So there I was, out FROS Hunting for the benefit of all goddess-kind, when I came across this picture:

Hmmm, that’s an intriguing looking man. Let’s pull out the FROS checklist. Gorgeous come-hither profile … check. Potentially sexy smile … check. But that’s about all I can tell from this photo. I need another one.

After much searching, I found this:

Wow! Great smile and that hair — niiiice! But it’s still not enough. I need an even BETTER photo, one that shows off his (hopefully) sculpted abs. For all I know, he could have a pudgy middle and while that’s PERFECTLY ok for a Goddess, we require more of the men who wave our palm leaf fans.

Fortunately, I soon found this photo:

Definitely not pudgy and perfectly capable of some advanced palm fan handling.

But, I wondered, what would he look like on a date?

So off I went again, roaming the internets, looking for more photos of our subject and I found THIS:

Now we’re getting somewhere! He’s looking very good out of his uniform, isn’t he? He could definitely take me out on a date if he showed up at my house wearing this.

But . . . how would he look in my house?

This photo sort of answered that question:

That did it. I think our handsome Swedish hockey goalie, Mr. Henrik Lundqvist, is a PERFECT FROS candidate, don’t you?

37 Comments »

Your favorite day of the month is here again! Its Fun Contest Saturday!

The second book in Madeline’s new series, Provocative in Pearls, just came out and next month we get Karen Hawkins’s next contemporary, Lois Lane Tells All! That’s a whole lot of good reads, isn’t it?

Fun Contest Saturday is two things. 1. FUN. 2. A contest. Which means one lucky reader is going to win two signed books. One each from Madeline and Karen. I’ll ask two questions and to enter you just need to email your answers to goddesscontest@gmail.com. Please use the subject line “Feb Contest” and include your Goddess blog name and full mailing address.

Let the contest begin!

1. Lord Hawkeswell and Verity strike a bargain. What must she accept from him daily?

You can find a hint on Madeline’s website.

2. Mark Tremayne returns to Glory for a job. What job is he taking over?
There’s a hint, right here, on Karen’s website for you!

Remember, don’t post your answers in the comments below. Email them to goddesscontest@gmail.com.

The contest ends at midnight, Sunday, February 28.

One winner will be chosen at random to win. They will be able to choose one book from Karen and one from Madeline from the Mt. Oly prize temple shelves.

Good luck to y’all!

This Saturday I’m working on paperwork and my taxes. Two things that I seriously do not enjoy. What are you doing this Saturday? And tell me, is there anything you have to do on a regular basis that you really detest?

31 Comments »

At my house right now we are in the process of “the big decision” ie-where youngest son will choose to go to college.  I’m not exactly sure what to tell him.  If he ever asked.

When oldest son chose a school, it was based on basketball recruitment, combined with the schools that had the programs he was interested in, a coach who wasn’t psycho and the fact that he wanted to remain in Wisconsin.

When I went to college, I knew I wanted to go to the University of Iowa because of their writing program.  Not that I stayed long enough to get into it, but it did give me a basis for choosing.  (The homesickness that blindsided me sent me back to Wisconsin after a single year.)

But all this confusion has gotten me thinking about how people make big decisions, and realizing that I’ve never really agonized over one. (I’m lucky.  I know it.)

When we bought a house, we bought the house that IVs, dad’s best friend (got that?) sold us at a steal-deal.  No big decision there.

No big decision when IV asked me to marry him either.  I had no choice.  First time I saw him, I knew.

I’ve never had two publishing houses duking it out over me.  (I’d like to.)  So I never had to weigh pros and cons career-wise.

I always thought that if I had to make a major decision I would list the pros and cons on my yellow pad, total them up and voila!  (Does this actually work?  Anyone?)

I could ask for advice from my trusted friends and family.  Then total that up too.

But really . . . how DO you make a huge decision that’s going to alter your life?  I need some advice.  For the kid.  If he ever asks.

I’ll be giving away an ARC of my May release CHAOS BITES today.  I’ll draw a name at random from the posters on today’s blog.

72 Comments »

I love book trailers. I love how they set the tone for the book, allow for a seemingly secret glimpse between the covers, and rev up the reader for release date. I love the texture, the talent, and oh, don’t forget the teasing. That provocative glimpse of lace or a look, a haunting face or the sight of a silky gown, all tempt me to the cash register, book in one hand, debit card in the other.

Here’s an example of a book trailer that had me panting for the book:

Pretty good, eh? The book was even better, which says something, indeed.

Still, one of my friends told me she didn’t care for book trailers because they never gave her enough information. She’d rather see a whole scene from the book. I don’t know how I feel about that. On one hand, it would be nice to see the hero and heroine really interact. On the other, it would be difficult to set the scene without giving away the entire story.

I think I’ll just stick to the overview method. But then again, an entire scene would be nice . . . oh heck! I don’ t know!

Do you watch book trailers? Do they ever make you want a book you might not normally buy? What do you think about the two book trailer methods — overview, or one scene?

66 Comments »

They say “information is power.”  Not sure who the “they” are, but “they” must be wise, right?

Hmmm.  Not so sure about that anymore.  In this age of info-at-a-click, we get deluged with data, and I don’t know about you, but I’m not feeling any more powerful than I did before.  In fact, I’m feeling a lot less powerful than before.

“Before what?” you ask.  Ahh.  Before THIS (cue scary music):

This is a dust mite.  It lives in your carpet and feeds on your dust.  (ICK!)

“Eat my dust!” you might say.  “Welcome to it!  Eat it all!  Saves me the trouble of vacuuming!”  You might say that, but you would be WRONG! (cue more scary music)

Because living in your dust is more ICK than you can shake a stick at.  Leading scientists say so, and we know they are never wrong.  So, living in your dust is:

• Shed bits of human skin, animal fur, decomposing insects
• Food debris
• Lint and organic fibers from clothes, bedding and other fabrics
• Tracked-in soil, soot, particulate matter from smoking and cooking
• And, disturbingly, lead, arsenic and even DDT.

These scientists have even come up with a computer algorithm to model how the dust gets in and leaves — IT NEVER LEAVES — and how your dust is different than your neighbors’ and your Aunt Didi who lives in Poughkeepsie.

This, my friends, is far more than I want to know.  I do not want to think about the bits of shed skin in my carpet or the decomposing insects that get into my food.  I am far, far happier not knowing.

Information may be power, but ignorance is bliss.  I like bliss.  Unfortunately, I’m also a power-hungry information junkie, so I’m totally conflicted.

The best thing I can do is not click on the articles with disturbing titles like “Dust’s Disturbing Components,” “Space Junk Collision Averted,” (whew!), and “Danger Lurks Under Megacities,” opting instead for comfort-reads such as “Kardashian’s Sizzling Mini” (it did indeed sizzle) and “Surprising Things You Can Recycle.”  (That recycling one was a real nail-biter.)

“How Asexual Species Survive” was one I couldn’t resist.  I clicked, therefore I know.  Whether I wanted to or not.

Are you an information junkie?  Do you click on articles?  Do you feel more informationally powerful than you did before?  What have you learned that you really did not want to know?  Did you read the one about Kardashian’s sizzling miniskirt?

57 Comments »

Today is the release of Provocative in Pearls, the second book in my Rarest Blooms series. It also marks the first time that a title that I chose ended up on one of my covers. This is pretty pitiful when you realize this is my 19th book. I mean, I know authors who have titled all their books. I have too, just my publishers have changed my titles to other ones.  

I used to pick the title when I started writing a book, so those later changes bugged me at first. I had lived with that title for months. It was my book’s name. It felt weird to see it with another name attached to it. This happened often enough that I got the message, though. My titles sucked.

By about my fourth book I stopped thinking up titles until after the book was written, so I wouldn’t bond with it too much. I would have skipped it all together, but I had to put something on that cover sheet. I worked at those titles and even loved some of them. However, those did not survive either. I think the problem was that I tended to pick titles that made great sense to me, but I had read the book. To someone who had not read the book (like the publisher’s marketing director) the titles said nothing at all.

If I could just be removed from the entire titling process now, I would not be upset. Only it does not work that way. I still have to try and think of great titles even though the evidence is that this is overwhelmingly futile. My editors always asked for ideas and help, and it is my job to give it a shot.

My current editor (I actually had her for books 1 through 11, and now we are back together) likes to brainstorm when it is title time. We spend a few days trying to come up with title ideas that have zing and zip, will fit on the cover, will catch the eye, and will evoke all the things we want to evoke in what amounts to maybe fifteen letters of the alphabet. I shoot her emails filled with word pools, with combinations and variations of title words, with take-offs on songs and movies and all the other tricks. I ask my fans for help (and one time a fan did provide the title that was used.) It is pretty stressful for me.

My editor never says mine are horrible, but we never end up with one of them. We do, however, find a title. Or she does. The final title doesn’t seem to have any of my ideas within a hundred miles of it, but she honestly thinks our “brainstorming” produced it. I guess all my sucky titles help the good ones emerge in her head.

Anyway, with this series, we went through that whole process and somehow—I truly do not know how it happened— we ended up with a set of titles that we thought were very good, very cool, very apt, and also different. Well, except for one. The title for the second book, while it fit with the others, was “meh.”  We got into that thing where you both try to convince each other and yourself that it works, really it does, but both of us knew it didn’t.

Then suddenly, in a split second of inspiration, Provocative in Pearls came to me. We both knew at once it was perfect for this series and this book. It was brilliant. I was brilliant.

One out of 19 is a pretty sad score, but I could have struck out again. And who knows, maybe when it is time to title my 38th book, I’ll be brilliant again.

Publishers consider titles a crucial marketing tool. Have you ever been drawn to a book by its title?

Can you think of a book title that you thought was perfect for the book? Can you think of one that made no sense?

Is there anything about the way romances are titled that bugs you?

I have heard that the word Duke in a title helps sell an historical romance. Are you attracted to Duke books?

Are you the kind of person who is good at things like titles? If so, can I adopt you?

In case you are wondering, the next two titles are Sinful in Satin, and Dangerous in Diamonds. If you are curious about Provocative in Pearls, you can read an excerpt on my  web site  There is a video for PiP there too.

To celebrate this release date, two of the visitors who comment on today’s blog will win a signed copy of Ravishing in Red, or any novel in my backlist.

122 Comments »

I would have put this up the day of my book release, but someone else had it at the time, so here it is, a little late. As usual, Will is a little delusional, but then, so are many of our heroes. They tell themselves they don’t need love. Or they tell themselves they don’t DESERVE love. They tell themselves they’re big, bad boys and marriage is a mistake. Then they turn around by the end of the book and take it all back, once they grow up. I just finished watching part of an old favorite, High Fidelity (with John Cusack), where he spends an entire movie deluding himself. I just love self-deluded heroes.

Then there’s the ones who have insecurities–they’re not wealthy enough or aristocratic enough or macho enough for the heroine. My favorite one of those is Sebastian, Lord Dain, from Lord of Scoundrels, who simply cannot believe that the heroine finds him attractive.

Do you like self-deluded heroes or would you prefer they not be deluded? Who are your favorite self-deluded heroes? What is your favorite hero delusion?

33 Comments »