Gareth is isolated for almost the exact opposite reason—that he’s been told that he’s better than everyone else, and so doesn’t have a solid set of peers that he can relate to. He’s a marquess and a Blakely, and he keeps himself apart because he doesn’t believe that he has peers.
[Return to the text]
Jenny and Ned
Q. Jenny has an extremely sweet and genuine friendship with Ned, despite the falsehoods at the core of their relationship. Was it difficult to balance that authentic affection with the facts of Jenny’s profession?
A. In the precursor to this book there was a heroine, Claire, who had a hapless little brother. I loved the characters too much to let them go.
In that book, Ned was the brother of the heroine, and while Ned and Jenny aren’t related in reality in this book, their relationship dynamic is very much that of older sister and little brother. I absolutely loved writing Ned and Jenny’s relationship. It was so painfully bittersweet.
For whatever reason, it’s much, much harder for me to write relationships that are simple and uncomplicated. Difficult balances are my favorite thing to write.
I’ve always felt that the heart of this book is as much about the two brother-sister relationships (Gareth/Laura and Jenny/Ned) as it is about the romance between Gareth and Jenny. Because I had to reread these books to make the enhanced edition, I actually might make a stronger statement: I think the brother/sister relationships in this book are stronger than the romance.
[Return to the text]
Jenny and her boundaries
Q. Jenny spends a lot of time trying to get Gareth to understand her boundaries as regards their relationship. Was her first abortive turn as a mistress the primary motivator there or was it a combination of her other life experiences as well?
A. Jenny has spent her entire life not receiving respect. I think that acting as a man’s mistress really brought to the forefront all her feelings on this matter, but she learned, very early on, that if she doesn’t insist on getting what she wanted, she was never going to get it.
Jenny’s insistence on independence also is driven by the fact that she has been abandoned so many times. She doesn’t trust other people to give her things, because other people go away. She is much more comfortable giving than being given.
[Return to the text]
Laura and Gareth
Q. In direct contrast to Jenny and Ned’s relationship, Gareth not only resists connecting with Ned, but is terrible at connecting with his sister, Laura. He generally credits this to his grandfather’s influence, but do you feel there are other reasons?
A. Gareth is bad with people generally, and he’s never had anyone to teach him how to get it right. In fact, most of the people in the world—not just his grandfather—have been teaching him that he’s better than everyone else. And since he’s rather isolated, nobody is in a position to correct him.
His own natural inclination is quite introverted, and that’s probably not a complete description. After I’d written the first draft of Proof by Seduction, I read Look me in the Eye by John Elder Robison, about his experience with Asperger’s, and I realized that for whatever reason, Gareth felt a lot internally like Robison described. I wouldn’t want to venture a guess as to how far down the spectrum Gareth falls, but it made a lot of sense to me. The only change I made to the text after I read Robison’s memoir was that I made more mention of Gareth’s eye contact. Gareth doesn’t notice this is happening—he’s of a social status where people would naturally not make friendly eye contact. When this happens in the book, Jenny interprets it initially as arrogance. It’s only a little later that she starts to translate it as unease.
None of this is explicitly explored in the story. I really don’t think that anyone of the time would notice that someone fell on the mild end of the Asperger’s spectrum. They had no idea what Asperger’s was, and most of the symptoms can be interpreted in other ways. Wealthy, powerful men were allowed to be eccentric, and nobody expected an explanation. And at the time, the understanding of mental differences was so poor that the notion that someone could be a sane, functional human being, but not neurotypical, would have been beyond comprehension. So I’ve never really talked about this much. It’s really more of author headcanon than actual, textual truth.
[Return to the text]
What is up with Hat on Top?
Q. Where did you get the idea for Hat on Top?
Your eBook reader software does not support the playing of audio. If you’d like to read a transcript, please visit http://www.courtneymilan.com/enhanced/pbs.php.
The origins of Hat on Top (0:17)
[Return to the text]
About the ending…
Q. In the climax of the book Gareth doesn’t just accept Jenny as his equal, but as his better and in the process overturns a lifelong belief in his own superiority that heavily influenced how he lived and connected to people. In the moment, he was obviously more concerned with Jenny, but was that complete overthrowing of his core beliefs easy for him to accept or did he continue to struggle with it here and there?
A. I doubt Gareth will ever get over all of the issues that he has—who ever does?
But I think that for him, getting to the point where he is able to admit that someone else is his superior is indicative of the fact that he’s becoming more secure. He no longer feels threatened by those who are out there.
And the thing that I think saves Gareth from being an incurable jerk (as compared to just, you know, a regular jerk) is that he is actually very fair-minded. Once he has come to the conclusion that Jenny is not his inferior, he wouldn’t go back on that. Instead, he’d realize that he learned a lesson—that he needs to examine his beliefs and try to be more fair to the people around him. I imagine that examination would take time, but with Jenny around to smack him (figuratively) when he gets overbearing, I think he’ll be a better person.
[Return to the text]
Elephants.
Q. Why elephants?
A. I have an aversion to the typical things that heroes give their heroines as part of a book. I absolutely hate the scenes where the hero takes the heroine out and gets her a brand new wardrobe—usually telling her what to wear, and encouraging her to drop her neckline over her protests. I know lots of people love that kind of thing but I personally don’t enjoy it.
(Possibly this is because I have had the experience of going shopping with someone who “knew better” and it was deeply, deeply humiliating. Every time I read one of those scenes, I wince. Because instead of imagining the heroine looking the mirror and thinking, “Oh, gosh, I’m beautiful!” I always remember my own reaction—which was “I have been doing this wrong for thirty-three years. I am so dumb.” But this is rather a digression.)
There’s that scene that’s in about 50% of the romance novels wherein the man buys the woman some absolutely gorgeous piece of jewelry. I hate that. (True fact about Courtney Milan: as of 2014, she has been married for six years. And she and Mr. Milan have not yet picked out wedding rings.) Jewelry, for me, is cold and impersonal. It’s something that every man gets a woman.
I’ve always felt that stand-ins for traditional romance aren’t nearly as romantic as something that is so purely personal that it gets to the heart of the person you love.
So, yeah. Elephants.
This is how I envision the interior of the stable.
[Return to the text]
Change.
Q. Proof by Seduction was your first book. If you could go back and change one thing about Proof, what would it be?
A. There are consent issues in Proof, especially involving that first kiss, that I have become much warier of writing as an author. I don’t think I would write a character like Gareth any longer, but I don’t know how I could change this book without completely rewriting it and making it a different book.
The one thing I most wished I could go back and change about Proof is something I did change for this version. In the orig
inal version, I used a word to refer to the Romani that is a racial slur.
I didn’t know the history of that word when I wrote this book. That’s not an excuse; I’m a writer, and I should have looked into it. I’m sorry I did, and for everyone who read it and was hurt by it, you have my apology.
I went through the book and found every instance of the word. It was never necessary. It added nothing to the story—no depth, no additional meaning, nothing except the capacity to harm people. I can’t defend its use, and I don’t want to. I’ve removed it. And if you didn’t notice until you read this… Well, that’s why I needed to take it out.
Acknowledgements
For The Governess Affair: THERE ARE ALWAYS MORE people to thank than I can remember. As always, Tessa Dare, Carey Baldwin, and Leigh LaValle provided emotional support and help in the writing of this novella. The Northwest Pixies (plus additional friends) helped shame me into making sure I met my word count goals, with special mentions to Rachel Grant (for the magic coffee mug), and Darcy Burke and Natasha Tate for talking me through some parts of the middle.
I’m always grateful for my amazing team: Robin Harders and Martha Trachtenberg for editing, and Christine Dixon and Tina Marie for proofreading, and to Kristin Nelson and Lori Bennett who are helping me reach even more readers.
And then there are all those who provided support in so many ways—my husband and family, my dog and cat (yes, even the cat); the Pixies; the Loop That Must Not be Named.
Most of all, thanks to all my readers. Your support and enthusiasm mean everything to me.
For Unveiled: I HAD A LOT OF HELP writing this book.
The discussion about marriage I had with Tessa gave rise to the central premise of this book; Tessa, Amy and Leigh talked me through the basics one cold morning in Vail, and the Northwest Pixies brainstormed titles on a Friday night (Darcy Burke gets the credit).
This enhanced edition wouldn’t have been possible without Kristin Nelson, my wonderful agent, who negotiated a contract that allowed me to make this edition. I remain grateful to Margo Lipschultz at HQN Books, who pushed me to make this the best book I could.
The Vanettes, the Pixies, Destination Debut and the Loop that Must Not Be Named—without any of you, I would have gone insane.
The lovely staff at Montacute House answered numerous strange and silly questions. Darren did his best to correct my execrable Latin. Franzeca Drouin, as always, went above and beyond the call of duty. Elyssa Patrick is still my favorite beta reader ever, and I rely on Kim Castillo for pretty much everything else.
Finally, I need to thank my husband for listening to me read parts aloud and not wincing, and my dog, for curling up patiently at my feet when I was too busy writing to take him to the dog park.
The cat gets no thanks. I still have scars.
For Proof by Seduction: EVERY BOOK—ESPECIALLY A DEBUT NOVEL—owes a debt to an enormous number of people.
This list is lengthy, but not exhaustive:
Tessa and Amy, for everything.
Franzeca Drouin saved me from innumerable errors more times than I can count. David Berry, Rupert Baker and Stephanie Clarke answered strange and nitpicky questions.
Amy Atwell, Jackie Barbosa, Anna Campbell, Lenora Bell, Darcy Burke, Diana Chung, Amanda Collins, Lacey Kaye, Lindsey Faber, Sara Lindsey, Terri Osborn, Elyssa Papa, Janice Rholetter, Erica Ridley, Maggie Robinson and Sherry Thomas all read pages at various points along the way and encouraged me. Kristin Nelson, my extraordinary agent, and Sara Megibow, her awesome assistant, made all my dreams come true, even the ones I was scared to dream.
Thanks to the team at Harlequin Books, particularly my editor, Ann Leslie Tuttle, and Charles Griemsman, for believing in this book and doing such a beautiful job in launching it.
Finally, to all the readers who found me through this book… Thank you. Thank you for enjoying this book. Thank you for telling your friends about this book. Thank you for everything. I wouldn’t have a career without you, so thank you.
For the enhanced editions: RAWLES WROTE THE QUESTIONS for the Q & A, and the amazing Tessa Dare helped out with the audio. Finally, Gwen Hayes, Heather Riccio, and Liz Pelletier at Entangled Publishing helped make distribution of this version possible. Thank you.
Copyright
This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and incidents are the product of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events, locales, or persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.
The Governess Affair: © 2012 by Courtney Milan.
Unveiled: © 2011 by Courtney Milan.
Proof by Seduction: © 2010 by Courtney Milan.
Enhanced materials: © 2014 by Courtney Milan and Rawles Lumumba.
Cover design © 2014 Courtney Milan.
Cover photographs © Gromovataya | Dreamstime.com.
Digital Edition 1.0
All rights reserved. Where such permission is sufficient, the author grants the right to strip any DRM which may be applied to this work.
Seductive Starts Page 74
