Contemporary vs Historical Voice

I’ve thought about this a lot lately.

It’s no secret that my friend and guest blogger, Ava March, has a wonderful historical voice. I know she goes to great pains to make sure she has each detail correct, titles, clothing etc. When you read one of her Regencies it feels right. Ava swears she cannot write a contemporary book (I don’t really believe her by the way).

I’ve written historicals. The Squire and the Sorcerer’s Lover series are both set in medieval times (quick shout out to E.H. for the best movie ever, Ladyhawke). And so is A Knight For All. Of course, Another Chance, is set in the Regency. But I definitely do not have a deep historical voice. I write what could be considered “historical light”. I try to get simple things like titles right, but you aren’t going to find lots of historical details. If that is what you are looking for probably my historicals won’t be for you.

I originally started writing historicals, actually, because I always loved reading them myself. But I decided not all that long ago really that for the most part my voice is better suited to contemporaries. Probably in much the same way Ava has decided her voice is suited to historicals.

Does that mean I won’t write more of my male/male historical lights? No, I definitely will. I already have plans in the works for more so I can’t say I will write strictly contemporaries. But likewise I can’t or won’t change my style of writing. My brand of historical light will not be for everyone.

And speaking of contemporaries, Elisa Rolle did a lovely review of Most Likely to Succeed over at her livejounral. Elisa is a wonderful supporter of our genre as most familiar with the male/male genre know.

http://elisa-rolle.livejournal.com/617713.html