I've been following
Ann Herendeen's career since she published Phyllida and the Brotherhood of Philander with HarperCollins in Spring 2008. This was before Running Press started their m/m historical romance line and Herendeen's m/m, m/f combo (with one of those 'm's being the same gent) was the nearest thing I'd seen to m/m romance breaking into mainstream publishing. Now, Ann's back with
Pride/Prejudice, also from HarperCollins and published just yesterday! I happen to know that the '/' in the title is no happenstance. Let's hear what Ann has to say about it, shall we?
Oh, and don't miss the excerpt from Pride/Prejudice at the end of the post.
Tell us about your recent publication.
Pride/Prejudice is what I call “the hidden story” of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. It takes the same characters and plot and brings to light the homoerotic subtext. Most of us are familiar with the central romance, of proud Mr. Darcy and prejudiced Elizabeth Bennet, and how they learn the truth behind their mistaken “first impressions” (Austen’s original title). But I see a similar development in the relationships between Mr. Darcy and his “gentlemanlike” friend Mr. Bingley, and between Elizabeth and her friend Charlotte. In both cases, one of the partners has to learn to respect the other’s choices and to treat him or her as an equal.
This is a bisexual love story: the same-sex relationships are in addition to the m/f ones, not instead of them. I’m not changing the story, only showing a part of it that couldn’t be seen in Austen’s time. I don’t think Austen was consciously writing “bisexual” characters; that’s a modern way of categorizing people. But the kind of friendship she portrayed between Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley, the affectionate but domineering control that Mr. Darcy wields, can very easily support a sexual interpretation. Elizabeth’s sense of betrayal at Charlotte’s marriage to the loathsome Mr. Collins also carries an implication of jealousy. And the exploitative relationship between Mr. Darcy and Wickham practically requires a sexual aspect to make sense of it.
What gave you the idea for this story?
Writing my first novel, Phyllida and the Brotherhood of Philander. That story took a traditional Georgette Heyer form of the Regency romance—a witty, drawing-room comedy of manners—sexed it up, and queered it by making the hero “slightly bisexual” (as I described him in my presentation for a conference—see below). The idea was to use all the clichés or standard tropes of these m/f romances—the alpha male rakish hero, the marriage of convenience, and the Bertie Wooster-ish group of the hero’s friends—to tell an m/m/f romance, giving the hero a hea with his wife and his boyfriend.
Phyllida has a minor subplot in which the hero thinks his wife is the author of Sense and Sensibility, which was published anonymously. (She actually writes trashy gothic novels.) And it got me thinking about Pride and Prejudice, because I saw the possibility in that novel for a similar m/m/f situation. Because P&P was published in 1813, it’s usually read as taking place in 1812, so it was a natural progression from writing an m/m/f love story set in 1812 to telling P&P as an m/m/f story—or slightly m/m/f/f.
Why do you write?
When I started, it was to write the kind of thing I wanted to read but didn’t see anyone else writing: an m/m/f love story in the form of a traditional m/f romance novel. I think of Phyllida as my fantasy autobiography—what’s sometimes called a “Mary Sue.” If I could go back into the fictional past and be the heroine of a Regency romance, this would be it.
Working on P/P was a very different experience. I wasn’t writing “my” story; I was writing Jane Austen’s story, trying very hard not to change it, but to bring out some of the hidden aspects. Writing about other characters, as opposed to a version of me and my fantasies, changed how I felt about writing.
Now I think it’s more like what real writers do: they look for truths—about the world, about themselves, about relationships—by telling a made-up story. I see writing as a conversation with readers. It’s not just me talking to my computer. When we write something intended for publication we hope other people will read it and be moved by it. I’m still writing for myself, in the sense that writing fiction allows me to be completely honest—or as close as anyone can get. But I’m also putting this candid viewpoint out there and saying, “This is what interests me, what turns me on, what makes me laugh. What do you think?” Naturally I’m going to get negative responses as well as positive ones, but that’s what it’s all about—a way to reveal, through my fiction, the true self that feels hidden within my physical being and day-job existence, and see how other people react to it.
To what/whom do you credit your success?
First: to the fact that I write comedy within an old-fashioned narrative style. People can enjoy my stories on different levels: as genuine romance or as a humorous take on a familiar genre or story. Most of the books I read growing up were written at least fifty years ago (I’m almost 55), and many of them had a style that’s deceptively easy. The reader assumes it was as easy to write as it is to read. Only when you try to emulate it do you find out how hard it is to achieve. But I keep trying.
Second: my editor at HarperCollins. He’s the one who, in his words, “came across” the POD Phyllida and liked it enough to give it a chance at real publication. It was the humor that attracted him. HC published Phyllida as regular fiction, not as romance, and I think my editor was surprised that some readers took it seriously as a love story. Many people assume I was one of the select few to be picked out of the slush pile, and want to know my secret. The truth is even stranger. I did send my manuscript to publishers and agents, but gave up after six months and did print-on-demand instead.
Third: I also have to thank some influential bloggers, especially Michelle Buonfiglio and her blog, Romance B(u)y The Book, and the Smart Bitches, Trashy Novels. They both gave the POD Phyllida great publicity, and I suspect this was one of the reasons my eventual editor decided it was worth a look.
How did you start writing?
I had read a number of Marion Zimmer Bradley Darkover novels years ago. I especially liked The Heritage of Hastur with its homoerotic coming-of-age story and the villain, Dyan Ardais, who is primarily same-sex oriented but admits to being “a man of impulse”—desiring a woman, even marrying, on one or two occasions. Then, much later, I found a book of Darkover fanfiction. Like all overconfident neophytes, I thought I could do as well as some of those writers, and I sat down and wrote a story, told in the first person, about being one of Dyan Ardais’s “impulses.” (Yes, reader, I married him.)
The story sucked, but at the time I was quite pleased with it. I wrote several more, chronicling the adventures of the little family I created with Dyan, his boyfriends, and our two children. Eventually the stories became longer, then novellas. I had written two full-length novels and was halfway through a third when I realized two things: 1) Bradley had stopped permitting fanfiction, so all this work was unpublishable; and 2) while my first efforts were atrocious, I had gotten better with practice and could perhaps try to publish something. That’s when I switched to Regency romance. The comic mood of most regencies suits my voice, and it was a genre I felt comfortable working in.
If you could change one thing about the publishing industry, what would it be?
Publicity. I would make it possible for new, marginal writers to get publicity, like readings, interviews—ideally, a book tour—if they want it.
When the big publishing houses pay an enormous advance to a celebrity or bestselling author, they obviously don’t want to lose that investment, so they’re willing to put additional money into publicity to make sure the book performs up to expectations. Authors like me, who get very small advances, aren’t worth the extra expense. If our books don’t sell, the publisher hasn’t lost hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars, only a very few thousand. There’s no point in throwing any more money down the drain after that initial small loss.
Blogging is just about the only way new authors have to promote ourselves, and I’m not very good at it. Public appearances and interviews are much easier for me. It’s something I enjoy doing, and I think most books sell better when the author is right there with readers, face to face, answering questions and sharing her pleasure in her work. But it only happens now for the few authors who already have the big sales or get a big advance, and can be counted on to fill seats. I would be willing to set aside some of my minuscule advance for PR instead of taking it as cash, but since I would need help making the arrangements and getting gigs, I suspect the publishers would still consider it not worth the trouble.
Of course, being featured in a special segment like this Author Spotlight is much, much more fun than trying to be a conscientious blogger or Twitterer—and I thank you for giving me the opportunity!
What is your proudest moment as an author?
Being invited to be a panelist—a speaker—at the conference held at Princeton University last year called “Love as the Practice of Freedom? Romance Fiction and American Popular Culture.” My proudest moment was meeting the other panelists: multiply-published romance novelists like Jennifer Crusie and Eloisa James; and scholars like Stephanie Coontz, author of the pioneering nonfiction work, Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage—and then standing up and speaking about my one published book (at the time), and realizing I was, however briefly, part of this group.
Kirk, or Spock?
Spock. I figure he must be bisexual, as it’s the most logical orientation, being open to relationships with both (or all) sexes ;)
Here's an excerpt from Ann's newest release, Pride/Prejudice:
, just came out from Running Press a few weeks ago.
Recent Comments