A Historical for Every Reader
Jul 28th 2007
Sabrina JeffriesOn Writing!
I keep hearing about the “wallpaper historical” as if there really are two kinds of historical romances, ones with accurate historical detail and ones without. I find the notion amusing. Because there are WAY more kinds than two.
Yes, there ARE historical romances with rich historical detail, mores, and manners that immerse you in a period. And there are also historicals where you couldn’t guess the period unless someone told you. But between those is a vast mixture. That’s because there are as many types of readers as there are types of books.
For example, there are the readers who enjoy historicals because they allow plots that wouldn’t work in a contemporary. After all, a man kidnapping a woman in a historical can lead to hot sex and witty banter, but any man kidnapping a woman in a contemporary is probably not the hero, and she’ll probably be testifying against him at trial. And let’s not forget the ever popular marriage of convenience, which is great fun in a historical and just plain sleazy in a contemporary (think green card marriages and Russian mail-order brides).
Which brings us to the readers who read historicals for the character types. They’re the ones who’ll buy any book with a highwayman … or a duke … or a Scotsman … or a rakehell. Some want accurate Scotsmen; some don’t care that Scotsmen didn’t really wear kilts in 17th century Scotland–for them it’s no fun without a kilt.
I could go on and on—readers who like those historicals that have lyrical language, readers who like the themes involving class difference or social standing, and readers who find the sex more exciting with corsets. There are readers who mix and match–who like to learn some history and thus want it to be accurate but who also want their proper lady heroines to be down and dirty in the bedroom. Or ones who don’t want any sex, but also don’t want to be “bored” with politics or religion of the period.
My point is, it’s useless to separate historical romances according to how accurately they mimic the period. For my own part, my books have certain historical underpinnings that are absolutely correct (I do tons of research from period sources). But my novels don’t describe every gown, and my characters have more modern sensibilities. So are they wallpaper historicals? I honestly don’t know. And I honestly don’t care. My readers, whoever they happen to be, enjoy them. Some other writers’ readers would hate them. I’m okay with that. I figure there are plenty of readers to go around.
So what about you? Assuming you read historicals, why do you read them? What kind is your favorite? Which characteristics of the historical romance rev you up? Which ones bore you? And if you don’t read historicals at all, why not?
30 Comments »
30 Responses to “A Historical for Every Reader”
pri.r. on 28 Jul 2007 at 4:17 am #
Personally i run towards historical with Scotsmen…. because who could resist??? all that brawny male temptation *drools*.
i don’t care much for the historical accuracy of the historicals that i read…because quite frankly if i didn’t know them to begin with i’m not really going to notice now am i?… completely invalid point you say?… well you may just be right but ignorance is bliss at times.
Oh the old “marriage of convienience”… i think it’s fabulous as a tool so that the characters are always together… well mostly.. because there are times when a book needs a little pick up if it’s going slow, the marriage comes in handy…for instance “Meet me at Midnight” by goddess Suzanne Enoch… well that story wasn’t actually going slow, but admittely i did my little jig of celebration when Sin announced that him and vixen had to get married?!?!
don’t fool yourselves people, in the end i believe it all comes down to the romance itself,the facts help but i just love the characters
MizMacgyver on 28 Jul 2007 at 5:59 am #
I like historicals if they have a lot of historical details, although I sometimes have to read them in front of the computer so I can look things up as I go along. (If there is a lot of description of the clothing for example I sometimes have to look it up so I can “see” what I am reading) I also like historicals that aren’t so rich in period information. It is really like contemporaries. If I like the characters and the plot, it doesn’t matter, the added information is like icing on a cake, I would still eat the cake without the icing, the icing just makes it a little better. I don’t like authors that put modern speech into historicals, I can’t see an 1800’s English miss saying “Wow”, just turns me right off and the book is never finished. I favor Scotsmen for some reason, maybe it is the brogue
I can read brogue like it was my native tongue.
Ann in IL on 28 Jul 2007 at 7:21 am #
I prefer historicals - Scottish or English 1800’s with a smattering of contemporary and medieval now and then. I love the grandeur and lifestyle of historicals. Maybe it’s the wealthy lifestyle that appeals to me the most. Ladies with nothing else to do but go for fittings of gorgeous gowns, changing gowns several times a day for all the various social committments. Always being escorted and cared for by a gorgeous alpha male or a servant to do all the scud work. Who wouldn’t like that?
I find it interesting to see how the different authors treat historical facts. A little politics has to be in the mix, but I’m not a fan of politics in the extreme.
I have questions. Does Almacks still exist? Is the building a historical site? Is there a modern day equivalent? Do the British still do the “presentation” or coming out rituals for young females?
I guess I find the British and Scottish historicals so fascinating because they challenge my imagination to “live in a castle”,
Ann in IL on 28 Jul 2007 at 7:29 am #
continued…
ride a horse, ride in a carriage and just be waited on hand and foot - and adored - (read pursued) - by a gorgeous alpha male. In other words……….treated like I think I should be treated………..which - TRUST me - ain’t happening in this life.
And since my personal library only consists of about 700 books, and my imagination is never satisfied…………just keep crankin’ out those historicals, cuz I’m just sitting here waiting for them.
Karen Hawkins on 28 Jul 2007 at 9:08 am #
Sabrina, this is a great topic! I’ve been reading some historical novels lately, and I was thinking about this the other day.
I read books — historical and contemporary — for characters.
Books with historical settings fascinate me because I love history and find it interesting to see people deal with the limitations of their lifetime.
I love historical romances because I want to see fascinating characters dealing with the limitations of their lifetimes, and have the satisfaction of watching them triumph and find love anyway.
When I read historical romance, I like some historical detail but I don’t want to feel as if I’m reading a history book. I don’t want details about the non-bathing eras in a romances but I’ll put up with a little of that in a straight historical novel, if that makes any sense.
Sabrina Jeffries on 28 Jul 2007 at 10:08 am #
For me, part of it is that I NEVER read historicals for the historical detail. I DO read them for the historical events or unusual things. That’s why I have things like peepshow boxes in one book and prison reform in another. That stuff fascinates me. But although I like a little touch of the clothing, and I do enjoy the rigidity of the society, I know that despite my upbringing, I wasn’t typical, so I don’t expect historical characters to behave strictly according to their times. Plus, I’ve read a LOT of history, so I know there were people who bucked the system. That was kind of my point–I read historicals in a completely individualistic way. I’m sure I’m not alone.
amy1242 on 28 Jul 2007 at 10:19 am #
I enjoy historical romances with a lot of accurate history included. Pirates, Scotsmen, Dukes, Knights, whatever…surrounded by historical facts and I’m a happy reader. I also like a little humor. You Goddesses are great at adding humor! My pet peeve…whiney, crying women! I hate when authors write about weak, pathetic women. I need the women to be strong, never say die and to never give up…no matter what. The hero can still be protective and his love interest can shed a tear or two as long as there is good reason and it’s not self pittying. Just don’t make her a crying, whiney brat! I’ve stopped reading books right in the middle saying, “For heavens sake! I can’t stand this woman a minute longer!” Wanting to slap some sense into her before I toss the book on the ‘get rid of quickly’ pile. History be damned.
Keri Ford on 28 Jul 2007 at 10:19 am #
Historicals are my favorite to read. I don’t care about history or facts or stuff happening around important eras of time and all that crap. I didn’t like history in high school, college, or now.
BUT…but! I LOVE how the romance in a historical develops. I love the idea of a innocent virgin who doesn’t know why her tummy’s tickling her down to her toes when the hot seductive hero simply breathes on her neck. I can’t get enough of it.
I do not care whether it’s English or Scottish. I do not care if the setting is fact or fiction. I do not care if they were floating on a boat between here or there! –sorry Dr. Suess fan
I think the way of the times way back when is fascinating. It always tickles me how the hero gets so freaking turned on by seeing ankles. Ankles! I read so many historicals not only because I enjoy them, but because I want that sweet romance that’s so precious in a historical to find it’s way in my manuscripts.
Maggie Robinson on 28 Jul 2007 at 1:46 pm #
Great post! I hate it when I read the dismissive “wallpaper historical.” I’m not a purist, and am not overly fond of books actually written in the nineteenth century (I know I have to make an exception for Austen or I’ll really get in trouble!). I’m never in doubt I’m reading (and writing) FICTION. A well-researched book is wonderful, but research won’t replace romance or wonderful characters. The plot conventions you mentioned fulfill a certain need for strong 21st century women to indulge their elusive alpha male fantasy…which would certainly be insufferable if encountered in real life.
Ellen on 28 Jul 2007 at 2:37 pm #
Alas my Gees….I may be part of a dying breed. Yes I love historicals with all my heart because they transport me out of myself into the beautiful worlds you create. However, I am always looking for a great western love story. They are what I would prefer to read (and write). Everyone tells me that it is a dead market, but I cannot turn away from it.
I didn’t start out that way. My absolute first loves in historicals were “The Wedding” and “The Bride,” by Julie Garwood. I love a man in a kilt and could give a hoot if they actually wore them during the 17th century. Let’s face it, nobody bathed in those days, but I am always relieved when the author throws in a good bath scene. LOL
Sabrina, I will look forward to reading your newest release. I will be thrilled if you don’t go on and on with historical details. Further, I will love it if you don’t give your character some name that requires me to stumble over it again and again. I just want the romance. Strong men, unknowing virgins, great sex and a plot that takes me on a wonderful journey….and don’t forget to wash!
helen on 28 Jul 2007 at 3:03 pm #
I love historicals English or Scottish. Men seem to be more manly back then and the way they lived the clothes and wealth although I don’t want too much history I love the way they dress and lived back then and the love seens are fantastic. They take me back to another time and I can loose myself in them and turn off to what is going on around me.
Have Fun
Helen
dbrown3400 on 28 Jul 2007 at 3:30 pm #
I was a history major in college and am still fascinated by certain periods, esp. the Regency. It was a time of great change, which provided a back drop for novels of all types reflecting that time. I’ve mentioned in this blog several times that “duke” books are my favorite, but any story involving royalty of any kind, especially someone who thinks he is a commoner, or a spy setting involving the Prime Minister, are entertaining.
I enjoy more titillating relationships but will settle for less if it’s a favorite author telling a good story. I especially like family, or related, books. In fact, I will reread an entire series before a new release in that series comes out. I’ve never read Suzanne’s contemporary series and will use the release of her new book to do so or the entire Heiresses series with Sabrina’s next book. I find parts that I missed, somewhat like reading the book for the first time. Rachel’s, etc. More. . .
dbrown3400 on 28 Jul 2007 at 3:36 pm #
Reading Rachel’s or Suzanne’s books will probably encourage me to mix a few contemporaries with my historicals.
Donna
Julia London on 28 Jul 2007 at 5:31 pm #
Donna, don’t forget Julia’s contemp! I have one out the week after them
Ellen, its so interesting you said that about westerns. About three months ago, an idea for one popped into my head and I am dying to write it. I don’t know why–I haven’t read a western romance in years and years. But I obviously love historicals, and it would be a little different from the genteel society of England. It would be fun!
Claudia Dain on 28 Jul 2007 at 5:56 pm #
I so agree, Sabrina! There are all sorts of reasons to read a historical and none of them are either right or wrong. It’s all about preference in what entertains us.
dbrown3400 on 28 Jul 2007 at 6:03 pm #
Julia,
That’s one thing so nice about Amazon’s Prime One-Click. As soon as I know about a book, I put it on one-click and it magically appears on my doorstep the day it comes out.
Donna (who is totally wired into this book business).
Re: Almack’s
http://www.victorianlondon.org/publications/thegreatmetropolis1.htm
Also, I always wondered how big their closets were.
db
twolilhahas on 28 Jul 2007 at 6:17 pm #
I’m not a history buff. Therefore, little historical inaccuracies don’t bother me too much. I don’t really notice, mostly. There have been times that I’ve read a dictionary along with a historical romance novel checking word dates. Then I was all, “anon” was not a word then! So, I quit doing that. Now, I just enjoy them.
But if I notice a glaring problem, it bugs me to death.
gannon on 28 Jul 2007 at 6:37 pm #
Historicals are my first love! I do read just about every other sub-genre of romance, but I will always come back to historicals. They allow me to learn about another era, without getting too bogged down by nitty gritty details (although I do enjoy history books on occasion).
The most important thing is a strong story with characters I truly come to care for. If you give me that, I’m happy! Of course, a brawny Scot in a kilt is always welcome! Thanks for the pic of Sean Connery—love that man!
krystal on 28 Jul 2007 at 7:08 pm #
I love all kinds of romances, but especially the historical ones. The Regency period is my favorite. I usually read for characters and character development, but I also like those that manage to give me accurate information without sounding like a history book. I also like the modern ones but I have to have historicals in the mix or else I feel like I haven’t really read anything.
Even though I like reading for characters, I like knowing what time period they are supposed to be in. I hate it when I’m reading and I can’t tell what time period they are supposed to be in. It’s one of my biggest pet peeves that I come across in books.
Sabrina Jeffries on 28 Jul 2007 at 7:48 pm #
Ann, Almack’s is kaput and has been for some years. There’s a building where it stood that bears a plaque in its honor.
I love hearing the variety of reasons people read historicals. I truly believe that we are not the homogenous audience that publishers assume we are.
Kay on 28 Jul 2007 at 8:22 pm #
I love historical details, and the more day-to-day details the better–clothes, food, customs…….
I was a devoted follower of Ellis Peters’ historical mysteries more for the historical details than the mystery part.
Dilimis on 28 Jul 2007 at 8:41 pm #
I really like historical romances. My favorites are those set in England, although I won’t say no to the occasional Scottish or Medival romance. I adore reading historicals set in England because of the way they lived. All those servants and all that weath and all those rules…quite frankly, it’s fascinating. Plus, it allows for some of my favorite plot types. Marriage of convenience plots make me cackle in glee. I know the characters aren’t having much fun, but I am!
On the subject of historical detail I have to say that unless it was huge I wouldn’t notice if it was wrong. I like knowing what time period I’m in though. If the book doesn’t have a date I tend to wonder exactly where I’m supposed to be.
catslady on 28 Jul 2007 at 10:14 pm #
I have always enjoyed historicals the most. I think I like different kinds at different times but on a whole I do want things to be accurate - I care more for the overall history - time, places, events - than explicit details of what their clothes looked like. I like longer books and really enjoy a lot of characterization which seems to go well with historicals. And then I think I like to hear about time periods that I’m not living in.
pri.r. on 28 Jul 2007 at 10:15 pm #
Dilimis i hope you will join in my dance of glee for all marriage of convenience plots!
doglady on 28 Jul 2007 at 10:16 pm #
While I read a wide variety of genres, historical romances, particularly Regency historicals are and will remain my first love. I am not fond of authors who have done no research and make it obvious that they have not done so. But if the story is good and the characters memorable, I don’t think it is necessary to load the reader down with historical details. I love learning neat little things that authors include in their stories. I LOVED the peepshow boxes, Sabrina! Little things like that, things I never knew about before, just make me giggle. A romance novel is like a painting. I feel like the historical details are the background of the painting. The background can be beautifully detailed like a Rembrandt or dreamy and colorful like a Van Gogh. Either has its own appeal. The focus of the painting, however, should always be the characters. I want them boldly drawn, with lots of little quirky details, so that every time I look at the painting I find out something new about them.
Dilimis on 29 Jul 2007 at 12:31 am #
pri.r. — I’m all for it!
Doglady, I really like your comparison of a romance to a painting. It’s really nice.
Reading about all the different kinds of romances everybody likes has been an interesting experience.
Nicole Jordan on 29 Jul 2007 at 9:35 am #
Sabrina, I think you strike the perfect balance in your historicals.
And Dl, that’s a wonderful analogy about romances and paintings.
For me, the romance and story and characters are much more important than the historical detail, but I do like to have at least enough flavor to make me feel I’m in that time period, era, setting.
Glaring historical inaccurcies are a big pet peeve of mine, since I’ve spent so much time researching my own books and believe the author can take a little more time to get facts right.
And I chew nails when I hear contemporary slang in an historical. Mainly because it rips me out of the story and I can no longer suspend disbelief and live vicariously through the characters.
But I can overlook even egregious mistakes if I’m transported by the romance.
NicoleJ
Aimee on 30 Jul 2007 at 9:49 am #
I love historical romances. I am a big history buff anyway so I love when it is about actual people. Although pretty much any historical will do I love them all from the sexy native americans to the rough and tumble rogues and scondrels to the pirates and pretty much any bad boy.
Susan K on 30 Jul 2007 at 12:36 pm #
I love historicals! I hardly ever read any contemporaries but I will make an exception for the goddesses. Regencies are my number one favorite. But I also like stories with pirates, scotsman, westerns and medieval.
BethanyHamilton on 01 Aug 2007 at 7:05 am #
I love Love LOVE historicals
Someone would be hard pressed to get me to read anything else 
I love them because of the types of characters allowed. I like my men uber alpha, and that’s really only allowed in Historicals. Like Sabrina said, most scenarios I enjoy reading would land someone in jail in contemp. I just don’t like “sweet” romances, or anything else where the H/h fall willingly into each other’s arms. I like fire, and I like the heroine being helpless to stop whatever plans the hero has simply because she’s a girl.
I also love them because I read to escape. If I wanted contemporary, I’d walk out my front door and experience it first hand. I like the idea of riding horses and taking carriages everywhere, and having butlers to answer doors, and kitchen wenches to make my dinner. Since there are no time machines, being whisked away by a great romance is the next best thing.