As I was researching for my current book, I came across a blog written by a historian who claimed she hated historical romance that did not exactly follow the construct of the era in which the story is set. In fact, she preferred an ordinary romance in which boy and girl meet, boy and girl fight/misunderstand/do anything they possibly can think of to sabotage their relationship before boy and girl fall in love and marry.
Personally, I prefer alternative historical romance in which many of the era’s constructs remain true to history while others are altered (in a believable manner if one cares to set aside any preconceived notions about what is and isn’t acceptable in a historical romance) . My stories tend to fall into this category. While not ‘wallpaper’ romances, they are stories that could have happened within a given society’s parameters. Consequently, my stories feature more than the typical boy/girl romance and tend to take readers on an adventure and my characters on a journey of discovery.
I would love to hear what you prefer. Are you a traditionalist and prefer the typical boy/girl romance or do you like your history with a dash of adventure that stretches an era’s notions about romance and gender roles? Or maybe, you could care less. Let me know below!