C.C. Aune
Question: When did you first discover Jane Austen?
Answer: Hmm. Shockingly late, considering my work.
I have always been obsessed with historical fiction, nonfiction, and biographies. Also, I'm an Anglophile (not a rabid royal worshiper type, just a history buff), especially because I also do genealogy, and most of my family history is English. The family lines go way back, most of them to the 1400s, and some even further. I've been to Britain several times, once just to do research.
So when the concept for Oath fell into my lap (around 2001), I was predisposed to want to write something super detail-oriented. (That's a whole other topic for discussion.) I was utterly uninformed about regency literature. A writing friend told me about Georgette Heyer. Jane Austen came along sometime after that. (Not to mention Fanny Burney and other authors of that era.) I had missed seeing the famous BBC 1995 P and P, so I had to rent it in bits at the video store!
In short, I'm not exactly sure when I first read P and P, but my Borders Books copy says 2004, so it looks like I must've been writing my series for 2-3 years before I ever read Jane's work! Really shocking! I believe I was channeling Heyer, Dorothy Dunnett (her Lymond series), and Diana Gabaldon as I first embarked on my own writing. And then Jane Austen came along to add the refinement.
I remember quite clearly thinking that I wanted to use the device of writing letters and the delay in communication in 1820 to create the suspense, the drama, and the miscues of the story. I was sitting on my computer thinking how the average reader of 2001 might no longer appreciate how deeply "snail mail" affected lives 200 years earlier. My original drafts were actually epistolary, just Josephine and Prudence writing letters to each other in first person. Sadly, the premise became forced by the second and third books when they can no longer communicate by mail, so I rewrote it using third person structure. I should add that Wilkie Collins' The Woman in White was my real foundation in terms of the first person, epistolary, and document-driven structure.
Question: What do you think Jane Austen would think of her impact with so many literary offshoots, from parody to pastiche?
Answer: For the most part, I think Jane would be delighted. For one thing, she could not have imagined a world where women could write with their own name openly credited, and on any subject of their choosing. I suspect she would've verbally pooh poohed the idea that she led the way, yet would secretly have felt proud of the knowledge that she had.
And what validation! Not only was she a pioneer in a new genre and as a female making her career as an author, but her work has remained relevant in a world where many of the key plot points no longer affect most modern women. Why is this? Because her characters' feelings and behaviors are still universal. Because her humor and dry observations of humanity are still universal.
When it comes to the knockoffs, which range from serious to silly, Jane might rightly feel flattered in all cases, though I'm certain her sensibilities would be shocked by many versions. Could she even wrap her head around any book with adult themes that employed her characters? Surely that would give her the vapors! She might not mind the murder mystery and vampire tale homages, though they'd probably puzzle her to no end. Her purpose was completely different from theirs, which use her beloved characters as pre-fleshed-out props for stories that discard her social commentary. But I like to think that she'd be pleased with the agency given to females in these homages. That has always been my objective, to offer women in Jane's time period the opportunity to have more power in their lives, and to look at how that society, men in particular, would react when women try to assert those strengths. Hint: there are always plenty of obstacles, even when a gentlewoman possesses unique powers.
Question: Where do you get your inspiration from?
Answer: The initial concept itself came from a brief writing project with another writer, who ended up bowing out. I came to it with no knowledge of the historical period, the language and writing style, nor the literature, and no particular affinity for magical fantasy. My learning curve was huge. I had been reading Wilkie Collins and liked the idea of unfolding a story about women through letters, testimony, and legal documents. I had just devoured all four (at that time) Diana Gabaldon Outlander books and loved her attention to historical detail. I started reading Georgette Heyer, which is where I began to pick up the manner of speech of that time (yes I now realize she is not regarded as the finest scholar, among other things.) Oh, and Dorothy Dunnett's truly phenomenal Lymond Chronicles.
At some point, likely after the series was well under way, Jane Austen finally came into my life. All the popular Austen knockoffs like PP and Zombies, Death Comes to Pemberley, and Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell were published well after my project had gotten under way. I had probably written four or five novels worth of text before they hit the bookstores, so none of those works are influences on my writing.
Question: What makes the early 19th century mesh so well with magic?
Answer: One main theme of my series is that perhaps magic has actually become obsolete. It is the Age of Enlightenment and also the Industrial Age. The Regency sits right on the cusp between the old world and the new world, politically, scientifically, mechanically, and socially. I address the idea that rational people do not and cannot believe in magic. It's considered irrelevant, a relic of the feudal past, when kings and lords had less physical power to maintain their dominions. So when the book opens, magic has been banned for about 15-16 years. Very few people remain alive who've inherited magic, many of them orphaned young adults, but some of the original ones want very much to restore their so-called birthright.
I like to emphasize the "scientific realism" aspect of magic, so I talk about genetic inheritance (yes, the period is 40 years before Mendel, but hey), and in the second book I address layers of consciousness, the "ether" that surrounds us, through which magic moves, and what it feels like to create magic.
I like to think of magic as a thing that must be studied, learned, and honed, and that some people might actually be much better at it than others. This early 19th century time period feels perfect for this clash of rational thought and scholarliness with irrational, inexplicable forces.
Question: The world building and system of magic varies greatly in the Regency fantasy genre, how did you go about creating yours?
Answer: As I said in the previous answer, I started with the idea that this was a world that was transitioning into a more rational, scientific view of inexplicable phenomonena. Magic needs to be experiential and also challenging to its user, not just a "Bewitched" nose wiggle. Also, magic is rare in humans, so a nonbelieving witness will not even stop to consider that they've seen magic as opposed to some odd, inexplicable event.
Certainly, some magical skills do come naturally, and can even be deployed without much aforethought. It will become clearer in the second book that there are two types of Talisman Keepers, Mages and Protectors. Protectors like William MacNeal and Josephine have intuitive defensive physical skills that they are driven to hone without knowing why. They will always be better at fighting, shooting, and leadership than the average person. MacNeal has another enhancement: he has visions that warn him of impending disasters. Mages like Prudence can do minor magical tasks, even unconsciously. But their strength lies in studying the art of magic, knowing specific spells and charms, and knowing which ones to choose and how to deploy them properly (in book 2, Prudence frequently deploys magic incorrectly). Both groups receive additional boosts from their Talismans. The Talismans do not themselves impart powers, they magnify them. Josephine and Prudence don't quite grasp this detail in book one, but by the opening sequence of book 2 it is clear to them.
There is an additional layer to the magic in my world: it is tied to ancient Celtic roots and the language of magic is Gaelic. There is yet more to it, but not everything is revealed, even in the second book. But you will get a further look into the magical system, its history, and the intentions of the antagonist rebel faction.
Question: If you had to choose between writing only period literature or only fantasy literature, which would win?
Answer: That's tough to answer, particularly since I'm researching a new historical fiction series that's period literature but has absolutely no magic. The period aspect to literature is my main jam. The fantasy aspect to my first series came about by chance, though I have really enjoyed creating this intricate alternate universe. I have enough material to explore the Talisman Keepers for a long time yet to come, and would likely be able to create a prequel series using the same world and rules. So, the answer is, I quite love my cast and will not be retiring them any time soon. But I also have non-fantasy ideas to explore.
Question: Be honest, have you ever dressed up in Regency clothes just to pretend for a moment you are in the past?
Answer: Indeed! I was somewhat in costume when you and I met at the Con in Madison in 2018. I had a silly hat that sort of approximated a bonnet, a velvet coat that is cut much like a pelisse, and some granny boots. In 2021, I acquired a handmade period bonnet from a real hatmaker and wore it to a local book fair last year (a super dorky picture is in my posts*). The book fair is coming up again later this month, and I've been contemplating buying a cheap costume dress to go all in.
In the back of my mind, I would love to get the full kit for appearances. And then there's the annual Austen event in Bath....attending that would be a hoot! I'm one of those people who's both an introvert and an extrovert. I rather like the attention I get from cosplaying, moreso than the effort of selling my books in person. I think: aw, just buy my book and let my writing speak for itself! Don't make me talk about it. I'm a writer, hahaha.
*Which I have reposted here! Evil laugh evil laugh!
Biography:
C.C. Aune's ramblings have led her through 49 states - nine of which she has called home - plus a fair number of countries. She has been a journalist and a contributor for the companion book to PBS's 2000 series In Search of Our Ancestors. Currently, she directs the blog One Year of Letters, which explores the internal landscape of writers. The Ill-Kept Oath is her debut novel.
C.C.'s Social Media:
Website
Facebook
Twitter
Goodreads
Soul Taken by Patricia Briggs
