What Deb said. I've also been told it's a good idea to place a sheet of colored paper between the synopsis and the manuscript, just to make it easier for the editor to separate the parts. And if the ms is skinny enough, I think you can use a binder clip instead of a rubber band. Just no staples or other binding.

I think the bio looks great, BTW.

And, y'all please tell me to stop endlessly defending my decision to write commoner heroes over on my Regency list. It's not like I didn't know going in that I'm swimming against the tide on that one. And while it is annoying to hear people say they'd never read a story with a commoner hero because they want the fairytale aspect (what's not fairytale about starcrossed love with a happily ever after, I ask you, and it's not like my own preference for the commoners means I never read books starring dukes), I'm not making them more likely to read my book once it's published by arguing about it. And it's not like there's no one on the list who agrees with me, either.

It's just so hard for me to keep my mouth shut, even when I know the only sensible thing is to shut up and write, and let my stories demonstrate the utter sexiness of the common man.

Yes, on the coloured paper, and also yes on the big giant binder clip, but no piercings.

Susan, I am clueless on the commoner problem, because for me, sexy is sexy, and who gives a shit about the title?

Susan, I am clueless on the commoner problem, because for me, sexy is sexy, and who gives a shit about the title?

I know! But a lot of the appeal of the Regency for many readers is the whole lords and ladies fantasy, so I have to get used to a certain amount of "But that's not what I read a Regency for," if I'm going to bend and break that particular standard.

It's not like I can blame them--I certainly have my own quirks and preferences as a reader. But for almost all of them I'll make an exception if it's well-written enough.

As I'm writing my own stuff, I know there are people that will hate the hell out of it...partly I want them to, because I'm smashing some idols(in theory, because nobody may ever know...it may be just mine.) Partly, that thought makes me sad because some of my real-life local friends are like "Go you, writing that book!" sight unseen and I believe the fact of what I write will cause them not to feel that way when they see it.(ooh, I said when, not if... I'm in trouble now!) But I have to tell the stories I've got...I've wasted too long trying to be a Nicer person and not respond to all that grotty violence and human failings and...am I the only little girl that never played Princess? Feeling so, reading Susan's crit.

am I the only little girl that never played Princess? Feeling so, reading Susan's crit.

No, you're not. I have to admit that I'm a bit boggled at the "nobles only, please" talk. I think that a rough-hewn commoner paired up with a ladylike Edwardian woman is very sexay. IRL, I would probably shy away from the nobles for any number of reasons.

Dude, if it's good enough for fricking Lawrence, it ought to be good enough for that bitch, okay? Pardon my trademark bluntness. Readers like that are probably why so many romances read like clothes catalogs.

am I the only little girl that never played Princess? Feeling so, reading Susan's crit.

I used to play Princess Leia.

Which may actually explain why I find the lady-commoner pairing so sexay, come to think of it...

Allyson, the bio is wonderful.

But a lot of the appeal of the Regency for many readers is the whole lords and ladies fantasy

For what it's worth, I bought a bunch of non-noble books when I was editing the traditionals. And a couple really odd ones -- a few set in Scotland, even. That said, though, someone in the book was usually noble, even if it wasn't the hero, so there was usually a reference to a house party in the country, or ton parties in town.

That said, though, someone in the book was usually noble, even if it wasn't the hero, so there was usually a reference to a house party in the country, or ton parties in town.

Well, Anna is the daughter of a viscount and the granddaughter of an earl, and Portia is an ex-marchioness, so I think they've got the blue-blood side covered. Of course, both are more war stories than ton stories, but surely I'm not the only one who likes that. And of course I know I'm not--there are others on the list who are talking about their favorite common heroes, unusual settings, and the like. It's just that the ones who say they wouldn't want to read about a non-noble hero, where's the escapism in that, etc. that stick in my mind, because it's easy to read it as, "Susan, why are you writing that? It's a stupid idea, it's not romantic, and I sure don't want to read it."

Which I know just means not everyone is going to love what I do. DUH! And really, I'm cool with it. No major angst going on, just venting here a little to help me keep my mouth shut there. (But dammit, Jack could so kick their favorite heroes' ducal arses.)

I'm wondering if the Lord with Commoner isn't just an unadmitted version of what Nic christened the "Guido complex" - basically, a nice intelligent refined woman who once, just once, would like a hot night of monkey fucking, saddling up a construction worker with bulging pecs, hung like a stallion, and without two thoughts to rub together to make fire with. You know? Screw the intellectual chatter and the refinement: one night with a guy named Guido.

I laughed until I pulled something, when he explained the concept. But the more I think of it, the more likely it seems. Ooooh, Dame Griselda, oldest daughter of Sir Putney-Yutz of stately Washbasin on the Drainboard, married to the inbred nobleman, and gets to spend six hours with the ploughman, up in the hayloft of one her father's amusing little manor farms....