anyone has good recommendations.

    Reply
  122. Katie, thank you for thoughts. I think we’re probably on a similar page, although I know people who think I’m a wuss because I can’t get into the dark elements. “G” I really don’t think the majority of the world disagrees with us or we’d have at least some outbreak of hostilities showing up here. It’s good to know I’m not alienating intelligent audiences.
    Oh, and I’m an idiot. Mystic WARRIOR is the manuscript I just turned in. Mystic RIDER is the book that will be out next summer. I’m trying to chase down pretty pictures to give the art department cover ideas.
    Given the cost of media mail these days, Kalen, that’s a very generous offer! I won’t be diving into London anytime soon or I’d take you up on it. I’ve noted the title though. Never know when a good book comes in handy.
    Right now, I’m chasing down books on Somerset in the late 18th century if anyone has good recommendations.

    Reply
  123. Katie, thank you for thoughts. I think we’re probably on a similar page, although I know people who think I’m a wuss because I can’t get into the dark elements. “G” I really don’t think the majority of the world disagrees with us or we’d have at least some outbreak of hostilities showing up here. It’s good to know I’m not alienating intelligent audiences.
    Oh, and I’m an idiot. Mystic WARRIOR is the manuscript I just turned in. Mystic RIDER is the book that will be out next summer. I’m trying to chase down pretty pictures to give the art department cover ideas.
    Given the cost of media mail these days, Kalen, that’s a very generous offer! I won’t be diving into London anytime soon or I’d take you up on it. I’ve noted the title though. Never know when a good book comes in handy.
    Right now, I’m chasing down books on Somerset in the late 18th century if anyone has good recommendations.

    Reply
  124. Katie, thank you for thoughts. I think we’re probably on a similar page, although I know people who think I’m a wuss because I can’t get into the dark elements. “G” I really don’t think the majority of the world disagrees with us or we’d have at least some outbreak of hostilities showing up here. It’s good to know I’m not alienating intelligent audiences.
    Oh, and I’m an idiot. Mystic WARRIOR is the manuscript I just turned in. Mystic RIDER is the book that will be out next summer. I’m trying to chase down pretty pictures to give the art department cover ideas.
    Given the cost of media mail these days, Kalen, that’s a very generous offer! I won’t be diving into London anytime soon or I’d take you up on it. I’ve noted the title though. Never know when a good book comes in handy.
    Right now, I’m chasing down books on Somerset in the late 18th century if anyone has good recommendations.

    Reply
  125. Katie, thank you for thoughts. I think we’re probably on a similar page, although I know people who think I’m a wuss because I can’t get into the dark elements. “G” I really don’t think the majority of the world disagrees with us or we’d have at least some outbreak of hostilities showing up here. It’s good to know I’m not alienating intelligent audiences.
    Oh, and I’m an idiot. Mystic WARRIOR is the manuscript I just turned in. Mystic RIDER is the book that will be out next summer. I’m trying to chase down pretty pictures to give the art department cover ideas.
    Given the cost of media mail these days, Kalen, that’s a very generous offer! I won’t be diving into London anytime soon or I’d take you up on it. I’ve noted the title though. Never know when a good book comes in handy.
    Right now, I’m chasing down books on Somerset in the late 18th century if anyone has good recommendations.

    Reply
  126. No hostilities, what would be the point? But on occasions such as this I like to break out the Frank Herbert:
    “I must not fear.
    Fear is the mind-killer.
    Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
    I will face my fear.
    I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
    And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
    Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
    Only I will remain.”
    Ah, I love books!
    Blessings to all Wenches and Wenchlings.
    Write on…

    Reply
  127. No hostilities, what would be the point? But on occasions such as this I like to break out the Frank Herbert:
    “I must not fear.
    Fear is the mind-killer.
    Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
    I will face my fear.
    I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
    And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
    Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
    Only I will remain.”
    Ah, I love books!
    Blessings to all Wenches and Wenchlings.
    Write on…

    Reply
  128. No hostilities, what would be the point? But on occasions such as this I like to break out the Frank Herbert:
    “I must not fear.
    Fear is the mind-killer.
    Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
    I will face my fear.
    I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
    And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
    Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
    Only I will remain.”
    Ah, I love books!
    Blessings to all Wenches and Wenchlings.
    Write on…

    Reply
  129. No hostilities, what would be the point? But on occasions such as this I like to break out the Frank Herbert:
    “I must not fear.
    Fear is the mind-killer.
    Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
    I will face my fear.
    I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
    And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
    Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
    Only I will remain.”
    Ah, I love books!
    Blessings to all Wenches and Wenchlings.
    Write on…

    Reply
  130. No hostilities, what would be the point? But on occasions such as this I like to break out the Frank Herbert:
    “I must not fear.
    Fear is the mind-killer.
    Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
    I will face my fear.
    I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
    And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
    Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
    Only I will remain.”
    Ah, I love books!
    Blessings to all Wenches and Wenchlings.
    Write on…

    Reply
  131. From Sherrie:
    Religion, magic, witchcraft, whatever–if it’s a good story, it’s a good story. The practical part of me has a hard time truly buying into fantasy/paranormal, so I prefer my historical romances “straight,” but I can still enjoy a well written story with fantasy or paranormal elements. And because “organized religion” *g* has always been a part of my life, I don’t have a problem when religion crops up in a story, either. If magic crops up, well hey, that’s fine with me too!
    I’m a freelance editor, and based on what’s crossed my desk in the past 3 years, there’s a trend toward dark, violent, and very bloody paranormals. (Why *is* that, I wonder?) I just say a quick prayer for protection (so I don’t get depressed by all the blood and gore and hoplessness!) and then I go on my merry way, editing and proofreading.
    And as far as magic and fantasy are concerned, I can’t remember when I last critiqued/edited a manuscript that *didn’t* have these elements!

    Reply
  132. From Sherrie:
    Religion, magic, witchcraft, whatever–if it’s a good story, it’s a good story. The practical part of me has a hard time truly buying into fantasy/paranormal, so I prefer my historical romances “straight,” but I can still enjoy a well written story with fantasy or paranormal elements. And because “organized religion” *g* has always been a part of my life, I don’t have a problem when religion crops up in a story, either. If magic crops up, well hey, that’s fine with me too!
    I’m a freelance editor, and based on what’s crossed my desk in the past 3 years, there’s a trend toward dark, violent, and very bloody paranormals. (Why *is* that, I wonder?) I just say a quick prayer for protection (so I don’t get depressed by all the blood and gore and hoplessness!) and then I go on my merry way, editing and proofreading.
    And as far as magic and fantasy are concerned, I can’t remember when I last critiqued/edited a manuscript that *didn’t* have these elements!

    Reply
  133. From Sherrie:
    Religion, magic, witchcraft, whatever–if it’s a good story, it’s a good story. The practical part of me has a hard time truly buying into fantasy/paranormal, so I prefer my historical romances “straight,” but I can still enjoy a well written story with fantasy or paranormal elements. And because “organized religion” *g* has always been a part of my life, I don’t have a problem when religion crops up in a story, either. If magic crops up, well hey, that’s fine with me too!
    I’m a freelance editor, and based on what’s crossed my desk in the past 3 years, there’s a trend toward dark, violent, and very bloody paranormals. (Why *is* that, I wonder?) I just say a quick prayer for protection (so I don’t get depressed by all the blood and gore and hoplessness!) and then I go on my merry way, editing and proofreading.
    And as far as magic and fantasy are concerned, I can’t remember when I last critiqued/edited a manuscript that *didn’t* have these elements!

    Reply
  134. From Sherrie:
    Religion, magic, witchcraft, whatever–if it’s a good story, it’s a good story. The practical part of me has a hard time truly buying into fantasy/paranormal, so I prefer my historical romances “straight,” but I can still enjoy a well written story with fantasy or paranormal elements. And because “organized religion” *g* has always been a part of my life, I don’t have a problem when religion crops up in a story, either. If magic crops up, well hey, that’s fine with me too!
    I’m a freelance editor, and based on what’s crossed my desk in the past 3 years, there’s a trend toward dark, violent, and very bloody paranormals. (Why *is* that, I wonder?) I just say a quick prayer for protection (so I don’t get depressed by all the blood and gore and hoplessness!) and then I go on my merry way, editing and proofreading.
    And as far as magic and fantasy are concerned, I can’t remember when I last critiqued/edited a manuscript that *didn’t* have these elements!

    Reply
  135. From Sherrie:
    Religion, magic, witchcraft, whatever–if it’s a good story, it’s a good story. The practical part of me has a hard time truly buying into fantasy/paranormal, so I prefer my historical romances “straight,” but I can still enjoy a well written story with fantasy or paranormal elements. And because “organized religion” *g* has always been a part of my life, I don’t have a problem when religion crops up in a story, either. If magic crops up, well hey, that’s fine with me too!
    I’m a freelance editor, and based on what’s crossed my desk in the past 3 years, there’s a trend toward dark, violent, and very bloody paranormals. (Why *is* that, I wonder?) I just say a quick prayer for protection (so I don’t get depressed by all the blood and gore and hoplessness!) and then I go on my merry way, editing and proofreading.
    And as far as magic and fantasy are concerned, I can’t remember when I last critiqued/edited a manuscript that *didn’t* have these elements!

    Reply
  136. I don’t have an issue with magic in fiction or movie or TV because it always boils down to good versus evil. While the Bible does condemn witchcraft, with Harry Potter, we’re dealing with a wizard society, so why wouldn’t the characters have magic? As for religion in romance novels, while I don’t expect it post-Enlightenment, its absence in medievals is what makes me VERY picky. I’m not privy to the authors personal beliefs, but I loved how Iris Johanssen and Frances Temple utilized religion to make the period more grounded in accuracy in their novels, Lion’s Bride and The Ramsay Scallop, respectively.
    To be honest I see an author utlizing things they don’t necessarily believe in to be the pinnacle of skill–IMO,just like when a straight actor portrays a gay character, or a woman portrays a “male” character(Tilda Swinton as the Archangel Gabriel in Constantine), and so on, a true artist pushes past their personal feelings for the sake of the story’s credibility.

    Reply
  137. I don’t have an issue with magic in fiction or movie or TV because it always boils down to good versus evil. While the Bible does condemn witchcraft, with Harry Potter, we’re dealing with a wizard society, so why wouldn’t the characters have magic? As for religion in romance novels, while I don’t expect it post-Enlightenment, its absence in medievals is what makes me VERY picky. I’m not privy to the authors personal beliefs, but I loved how Iris Johanssen and Frances Temple utilized religion to make the period more grounded in accuracy in their novels, Lion’s Bride and The Ramsay Scallop, respectively.
    To be honest I see an author utlizing things they don’t necessarily believe in to be the pinnacle of skill–IMO,just like when a straight actor portrays a gay character, or a woman portrays a “male” character(Tilda Swinton as the Archangel Gabriel in Constantine), and so on, a true artist pushes past their personal feelings for the sake of the story’s credibility.

    Reply
  138. I don’t have an issue with magic in fiction or movie or TV because it always boils down to good versus evil. While the Bible does condemn witchcraft, with Harry Potter, we’re dealing with a wizard society, so why wouldn’t the characters have magic? As for religion in romance novels, while I don’t expect it post-Enlightenment, its absence in medievals is what makes me VERY picky. I’m not privy to the authors personal beliefs, but I loved how Iris Johanssen and Frances Temple utilized religion to make the period more grounded in accuracy in their novels, Lion’s Bride and The Ramsay Scallop, respectively.
    To be honest I see an author utlizing things they don’t necessarily believe in to be the pinnacle of skill–IMO,just like when a straight actor portrays a gay character, or a woman portrays a “male” character(Tilda Swinton as the Archangel Gabriel in Constantine), and so on, a true artist pushes past their personal feelings for the sake of the story’s credibility.

    Reply
  139. I don’t have an issue with magic in fiction or movie or TV because it always boils down to good versus evil. While the Bible does condemn witchcraft, with Harry Potter, we’re dealing with a wizard society, so why wouldn’t the characters have magic? As for religion in romance novels, while I don’t expect it post-Enlightenment, its absence in medievals is what makes me VERY picky. I’m not privy to the authors personal beliefs, but I loved how Iris Johanssen and Frances Temple utilized religion to make the period more grounded in accuracy in their novels, Lion’s Bride and The Ramsay Scallop, respectively.
    To be honest I see an author utlizing things they don’t necessarily believe in to be the pinnacle of skill–IMO,just like when a straight actor portrays a gay character, or a woman portrays a “male” character(Tilda Swinton as the Archangel Gabriel in Constantine), and so on, a true artist pushes past their personal feelings for the sake of the story’s credibility.

    Reply
  140. I don’t have an issue with magic in fiction or movie or TV because it always boils down to good versus evil. While the Bible does condemn witchcraft, with Harry Potter, we’re dealing with a wizard society, so why wouldn’t the characters have magic? As for religion in romance novels, while I don’t expect it post-Enlightenment, its absence in medievals is what makes me VERY picky. I’m not privy to the authors personal beliefs, but I loved how Iris Johanssen and Frances Temple utilized religion to make the period more grounded in accuracy in their novels, Lion’s Bride and The Ramsay Scallop, respectively.
    To be honest I see an author utlizing things they don’t necessarily believe in to be the pinnacle of skill–IMO,just like when a straight actor portrays a gay character, or a woman portrays a “male” character(Tilda Swinton as the Archangel Gabriel in Constantine), and so on, a true artist pushes past their personal feelings for the sake of the story’s credibility.

    Reply
  141. I just wrote a long reply and my connection crashed, disappearing all of it. I don’t have time to recreate, but I want to say this has been an excellent discussion and I’m enjoying it immensely.
    And I don’t think reading about or discussing different beliefs ought to undermine our faiths unless our faith is weak. I think questioning broadens our thinking, and should strengthen the foundation of our beliefs, so this is all Good.
    And Sherrie, I think what you’re seeing is the cyclical nature of the business. We’ve been writing “light” since 9/11 and the wheel is turning. For those of us who don’t like violence, it’s not going to be fun!

    Reply
  142. I just wrote a long reply and my connection crashed, disappearing all of it. I don’t have time to recreate, but I want to say this has been an excellent discussion and I’m enjoying it immensely.
    And I don’t think reading about or discussing different beliefs ought to undermine our faiths unless our faith is weak. I think questioning broadens our thinking, and should strengthen the foundation of our beliefs, so this is all Good.
    And Sherrie, I think what you’re seeing is the cyclical nature of the business. We’ve been writing “light” since 9/11 and the wheel is turning. For those of us who don’t like violence, it’s not going to be fun!

    Reply
  143. I just wrote a long reply and my connection crashed, disappearing all of it. I don’t have time to recreate, but I want to say this has been an excellent discussion and I’m enjoying it immensely.
    And I don’t think reading about or discussing different beliefs ought to undermine our faiths unless our faith is weak. I think questioning broadens our thinking, and should strengthen the foundation of our beliefs, so this is all Good.
    And Sherrie, I think what you’re seeing is the cyclical nature of the business. We’ve been writing “light” since 9/11 and the wheel is turning. For those of us who don’t like violence, it’s not going to be fun!

    Reply
  144. I just wrote a long reply and my connection crashed, disappearing all of it. I don’t have time to recreate, but I want to say this has been an excellent discussion and I’m enjoying it immensely.
    And I don’t think reading about or discussing different beliefs ought to undermine our faiths unless our faith is weak. I think questioning broadens our thinking, and should strengthen the foundation of our beliefs, so this is all Good.
    And Sherrie, I think what you’re seeing is the cyclical nature of the business. We’ve been writing “light” since 9/11 and the wheel is turning. For those of us who don’t like violence, it’s not going to be fun!

    Reply
  145. I just wrote a long reply and my connection crashed, disappearing all of it. I don’t have time to recreate, but I want to say this has been an excellent discussion and I’m enjoying it immensely.
    And I don’t think reading about or discussing different beliefs ought to undermine our faiths unless our faith is weak. I think questioning broadens our thinking, and should strengthen the foundation of our beliefs, so this is all Good.
    And Sherrie, I think what you’re seeing is the cyclical nature of the business. We’ve been writing “light” since 9/11 and the wheel is turning. For those of us who don’t like violence, it’s not going to be fun!

    Reply

Leave a Comment