I once read that with a historical set in England, English readers can immediately spot an American writer. I can believe that, because I think it’s the same with Texas stories. If you are born and bred here, you’re going to instantly spot a writer from, say, New York City. It doesn’t mean they aren’t a great writer. And it doesn’t necessarily spoil the story for me. But there are certain flavors and nuances of places and people that simply can’t be picked up during a few days or weeks of research, and “outsiders” who get it right are few and far between.

Because of that, I’d usually rather read stories with settings in a place I don’t know as well. It’s easier to get lost in a story when I’m not giggling about a lack of trees or rivers and lakes in east Texas, or the “flatness” of the landscape in El Paso.

Still, I’d like to say that, even if I giggle, the author might still be able to come across with a story that I’ll heartily enjoy, so I won’t say that her “misses” will totally ruin it for me.

I hate it when writers have clearly not been to where they’re writing, and there are obvious errors (especially the ones that would be solved with 10 minutes of research).

Plus, with my haphazard housekeeping skills, I have no room to protest references to everpresent mildew. Sigh.