Ask the Author: C.W. Gortner
Answered Questions (41)
C.W. Gortner
Sorry for my delay in answering. GR sort of hides this section.
So, the short answer is yes, I have MM books written - specifically, a fantasy trilogy with a gay romance at its heart. I delayed publication because I renewed my publisher contract for my latest historical novel, THE SAINT LAURENT MUSE, which actually has a lead gay character in Yves Saint Laurent. For my fantasy trilogy, it's a new genre for me and I'll most likely end up indie-publishing, as it's quite challenging to sell high fantasy with gay male leads to a major publisher (complicated and frustrating; it's another Medium post for me to write). Embarking on a self-publishing venture requires initial work under the hood and I want to do it professionally. I'm looking forward to it, just don't have an ETA right now. Feel free to write to me via my website for updates. And thanks for asking!
So, the short answer is yes, I have MM books written - specifically, a fantasy trilogy with a gay romance at its heart. I delayed publication because I renewed my publisher contract for my latest historical novel, THE SAINT LAURENT MUSE, which actually has a lead gay character in Yves Saint Laurent. For my fantasy trilogy, it's a new genre for me and I'll most likely end up indie-publishing, as it's quite challenging to sell high fantasy with gay male leads to a major publisher (complicated and frustrating; it's another Medium post for me to write). Embarking on a self-publishing venture requires initial work under the hood and I want to do it professionally. I'm looking forward to it, just don't have an ETA right now. Feel free to write to me via my website for updates. And thanks for asking!
C.W. Gortner
Hi Martin,
Thanks for your question. With a biographical novel, it's a hybrid of both approaches. My heroines actually lived, so I have to stay faithful to the facts of their life, yet at the same time I must find the arc in their life on which to build my novel. In some cases, as with Maria Feodorovna, Chanel and Dietrich, I select a large portion of their lives, not their entire life, because real lives can have several arcs and a novel is a finite amount of words. I find it more challenging to build a novel on the entire life, as I did with Catherine de Medici, because of limitations on word counts - you end up leaving out as much as you put in. In the end, my work is fiction, based on fact, so it's a delicate balancing act between the two.
Thanks for your question. With a biographical novel, it's a hybrid of both approaches. My heroines actually lived, so I have to stay faithful to the facts of their life, yet at the same time I must find the arc in their life on which to build my novel. In some cases, as with Maria Feodorovna, Chanel and Dietrich, I select a large portion of their lives, not their entire life, because real lives can have several arcs and a novel is a finite amount of words. I find it more challenging to build a novel on the entire life, as I did with Catherine de Medici, because of limitations on word counts - you end up leaving out as much as you put in. In the end, my work is fiction, based on fact, so it's a delicate balancing act between the two.
C.W. Gortner
I have considered self publishing, as have most authors. It's very tempting, but just like traditional publishing, independent publishing has become quite crowded and it's not easy to do it successfully. In the future, I may decide to venture into it, perhaps in another genre, as I've written several manuscripts that aren't historical fiction, but for the moment, my current contractual obligations are such that I simply don't have the time. Thanks for asking!
C.W. Gortner
Thank you! I'm delighted you enjoyed the book.
My novel about Sarah Bernhardt will probably be published in 2020. I don't have firm dates yet but the manuscript is with my editor.
My novel about Sarah Bernhardt will probably be published in 2020. I don't have firm dates yet but the manuscript is with my editor.
C.W. Gortner
Hi Ellen,
Great question on a subject that has stymied authors forever.
Perhaps because I write in first-person, a form of unintentional transference bleeds through, in that I, the writer, become associated with my character. I also think that in general, some readers tend to lump authors and subjects together as one; I've seen it happen with other writers, as well.
That said, Chanel is a challenging character; she's combative and not always nice, she's fallible, and she makes terrible decisions that she justifies as the right decision, for reasons of her own. She was known for being less than forthright in real life, too, so I wanted that aspect of her personality to color the book, not overtly, but on a subtle level. I've said before that I don't care if readers like my character; I'm less interested in likability than I am in empathy. Even if we disagree with the character, do we understand WHY she chooses to behave as she does? Understanding someone and liking them are two distinct things. For example, I understand Chanel wanting to regain control of her perfume without liking how she went about it.
To be an historical novelist, empathy is my primary obligation. The moment I start judging my character, the novel ceases to be about her and becomes about my judgment of her. Chanel is telling you her version of events, and few of us know we're behaving badly in the moment or can admit it afterwards. Chanel had extraordinary determination and accomplished extraordinary achievements in her life, but like all of us, she wasn't perfect. She had her flaws.
I understand readers' negative reactions to her because she's not designed for sympathy. She wouldn't have cared what we thought of her. Some readers have accused me of white-washing her, particularly during the later chapters on WWII. Perhaps I erred in my approach, but my intent was to not excuse her behavior - I personally find it reprehensible - but rather to present it in the way she may have seen it at the time. I loved writing her, she was a joy to inhabit, but there were several instances when I did disagree with her. I had to set my disagreements aside because it's not about me. And other characters' reactions to her, such as Misia Sert, convey the doubt toward her intentions that Chanel herself won't admit.
Some readers have firm, black-and-white impressions of historical characters. For some, Chanel will always be a self-serving Nazi collaborator. The circumstances she faced and her reasons for behaving as she did are lost in the hindsight of history; I believe very little in life is black and white, however, except Chanel's clothes. Her motivations were often complex, woven with shades of grey - a point I've touched upon before in my answer here to a question by Martin Turnball. She may well have been as heartless as her detractors claim or she may have been motivated by a sense of obligation, clouded by the situation in which she found herself. In the end, like much about Chanel, we can't know for certain. Her friend Winston Churchill said it best: "She's an enigma wrapped in a mystery."
When I see negative reviews, I try to take it in stride. Reading a book is a subjective experience and we all come to its pages with our own preconceived impressions and opinions. I know that I can't please everyone and that I can, and will, upset some. I don't enjoy being criticized, of course, but that's part of being a published writer. Your work goes out into the world and you can't control how it'll be received.
I'm proud of my books. I know how much effort and time I spend researching and writing them. I know how challenging it is to set out to write what I do. That must be my default position. I give every novel I write my utmost, but the reception isn't a private party where I oversee the guest list.
Great question on a subject that has stymied authors forever.
Perhaps because I write in first-person, a form of unintentional transference bleeds through, in that I, the writer, become associated with my character. I also think that in general, some readers tend to lump authors and subjects together as one; I've seen it happen with other writers, as well.
That said, Chanel is a challenging character; she's combative and not always nice, she's fallible, and she makes terrible decisions that she justifies as the right decision, for reasons of her own. She was known for being less than forthright in real life, too, so I wanted that aspect of her personality to color the book, not overtly, but on a subtle level. I've said before that I don't care if readers like my character; I'm less interested in likability than I am in empathy. Even if we disagree with the character, do we understand WHY she chooses to behave as she does? Understanding someone and liking them are two distinct things. For example, I understand Chanel wanting to regain control of her perfume without liking how she went about it.
To be an historical novelist, empathy is my primary obligation. The moment I start judging my character, the novel ceases to be about her and becomes about my judgment of her. Chanel is telling you her version of events, and few of us know we're behaving badly in the moment or can admit it afterwards. Chanel had extraordinary determination and accomplished extraordinary achievements in her life, but like all of us, she wasn't perfect. She had her flaws.
I understand readers' negative reactions to her because she's not designed for sympathy. She wouldn't have cared what we thought of her. Some readers have accused me of white-washing her, particularly during the later chapters on WWII. Perhaps I erred in my approach, but my intent was to not excuse her behavior - I personally find it reprehensible - but rather to present it in the way she may have seen it at the time. I loved writing her, she was a joy to inhabit, but there were several instances when I did disagree with her. I had to set my disagreements aside because it's not about me. And other characters' reactions to her, such as Misia Sert, convey the doubt toward her intentions that Chanel herself won't admit.
Some readers have firm, black-and-white impressions of historical characters. For some, Chanel will always be a self-serving Nazi collaborator. The circumstances she faced and her reasons for behaving as she did are lost in the hindsight of history; I believe very little in life is black and white, however, except Chanel's clothes. Her motivations were often complex, woven with shades of grey - a point I've touched upon before in my answer here to a question by Martin Turnball. She may well have been as heartless as her detractors claim or she may have been motivated by a sense of obligation, clouded by the situation in which she found herself. In the end, like much about Chanel, we can't know for certain. Her friend Winston Churchill said it best: "She's an enigma wrapped in a mystery."
When I see negative reviews, I try to take it in stride. Reading a book is a subjective experience and we all come to its pages with our own preconceived impressions and opinions. I know that I can't please everyone and that I can, and will, upset some. I don't enjoy being criticized, of course, but that's part of being a published writer. Your work goes out into the world and you can't control how it'll be received.
I'm proud of my books. I know how much effort and time I spend researching and writing them. I know how challenging it is to set out to write what I do. That must be my default position. I give every novel I write my utmost, but the reception isn't a private party where I oversee the guest list.
C.W. Gortner
Hi Ellen,
Thanks for your kind words. I've published three novels since MADEMOISELLE CHANEL. THE VATICAN PRINCESS, about Lucrezia Borgia (2016); MARLENE, about actress Marlene Dietrich (2016), and THE ROMANOV EMPRESS (2018), about Empress Maria Feodorovna, mother of Tsar Nicholas II.
My next novel is about Sarah Bernhardt, the 19th century French theater actress and the world's first international celebrity. I don't have a firm publication date yet but I believe it will be in 2020.
Thanks for your kind words. I've published three novels since MADEMOISELLE CHANEL. THE VATICAN PRINCESS, about Lucrezia Borgia (2016); MARLENE, about actress Marlene Dietrich (2016), and THE ROMANOV EMPRESS (2018), about Empress Maria Feodorovna, mother of Tsar Nicholas II.
My next novel is about Sarah Bernhardt, the 19th century French theater actress and the world's first international celebrity. I don't have a firm publication date yet but I believe it will be in 2020.
C.W. Gortner
Hi Martin,
An honor to hear from you. I have a rather long-winded response.
Accuracy vs story is always a thorny issue. As a novelist, story is paramount to me, but as an historical novelist, accuracy must also take precedence. The balance between the two is never easy to achieve. Personally, I try my utmost to not alter or distort historical fact, but as I tell my stories in first-person, the impressions of my character are her own and may deviate from the historical record in how she interprets her life.
For example, Isabella of Castile is seen by history as a religious fanatic; we have far more insight today into the terrible persecutions of the past, so it stands to perfect reason that her actions during her reign toward the conversos and Jews are viewed as unconscionable. Because they were. But Isabella herself wouldn't have seen it that way; to her, saving her subjects' souls was a very real and pressing obligation. She fervently believed that God had appointed her as queen to uphold the Catholic faith. My challenge involved immersing myself in her mindset - which I certainly don't agree with - and depict her as a woman of her times. Isabella had many remarkable qualities, but she was fallible and deeply misguided when it came to her faith. I've read reader criticisms of my novel that I made her too sympathetic and she never wavered in her cold-blooded ambition to expel the Jews from Spain. The historical record disputes this popular assumption; there are several documented incidents that reveal Isabella not only struggled morally with her ultimate decision to authorize the expulsion, but also that she attempted other means to first "gently guide and educate" conversos away from practicing both the Jewish and Catholic faiths. Her initial intentions were directed solely toward conversos who'd lapsed, as defined at the time by the Inquisition - an establishment she also delayed implementing for several years and tried in vain to curtail to her authority. This does not excuse her behavior; it merely demonstrates the complexities she believed she faced as a Catholic queen.
One of the challenges we often must deal with as historical novelists is that in the final say, history is written in black and white, yet there are countless shades of grey between fact and intention. I see my task as an historical novelist to write within those shades of grey. We also must patiently contend with those who believe they know the history better than we do, despite our painstaking research. With such polarizing figures as Isabella of Castile and other controversial women I've written about, it's a given that some will not agree with my portrayal and even vehemently dispute it.
When we write a historical novel, as you know, we can't include everything. I often struggle with what not to include even more than with what to include. My word count is determined by my publisher. A life is filled with infinite moments, but a novel is finite, so I must find my story within the sprawl of these moments. Some of my critics will claim that I'm not historically accurate in my work, which is their prerogative. When I do sacrifice historical accuracy for emotional accuracy, it's always very well considered.
An example I can cite of this is in my most recent novel, THE ROMANOV EMPRESS, when my character the Dowager Empress comes across Rasputin during her visit to the Alexander Palace. There's no historical evidence that Maria ever met Rasputin in real life, but it was necessary for the novel for us to see him and her reaction to him. The historical record tells us that she did in fact visit the palace after one of Tsaverich Alexei's more serious hemophiliac episodes; the record also says it was one of the first documented times that Rasputin was summoned to see the boy and "heal" him. Taking both these facts into account, I built a scene where Maria meets Rasputin briefly, in passing. Did it happen? Probably not. But in this particular case, it was required to bring Maria's perspective toward him and her daughter-in-law Alexandra into better focus for the reader.
I hope this helps to answer your question. Thanks!
An honor to hear from you. I have a rather long-winded response.
Accuracy vs story is always a thorny issue. As a novelist, story is paramount to me, but as an historical novelist, accuracy must also take precedence. The balance between the two is never easy to achieve. Personally, I try my utmost to not alter or distort historical fact, but as I tell my stories in first-person, the impressions of my character are her own and may deviate from the historical record in how she interprets her life.
For example, Isabella of Castile is seen by history as a religious fanatic; we have far more insight today into the terrible persecutions of the past, so it stands to perfect reason that her actions during her reign toward the conversos and Jews are viewed as unconscionable. Because they were. But Isabella herself wouldn't have seen it that way; to her, saving her subjects' souls was a very real and pressing obligation. She fervently believed that God had appointed her as queen to uphold the Catholic faith. My challenge involved immersing myself in her mindset - which I certainly don't agree with - and depict her as a woman of her times. Isabella had many remarkable qualities, but she was fallible and deeply misguided when it came to her faith. I've read reader criticisms of my novel that I made her too sympathetic and she never wavered in her cold-blooded ambition to expel the Jews from Spain. The historical record disputes this popular assumption; there are several documented incidents that reveal Isabella not only struggled morally with her ultimate decision to authorize the expulsion, but also that she attempted other means to first "gently guide and educate" conversos away from practicing both the Jewish and Catholic faiths. Her initial intentions were directed solely toward conversos who'd lapsed, as defined at the time by the Inquisition - an establishment she also delayed implementing for several years and tried in vain to curtail to her authority. This does not excuse her behavior; it merely demonstrates the complexities she believed she faced as a Catholic queen.
One of the challenges we often must deal with as historical novelists is that in the final say, history is written in black and white, yet there are countless shades of grey between fact and intention. I see my task as an historical novelist to write within those shades of grey. We also must patiently contend with those who believe they know the history better than we do, despite our painstaking research. With such polarizing figures as Isabella of Castile and other controversial women I've written about, it's a given that some will not agree with my portrayal and even vehemently dispute it.
When we write a historical novel, as you know, we can't include everything. I often struggle with what not to include even more than with what to include. My word count is determined by my publisher. A life is filled with infinite moments, but a novel is finite, so I must find my story within the sprawl of these moments. Some of my critics will claim that I'm not historically accurate in my work, which is their prerogative. When I do sacrifice historical accuracy for emotional accuracy, it's always very well considered.
An example I can cite of this is in my most recent novel, THE ROMANOV EMPRESS, when my character the Dowager Empress comes across Rasputin during her visit to the Alexander Palace. There's no historical evidence that Maria ever met Rasputin in real life, but it was necessary for the novel for us to see him and her reaction to him. The historical record tells us that she did in fact visit the palace after one of Tsaverich Alexei's more serious hemophiliac episodes; the record also says it was one of the first documented times that Rasputin was summoned to see the boy and "heal" him. Taking both these facts into account, I built a scene where Maria meets Rasputin briefly, in passing. Did it happen? Probably not. But in this particular case, it was required to bring Maria's perspective toward him and her daughter-in-law Alexandra into better focus for the reader.
I hope this helps to answer your question. Thanks!
C.W. Gortner
Hi Dianne,
All of my novels are stand-alones and can be read in whichever order a reader prefers. The only connected ones are THE LAST QUEEN and THE QUEEN'S VOW, the former being about Juana la Loca of Castile and the latter about her mother, Queen Isabella. Historically, THE QUEEN'S VOW precedes THE LAST QUEEN, but you can read either one first, as the books cover different times in Isabella's reign and feature different viewpoints, with Isabella telling her story in THE QUEEN'S VOW and Juana telling hers in THE LAST QUEEN.
I've been to Toledo several times. It's a very beautiful city.
All of my novels are stand-alones and can be read in whichever order a reader prefers. The only connected ones are THE LAST QUEEN and THE QUEEN'S VOW, the former being about Juana la Loca of Castile and the latter about her mother, Queen Isabella. Historically, THE QUEEN'S VOW precedes THE LAST QUEEN, but you can read either one first, as the books cover different times in Isabella's reign and feature different viewpoints, with Isabella telling her story in THE QUEEN'S VOW and Juana telling hers in THE LAST QUEEN.
I've been to Toledo several times. It's a very beautiful city.
C.W. Gortner
Thank you so much! I really appreciate your support of my work!
C.W. Gortner
Excuse my delay in answering your question.
Airplane travel for passengers wasn't a reality until later in the 20th century. Chanel did embark on that long drive to Cannes after Boy's death, however.
Airplane travel for passengers wasn't a reality until later in the 20th century. Chanel did embark on that long drive to Cannes after Boy's death, however.
C.W. Gortner
Please forgive me my delay in responding.
I appreciate your kind words about my work. I've never had the opportunity to study pre-Mughal history; it does sound fascinating.
I appreciate your kind words about my work. I've never had the opportunity to study pre-Mughal history; it does sound fascinating.
C.W. Gortner
I'm sorry for the delay in responding. Yes, I have considered it; Mary of Scots is one of my favorite queens. I did write a little about her in my book on Catherine de Medici. I hope that in the future, I can devote a full novel to her.
Thanks for asking!
Thanks for asking!
C.W. Gortner
Thank you! I spent about two years researching and writing, but I'd researched Chanel for my graduate degree in fashion marketing, so I was already well informed of her design contributions by the time I decided to write a novel about her. What I didn't know a lot about was her personal life, what motivated her, and it was a fascinating journey to discover her inner heart.
C.W. Gortner
Depends on the subject. For Chanel, it took three years of intensive research and writing once I decided to write about her. But I'd also studied her for many years before that, as part of my fashion degree, so I had a head start on her. With other subjects, it can take longer to research.
C.W. Gortner
Thanks for your question and please excuse my delayed response. I've always been fascinated by the Romanovs, so when I decided to write a novel about them, I wanted to capture not only the tragedy of the final years of the dynasty, but also the events that led to it, as well as the era before Nicholas II took the throne. Minnie isn't as well remembered as her son and his doomed family, but she was a much-beloved tsarina who witnessed both the reigns of her father in law and her husband, Sasha, before her son became tsar. Her life was enthralling to me, a foreign princess who wed into the most powerful and wealthy ruling house of the era, and had to forge her path. She was also a rare voice of reason during the troubling years leading up to the 1917 revolution. In short, I found her a perfect subject to fictionalize! I hope you enjoy the book when it's published next year.
C.W. Gortner
Thank you so much. I hadn't thought about the parallels to the Trumps, but hey, if it fits . . .
Empress Maria Feodorovna, mother of Tsar Nicholas II, is next!
Empress Maria Feodorovna, mother of Tsar Nicholas II, is next!
C.W. Gortner
Thank you for your question and for your praise! Lovely to hear.
I think there's always been a market in historical fiction beyond the Tudors. For example, all of my stand-alone novels are about women who aren't Tudors, spanning eras from the early 15th century to the 20th century. And my Spymaster trilogy, while set in the Tudor era, features a fictional male lead character. But in general, historical fiction comprises a much smaller market share than other genres, and is therefore more prone to restrictions based on the subject's perceived marquee value. One or two books may break the mold, but unless they're huge bestsellers, it won't necessarily persuade publishers to take further risks on unknown historical personages. I've written about famous women who aren't often covered in fiction; I always attempt to find a character who can appeal to the publisher and also be fresh to my readers. My next novel is about Empress Maria Feodorovna, the mother of Tsar Nicholas II, and she's never been featured before in full biographical novel.
However, I've had my publishers turn down a few ideas in the past, because the character was deemed "not well-known enough." It happens. I sometimes disagree with the publisher's stance, but the market right now is very difficult for books and for historical fiction, in particular. The Tudor boom has faded and so, many publishers are acquiring less historical fiction across the board. The genre often undergoes these up-and-down cycles, and I'm fortunate indeed that I can still publish books in the current environment. I'd love to write about more obscure subjects, but in the end, I need the publisher to want to take that risk. Until then, I'll do the best I can to find subjects that meet both their and my criteria. It's not easy. That said, I've had the luck to write and sell novels set in different countries and eras. I'm not restricted to the Tudors or another dynasty as my sole focus. Which is perfect for me, as I tend to be promiscuous in my historical interests.
I think there's always been a market in historical fiction beyond the Tudors. For example, all of my stand-alone novels are about women who aren't Tudors, spanning eras from the early 15th century to the 20th century. And my Spymaster trilogy, while set in the Tudor era, features a fictional male lead character. But in general, historical fiction comprises a much smaller market share than other genres, and is therefore more prone to restrictions based on the subject's perceived marquee value. One or two books may break the mold, but unless they're huge bestsellers, it won't necessarily persuade publishers to take further risks on unknown historical personages. I've written about famous women who aren't often covered in fiction; I always attempt to find a character who can appeal to the publisher and also be fresh to my readers. My next novel is about Empress Maria Feodorovna, the mother of Tsar Nicholas II, and she's never been featured before in full biographical novel.
However, I've had my publishers turn down a few ideas in the past, because the character was deemed "not well-known enough." It happens. I sometimes disagree with the publisher's stance, but the market right now is very difficult for books and for historical fiction, in particular. The Tudor boom has faded and so, many publishers are acquiring less historical fiction across the board. The genre often undergoes these up-and-down cycles, and I'm fortunate indeed that I can still publish books in the current environment. I'd love to write about more obscure subjects, but in the end, I need the publisher to want to take that risk. Until then, I'll do the best I can to find subjects that meet both their and my criteria. It's not easy. That said, I've had the luck to write and sell novels set in different countries and eras. I'm not restricted to the Tudors or another dynasty as my sole focus. Which is perfect for me, as I tend to be promiscuous in my historical interests.
C.W. Gortner
Thank you for asking and for your kind words. I actually would like to write a series of novels set in late medieval Spain, but it really always depends on what my publisher wants to acquire from me. Medieval topics outside of Britain are tough to sell, so . . . I still hope to write it one day. As for ancient times, I'd need a good story that I could inhabit; I'd love to explore ancient Egypt, but haven't yet found a character who hasn't already been well-covered. And again, ancient Egypt can be challenging to sell to a publisher, too. But, never say never.
C.W. Gortner
Sure. Here are links to two written interviews I did for my virtual tour. Thanks for asking!
http://www.onebookshy.com/interview-c...
https://aliteraryvacation.blogspot.co...
http://www.onebookshy.com/interview-c...
https://aliteraryvacation.blogspot.co...
C.W. Gortner
Thanks so much! This is a tough question to answer in a limited arena. Basically, despite the dry facts of history, it was lived by people - human beings, with foibles, personal desires, and all the emotions we still feel. Their situations or concerns might have been different from ours today, but they still had families, loves, hates, lusts and pains. I think for me, the trick, as it were, is to never forget that beneath the facts surrounding my character, she was a flesh and blood being, and subject to all the complexity that being human means. I try to bring that to the fore: who she might have been, under the gowns and historical framework, and to not judge her bur rather present her point of view to the best of my abilities. Let the reader decide how they feel about her. Not judging her is key for me; the moment I start passing judgment on my character, then she ceases to be her own creation and becomes mine. I don't want to be "seen"; it's her story, so if I do it right, her voice is the only one the reader should hear. I might not agree with her (I often don't) but that's not the point. If she believes what she's saying or if she's lying to cover her tracks, that's her choice. It says something about her. I play a bit with my reader in my books: is my character being honest or is she coloring her story to suit herself? The facts are there, but she has to transcend them and give her perspective for us to engage with her. Not sure how I do it, as far as process goes: it's organic. When I write, I know instinctively whether she's present or I'm just banging out hollow words. If I feel she's eluding me, I stop and try to find her; I want to be inside her skin, looking out. Not looking at her from a distant vantage point. I have to feel her and believe her, regardless of her honesty.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more