Too Many DragonsJust in case any of you missed it, I want to make it clear. Father of Dragons is not a sequel to King of Dragons, King of Men. KODKOM is a stand alone, sorry. There will be a sequel for Father of Dragons called Lover of Ghosts. But it isn't listed at Samhain because I haven't written it yet. So any similarities between my current paperback releases relate solely to my fondness for high fantasy and unimaginative titles....
King of Dragons, King of MenComing out in paperback on October 30th, KODKOM already has a a sales rank. A less than lofty #148,745 but that means at least one person has pre-ordered it two months in advance!
promoTUESDAY: KODKOM "King of Dragons, King of Men is a true fantasy tale that involves great magical beings and ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances. The story creates a believable magical but ordinary world that begs to be explored. Throughout the tale William, Allen and Margaret explore the morass of morals that is created by the love of two men and one woman." [Sabella, Joyfully Reviewed]
The picture today is a sketch I did about half way through writing KODKOM. Anne Cain was nice enough to use it as a basis for the eventually cover design.
NEWS: King of Dragons, Kind of Men [reviews]KODKOM (as I like to call it) came out in ebook form on February 27th. The paperback release has been pushed back a little to October 16th. Sadly this will probably be a few months after I leave town--where I have the local Borders actually actively offering to hold a book signing for me. However, with a little luck I with still be working somewhere in the US of A and might be able to pop back to visit and do my own cheap-arse version of a book tour. I am currently hanging out, expecting the first full royalty report any minute now.
I was very interested in seeing the reviews for this story as I expected it might cause some consternation. KODKOM is a menage (MMF) story, but it is not erotic. I think the erotic romance genre is great, but polyamory is not just a sexual kink. In fact, in most cases polyamorous relationships take longer to become sexual and may involve less sexual activity overall as the relationship is more complex. But anyway, the first reviews are in and on the whole I am very pleased.
Speculative Romance Online says: "You won't be sending this one back to the kitchen. For those who have shied away from trying non-traditional romantic pairings because of explicit sexual content, here's a great way to increase the range of your reading palate. The bedroom door stays firmly closed, but the windows into the characters' hearts stay wide open."
Over at Fallen Angels I got a 5/5 and "recommended read" which I am showing off here. Michelle writes: "Emily Veinglory is a personal favorite of mine, just for the fact that her writing is so exquisitely rendered; it’s almost poetic sometimes. She does a most admirable job at world building here, and layers plot upon plot ever so seamlessly. Watching these three stumble along in life and love is poignantly entertaining, for sure. I love, love, love this foray into the medieval setting with a delicious, non-traditional twist. More, please!" (It would be fair to say that Michelle is a favorite of mine).
At Coffee Time Romancethe lack of explicit sex was noticed, but fortunately not a disappointment: "I expected this book to be a tale of hot sex that would keep me warm all night. Instead, I found an enchanting medieval story that will forever have a special place in my heart."
"Veinglory Blog" is the bloggy home-base of persona von data* Emily Veinglory. Emily is a writer of erotic romance, dark fantasy and gay fiction.
She is also an illustrator, crafter, blogger, poet, reviewer, adventuress and general purpose smart ass. If you don’t like Emily Veinglory you probably
won’t like this blog. If you do like Emily Veinglory you still might not like this blog. But if you Google Emily Veinglory you may well end up on this
page, and learn the answer to the question: Who the hell is Emily Veinglory?**
* hybrid of a pen name and an online avatar.
** How’s that for keyword density?***
*** That was a rhetorical question.