Everyone is talking about Christopher Nolan's blockbuster film, The Odyssey. It makes me want to shine the light on historical novelist Judith Starkston, author of Achilles's Wife: A Novel of Greek Myth Retelling.
I met Judith at my very first Historical Novel Society conference, in St. Petersburg, Florida, and we became friends. We met again at the conference in San Antonio, Texas, and we actually walked through the Alamo fort together!
Judith, who has degrees in classics, wrote Hand of Fire: A Novel of Briseis and the Trojan War, which I very much enjoyed. The novel takes the perspective of the woman whom Achilles pursues, depicting her as a fully developed person and not just a spoil of war. I was intrigued to learn that this spring, Judith published Achilles’s Wife: A Novel of Greek Myth Retelling.
This book tells the story of the woman Achilles married before he sailed for Troy. I caught up with Judith to ask her some questions.
Nancy Bilyeau: Please talk about what kind of novels you write.
Judith Starkston: I write historical fiction that retells Greek myths. In both my earlier novel, Hand of Fire, and my current release, Achilles’s Wife, I chose as my central focus women who have been silenced or marginalized in the myths. Many of the underlying assumptions of our culture came from the Graeco-Roman tradition—for example, the idea that powerful women are “monstrous” (or “brassy” or a witch, etc). My novels rework those stories in ways that expand our unconscious view of the “appropriate” roles for women. What better way to rewire our stubbornly ingrained archetypes than turning those ancient myths on their heads in immersive, entertaining fiction?
NB: What draws you to the story of Achilles and the fascinating women in his life, his mother, lovers and wife?
JS: In modern understanding, Achilles is often reduced to a selfish, bloodthirsty warrior who lets his fellow Greeks die because their Commander-in-Chief Agamemnon took away his war loot. That’s not how I see the tradition.
Briefly put, Achilles is the only one who challenges a greedy, power-hungry Agamemnon and the meaningless war Agamemnon has caused. Achilles is forced into withdrawing from the battle through the twists that come from this morally driven stance. There’s a cost to standing up to corruption.
So, as a character for my fiction, Achilles is a juicy source of tragic flaws, admirable courage, and, to add another element, ambiguous, complicated love stories with one all-important man and two (mythically silent) women. As you can imagine, Briseis and Deidamia (Mia for short) are no longer silent in my novels.
Hand of Fire takes place close to Troy, and the power struggles between Achilles and Agamemnon are key to its plot, which is experienced through Briseis’s eyes as a war captive of Achilles. In essence, it’s the Trojan War told from a key woman’s perspective.
Achilles’s Wife opens earlier in mythic time, with Thetis, the goddess mother of Achilles, trying desperately to protect her mortal son from his foretold early death at Troy. She is a mysteriously powerful goddess, whose forced marriage to a mortal has turned her against all humans. She calls them “worms.” But she also faces the overwhelming force of motherlove for her human son who will die. Trapped between contradictory drives, she makes decisions that throw her into conflict with her son—not the least of which is to “hide” him inside a woman’s body so no one will find him to recruit for the war. That’s a shift I added to the myth. Achilles is usually portrayed in slapstick drag, dressed up like a girl, but still in a very male body. No one would notice a big warrior in a dress, would they?
This shift from the silly to the traumatic creates room for Achilles, during his time as a woman, to develop a serious friendship with the young woman Deidameia, whom the myth tells us he married on the island of Skyros before the Trojan War began. Traditionally, the myth mentions only that she was a pretty girl whom he got pregnant.
You could sum it up: randy teen gets girl pregnant and splits. Not very interesting! Instead, growing out of their meaningful friendship, the novel explores a more complex story of gender and friendship, marriage and motherhood, and, most challenging, motherhood and governance.
NB: Does the popular culture’s fascination with the Trojan War present opportunities or challenges for you when writing historical fiction?
JS: The opportunities far outweigh the challenges. While some readers are very set in their view of these mythical characters and thus are positively allergic to “my” Deidamia or Achilles, most are intrigued to find new takes in each myth retelling, whether mine or any of the many excellent writers of the genre. Mythology-based films, like Nolan’s Odyssey, and best-selling novels set in the Trojan War, like Song of Achilles or A Thousand Ships, bring enthusiastic readers to this subgenre of historical fiction. Popularity is a benefit.
I bring historical accuracy to my Bronze Age Greek world that isn’t always found in this genre, and I think my readers appreciate it. I don’t think such dedication to history is required for good mythic tales, but it is for me. Mythology has always been full of contradictory and changing versions, so the current popularity of reinterpreted myth retellings is a continuation of a centuries-long trend. Most readers revel in that variability and creativity. That makes it very fun to write.
Goodreads is running a giveaway of my historical mystery, The Heiress of Northanger Abbey. Five signed paperbacks are being offered. To enter, go here.
Early reviews have been encouraging!
BlueInk Review gave it a star and said, "Nancy Bilyeau’s novel is a smart update and sequel to Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey, set 22 years later. But Bilyeau doesn’t just attempt a stiff Regency pastiche; instead, she writes with a gorgeous, fluid voice that brings Jane Austen’s beloved characters back to life in a beautifully layered and thoroughly human way."
“Prepare to be captivated by this brilliant homage to the Gothic genre that will thrill Austen fans and lovers of historical fiction alike. Impossible to put down.” —Syrie James, bestselling author of The Missing Manuscript of Jane Austen and The Mysteries of Pendowar Hall
“Mysteries and dangers … very enjoyable!” —Janie Chang, USA Today bestselling author of The Fourth Princess: A Gothic Novel of Old Shanghai
“Twenty years after the events of Northanger Abbey, one of Jane Austen’s most gentle and warm-hearted heroines sets out to protect her daughter from the very real dangers of being an heiress. The result is a sparkling tribute to Gothic stories, replete with moors, ruined castles, vampyre stories and forbidden romance. Insightful and charming, this is a novel of which Miss Austen would surely approve.” —Susan Breen, award-winning author of Merry
“The Heiress of Northanger Abbey is richly layered, deliciously Gothic, and brimming with psychological suspense.” —Emilya Naymark, author of the Sylvan mystery novels
“A compelling version of the story years after Austen’s own story closes….Impossible to put down and highly recommended.” —Michelle Cameron, author of Napoleon’s Mirage
I'm excited to share the cover of The Heiress of Northanger Abbey. It's a Gothic historical mystery and a sequel to Jane Austen's classic. Twenty-two years later, Catherine Tilney must fight to protect her daughter from fortune hunters.
This novel is for Austen fans and anyone who adores a high-spirited Regency tale, savors a hint of the Gothic, and longs to be transported to the mist-shrouded moors.
The book officially goes on sale September 1st. Preorders are possible now--and the ebook is discounted to $4.99 before publication. (Paperback will be sold later.)
I'm so grateful for the endorsements that have come in:
"Prepare to be captivated by this brilliant homage to the Gothic genre that will thrill Austen fans and lovers of historical fiction alike. Impossible to put down!"- Syrie James, bestselling author of The Missing Manuscript of Jane Austen and The Mysteries of Pendowar Hall
"Nancy Bilyeau's sequel employs prose reminiscent of Austen's writing, with enough twists to keep the story interesting. Very enjoyable!" -Janie Chang, USA Today bestselling author of The Fourth Princess: A Gothic Novel of Old Shanghai
"Twenty years after the events of Northanger Abbey, one of Jane Austen's most gentle and warm-hearted heroines sets out to protect her daughter from the very real dangers of being an heiress. The result is a sparkling tribute to Gothic stories, replete with moors, ruined castles, vampyre stories and forbidden romance. Insightful and charming, this is a novel of which Miss Austen would surely approve." -Susan Breen, award-winning author of Merry
“The Heiress of Northanger Abbey is richly layered, deliciously Gothic, and brimming with psychological suspense.” —Emilya Naymark, author of the award-nominated Sylvan crime novels
"Catherine Morland is older and wiser, but twenty years on, she’s still drawn to the Gothic. A thrilling sequel that honours the original but brings its own delicious drama. Familiar characters in a masterful new tale about the next generation of the Tilney family."— Kate Braithwaite, author of The Scandalous Life of Nancy Randolph
“A compelling version of the story years after Austen’s story closes…impossible to put down and highly recommended.” —Michelle Cameron, author of Napoleon’s Mirage
My Substack about these podcasts got such an enthusiastic response, I wanted to share that section here on my author website blog.
After enjoying two episodes from different podcasts on Henry VIII in recent weeks, I was excited to see that the long-running podcast The Rest Is History was releasing a series of episodes devoted to Elizabeth I. I’ve enjoyed the witty and erudite talks by Tom Holland and Dominic Sandbrook, especially their mini seasons devoted to Lord Byron and the French Revolution.
This is why I was dismayed to hear so many mistakes and misinterpretations in “Elizabeth I: The Fall of the Axe,” the episode about her parents. After beginning reasonably well on the background of Henry VIII and his first marriage, I’m told that Elizabeth I’s mother, Anne Boleyn, “was not even really an aristocrat.”
Oh?
She was the granddaughter of the Duke of Norfolk and spent her childhood and teenage years as a maid of honour at the courts of Brussels and Paris, two of the most prestigious in Europe. No other Englishwoman in the early 16th century had such a heady start.
We’re also told that Anne’s father, Thomas Boleyn, was a country squire who loved horses, akin to Major Ferguson, Sarah Ferguson’s father.
What?
Boleyn, proficient in Latin and French, was England’s ambassador to France, nothing like the “galloping major.”
Things got worse. They say Anne Boleyn miscarried of nearly a full-term son in 1534, Henry VIII formed a liaison with Jane Seymour in 1534, and Henry Norris, executed for adultery with Anne in 1536, defended her on the scaffold. The historical record does not support any of these “facts.”
What makes it so baffling is that in the YouTube version, you can see the men reading from notes. Where on earth did they get these notes? It’s not as if the life of Anne Boleyn is obscure! The Tudors and The Other Boleyn Girl get more history right than this. I’m baffled.
Nonfiction Book to the Rescue
I don’t think I will be listening to the rest of The Rest of History’s episodes on Elizabeth I. Which is a shame, because it feels like these days historians are putting the Late Elizabethan court under greater scrutiny than the usual “Armada-Shakespeare-James I Succession” golden haze.
Five years ago, I was drawn to the end of Elizabeth’s reign and wrote “Elizabeth I: The Final Days of the Great Queen” for English Historical Fiction Authors. When researching it, I felt like Elizabeth’s naming of her successor, the Scottish king who was her first cousin twice removed, carried the whiff of the apocryphal. Supposedly, while dying and unable to speak, she pointed to her head when James’ name was spoken. But I wasn't aware of anyone challenging it. Until now.
I have just finished reading a full-length book that delves deeply into this fascinating subject: The Stolen Crown: Treachery, Deceit and the Death of the Tudor Dynasty. The author is Tracy Borman, Chief Historian for Historic Royal Palaces, the charity that manages Hampton Court Palace, the Tower of London, Kensington Palace, Kew Palace, and more. Borman’s research makes a strong case that Elizabeth I never named James; instead, Elizabeth’s closest counselors engaged in a dangerous conspiracy with James, up in Scotland, to smooth the way for him to succeed. Years after he took the English throne, James was so sensitive on this subject that he pressured William Camden, writing a book about Elizabeth I, to distort the tale of the succession sequence. Borman reports that examining Camden’s handwritten manuscript proves that key passages were pasted over and rewritten to make James I look better.
James I is very much a mixed bag. Undeniably intelligent, he was obsessed with a fear of witchcraft and personally wrote Demonology, a treatise meant to justify witch trials and executions. Elizabeth’s councillors were taken aback to realize that, unlike the last Tudor monarch, he was not interested in hands-on running of the country or financing world explorers. When not ranting about witches, he wanted to go hunting and have affairs with beautiful young men. The miniseries Mary & George depicts an ambitious woman from a second-rate gentry family, played memorably by Julianne Moore, scheming to get her handsome son, played by Nicholas Galitzine, into the bed of the new King of England.
One bone I have to pick with Borman’s book is the title. James “stole” it from…who? He had no serious competition for the English throne. That's one of the chief reasons the Tudors were followed by the Stuarts. His tragic first cousin, Arabella Stuart, seems to have struggled with severe emotional problems and behaved erratically, Borman writes. Other relatives with a strain of Tudor or Plantagenet blood were not persuasive candidates. He was the strongest in a weak field.
While she took great pains not to name him officially, Elizabeth maintained a steady correspondence with young James, giving him a “master class in monarchy” that, in a pique of misogyny, he ignored his whole reign, Borman writes. James didn’t want to work with Parliament or create a majestic presence that the public could admire, as the Virgin Queen had done. Instead, he was obsessed with the “divine right of kings,” a concept unconnected to leadership, which he unfortunately instilled in his son, the future headless Charles I.
The Stuart father and son’s conviction that God had put them on a higher plane than mere mortals didn’t go down well in the 17th century. Today, reading about disgraced Andrew Windsor-Mountbatten’s demand that he be given a cook, housekeeper, gardener, and a butler before agreeing to hide himself away on the vast Sandringham estate, you have to wonder what delusions of innate superiority are still being inculcated by the royal family.
Can a more severe punishment be imposed on Andrew? This isn’t the 15th century, when Edward IV could order his brother, the duke of Clarence, to be drowned in a barrel of Malmsey. As Tina Brown pointed out in The Interview, released yesterday, it’s risky to make Andrew and Fergie’s lives so horrible that they have nothing left but to sell their secrets...
If you want to read more of my reviews of historical podcasts and nonfiction as well as historical fiction, subscribe to my new, free substack, "History, Horror & Headlines."
A mournful funeral procession made its way to St. Patrick’s Catholic Cemetery in Leytonstone on Nov. 19th, 1888. Thousands lined the streets to say farewell to the woman in the coffin, some of them weeping.
“God forgive her,” some called out as the procession lumbered past.
Forgive her for what?
The tragedy began the morning of Nov. 9th, ten days before. James Whitehead, a 54-year-old merchant who’d made a successful second career in politics, was the star of the Lord Mayor’s Show, a London tradition that was always held on this date.
As the city’s new mayor, Whitehead, a champion of reform, had desired a more stately event than the circus-like Mayor’s parade, famous since the 16th century. But, heedless of Whitehead’s embarrassment, crowds gathered along the Gresham Street to Guildhall route, with many police called upon to patrol and control.
It was perhaps a welcome distraction from the horror.
For the past six months, London had been transfixed and terrorized by the murders of a series of women in the Whitechapel District of the East End. The last of the horrific slayings — dubbed the “Double Event” as two prostitutes, Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes, had their throats cut within two hours of each other — was on Sunday, September 30th.
The stereotypical image of Jack the Ripper. In reality, to blend in on Dorset Street and the rest of Spitalfields, the murderer would have had to appear much less posh
Although the police had interviewed at least 2,000 people, they had not zeroed in on the man responsible, the same one who may or may not have written taunting letters to the newspapers signed “Jack the Ripper.” There was some hope that the killing spree was over, since more than a month had passed. The Lord Mayor’s Show was an occasion to set aside fear and celebrate.
One person not hurrying to the parade was Jack McCarthy, landlord of many properties in Whitechapel occupied by the destitute, ranging from the respectable working poor to thieves, gamblers, hopeless alcoholics, and “Unfortunates,” the Victorian euphemism for prostitutes. As always, McCarthy had money on his mind. Around 10:30 am, McCarthy told his assistant, Thomas Bowyer, to try to collect the rent in arrears at №13 Miller’s Court, a ground-floor room on a narrow 20-foot-long cul-de-sac of Dorset Street.
Even within Spitalfields, an overcrowded East End parish infamous for its poverty, crime, and filth, Dorset Street was in a class all its own. Part of the “wicked quarter mile,” it was a 130-yard-long street almost entirely occupied by common lodging houses and pubs. In 1901, the Daily Mail, under the headline “The Worst Street in London,” would publish an article saying, “…The lodging houses of Dorset Street and of the district around are the head centers of the shifting criminal population of London… the common thief, the pickpocket, the area meak, the man who robs with violence, the unconvicted murderer…”
As grim as these lodgings were, the alternative — “sleeping rough” — was worse. Many of the poor struggled daily to pay for their “doss house” bed. The September 8th victim of Jack the Ripper, 47-year-old Annie Chapman, was murdered while trying to earn enough money on the streets to pay the nightly charge at her common lodging house at 35 Dorset Street.
(To learn more about the "canonical five" victims of Jack the Ripper and how their lives are far more complex than that of the stereotypical East End prostitute, I highly recommend The Five, written by Hallie Rubenhold.)
Dorset Street, dubbed “the worst street in London”
At 10:45 a.m., Thomas Bowyer knocked on the door of 13 Miller’s Court. In April of that year, a Billingsgate Market fish porter, Joseph Barnett, and his young companion, Mary Jane Kelly, had moved into the room, costing 4s/6d a week. It was 10-foot-square with two small windows, a bed, two tables, and a fireplace. In Spitalfields, this was a home better than the average.
But Barnett lost his job. He moved out after quarreling with Mary on October 30. She was living there alone, a common sight in the neighboring pubs, drinking with friends. Although she told those friends she was afraid of Jack the Ripper, Mary had turned to prostitution to support herself. It was not her first time earning her living as an “Unfortunate.”
Pre-Raphaelite artist Dante Gabriel Rossetti’s painting “Found”
Press enter or click to view image in full si
No one answered the knock on the door. The small window next to the door had been broken weeks earlier by Barnett or Mary and was blocked by a heavy material hanging from the inside. Bowyer pushed aside the material to see inside. Seconds later, sickened and horrified, he ran to fetch landlord McCarthy.
Press enter or click to view image in full size
The series Ripper Street centers on the ingenuity of the late 19th-century East End police. The reality was different. An inspector joined the men at the Miller’s Court window but did not provide initiative. The group summoned a doctor. The doctor had the presence of mind to call for a photographer. But the door was locked — McCarthy had no key — and the group waited outside, first for trail-sniffing bloodhounds that never showed up and then for someone to make the decision on how to enter the room. At 1:30 pm, McCarthy finally broke through the door with a pickax. This delay made it even harder to set the time of death, which is hotly debated to this day. Some put it as early as 1 a.m., others say it was as late as 8 a.m., with the murderer taking advantage of police being preoccupied with the Lord Mayor’s Show. Two days later, Mary Jane Kelly was formally identified at the mortuary by Joseph Barnett, who was questioned and cleared of suspicion. As the city responded with panic and revulsion, doctors performed their post-mortem and police gathered what information they could. It had been a cold, drizzly night. No one had seen or heard anything suspicious besides a soft female cry of “Oh, murder” at about 3:30 am. That cry was ignored. It seemed incredible — even supernatural — that she’d been killed in such a crowded area. Despite the presence of hundreds of people nearby, sleeping fitfully, coming and going all night, men in and out of pubs and prostitutes returning to their rooms to warm up before going back on the streets, no man was seen leaving Mary’s room, covered with blood or otherwise. However, Miller’s Court was just a little over a yard wide and lit by a gas lamp. Mary herself was seen and heard by neighbors throughout the preceding day and sporadically that night as she looked for business. Just before midnight, a neighbor saw Mary lead a man with a “blotchy” face and a thick “carrot” mustache to her room. At 2 a.m., an acquaintance spotted Mary with a man on Commercial Street, five foot seven inches or so, in his 30s, “respectable appearance.” After sharing a laugh and a kiss, they walked together to Dorset Street and toward her home. Was either of these men her killer? Although an elaborate mythology has developed surrounding dark involvement by the Royal Family — particularly Prince Albert Victor — nothing in these theories has any connection to fact. Far from being indifferent to the Whitechapel murders, Queen Victoria was upset and concerned.
Queen Victoria in 1885
On November 10th, the day after the murder, she sent a telegram to Prime Minister Lord Salisbury: “This new, most ghastly murder shows the absolute necessity for some very decided action. All these courts must be lit, & our detectives improved. They are not what they should be. You promised, when the 1st murders took place, to consult with your colleagues about it.” Three days later, Her Majesty sent her ideas to the Home Secretary of what the detectives should focus on, including “The murderer’s clothes must be saturated with blood and must be kept somewhere!”
As for the persistent association of Queen Victoria’s grandson, Prince Albert Victor Christian Edward, the Duke of Clarence, to the public and Prince Eddy to friends, with the crimes, the prince was unquestionably not prowling the East End at the time of the murders. Documentation has placed him far away from London. On the night of the “double event,” Prince Eddy was at Balmoral. To account for this inconvenient fact, subsequent theories have his doctor or trusted aide killing off prostitutes to cover up a secret marriage or as vengeance for syphilis. These are fantasies.
Although he was not a man fond of learning, Prince Eddy’s reputation for depravity is undeserved. A new theory is that some people in the 20th century confused the reputation of Eddy, who died of influenza at age 28, with another royal heir, Rudolf, Crown Prince of Austria, who died in a murder-suicide with his teenage mistress in 1889. Shy, insecure, and partially deaf, Eddy, during his short life, is known to have hurt no one. His greatest crime was possibly boring people.
So where did all of this come from? In 1970, a retired British physician, Dr. Thomas Stowell, published an article in The Criminologist, suggesting that Prince Eddy was involved, based on documents he claimed to have seen (and which no one else has since unearthed). Dr. Stowell, rather eerily, died days after the controversial article was published. His son burned his papers shortly afterward. The hook, however, was baited. All sorts of feverish theories followed, including the one outlined in the 1979 film Murder By Decree: That Prince Eddy’s doctor and friends slaughtered the five prostitutes because they knew he had secretly married an East End woman named Annie Crook. The case is solved by Sherlock Holmes!
Prince Eddy One of the reasons there was so much fascination with Mary Kelly, then and now, is that she was young and attractive. She was “fair as a lily” and had “blue eyes and a very fine head of hair which reached nearly to her waist.” She “was on pleasant terms with everybody,” one contemporary said. Her landlord McCarthy said she was “a very quiet woman when sober but noisy when in drink.”
Heather Graham as Mary Jane Kelly Barnett testified as to his dead lover’s background:
“She said she was born in Limerick and went when very young to Wales. She did not say how long she lived there, but that she came to London about four years ago. Her Father’s name was John Kelly, a gaffer or a foreman in an ironworks in Carnarvonshire or Carmarthen. She said she had one sister, who was respectable, who traveled from market place to market place. This sister was very fond of her. There were six brothers in London and one in the Army. One of them was named Henry. I never saw her brothers. She said she was married when very young to a collier in Wales. I think the name was Davis or Davies. She said she lived with him until he was killed in an explosion.
After her husband’s death she went to Cardiff to a cousin. She was following a bad life with her cousin, who, as I often told her, was her downfall. She was in a gay house [brothel] in the West End, but in what part she did not say. A gentleman came there to her and asked her if she would like to go to France… She did not remain long…”
A friend confirmed that Mary said she was originally from Ireland. She talked of receiving letters from a beloved mother and hoping to reunite with her and live there.
Nonetheless, in the 137 years since her death, no fact about Mary Jane Kelly’s background has been verified. Despite the efforts of many Ripper scholars, there are no records of her birth, marriage, or residency in Ireland, Wales, or France. No member of her family attended her funeral or came forward after her murder; no one could find evidence of the young husband’s life or death. There is not a trace of her to be found before she came to London. This was not the case for the other four women, who were thought to have been killed by the Ripper. Researchers have records of birth and marriage, employment, and even a wedding photo of one woman.
It is possible that Mary Jane Kelly used a false name the entire time Barnett and their friends knew her and invented all the details and names of family and husband. If so, will anyone ever discover her real identity? Because she was the last agreed-upon victim of Jack the Ripper, the youngest, the most horribly murdered and the most mysterious, she maintains an inescapable grip on the imagination of those obsessed with the crimes, unsolved to this day.
On Monday, November 19th, 1888, the woman known as Mary Jane Kelly was buried at St. Patrick’s Catholic Cemetery in Leytonstone. Barnett and her friends could not pay for her funeral; the expenses were met by a sexton of Shoreditch. Thousands attended the six-mile-long procession, some straining to touch her coffin. Men removed their hats; women called out, “God forgive her.” Two mourning carriages followed, carrying Barnett and five women friends. The coffin was carried to an open grave listed as №16, Row 67.
The entrance to St. Patrick’s Catholic Cemetery. On the night of her murder, neighbors on Miller’s Court had heard Mary Jane Kelly singing in her room one of her favorite songs, over and over, for about half an hour between midnight and 1 a.m.. The song was “A Violet From Mother’s Grave,” written circa 1881.
Scenes of my childhood arise before my gaze
Bringing recollections of bygone happy days.
When down in the meadows in childhood I would roam,
No one’s left to cheer me now within that good old home,
Father and Mother, they’d have pass’d away;
Sister and brother, now lay beneath the clay.
But while life does remain to cheer me, I’ll retain
This small violet I pluck’d from mother’s grave.
Only a violet I pluck’d when but a boy,
And oft’ time when I’m sad at heart this flow’r has giv’n me joy;
So whole life does remain in memoriam I’ll retain,
This small violet I pluck’d from mother’s grave.
Well I remember my dear old mother’s smile,
As she used to free me when I returned from toil,
Always knitting in the old arm chair,
Father used to sit and read for all us children there,
But now all is silent around the good old home;
They all have left me in sorrow here to roam,
But while life does remain, in memoriam I’ll retain
I was intrigued to hear about the new novel by Jillian Forsberg, titled The Porcelain Menagerie, and even more so to learn it is set in the eighteenth century! In researching and writing The Blue, I delved into the tumultuous--even violent--history of porcelain creation in Europe, once inventors had "broken" the secret of the Chinese formulas.
I was lucky enough to read an advance copy of Jillian's novel and loved it. Here's a plot description: In a world where ambition is as fragile as porcelain, two lives are shaped by a king's dangerous obsessions. In 18th-century Dresden, the dangerous whims of King Augustus the Strong shape the court and the lives of those held captive, both people and animals.
Now the novel is out and winning rave reviews everywhere. I caught up with Jillian to ask her a few questions:
Nancy Bilyeau: You and I are both drawn to the history of porcelain when creating historical fiction. Why does it fascinate you?
Jillian Forsberg: Art history has always been interesting to me, but the creation of porcelain is truly an intriguing story — I love secrets, drama, and beauty, and porcelain encompasses all of those things. From the Chinese makers who perfected it to the Europeans who tried and failed and tried again to copy it, there’s such humanity in the process. In China, from one step to the next is the product of community, and in Europe, it always inspires me to find stories of reliance when the early makers failed so many times and just kept at it. It’s amazing, too, to see the differences in art that are considered wildly successful from different parts of the world: some look amazing, and some look downright grotesque.
NB: What makes the 18th century an exciting setting for a narrative?
JF: Well, I think I’m biased! My master’s thesis is set in the 18th century, and therefore, a lot of my mental energy was spent in that time period. Those 100 years for me have always been delicious because of the Age of Enlightenment, the expansion of curiosity, and then, toward the end of the century, upheavals and revolutions all over the world. One of my favorite things is a good museum gallery, and the 18th century produced some of the finest artifacts and collections of any time period. The ultra-wealthy sought out collections of all kinds of things, and it really was a testament to how the 1% lived. But below the shimmering surface of fine goods, the middle class was finding its footing… the thread through the 18th century is change, beauty, and endings. That makes for quite an exciting historical fiction setting!
NB: I find Augustus the Strong pretty mind-blowing as monarchs go. What were the most surprising things you learned about him?
JF: He truly is. I think I was truly surprised that even with my formal education, I had never heard of him. He would have been sorely disappointed in that! The man was almost a caricature as far as kings go — over the top, outlandish, boisterous, and relentless. But he didn’t really DO anything. The latest biography published about him, just last fall, is literally called Augustus the Strong: A Study in Artistic Greatness and Political Fiasco. He tried his best to be memorable, but unfortunately, what was most recorded was his rumored 300+ bastard children, terrible addiction to blood sport, chaining artists to the floors of their studios, and, my personal favorite, ripping horseshoes in half in front of a crowd. The man was unbelievable. A perfect fictional subject, a quite imperfect king.
To learn more about Jillian Forsberg, go to her website.
Muse Books, the publisher of my next novel, is offering a special giveaway of The Heiress of Northanger Abbey.
This is a softcover special edition! To enter the giveaway, go here. It will be open until September 1st.
Plot description:
"Twenty-two years after her fateful first visit to Northanger Abbey, Catherine Tilney is happily married to Henry Tilney and raising their daughters, Phoebe and Susan. Life seems idyllic until a disturbing letter arrives. Now, with the prospect of Phoebe inheriting Northanger Abbey, Catherine fears fortune hunters are circling. It all feels eerily like the plot of the latest Gothic sensation, The Vampyre— but is Catherine again letting her imagination run wild or is a deadly threat closing in?"
The Heiress of Northanger Abbey is part of "Once Upon a Gothic," a four-book set: The other classics with sequels or retellings will be Frankenstein, Phantom of the Opera, and Dracula.
My novel can be ordered individually or as part of the quartet. This is all an initiative happening on Kickstarter. Fiction sold on Kickstarter is a new path to publishing fiction that's gaining in popularity. Because of its newness, people have a lot of questions. I figured my website blog would be a good place to answer the questions I'm fielding.
Why is this novel available on Kickstarter?
Because it could very well be the future of fiction—or at least one type of future. When you back this book on Kickstarter, you’re purchasing the book directly from the authors and publisher, instead of through a retailer—Kickstarter allows authors to sell our books without splitting profits with retailers, who can take up to 70% or more of a book’s sticker price. This enables us to produce special edition publications that wouldn’t be financially feasible otherwise. In exchange, readers get exclusive, high-quality books and unique swag not available elsewhere. We envisioned these books being read by candlelight during a storm!
What format is the book going to be available in?
The Heiress of Northanger Abbey is part of the Once Upon a Gothic book series, which consists of four beautifully designed special edition books in Tête-Bêche format, meaning they are two books in one, with the classic novel and the retelling bound together. All of the books will be available in softcover and hardcover formats individually and as a four-book set. Because these are special editions that won’t be sold through retailers, there are no ISBN barcodes or sales text on the books, which are required by retailers. An e-book omnibus will also be available of all four novels.
Is this a fundraiser for the publisher or authors?
No, this isn’t a fundraiser. All Kickstarter funds go to printing books, fulfilling orders, and author royalties. The books are already written, edited, designed, and ready to go on press upon conclusion of the Kickstarter campaign. We already have sample books printed! Again, Kickstarter is an alternative way to purchase books.
What kinds of extras or swag are planned for the Once Upon a Gothic books?
Every reader who purchases books during our Kickstarter campaign will receive a bundle of exclusive extras. Some are digital—these include a short story by Paulette Kennedy, Nancy Bilyeau's playlist for writing, a never-before-shared alternate ending to Kris Waldherr’s “Unnatural Creatures”, and an invitation to an exclusive AMA Zoom event with all four authors. (The event will be recorded for those who can't make it.) Other extras are physical, such as signed bookplates, custom-designed bookmarks, and more. In addition, special gift packages and add-ons will be available for purchase through Kickstarter, which will offer books bundled with candles, tarot readings, custom-designed book boxes, virtual experiences, and other goodies.
Will The Heiress of Northanger Abbey be on Goodreads or Netgalley?
No, it won’t be on Netgalley. This is a Kickstarter exclusive that won’t be released to the general public because it is a special edition. However, the book may be posted on Goodreads, if people want to review it.
Can I purchase The Heiress of Northanger Abbey as an ebook?
Yes. Although the print version is how the special book design features can best be enjoyed, there will be an ebook omnibus of all four novels available through Kickstarter and from the publisher. However, the ebook will only be available for a limited time after the Kickstarter ends.
Can I get the extras and add-ons after the Kickstarter is finished?
No, those are exclusives for people who purchase books during the Kickstarter campaign. One of the joys of Kickstarter is that we can bundle special edition books this way.
How do I ask my librarian to order it?
When the Kickstarter is finished, you can ask your librarian to order it. However, these special editions will only be available directly through the publisher for a limited time.
Please follow this campaign on Kickstarter. Signing up to follow it does not obligate you to buy anything! If you are curious about this publishing journey, following the campaign is the best way to gain information. And if you are a reader, we hope very much you will want to support our breaking free from traditional paths to do something different and creative. Thank you so much!
.jpg)
