Tuesday, August 2, 2005

Candice Proctor

Below I said I read Candice Proctor was going to be writing romantic suspense. That info was wrong. It's even worse. According to her site, she's "reinventing" herself as an author of Regency-set mysteries. How sad... I hate it when romance authors totally switch genres, especially romance authors I love. And Proctor's Australian-set romances rank among some of my very favorite historical romances.

And BTW, she has an interesting article on her website about the lack of respect given to romance authors. She writes, "My romances are just as meticulously plotted and contain the same well developed characters as my mysteries and thrillers. Yet my romances—despite their hefty advances and starred PW reviews—are seen as being less worthy of respect than my hardcover mystery. Why?"

Good question.

4 comments:

  1. Ellen, it may not be Candice's choice to switch genres within romance. (I don't know either way, I'm just mentioning this. *g*) A friend of mine broke into historical romance with a pirate romance, which she followed up with two great westerns. Then, her publishing house wanted her to write a Regency. That's how they felt they could build her career and sales.

    I don't know if I'd be able to do that or switch from romantic comedy to, say, more intense romantic suspense. I hope I never have to find out! LOL

    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh, sure, I know, Mary. And an author's career is sometimes best served by switching genres. That's for her and her agent to decide. I just don't like the fact that many of the really good historical authors are switching genres (even though some of them are continuing to write historicals, too). It suggests historicals are on the wane, which is an idea that makes me unhappy. Admittedly I don't write them myself anymore, but my first two books were historicals, so I have a soft spot for the genre.

    And I switch subgenres all the time. It works for me, but I realize it may not work for every writer:-). I guess we all have to do what's best for us!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for the link to that article, I'm very interested in this phenomenon.

    ReplyDelete