Regency vs. A Regency

World, meet Tristan Kelly. 

I was talking to Marie Sexton this morning, and she casually mentioned a mistake that she made with the book her publisher is releasing today. Some readers have stumbled upon something that I never considered as an obstacle. (I read parts of the book in beta.) Her book contains the word "regency." This has lead some to call it a Regency Romance, and others to go into the book thinking that it is a Regency Romance in space. I imagine their surprise when they get a few chapters in to discover that not only is it not a Regency. It's erotica. Of the male/male variety.

And the first thing that popped into my head was "definitions!" Hello, dictionary, I have missed you. (Not really, but it doesn't need to know that. Shhh.)

re·gent
noun /ˈrējənt/ 
regents, plural

• A person appointed to administer a country because the monarch is a minor or is absent or incapacitated
• A member of the governing body of a university or other academic institution

adjective /ˈrējənt/ 

• Acting as regent for a monarch
  
  • the queen regent of Portugal

re·gen·cy
noun /ˈrējənsē/ 
regencies, plural

• The office or period of government by a regent
• A commission acting as regent
• The particular period of a regency, esp. (in Britain) from 1811 to 1820 and (in France) from 1715 to 1723

adjective /ˈrējənsē/ 

• Relating to or denoting British architecture, clothing, and furniture of the Regency or, more widely, of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Regency style was contemporary with the Empire style and shares many of its features: elaborate and ornate, it is generally neoclassical, with a generous borrowing of Greek and Egyptian motifs

Pride and Prejudice, 2005.

A Regency Romance is one that takes place in the United Kingdom between the years of 1795 and 1837. This period is a little longer than the actual rule of George IV as prince regent, but that's because they're including the transition from Georgian to Victorian eras.

Regency Romance has some conventions that are period appropriate, and others that are expectations of the audience who reads them. You can read what appears to be a short list on Wikipedia.  The regency of George IV, Prince of Wales, is the setting and timeframe of Regency Romance, but the genre does not and should not impact the word "regency" in the same way.

Queen Haptshetsut, Pharoah of Egypt
My son says, "She looks like chocolate!"

When I hear the word "regent," I don't think of Britain. I don't think of France, which had a regency period of its own in the 18th century. I think of Egypt.

Queen Hapshetsut ruled as king for 22 years of the 18th dynasty. There's a lot of revisionism and hyperbole in Egyptian history. On one hand, she is well regarded in inscriptions, and on the other, her forms were chiseled out leaving Hapshetsut-shaped voids. She stepped on toes, but Egypt prospered, so I feel comfortable in thinking she ruled well. Which is not an assessment of her character as a woman, because just look at that picture. They gave her every symbol acknowledging a pharaoh (who they regarded as a god on earth). She had the nerve to claim the throne of Egypt as rightfully hers, and people said okay. She had to be a magnificent bitch. But...she wasn't technically the king, which only validates my admiration. She was her step-son's co-regent, because he was a child when his father died.

Other countries to have regent periods include Finland, Hungary, and Iceland while it was ruled by Denmark. When Poland and Lithuania were a dual-state, they were ruled by a Roman Catholic Primate during the years between kings, which were elected. At present, San Marino elects two captain regents twice per year to rule the country in tandem. In addition to nations, regency principles are also a component of modern universities.

So, let's look at the blurb for Blind Space.

Captain Tristan Kelley enjoys the luxuries of Regency service, as well as the pleasure of his prince's bed. It's an easy life, if not a happy one. When the prince decides to take a trip through the perilous Blind Space, Tristan must go with him, but somebody in the prince's guard is a traitor.

Blind and held prisoner, Tristan finds himself at the mercy of Valero, a pirate who bears no love for the Regency. Valero is determined to seduce Tristan, and Tristan fears his resolve won't last. His duty is clear, but so is his desire. As the days tick by without word from the Regency, Tristan begins to question his loyalty to his prince, the Regency he's sworn to, and the man who holds him captive.

Tristan begins to realize that being a prisoner may actually set him free.

The word "Regency" is used four times in the blurb. I have issues with the repetition, but that's neither here nor there. In this context, there are some things that are clear: 1) Regency is a governmental entity, 2) the story is taking place in space, not Great Britain.

Maybe that doesn't necessarily preclude it from being a Regency Romance. The genre probably has sex slaves, pirates and seduction. Is there a gay Regency sub-subgenre. I don't read Regency, so I have no idea.

Silver's site has an information tab for their books, so lets click on that. It says, "Gay, Pirates, Romance, Science Fiction."

I guess what I'm trying to say is that as readers, we should not rely solely on our understanding of a word, particularly when all other evidence points in a different direction. "Space" should be the first clue that this isn't a Regency Romance. Based on the blurb, it could be a Regency-type Romance set in space, but wouldn't that be a great marketing point? The very fact that it's not marketed as such rather stacks the odds against it being that.

And as writers, I truly believe we have a responsibility to know from where our genres come. Regency authors should know not only what the elements of Regency are, but where they came from and how they came into being. For instance, an author with eloping characters needs to know that the logistics of  such a move were different in 1752 than they were is 1753. Science fiction has many layers flavors ranging from soft to hard, and some of them have nothing to do with fantastic technology or space ships. Paranormal and Urban Fantasy authors need to know what is being done in their genre by other authors, and they need to know how far they can push the limits of their audience's belief. While it's acceptable, (and as a reader, I would encourage the authors) to break conventions, it is necessary to know what the conventions are first.

We all, myself included, need to know the difference between "Regency" and "a regency."

My Storytelling Approach, Pt. 1: Puzzle Building and Solving

Ariade (Ellen Page) folds a street in Inception.

I really loved the movie Inception. It’s not the best movie I’ve ever seen. Not the prettiest, the most profound, or best executed, but the scene where Ariadne learns to build dreams struck a chord deep in my chest that still makes me shiver.

Christopher Nolan defines science fiction in this movie, at least for me. He gives form to symbolism, symbolism to form, and uses both to turn reality inside out. He gives his characters the power to bend and break the rules of physics at will within the context of the dream. As a balance, he assigns consequences for abusing that power. The dream state is addictive. The more time the dreamer spends under, the higher the potential for addiction. The further into the dream one goes, the greater the risk for losing the sense of being. Time stretches out. The line between what is real and not becomes harder to see.

That was the price that Cobb’s wife, Mal, paid for the life they built while dreaming.  She lost her grasp on which world was real.  Certain that she was trapped in a dream, she walked out of a high rise window and fell to her death.  Also a consequence, Cobb can no longer do his job. His mind always throws Mal into the mix, and her goal is always sabotage. (Mal...bad...coincidence? Not remotely.) Therefore, a new architect, Ariadne is brought in to build the biggest dream world Cobb’s team has ever attempted. The way that Ariadne builds her first dream world reminded me very much of how I build my stories.

My creations, however, have not prompted someone else’s subconsciously-created minions to attack me…yet.

I’m fairly good at jig-saw puzzles. I’m getting pretty good at sudoku. Crosswords and ciphers stump me, but that’s their job, right? Novels are like a 3D jigsaw with blank pieces coated in dry-erase material. I’m putting pieces together…but I’m also creating the pieces, one at a time, as I go along. In the end, I’m even surprised at what comes together. Honestly…I look at a finished manuscript printed out and think, “Holy S&#%! Where did that come from?”

Every. Single. Time.

So, I thought that I for today’s post, I’d try to work through HOW I put my puzzles together. One story came to mind immediately. Probably a distraction, but let’s follow it and see where it goes.

In 1999, as I’ve mentioned on other posts, I was working on Circle of the Butterfly. (Speaking of distractions, that one was a road trip to Albuquerque that ended up in Milwaukee. It was planned as seven double-POV novellas…ended up a two-volume epic told from 19 POVs. Not as convoluted as it sounds, but still…oops.) Anyhow, I had gotten to this scene where I needed to get an army inside of the walls of a fortified city. I had spent weeks working out the scenarios that could use to accomplish that. One day, I’m sitting on the couch looking through my notebook, and there it is. If the answer had hands, it would have slapped me. Much earlier in the timeline, one of my POV characters is sitting in a window, watching refugees flood through the city’s gates. This woman is the same narrator that observes the siege for which I am trying to provide foreign soldiers. Bingo…the army is already in the walls and had been for months.

Puzzle piece polished off. And the contours of the piece provided additional possibilities, like inside collaborators, sleeper agents, mass betrayal by the kingdom’s holy knights…is there anything more fun than a setting turning itself inside out around unsuspecting characters? Possibly, but rare, I’m sure.

Where was I? Oh, yes. My writing approach.

I’ve come across a lot of talk about “pantsers” and “plotters.” I used to be a pantser, until I took a writing class that squashed that habit like a bug, but strict plotting never worked for me either. I’m in between, I guess. I’m a pantser on the scenes, but a plotter on the bridges between them. I always have more than one chapter in progress. And I start editing before I’m done with the first draft. These four things allow me to plant details to cinch the story tight in the end. I can examine plot holes, build upon detail that will be crucial at other parts of the story, and keep a consistent narrative feel throughout.

I’ll give you this example from January Black.

They shared snacks and traded small talk when they were in the apartment at the same time. The moments combined to make him feel as if he belonged in the king's home and presence, but he never grew into the idea that he knew Hadrian.

They seem insignificant sentences, but they figure into the resolution of the plot. I’d explaining how but some readers don’t like spoilers. [wink] Truth is, though, those sentences were written simply as Matty’s reflection on his friendship with his king. A statement of fact, nothing more. It was during the first round of editing that they struck me as an integral detail to the story. Recognizing the importance of the second sentence resulted in serious rewrites to a dozen other chapters.

Let's go back to the Inception clip for just a moment.  Ariade asks Cobb about messing with the physics of the dream, after which she folds a city on top of itself and then literally walks UP the street. The viewer follows them…the impossible becomes the new reality and the dream continues. The world as it had been before is now insignificant…and having broken the barrier, Ariadne charges forward to see what she can make the dream do next.

I mentioned before that I start my first edit before I finish my first draft. What I mean by that is that when I’m about half-finished, when I have a rough idea of how many chapters I’m going to end up with, I print the file out…with blank pages for chapters I haven’t outlined yet…and I put them into a three ring binder. Then I start going through it with a red pen looking for bits like the one above. I scrawl notes all over regarding what needs to be added and what needs to be taken out because it’s already not working. In this way, I create pieces for my puzzle that will fit voids in multiple locations…describe a character in chapter seven, provide an obstacle in chapter forty-three, and provide motivation for a choice made in fifty-nine.

I like the three-ring binder better than a word processor, or even Scrivener for this step, because I can physically put my hand on page 59 and flip to it while working out a scene on page 259, and then back again. I find it much easier to develop an idea between two separate parts of the book when I can see them side by side. I can figure out the logical place to gloss over months of the timeline. I can plant the seeds for an incident in chapter 47 throughout the opening act. When I’ve got my details sewn, my edits entered, and my sketched scenes written, I can then address the climax, nudge a character into mischief and knock down three-hundred pages of dominoes.

Catch up with me next week when I post part 2, in which I will describe the process of my second and third (and fourth, fifth, sixth…) round of edits. Tomorrow...I'll be throwing whatever at the wall and see what sticks.