Rose Lerner is a brand new author writing historical romances in the vein of, you guessed it, Georgette Heyer. This is quite a feat, to be compared to such a cornerstone of romance. So, we're going to read Rose's debut novel,
In for a Penny and see what we think!
IN FOR A PENNY
No more drinking. No more gambling. And definitely no more mistress. Now that he's inherited a mountain of debts and responsibility, Lord Nevinstoke has no choice but to start acting respectable. Especially if he wants to find a wife-better yet, a rich wife. Penelope Brown, a manufacturing heiress, seems the perfect choice. She's pretty, rational, ladylike, and looking for a marriage based on companionship and mutual esteem.
IN FOR A POUND
But when they actually get to Nev's family estate, all the respectability and reason in the world won't be enough to deal with tenants on the edge of revolt, a menacing neighbor, and Nev's family's propensity for scandal. Overwhelmed but determined to set things right, Nev and Penelope have no one to turn to but each other. And to their surprise, that just might be enough.
For more on Rose, visit her website at www.roselerner.com.
My question for all you historical-lovers: why do these kinds of stories still resonate with us today, even though women don't face these exact sort of marriage issues?
Hey everyone. I will indeed be here next week! I'll also be hanging around all month though, and I'd love to hear your thoughts on Penny (or, you know, other books, or original Star Trek, or whatever) whenever you feel like posting them. 
I'd be happy to answer questions about the book too if anyone has any! Melanie, is this a spoiler-friendly thread? If not, I'll set up another one where people can talk spoilers if they want to...
Melanie_Murray wrote:
Are those quotes both from Star Trek movies? They're hilarious!
Yes! The revenge one is said by Khan in Wrath of Khan and the other one is Kirk trying to explain to a 1980s woman why Spock is so weird in Voyage Home, aka "the one with the whales."
So tell us: how'd you decide to try your hand at your own romance, and did you set out to emulate the Heyer model?
Oh, and can you sum up the story of the book for us?
I wrote my first romance my senior year in high school. I'd been reading traditional Regencies since I was 12 along with a good friend of mine--there was a fabulous used bookstore in Eugene that specialized in mass market paperbacks and they had a whole WALL of Regencies. We'd go down there every couple of months and get like ten books at a time, and loan them back and forth. The first couple years of high school we used to write each other letters in character as Regency debutantes--we got the idea from
Sorcery and Cecelia, or The Enchanted Chocolate Pot. From there it was a short step to writing an actual Regency. Obviously, a first novel by a 17 year old, it wasn't very good. But I loved it.
I wouldn't say I set out to emulate Heyer exactly. She's definitely been a huge influence, and I can see from the reviews that it shows, which is a huge compliment! Historical voice and banter between characters are a big part of my writing style for that reason. And I do tend to develop the mental chemistry between my hero and heroine more than the sexual chemistry (although that's important too!). But In for a Penny itself is more of an argument with Heyer than anything else: it's my answer to
A Civil Contract. I was pretty happy with how I said this in a guest post at The Book Smugglers so I'm going to just copy and from that post:
"I adore Georgette Heyer. I envy her prose style to the soles of my shoes. And A Civil Contract makes me want to throw it at the wall every time I read it.
It’s about a penniless lord who marries the daughter of a self-made man for her money. Jenny is 'too commonplace and matter-of-fact to inspire…passionate adoration,' unlike the woman Adam loves, a high-strung aristocratic girl with beautiful eyes. So far, so good. Except at the end of the book, Jenny’s in love with Adam and he is still not in love with her. Instead, they discover that a marriage of quiet content can be more enduring than passion.
I’m not opposed to that sentiment, and I know a lot of readers love the book for that very reason. But why Jenny? Why is Jenny denied what every other Heyer heroine gets: the passionate adoration of her hero? What if, I thought, I wrote a marriage of convenience between a penniless lord and the daughter of a self-made man where he’s the one who feels inadequate, and she’s the one with the ex-boyfriend?
Until his father’s death, my hero Nev has never had to deal with either responsibility or business management. And my heroine, Penelope, grew up helping with the books in her father’s brewery. Nev is impressed and a little turned on by her accounting skills, but he can’t shake the lingering fear that she’d be better off with sensible, ultra-competent Edward…"
Which I guess answers your "summing up the book" question too! Although that's really just the initial idea and it grew a lot from there. When Nev marries Penny for her money he thinks his troubles are over, but when they get to his estate they realize money is the least of their problems, which include but are not limited to: hungry, resentful tenants, Nev's family's propensity for scandal, an incompetent steward, a menacing neighbor, local poaching wars, recent crop failures--and, of course, their growing love for each other.
