The first and most important step in writing The Royal We was obviously creating our central characters — fleshing out Nick, Bex, Lacey, Freddie, the friends and enemies they make. But we also needed a Queen. And she needed a family. So we needed to change history.
We’re frequently asked why, in the face of that obstacle, we didn’t just set the book in a country we invented out of whole cloth. For whatever reason, that never crossed our minds. The Royal We needed to feel grounded, because at its crux is the push and pull between an ordinary person and her extraordinary situation, and the potential sacrifice of one for the other. Her world therefore had to be relatable. Familiar. She had to be walking the streets of a real city so that the reader could truly put themselves in her shoes, and empathize with the divide between where she came from and where she went. But more importantly, a huge part of the story is Nick’s destiny. He is going to be king. And that reality, and the burden it puts on him, has so much more heft when the reader brings into the story a knowledge of what that means. Socially, politically, even just terrestrially. In the wonderful FitzOsbournes trilogy by Michelle Cooper, about the family that rules the fictional island of Montmaray off the coast of the UK, an imaginary country works because it’s not REALLY about that; at its core the trilogy is the story of a close-knit group of kids who grew up in bizarre isolation, and then had the sanctity of their unit threatened by the various dangers of World War II (and in fact, even that trilogy eventually forsakes Montmaray for England’s richer tapestry). Those books explore what happens when the world encroaches on you. The Royal We is the reverse, a story about a girl who encroaches on a world. Bex falls in love with a man who just so happens to have another marriage in the hopper — to his birthplace — that is bigger than anyone could possibly imagine. She chose England the first time with just the weight of her own desires and expectations at stake, but when she chose it again, it was a heavier decision. Using the UK in this situation gives readers an innate understanding of just how big a deal, and how explosive a pressure-cooker, that choice is.
Besides, let’s face it, setting the book in London gave us ample and irresistible chances to color the story with actual landmarks, traditions, and references to Henry VIII. Sold.
Creating our fictional Lyons dynasty, however, wasn’t as simple as just pulling Queen Eleanor’s name out of a hat and then making up the rest as we went. That’s a quick way to make a tangled web that won’t unravel. Offhand mentions of random royal relatives would start to step on each other, and risked disconnecting readers from a world where the pieces not only didn’t seem to fit together, but felt like they were pulled from different puzzles. What we had to do was, in essence, our homework. Like using scratch paper in math to work out a problem so that you can fill in the right answer on your exam, even if your teacher never gets to marvel at how you arrived there. We knew we wouldn’t be able to show our work via a full and lengthy Lyons timeline at the front of The Royal We — in our first draft, our attempt accounted for a full five Microsoft Word pages, so we had to slice-and-dice — but in order to thread our narrative with allusions to Eleanor’s ancestors, every reference had to ring accurate. If it didn’t feel true to us, it wouldn’t feel true to the reader.
The trick became tweaking events in the UK’s actual monarchical timeline so that it afforded us exactly the right amount of space. Cut it too close, and we’d cross streams with the Windsors of today; erase too much, and we’d wipe out crucial elements of what makes the UK what it is. We wanted some room to create our own rulers with big romances and zany deaths, but we had to do it without abundance of real Edwards and Georges in the way — yet also without losing too much of Britain’s fabric, or London’s architecture and landmarks. Delete Victoria, and it deletes Albert, which zaps out Royal Albert Hall and the gargantuan golden monument to him that she built after he died. Poof: one grand romantic gesture stricken from the record. It’s a domino effect. Besides, we were already contending with minutiae like the fact that our characters would refer to Queen Elizabeth I as simply Queen Elizabeth, because the regnal number isn’t added until there is more than one, and of course, in The Royal We there is no QEII. In short, there was only so much of the past we could twist without making pretzels of our brains and of British history.
In the end, we chose to keep Queen Victoria, but make two critical changes to her immediate successor(s) — we prematurely eliminated a son, and revived a grandson — so that it created a completely fresh crew (and eventually gave her the regnal number we took away from Elizabeth I).
Oh, and a word about names: We strove to christen our characters in a way that was at least somewhat in keeping with history — we threaded in connections for a few where we needed them, like as middle names, or Frederick and Richard being actual ducal family names for the one we revived for Queen Victoria II’s husband — but which didn’t step on the names of current royals or on any of the kings we eradicated. So, for example, we couldn’t invent a new George, because he’d have been George V, which easily would be confused with the ACTUAL George V that we had eliminated from the timeline. Ditto making a new fictional Edward VIII. Further, we couldn’t invent a Charles, because he’d have been King Charles III in our book, which is the same number the real Charles may be someday (unless he styles himself George VIII or something) and that would create similar confusion in the future. And William and Harry/Henry we stayed away from for obvious reasons, although with William, it’s also the same monarchical issue of not wanting to make up a William V that would someday cross streams with the eventual William V (if that’s what he chooses for himself). Finally, we realized hearing the names of ANY of the present-day crew would take you out of the book because it’s so hard not to picture their faces, so we struck Edward, George, Andrew, Anne, Elizabeth, and Philip from the list. Fun fact: Prince Edwin was originally named Prince George, until we read through the first draft and realized that every time we saw his name we pictured the new little moppet and his CHEEKS.
Here’s our timeline, created with help from my research star of a sister, including children, spouses, deaths, and other historical notes explaining certain decisions we made. There are NO book spoilers herein, but there are in the comments, so beware if you’ve not read the entire book.
HOUSE OF HANOVER: 1714-1901
Georges I through IV, 1714-1830
William IV, 1830-1857
Queen Victoria I: 1837-1901
- Spouse: Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
- Children: Victoria (1840), Albert Edward (1841), Alice (1843), Alfred (1844), Helena (1846), Louise (1848), Arthur (1850), Leopold (1853), Beatrice (1857)
- Albert Edward, Prince of Wales: Assassinated in 1900; never succeeds his mother
- Spouse: Alexandra of Denmark
- Children: Prince Albert Victor (1864), George (1865), Louise (1867), Victoria (1868), Maud (1869), Alexander (1871)
- Death: Assassinated in Belgium by a protester of the Boer War, worsening relations between the United Kingdom and the continent
- Notes: In real life, Albert Edward, a.k.a. Bertie, survived the assassination attempt and became Edward VII. This was our first big reversal of real events.
HOUSE OF SAXE-COBURG-GOTHA: 1901-1916
King Albert: 1900-1916
- Spouse: Georgina Lyons-Bowes (name chosen as a loving nod to the real Queen Mum, Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon), 1885. Albert falls ill with typhoid in early 1884, which freaks out the royal family because that’s what actually did kill Victoria’s Albert. Georgina is instrumental in nursing him back to health, and they fall in love. It causes a minor scandal because Georgina is not the high-profile foreign princess the world would’ve expected for the heir, but the royal family and nation are so grateful for her aid in Albert’s survival — and, her family is sufficiently upmarket — that the furor quickly subsides.
- Children:
o Princess Victoria Eleanor, born 1886
o Prince Arthur Edwin Alexander, born 1889
o Prince Charles Richard George, born 1891, d. 1918 - Historical note: In real life, Albert Victor actually died young of pneumonia, and a devastated Victoria honored him with a large and loving tomb at St. George’s Chapel in Windsor (when we passed it on our tour, I said to Jess, “See this? NONE of it exists in our book”). He was engaged at the time to Mary of Teck, who — while recovering from their mutual grief, in what was by all accounts a genuine accident of affection — fell in love with Albert’s brother George and married him instead. George also filled Albert’s role as heir, later becoming George V, a.k.a. Queen Elizabeth II’s grandfather.
- Dynastic change: Having nursed Albert so successfully, Georgina as Queen Consort becomes a prominent advocate for health causes, hospitals, nurses, etc., and often visits the sick and wounded – which endears her to the people and naturally leads to her brave and unprecedented journey abroad to comfort the WWI wounded. En route, she is killed, another casualty of war. With a heavy wariness of the Germans already fomenting on his home shores, Albert harnesses his grief and that of his country and changes the dynastic name from his grandfather’s Saxe-Coburg and Gotha — thus distancing Britain’s rulers from their German roots — to Lyons. It’s both in honor of his late wife, and a homophone with the three lions that feature twice on the Royal Standard flag (and once on the England football jerseys).
- Death: His broken heart drove him mad, and eventually to his grave.
- Notes: In real life, George V changed the dynastic name to Windsor (and stripped 15 German relatives of their British titles) purely for political reasons. Per Wikipedia: “High anti-German sentiment amongst the people of the British Empire during World War I reached a peak in March 1917, when the Gotha G.IV, a heavy aircraft capable of crossing the English Channel, began bombing London directly and became a household name. In the same year, on 15 March, King George’s first cousin, Nicholas II, the Emperor of Russia, was forced to abdicate, which raised the spectre of the eventual abolition of all the monarchies in Europe. The King and his family were finally convinced to abandon all titles held under the German Crown and to change German titles and house names to anglicised versions.” Hilariously, Wikipedia also says, “In reference to Shakespeare’s The Merry Wives of Windsor, German Emperor Wilhelm II remarked jokingly that he planned to see The Merry Wives of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.” Oh, Wilhelm, you joker.
HOUSE OF LYONS: 1916-present
King Albert: 1916-1917
King Arthur I: 1917-1919
- Spouse: None
- Engagement(s): Grand Duchess Olga of Russia (b. 1895). Arthur drags his feet on making it official because he is in love with his best friend’s wife. Then World War I does the rest of the work, making the union logistically impossible for a time. The engagement stands because it’s considered such a desirable match, but then Olga is assassinated in 1918 before she can get to London to say her vows. Thus, Arthur is free to marinate in his romantic depression.
- Children: None
- Death: Pneumonia, on the official record, but per the Lyons lore it was booze and unrequited passion.
- Historical notes: Olga of Russia, oldest daughter of Tsar Nicholas II, is a real person, and that is her real death. We just borrowed her for this purpose.
Queen Victoria II: 1919-1957
- Succeeds her childless brother Arthur at age 33
- Spouse: Married in 1907 to Frederick Sackville-Germain, 8th Duke of Dorset
- Romances: Crown Prince Sigmund of Germany
- Children:
o Prince Arthur Frederick Edwin, born 1909
o Prince Richard Charles Nicholas, born 1910
o Princess Mary Victoria Louise, born 1912 - Notes: First owner of the Lyons Emerald, given to her by her father on the occasion of her wedding. … In reality, the Dukedom of Dorset became extinct in 1843 when the 5th Duke, Charles Sackville-Germain, died unmarried and childless. Traditional Dorset/Sackville family names actually and helpfully do include Frederick and Richard.
King Arthur II: 1957-1958
- Spouse: Princess Ingeborg Christina of Denmark (born 1911).
- Children: None
- Death: falls off his horse.
- Notes: Ingeborg is a fictional daughter of King Christian X — himself the brother of the Norwegian king, so it’d be considered a suitable match for an heir.
King Richard IV: 1958-1960
- Spouse: Princess Marta Eleanora of Sweden (born 1912)
- Children:
o Princess Eleanor Alexandra, born 1933
o Princess Georgina Elizabeth Agatha, born 1935 - Death: boat accident (as Nick points out to Bex, Lyons kings have an unfortunate tendency towards fatal idiocy)
- Notes: Marta is the fictional second daughter of King Gustaf IV.
Queen Eleanor: 1960-present
- Spouse: Married in 1954 to Henry Nicholas Vane, 7th Duke of Cleveland
Children:
o Princess Agatha Mary, born 1955
o Prince Richard Phillip Christian, born 1956
o Prince Edwin George Albert, born 1959 - Notes: The Dukedom of Cleveland actually became extinct in 1891 when the 4th Duke died with no (legitimate) heirs. We chose a homegrown consort, so to speak, because rumor has it the Brits actually hoped for the same with Queen Elizabeth II — and picking someone from Greece would’ve been too close to reality, Russia too controversial, and Scandinavia, too close to Eleanor’s lineage.
THE NEXT GENERATION
Princess Agatha
- Spouse: The Hon. Julian de la Poer
- Child: Nigel de la Poer (b. 1993)
Richard, Prince of Wales
- Spouse: Married in 1985 to Lady Emma Somers (b. 1965), daughter of Charles, 7th Earl Somers
Children:
o Prince Nicholas Alexander Arthur Edward, born August 1986
o Prince Frederick Charles Richard, born April 1988
Notes: Google “Earl Somers” to see why we chose that name…
Prince Edwin
- Unmarried as of the beginning of The Royal We.
50 thoughts on “The Royal We: Rewriting the Past”
Jessica
You read my mind! I was totally trying to figure out where the real family tree ended and your invented one began. This was fascinating, thanks for sharing!
LikeLike
Caitlyn
I love the Lyons-Bowes nod to the Queen Mum, too, you two. Well done!
LikeLike
Samantha Klein
This is super-cool. So, was Albert the son of Albert Edward, then? That wasn’t clear. I love the Somers tie. 🙂
I wanted to say something about the book, but I couldn’t find the right place before. Maybe this is it. It’s a really fun book, and I enjoyed it. I was impressed with the amount of insight you seemed to have on living such a public life … it’s hard to believe that it would truly be anything but as you describe it.
SPOILERS TO FOLLOW:
The most incredible part for me, though, was the relation of Mr. Porter’s death. I know that that must have been an incredibly personal thing to write, and I just wanted you to know that it was extremely moving and I could feel the personal weight of it. Very effective writing. I’m grateful for it, and at the same time, I’m sorry that you knew so well how to convey those feelings. I guess I hope that maybe it was comforting for you to put that all down.
All the best — I’m a longtime fan. You ladies keep writing, and I’ll keep reading. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jessica
Thank you, so so much.
LikeLike
Lori
I sat on the upper deck of a cruise ship and cried my eyes out when reading that part.
LikeLike
Lynn
What an interesting look at your process. I love reading things like this. Thanks for posting it!
LikeLike
Elizabeth K Mahon (@scandalwomen)
Ah, Somers-Cocks, like Heather Cocks! I get it! Cool beans.
LikeLike
Erykah
Getting rid of Mary of Teck means my alma mater no longer exists! Or is called Queen Georgina University in your world. Which works 🙂
LikeLike
Heather
Well, she still EXISTS — I like to think she married George anyway and they just led a low-key life. But also possibly an academic one, so that your alma matter can happen. 🙂
LikeLike
Julia
Fascinating!! Thanks for sharing 🙂
For the sequel that your publisher absolutely MUST green-light, try Aeon Timeline. http://www.scribblecode.com
My writer friends who have done things with complex timelines find it absolutely invaluable.
LikeLike
Soph
My thought is that there will never be another King Richard, because of the Princes in the Tower. The numbering is uncertain and leads to some nasty questions. Am I overthinking this? Yes.
LikeLike
Heather
In what way is the numbering uncertain? Honest question! Maybe we can explain it. Also, I think for our purposes we’re okay with Richard. Because Richard IV, in this world, was not ever expected to be Richard IV. He wasn’t the heir, he was the heir’s brother. Given that, I buy that they might’ve taken the chance on the name. And then Eleanor named her heir Richard in honor of her father.
LikeLike
Soph
OMG Heather responded to me! Uncertain because calling him Richard IV implies that Richard, Duke of York, was killed before his brother, Edward V. Calling him Richard V then acknowledges that both boys (both Kings of England) were killed. All in all, a very sticky situation that I think they’d probably avoid altogether. I’ll buy that if it’s a second son, they might go with Richard. Honestly I didn’t notice it in the book, but now that you’ve so nicely walked us through the chronology, it stood out.
LikeLike
Heather
I see your point, but even with Edward V dying first and the crown technically passing to his brother before HE died, the young duke was never officially crowned Richard IV and history doesn’t generally acknowledge him as such. I think we can get away with skirting that piece of minutiae, even though I love minutiae.
Another problem we had was — and I could cover this in the piece, actually [note: ADDED IT] — that we strove to use names that were at least somewhat in keeping with history, but without stepping too much on the names of CURRENT royals or on any of the kings we eradicated. So, we couldn’t make a new George V, because it would confuse things with the ACTUAL George V; ditto making an Edward VIII. And hearing the names of the current crew would take you out of the book because it’s so hard not to picture their faces, so we struck Edward, George, Andrew, and Philip from the list. Prince Edwin was originally named Prince George until we read through the first draft and realized how freaking CONFUSING that was with the new little moppet. And we couldn’t invent a Charles, because he’d have been King Charles III in our book, which is the same number the REAL Charles may be someday (unless he styles himself George VIII or something) and that’d be Confusing In The Future. And then William and Harry/Henry we stayed away from for obvious reasons — well, there is a baby Henry, but it isn’t distracting I don’t think — although with William, it’s also the same monarchical issue of not wanting a William V that would then confuse things with the eventual William V (if that’s what he chooses for himself).
And we couldn’t take history back and make our timeline begin with the two princes secretly being rescued and taken to France and then returning to claim their birthright, because that would eradicate Queen Victoria, which we specifically didn’t want to do. So we picked Richard, even knowing that history views RIII as such a rotter, because we decided Vic II was TAKING BACK THE NAME and was just burning it off on her second son. (That’s also why we made her husband a Sackville-Germain. It’s a real ducal family that we revived and extended long enough that the 8th duke could marry Queen Victoria II, and Frederick and Richard are Sackville-Germain family names, which is where and why Vic and Fred got Richard, and what eventually yielded our Freddie).
But yes, Vic II never figured it would be an issue, because she didn’t imagine Arthur was going to die falling off his horse, the dumbass.
However, I said it above and I’ll say it again: I love minutiae and I love that you brought this up. This is why we love Fug Nation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ottawa Amy
Great write-up, Heather, and some very smart thinking. I really liked your point about “tweaking events in the UK’s actual monarchical timeline so that it afforded us exactly the right amount of space.” I think that’s something that writers, to be good, have to do well. The reader should encounter some familiar figures and have some imaginative space to play “what if?” but not have to spend any time thinking, “hey, that can’t be right.” So props to you for doing it so well.
One nitpick. George V was QEII’s grandfather, not great-grandfather. (When she was a child, she apparently called him Grandpa England, which I think is very sweet.)
Count me among those who loved The Royal We. I look forward to another installment!
LikeLike
Heather
Whoops, that’s totally a product of me trying to put this up too hastily — which is amusing given that the whole idea behind the post is, “Be thorough!” SIGH. Thanks!
LikeLike
Ottawa Amy
I can relate. I work with words for a living, too, and if I had a nickel for every time I’ve done something similar, I could maybe retire from working with words for a living.
And, sorry to be that person–pointing out a mistake. I just know that you ladies are sticklers for accuracy. (The above post is proof of that.)
LikeLike
M.E.
I loved the use of the name Eleanor. Eleanor of Aquitaine was a total badass of a British Queen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jessica
That’s exactly why we chose it!
LikeLike
Jess
I’d been putting off reading this (I have a thesis due in under a month!) but reading this family tree actually made me grab my Kindle and buy it on the spot.
Looking forward to reading the Royal We!
LikeLike
CleaK
Did Nick and Bex get the Clarence Duchy due to your Plantagenet ties? I’m really glad you posted this; i was curious about the new royal history.
LikeLike
Jessica
No, that’s just a delightful bonus. It’s just because it was available and historically meaningful (and we couldn’t use Cambridge)!
LikeLike
Meg
I said this on Twitter but : this is amazing and I love it SO MUCH. I’d worked out much of the tree on my second read of the book but having all of the reasoning and tiny little tidbits is absolutely delightful. Creating new long-reigning queens is awesome.
LikeLike
Kat
Thank you for writing about this! I remember asking about this on Twitter, so this is great. I find royal family history and family trees fascinating, and apparently, that extends to fictional royal families. It’s wonderful to see how much thought and careful consideration went into this. I also love reading about things I didn’t think of myself, and that now totally make sense, like how one of the reasons you steered away from actual royal family names was to prevent future confusion when Charles, William, and George eventually ascend and choose their regnal names.
I hope you guys write about how you came up with the character names, like Lady Beatrix Larchmont-Kent-Smythe.
LikeLike
Jessica
A lot of the names, like Bea’s, we just made up because we liked them. Her name, we knew had to be insanely multi-barrelled and it was funnier if that was an almost-acronym, especially a rude one.
In further name trivia, we almost named Freddie “Peter,” which works on a man-child homage angle (Freddie does kind of refuse to grow up, or that’s how people think of him, anyway), but he just never FELT like a Peter to us, so that was very short lived. “Freddie” as a name is a bit of an homage to Lucy Honeychurch’s incorrigible and wonderful younger brother in A Room With a View, as well.
LikeLike
Kat
Given that Bea’s nickname is Lady Bollocks, does it follow that we could call Paddington Lady Pillock? Was that intentional? 😉
LikeLike
Britta
Freddie is also, I believe, the idiot son in the Wodehouse Blandings Castle series. It is my go-to name for slightly daffy British aristocrats. I honestly thought it stemmed from that reference!
LikeLike
Ash
This genealogy is absolutely fascinating, and love that you girls did this kind of backstory. All of my favorite authors have really good world-building skills, and although you didn’t create the world, you certainly created a new family to run it. Cheers to you both! I’m so pleased the book is being so well-received, I’ve been recommending it! Also, it’s kind of intriguing – a death here, a life here, and look what could (and what might now) change in history. All the might-have-beens…
And WRT to Earl Porter – that was a beautiful homage, and I’ve been following you two for long enough to know where that bit of writing came from (or should I say, who). It stands up just fine as part of Bex’s story – indeed, it’s pivotal moment! – but knowing that it was truly written from the heart made it especially poignant. I cried for both Bex’s loss and yours.
Holding out hope your editors/publishers would sign off on a sequel!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Soluna
Thank you for this! I just finished The Royal We today (really!) I enjoyed it so much and loved coming here and seeing the thought that went into the alternate timeline. My given name is Elizabeth and I have a daughter named after Eleanor of Aquitaine so the name-switch was very amusing to me.
LikeLike
Colleen
Thanks so much for sharing this – as I read the book, I kept flipping back to the family tree and wishing it went back further. Fun to read your alternate history!
LikeLike
JenLWB
What a fascinating explanation! Loved the book too.
This led me to a wikipedia wormhole, the highlight of which was discovering that the real life Duke of Edinburgh (AKA Phil the Greek) is worshiped as a deity on some islands in Vanuatu…
LikeLike
Gareth
I haven’t read the book, but was “de la Poer” a reference to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rats_in_the_Walls?
LikeLike
Jessica
No, it wasn’t — I’m not familiar with Lovecraft, particularly.
LikeLike
Gareth
Fair enough, it is a funny coincidence.
LikeLike
SaraNoH
Oh, this is lovely! I have been having a lot of fun trying to imagine how you altered things and whether any of the real peripheral royals might remain in Bex’s world. I did guess that you might have saved Prince Albert Victor from an early death, but couldn’t figure out what happened to Mary of Teck. Now that we know about Georgina Lyons-Bowes, I’m hoping that Prince George caught Mary on the rebound from his brother and they lived happily ever after. So, yeah, I’ve put a little too much thought into this, but the British royal family genealogy is kind of my fantasy baseball league.
LikeLike
Heather
I’m with you — I like to imagine destiny brought Mary and George together regardless.
LikeLike
Megan
If some studio doesn’t snap this up for a movie, then Hollywood is truly run by idiots. Cannot wait for a sequel…..(so get to work)!
LikeLike
Robyn V
I started (and finished lol) the book this weekend, and I was ever so pleased with it. 😉 It really makes you wonder what life is like for Kate and Pippa and the lot; what they’re really like behind closed doors, and if they ever just want to schlub off to the 7-11 in yoga pants and flip-flops to get a slushie or something. Thanks for a fun read – it will be my staff pick for August here at the library!
LikeLike
Jessica
Oh, fantastic!! Thank you so much.
LikeLike
Robyn V
No problem! If you ever find yourself wandering through Ohio stop by – St. Clairsville Public Library. I’ll roll out the red carpet – there’s probably one in the basement somewhere. We keep everything around here.
LikeLike
Saj
When I first read this post, it would not let me leave a comment, so I’m glad I revisited today! I am crazy about history and the fact that you can alter it ever so slightly and yet keep the integrity of a Royal Family we all know almost intact is AMAZING! I’m enjoying this book so much and love it when a place I’ve been to pops up and I’m right back there as in the middle of the action! This book and you two are GENIUS! Honestly, since I started reading all I’ve wanted to do is go back to England! Fug Nation should do a pilgrimage! 😉
LikeLike
summerestherson
Y’all are pretty much the coolest. This is SOOO up my alley, and kudos to you two for being so detailed! It makes my little Anglophile, monarchy-loving heart happy! Thanks for the fascinating read!
LikeLike
hideous
Fingers crossed one of you ladies will respond to this question. Are you planning a sequel?
LikeLike
Jessica
We’re not working on one at this very moment — we’re not working on any book right this second, actually — but we definitely wouldn’t be opposed to writing a sequel. The honest truth is that it depends on if our publisher wants one!
LikeLike
Saj
Where do I send the publisher a letter asking for it? Or is there a petition I can sign? XO
LikeLike
Jessica
You can always email or tweet or snail mail Grand Central Publishing!
LikeLike
Saj
Thank you! I will try and hope other Fug Nationals do the same. XO
LikeLike
hideous
Absolutely. Now chant as one voice….seQUEL,seQUEL!!
LikeLike
Kate
Fun, crafty, absolutely loved it!!! However still so many questions left to sort out. Definitely needs a sequel and I can’t wait to read it 🙂 fingers tightly crossed!
LikeLike
amylynniebug
I just finished the audio book (your reader was excellent, and I only wanted to correct maybe two pronunciations :0), I hope she sounded like the Bex in your heads, I can’t imagine anyone else having read it!) and had to come tell you how much I enjoyed “The Royal We”. I started listening to audiobooks during migraines, but this was SO good, I saved it for non-headache days so I could actually really listen! And I started over the second it was over. Well, after I thought about it for a while and listened to the bit that told me not to pirate it. :0) I promise, no pirate-y-ness.
I will look at the new genealogy again, I see one family connection – well, sort of two since Hanover is mentioned. Grace Kelly was my cousin and of course her eldest daughter is still/ sort of/ in name only/I just forgot where I was headed with this… oof! Once again with feeling! Grace Kelly (not mentioned until the dress) and her daughter Caroline, not mentioned exactly but who is HRH Caroline of Hanover.
I wrote myself a note to see, aside from Grace, if any American ladies did become Princesses. Off the top of my head there are a few, but they wed fellas in the Middle East.
Perfect time for a new American Princess, I love that so many Royals are finally getting to marry for love, so your book (among many other lovely things!) was really timely.
Sorry to ramble, really enjoyed the book!!
LikeLike