Cecilia Grant

Show Notes

The Reformed Rakes talk about Cecilia Grant’s Blackshear series. Cecilia Grant published the first Blackshear, A Lady Awakened, on January 1, 2011. She published a book a year until 2014. The Blackshears series deals with themes of family reconciliation, labor, and the economics of sex. The Rakes heartily recommend all three books as singular examples of the high angst, high reward relationships in historical romance.

Books Referenced

A Lady Awakened by Cecilia Grant

A Gentleman Undone by Cecilia Grant

A Woman Entangled by Cecilia Grant

Destiny’s Surrender by Beverly Jenkins

The Scottish Duke by Karen Ranney

Not Quite a Husband by Sherry Thomas

Flowers from the Storm by Laura Kinsale

The Edge of Impropriety by Pam Rosenthal

The Westcott series by Mary Balogh

References

https://romancewritersonthejourney.wordpress.com/2010/05/16/meet-debut-novelist-cecilia-grant/

Blackstone, William, “Parent and Child,” Commentaries on the Laws of England (William Hardcastle Brown, ed., 1897).

Fonblanque, J.S.M and J.A. Paris, “Suppositious Children,” Medical Jurisprudence (1823).

Transcript

Chels: Welcome to Reformed Rakes, a debauched and rehabilitated romance podcast steeped in history. My name is Chels and I'm the writer of the romance substack, the Loose Cravat, a romance book collector and BookToker under the username, chels_ebooks. 

Beth: I'm Beth and I'm also on BookTok under the name bethhaymondreads.

Emma: I'm Emma, a law librarian, who writes about the intersection of justice and romance on the substack Restorative Romance. I'm also on BookTok under the name emmkick. 

Chels: Today we're talking about the Blackshear Series by Cecilia Grant. From the years 2011 to 2014, Grant wrote three novels and one novella centered around this Regency Era family. We'll be covering her full-length novels today. A Lady Awakened, A Gentleman Undone and A Woman Entangled.

In an interview with Kelly Gwen on her website Romance Writers on the Journey, Grant revealed that she began writing Regency romance in 1995. She was heavily inspired by Georgette Heyer and what she called “Signet-style traditional Regency.” But in the 10 years it took her to write her first book, the landscape of historical romance had entirely shifted. If she wanted to sell, she'd have to learn how to write sex scenes, and she'd have to find her own voice.

And she most definitely succeeded on both accounts. Grant’s writing is distinct, simultaneously prosaic and biting. She told Gwyn that her publishing deal came while she felt overwhelmed and overmatched in her IT job. And that email, with an offer, came with catharsis.

The heroines in all three of her novels have a similar trajectory: an unsung talent that shapes them just as much as their relationships do.

When I picked up her first book, A Lady Awakened, I knew I was reading a book that was seminal in the Chels’ Romance Canon. This book was clever and empathetic and introspective in a way that sank in my gut and refused to evacuate. I loved it, and I wanted everyone to read it, to understand me better.

What's your experience with Cecilia Grant?

Emma: I'm almost positive that I first read Grant on Chels’ recommendation. I think the first month that I read it was June 2022. I started with A Lady Awakened, and was totally bowled over by how she pulled off this plot, which we'll get into in a second. The plot on paper feels impossible. I had just read a Mary Balogh book that had a very neat family reconciliation that I didn't totally buy, and I wanted something thornier and messier, and I found it in the Blackshears

Beth: Unsurprisingly. I also picked this up on Chels’ recommendation, but I picked it up in December. 2022.

Chels: It feels like this intro is just so y'all can compliment me on recommending. 

Emma: Chels has amazing taste! 

Chels: That's not what I was going for, but I appreciate it! 

[LAUGHTER] 

Chels: We split this podcast episode into three parts, one for each book. Emma is going to start with the first in the series, which is also her favorite, A Lady Awakened.

Emma: So in A Lady Awakened, Martha Russell's husband has just died without an heir. So Seton Park, the home she's living in, will be passed to her husband's brother, Mr. James Russell, unless she produces a son within the next nine months. At the time of his death, Martha knows that she is not pregnant, but keeps this to herself to avoid immediate eviction from her home.

When Martha discovers from her maid that Mr. Russell has a history of raping the women servants of Seton Park, she resolves to defraud him out of the estate. She devises a plan that involves a new man in town, who has a reputation for rakishness and a need for cash.

Enter Theo Mirkwood, who has been sent to his father's country house to settle down and learn some responsibility. Importantly, Theo's father has not given him an allowance to afford any amusements.

Martha invites Theo to her home, and after some communication missteps, she offers him a deal. She will pay him £500 to help her conceive a child. Theo initially is taken aback, and lists some scruples that he has, but eventually consents, primarily driven by his immediate attraction to the wrapped-up, stern widow.

Their agreement calls for encounters every day for a month and starts immediately after their first meeting. Theo believes that the relationship will involve seduction on his part, but he is quickly disavowed of this notion. As he showers Martha with compliments, she rebuffs him and insists on getting it over with.

Theo is confused by this, but takes his own pleasure, even in his disappointment at her neutral to negative responses to his sweet nothings and caresses.

First, the meetings take place in the afternoons, and then move to evenings, and with growing friendship, Theo starts staying the whole night. Parallel to these meetings, they both begin aiding each other in their domestic missions.

Theo is attempting to learn land management, though he knows little about the mechanics of farming, and Martha is struggling to connect with the people on and around her lands, given her short marriage, quick entering into mourning, and reserved personality.

Martha's mind is well-suited for land management problems, helping Theo pick up with the necessary knowledge quickly, and Theo charms basically everyone he meets, surreptitiously sending middle class women from the town to call upon Martha, and charming tenants on both of their lands

In their sexual relationship, Martha insists on not experiencing pleasure. This is important to the moral calculus she's done to justify her pious fraud. Additionally, she has no interest in Theo, physically or emotionally, as long as he is an unfeeling rake that she is using as a “stud animal,” Martha's words.

But after he takes her to meet one of his tenants, Mr. Barrow, who they discover has fallen seriously ill, and Martha sees Theo's affection for the man, as well as the rapidity with which he forms a plan of care, she decides to allow Theo to aid her in her pleasure. But at this point Theo has grown more interested in her as a friend, companion, and adviser, and takes her displays of eagerness as indications that she wants the job over with faster.

Theo has a meeting with the laborers to describe his plans for the lands, including starting a dairy farm. He commands the room and gains the laborers’ trust, and Martha tells him just how proud she is of him. This inspires Theo to change the dynamic during their meetings, and with Martha in control, she's able to articulate her desires for him, and he is able to understand them.

This sudden and easy intimacy leads Theo to confess his feelings and propose, which Martha responds to with a pregnancy announcement. They separate coldly, as Martha insists on continuing with her defrauding plan, which will not allow for marriage to Theo.

When the wayward Mr. James Russell announces a visit, Theo calls on Martha again. She initially thinks he's coming to collect his £500 of payment for their procreative success, but instead, he offers to aid her and her servants in protecting themselves from Mr. Russell's lechery.

During the visit Martha meets the brother’s family, and begins to doubt the morality of her scheme. She amends her plan, realizing she is not alone in wanting to resist Mr. Russell's residence in town. In a confrontation attended by various townspeople, including one of Mr. Russell's past victims, the residents of Seton Park make it clear he will not be welcome in their town, even if Martha's child turns out to be a girl, which would allow him to inherit

Theo had taken up a post in Martha's sitting room during Mr. Russell's stay to chastely protect her. After the town showdown against Mr. Russell, Martha is emboldened to ask, as directly as she can, for Theo to share her bed once more. Theo is gone when she awakes, but she has one additional idea. Martha offers Mr. James Russell a choice. She will let him inherit, independent of the results of a pregnancy, if he is never in residence at the Park, allowing his wife and two sons to live there: or he can wait nine months to see if she has a son. He chooses the sure thing, and returns to London. Martha hears that Theo has also returned to London and thinks he has left her.

Actually, Theo has gone to London to explain what has happened to his family. His father is disappointed and confused by Theo's framing of the situation. A widow is pregnant with his child, but they cannot marry yet, and the child will not be recognized as Theo’s? But Theo is in love with the widow?? The women in his family indicate they will accept Martha and the child.

Back at Seton Park. Martha prepares to go to her brother's home, having told the community she has miscarried. When Theo returns to the county, he hears reports of the miscarriage. He bursts into Martha's home, and accidentally reveals to her present siblings that she is pregnant, since she has to explain to him that the miscarriage was a lie, and explain to her siblings his presence. Martha proposes in a roundabout way to Theo, and he accepts in front of her confused family, surprised by this emotional drama from their starchy younger sister.

When we're thinking about this book, I always call this book a slow burn where they're having sex the entire time. The sex scenes in this book feel so singular to this couple. I compare them favorably to other romance novels, where the scenes…where the sex sort of seems to go in a required order of intimacy.

Because of the nature of their arrangement, the first two sex scenes are really not that sexy. Instead, the intimacy comes from each of them opening up, and even really through their actions rather than their words. So I really want to talk about how Martha and Theo talk to each other.

So miscommunication is a big topic, in how we talk about romance novels, people label things as miscommunication trope a lot of the time. Do either of you consider this book a miscommunication book?

Beth: I see it as a miscommunication book because I see almost every romance book as a miscommunication book, because you are learning how to communicate with the other person. That's the foundation of every relationship. So yes, I would, I would call this a miscommunication book.

Chels: Yeah, absolutely. I think kind of one of the big things with Theo is that he thinks that it's gonna be easy for him when he first starts sleeping with Martha. It's just like this big win for him right?

It doesn't end up working out the way that he thinks it will, because Martha has this moral calculus, and it's something that he doesn't understand. She deliberately keeps him in the dark for a lot of a lot of the book. So he doesn't really get in his mind why she's being so cold to him, and why she's refusing to enjoy the experience.

Emma: Yeah I feel like this book actually plays with miscommunication versus miscommunication trope. There's one moment where they haven't spoken when Theo goes back to London, and she thinks that he's left her. That sort of has that, like third-act, break up words have not been exchanged from each other. But if you boil this whole book down to a miscommunication trope in the third act, you're missing all the miscommunication that happens the whole book, where they're just not speaking the same language like. They’re actually talking to each other constantly, because they see each other probably more often than most other romance novels that I've read, but they're constantly with each other, because they see each other every day for a month. They don't have to wait for a ball to happen to see each other and have an exchange, or even write letters to each other. They're just talking all the time. 

But there is a concept that I thought about with them, and it comes up a few different times in how they characterize their own language. They're constantly wishing for the correct words, like when Martha wants Theo to come to her bed, she says, like “I wish I could signal to him. I wish I could…like I'm sending the wrong signals, and I don't know what words to say,” because at that point, when she's asking him to perform a certain way, he thinks she's just trying to get this over with. And she doesn't realize what she needs to say. 

And there's this concept in legal writing that is called “magic words.” When you’re making a legal argument, there are words that lawyers sort of imbibe with extra meaning. I think a lot of people who are not lawyers call them like legalease, and it's like why do these legal words have specific meeting? Where they're commonplace counterparts words don’t have that meaning. 

I think that's the lesson that Martha and Theo learn with their communication is that there are no magic words. There is no special, correct thing that they could say to each other that would suddenly make them trust each other. What they have to do in order to get to this place of trust is this action, and I love that there's not actually a big moment where they say the correct thing to each other.

Even the scene where Martha is able to communicate to Theo “I want to be with you. I want you to come to my bed.” She does it through her actions, and they are able to understand each other because of this level of trust they've established. She's not giving this big speech, saying, like, “I'm ready for this relationship. I'm ready for this moment.” 

Even her proposal, her sister is there, and she says, was that a proposal, did I just witness that? Was that actually a proposal? But Theo and Martha both understand like that was a proposal. That's that's how they communicate with each other is through this like shared language that only comes through trust and action.

Beth: Yes. I agree with everything you said. I. Yeah, I like the idea of magic words, and I almost think of it. Well, I feel like there's this thing that will happen often in books, and I call it the big conversation. It's like the pivotal moment happens after the big conversation. But between Martha and Theo it's the accumulation of just a lot of actions, a lot of time spent together that eventually leads them to: getting on the same foot.

Emma: Yeah. And when so many miscommunication books like when people complain about miscommunication, they say, like. “just have a conversation” right like that's always the answer, like they're like, “Why don't these characters just talk?” Theo and Martha are talking the whole book. They're constantly talking to each other, but they're not…they're not ready! There's no way for them to be on the same page until the end of the book. So you can't be wishing for them to have a conversation because they're they're doing that all the time. So it's not an easy fix.

Chels: Yeah, you bring a lot of other baggage to a conversation like you have different points of view, and you're interpreting what the other people are saying in a way that they might not necessarily have meant, or maybe they meant it, but not quite as mean. 

Emma: Just thinking, also both Martha and Theo are sort of saying similar things to each other, the whole book. “Do more, do more in the bedroom,” and at the beginning it's like, “Get this over with, Stop trying to make this last longer,” and then by the end of the book it's like, “do more, because, like I want to be with you. I'm in love with you.” And he's interpreting them the same way because she's established this like grammar of talking.

Beth: I find yeah, I like that because I think it's very hard to change a dynamic once it's been set. And Theo and Martha are able to do that by the end of the book. 

Emma: I guess, on the theme of like what actually happens in the book. And I referenced this in like my experience, the first reading  A Lady Awakened--the plot in this is a little bonkers. I’m sometimes reticent to call plots in romance novels bonkers. But the plot of this book is something that is often sort of elided to or alluded to in other romance novels, and it's the idea of a widow having a child to defraud a will, as I wonder if either of you could talk about other experience you've had with books that involve like widows and having heirs, or getting an estate, because I feel like it's pervasive in romance. But this is the only one I've read that sort of acts on this fear of a widow defrauding a will.

Chels: There are a few books that come to mind, although not necessarily the same exact scenario. In The Edge of Impropriety by Pam Rosenthal there’s a widow named Marina. She is a writer, and she has this air of mystery because the ton is always guessing who she’s inspired by. Her latest muse is a young man named Anthony, and Marina is not actually interested in Anthony, she’s interested in his uncle, Jasper who is a scholar. 

It turns out though that Anthony, who is titled, is not his father’s son, he’s Jasper’s son. It’s this huge secret, although the reader knows pretty much the whole time. 

There’s also Flowers from the Storm by Laura Kinsale. The Duke of Jervaulx is sleeping with his lover in the beginning and he’s fondling her pregnant belly, telling her that she needs to quickly sleep with her husband in order to pass her baby off as legitimate. This does not go to plan. 

I might be stretching with this one, but I keep thinking of Not Quite a Husband by Sherry Thomas. There’s no baby, no widow, but there is fraud in the dissolution of marriage. I’m not sure if I should say divorced or annulled, maybe you can tell me the difference Emma? 

Emma: So the difference between annulment and divorce, and this is still true, now: an annulment is when the marriage is erased, it never took place legally. Often it is because some element of the marriage contract is off. So a famous historical attempt at annulment is Henry VIII trying to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. He has got an papal dispensation in order to marry her because she was his brother’s widow. Catherine has testified that she had never consummated her marriage with Henry’s brother, so they were allowed to get married. 

But when Henry decided he wanted to marry Anne Boleyn, it was argued that the original dispensation was faulty, so Catherine and Henry’s marriage should actually have been annulled. The Catholic Church disagreed and the rest is history. 

Now, when people might seek an annulment because they haven't consummated the marriage, if you have a quickie marriage in Vegas, and you don't sleep together after you get married, you can annul it. Okay, that's a function for annulment is that we never were really married at all, it takes it off the books. This comes up a lot historicals, where they will say really married until we consummate it. And so there, there's this supremacy of consummating as the final factor that creates a marriage. So yeah, that consummation would be the thing that could generally make a difference between an annulment and a divorce, because divorce you have to actually break apart the marriage, like the contract has taken place and is binding in some way. 

Chels: Thank you! So it is annulment. Bryony and Leo have been married for a year, and they’ve consummated it, but Bryony convinces Leo to lie and say that they haven’t so she can get the marriage annulled and this kind of like sets off the second chance romance. So that’s another fraud. 

Lastly there’s Destiny’s Surrender by Beverly Jenkins and The Scottish Duke by Karen Ranney. They’re kind of similar in one regard: both books have the heroine get pregnant by the hero in the beginning of the stories, but the hero casts doubt on the legitimacy. I think in both books they knew from the get-go that the child was theirs and it wasn’t a suppositious heir situation. 

Emma: So the phrase that Chels mentioned is the legal term for what is happening in this book and that’s “suppositious heir.” Suppositious just means “based on assumption rather than fact.” and this refers to any person who is passed off as a legitimate heir when they are not. 

There are two ways this could happen, both of which Martha considers: a widow being pregnant and passing it off as her husband’s and the stealing/purchasing a baby and passing it off as her own. 

Grant does not use this term, but as I was rereading the book I wondered if this was moral panic invented for romance novels or something people were actually worried about in the 19th century, so I did some legal research into older jurisprudence, to see what people were talking about in the 19th century. 

Because it has a name, it does seem to be something that courts were worried about happening! But the anxiety seems to be much more about passing off a stolen baby as an heir, which Martha does consider in the book, but decides against pursuing because she can’t stomach the ethics of it. 

The actual cases that use this phrase, were much more likely to be about an adult who had been sort of brought in to being an heir, but not actually be a legitimate heir. Or a stolen baby being passed off as a direct heir. 

For pregnant wives, there was a strong presumption of legitimacy of birth at common law, even when circumstances made it very likely that the child was not the father’s. So if a couple is married, they tend to assume the child is legitimate. Blackstone, a famous legal commentator, acknowledged the historical law that bars widows marrying within a year of their husband’s death. Martha and Theo reference this tradition, but this would not be a law per se that they’re beholden to as much as a tradition, that sort of, to keep everything on the up and up. 

Suppositious heirs also come up in medical jurisprudence guides--the idea that doctors might be called to testify to the mechanics of this process seems to be distasteful to the writers. “In England and elsewhere precautions are taken which are as offensive to female delicacy as they are ineffective to the demonstration of truth.” This guide basically suggests that artists would be as qualified to determine parentage as the doctor. So based on the jurisprudence I have seen, the courts have the idea that this was a thing, but they realized it would be almost impossible to litigate--they really feel like it shouldn’t be a question for the courts. 

And if a woman was found out to have defrauded in this way, she does not seem to be subject to punishment. Again, Blackstone’s acknowledges that this would be something that was punished under Gothic law, so central Europe / medieval law. But that common law in England would not punish a woman for doing this. At least in the courts. 

So of course Martha and Theo don't steal a baby. They have a baby. They live happily ever after. I think this book is perfect.  I love all 3 of these books, but this one is just totally perfect, Emma Soup. So I’m gonna throw it to Chels, they're gonna talk about A Gentleman Undone. 

Chels: In the second book in the Blackshear Series, Will Blackshear has recently returned from the war, having sold his commission, he is now just a gentleman playing cards at a gaming club.

We start with his point of view when it quickly becomes clear that he's hard up for cash, and extremely depressed, but that takes a bit of a back seat because he notices four courtesans. Three of them are beautiful, and his eye lingered, naturally, on the fourth.

During the card game the conversation turns to the women nearby. The protector of the courtesan Will’s enraptured with, Roanoke, brags to everyone within earshot that the reason he selected her to be his mistress is because she cannot have children, so he doesn't need to worry about fathering bastards.

Later that evening Will hides in a dark and secluded room upstairs, only to be interrupted by Roanoke and the woman who he's since learned is named Lydia against his better judgment, he lingers once again enraptured by Lydia. Just as he's about to quietly leave the room, they make eye contact.

Later that night Lydia and Roanoke join Will at the card table. Roanoke nods off, and Lydia picks up his hand of cards. Will despondently watches as Lydia slowly fleeces him to the tune of £180.

Three nights later, they are all back at Beachum’s, the card room. Roanoke has fallen asleep, and Lydia quietly, unassumingly, makes small bets and rakes in money. Lydia notices that Will is watching her intently, and Will confronts her later that evening. He says that he knows she was cheating, and he demands his money back.

Will attempts to appeal to Lydia's morals, saying that the money can't be of any consequence to her, and that he needs it desperately. But this was the wrong thing to say. Lydia refuses to return the money.

Lydia then takes her ladies’ maid, Jane, with her to a bank to invest in an annuity. Lydia's plan is to let her card earnings grow so she can eventually support herself as her position as a mistress is precarious, and she wants to be self-sufficient.The clerk recognizes Lydia from the brothel she is to work at, and he stops helping her, and begins to lear.

Lydia and Jane leave, unsuccessful. Meanwhile, Will brings his sister Martha to visit a woman named Mrs. Talbot. Mrs. Talbot is a widow to a man that Will knew in the war. After her husband dies, she and her son have to live with a relation that is less than kind. Will feels responsible for the well-being of Mrs. Talbot and her son. But it's unclear as to why Will feels culpable for his death.

On the long walk home from the bank, Lydia and Jane pass Will and Martha in a curricle. Will stops and offers Lydia and Jane a ride. When Lydia refuses to take the ride as there isn’t space for three, Will jumps out of the curricle and offers to walk Lydia home. She rejects him, but he insists walking several paces behind her, so they don't look like a couple.

The next time Will sees Lydia and Roanoke at Beechum’s, Lydia deals while Roanoke sleeps once more. But she asks Will if he’d like to buy another card, and this strikes him as odd because he can buy or twist according to the rules. Surely Lydia knew that, which leads him to realize that Lydia was telling him to buy. He proceeds to follow her directions, winning £180--the exact amount that Lydia fleeced him for. 

At a house party on a different day. Lydia retreats to a secluded room to play cards. Will finds her, and attempts to ask how she was able to win his money back. Lydia reveals her proficiency at cards, and Will is awestruck. Lydia proposes that they help each other. She'll teach him cards, and he'll help her find a man of business to store her money.

When it becomes clear that Will will never have the same level of talent that Lydia does, they change the plan together. They come up with an elaborate system of tells with Lydia communicating to Will how to place bets and Will following along. The first night they try, they went over £1,000. 

Lydia and Will kiss triumphantly, but Will breaks away, having second thoughts. Lydia gets angry and cuts ties with Will. Later they meet at a house party they're both attending and reconcile. Lydia tells Will her family history--that her parents died in a carriage accident, and that she lost her brother in the war.

Lydia went to work in a brothel, partially to make money, but partially to slowly kill herself with disease. When Roanoke offered to make her his mistress, he took advantage of her ignorance, and didn't set terms for settlement, which is why Lydia has nothing to fall back on. 

Later that evening, Will, who is still incensed by Lydia's story, places a bet with Roanoke. The terms are salacious: If Will wins, he gets a night with Lydia. Will does win, and Lydia is humiliated by her protector turning her over, and angry with Will. He tries to explain that he wanted to buy her a free night, but it doesn't comfort her.

Lydia and Will eventually sleep together, and Roanoke insults Lydia and implies he'll take Jane, her maid, as a mistress instead. Lydia slaps him and Roanoke back hands her in return. Will intervenes and challenges Roanoke to a duel.

Lydia begs Will not to duel with Roanoke, but Will refuses. Knowing that Will is counting on their money to assist her in the event of his death, Lydia gives it all to Mrs. Talbot, the wife of the dead soldier Will knew. 

When Will shows up to the duel. Roanoke asks Will not to tell his younger brother, who is acting as a second the circumstances of the duel should he win. Will thinks that since Roanoke is experiencing regret, he might apologize, and end the duel. But Ronaoke does not. Last minute, Will tells Roanoke that he will delope when the duel begins. Will aims his gun away, while Lydia watches on, smiling.

In the epilogue Will and Lydia are married. We learned that Roanoke deloped as well, and Will and Lydia made lives for themselves in trade with Will working as a clerk at the docks. They are living on diminished means, but they are blissfully happy with each other.

So this is my favorite book out of the series, partially because I am just obsessed with Lydia. I adore her. Which kind of gets me to the first talking point. Something that really stands out about that book is that Lydia is, of course, a courtesan, but she's another man's, c. Is on for over 2 thirds of the book.

Historical Romance has a fraught relationship with sex work and courtesans. But I truly love how Cecilia Grant handles Lydia's character! What do you think about this, Emma?

Emma: I think it's so good, because Lydia is so smart, she's so fun to read in this economic role that she's in. And I also love, like you said, two-thirds of the book is such a big portion. I think other courtesan that we meet in historical romance often are just leaving their employers, or don't have a dedicated employer where she's really Roanoke’s woman. I can think of other ones where it's like it's sort of referenced obliquely. This one like we see sex scenes with Roanoke, she is having sex with him for a big majority of the book, and it's so novel which I love, and it it really makes the sort of discussion of sex work. I think it’s much more robust. 

I think a good test of whether an author is doing something sort of for fetishistic purposes, or sort of just to get points for plot is how often we see the person in a community and in the situation themselves, and the fact that we are seeing her do sex work throughout the book, I think, is a good indicator that this is really a big part of Lydia's character, and Grant is thinking about it really in depth. 

Chels: Beth?

Beth: I don’t have too much to add beyond what Emma said, other than that I liked that Lydia enjoyed her work and a lot of other people noted that in their reviews as well. 

Chels: Yeah, I think kind of another point that I would add for Lydia, being a sex worker is that I really love the way that Grant specifically lays out how sex work is work with like the highs and lows. Something that I really loved about this book is that there are many times where Lydia is just so bored with Roanoke.

[laughter]

She’s waiting…she has a thought, she thinks, “Go away until you have another erection,” because he's talking to her about a house party and asking her about plans, and she's like “I don't care about this at all,” and you don't know me, and don't care me enough to realize

And another thing, too, that I really love about how this book handles Lydia, and her being a sex worker is that I think sometimes there it's like a a sort of like when a couple of end game, like the sex is like transformative in a way. 

Beth: Yes

Chels: And I think Grant really avoids that here, or at least avoids it in a way where it's not just like the physical pleasure is overwhelming for Lydia, I think. For Will, it was kind of overwhelming for Will. But Lydia, you know, she's been doing this for a long time and she enjoys her work.

I there's kind of like a lot of humor in kind of the way that she she references it and thinks about it. And even though she thinks Roanoke is as dumb as a back of rocks like she still really enjoys sleeping with him.

But moving on from Lydia, I want to talk about will so specifically about Will and honor, because that comes up in the book a lot. Honor is very important to him. It has everything to do with himself, and how he values himself.

A big thing about Will is that he obviously has PTSD. After coming back from Waterloo, and that completely warps how he sees himself, when Will confesses to Lydia what happened at Waterloo with Talbot, the soldier and the true reason why he feels responsible for his widow. This is kind of like him peeling back the curtain. So what happened is that Talbot was gravely injured, and Will decided that he wasn't gonna let him die. So he tries to move Talbot, and ends up injuring him even more. I think he gives Talbot a spinal injury. And so at that point. Talbot is in deep pain, and he begs Will to kill him and Will does.

Chels: What did you think about this reveal, Beth?

Beth: Well, it is shocking, it is an illuminating insight into Will’s character. It’s almost like Will and Lydia live their lives to make up for past tragedies, Will’s stemming from Waterloo and Lydia from her parents.  

Emma: Yeah, I think it's another example of the sort of the specificity that Grant is able to do with these different situations, because Waterloo again, like one of these things that looms large and historical romance, it's often the disability, the disabling event for heroes. If someone has lost a limb, if someone has an eye patch in the Regency period, Waterloo is sort of there, but this we really deal with…there's like a specific thing that happened to Will like it's not just Waterloo in general, like there's a specific interaction. We get the description of that. We see him reveal it to someone else. So it's just all these things...it is a testament to Grant’s character work and her plotting that she just doesn't let it be this backdrop. So within the novel it becomes that much more emotional and connected for the reader to Will.

Beth: Yeah, that's a good point.

Chels: Beth, you had some thoughts on Lydia's intelligence that I want to talk about.

Beth: Okay, so writing actually smart characters is difficult because you want to show your character doing something smart and the audience might not realize the level of skill needed for what the character is doing. For example, if you have a character apply a unique piece of knowledge about computers, it might go over the heads of some readers if they don't, at least have the basic knowledge of what the character is doing. So then the author needs to give you the information you need that is not info-dumpy and the best way to do this is to integrate it into the plot. 

Like in the courtroom scene on Chernobyl, where Jared Harris explains what went wrong it doubles as educating the audience as well. So same with the probability scenes where Lydia teaches well how she counts cards, and he's unable to replicate what she can do. So she suggests working together, and it's not like a look, “how smart she is!” for no reason, but the real crux of it is, they both quickly need money and she's leveraging a skill she has.

Chels: I love the way the Grant writes the card sequences, because, like Will, I felt as though I was half following, but I was a bit overmatched, so Lydia is just running circles around everyone, and while she can explain what she's doing in a way that we can kind of understand, or at least begin to. It's something that's well outside of most of our capabilities.

There's of course, the part where Lydia shows off like that's kind of like this “Wow!” moment for Will, where Lydia is also kind of like reveling in Will seeing her as a person with value and that’s how she can fly under the radar playing cards because she's not beautiful, and she's a woman. So people kind of see her as unassuming when she can frankly skin you alive.

Emma: Lydia is one of the most intimidating romance novel heroines I have ever read, I think I would be scared to meet her, but she's not mean it's like that's not… I think, a lot of times when you write an intimidating, sort of thorny woman, it's because she's cruel and has to get over that, or she's like vain, and has to get over that. But she's just so smart that like that really is the trait for her. And it just makes for someone who I can't think of a heroine who I’m like “Oh, that's like she's that type.” Lydia's really like of herself.

Chels: So Minnie from The Duchess War by Courtney Milan is another character that I sort of group with Lydia. Minnie is a master at chess so she has that specialized skill, but she has an overwhelming intelligence kind of like Lydia. And the duke, her love interest, is like “Oh god she’s out of my league!” 

[laughter]

Her skill definitely goes beyond “Hot Girl Hobby,” which is your thing, Emma.

Emma: Yeah, I can quickly explain what a “hot girl hobby is” If you don't follow me on TikTok, as I talk about these all the time. A hot girl hobby is the thing that the woman occupies herself with in romance novel. Like the hero is usually titled, he has land. A hot girl hobby for heroes in a romance novel is often being a landlord.

But a hot girl hobby is like this way for an author to show off their historical knowledge, like, oh she’s a beekeeper! Here’s how they kept bees in the Regency period! She is a spelunker and here’s what Regency caves were like! I love reading these books because I love hearing about the hobbies, and how these women spend their time. But sometimes the hot girl hobby comes across as really like perfunctory. It's like, okay, like this is how she spends her time. There's gonna be a meet-cute involving the hot girl hobby. It will probably allow for her and the hero to be alone together. You can sort of predict the beats of the hobby.

But, Lydia, I think, because she's a sex worker, so she has a job. So it's not just card games. It's not just a way for her to occupy herself, like she's using it for additional funds. But also she's spending a lot of her time doing her actual job that it doesn't come across as that sort of like. Oh, like. Now, now, here's the cute thing that the heroine is gonna like to explain to us in historical terms, that's fun to read, but is sometimes sort of surface level in its engagement.

Beth: And sometimes I feel like the hot girl hobby is just getting a character from 1 point to another. In one of the Amanda Quick books, Amanda Quick’s books…that’s hard to say.

[Laughter]

Beth: The heroine, she loves fossils. 

Chels: Ravished!

Beth: This is like a joke, but honestly, it just gets her to the cave. Do you know what I mean? Like it's not beyond that. It's not really adding much to her character the way that counting cards and stuff is adding to Lydia's depth.

Emma: Or it's like the hero will take her hobby seriously. It's like I want to open a lending library, and I can't, but this hero, I’m gonna marry the Duke, who will help me open the lending library.  And so it's sort of this test of like female value for the hero. It's oh! he sees her value through this occupation that she takes up, which again, it could kind of be subbed in like the lending library could be fossil hunting, it could be beekeeping, it could be beer-making.

These are all things that for any given heroine they could be doing anything in the structure. That's not true of Lydia and cards, she has to be doing something that she can earn money, and also like, get the edge up on other people.

Chels: Yeah, and that kind of gets me into my next point, which is that the card scenes are well. The card scenes are where Lydia and Will truly start to establish intimacy. So Lydia and Will have devised this elaborate system of tells they're pretending they don't know each other. Lydia, is a flirt, looking for a mark, and Will is just some guy, but the way they communicate is so intricate. For example, Lydia sizes up Will, while she's in character, and says, “you've just come out of the navy,” and you've got prize money wearing holes in your pockets.

And so the quote from Grant is: “Navy, was the pertinent word. Any maritime reference must lead him to boat from boat to sank from sank to cinque.”  Which is the French word for 5. Will needs to bet 5 counters with this.

How elaborate is that? How could you possibly remember that? It’s just??? Not only do they have like five layers in this? But then there Lydia is also like sending like little digs and signals to Will while they're betting that it's just like hilarious. Will like “what is happening?”

Beth: Yeah, she's lapping him intellectually, and I'm like, what was that again? But I do like it. How it doubles is building their intimacy as well. Like you, said these scenes.

Emma: I feel like anytime you have game theory in a romance. It's like there has to be the game, and then there has to be like the macro game above it for it to work. It's like everyone has their cards, but the game is in the like looks over the cards, and if that doesn't work, then like you again, it’s just like plot dressing, but but I I I mean I love game theory and romance novels. I wish more authors sort of took up that sort of like math aspect of it. Because I feel like romance and sort of flirting is game theory like you're always looking for an algorithm of how do we match these things up together and like, get the right input for the right output or the opposite. Get the right output for the right input. 

Chels: Speaking of intimidating women, there's one in our next book, and this is actually Beth's favorite. So I'm gonna pass it along to her.

Beth: Yes, A Woman Entangled is my favorite, so let me give a quick summary. So Kate Westbrook is beautiful, and she knows it. Her father married an actress, and his family disowned him for it. Mr. Westbrook is the son of an earl. Nick is a barrister, and works with Mr. Westbrook, enjoying a close association with his family.

He tried to propose to Kate three years ago, but she aspires to marry into the aristocracy and reclaim her family status. They've settled into friendship. Kate delivers congratulatory notes to her Aunt Liddy Harrington every time one of her children gets married. She's done this over the past 5 years, hoping for an in with her aunt into the society she wants. Finally she gets a response from Lady Harrington to meet with her. Nick disapproves of this because her father never attempted to reach out to his family after they cut him off.

Besides, Kate hasn't told her family about her attempts to reconnect with the Westbrook extended family. Mr. Westbrook talks Nick up to Lord Barclay, an aristocrat who actually wants to do his job as a politician. He needs speech and argument lessons. Nick hopes a connection with him will advance his political aspirations. He needs money for land to qualify for the House of Commons. Barclary hasn’t engaged a secretary yet, which, if he hired Nick, would provide Nick with money, and a connection. 

Nick has disowned Will for the sake of his future career. Kate meets with her aunt. At her aunt's house, she meets Miss Smith, who is socially higher than her, and has a dowry, yet is plainer. Her aunt proposes a plan to introduce Kate into society, so that she can become…a lady's companion. This devastates Kate, and later, when she talks to Nick about it, she owns he was right.

He responds by supporting her, and said, she'll still meet gentlemen at the ball. When Mr. Westbrook finds out he'll be at the same ball, he asks Nick to chaperone Kate, which he agrees to do. At the ball, Nick speaks to Lord Barclay, revealing nothing about his brother's marriage, although he feels he should disclose it. 

Nick discovers Kate outside with another gentleman. He sends him away, and then lectures Kate in an empty room for being caught alone with the man. They're almost caught, and duck behind some furniture, for a few minutes. Nick apologizes for his hypocrisy, and then a forehead kiss leads to a full-on kiss. Kate tells Nick she's not sorry it happened

Three days later, Nick is at the Westbrooks, giving Barclay speech lessons. Barclay asks Nick if he has any feelings for Kate, and he says they're friends. Nick and Kate receive invitations to the Cathcart Ball.

After reflecting on his own dubious behavior with Kate, Nick impulsively visits Will at his work. He's not there, and Lydia dismisses him rudely. 

Athe ball, Kate enters, and her beauty still strikes Nick, but he tells Barclay he should dance with Kate. Nick dances with Mrs. Simcox, someone he hopes to go home with. Mrs. Simcox asks Nick to leave the ball early with her, but he has to wait for Kate. So she goes with another man. Kate's dance partner fails to show up--he's with Mrs. Simcox, although she doesn't know that. So she goes looking for him, and finds Nick relaxing in a room, by himself.

Nick berates her for yet again being alone with the man. Kate says she's looking for her dance partner, and when she names the man, Nick tells her he's left with a woman. They talk for a bit, and Kate says Nick can confide in her, and he says she's not the person he could confide in. 

Kate realizes she's been a friend of gossamer substance and places a hand on his arm, inviting him to kiss her. He recoils and asks her what she's doing. Kate lashes out, saying he didn't oppose kissing her last week.

Nick says Mrs. Simcox was right--that Kate had put him on a shelf and is only getting him attention now because she feels her power over him is waning. She says she doesn't believe he is not impartial to her, based on their kiss. Nick is angry now, and says there's a difference between regard and lust, and he only did what any other man would do.

She slaps him, he kisses her. Then they make it to the couch, and he gets her off. After, he promises he won't say anything to anyone--her virtue is still intact, and they don't have to act any differently around each other.

During her visit with Lady Herrington and Miss Smith, Kate's grandma falls ill. As they leave, the Smiths offer to help Kate find her father, so he can be there. Eventually they end up at the courts, where Will takes care of getting Westbrook to his mother.

After her grandma passes. Kate's father tells her he grieved his family a long time ago, and she's lucky she is an affectionate family on her mother's side.

Beth: Later she makes her way to Nick’s house and says they'll never have one another in marriage, so she wants to be with him one last time, since she hasn't given up her hope of marrying into the aristocracy. They sleep together. Afterwards, Nick says he wants to rekindle his relationship with Will.

Kate believes it's a good idea, even though she initially supported him when he cut Will off, after seeing what a family estrangement is like when it's dragged out for years, she wants his happiness to be his primary motive. 

Nick visits Will and tells him about Kate. During this recital, he realizes he wants to marry her. He sees Barclay, confesses his connection to Will, and Barclay’s cool about it. He also tells Barclay that he wasn't truthful before, and he's in love with Kate.

He proposes to Kate. She says it would suit her to be a politician's wife. They get married.

Oh okay, so one point that I wanted to touch on is that in all three books, each woman is aiming to protect other women. Martha, with her household, Lydia, with her maid, and Kate, wants to save her youngest sister Rosalind from all the bullying she gets because of her family situation.

So I was wondering if either of you agree with that assessment. 

Emma: Yeah, it does seem important that, like the scheme in each book is the woman's doing, even when they were starting with the hero’s perspective. The person who's coming up with ideas is the heroine, and there's I think, in all their schemes are like complicating for them like I think you could, especially for Kate. And this one, like Kate, has this vanity, which I think is a common trait of historical romance novel heroines. I think we're gonna talk about this later, but she's definitely like cut in the mold of like Emma Woodhouse. 

She has a very keen sense of what she looks like, and how she's gonna use that for marriage because she needs to, unlike Emma Woodhouse, who's independently wealthy, but the scheme, and like why she's doing these things from the jump, it makes her so much more sympathetic than a heroine who's just focused on her vanity, even as you're reading some of her quotes about herself. You're like “she's really full of herself.” But you know why she has sort of grown up as this older sister, knowing that this is sort of the skill she has to offer, and maybe help her family out.

Beth: Yeah, Kate knows her beauty is a useful asset, and Grant demonstrates this right at the beginning of the book, when she and Viola are in a bookshop together. Viola is her sister.

A young man sees Kate and blushes and ducks his head behind his book. Kate had seen a dozen variations of this reaction. Then she has this thought “not terribly useful, the admiration of such a man, still it gave a girl hope. She could not one day drive a Marquess, for example, into a slack-jawed stupor. And why should she not?” 

I like how you tied it to Emma Woodhouse. Emma is not really preoccupied with her beauty, but she has the luxury of not thinking about it because she is independently wealthy. Kate has this ace in her back pocket, so she can leverage to get back into the aristocracy because she kind of sees it as her birthright. And I think even deeper than that she does want to reconnect with her family. 

I know she's social climbing, but just the underlying feeling she has for most of the book, she mourns the loss of like she sees her uncle and her grandma like these are people who are actually related to her, that she hasn't grown up with them and they don’t know her and she doesn't know them.

Chels: Yeah, estrangement is kind of like a running theme throughout all three of the books. And while Kate has to be really mercenary, and the way that she leverages her beauty. There's kind of like that added layer, as you said of her wanting to reconcile her family, but something that kind of shows how young she is, and how like untested she is is the fact that she thinks that she can do it. 

She thinks that reconciliation is a given, and that if she just is so good and ingratiates herself, and shows that there's nothing wrong with being the daughter of an actress. If there's nothing wrong with her, she has studied, she knows what to say and what to do.

She thinks that if all of that goes well, it'll bring her father's family back over which it can't, because they let him go their own son.

Beth: Yeah, there's a scene in the book where she finds a bunch of letters that her father kept, and I think that spurs her even more because she sees how her grandmother used to speak to her father. And how her uncle, his brother, spoke to him. And I think she really mourns that loss. But, like you said, she's too optimistic in what she thinks she can accomplish: getting back in. 

And I think Lady Harrington is that dose of reality. Lady Harrington always frames it as well, too bad, you know they don't know your bad connections. Obviously he doesn't know, or he wouldn't approach you that way.

Emma: Yeah, I think related to Kate's sort of conception of reconciliation, like throughout the whole book, she's very backwards looking. like she's like “I have to fix this past generation like this is the key to everyone in my family's future” is correcting this foundation that she sees, and that doesn't really totally get solved. But she sort of shifts where she's looking by the end of the book because she has this relationship with Will, or excuse me, Nick.

So this relationship with Nick, who is sort of in the middle of one of these situations where, if he doesn't talk to Will soon, they may never speak again. And so she's now looking sort of in front of her. Like she's not looking on like what she can do in the past. It's like, “how can I support Nick in this reconciliation, like if this is what he wants?”

And I think the final scene, where, like if their families come together for the wedding breakfast, where it's the Blackshears and all the people they've been married into, and you sort of see how these families, and how these new dynamics exist where I think Martha is sitting with someone's husband. I can't remember who Martha is sitting with, but it's like a starchy character and a starchy character. And then you see these little dynamics, and all of a sudden Kate is like, oh, like, when I get married, I can now look forward.  And the other thing doesn't matter as much, and that I think that's she really just sort of turns forward. 

And I think, like people could see people complaining about this book. Kate, just like suddenly changes her mind about wanting to marry Nick right like it's like what's there's the conflict resolution, like sort of seems to go by really quick. 

But what happens is that Kate just decides she doesn't want to look back anymore. She wants to move forward, and she's like, Of course, “I would be a good politician's wife. I'm incredibly charming. I love meeting new people! I could be so good at this!” So all the skills that she was looking at is like very conservative worldview of getting into the aristocracy, she's now able to apply in a different direction.

Beth: Yeah, for sure, that's another thing I wanted to talk about is that it requires skill to social climb. She's good at reading people and making the right connections. I do love Kate's revelation at the end, where she figures out why she wanted to marry so well. “Don't laugh, Nick, but I think it might suit me very well to be a political hostess, and in the meantime to strive with you toward that end. All these years I pursued social status with such industry and lately it's become more and more clear to me that I kept at it because I enjoyed the industry and the challenges at least as much as I long for the goal itself.”

So how does Grant frame social climbing, and what instances stand out to you from the book where Kate, and Nick honestly, exhibit the skill as well.

Chels: Yeah, so there's that scene where Kate is with Lady Harrington, and she kind of, Lady Harrington is trying to tell something to Mrs. Smith and her daughter, and Kate knows that Lady Harrington wants her to react a certain way. So Kate kind of has to walk this fine line of like doing what she wants without making it seem super obvious, and she nails it.

Beth: Yes, that's a good scene, and I feel Nick exemplifies this as well with this connection with Lord Barclay like he knows how much information to reveal to him, how to make the relationship progress in a way that will benefit him in the future. The conversations are a little more overt, because I think the differences between men and women, like Lord Barclay says: basically, do you have any political aspirations? And Nick says: yes, yes, I do.

Whereas Kate has to be a lot more in the background with her machinations, not quite revealing what she's doing.

Emma: And Nick also talks about this in terms of like litigation, because he's currently working as a barrister. And so when he's in the courtroom, and there's a scene in the courtroom, where he talks about what he has to manage in the people that he has to manage. He has to manage the audience, and he has to manage their reaction to him. And this is a part of being like a good advocate like that he's taking on these cases. It's like a sort of the other side of social climbing. The same skill set that Kate is using to work a ballroom, Nick is using and honing in the courtroom in order to advocate for his clients, and he's a really good litigator, like he's very skilled at this. And that's why he's able to tutor Barclay, because he witnesses him and says, “you're good at this, I want to be better at it.” So it is a learned skill for both of them.

Chels: So when we're thinking about all three books together as a whole family and reconciliation, and whether you can or can't do that is like a big theme of all three books. So in the first book, Theo and Martha get maybe not estranged from Martha's family, but they're kind of not as warmly embraced as I think they would hope, because of the way that their relationship starts.

So and that kind of ripples into the second book, right? So Theo, when he is like seeing Will at a family gathering, Theo is trying to ingratiate himself and ingratiate himself to Will, because he knows that Will is like his in with the family, and Will, at the time, is not super receptive to it. But then later, Will becomes the outcast when Will marries Lydia. 

And so then we go to the third book, where Will is almost completely estranged. Martha and Theo still have kind of a little bit of a taint on their marriage. And then Nick is the one who's like trying to hold up the reputation for the entire family, just based off of cutting off the appropriate people and acting a certain way. And so when we kind of like get to the end, and we're looking at all three books and like what's happened, the journey for everyone, and maybe not making the most advantageous or respectable marriages, but finding their own happiness that also can deeply hurt other members of their family. So it gets really messy.

There are a lot of other historical romances that have family units as like the book to book characters.  I'd love to hear kind of how you think about how Grant fits into that. 

Emma: Yeah, I guess in terms of the one that makes it makes me think like the most stark contrast is to maybe Mary Balogh’s Westcott series, which is much longer. There's so many of them, but that series is really themed around reconciliation because you always go back to the Westcotts, every time there's a conflict. The Westcotts are the main family, there's so so many books where the conflict is solved by people returning to the Westcott sort of home base. And also like the dynamics in that family are very stagnant. Like there's always like a big family reunion with the Westcotts, and they’re like thirty of them like there. There's always all these chapters where they list all the Westcotts out. 

But I think in this book, because we're only dealing with siblings, it's one generation, and I think the reconciliation is more like a transformation. And I’m thinking about Martha, the big issue for her is that her siblings don't understand her marriage. They have this image of her as this sort of starchy young girl, who's now a young woman. She's only 21 at the beginning of the book. And they have this image of what she fits into their dynamic of the Blackshears, and her first marriage didn't really disrupt that, and all of a sudden she's a different person.

And they're just confused by it, and they don't know what to do with it. And I think that's sort of the theme of their….it’s not even really a reconciliation.. They just have to understand that she's now in a person in a relationship, and I think at least it like in my sibling dynamics, you have to deal with the fact that people you grew up with are gonna have partners, and those partners are gonna have a different family unit. And you have to go along with that transformation. And sometimes there is, I guess, like tension or it's rough around the edges for people sometimes, and I like that. It feels much more realistic and true to life, and something like the Westcotts, where everything is solved with reconciliation. Reconciliation is the priority, and it's total. You apologize for what you've done, even if you didn't really do anything wrong. And you are accepted back into the fold.

And this, I think people are not necessarily. Will doesn't apologize for marrying Lydia. He wants to be with her, and he's gonna do it, and Nick has to learn to understand his new priorities.

Beth: Yes, and I like Grant that fully explores the ramifications of each character's choice and kind of on theme what we're saying, this goes on into the next book. It's not completely, neatly wrapped up at the end of the first book. It just keeps rippling through each one of them.

Emma: I don't know if another trilogy that has like…yeah, like A Lady Awakened is my favorite, but it's like because I have to pick one. The other two are both five-star books like I love. I love all 3 books. I've not read the novel yet. I'd like savoring it, because I’ll be done with Grant after I read the novella and I’ll be so sad! 

Chels: They all enhance each other too, like you can read them so easily as a standalone. You aren't missing anything. That was something that I truly cherished going back, reading them, kind of knowing, knowing all of the characters, and like how they would interact and what the consequences would be. Everything kind of like took on…like I just wonder how much of that she planned out. 

Emma: It’s like an epic!. It is so so fun to see Nick in A Lady Awakened. And you're like “you don't even know what's coming, buddy!”

Beth: We’ll do free word of mouth marketing. 

Emma: Yeah, please write more books. We will shout you out. Cecilia Grant, you’re our hero. 

Chels: I’ll make Tiktoks. I’ll do what you want. I don’t know! 

Beth: Yes, the end! Don’t steal babies!