Comments on: Historical Accuracy

By: Valerie

Valerie — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:41:52 +0000

I love Catherine Coulter, Stephanie Laurens and Jude Deveraux. I agree as far as the historical accuracy goes, I don’t know what fashions were like or even what slang was popular, but i know, for the most part, what societal values were like. I don’t care to see modern mores in historical fiction. I read fiction to be entertained. If i wanted to learn something i’d pick up a text book.

By: Jane

Jane — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:23:40 +0000

I’m a big fan of Andrea Pickens. I can’t wait for the third book to be released. Jenna Petersen has a Lady Spies series. Some favorites include Julia Ross, Julie Garwood and Jacquie D’Alessandro. Historical accuracy is not important if I’m reading fiction.

By: Cathy M

Cathy M — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:13:14 +0000

Stephanie Laurens is one of my favorite historical romance authors. As for historical accuracy, not a biggee for me. I read romance fiction for the storyline, and let the author create any world they want to share with me.

By: azteclady

azteclady — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:33:36 +0000

I am not that well versed in History myself that I catch a lot of the things that other catch. In my case, what can–and sadly, often does–pull me out of the story is poor characterization.

I may not know what kind of undergarments were in use in the 1800s vs what was worn in the 1600s but I would imagine that neither women nor men would speak to each other, nor behave in public the way people today do–the social mores were much different, and the imbalance of power between the genders much more marked. To keep me reading, that should come through in the writing, more than anything else.