![]() ![]() I’m researching a Regency trilogy, and the newspaper reports give a horrific picture: a litany of blackmail, persecution and betrayal, prison, the pillory and the gallows. Much of the past was an awful place for queer people, particularly though not exclusively men. How can you have a happy ending to a male/male Regency romance when your heroes not only can never come out, but could face the gallows if they get caught together? How can the reader believe in a proper HEA in a hostile world? Isn’t every queer historical romance either a parade of angst or an unconvincing denial of the horrible realities? If you don’t like your romance to be angst-filled, and you want to be assured that when you close the book, you leave the characters at the start of a blissful life together, it seems that queer romance has a problem. I don’t like queer historicals, they’re so depressing. This, penned by author KJ CHarles, is the second of the four. Over the next month, AAR will run a column a week as part of our participation in Queer Romance Month. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |