How accurate does a Regency have to be?

I write at least three new Regency romantic adventures every year – sometimes four – as well as two mainstream historical novels set in World War II. Obviously with any books set in living memory it essential to get all historical details absolutely right so I tend to spend far longer on background reading and detailed research with these books than I do for my Regency romances.
One author, a friend who also writes Regency, said to me when I mentioned that she had made a couple of minor historical mistakes that as her books sold for less than £1 it didn't really matter. A reader would hardly expect a writer to spend as much time on these details if the book was going to be sold for so little.
What do you think? Is she right? Do readers get what they pay for and don't expect the same standard of historical accuracy in a less expensive book?
I think that every book, sold for whatever price, should be as well written and as accurate as the writer can make it. Of course, no reader was alive in the Regency and therefore less likely to be as knowledgeable about the period. However, many readers are fans of Jane Austen and will have gleaned a lot of accurate history from reading these books and watching TV and film versions.
I don't do as much research when writing a Regency story because my background knowledge is so extensive after having written more than thirty books in this genre.
What I do is check when I'm not sure – for instance I wanted to know what songs might have been sung around the piano at Christmas time. Hark the Herald Angel was written in the 1700s, so I used that, but I had to check online first.
I know that my books are more historically accurate nowadays than they were when I first started writing and I'm proud of that. I'm not talking about major anachronisms such as talking about turning on the tap or catching a bus which I've never done, but small details like using the word fiance, which wasn't around until much later.

What about covers? Not whether the picture on the front has the correct hair colouring as the heroine or hero, but whether the setting and costume are correct. In the cover on the right the girl looks exactly like my heroine – however, she wouldn't have worn a white dress with such a low back. I had to settle for a slight inaccuracy as it's almost impossible to get perfection if you use photographs rather than artwork for your covers.
 The cover on the left was for one of my early Regency novellas for My Weekly Pocket Novel. Need I say anymore?
A Runaway Bride is a recent book with a lovely cover from Jane Dixon-Smith and I thought it historically correct until a friend pointed out there was a zip running up the back which neither Jane nor I had noticed. Would you have noticed if I hadn't pointed it out to you? The MW PN cover is horrendous and totally misleading, however despite the minor inaccuracies, I think both the other covers give the feel of a Regency romance.
I've been told by some readers that too much "history" in a Regency spoils the romance and that as long as the setting and dialogue are reasonably correct, they don't even notice the details. The plot and character is what is important.
Do you agree? How much historical detail is too much and drowns the reader in unnecessary information? I'm not talking about a huge info dump – that's never a good idea. I like to put in details that bring the period to life and use the correct words when possible. If I call a bag a reticule then I make sure it's obvious from the context what it is.
I would be interested to hear your views.
Fenella J Miller

Price, cover or content?

I had raised the prices of all my mainstream, full length books to £2.99 -  they should have been £2.50  for me to keep the same royalty - and sales plummeted. I read somewhere that books should never be priced at £2.50 ( or anything £.50) which is why I made them £2.99.
I have now reduced the prices of all of them to £1.99 - and will  have to absorb the reduction in royalty of £0.40.

Original Cover.

People happily spend £3 on a coffee, but for some reason don't want to pay the same for a book which has taken months to produce.
How much does price influence you? I must admit I get the majority  of my books via KU nowadays, and would only spend more than £2.99 for a book from someone like Lee Child or Donna Leon.

Covers - how important are they to sales? I have changed the cover for Lady Emma's Revenge because several people said they looked as if they were asleep. Hadn't occurred to either Jane or I until then - but decided to have a new cover. Would the old cover have put you off buying the book? I know that I don't even look inside a book if I don't like the cover.

New cover.

What about content? Obviously the story is the crucial thing for any book - but if the price and cover are not right then readers don't even 'look inside.' What I'm asking about is the 'front matter'. I only have a title page, copyright stuff and acknowledgments  - my book list is at the end. Some books have pages of  information about family etc/book lists'historical notes and contents page before the book starts - would you persevere and read the excerpt or give up?
When  KU began and writers got paid if a reader read 10% of the book there were, I'm told, hundreds of very short books published where 10% of the book was just the 'front-matter'. not sure if this is true - but saw it on several loops.
For me it's cover, price and content -what about you?
Fenella J Miller

'Lady Emma's Revenge' will be published in June 2015.

The Scandal at Pemberley

£2.50 or $1.99 Amazon only.

I'm thrilled to tell you that the second book in my 'At Pemberley' series is now available on Amazon. I'm really enjoying writing this series and my intention is to publish a new installment every year. The next one - 'A Spy at Pemberley' is in the planning stage and I hope to get started in the autumn.
I thought about writing a book for Mary and Lydia, but have decided not to - the next one will be a new story about Darcy and Lizzy.

Blurb for 'A Scandal at Pemberley'.

A Scandal at Pemberley is Georgiana Darcy and Major Jonathan Brownstone's story. The major is to be groomsman for his best friend, Adam King, when he marries Kitty Bennet at Pemberley. Georgiana is about to embark on her first Season, but after meeting Jonathan she is having doubts about going. As Lizzy is expecting twins Darcy can't accompany his sister but is happy for his new brother-in-law to stand guardian in his stead. 
When George Wickham arrives uninvited at Pemberley, he sets in motion a chain of events that could cause a scandal from which none of the family would recover.

http://amzn.to/1DHctvY (.com)
http://amzn.to/1zFlqSz (uk)

Hope you enjoy this second installment -it's a stand alone book - but continues the story started in the fist book 'The Ghosts at Pemberley'.

Fenella J Miller

Poldark - is Aiden Turner enough?

Like 90% of the female population I was avidly awaiting the new version of Poldark. I remember loving the first series many years ago but fortunately didn't remember much about the story. I read the Winston Graham books, but again so long ago I have no recollection the plot – apart from I seem to remember Ross becomes an MP in the last book.
Aiden Turner certainly doesn't disappoint – he's an excellent actor and has to be the best looking lead on television at the moment. Demelza is equally attractive – funny, but I can't remember the name of the young woman who plays her. Indeed, I cannot criticize the acting, the setting or the costumes.

I'm sure you sense there is a big 'but' coming– and here are the reasons I am disappointed in the BBC production.
1. Ross is supposedly penniless but by last Sunday's episode he was the proud possessor of not only a carriage, but three different black horses.
2. Verity arrived for a prolonged visit with a trunk the size of a briefcase – what was all that about? Also on the luggage front Demelza and Ross took no luggage when they went to stay for Christmas but mysteriously a new gown arrived which Demelza then abandoned the next day.
3. Ross had a carriage – why on earth didn't he use it to take Demelza for her first overnight visit at the big house?
4. If the mines and the big house were within walking distance, why did Ross gallop hither and yon on so many occasions?
5. When Ross and Demelza galloped to help with the pilchards they were seen walking home without their horse. On one occasion he actually galloped home in the same direction as he galloped away.
6. Demelza's pregnancy: she announced that she was pregnant in September – in those days she wouldn't have known for certain until she was at least two months – then she is only just experiencing morning sickness, has a waist like wasp, three months later when she should have been at least five months pregnant.

7. Elizabeth's baby has remained a babe in arms – is there something wrong with the poor little thing that we don't know about? He should now be sitting up and taking an interest.
8. Demelza's dancing – we all know that she is an awkward young woman – but really! Why make her look as though she has a pair of feet like kippers.
9. The head of the household kicked the bucket and it's as if he had never existed – in those days the house would have gone into black and there would be no parties or celebrations for a minimum of six months.
10. It wasn't until Victorian times that gentlewomen attended funerals – of course, it might have been different in the wilds of Cornwall – but I doubt it.
11. The final and most ridiculous incident was the arrival of the villains and their partners unannounced, "we were just passing by and called in," on Christmas Eve!! Good grief! We wouldn't do this in the 21st-century, let alone in the 18th when etiquette was everything. Surely somebody must have checked these facts?

There – I've dared to speak ill of the Poldark. The BBC's production/direction are to blame for these appalling inconsistencies and historical errors and I cannot fathom why more effort wasn't put into this production.
They have a superb cast and the script is okay - but I can't be the only one who is irritated beyond measure by the sloppy production values. I will still watch the programme twice – once in the morning on my own and again with my husband in the evening, but some of the gloss has definitely gone for me.
What do you think? Will I now get hate mail and a storm of abuse? :)

A Cornish Maid - inspired by the original version of Poldark.

£0.99 / $0.99

I am delighted to tell you that I have just republished A Cornish Maid, first released in 2010 by Musa, and I think that the brilliant Jane Dixon-Smith has captured exactly the feeling I wanted.
I sold my first book exactly ten years ago this month – forty books written to date and most of them now published – and decided that I am going to start this second decade with a different style of cover. What do you think?
My Demelza is quite different from the Poldark Demelza, she is gently bred but orphaned and fallen on hard times. She has glorious black hair whereas the Demelza in Poldark has red hair.
My hero, Lucas Fairfield, has fair hair, but in all other respects I hope he is as attractive as the current Ross Poldark. Lucas does a fair bit of shirt removing as well. He was also a  soldier, but he was recently returned from the Peninsular and not the Colonies.

Richard Sharpe (Sean Bean)

All my previous Regency heroes were written with Richard Sharpe (Sean Bean) firmly in mind, but from now on it will  have to be Ross Poldark (Aidan Turner). Both fictional heroes share the same characteristics – in fact they have the characteristics that are essential in order to be a good hero. A hero, in my opinion, must be honest, kind, intelligent, brave, have a sense of humour and be physically attractive. Both Richard Sharpe and Ross Poldark, both brought to life by brilliant actors, epitomize a hero.

Ross Poldark (Aidan Turner)

In the small Cornish village of Tregorran, Demelza struggles to keep the family house intact and care for her young brothers and sister after the deaths of their parents. Knowing that she is losing the battle, she agrees to take in a paying guest: handsome Lucas Fairfield. But the growing attraction between the two seems doomed from the start. With Lucas obliged to return to his ancestral manor and Demelza devoted to caring for her siblings and own familial home in Tregorran, Cornwall. Can they ever find happiness together?




http://amzn.to/1EIqEPa (.uk)
http://amzn.to/1D4IbGo (.com)

Fenella J Miller

Victoria's War: Shadows – inspired by my mother's memoirs.

I'm delighted to tell you that the first part of the World War II family saga which was inspired by my mother's memoirs, is now live on Amazon. My mother was Anglo-Indian and the daughter of a Rajah. She went out to join her father and his family in 1935 and stayed for four years.The first few chapters of the book are set in India in 1939 and several of the events actually happened.

£2.99 - out now.

Victoria in no way resembles my mother, but the descriptions of the palace, jungle and various other things are based on actual accounts. I shall be publishing the  memoirs in the summer and already have a fabulous cover for them.
The second part of the book, Victoria's War: Reunited, he's ready to go to my proofreader and will be out in May or June this year.
I loved writing this book, it is different to my other World War II books as a lot of it is set abroad. It opens in India in 1939, then moves to Essex, to Africa, India and Burma, then to Boston USA and ends in London in 1950.

Victoria Bahani, the spoilt, privileged daughter of the Rajah of Marpur and an English woman has always believed she would marry an Englishman and not an Indian. When she meets Captain Henry Hindley-Jones on the train to Delhi she knows he is exactly the kind of man she and her mother had been thinking of. 
However, things are changing in India and her father no longer approves of the British. Marrying Henry means she must give up her Indian heritage and become an Englishwoman – will she live to regret her impulsive decision?

http://amzn.to/1xAmVAw (.uk)
http://amzn.to/1F76jrY (.com)

To KU or not to KU?

There has been a lot of chatter on various loops over the past few weeks about whether Amazon's Kindle Unlimited has been a disaster or a triumph for author-publishers.
I have come to the conclusion that it depends what price your books are, how many books you have available and what genre you write in.
Just in case any of you don't know what I'm talking about I will give a brief explanation. K U is similar to Net-flicks or iTunes – you subscribe for £8.99 or $9.99 a month and can then borrow up to 10 books at a time. If you want to borrow an eleventh book then you have to return one of the books already  on your device. You can keep these books as long as you want – but I don't know if you can borrow the same book  a second time as I've not actually tried to do so.
There are around 75000 books in the system, the majority are author-published, but not all of them. Amazon put in a pot of money each month and, depending how many borrowers there are, the amount given to each author for each loan can vary. As the dollar is so strong at the moment $1.50 means that each borrow is worth £1. Amazon introduced a bonus system last year – if your sales put you in the top hundred you get a substantial payment, and if a book is in the top hundred you get another payment. I've been fortunate to get four of these author bonuses so far.
Now, for me, as I have forty books and box sets available, and most of them are Regency (a very popular niche market), and all these sell at less than £1.50, you can see that  every borrow gives me massively more than a sale. In the US my loans often outstrip my sales, but not so in the UK.
However, for those writers who price their books at more than £1.99 every loan could be said to be a loss as they would get slightly more from a sale than from a loan, The more expensive the price of the book the bigger the loss. Some writers have pulled out of Amazon Select because  their income has halved. For those authors who have some titles in the system and some out they found that sales for the ones out of the system vanished altogether as readers just borrowed the ones in KU.
I have heard writers say they don't wish their books to be given away free so will not join KU. This is not what is happening, books are not free, they are being borrowed  and for each borrow the writer is given a $1.50 compensation – this seems like a good deal to me. Personally, I believe that people are more likely to try my books if they can borrow them than if they have to buy them. I don't think that someone who has borrowed a book is necessarily the same person who would buy it.
KU has doubled my income and I think it a brilliant system and of benefit to writers and readers alike. I am reading more books than before, and even if I don't like the book I have downloaded, I always flick through to the 10% mark so the author gets their payment.

What do you think? If you are a reader, have you joined? If a writer, are you in the system or out?
I can't be the only writer who thinks KU is fantastic , but all I hear on Facebook or tails of woe and anguish.

Fenella J Miller