Mistress, consent, and tea

It's happening! Mistress is now out for Kindle, and paperback should be following in the next day or two.

If you've read my other work and are considering this, you should know that it contains fairly explicit adult scenes -- several of them. It also contains a lot of other story, though; they definitely don't just jump into bed. This is a story where sex is central to the storyline, and part of my aim was to make that sex fairly realistic (up to and including a break to use the chamber pot). It's also a story about regrets; Persuasion is decidedly my favorite Austen story, and the autumnal hindsight of that story was very much an influence on this one.

It's probably come as a surprise to some that I'm even writing something that doesn't "fade to black," and I promise the Constant Love series will continue at its current level of chasteness. It wasn't even something I'd intended to do when I started in this genre, although I read some of it. What made me want to do it was the rather tremendous number of stories out at the time that put Darcy somewhere in the span between confident debaucher and out-and-out rapist.

The latter I have the biggest issue with, obviously. I'm fine with rough sex or even BDSM between consenting adults, but stories where the female doesn't consent (and even specifically says no, or to stop), and then ends up enjoying it later anyway, I believe contribute to rape culture. The message it sends is that it's okay to do this, because she'll wind up liking it. It is NOT okay.

My issue with the whole range, though, is that Pride and Prejudice already has a character who is a rake and a seducer of young women. His name is Mr. Wickham. The whole point of Wickham is to be the antagonist, and Darcy's opposite, so the absolute last thing I want to read is something where Darcy acts like Wickham. It would make a lot of sense for there to be stories where Wickham does these things, but I suspect not a lot of people would want to read them. We don't like Mr. Wickham, in large part because he does those things.

So the idea for Mistress was born out of, essentially, a counterpoint to those stories. Darcy's character arc in P&P is to change his behavior, and better show that he's actually a really considerate guy. At the risk of sounding like the fortune cookie game, Mistress shows that he's a really considerate guy...in bed.

And he has to be, because Elizabeth is a widow, and she's spent her (thankfully) short marriage getting poked every night by Mr. Collins. Ick, I know. I didn't want to go into detail on it, because, well, nobody wants to read that, but also because there's a real gray area as to whether what she went through was rape, and this really underlines the situation for women in her time.

Legally, it wasn't rape, because he was her husband, and in those days, technically his property. She went willingly, if reluctantly, to bed with him because it was her duty. This is easiest to couch in the tea consent analogy:



So using the tea analogy, she basically contractually obligated herself to drink a cup of earl grey every night, without ever having drank a cup of earl grey, and then found out bergamot is disgusting. Consent is, unfortunately, implicit in the marriage vow, and she's married an inept, inconsiderate (and due to the circumstances, domineering) man.

So what is Mistress, then? Well, I may as well continue the tea analogy. After absolutely loathing earl grey, let's just say Elizabeth has sworn off tea. And let's say someone returns to her life, and says I love you, please try English breakfast. It will be much better. And she says, okay, I'll try it, but just one cup. And he makes the tea, and he's like, here, make sure it's not too hot before you drink it. Would you like some milk? Or sugar? I made some scones, would you like to have a scone with your tea?

And that, folks, is how I want my Mr. Darcy to be. He's a gentleman, and he makes an amazing cup of tea, a cup of tea so damn good he doesn't need to force anyone to drink it, a cup of tea that is indeed so good that the next question is, of course, "May I have another cup of tea?"

Why yes, Elizabeth, of course. You may have as many cups as you choose to ask for. And no more.

I hope you all enjoy Mistress -- I know it's been a long time in development, and that's in large part because I used so much reader feedback from the online posting and other touchpoints to improve it. So for those who gave feedback, THANK YOU, and I hope you enjoy the finished product. You might want to give the Spotify playlist a listen as you read.

As always, if you enjoy the story and wish to help support my writing, Amazon and Goodreads reviews are much appreciated!

And if you're interested in winning a copy or just reading more about the series, I'll be embarking on an extended blog tour for this one, with opportunities to do so at every stop:

• March 18 / My Jane Austen Book Club/Launch Post & Giveaway
• March 19 / Of Pens & Pages/Book Review, Excerpt & Giveaway
• March 20 / Margie’s Must Reads /Book Review & Giveaway
• March 21 / More Agreeably Engaged/Author Spotlight & Giveaway
• March 22 / Every Savage Can Dance/Book Review & Giveaway
• March 23 / Just Jane 1813/Guest Post & Giveaway
• March 24 / Diary of an Eccentric/Book Review & Giveaway
• March 25 / My Love for Jane Austen/Excerpt Post & Giveaway
• March 26 / My Vices and Weaknesses/Book Review & Giveaway
• March 27 / So Little Time…/Excerpt Post & Giveaway
• March 28 / Babblings of a Bookworm/ Guest Post & Giveaway
• March 29 / From Pemberley to Milton / Vignette Post & Giveaway

Country House Libraries

In my latest post for Austen Authors, I'm taking a closer look at one room, the library, and what it might have been like at some of the houses in Pride and Prejudice.

What happened to Mrs. Bennet's money?

Usually when I post about things in this blog, I have at least some sort of theory about them, and this is my place to expand on that theory (outside of working it into my stories). I have no theory on this one. I'm curious whether anyone else does -- so if you do, please chime in within the comments.

Mrs. Bennet's daughters get their share of four thousand pounds after she dies, and Elizabeth's fortune is later indicated to be one thousand pounds, in the four per cents, while Mr. Gardiner indicates in his letter to Mr. Bennet of Lydia's portion of the five thousand pounds divided among the sisters after the decease of Mr. and Mrs. Bennet.

I suppose I always thought that the four thousand pounds grew to five thousand pounds because the interest had been reinvested. Lately, despite an abhorrence of math, I did the math (well, actually a spreadsheet did the math, but I did the formula!), and was surprised at what I found.

If it had been in the five per cents, by the time of the novel, it should have turned into at least 11,000 pounds. Even in the four percents, the safer assumption as it is what was indicated by Mr. Collins, it would have been more than 9,000 pounds. What's more, if Mr. and Mrs. Bennet lived another 10 years, it would have been 13,493 pounds (in the five per cents, more than 18,000 pounds -- I have no idea why one would invest in the four per cents when the five obviously brings more money...perhaps it was more risky?). Obviously, after Mr. Bennet died, Mrs. Bennet and any remaining daughters would have begun living off of the interest.

Each of the Bennet daughters should likely have had at least two thousand pounds, unless both Mr. and Mrs. Bennet die before 1816. Which doesn't sound like much compared to Georgiana Darcy's 30,000 pounds, but it could have brought each of them one hundred pounds a year in the five per cents, which is the very base level of genteel living. If all of them had remained unmarried, they would have had something like five hundred a year, which puts them in range with the Dashwoods -- come down from where they had been, but not by any means living in hedgerows.

So this leaves me with the question -- what happened to the money?

Did it form Mrs. Bennet's pin money, and she spent it all on ribbons? Were they instead taking the interest and including it as part of Longbourn's income? Was there some great expense in the past that required them to dip into the savings? Perhaps Mr. Bennet purchased more land or used it to fund improvements to the estate?

Regardless, it makes the negligence of the Bennet parents even more egregious, to me. I think more lowly of Mr. Bennet, particularly, now, for not taking what should have been a comparably simple step to keep growing his wife's fortune.

I don't think this is going to have any bearing on the Constant Love series, but I'm going to file it away for possible future use. What will make the series is my conjectures on the financial status of the Fitzwilliams: namely, why did both Lady Anne and Lady Catherine not marry noblemen, as would a have been expected, and why was a colonelcy all that could be done for Colonel Fitzwilliam? It's going to be awhile before we get to my theories on these, but get to them we shall!

PS: Today (7/26) is your last day to enter to win an ebook copy of A Constant Love, over at Babbling of a Bookworm. And while you're there, you can read my guest post on Regency London.

"All six, every year"

A friend recently brought my attention to this New Yorker article, about the history of reading for pleasure. I'd always assumed this was something that had always been done, but as it turns out, the notion of reading for pleasure really developed during the period from about 1750-1850.

This places Austen's work in a new light. She was part of that early few generations of people who read because they enjoyed it. Novels were not merely moral stories, to be learned from and quoted, but for entertainment.

And Austen's role in further shaping the act of reading for pleasure cannot be underestimated. To understand my title, go check out the article, and Gilbert Ryle's delightful quote when he was asked if he read novels. There are a number of works that were produced between the years 1750 and 1850, but how many of them are so very entertaining as to be worth reading, over and over again?

Jane Austen didn't just create brilliant novels; she created some of the first enjoyable novels. She took a new and developing genre, and produced stories that could be enjoyed, time and time again, and that people could continue to relate to, 200 years later. I continue to be in awe of what she did.