Monday, July 20, 2009

Lynne Connolly - A Different Type of TBR Pile

Yesterday we reported the results of our poll on how many books are needed for a two week holiday. Nine of the respondents answered 15 books! If you are packing so many is there any room for swimsuits and sunblock? Do you have to pay overweight baggage charges? Or do you go digital? One RNA member, Lynne Connolly, has been a huge propoment of e-readers for a long time so we asked her to share with us her TBR Pile. She writes historical romance for Samhain Publishing, and paranormal romance for Ellora’s Cave and Loose-Id.

My TBR pile.

A photograph wouldn’t be particularly helpful, since it’s of a computer screen!
My TBR is mainly electronic. Since I discovered ebooks, I haven’t looked back. My shelves thank me, my husband thanks me, since he’s no longer breaking his neck tripping over the piles of books all over the floor, and my shoulders thank me, because I’m no longer hauling around stacks of books wherever I go.

Now I carry an ereader which holds hundreds of books. So I won’t list them all here, just the ones next on the list. I review for The Good, The Bad and The Unread, but I won’t review books by friends, or from publishers I’m with, so some of these are review books.

I just finished Olivia Gates’ The Illegitimate King (Silhouette Desire) and I have to admit it wasn’t one of my absolute favorites, because the hero is a bit too alpha for me. But she has a great way with words and reading her books is usually an exercise in lush enjoyment.
I’m currently reading Elizabeth Hoyt’s To Beguile A Beast, a Georgian-set romance that so far I’m really enjoying. A wounded, angsty hero, a practical, beautiful woman determined to drag him out of his self-pity – what’s not to like?

I read mainly HMB’s (Harlequin/Mills and Boon) and American authored romances, because I write for that market and it helps me to keep in touch. And because I love a good paranormal romance, something that hasn’t caught on in the UK as yet. Buying them in ebook format means I don’t have to wait for them, and I don’t have to pay £7.99 for a $7.99 paperback, something that annoys me.

I have Jory Strong’s “Zoe’s Gift,” an erotic fantasy romance (set on another world). I love her books, and this is definitely just for fun. (From Ellora’s Cave)
Jennie LucasThe Innocents’ Dark Seduction (HMB)
Liz CarlyleTempted All Night
Elizabeth LowellBlue Smoke And Murder (love her books, a great writer).
Susan Elizabeth PhillipsWhat I did for Love (romantic comedy. I love SEP’s books)
Sherrilyn KenyonDream Warrior (paranormal romance)
JR WardLover Avenged (paranormal romance) (have started this one a few times but I can’t get into it – can’t seem to get over the h syndrome).
Evangeline AndersonStr8te Boys – I don’t read much m/m, but I like Anderson’s voice
Larissa IonePleasure Unbound (paranormal romance) Looking forward to starting this series.
And I’m waiting for the new Suzanne Brockmann, due out soon. I am a big fan – nobody takes you right into a character like Brockmann does.

As for non fiction – we’ve just had our dining room/library redone, and all my non fiction books are in boxes, so I can’t recall what I have. Two biographies of Bonnie Prince Charlie (who wasn’t Bonnie and wasn’t really a prince, either) for sure.

Lynne's latest book, VENICE, is the third in the award winning Richard and Rose series.
Richard and Rose marry...but their troubles are far from over. You can find her and more about her books on her website .

So our new poll is about e-readers....join the debate.


Laura Vivanco said...

"what’s not to like?"

Was that a rhetorical question? I suspect it is, but I'm not absolutely certain. Just a few days ago I saw what I think was another rhetorical question. The author referred to herself as "girl" and then added "I use that term loosely. Woman sounds weird, though, right?"

It would seem pedantic to reply to a rhetorical question, but on the other hand any question, even a rhetorical one, does seem to invite a response. I suppose that with rhetorical questions that's only a problem if the reader's answer to the question differs from the one the author intended the reader to give.

"Two biographies of Bonnie Prince Charlie (who wasn’t Bonnie and wasn’t really a prince, either)"

I'm intrigued. Why wasn't he really a prince, and do you mean that you don't think he really looked like this? Or is it that ideas about what constitutes masculine beauty have changed?

Magdalena Scott said...

I read e-books on my Hewlett Packard IPAQ pocket PC. At the moment, Microsoft Reader is my fave format, but I also use Mobipocket, Adobe PDF...whatever a desktop or laptop will do, the IPAQ will do, and it fits in my very small purse. Also has my Outlook calendar (synced with laptop), a picture viewer, mobile version of Word, Excel, PowerPoint. I love e-reading, and at this point, reading a paperback or hardcover isn't fun anymore.

lynneconnolly said...

Hi Laura!
I meant that I love books about angsty heroes and strong women who drag them out of their self-pity. I've finished the book now, and it was a real treat.

Bonnie Prince Charlie - He wasn't a prince because he wasn't acknowledged by the people of the country he claimed to be prince of (the public acclamation at Edinburgh doesn't really count - not under the Act of Settlement of 1689), he was never the son of a king. You aren't automatically a prince just because you and your family say so, even if you're a Stuart.
He was considered handsome in 1745, but by 1755 he'd degenerated into a fat, womanising wife-beating alcoholic. And this was his so-called friends and advisors talking. According to eye-witness accounts, he was, at the time of Culloden, moderately tall, pale-faced with protruberant light blue eyes, and likely to redden at the least agitation. He didn't take well to academic studies (he could have been dyslexic) and had the unfortunate Stuart propensity for tantrums and insisting on getting his own way.
If by any miracle he'd won the '45, and after King Louis's rejection of the campaign at Calais, he was never likely to, it would have been a complete disaster for Britain, which at the time was moving from an autocratic monarchy to an oligarchy, on its way to more reforms in the nineteenth century. BPC would have had none of that. His father, a much better prospect, might have done a little better. But it didn't really matter because that branch of the Stuarts petered out after Charlie and his brother (a Catholic cardinal) died.
"Bonnie" often implies good of heart as well as body, and BPC showed little of that.

Magdelena, I could agree with you more. My iPaq is my constant companion. I use it for reading, remembering dates, shopping lists, it's invaluable.

Laura Vivanco said...

"You aren't automatically a prince just because you and your family say so, even if you're a Stuart."

Were they still keen on the idea of the divine right of kings at that point, or did the Stuarts give up on that after what happened to Charles I?

lynneconnolly said...

They believed, at least BPC did. His pragmatic and clever father didn't. He was the one who nearly won in the '15, came much closer than his son, and after he lost, he used his position politically, became a cuckoo and a wedge to retain some influence in Europe.