Don't mind the "Hey! Why isn't she sending it ME?!?!?" tone - that's a humongous compliment.

OK, then I'll stop worrying about the fact there's no way I'm sending it to ANYBODY for another few weeks. (I've been told the way to handle that with anyone at the conference who asks to see it is to send them a letter right away thanking them for their interest, explaining that I'm giving it a final polish to make sure it's my best work, and promising to send it by X date.)

It's not really in the Laurens/Jordan range of sensuality--there's more in my work than you'd find in the traditional, shorter-length Regencies, but it's only a super-hot book when you compare it to my inspiration, who of course is Jane Austen. So I hope that won't disappoint her. The All About Romance website uses a sensuality grading system of Kisses-Subtle-Warm-Hot-Burning as part of its reviews, and almost all of Laurens' and Jordan's books get Hot: "Very explicit sensuality. There is an expanded focus throughout the book on sexual feelings and desires. The love scenes are longer, and there are at least 2 or 3 of them. The characters often think about their sexual feelings and desires, and making love is graphically depicted. Both the emotions of the hero and heroine and the phsyical feelings of both are important during love scenes. Examples: (older Catherine Coulter, earlier Julie Garwood, Linda Howard [in general], Elizabeth Lowell, J.D. Robb)." My book is closer to Warm: "Moderately explicit sensuality. While our lovers do make love, and the reader is there with them, physical details are described, but are not graphically depicted. Much is left to the reader's imagination. Emotions and feelings are most important. While there is sexual tension, there may not be more than one or two love scenes in the whole book. Examples: (Nora Roberts, Lorraine Heath, Debbie Macomber, Julia Quinn)" (My book has three major sex scenes.)

The active author I most want to emulate is Jo Beverley--a great writer with a real passion for history. I also like Mary Jo Putney and Mary Balogh, though they're both more hit-or-miss. And I wish Patricia Gaffney still wrote romance--if I could write a book as good as To Love and to Cherish or Wild at Heart, I'd feel I'd really arrived.

FWIW, Laurens' Harlequin stuff is warm rather than hot.

It's more mannered than her later work, and closer to what you've been doing.

Susan, I'm going to send Marlene the relevant part of that post - the hotness factor. She'll know precisely what she's waiting for, then.

And, more from Marlene, for Susan:

(Susan): The active author I most want to emulate is Jo Beverley--a great writer with a real passion for history. I also like Mary Jo Putney and Mary Balogh, though they're both more hit-or-miss. And I wish Patricia Gaffney still wrote romance--if I could write a book as good as To Love and to Cherish or Wild at Heart, I'd feel I'd really arrived."

(Marlene): Ok, from what you'd said (Deb), I thought she wrote hotter than she does, but still this is wonderful romance territory.

I love Jo B. (and she's a mist-er) Early Mary Jo(that are being reissued now). Mary Balough wrote a short story that's one of my favorites of all time, I think it's called Little Sparrow or Little Bird, but I'm not sure. Nearly a novella in length. It is perfect. Julia Quinn is uneven. CC's early (early meaning early '80's straight regencies) were good. I like her historicals, but on rereading I find her dialogue repetitive in spots and also juvenile. Goes to show how much the market has changed.

One of my favorite romance books is Garwood's THE PROMISE, and I've read it at least four times. Deb, you know how I feel about Nora. At her feet. Her newest hardcover and JD Robb are sitting on my desk and I'm not allowed to read them until I finish my work...which may be a while!!! She is my incentive, and I walk every day in one of my many Nora shirts.

Pat Gaffney is an excellent writer. Has to be special Americana to

The bottom line is most of these ladies got their starts at H/S.

xxxm

(so, more useful info.)

I know lots of brilliant people write or have written for Harlequin, but my understanding is that your book is only out there for a month or so, and they own all rights forever, so next to no chance of having your early works reprinted once you hit the big time. If that's accurate, I don't want to go that route unless I've exhausted the other possibilities.

First night conferencing details in Bitches. And I'm off to attempt to sleep.

Any tips for editing the novel-length manuscript? So far I'm taking it scene by scene. First I read through, correcting any errors I find and making changes that make the prose flow better. Then I think about what that scene is doing there, and if it serves its purpose, and if there's anything I can cut, since I need to lose about 25,000 words to get this puppy to marketable length. And at some point before I ship it out, I'm going to need to do a big fat continuity read, since I'm sure it's got all the glitches you'd expect in a book that took two years to write and was written out of order.

Probable cereal...

Interesting tidbits from conference:

Among the speakers, we had local category author Jane Porter, who submitted for 17 years before getting her first sale, and also local but very big-name historical author Julia Quinn, who sold her very first novel. The odds are overwhelming that I'll be somewhere in the middle, but such is my hubris that in my vain little heart I believe I'll be closer to Quinn. (Porter started very, very young--she submitted her first manuscript at 19--and it sounds like she made every beginner mistake in the book in both craft and dealing with the publishing industry.) Anyway, I found it encouraging both that you really can get a hit your first time out, and that dogged persistence and patient practice of the craft can pay off.

I'm also feeling cautiously optimistic about my pitch to the Avon (Harper imprint) editor. When I'd finished, she said it sounded like a very good set-up and asked if it were serious or light. I said it included some humor, but overall was on the serious side. She said that was good, because they had quite a few light/humorous Regency authors, and she thought the line would benefit from more variety. And they ask for three chapters and/or 100 pages, which I think is enough to show off my good qualities.

Susan, you need someone to read it top to bottom and suggest as they go.

Is that the sound of someone volunteering to have a fat 125K-word manuscript file in her inbox?

Susan, if it isn't the sound over there, it most DEFINITELY is the sound over here. I love regencies, LOVE them. I don't get to read nearly enough good ones. I catch the most egregious historical errors, but generally don't mind smaller ones if they're in the service of a good story.

Please? Profile address is good.