Clean Romances discussion

Welcome!! > BEFORE YOU POST...

Comments Showing 1-50 of 83 (83 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by Jaimey, Co-Mod (new)

Jaimey (jaimeygrant) | 409 comments Mod
...please take the time to make sure you've selected the appropriate folder for your topic. It only takes a moment to do so. If you don't think there's a folder to match your topic, please let us know and we'll look into adding more folders. With so many members and topics, it's important to maintain organization.

Thank you so much for your understanding and for making this such a great group! :o)

message 2: by Joyce, Group Creator (new)

Joyce | 592 comments Mod
Hi Sherry Lynn! Welcome to Clean Romances. We're so glad you found our little but growing group. :-) The questions are purely for fun. Answer them if you'd like or not. It was just a fun way one of our members thought up to try to get to know each other a little better. And yes, it's a constantly open thread, so new members can always jump in.

message 3: by Caroline (new)

Caroline Fyffe | 34 comments What a great group! Hi everyone. I'm so happy to find you....
I'm an author who writes western historical romance. Mine are sweet traditional, I'd say. My latest, MONTANA DAWN, was recently chosen as Best Western Romance for 2010 at the Love Western Romances. I'm looking forward to getting to know you all.

message 4: by Joyce, Group Creator (new)

Joyce | 592 comments Mod
Welcome to Clean Romances, Caroline! We're excited that you're joining us. :-)

message 5: by Caroline (new)

Caroline Fyffe | 34 comments Thank you so much, Joyce! Good to be here....

message 6: by Susan (new)

Susan Hatler (susanhatler) | 72 comments Hi Caroline!! Congrats on Montana Dawn. I actually live in Montana...are you here, too?

message 7: by Caroline (new)

Caroline Fyffe | 34 comments Hi, Susan--thank you! I'm not in Montana, but I love the big sky state. I've vacationed in Glacier National Park years ago and remember being speechless with the beauty of it all. I'm dying to get back there sometime soon. I have a college friend who has an open invitation for me to come, so I hope I can make that in the near future. Actually, I'm a recent transplant to Kentucky from California last year...

What part of Montana are you in?

message 8: by Susan (new)

Susan Hatler (susanhatler) | 72 comments Oh, I thought your book looked familiar. I think we were in SVR together last year. Let me know if you're ever in the area...would love to get together for coffee with our laptops! Hope you're enjoying Kentucky.

The Boyfriend Bylaws The Boyfriend Bylaws by Susan Hatler

message 9: by Caroline (new)

Caroline Fyffe | 34 comments Hey, Susan...great to see you again. LOL Yes, that's it. I'm glad you remembered that!
Did you transplant from Sac. too? And, I'd love to get together with you when I make it up to Montana. I'll be sure to let you know.

message 10: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments Hi, I just joined. My first clean romance was published by Astraea Press in February. It's called, "Sunny Days, Moonlit Nights" and is available as an ebook and a paperback.

I have finished the first draft of a clean romance sequel called "April in the Moonlight" and will begin editing it soon.

message 11: by Joyce, Group Creator (new)

Joyce | 592 comments Mod
Welcome, Jean! Congratulations on your book. :-)

message 12: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments Thank you! i hope you all will come and read a snippet on six sentence Sunday. You can read more about the book, including an ongoing prequel at my blog,

message 13: by Carrie (new)

Carrie (cmdfamily) | 8 comments Hi, guys! My name is Carrie...I'm new here! I am married and the mom of 6. I love, love, love to read and am constantly trying to find clean books by reading book reviews, etc. I can't always find those kinds of reviews on all the books I want to read, so hopefully this group will be a good go-to place for that!
I am a big fan of paranormal romance, but I also love regular long as there's romance! :)

message 14: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments Mu publisher publishes only clean romance and ya. You should check us out at, Carrie.
There appears to be a big audience for clean romance. Do you find that to be true? I've heard that erotic is pushing sensual and clean romance aside. While I think there is an audience for erotic and I have read and like some of that genre, I don't think the others are dying out. What does everyone here think?

message 15: by Carrie (new)

Carrie (cmdfamily) | 8 comments Thanks for the site...most of my family and friends prefer clean books! I would sincerely hope that it does not get pushed aside! But I really don't think it will. Especially not here in Utah!! :)

message 16: by Kay (new)

Kay Springsteen (kayspringsteen) | 44 comments My (adult) daughter was so happy when she found out she could read my books without being left with an "icky" feeling afterwards.

message 17: by Joyce, Group Creator (new)

Joyce | 592 comments Mod
Welcome Carrie! I think maybe the only thing erotic romance is pushing away is a lot of readers from the romance field. From the way this group is growing, there is clearly an audience still in search of clean romances. I think a lot of people just don't know where to find them. That's one of the gaps this group hopes to fill. I think you will find many wonderful clean romances, old and new, on our group bookshelf. Check it out! And if you find any clean, secular romances that AREN'T on our bookshelf, please, please add them. We want to offer readers as many clean romance options as we can find!

message 18: by Delaney (new)

Delaney Diamond (delaney_diamond) Welcome to the group, everyone! I usually lurk, but I wanted to answer Jean's question. I write sweet and sensual romance, but I read all kinds of romance, from sweet to erotic. I like the variety, and what I read depends on my mood.

I don't believe at all that erotic romance is pushing out sensual and sweet. Erotic romance is popular, but there are plenty of people who read sweet (for example, this group is growing by leaps and bounds) and sensual.

I was really glad to see Astraea Press come onto the scene. As Joyce pointed out, outside of specific authors, readers don't know where to find sweet romance. Astraea is a nice one-stop shop.

message 19: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments Thanks, Delaney. We are pretty happy to be there, too. I do have two sensual books coming out in the fall with another publisher, but I am working on a sequel for my Astraea Press book right now.

message 20: by Michael (last edited May 09, 2011 11:06PM) (new)

Michael Vorhis (mike_vorhis) | 15 comments Never thought I'd see the day when I came across a large group of folks who appreciate "clean" literature. So happy to be here! I've always felt that beautiful literature must always take a loftier road (not to mention the fact that cheap thrill scenes seems just so...well, cheap). The good stuff is hard to come by, yes, but I never dreamed just how MUCH stuff out there doesn't qualify!

My favorite novels and films are all way above board; my best work as a writer up to now is this:

ARCHANGEL by Michael Vorhis ARCHANGEL, by Michael Vorhis.

This group's guideline says, "Not 'Christian' or 'Inspirational'." Despite my book's title (which is absolutely perfect for the characters and the old-fashioned story of doubt and commitment), ARCHANGEL is neither a dogma-pusher nor one of the many nether-world-power-spirit things going around right now. It's literature. It's unique.

I think I know what "clean" means...I'm a person of dignity and discretion...and yet I wrote this book. Why? There's some tension in it, and there are foul deeds that I'm sorry to say have made some of my loved ones cry--unfortunately there's no other way to make low characters seem low than to have them talk and act like the people they are. They have to ring true. Those folks in this story are sometimes not "clean."

But the people that matter are not intimidated by any of that, and neither should the reader be. The love and the courage are beautiful, and unconquerable. The subtle romantic undercurrent literally carries the story from start to finish, despite the fact that it rarely rises above a soft whisper.

And I'm not going to spoil it any further!

If you read ARCHANGEL from start to finish and are not moved to recurring images of devotion and greatness in your own heart, let me know and I'll get you a refund. I think you'll see that there is great beauty in struggle, in friendship, and in courage.

I invite you to experience ARCHANGEL, an eBook available at literally any eBook seller.

Thanks! Now I'll turn my attention to being a good group member and participating in the discussions.

- Mike

message 21: by Joyce, Group Creator (new)

Joyce | 592 comments Mod
Welcome Mike! Your book sounds intriguing. I completely understand about "low characters" doing "low things" in a book to ring true. The one thing this group does not accept is graphic sex scenes, whether by "low" characters or anyone else in the book. Note the word "graphic". That doesn't mean immoral characters can't be immoral, just that we don't want a blow by blow description of it in books represented in our group. Does that make sense? Saying that, I haven't read your book, so I can't judge how it may or may not meet our criteria. I'm trusting for now that it's fine, so again, welcome! I hope you enjoy it here. :-)

message 22: by Michael (last edited May 10, 2011 12:40PM) (new)

Michael Vorhis (mike_vorhis) | 15 comments Hi Joyce,

Thanks for the gracious welcome! You pointed out,

> The one thing this group does not accept
> is graphic sex scenes

And I absolutely hate that kind of hack writing too. Not only for taste reasons, but also in defense of art! I so gratefully thank you all for having this group, and I applaud the standard you're establishing.

The line we're discussing is not often easy to know. Some people want villains to be toned down too far (one reviewer asked me why I couldn't just have the bad guys say the initials "G.D." so that the page would not be blemished with a curse). And it can be difficult to describe a crime without establishing the tasteless lowness of it.

I agonized over that line in writing ARCHANGEL. In the end I went with my personal instinct--I decided that as long as I establish a character as tasteless and low, then if they do something despicable, the book's theme and standards are on the right side of the whole question. And as long as just a brief sentence (out of ~400 pages) is used to establish that lowness, the ideals we all believe in are maintained.

Taste and decorum are relative things. There is no Goodness without there being Badness to conquer and abolish. Literature that evangelizes strength and virtue has to have that virtue come up against its antithesis, and then strive against it.

Does it sound like I'm okay here? I hope so, because if I've failed on this point then I'll be pretty disappointed in myself--again not only for sake of decorum but for sake of art. I do not want to crank out cheap means' of attracting attention (anyone can do that). I wanted to produce a masterpiece that would stay with a reader for weeks or months, and let them discover new dichotomies and ethical dilemmas and flavors of courage in the story the more they considered it.

And I'm not even sure I got my initial "hello" into the right folder here...sorry if I flubbed that one too....

- Mike

message 23: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments But don't forget romance! Where would we be without romance in this world...nowhere. *sighs*.

message 24: by Michael (last edited May 10, 2011 02:22PM) (new)

Michael Vorhis (mike_vorhis) | 15 comments > But don't forget romance!

How true Jean, didn't mean to ignore the blossom to attend momentarily to the stem.

Personally, I think of Romance in a novel in two ways (and Jean please tell me how you think of it too): First, there should always be a subtle or less subtle stream of romantic interest between two characters whom we grow to care about. Second (and to me extremely important), there must be a romance between the main protagonist and the reader.

I believe it doesn't matter the gender of the protagonist, nor that of the reader. Why? Because Love is a whole other thing from physical gratification or chemical attraction. Love stands above all those gain-based, possession-based emotions. Love is for people, by people.

I know my own example best, so kindly forgive me if I use it: Male readers of my novel experience a strong "romance" with the main protagonist because he is what they are in their finest hour. The character defines the loftiest aspirations of strength, humilty and courage that male readers have for themselves. By relating to him, they feel renewed love for themselves.

And women readers experience a strong personal romance with that protagonist essentially because his qualities and capacity for devotion make him what every woman deserves.

I think the personal romance with the reader is paramount to literature qualifying as "Romance." What are your thoughts on this? What would be some examples you might think of?

- Mike

message 25: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments I'm afraid I don't agree. I take a more literal approach and refer to romance and a relationship of love between two people. In my books it's always man and woman, but it doesn't have to be.

After writing six romance books, I think I know a little about chemistry both physical and emotional. But it's that connection and the sacrifice and devotion between two people that knocks my socks off, making me laugh and cry and sigh with them both.

message 26: by Michael (new)

Michael Vorhis (mike_vorhis) | 15 comments Okay. I don't quite know how that would be a disagreement, but I easily appreciate your sentiments. After writing so many Romances and living a Romantic life, I can say I know of these things as well.

Other than the writing skill itself, it comes down to knowing people, and especially Romantic people.

- Mike

message 27: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments We agree there.

message 28: by Joyce, Group Creator (new)

Joyce | 592 comments Mod

1st, our group only monitors sex scenes in the books on our group bookshelf, not language. We do have a thread where readers can rate language in books if they want to, but it's not required, and so far, no one actually has. No book will be excluded from our group due to language, although some readers may simply choose not to read books with particular language in them. That's a choice for each of our readers to make for themselves. In short, we will not exclude your book for language, so you don't need to worry about that.

2nd, although "romance" may indeed be defined in many different ways, for the purposes of our group we are generally talking about the romance "genre" as publishers tend to define it, and that generally requires (as Jean said) "a relationship of love between two people". And yes, in our particular group, that relationship is between one man and one woman. That certainly doesn't mean that there can't be other relationships developed in the book, such as the love between parents and child, the love between friends, etc, but if there is no one-man/one-woman romance thread included, then for our group, we would not consider it a romance.

Does that make sense?

Okay, I just re-read your comment above. " can be difficult to describe a crime without establishing the tasteless lowness of it.... There is no Goodness without there being Badness to conquer and abolish. Literature that evangelizes strength and virtue has to have that virtue come up against its antithesis, and then strive against it."

I agree with these statements and yes, I think you're okay in this group on this point. And it was perfectly fine to introduce yourself here too. We're glad to have you here!

message 29: by Francine (new)

Francine (francine_76) | 2 comments Don't worry Michael, we girls sometimes see our side of things. You have a wonderful way with words and I liked and agree with how you said it. The very best Romances I've read were ones where I fell in love with the main man myself. If I can't relate enough to do that it's usually not great for me. There are even romances where the woman behaves badly for a time and I fall for him but don't relate so much to her. And there are those that are so subtle they go into the sunset not yet having kissed. It still works if there is romance in the air, romance is in the eye of the reader. Some people love subtlety, some don't get it, and everything in between. I like your thoughts and I've marked your book to read.

message 30: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments It is hard to write a clean romance these days. One has to develop a plot that supports amorous restraint logically, something that makes sense. I find it a challenge that I enjoy. I feel it makes me a better writer and the story more interesting if I don't fall back on a steamy love scene to keep the reader interested.

I think Sunny Days, Moonlit Nights does that. I am working on the sequel and have another plot for a sweet romance percolating in my brain.

Do you think it's okay for an author to keep the hero and heroine out of bed because she simply refuses to engage?

message 31: by Carrie (new)

Carrie (cmdfamily) | 8 comments Jean, I absolutely think it's OK to keep them out of bed!! I am a believer in saving yourself for marriage! And even if they do end up in bed together, it can be written tastefully...leading up to the act and then letting your imagination fill in the blanks.:)

message 32: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments I agree with you. My publisher won't go that far, so I need to keep them out of the bedroom and have a solid reason for doing so. A challenge for the writer. I accomplished this in "Sunny Days, Moonlit Nights" and am working on the sequel, which also has good reasons to keep them out of bed.
I have another book kicking around in my head, too, with a perfect premise for clean romance. The challenge is fun!

message 33: by Carrie (new)

Carrie (cmdfamily) | 8 comments I say, good for you! :)

message 34: by Carrie (new)

Carrie (cmdfamily) | 8 comments BTW, I put it on my 'to-read' list! :)

message 35: by Francine (new)

Francine (francine_76) | 2 comments Jean wrote: "Do you think it's okay for an author to keep the hero and heroine out of bed because she simply refuses to engage? "

Is it okay, you ask...actually I don't know why the focus so often remains on bed at all. Rather than keeping sex the main question, air brushing and nicing up the words and calling it clean, I prefer romances to be woven through moral dilemmas that transcend this level of singular "engagement." I don't read to experience bed scenes. I love Romance, as it applies to the lives of great characters and their larger stories, the external pressures on them, and especially I like to see that characters are actually dedicated to something larger than themselves. In the real world, romance happens stirred in as an important ingredient in the mix of life, like sugar in bread dough (pardon the analogy, I bake occasionally). So I like literature to have that 'real' feel too.

Your publisher's requirements are of course important to your livelihood, but are a practical and artificial filter superimposed on the process. If we're talking about perfection and ideals, then volume marketabilty is not part of the definition of the ideal Romance novel.

I like a character to do what that character would really do and needs to do with respect to her larger story. I want her to care about meaning and not have this preoccupation with one kind of motion. If we decide on whether it's okay or not okay, then we've agreed on a 'formula' for our literature, which is too constraining.

Well that's my honest reaction Jean, it depends on the larger story, which should truly be larger but most often is not. I know most of what's out there just constructs some story around the romance and the decision of the bed. I try to appreciate each for what it can do well (or well enough), and meanwhile remember the great ones.

message 36: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments Thank you, Carrie, I hope you like the book. Francine, I appreciate your perspective. I agree with you and believe that the story has to be organic. In "Sunny Days, Moonlit Nights", my heroine has run away from a philandering husband. She is seeking a divorce but while she does not have one, she feels she is not free to be physically involved with another man, even though she has fallen in love with a man from her past. There are also threats to him, unknown to him, by her husband. She keeps her distance to protect him because she loves him and because when they were kids, he protected her. I think that is true love and romance. Sacrifice is part of real love to me and Sunny is willing to sacrifice some temporary pleasure for the man she loves.
I hope that qualifies for everyone. I think it grows out of the story naturally and is not an artifice, just to move the plot along.
Reviews have been pretty good, so I guess the critics agree.

Aroma with Love ok

message 38: by Heather (new)

Heather (heather_la) | 2 comments Francine wrote: "...actually I don't know why the focus so often remains on bed at all..."

So well said Francine, I agree with you! I think most Romance writers try to box in the story to focus so primarily on the one element an average reader yearns to swim in. Then before you know it it becomes a rule!

In The Thorn Birds, if the story had been written just a little differently and Maggie and Father Ralph had not enjoyed their week together on the beach, wouldn't the story still be a Romance? Of course it would. So it's fine if a bigger picture encompasses, sometimes even dominates, the romantic thread. Some modern films like Titanic and Pearl Harbor are other good examples, you better believe they are romances and they feel real and are often beautiful and deep in more than one way at a time.

message 39: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments On that vein, Heather, I agree and the biggest, grandest romance of all times encompasses a huge historical event..."Gone With the Wind" was a romance set against the backdrop of the Civil War and to me it is the greatest American romance of all time.

message 40: by Heather (new)

Heather (heather_la) | 2 comments Michael wrote: "First, there should always be a subtle or less subtle stream of romantic interest between two characters whom we grow to care about. Second, there must be a romance between the main protagonist and the reader...paramount to literature qualifying as 'Romance.'"

You have illuminated a point that most don't consciously realize Michael. Are you a Literature professor perhaps? I like your wonderful and authentic insights, thank you for sharing them. Thinking back, every classic Romance I can think of has the quality you describe.

message 41: by Michael (new)

Michael Vorhis (mike_vorhis) | 15 comments What a gracious thing to ask, Heather! No, not a professor, but thanks for such a distinguished guess. For that matter I admire your instincts and insights as well. Now you have me thinking back to all the truly great stories I've ever read, to see what other similarities they share!

- Mike

message 42: by Therese (new)

Therese Gilardi | 19 comments this is an interesting discussion. when i wrote my recently released sweet paranormal, "matching wits with venus", i found that i needed an "off the page" encounter between two characters as it was absolutely essential to the plot. i don't think this detracts at all from the book, and apparently the publisher agreed as "wits" was released by astraea press, which bills itself as a clean house that supports high moral values. as a reader, all i really care about is that a character's actions ring true.

message 43: by Jean (new)

Jean (jeanjay) | 38 comments I agree with you Therese. That seems like a perfect way to handle something that was essential to the plot. While I understand that some people don't want to read explicit details in love scenes, but if a physical encounter is necessary to a good plot and done "off the premises" I think it's perfectly fine and would agree with Astraea, also my publisher.

message 44: by Michael (last edited May 12, 2011 01:25PM) (new)

Michael Vorhis (mike_vorhis) | 15 comments Therese mentioned: "off the page encounter...high moral values...character's actions ring true."

Great observations Therese. There are definitely a few people who simply do not want to read a single foul word or witness a villain accosting someone no matter how it's presented, but I think most selective readers derive their selectivity from the following: We do not want our senses to be dragged through the slime of degrading behavior to the point that we live and taste all of it. And we do not want degrading behavior to be celebrated.

As you so aptly point out, our characters must behave as they really would. This means dirty deeds might be done. Now, linguistic artistry should be able to transfer the affront to the reader's head without unnecessary discomfort and still not dilute the objectionable impact, but as long as that care is taken and that skill is in the author's quiver, most readers do want a REAL story.

Like many of us, personally I've always been a sucker for Good (including good morals, good values, selflessness, courage, and love) ultimately prevailing over evil, and also over apathy. So I do establish the baser elements in a story, so that Good (morality, courage, love) has the need and opportunity to rise to that challenge.

Short point is: I agree with you a thousand fold on the ringing true, and it follows then that the art is in doing it without a discerning reader becoming insulted by formula or gratuitous garbage to the point of tossing the book aside.

If we do it well enough, even the most selective reader comes away with a wonderful feeling that goodness triumphed.

Anyway, those are some key tenets I live by in my own writing (my novels and also shorter works). It's one reason why I LOVE to meet other people (like this group) who believe in quality and sensibility. Kindred spirits. :)

- Mike

message 45: by Therese (new)

Therese Gilardi | 19 comments well said mike!

message 46: by Donna (new)

Donna | 41 comments How very interesting your discussion has been so far. I am not a writer but an addicted reader. Recently, I have begun feeling frustrated by the continued expectation that all historical romances have the man being experienced and the woman a virgin. Do you mean to tell me that any self respecting woman would raise her sons to have no restraint. I can not believe that ALL "regency" men were this selfish and stupid. Am I wrong in thinking Mr. Darcy held himself to a higher standard? Why aren't there more noble men in novels of any/all time periods?

message 47: by Michael (new)

Michael Vorhis (mike_vorhis) | 15 comments What a great cut to the key point you made there, Donna. "Noble men." Men of Dignity. Men of Honor. Wow--goes right to one of the aortas of the heart of Romance.

As fun as all the 007 films were for other reasons, I always found myself embarrassed by all the applauded promiscuity. It seemed to fly in the face of the ethic of Honor.

Maybe it depends on the parents, but I agree that no self-respecting father and mother would raise their sons to be wanton, or careless with another human being's fortunes or feelings. But then there are plenty who take pride in their kid bullying other kids.

The opposite part of your point should make us consider whether its fair to revere female characters who are virtuous, over those who may be less so. There are numerous literary examples of respected and loved female characters who are more worldly, but they usually are portrayed as having never really lost their innocence despite their experiences. That's probably because innocence is naturally beautiful (naturally childlike) in any character.

I'm very glad you brought this up, because I can now go back and try to figure out why on earth I made the choices for my characters that I did. I believe my main female character has more than enough innocence to keep pace with her natural wisdom. Not sure why I did that, but I think she did it herself, not me.

And my primary male character is by my standards the very definition of moral strength, his own doubts and struggles with greater questions notwithstanding. I do know why I did that--it was essential to the story I wanted to write. If you like "noble" male protagonists, then I think (I hope) you would approve. At least, if I failed in that, then I've failed in pretty much everything I set out to accomplish with that book.

I've said it before--I think we need to have our own love affair with the main characters. For the primary male character, women should love him for what he is, and for his honor. Men should love him because he is who they want to be. And for the primary female character, it has to be just the same with the genders switched.

In short, I think you hit one very important nail on the head here. Thanks for making this point, and making me think!

- Mike

message 48: by Meg (new)

Meg Mims (httpwwwgoodreadscommegmims) | 12 comments AMEN to both Donna and Mike. YAAAY! Understanding your characters is KEY to making them 3-D and not flat cardboard cutouts. I have read too many books, no matter what genre, where they act like puppets. Let's throw out examples of IN-DEPTH characters! Beyond the classics, that is.

Jonathan Maberry -- Joe Ledger is multi-developed. He admits to having The Killer, The Cop and the Human (or whatever the third guy is) inside him. Guess what comes out with the Zombies? LOL - great series, and jam-packed with both action and emotional baggage.

Charles Todd -- Ian Rutledge, who is haunted by a soldier he ordered killed. Excellent development in both plotting and in-depth emotions of this troubled man who has honor and integrity at war with his duties during WWI.

LaVyrle Spencer -- always in-depth with both heroines and heroes. Emotional explorations, especially November of the Heart, Morning Glory and Hummingbird. Fabulous reads.

Cheryl St. John -- emotional, tug-at-your-heart stories mixed with complex heroes and heroines.

Those are just a FEW authors whose standards I try to meet. You'll see when DOUBLE CROSSING comes out in August from Astraea Press if I met that goal. :-D
And if I fell short, please tell me so that the next book will delve further.

message 49: by Debra (new)

Debra Brown (debrabrown) | 78 comments Donna, I agree with you that in reality, there are many gentlemen, and they should be portrayed in literature of all time periods. You may like my book in that regard, but it is not yet in print.

message 50: by Michael (last edited May 16, 2011 10:20AM) (new)

Michael Vorhis (mike_vorhis) | 15 comments I like the sound of your characters Meg!

- Mike

« previous 1
back to top