The Adventures of Alianore Audley now has a new cover and the text has been somewhat upgraded.
Showing posts with label The Adventures of Alianore Audley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Adventures of Alianore Audley. Show all posts
Sunday, 1 May 2022
Friday, 29 April 2022
Wednesday, 13 April 2016
An Interview with Alianore Audley
Given that there are to be online interviews with King John and King Richard III I thought it only fair that we should have something similar here. Unfortunately, being a bit hard up, it wasn't possible to meet the fee demanded by dead monarchs, so I hope you will settle for a little chat with Alianore Audley:
BW: First of all, what do I call you? Dame Beauchamp? Mistress Audley?
AA: Alianore will do. We don't really do titles in This Place. Apart from The Management, that is.
BW: Right. Well, Alianore, is is fair to say you were the first female intelligence agent?
AA: No. We've league tables for that sort of thing and I'm not even in the top thousand. Maybe the first Englishwoman of breeding who left notes behind.
BW: Talking of notes, you left a very favourable record of Richard III - in the light of what you know now, do you stand by it?
AA: Look darling, Richard wasn't a saint, but you have to look at what followed. I mean, Henry Tudor! Nasty, mean, snivelling little man. His grandfather was a wardrobe attendant! Fancy having someone like that as king. The idea! At least Richard had a respectable pedigree. He killed one or two people, I'll admit, but either they deserved it for plotting against him (Buckingham for example - what a jerk) or they were frightfully common fellows who'd just got a bit above themselves. Yes, I do mean the Woodvilles.
BW: But Alianore, the Woodvilles had lots of noble quarterings on their mother's side. And Anthony, at least, was a highly civilised man, and a noted chivalrous knight.
AA: Yes, but they were Richard's enemies. They'd have killed him given half a chance. Be serious! It wasn't a game of cricket, you know. And really! Dame Jacquetta was a foreigner. You don't think that English gentlefolk took her quarterings seriously, do you? A woman who claimed descent from a (expletive deleted) water snake! Forsooth and forsooth, as Mad King Henry used to say. (Or so I am told).
BW: First of all, what do I call you? Dame Beauchamp? Mistress Audley?
AA: Alianore will do. We don't really do titles in This Place. Apart from The Management, that is.
BW: Right. Well, Alianore, is is fair to say you were the first female intelligence agent?
AA: No. We've league tables for that sort of thing and I'm not even in the top thousand. Maybe the first Englishwoman of breeding who left notes behind.
BW: Talking of notes, you left a very favourable record of Richard III - in the light of what you know now, do you stand by it?
AA: Look darling, Richard wasn't a saint, but you have to look at what followed. I mean, Henry Tudor! Nasty, mean, snivelling little man. His grandfather was a wardrobe attendant! Fancy having someone like that as king. The idea! At least Richard had a respectable pedigree. He killed one or two people, I'll admit, but either they deserved it for plotting against him (Buckingham for example - what a jerk) or they were frightfully common fellows who'd just got a bit above themselves. Yes, I do mean the Woodvilles.
BW: But Alianore, the Woodvilles had lots of noble quarterings on their mother's side. And Anthony, at least, was a highly civilised man, and a noted chivalrous knight.
AA: Yes, but they were Richard's enemies. They'd have killed him given half a chance. Be serious! It wasn't a game of cricket, you know. And really! Dame Jacquetta was a foreigner. You don't think that English gentlefolk took her quarterings seriously, do you? A woman who claimed descent from a (expletive deleted) water snake! Forsooth and forsooth, as Mad King Henry used to say. (Or so I am told).
BW: Have you any regrets?
AA: Not telling more of my story and not buying more land while it was cheap.
Tuesday, 15 October 2013
The Adventures of Alianore Audley
The Adventures of Alianore Audley is now available through Amazon in Kindle format. I am currently checking a proof for a new printed version for the traditionalists among you. This will be a slightly larger format than the former Bewrite edition, and should be available shortly, also through Amazon.
For those of you are millionaires, there is also a de luxe version available through Blurb, including a hardback edition. But cheap it is not! The forthcoming paperback should be a lot more reasonable.
Work continued slowly on Alianore Audley and the Holy Grail. No promises as to when this will be forthcoming, but I will get there. I have put too much effort into it now for it to be abandoned.
Also on the stocks is a small factual work Frustrated Falcons which is about Edmund of Langley's three children. I am looking for my notes on Edward, the 2nd duke, which I need before I complete it. I think I can describe this little book as 'forthcoming'.
For those of you are millionaires, there is also a de luxe version available through Blurb, including a hardback edition. But cheap it is not! The forthcoming paperback should be a lot more reasonable.
Work continued slowly on Alianore Audley and the Holy Grail. No promises as to when this will be forthcoming, but I will get there. I have put too much effort into it now for it to be abandoned.
Also on the stocks is a small factual work Frustrated Falcons which is about Edmund of Langley's three children. I am looking for my notes on Edward, the 2nd duke, which I need before I complete it. I think I can describe this little book as 'forthcoming'.
Wednesday, 25 May 2011
The Daisy and The Bear
Just a brief mention of a new novel by Karen L Clark, The Daisy and the Bear.
This is a wonderful story of the Wars of the Roses, concerning Richard Neville Earl of Warwick and his true lurve. It'd be a shame to tell you who that is at it would completely spoil the plot and your enjoyment. This is a light-hearted tale, not to be taken too seriously, that seriously rips the pee out of bad historical novels. Indeed one particular author - whose name I shall not mention, but it rhymes with Dilippa Regory - has her interpretation of Elizabeth Woodville/Wydeville/however you spell it - rather delightfully parodied.
If you enjoyed Alianore Audley you will likely have the sense of humour that this book requires. (And if you haven't read Alianore Audley please buy that too, as I need the money. In fact, buy several copies for your friends.)
The ISBN for The Daisy and the Bear is 5-800056-222853. Further details may well be found on Karen's excellent website
Honesty and the reviewer's code compel me to reveal that I won this book in a Facebook competition, but I wouldn't have minded buying it. Honest.
This is a wonderful story of the Wars of the Roses, concerning Richard Neville Earl of Warwick and his true lurve. It'd be a shame to tell you who that is at it would completely spoil the plot and your enjoyment. This is a light-hearted tale, not to be taken too seriously, that seriously rips the pee out of bad historical novels. Indeed one particular author - whose name I shall not mention, but it rhymes with Dilippa Regory - has her interpretation of Elizabeth Woodville/Wydeville/however you spell it - rather delightfully parodied.
If you enjoyed Alianore Audley you will likely have the sense of humour that this book requires. (And if you haven't read Alianore Audley please buy that too, as I need the money. In fact, buy several copies for your friends.)
The ISBN for The Daisy and the Bear is 5-800056-222853. Further details may well be found on Karen's excellent website
Honesty and the reviewer's code compel me to reveal that I won this book in a Facebook competition, but I wouldn't have minded buying it. Honest.
By the way, the Blogger formatting isn't working properly today, so if this post looks odd, that's why. I'm not drunk or on non-prescribed drugs. Indeed I'm as sober as a particularly boring judge.
Sunday, 5 July 2009
Historical Accuracy
This topic is currently being discussed all over the place, and often more heat than light is generated in the process. Anyway, I thought I'd give my thoughts of the process and see what people think.
I have come to believe that it's impossible to create a 100% accurate historical novel, not least because we don't have all the necessary information. I've been studying the middle ages quite seriously since I was about 16 - in other words about 40 years - and what continues to astonish me is not how much I know, but how little. There are so many aspects to cover. To name a few - equine matters, archery, jousting technique, building systems, dress, social customs, sexual practices, politics, international relations and diplomacy, law, ships, armour...The list goes on and on, almost to infinity. Anyone - no matter how educated or talented - who kids themselves that they are an expert in all these fields is simply deluded.
OK, there are books and other sources for research. But research takes time - lots of it. And here's the breaking news. Even specialised experts, the ones who publish books on medieval pottery, or whatever, sometimes get it wrong. Historians have theories that other historians trash a few years later. What was historical orthodoxy in 1985 may well be 'outdated' now. Unless you keep up with every published book and article on your particular theme, you can expose yourself to error. If you've got the time and resources to do all that the chances are you won't have time to do any writing. You'll be a bit like a fellow I know who plans to build a super-accurate model of a local station. Last time I heard he'd built three coal wagons...
Then there's the little matter of language. Oh boy! How do you tackle that? People in the 14th and 15th Century spoke a different language to us, even when they called it English. Give your average reader a copy of Chaucer in its original form and see how much headway they make with it. Or even the Paston Letters (again in original form) which relatively speaking are easy peasy. Sorry, no one (except the odd eccentric) is going to buy a novel with the dialogue in that form.
So what do we do? Well I certainly don't think we should give up on accuracy. We should do our best, and not make stupid mistakes like having our medieval folk eating potatoes or drinking chocolate. Maybe we need to get together and check each other's manuscripts for particularly egregious errors. (My particular bête noire is when forms of address are incorrect - it really jerks me out of my suspended disbelief.) But let's not kid ourselves that we'll get everything absolutely right first time. The thing is, to at least try.
As for language, I think the best approach is the 'translation' one. In other words, it's a bit like translating Polish into English. You end up with modern English except for the odd Polish word put in for effect, or to cover a meaning that simply doesn't exist in English. The difference is you have to try to avoid modern idioms unless you're looking for comic effect. When wrote Alianore Audley I threw in all kinds of modernisms, slang and American usage becase I was deliberately trying to be funny. I was parodying the effect of language used in some medieval novels I've read over the years. It would have been equally comic to include a 'forsooth' or 'by my troth' every couple of lines. 'Tushery' I think they used to call it...
I have come to believe that it's impossible to create a 100% accurate historical novel, not least because we don't have all the necessary information. I've been studying the middle ages quite seriously since I was about 16 - in other words about 40 years - and what continues to astonish me is not how much I know, but how little. There are so many aspects to cover. To name a few - equine matters, archery, jousting technique, building systems, dress, social customs, sexual practices, politics, international relations and diplomacy, law, ships, armour...The list goes on and on, almost to infinity. Anyone - no matter how educated or talented - who kids themselves that they are an expert in all these fields is simply deluded.
OK, there are books and other sources for research. But research takes time - lots of it. And here's the breaking news. Even specialised experts, the ones who publish books on medieval pottery, or whatever, sometimes get it wrong. Historians have theories that other historians trash a few years later. What was historical orthodoxy in 1985 may well be 'outdated' now. Unless you keep up with every published book and article on your particular theme, you can expose yourself to error. If you've got the time and resources to do all that the chances are you won't have time to do any writing. You'll be a bit like a fellow I know who plans to build a super-accurate model of a local station. Last time I heard he'd built three coal wagons...
Then there's the little matter of language. Oh boy! How do you tackle that? People in the 14th and 15th Century spoke a different language to us, even when they called it English. Give your average reader a copy of Chaucer in its original form and see how much headway they make with it. Or even the Paston Letters (again in original form) which relatively speaking are easy peasy. Sorry, no one (except the odd eccentric) is going to buy a novel with the dialogue in that form.
So what do we do? Well I certainly don't think we should give up on accuracy. We should do our best, and not make stupid mistakes like having our medieval folk eating potatoes or drinking chocolate. Maybe we need to get together and check each other's manuscripts for particularly egregious errors. (My particular bête noire is when forms of address are incorrect - it really jerks me out of my suspended disbelief.) But let's not kid ourselves that we'll get everything absolutely right first time. The thing is, to at least try.
As for language, I think the best approach is the 'translation' one. In other words, it's a bit like translating Polish into English. You end up with modern English except for the odd Polish word put in for effect, or to cover a meaning that simply doesn't exist in English. The difference is you have to try to avoid modern idioms unless you're looking for comic effect. When wrote Alianore Audley I threw in all kinds of modernisms, slang and American usage becase I was deliberately trying to be funny. I was parodying the effect of language used in some medieval novels I've read over the years. It would have been equally comic to include a 'forsooth' or 'by my troth' every couple of lines. 'Tushery' I think they used to call it...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)