DesignedbyLara.com

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Is an Author's Lack of Research Insulting to Her Readers?


Lucy Monroe has the second book in her Children of the Moon series coming out on Tuesday. Moon Craving is about the Abigail, the deaf sister of the heroine from the first book, Moon Awakening and the hero Talorc, a shift changing werewolf and the laird of the Sinclair clan she ends up marrying. I really did enjoy reading Moon Awakening because it was a combination of humor, paranormal and a feeling of the old Julie Garwood medievals I used to love reading.



As I read Moon Craving, my enjoyment began to deteriorate over the constant use of certain words spoken by the characters that wouldn’t have been invented yet during this time period. Let me give a few examples on why lack of research on the author, as well as the editor, leads to a book that made me want to throw it against the wall as I kept rolling my eyes and was jolted out of the story because it became so annoying and obviously wrong.

Example #1: Talorc talking with Abigail:

“He should have done a better job of protecting you.”
“Okay.” She did not care if she ever saw her parents again.

I really don’t think the word “okay” was used in medieval Scotland. To make sure, I wanted to look up the origins of the word and when it came into use. @jentheginerkid recommended a great site called the Online Etymology Dictionary as a guide. I typed in the word “okay” and this is what was found:

OK:
1839, only survivor of a slang fad in Boston and New York c.1838-9 for abbreviations of common phrases with deliberate, jocular misspellings." Further popularized by use as an election slogan by the O.K. Club, New York boosters of Democratic president Martin Van Buren's 1840 re-election bid, in allusion to his nickname Old Kinderhook, from his birth in the N.Y. village of Kinderhook. The noun is first attested 1841; the verb 1888.

As you can see OK or Okay would not be used by the Scottish population.

Example #2: Abigail says All right” when Talorc orders her to do something. Again, this phrase jolted me out of the story.

ALRIGHT or ALL RIGHT:
Frequent spelling of all right, attested from 1893.

Example #3: The term “bitch” is spoken too many times to count as in regards to Abigail’s mother, who is described as a bitch.

Talorc turned to face his bride. “Your mother is a bitch.” Again, the amount of times this word was used raised some red flags.

BITCH:
In modern (1990s, originally black English) slang, its use with reference to a man is sexually contemptuous, from the "woman" insult.

From these three examples I’ve listed, it shows bad research from the author, as well as her editor. As a reader who caught onto these, wouldn’t Lucy Monroe also stop and think for a moment that perhaps just by going on the internet and searching for the origins of these words and how they were used, she could have written a more enjoyable and believable book?

But then again, perhaps a reader is not expected to question and take things at face value because Monroe writes such poetic passages as:

“When he had finished climaxing, he leaned forward and began to rub his seed into her skin, marking Abigail in an unmistakable way for all Chrechte warriors to recognize… Abigail lay compliant below him as he caressed every last drop of his come into her skin, until she was so thoroughly marked with his scent his own wolf would have a hard time distinguishing between their bodies.”

And

“Lifting her arms above her head, he nuzzled one of her armpits. An aphrodisiac like no other, the scent of her pheromones made him crazy. He nipped the tender skin right where arm and shoulder joined.”



I don’t know about you, but I hope aspiring authors don’t jump on the bandwagon of creating a heroine who speaks valley girl in the medieval era, and has a hero obsessed with rubbing his man fluids all his future mate’s body, not allowing her to bath after he does it, while having an armpit sniffing fetish.

Sorry Ms. Monroe, I expect better of you where you should respect for your readers, because they may just call you on these mistakes. Purple prose dialogue is one thing, but not researching some very noticeable faux pas is inexcusable.


Katiebabs

32 comments:

Aleksandr Voinov said...

Thanks for the laugh. I could have saved so much work with "Deliverance" since publishers obviously don't care enough...

Annarkie said...

I may have been able to forgive "all right," but "Okay" In medieval Scotland? WTF?
As for the cum-rubbing, he wouldn't let her bather afterwards...Seriously?
Armpit fetish...donno if I can go there.

MicheleKS said...

If mistakes take a reader out of a book then it's a fail on the author's part along with editor and copy-editor. But I've also seen contemporary authors called out on using dated slang such as a 70's term in a book set in the present. With a historical, you have to check your etymology and with a contemporary, you have to listen to how people talk today with special attention paid to a person's age (such as teenagers).

JenB said...

But...but...it has a WEREWOLF in it! In a world where werewolves exist, etymology is out the window. LOL

Srsly though...I really do break all my own rules when I read paranormals. Kinda hard to be too annoyed over anachronisms when the book also contains creatures that come straight from the imagination, y'know? :D I don't have a problem with an author taking other liberties when the supernatural is involved.

It sounds like a cool book to me!

LorelieLong said...

Example 1: I'm so with you.

Example 2: They etymology online definition *seems* to refer to the specific spelling of "alright." And I'll admit I dunno when "all right" came into usage.

Buuutttt....

Example 3: The 1990s usage is specifically when applied to a male. The quote you used refers to a female. The Dictionary of American Slang (I've got the American version 'cause that's what I write lol) says "A woman one dislikes or disapproves of, esp a malicious devious, or heartless woman -- from about 1400.

So Monroe's probably ok (heh) on that one. :D

JenB said...

Oh--as far as blaming copy editors, I agree to a great extent. However, in many (MANY) cases the author has the final word.

Meg said...

An armpit fetish? Eesh. And good call on spotting the time-period-inappropriate references! Definitely jarring to the reader.

heidenkind said...

The Okay is pretty hilarious. I'm no etymologist, but even I know that word comes from the US and is modern.

Do I think it's insulting to readers that Monroe didn't do her research? No... I think it's just plain laziness. One can only hope this isn't an example of how seriously she takes accuracy and believability in her novels.

Katiebabs a.k.a KB said...

JenB: And the dried jizz flakes and armpit sniffing is okay? I imagine the heroine didn't have a razor handy... ew.

Katiebabs a.k.a KB said...

Oh, I forgot to add, at one point the heroins says "Oh, brother." as in a complaint not in talking to her brother. O.o

Selena Blake said...

This is a perfect example of why I don't write historicals. I have enough work to do without worrying about word origins. That's why my hat is off to anyone who can write a historical well.

ChelseaW said...

I agree with you completely. Nothing takes me out of a story faster than writing that simply does not belong.

Thanks for this post!

Victoria Janssen said...

"Bitch" is old enough. (Though not "okay" and "all right.")

From the OED:
2. a. Applied opprobriously to a woman; strictly, a lewd or sensual woman. Not now in decent use; but formerly common in literature. In mod. use, esp. a malicious or treacherous woman; of things: something outstandingly difficult or unpleasant. (See also SON OF A BITCH.)

?a1400 Chester Pl. (1843) 181 Whom calleste thou queine, skabde biche?
1575 J. STILL Gamm. Gurton II. ii, Come out, thou hungry needy bitch. 1675 HOBBES Odyssey XVIII. 310 Ulysses looking sourly answered, You Bitch.
1712 ARBUTHNOT John Bull (1755) 9 An extravagant bitch of a wife. 1790 WOLCOTT (P. Pindar) Adv. Fut. Laureat Wks. 1812 II. 337 Call her Prostitute, Bawd, dirty Bitch.
etc.

Why yes, I am a geek.

And I worry all the time that I've let a modernism slip into a historical. Sometimes it's hard to spot it yourself when you're writing.

Moira Rogers (Donna) said...

Yeah, I've got to go with Lorelie on the "bitch" issue. The etymological reference you quoted explicitly refers to a usage that is...not what was in the book.

JenB said...

Well, I personally don't like the feeling of dried jizz on my skin... O_O But men are gross creatures and they do like "marking" their territory. If that man also happens to be canine...

Anyway, it doesn't turn me on, but I wouldn't hate the entire book because of it.

Also, I've watched my dog go into ecstatic raptures just from getting to roll around on my dirty laundry pile, so I don't have trouble imagining a werewolf hero getting cheap thrills out of smelling his mate's sweaty armpits. Again, not something I love to read about, but not a reason to give a low grade.

Jill Sorenson said...

I'm not mad at the armpit thing. Armpits are sexy! What?

Katiebabs a.k.a KB said...

Alright (haha) perhaps I'll give you bitch, but the word "okay" being used? Not going for that.

Jill: I assume that because it is not romantic at all, no mention of possible hair growing under the armpit is mentioned. So, man licking armpit of a woman who didn't shave back then is... bleck.

Ann Aguirre said...

Okay and all right are anachronistic.

Bitch is fine.

Semen doesn't turn flaky on the skin. It absorbs.

Armpit sniffing is a bit of a fetish, but it's consistent with a more primitive or animalistic hero.

mynfel said...

Heh. I caught one of your armpit comments on twitter today - guess this is what you were referring to.

And strangely enough, I had a post very much like this the other week - same sort of issues with the language, etc.

I give major kudos to the authors that do their homework thoroughly, but on the other hand, I'm not sure you can always be 100% right on everything.

Give me enough to suspend disbelief without pulling me out of the story and I'm good to go. :)

Katiebabs a.k.a KB said...

Ann: Good thing I didn't post a picture of corn flakes.

Mynfel: The sniffing arm pit made me go HUH? The rubbing in the man juices made me put down the book for a moment as I lost it.

Samantha Kane said...

There's a lot of that rubbing in semen going on in romance novels these days. That's a total WTF for me, because I would slap my man silly if he even suggested it. Blech. But, I have to agree that in a book with a werewolf hero, that and the armpit fetish are a little more understanding. It wouldn't make me like it, not my thing, but I get it.

As for language, when I'm writing my historicals I have an etymology dictionary open beside me at all times. Two words that are anachronistic but VERY hard to replace (for me at least) in a believable way for modern readers, Sex and Ass. Yes, there are historically accurate terms I can use. But I think overusing them pulls a reader out of the story more than using the modern words does. But okay and Oh, brother in a medieval? I have to agree, too anachronistic.

Jackie (Literary Escapism) said...

Katiebabs a.k.a KB said... Oh, I forgot to add, at one point the heroins says "Oh, brother." as in a complaint not in talking to her brother. O.o

Now if she had said "Oh Bother", I would have given that to her, but "oh brother?". I don't think so.

However, at the same time, i don't know if I would have actually paid attention to that detail. Word usage doesn't bother me too much as long as it works with the scene. A scene or certain actions can make me jump out of a book, but I don't think I've ever had a word to that before.

Holly said...

Many authors, including Garwood, use a more contemporary voice when writing historicals. I've seen all kinds of words used that weren't in play back when, but if the story is good enough it doesn't really matter.

It sounds to me like you're just being nitpicky because you were bored with the story. That happens to me all the time.

I'm not so sure I could look past the armpit lovin', though. That's not very smexy, IMO.

Katiebabs a.k.a KB said...

Holly: Part of me did like the story but the work okay and the amount of times the hero said the word "bitch" as well as some other writing issues pulled me out of the story.

Jizz rubbing and armpit sniffing made me go WTF?

Wasn't there a dark comedy movie made a few years ago with one of the male characters having an armpit fetish?

I guess he could have kept sniffing her magic hoo-haa instead since that seems to be the norm in most romances today.

nightsmusic said...

I can forgive a lot of things in paranormal as long as the author builds a world that's worthy of those things and remains consistent over however many books in the series there are. But if she/he is going to use specific times and places then no, make the speech, the actions fit the era. If the author is too lazy to do that, I have no time to read it. And if they're too lazy to do that, they're obviously too lazy to make a world of their own.

Vicious cycle, but I'd have tossed it. If I want current words, I'll read a contemporary.

As a side, Gabaldon in Outlander uses the armpit thing when Jamie is telling Claire the first thing a man does to break a horse is rub the horse's nose in his 'oxter', so the horse will always know his scent and then, with gentle handling etc, etc, etc...Claire had told Jamie how nervous she was and he says she should have 'rubbed his nose in her oxter'. Close to that anyway.

That said, maybe this author is trying to channel Gabaldon and doing a not very good job of it?

K. Z. Snow said...

I probably would've pulled up short quite a few times. The use of "come" and "done a better job" don't sound right to me either.

I'm hardly a medievalist, but there are certain words, idioms, and speech patterns that have a decidedly modern sound. A conscientious writer of historicals would, I think, make every effort to keep her "ear" trained on the language she's using.

L. Diane Wolfe said...

That's why so much research needs to go into a period book!

I think some of that comes from movies - so many set in the past are lax in their use of words current for the time.

KMont said...

Personally I'm not a fan of using the paranormal elements as an excuse to forgo correct historical elements, especially if they feel jarring enough to take me out of the story. Otherwise why bother with said historical time period. That's just me, though and had I actually been reading the book i might not have noticed it. Then again I might have as silly elements in paranormal romances have been bothering me more and more lately. Meh.

Melissa said...

I agree that 'okay' is poorly done and should have been corrected during editing.

As a prior poster has shown, 'bitch' is completely appropriate, having been in use c1400. Slightly different meaning, but just as ugly an insult.

For 'all right', I went to my brand-new copy of the historical thesaurus of the OED (figured it was a good investment since I DO write historicals!) Usage as 'acceptable' is c. 1953, as 'predicatively' is c. 1898 and as an 'expression of assent' c. 1837. Don't know what era the story is in, but dude on the cover has a sword so I'm guessing quite a bit earlier. Probably would have been better to use 'very well' c. 1564 instead.

Sandra Schwab said...

Given that this is a medieval romance set in Scotland, the people wouldn't have spoken modern English anyway, but Middle English - if at all. More likely, they would have used a dialect of either Gaelic or Scots. In other words, you'll never find a historical novel that uses historically accurate language.

Wanderer said...

My first thought was similar to JenB, there's a werewolf involved so I can look past the historical accuracies of the language. I'm more disturbed by the semen lotion and armpit scratch-n-sniff. o_O

hehehe, my word verification is aness

JenB said...

Ann, Semen really can flake...