Welcome to the Inaugural Author Chat Night at Passages to the Past, featuring Susan Holloway Scott

Woo Hoo....the moment has arrived!  I am so pleased to welcome you, one and all, to the Inaugural Author Chat Night at Passages to the Past, featuring Susan Holloway Scott!!


Here's how Chat Night will work:

All correspondence (questions and answers) will take place in the comments section of this post.  I will start off with a question or two to get the ball rolling and then the floor is open!   To see an example of my previous Chat Night, please visit the Sourcebooks Summer Reading Club Book Chat Night post and check out the comment thread.

We will of course be talking about Susan's latest AWESOME release of The Countess and the King: A Novel of the Countess of Dorchester and King James II and anything else that tickles our fancy: Susan's other books, Project Runway, Top Chef, baseball or hockey!!

SYNOPSIS:  Katherine Sedley lived by her own rules and loved who she pleased- until she became the infamous mistress of King James II...

London, 1675: Born to wealth and privilege, Katherine is introduced to the decadent court of King Charles II, and quickly becomes a favorite from the palace to the bawdy playhouses. She gleefully snubs respectable marriage to become the Duke of York's mistress.

But Katherine's life of carefree pleasure ends when Charles II dies, and her lover becomes King James II. Suddenly she is cast into a tangle of political intrigue, religious dissent, and ever-shifting alliances, where a wrong step can mean treason, exile, or death at the executioner's block. As the risks rise, Katherine is forced to make the most perilous of choices: to remain loyal to the king, or to England. 

If you are trying to win the SUSAN HOLLOWAY SCOTT GIVEAWAY EXTRAVAGANZA and you attend tonight, you will be earning 5 additional entry points.  You have to participate in some way by commenting so that I can see you were here!


Here is a little slideshow of the characters you will meet in The Countess and the King that I put together with help from Susan.  Enjoy!




IMPORTANT: If you run into any issues while Chat Night is in progress PLEASE email me at passagestothepast@gmail.com directly and I will get back to you ASAP.  I also have Google Chat if you'd like to instant message me there.

Let the fun begin!


Photobucket

138 comments:

  1. Hello and welcome to the Susan Holloway Scott Author Chat Night at Passages to the Past!!

    I am so unbelievably honored and thrilled to have the amazing and delectable Susan Holloway Scott here for my first

    Author Chat Night! Thank you Susan, for taking time out of your busy blog tour schedule to spend some time with us!

    We are here in honor of Susan's release of The Countess and the King: A Novel of the Countess of Dorchester and King James II.

    If you haven't had the chance to read it yet, you are really missing out - it is UNPUTDOWNABLE! Make sure to enter to win the SUSAN HOLLOWAY SCOTT GIVEAWAY EXTRAVAGANZA, for an opportunity to win said UNPUTDOWNABLE novel, as well as her other 4 equally awesome books!

    To start off this evening's festivities I'd like to talk to Susan about how well her readers are relating to Kate

    Sedley. You really had to fight to tell Kate's story, do you feel a bit of validation now that so many of your readers are connecting so strongly to this charming, yet unconventional woman?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Amy and Susan! I can't wait to read this book so I hope I learn a lot tonight. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you so much, Amy! I'm e-blushing at all that praise!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm here too! Hello, Amy, Susan and Pricilla!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Susan, today I had minor surgery on my leg. The doctor let me read your book while he worked on me, so the scene where Katypillar meets James Grahame and the Duchess of York will forever be linked to my leg surgery! I'm about 100 pages in, and thoroughly enjoying this book.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I found it :)! I cannot wait to hear what the author says!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I've not read it either. I'm hoping to win it. heh

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sorry, forgot my manners...hi everyone!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Susan, was Kate really considered not a beauty in her time? Because the painting of her that you and Amy put up shows, to me, an attractive woman. Or is that a 21st century sensibility?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I do feel validated! Because Katherine wasn't a "traditional" historical fiction heroine, my editor was a bit iffy about her being able to support a whole book. A heroine who was plain, outspoken, and not a princess or queen? Uh-oh!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Oh I am so excited to see my favorite people here, thank you SO much for taking time out of your busy lives to spend time with Susan and I! I can't wait to see what excellent questions you have in store!

    ReplyDelete
  12. This is such a great idea to be able to talk to everyone live and hear more about this wonderful sounding book!

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think that she was quite the attractive woman too. I always wonder about their tastes back then.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks Amy and Susan for this lovely idea! I can't wait!

    I'd love to submit a question about the how of writing this book. Susan, do you have a particular routine for getting into the heads of your heroines? Was their a particular trick for Kate?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yes, Katherine was considered horribly, embarrassingly plain in her time. She was ridiculed for being too thin, having strong features, dark brows, a wide mouth, and long legs. She'd be a supermodel today!

    ReplyDelete
  16. I agree with Christine and Heather - I think Kate was quite pretty. I always say that I was born in the wrong century when men liked a woman with curves :)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hi Susan!

    Thanks for the invite Amy.Hello everyone else too! I am thrilled to be here.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hi everyone! Just stopped in to say "hi" and hope you have a great time :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I also felt the painting showed an attractive woman but sensibilities change so much through the times and perhaps her personality also went towards deeming her unattractive although that is just so foolish

    ReplyDelete
  21. Susan, I have a question: do you have a favorite among your books or do you love all your "babies" equally? Wondering which one I should start with!

    ReplyDelete
  22. The fashionable lady in 1670 was plump (very plump), with languid eyes and a rosebud mouth, all pink and white. Not Katherine - why, her collarbones showed through her skin! Scandalous!

    ReplyDelete
  23. @Susan, your comment intrigues me! I rather enjoy my historical heroines when they're not royalty, so your editor's response surprises me!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hi, all! :) Glad we have such a big turn-out, esp. on the first night of Monday Night Football *ggg*

    ReplyDelete
  25. I suspect the painters glided over any unattractive features... either to gain favor with their subject, or because their subject's father was paying the bill! :)

    ReplyDelete
  26. Susan, of all of King Charles' mistresses who was your favourite to write about?

    ReplyDelete
  27. I am curious about how she was thought of to be witty. Since I haven't read the book, can you tell us more about her personality?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Priscilla, yes, I imagine her personality had a lot to do with how she was perceived. She was sharp in her humor, and spared no one - that does make men nervous (still does), and the easiest way to retaliate against a smart woman is to say she's not attractive. Nyah, nyah. Nothing changes, does it?

    ReplyDelete
  29. I'm here, kind of! In theory I should be working, but I did want to say hi to both Amy and Susan - great first guest for chat Amy.

    I do find it very interesting that Kate Sedley was considered so unattractive - I guess there was a type and if you didn't fit the type you weren't considered beautiful. Not necessarily all that different from today.

    I think I need to have lived in the 17th century personally to be considered attractive.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I agree with you, Amy, I must have been born in the wrong time period for my curves!

    ReplyDelete
  31. A favorite book? It's usually the last one I've finished - so "The Countess & the King" is the current fav. :)

    ReplyDelete
  32. There is nothing wrong with a little plump.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Elizabeth, yes, painters did flatter their subjects! But Katherine doesn't look like any of the other ladies of the time. Not at all....

    ReplyDelete
  34. It seems that strong, intelligent women are never truly appreciated; attractive or not. heh

    ReplyDelete
  35. If I miss your question, please don't take it personally -- just re-ask! :)

    ReplyDelete
  36. So glad you could make is Marg - time zones can be a doozy to figure out :) I am so thrilled at the turnout, thanks to everyone!

    ReplyDelete
  37. How do I get into heroine's heads? If possible, I read as much as I can of their letters or diaries, then what their contemporaries had to say of them. Graduatlly their "voices" begin to speak in my head. I know that sounds airy-fairy, but it's true -I do "hear" these first-person ladies in my head. Makes the writing fun. :)

    ReplyDelete
  38. I told the hubby he had to cook his own dinner.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Hello Everyone...just reading everyone's comments and trying to catch up. I haven't read this book yet Susan, but I love it when you say that, "my editor was a bit iffy about her being able to support a whole book. A heroine who was plain, outspoken, and not a princess or queen?"...because so many of us women and relate...we are just as plain and certainly not royalty...lol

    ReplyDelete
  40. Recently I read an Historical novel in which John Wilmot, Rochester, played a big role. I was fascinated by him, and wondered if he has much of a role in your novel.

    ReplyDelete
  41. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Do you have a favourite character from your novels and what makes them your favourite?

    ReplyDelete
  43. I think that one definitely has to be born in the right time for one's beauty to be appreciated. Most 17th c. gentlemen would be horrified by modern Hollywood beauties - too skinny, too blond, hair too straight, and smokey eyes!! And the tans -- they really wouldn't be able to figure out the tans!

    ReplyDelete
  44. My boss is out of the office which helps!

    Susan, I know we have talked about this before, but I thought I would ask in this open chat environment, What is it about Charles II and his court that makes for such interesting reading 300 years later?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Roberta - great comment! I agree that characters that are not royalty nor beauties are those that the majority of women can associate with and relate to.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Ooh, Lord Rochester! He has turned up in all of my last four novels! A very striking gentleman - and very tragic, too. Though sadly he didnt' look a bit like Johnny Depp in "The Libertine." *g*

    ReplyDelete
  47. I am SO glad the Tampa Bay Rays are playing the Yankees tonight....that way my husband leaves me alone with the computer...he he!

    ReplyDelete
  48. Lord Rochester is certainly an interesting character in this book!

    ReplyDelete
  49. Susan - that's just the kind of man that women love! Striking and tragic.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Susan, is there anyone you've come across in your research who you think deserves a happier ending than the one they've ended up with? Are you ever tempted to change someone's story?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Whoops, Blogger just bounced me there for a moment! Too many comments, LOL! Sorry 'bout that.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Where are you going in your next book?

    ReplyDelete
  53. How was she witty? She said what she though, plus she was very clever. Her father was considered a great wit at court, and encouraged Katherine to speak up as a child - you know how parents think everything their children say is funny. Fortunately, Katherine WAS funny. *g*

    ReplyDelete
  54. Katherine was also an heiress in her own right - also unusual for her time. Being independently wealthy has always made being an independent lady much easier. Money does that. :)

    ReplyDelete
  55. Wow...Johnny Depp was so dark in that movie...I had a hard time watching it. I preferred the movie "The Last King" with Rufus Sewell as Charles II.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Susan -- congratulations! And no spoilers, please, because I haven't yet had a chance to read your book.

    However...because Katherine sounds like quite the fascinating woman, I am getting the sneaking suspicion that I may need to add her affair with James to the table of contents in my 4th nonfiction "royal" book -- ROYAL ROMANCES!

    ReplyDelete
  57. Hi Susan and Amy! I'm here, too! Susan, I would love to know more about how you got your start as a writer and more about your writing process if you don't mind sharing.

    Thanks so much!

    ReplyDelete
  58. Oh, my editor-answer got lost - I said earlier that editors and publishers tend to be conservative, and prefer to stick with what they know will sell. Beautiful queens and princesses and Boleyns sell; hence, they buy more books with beautiful queens and princesses and Boleyns. Plain Kate made them nervous.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Kate's viper tongue was indeed inspiring. She ran with the best of the wittiest men in Charles II and James II's court, but it often backfired! And like Susan said, the easiest thing for a man to fall back on was making fun of Kate's looks.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Have you ever come across a person in history who you would love to write about but can't find enough about them to fill a book?

    ReplyDelete
  61. It sounds as if she was the Dorothy Parker of her day.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Heather, please feel free to put up your link to the Lord Rochester post! :)

    ReplyDelete
  63. Hey Susan! Sorry but I haven't read your book yet, but I do love your Two Nerdy History gals blog.

    Here is an off topic question for you: When you are researching for one book and stumble across another interesting character for another book, how do you not stop yourself from researching for both? Or do you keep two nopte books or something?
    And who is your favorite on PRoject Runway?

    ReplyDelete
  64. Susan, I, too, am intrigued by your editor's remark, because I think I've been there with the same editor. I am SO happy for you that you got the green light to bring this non-traditional (for historical fiction) heroine to life and to light.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Johnny Depp played Rochester a bit over the top, LOL - esp. with the tin nose! *g*

    Yes, Leslie, she does belong with your bad girls.

    Umm... how did I begin? The short version: I wrote my first book while I was on maternity leave when my daughter was born. I was clearly out of my mind. *g* I mailed if off blind to an editor who I chose because I liked her name. No kidding. Then my leave was over, I went back to work - and didn't hear from the publisehr for over a YEAR. That editor with the great name had left the company and abandoned my ms. When it was finally found, the senior editor was so embarassed that she read it, and bought it.

    ReplyDelete
  66. I am so glad you got green lighted too for this book. I totally skip all the Boleyn books because I think they've just been so overdone.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Not everyone can be a queen, princess or a Boleyn. Heavens, how many fascinating people have been lost to history because there is just nothing of them on paper.
    How sad.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Haha, I like Katherine as the Dorothy Parker of her day! Acutally that fits very well - it was a court where wit ruled. You had to be smart and funny to survive and prosper. Charles was a king who liked to be entertained....and if you could make the king laugh, you were golden.

    ReplyDelete
  69. It's great to have well written historical fiction from the Restoration period! Glad you had the opportunity to get published - great story on how you got started.
    Thanks for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Regardless of titles, money or looks...men are attracted to women who exude CONFIDENCE in themselves...it is the best aphrodisiac ;)

    ReplyDelete
  71. Unfortunately, I DO wander around a lot in research-land -- which is why so many of those "other" possible characters turn up on the Two Nerdy History Girls blog. I can't resist a good story, sigh...

    ReplyDelete
  72. I just mentioned Rochester...another favorite character from that period is Prince Rupert - does he figure in these novels of yours??

    ReplyDelete
  73. Susan - my post was on Lord Dorset - but here is the link to Arleigh's post about Lord Rochester :) http://historical-fiction.com/?p=2230.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Esp. the women. So many fascinating women have been lost to history....I'd love to write about some of them, but again, if you're not in a royal court, you probably won't get turned into a book. (Right, Leslie?) Which is sad.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I am getting so bored reading about the same royals over and over - it is refreshing and interesting to hear that you have chosen to write about a relatively unknown character - bravo to you and your editors for doing this book. Hopefully more will be on the way!

    ReplyDelete
  76. I agree with the comment about confidence being the best aphrodisiac! I think that's definitely what attracted James to Katherine - he wasn't particularly clever himself, and she said many of the outrageous things he secretly wished to say himself.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Susan, the first book you wrote was DUCHESS, correct?

    For anyone who hasn't read Susan's books, this is my opinion of the historical reading order, although they certainly all stand alone:

    ROYAL HARLOT (Charles II & Barbara Palmer)
    THE KING'S FAVORITE (Charles II & Nell Gwyn)
    THE FRENCH MISTRESS (Charles II & Louise de Keroualle)
    THE COUNTESS AND THE KING (James II & Katherine Sedley)
    DUCHESS (Sarah Churchill - what a piece of work that woman was!)

    ReplyDelete
  78. Linda, I read about Prince Rupert in one of the Morland novels, and it was definitely a case of why haven't we read more about him though.

    There are certain figures from history that it does amaze me that we don't have more HF about - Catherine the Great is just one example. That's why it is so great to get to read about someone who is lesser known like Katherine.

    ReplyDelete
  79. The same thing with Charles II - he liked a pretty face (ok, he really, really, really liked a pretty face), but if the lady wanted to last more than a night or two, she better be smart, too.

    ReplyDelete
  80. That's what kept Nell Gwynn around so long - she was smart!

    ReplyDelete
  81. Oops, I'm sorry, Heather! I don't have the list right here, and I didn't mean to confuse them. But Lord Dorset was a piece of work, too, wasn't he? *g* Sometimes the descriptions of life in that court sounds like the wittiest, funniest place imaginable - then others make it sound like "Animal House" in wigs. *g*

    ReplyDelete
  82. Oh Jenny, I can't pass up Project Runway talk! I really loved the last episode, they made some great looks! I LOVED Andy's design of the purple bathing suit and April's was really cool.

    How cute were Mondo and Michael C in the last episode?

    I don't really have a favorite of the season though, do you?

    ReplyDelete
  83. Yes, Susan, you're right. Editors are afraid to take chances because they think readers won't take chances on books about women they haven't really heard of. Of course on this loop, it's preaching to the choir because we are all interested in reading about, or writing about (or both) real-life historical fiction heroines who are not queens, princesses, or Boleyns.

    We have to vote with our wallets and support the novels written about those who were not queens, princesses, or Boleyns, or it will prove the publishers correct. They're in it to make a buck.

    That said ... my current historical fiction wip is about a very famous queen ... because my agent told me in no uncertain terms to "for God's sake, write about a marquee name this time!" (She's not a Boleyn, though. Or even a Tudor.)

    ReplyDelete
  84. Thank you for the historical order of the books, Christine Trent! I love having an order when I start reading a grouping of books. Even when they are stand alones, I love reading a bunch together like a series!

    ReplyDelete
  85. Hi Susan and Amy! Just wanted to pop in and say I think this is such a fabulous idea!! I've so enjoyed reading everyone's Q's and A's and discussion topics. The Restoration period was so fascinating! (And c'mon...I LOVE me some Project Runway!! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  86. As to PR - I think Gretchen needs an attitude adjustment

    ReplyDelete
  87. Christine, thank you so much for posting that list of books! Duh, I should've done it myself. *g*

    The books are all free-standing, but since they're all roughly set in the same time period, many of the characters overlap. But often someone who's a good friend in one book may turn up as an enemy in the next - which makes them more fun, IMHO. :)

    I would LOVE to write about Rupert of the Rhine, but alas, the powers that be say no for now. :(

    ReplyDelete
  88. Oh yeah...it is a real balance to know your own worth...and then to also make a man feel like he was the center of your world. Which the reality for most women, even the royals, was that the men did Rule the Roost...but because they were so insecure themselves it was always in the woman's best insterest to "stoke his ego"...shall we say...literally and figuratively!

    ReplyDelete
  89. Re: Project Runway, I'm getting a soft spot for Michael C (okay, the producers are manipulating us into it, too), because he is a talented designer and gets treated like dog poop by most of his fellow contestants. He may not be the most talented of the remaining designers, but he's less of a jerk than several of them.

    And I'll miss Casanova. He was such a character. Good for novelists to watch: the foreigner who understands only as much English as he wants to and pretends not to comprehend what he doesn't want to hear.

    Shades of "Fawlty Towers": "I'm from Barthelona; I know nothing..."

    ReplyDelete
  90. I might be the only person here who doesn't watch Project Runway! Anyone excited about Glee? Oh, anyone addicted to The Pillars of the Earth like me? I have to wait until each episode shows up on Netflix, but the ones I have watched so far are AWESOME!

    ReplyDelete
  91. Pricilla - I agree with you there, but it seems that Ivy is getting worse!

    ReplyDelete
  92. Yes, poor Catherine of Braganza! Yet it's a testament to Charles's seemingly endless charm that she remained in love with him (despite all his infidelities) and he, in a way, with her. She failed in her main queenly duty - to bear a son - yet he always defend her, and refused to divorce her like a certain earlier king....and she kept her head, too. *g*

    ReplyDelete
  93. Colleen, you're welcome. :)

    I actually read DUCHESS first, just because I stumbled upon it in a bookstore. But it really belongs at the end, chronologically speaking.

    I can't wait to see what Susan writes next.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Project Runway: I cannot STAND Ivy!!! Why is she still there? She makes awful clothes, too. I have to say my fav is probably either Mondo or Michael C. though this season hasn't really produced many jaw-dropping frocks, has it?

    ReplyDelete
  95. Lord Dorset was certainly a piece of work! I would not have wanted to get into a battle of words with him!

    ReplyDelete
  96. Back to heroines - who do you think does deserve a book who hasn't had one so far? Anybody, any time...

    ReplyDelete
  97. Colleen - I am SO excited for GLEE!

    ReplyDelete
  98. Leslie, I agree completely! Cassanova worked my nerves before, but he started growing on me and I was sad to see him go!

    ReplyDelete
  99. Charles felt enough twinges of guilt over having so many mistresses that he couldn't cast aside Catherine of B. He would have felt like a total heel. It would also have been highly impolitic for him to have packed her back to Portugal for failing to bring a child to term. And I do think he was genuinely touched by her almost childlike love with him.

    Catherine wasn't the first princess to fall in love with her Charles only to discover that even after they wed he was having it off with the woman who had been his paramour before then.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Yes - the secret to lasting as a royal mistress was stroking the, ah, royal ego. Charles's main mistresses reflect his own needs through the years. Lady Castlemaine and Nell Gwyn made him laugh, but as he grew older, Louise de Keroualle made him comfortable, and that was more appealing.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Susan, do you have any particular rituals associated with your writing? Things that motivate you and keep you going?

    ReplyDelete
  102. The fact that Charles II didn't put aside his wife is one of the things that I admired in him. He had the sexual morals of a tomcat, but he was true to himself and his own rules, one of which was that he wasn't going to put his wife aside.

    I find him such a fascinating character, but did find reading about James a refreshing change.

    At one point there was a comparison between the two brothers. It would have been hard to be sibling to someone as charismatic and charming as Charles, but I really came to like James in this book.

    And no, you aren't the only one who doesn't watch Project Runway. I presume it is on TV here but I have never actually watched it.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Yay dolleygurl! Just about a week left till it comes on :). Can't wait to see the sing off between Rachel and some new girl coming to the show (saw that on a preview online)!

    ReplyDelete
  104. Casanova bugged me to death in the beginning, but then he won me with his clever turns of phrase. He definitely understood more than he first let on. And the way he rolled his eyes!

    ReplyDelete
  105. Oh boy...I got bumped by blogger ;) I believe Charles kept Catherine because she provided the stability (even without an heir) to his thrown. He always feared another rebellion after witnessing his fathers.

    ReplyDelete
  106. I think Charles also respected Catherine of B. because he was his wife, and his queen. For a man who could see so devil-may-care, he did care very much about some things. Catherine was a "good" woman, and he had major guiilts about having treated her as he had.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Charles was certainly erm, interesting. Which is, I suppose why so many books are written about him and his court.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Sorry ahd to walk the doggie

    PR: There is an awesome blog by two guys, Tom and Lorenzo. http://projectrungay.blogspot.com/
    Check it out it will make you pee your pants.

    I thought Andy should have won, because his outfit was perfect and it had a prescence. April, like her but that was lingere people, not resort wear.

    Ivy has got to go. Gretchen, I'm still on the fence. Love Mondo and Valerie, but Val needs to pick up her game. I was nervous Mondo might get booted, but his past work has been amazing. Not sure who will make top three.

    ReplyDelete
  109. James was much harder to get a handle on than Charles. Poor James! In many ways he was the classic younger brother in his smarter, taller, more charming older brother's shadow. Once I figured that out - on Katherine's behalf, of course! - he was much easier to write.
    But boy, he did so some pretty awful things once he was king.....

    ReplyDelete
  110. I couldn't come in until now but want to wish Susan the very best of success with the new book, it beckons to me from the shelf oh so seductively, and to send a kudo to Amy...wonderful event. I'm looking forward to reading and relaxing!

    ReplyDelete
  111. Power...sometimes people just can't handle it.

    I too think the purple bathing suit should have won. The judges have been a bit wonky this year. I wonder if someone has been drugging the spray tan

    ReplyDelete
  112. I like the "darker" side of Charles, the melancholy side that engaged in all the back-stairs politics, rather than the Merrie Monarch stereotype. That's the more interesting side of him.

    Valerie was better in the beginning. That last dress for the "normal" woman was just awful. I have to say that I did like Gretchen's palazzo pants, though I can't stand her.

    ReplyDelete
  113. This has been so much fun and so knowledgeable (I hope I spelled that right :)). I can't wait to get reading your novels Susan! Thanks for doing this chat and letting us know a little bit about you!

    ReplyDelete
  114. Well I agree that there is some truth to the matter that Charles did love Catherine, however I see it as a "possessive" love for his wife. His motives always appeared selfish though and I think he only cared about what his "Court" and "the people" thought of him when it came to hurting his wife. But his guilt only lasted as long as his erections...as in many cases for men who are indulged with titles and power.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Very convoluted conversation - PR and Stuarts!!!

    Oops, someone asked about writing rituals - I don't have anything very exotic. I don't write at a desk, but on a laptop on the bed. I start early (about six) int he morning, and work most of the day through, sometimes into the night if things are going well. And I write seven days a week. How depressing is that? *g*

    ReplyDelete
  116. Yes it has been a delight. For a goat that doesn't get out much this is so much fun.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Many thanks to all of YOU for stopping by, and thank you, too, for your kind wishes!

    And a GREAT BIG THANK YOU to Amy Bruno for hosting this great chat! Major applause to Ms. Bruno!! :)

    ReplyDelete
  118. Thanks so much, Amy and Susan! Really interesting chat!

    ReplyDelete
  119. No rest for the creative, Susan!

    Thank you -- and Amy -- for this terrific chat!

    ReplyDelete
  120. Wow..Blogger is really blowing up...getting bit BANDWIDTH EXCEEDED stuff all over the front of your blog post Amy and I couldn't read the comments towards the end. Just wanted to say Thank You to Susan and to you for hosting this chat! Love having an open discussion and learning about how Susan writes. Not sad that you are on you lap top all day...most of us are ;) Have a wonderful week, fondly, Roberta

    ReplyDelete
  121. Yes, thank you Amy for hosting this event! I really enjoyed it.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Sorry about the bandwidth problem...of course Photobucket has to pick THIS time to get froggy with me!

    Thanks to all of you who attended, I am thrilled at the turnout though I should have been expecting it because Susan is so well beloved. You all wrote some great questions!!

    Thanks to Susan for sharing with us - you are a remarkable writer and woman and I am so honored to have gotten to know you this year!

    Have a great night everyone and thanks again!

    Amy

    ReplyDelete
  123. Writing in bed? God bless you Susan. I could see once in a while, that's where I used to do all myh school work, but all the time. I would end up reading books or sleeping.

    Amy, this has been a great chat and I can't wait to read all about the Stuarts, especially since I know very little about them. And I will be sending you an email about PR over the weekend :)

    ReplyDelete
  124. A little delayed - but this was a great event Amy and Susan. It went perfectly!

    ReplyDelete
  125. I'm sorry I missed the chat, I just got out of work over here on the west coast. I look forward to reading everyone's ocomments who paticipated though. I hope you can do this again, maybe on a weekend or at 8-9 PM so I can participate after work. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  126. Nice to see such enthusiasm. Good luck with the show.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Looks like I didn't have the right timing... At least I will enjoying catching on what everyone had to say and share. Way to go Amy!!! =)

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts with Thumbnails
 

Passages to the Past
All rights reserved © 2013

Custom Blog Design by Blogger Boutique

Blogger Boutique