|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.88
| 2,342
| Aug 2000
| May 19, 2013
|
really liked it
|
3.5 rounded up to four because this book was better than just okay, and its limitations weren't in story but in execution. This novel was an entertain
3.5 rounded up to four because this book was better than just okay, and its limitations weren't in story but in execution. This novel was an entertaining romp with high drama throughout, and tight in its plot. Too bad more attention wasn't paid to detail in terms of period "feel" using correct language and minimizing contractions, as well as technique related to viewpoint consistency and minimizing redundancy. Perhaps this author pumps out too many novels too quickly and gives them short shrift in regard to editing. I write technical reviews, so there won't be a synopsis nor much of a subjective analysis. Instead, I'll concentrate on those issues that, if ignored by the author, niggle the reader into dropping stars, yet aren't well commented on by most reviewers. - The plot was excellent in general. Some redundancy in content existed--trust that your readers know the material rather than repeating it! Some of the drama near the ending was low on detail, thus, difficult to follow. The ending was abrupt, and that disappointed, though. One does like to feel the HEA rather than have it truncated in favour of book-stuffing. - Flow was good, with a consistent pace that kept the reader on their toes, although the redundancy mentioned above did make for some slow spots. The drama near the ending was too fast-paced, so it became difficult to follow at times. - Dramatic tension was fairly intense throughout the book. This is not for angst weenies. I loved this aspect of the writing, though. - Point of view appeared to be third person, multiple, with head-hopping and filter words. This means the author probably misused a hybrid with omniscient narrator in the narration portions of the novel while trying to make her POV deeper. She should read up and practice deep POV, the gold standard in romance these days. - Narration was "telling" and not "showing." This is another modern writing technique for this author to embrace. - Language was clearly intended to be Regency, with about double the average number of non-Regency words for a Regency romance (eleven), and an average number of non-British usages (four)--I don't count spellings. Three cases of incorrect words or phrases were found. 92+ contractions were used, including some which had not yet been invented by the time of the story. Each one pulls the reader out of the era, something the author should be loath to see happen in her book. Most Regency romances have less than ten, and Pride and Prejudice had only eight contractions. Austen only used them for lower class and silly people. Authors who leave them in their books tend to be either amateur or lazy. - One punctuation error, a missing possessive, was noted. - Regency correctness errors included use of a presentation dress for a regular gown--I'm told that presentation dresses had panniers and impossible trains. In the Regency, "drab" was a colour, not a descriptor. Brothers and sisters never, ever danced together. Since dancing was akin to the courtship process, they could not dance together due to the rules of consanguinity. This is alluded to in Jane Austen's "Emma." - Characterization was consistent for the most part. Secondary characters were more likeable than the protagonists, whose mistrust of each other was so overplayed (the redundancy I mentioned) that it put them in a bad light. The protagonists' waffling almost made them into inconsistent characters--good one day, horrid/stupid the next. - The author had some good visuals, particularly with regard to clothing and people. Scene-setting using all the senses was evident, and more of this would have enhanced the book. - The romance in purest terms was harder to swallow. There was clearly healthy passion in a sexual sense; however, it was quite clear that this was lust not love. The animosity, particularly from the hero, made any development of love hard to believe. Little in the way of flirtation or banter or understanding between the two took place to initiate such feelings, and the male protagonist was indifferent to the joys of the family and the heroine just enough that it was difficult to accept him capable of being lovable or loving. But the three little words popped out because of the drama near the end, so it must be true. I found it to seem too convenient. - I commend the author for getting all her titles and inheritances correct. With such a large cast, it was certainly a lot of balls in the air. - The cover is clever due to the artwork with the cards, and I especially like that it's different than all those polyester-clad, shirtless, blow-dried covers we so often see in Regency romance. The balance of the title fonts seems just a bit off to me, as if they were forced to fit, but the scale is good for an Amazon thumbnail, which is important. The lady in the artwork isn't as pretty as I would have preferred given the heroine's descriptions in the book. Overall, this is a high-angst story well told, with excellent twists and turns that only enhance that dramatic tension. The background familial tale is entertaining as well. I believe this book would be stunning with removal of redundancies, use of deep point of view, POV changes by section clearly marked, and no contractions. A bit of reading on these gold standard practices, plus a good editor could help. The author's brilliant voice would still be front and centre. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 28, 2023
|
Jul 31, 2023
|
Aug 01, 2023
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||||
| B0BXHCQT8T
| 3.97
| 417
| unknown
| Mar 03, 2023
|
it was amazing
|
An almost perfectly edited, unique version of the cabin in the woods premise done extremely well, this was my introduction to Lilian's Hot Mush series
An almost perfectly edited, unique version of the cabin in the woods premise done extremely well, this was my introduction to Lilian's Hot Mush series of books, novellas that promise an option of steam and a definite strong romantic theme. I approve. I write technical reviews, so there won't be a synopsis or a lot of subjective analysis here, rather, I'll be looking at the details that would tend to make readers drop a star where most reviewers never mention the issue. - The plot is based on a common theme, yet it's very different in the way it's been carried out, so (mini-expose) the steam doesn't happen early on in the book like most cabin in the woods novels. Does that spoil the hot mush reading experience? I don't think so--it's better this way, as the drama is drawn out. - Pace is quick but not overwhelming, so you're not bored, yet you don't ever feel left behind either. - Point of view is third person, multiple, with head-hopping. Honestly, if Lory Lilian could rein herself in and stick to one point of view per scene, her books would be pretty much perfect. - Dramatic tension is moderate for the most part. - The author used some telling in the narrative, with some filter words. More consistent use of showing language would enhance her story telling. - Prose was excellent with a fine feel of Regency language without overwhelming the reader with difficult words. Below average use of non-Regency words (three) and Americanisms (two) were found. - I found two extra commas, both associated with appositives that didn't need them. - I didn't much care for the summary in the middle of the book that tried to pass quickly through time. The section reminded me of an epilogue. It was too rushed and was done in a voice incongruent with the rest of the book. As a result, I felt separated from the feel of the romance, and almost felt like skimming. - As for Regency factual errors, a Regency carriage typically only holds four adults. They just aren't very big. Also, the author used "Miss Bennet" for Elizabeth where the people would have called her "Miss Elizabeth" in real life. Only Jane was Miss Bennet. - Ms. Lilian is excellent at drawing images, whether it be characters or scenes, and both were well-represented in this book. I have no complaints. - The romance developed quickly in comparison to other romances, but it was believable and fit the "mush" description that Lilian was hoping for in this series. Kudos to the author. - I don't care for the cover. Are those people AI? They look like they came from a wax museum and they appear too old for Darcy and Elizabeth. Darcy looks a bit hung over. Elizabeth is pretty, though. The cottage is hard to make out at first due to the style of the art work, but once I got it, I liked it well enough. It doesn't go well with the style at the top, though. The font for the title is too fine and won't be easily read at a thumbnail scale. Lory Lilian is an excellent writer and these days, keeps an excellent editor to enhance that writing. I had just come from reading two JAFFs that were pretty terrible in terms of editing, so this was my warm blanket book. This team proves that a self-published book doesn't mean you have to tolerate being knocked out of the story for mistakes practically every page. In Lory's recent books, you sit back and enjoy her excellent distinctive stories, full of the energy in terms of angst and steam that readers love, without any distractions at all. What a pleasure! Disclaimer: I'm a JAFF author, and my reviews might be considered a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and this review is honest and impartial. I write my reviews for both the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jun 04, 2023
|
Jun 06, 2023
|
Jun 04, 2023
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| 0449005844
| 9780449005842
| 0449005844
| 3.97
| 4,523
| Jun 29, 1999
| Jul 05, 2000
|
really liked it
|
This was a delightful story with excellent prose, though written in simple, modern English and not historical, and thus without a great deal of care f
This was a delightful story with excellent prose, though written in simple, modern English and not historical, and thus without a great deal of care for Regency language and contractions. Loss of a star for the loss of that Regency and British "feel" and some blatant editing lapses. I write technical reviews so you won't see a ton of subjective reactions or a synopsis. Instead, you'll see the little issues that bug readers into dropping a star because they cringe when they see them as they read them, and most reviewers eschew writing about these small items. The plot is excellent and doesn't get into any side plots that are unnecessary to the completion of the story arc. There's a bit of redundancy in showing the disability of the female protagonist, which doesn't aid in the flow of the book. The story takes its time, which does causes some slow spots in the flow, which is languid at best in the first place. Don't expect a fast pace here. Yet there's still dramatic tension throughout, and it hits some very high points several times in the book. Point of view is third person multiple, deep, with no head-hopping. In one case, the author's POV was used ("response was unprintable"), which was confusing. You're not Jane Austen, dear. If you want to use her style, do it in the whole book, but don't just dump in one line and think it'll seem normal. It seems odd. Showing is done well, with an absence of filter words. Language is clear, concise, and used lovely prose, but alas, it didn't contribute well to a certain type of scene-setting. The story was set in Britain in the Regency and there was little indication as such within the prose other than vaguely in descriptions of places and apparel. Contractions were liberally used, jarring me over 60 times, and that wasn't all of them. 17 non-period words/phrases were counted, triple that of the average Regency novel, and three common non-British words/phrases were repeatedly used. This pulls the reader out of the sense of when and where the book takes place. Two words were misused, again causing confusion to the reader. There were no "big words" that the reader had to look up. A certain power to the author's modern words did help the feel of the book, though, especially in dialogue using argument. So all was not lost in language. The author couldn't make up her mind if a lady's suitor was named Robert or Robin. This wasn't just once, but half a dozen times. In several locations, closing quotation marks were missing, but this was the only punctuation error detected. Scene-setting was a good effort, but often was unclear. For example, the castle's location and layout were not described well enough to know what was happening at certain critical points in the book. It was the same for the gardens. The author tries hard to use these visual points to add life to the book, but it backfires when the descriptions lead to confusion with the reader. In other types of scene-setting, the author is exceptional, such as in clothing as a way to show aspects of the character. The development of the romance is so-so. It's clear that the two should be in love long before they admit it to themselves, but they won't even admit slight feelings when the author has done enough in the book to validate such. With such powerful changes between them, there would be more profound reactions in their emotions at earlier times in the book. It leaves the reader thinking the protagonists are lying to themselves and the reader. Tie that in with the overall slow pace, and it starts to feel like a romance rip-off. The cover is pretty weak. It's pale and monotone and certainly wouldn't make me run out and buy the book. Even though it's got some story themes in the artwork, it's not redeeming enough when one hasn't read the story. The cover must say "Buy me" over all those other livelier books on the shelf, and the only thing this one has going for it is the reputation and name of the author herself. This is the first book I've read by this well-known author, and I was surprised in the extreme that she got such a winning reputation with these handicaps behind her writing. However, the plot is what saved her. Even with its slow pace and redundancies, it's charming and unusual for a romance novel, and the twists and turns add enough angst to make the reader feel drama. I doubt I could ever give her five stars if the contractions and plain (boring, modern) language are her style, though. But I'd probably read another of her books, even though I know I'd be cringing over those items, just because the story is so good. Disclaimer: I write Regency romance and some might say this review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. They are intended to benefit both the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Mar 17, 2023
|
Mar 23, 2023
|
Mar 24, 2023
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| B09Z9GR7BT
| 3.93
| 457
| Apr 22, 2020
| Apr 30, 2022
|
really liked it
|
This book claims to be farcical but it's really not. There are some elements that are almost ridiculous, but the humour is all tolerable and only one
This book claims to be farcical but it's really not. There are some elements that are almost ridiculous, but the humour is all tolerable and only one element of an interesting story line. I cut a star for editing and style, which is a surprise given the name of the editor. This will be a technical review without a synopsis or much in the way of personal reflections on the book. The story comes from an interesting plot bunny and comes off as a bit rushed--the occasional scene could have been fleshed out better. Side plots fit and aren't a deterrent or tangent. Pace was fairly quick, with no slow spots. Unfortunately, in this third person multiple book, there was a fair bit of head-hopping, a deterrent to an easy read. Language is generally good Regency, but there were nine non-Regency words or phrases that I found, which would be above average for a full-length novel. Two Americanisms made their way into the book. In addition, the trite "breaking their fast" shows up more than once, which always grates on me. Austen said "breakfasting." In usage, "supper" was used when dinner would have been the meal at that time of day. In Regency faux-pas, the introduction is always to the lady first, then by hierarchy. Think of it as the person should be able to turn the introduction down. In another case, one would never have said "Aunt Catherine;" it would have been "Lady Catherine," regardless of familial relationship. Lady Audrey would be the daughter of an earl, not the wife of an earl. The wife of an earl is Lady , where in this case, I believe the author used Matlock. Characterization was good, with no one becoming a caricature and no specific traits being over-used, yet the characters remained true to many traits that were shown in canon. Scene-setting is fairly good in this book, utilizing all the senses to describe the situation and environs so the reader gets more out of the story. The timing of the romance was just right. It was believable, having been shown through the story that it was slowly developing at a reasonable rate. The cover is not bad, having an Elizabeth that entices the reader to come with her to join this story, and an in-character Darcy waiting for the reader and Elizabeth. Balance is off, with the author's name being crammed in and the title sitting at a not-quite-balanced position at the top. Some curlicues on the bottom might have helped, but I'm no artist. Thing is, these are still polyester models, which I've gone on record as disliking. They're pretty nice polyester models, but they still look fakey to me. Except I love Elizabeth's expression. I'm not certain if that would tip the balance on buyer excitement or not, but it is certainly a plus. Overall, this is an engaging story well told with a few errors, but not too many more than your average JAFF novel. It's just that Jo Abbott doesn't usually leave anything on the table, which is a huge surprise to me. Did the author write after the editor edited? I can't be certain. This is my first Elin Eriksen book, and I'd read another. Disclaimer: I'm a JAFF author, and some might say that this review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are always honest and impartial. I write them for the benefit of both the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Nov 03, 2023
Feb 06, 2023
|
Nov 05, 2023
Feb 07, 2023
|
Feb 06, 2023
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| 1735186643
| B09T4WYS5Z
| 4.36
| 815
| unknown
| Apr 01, 2022
|
it was amazing
|
Not perfect, but since I kept a few notes of the author's lovely prose, I couldn't very well knock off part of a star for fewer than average technical
Not perfect, but since I kept a few notes of the author's lovely prose, I couldn't very well knock off part of a star for fewer than average technical glitches, could I? Besides, I cried! Technical review: - Plot is well thought out and complete with no tangents or holes and contains special twists that throw the reader for a loop. Unique premise. - Pacing is regular throughout, with no slow spots. Heavier on the narrative than dialogue. - Angst (dramatic tension) is moderate throughout, with a few high spots. - Large blocks of telling with some filter words in a mostly showing book. - Third person alternating, deep point of view done well. - Good Regency language, with no exceptionally difficult words. Four non-Regency words or phrases, six contractions, four Americanisms, two homophones, a misused phrase, and an overused word. Some exceptionally memorable prose. - Periods should have been used with Mr. and Mrs. since they were used in the Regency, otherwise, no punctuation problems. - On numerous occasions, the author stated that there was no punishment for seducing a young girl. This is wrong. Statutory rape was age 15 in 1810 (two years' jail time), and seducing a lady for purposes of marrying her for her dowry was punishable by two to five years' jail time. (Thomas Edlyne Tomlins, The Law Dictionary...) This would have applied to Mrs. Younge as well. People in the Regency would be well aware of this law, and therefore this would comprise some of E's shock at Wickham's perfidy in canon. This information has been widely disseminated by me in two of my novels and on social media since 2019. However, if you can misinterpret how the food is set on the table, maybe you didn't read the end notes. Twice. - Scene setting was good for a book of this type, showing the situations by using the senses to enhance the story, though the visual was leaned upon the most. The Regency research done was exceptional. Details helped the feeling of being there, and as noted before, the language of that detail overtook the very few exceptions to proper Regency wording. E.g., literature, gaol setup, medicines. - The romance development was realistic and tugged at the heartstrings. I had teary moments at 60%, 65%, and 85%, much more than your typical excellent JAFF book. Causing me to have tears immediately puts a book among my faves. Some might criticize the protagonists' forgiveness as too easy, but those people do this in the case of every book. I personally think that part was balanced to the depth of the sins. - The cover is very good, reaching out to the passing reader and saying "buy me" for its unique look, colour balance, and overall balance. Its size is perfect for the Amazon thumbnail. The pictures also tell some of the story of the novel. I admire the work that went into making this perfect. The book is in my coveted "loved it" folder, where only the best of the five-star books go. To gush too much on the story would be to reveal spoilers that I didn't know when I read it, and my expectations were in acceptance of sadness, the author is such a good writer. No wonder this book keeps turning up on the "Best of" lists! Congratulations, Heather Moll. Keep 'em coming! Disclaimer: I'm a JAFF author, and some might claim this review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. I write them for the benefit of both the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 2023
|
Feb 05, 2023
|
Feb 01, 2023
|
Kindle Edition
| |||||||||||||||
| 0062867474
| 9780062867476
| B0796SN24S
| 3.96
| 4,193
| Feb 26, 2019
| Mar 26, 2019
|
really liked it
|
Star lost due to editing errors (mainly contractions) and book stuffing. Otherwise, this would be a five star book for excellent writing and angst. I w Star lost due to editing errors (mainly contractions) and book stuffing. Otherwise, this would be a five star book for excellent writing and angst. I write technical reviews, so no synopsis will be found in this review. Rather, the niggling things that cause readers to drop a star are noted. With this high a rating, a positive set of comments should be expected in most areas. The plot is tight, with no unnecessary tangents or gaping holes, and is fully resolved by the end of the novel. Pacing is steady at a pretty good clip due to excellent dialogue, good use of language (only two words that had to be looked up and 9 non-Regency words), and good use of deep point of view, third person alternating. The biggest issue I had with the book that threw me out of the period again and again was the contractions, an easy-to-fix situation that amounts to pure laziness on behalf of the author and editor. Not only were there contractions used by people who would not have said them (genteel, well-bred people), but some hadn't even been invented yet by the story time-line, assumed to be 1820ish by the hints in the book. Also, some were used where an alternate sentence construction would sound more to the period. The author had fairly good use of showing and not telling, but once in a while used a filter word (felt, saw) with a protagonist, taking the reader out of the tightness of the deep point of view. Some of the language was superb and poetic, though, causing me to very much admire Long's eloquence, in particular, in her love scenes. Characterization was excellent, as were the descriptions of the protagonists. We felt we knew them. Long is an expert at scene-setting, and her descriptions of the environs use all the senses to their height, something to be admired to a huge extent by other authors. This creates a fullness in a scene that isn't always there in a novel, even in good novels. Yet this book oozed with exceptional pictures of the exact situation in so many cases, we could see ourselves in the scene. It fit with her close POV. Angst (dramatic tension) is at least moderate through most of the story, with quite a number of high spots, so if you like a lot of late-night "I can't put it down," this is a great book. The development of the romance had appropriate timing, and the use of the introspection of each character assisted greatly in the sense of their position related to the other at any given time, yet it didn't feel like the author was telling. There was a strong sexual pull as part of this romance, and the steamy scenes were developed with expertise that demonstrates the maturity of Long's writing. Nothing was gratuitous, rather, sensual enhancement was the rule in these scenes, causing the reader to be titillated to an appropriate extent. You can still read this on the bus. The book ended at 88%, meaning that there was 12% book stuffing with an excerpt from the next book. I always thought that was cheap, shoddy salesmanship and I thought it had gone out of style. Well, no one told Julie Anne Long. Shame on you. I can't give a five star review to a stuffed book. The cover is good, since it portrays the sense of the book, including that stairwell, yet has a look that goes along with the ubiquitous large-skirted gowns look that is so common in Regency romances today. Kudos to Julie Anne Long for having a proper Regency gown and hairstyle on this book, though, even if the man's cuff looks a bit 1990's. The colour pops and overall, I think this one would say "Buy me!" I loved this tale, and pretty much expected to, given the track record I've had with loving Julie Anne Long's books. I just wish she'd take the extra effort and help her readers keep in the period feeling by removing that last few non-Regency words and all those contractions. That would make my day. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 27, 2023
|
Jan 30, 2023
|
Jan 27, 2023
|
ebook
| ||||||||||||||
| 1737335697
| 9781737335696
| B0BNLVFGW2
| 4.18
| 750
| unknown
| Dec 14, 2022
|
it was amazing
|
A book with merely a short burst of major angst is a surprise from angst queen L.L. Diamond, yet this book would be a one of those sweet Regency roman
A book with merely a short burst of major angst is a surprise from angst queen L.L. Diamond, yet this book would be a one of those sweet Regency romance JAFFs if it weren’t for the twist at the end. The newness of a cast of characters that apparently leads to a series of stand-alone novels is the draw here. As usual, my review will be technical, focussed on the items that most reviewers don’t comment on, but leave readers cold and cause them to drop a star. The plot is a pretty straightforward romance story arc using some new characters and a minor but important change within the canon characters, and the book has an interesting turn of events after the end of the main story arc. There are a number of repeats of canon in the beginning and some redundancy regarding the Austen retelling that could be considered a bit too much by mid-book since there are so many characters to tell the “tolerable” story to. This is a minor point. The story is complete and has a satisfying ending. The excellent banter leads the pace of the story as a full-on clip, with forward flow that moves and never stalls. There is good problem-solving by the characters that assists this quick forward flow. You won’t be bored reading this book. The voice is a third person narrative alternating point of view, with the two main characters in deep POV, done well, with no head-hopping or filter words. Language has an entertaining Regency feel without non-Regency words or Americanisms to distract from the feel of the era. I found no other editing errors. With the awesome beta team Diamond has used on this book, plus her own stickler qualities (I’ve beta’d for her on her early novels but not this one) this is no surprise. Characterizations were satisfying, especially since Diamond had to go through and introduce a number of new characters for a series. Each of the new characters was fairly consistent and interesting, though a couple of people probably got more air time than they deserved given it was already a lot of new faces. Darcy and Elizabeth had traits that matched up with those Austen offered in canon, while focussing on specifics that suited this particular piece of fiction. We get a slight divergence for Bingley that’s totally believable. The romance development was realistic and didn’t come too quickly. Rather, the interactions showed the development at a pace that worked, and that magical dialogue that’s trademark Diamond helped the relationship along winningly. The only thing I didn’t care for was some waffling on the part of both protagonists near the culmination, however, it was likely intended to build a little dramatic tension for some readers who appreciate that sort of material in a book (like me). Unfortunately, the repeat of the doubts came off as a redundancy, which would nag some readers. Where scenic visuals were used, they were very Regency appropriate and made the story even better. The author sneaked in a number of technical and historical concepts and situations to enhance the story and make the reader have an even fuller experience within the novel. These details set this author’s writing apart from the average JAFF novel. The cover is quite distinctive, which will differentiate it on the shelves or on Amazon. I’m not crazy about the petals at the lady’s shoulder since they look like angel wings. Otherwise, the beautiful main image is so unlike most covers as to make it definitely stand out, and the symbol of the rose is from within the story line--both are winning cover points. Attention to balance and to details such as curlicues show that the cover artist is a trained graphic artist. Diamondback covers are always good ones. On a final note, even though I found the main story arc of this book to be low angst and an easy read, which is not my typical style of book, I loved the exceptional characters and the distinctive story line that was offered and look forward to the next book in the series. The romance between D&E kept the reader waiting for more and delivered a warm level of passion to keep the reader spellbound. I’d tend to chastise an author for a diversion such as the twist at the end since it’s really not part of the main story line, but instead, a distraction. On the other hand, that plot twist contained the only strong angst in the novel, capturing the imagination within the tension. A highly recommended read. Disclaimer: I’m a JAFF author, and this review could be considered by some to be a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are all honest and impartial. I write them to benefit both the reader and the author. I’m friends with L.L. Diamond. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||
| B01GAL2ND4
| 3.97
| 401
| unknown
| May 28, 2016
|
liked it
|
This one was hard to read because although it had some strong bright spots, overall it was slow, overloaded with narrative and sex. My reviews are tech This one was hard to read because although it had some strong bright spots, overall it was slow, overloaded with narrative and sex. My reviews are technical, so I'll be focusing on the elements that niggle a reader and cause them to drop a star, yet are rarely mentioned by most reviewers. The plot was rather non-existent. Instead, we got a series of vignettes about D&E over the time that followed their marriage. Even so, the story had a clear ending with an epilogue for those who like them. Flow was forward and at a steady, rather slow pace. The balance of dialogue and narrative was heavy on the narrative so that in places, the story dragged to the point of being boring. The author needed to up the pace with more action. Point of view was mixed, with head-hopping. It was probably intended to be third person omniscient, but it came across as third person multiple at times. In two locations, the author had a character "see" themselves blush. This is one of those things that can't happen unless the writing is pure omniscient, yet the scene had not been written in that style. The author utilized filter words, which is a way to tell the protagonist's emotions rather than show them. Language was beautiful in places and pedantic in others. The former was almost poetic and worth a re-read. The latter was found in those long narrative sections. Nine non-Regency words and one non-Regency expression were used, and three Americanisms were detected. This is a normal rate for a JAFF book. Punctuation was good for the most part, with two missing closing quotes and a missing apostrophe. Canon deviations included using the girl Becky as the youngest; however, this was clearly intentional and worked well as one of the more entertaining parts of the book. Regency errors included five and ten course meals. Since a course includes somewhere around 8-12 hearty dishes not including the dessert course, there never tends to be more than two courses served. Another was calling a waistcoat a vest. Though not precisely wrong, it's not common nomenclature. Lady Matlock would never be called Lady Ellen. That would be an earl's daughter's name. Also, her Ladyship is incorrect--you do not capitalize the L. Referring to people's lives as a "story" within in dialogue is not quite right. You wouldn't say such a thing. Much of the dialogue was excellent. It included banter and a child's strange yet amusing perspective, among others. More of Lilian's dialogue would have helped to create more interest in the book. The characterization was good, including for the new characters. You really felt you knew some of them. With all the narrative, one would expect more scene-setting, and it was there, showing the beauty of the story. This would be the parts I mentioned earlier that I loved in the narrative. However, it was almost all visual. The romance is complete since this is a book about a married couple. Even so, the author does a lovely job of showing the solidification of their relationship throughout the book. The main problem is the sex scenes--there are too many with detail (not detail like erotica, but still they are rather specific scenes). I love me a steamy scene, but this was like beating the reader on the head with the fact that the couple was super hot for each other. At a sensible point, the author should have known to deviate past the detail and show without telling every movement every single time. This has been done, but not early enough and not often enough. Instead, the sex becomes as boring as those long sections of narrative mentioned earlier. The cover is a play on the previous book, Rainy Days, which had a plain rose. It's different enough to stand out and attract interest among readers. I personally think it's corny, but I also think I'd be in the minority. I believe most readers would love it and it would attract them enough to buy the book because of it. For an overview, the story is just ordinary, and bogged down by long tracts of text and too-frequent sex. It has its moments in excellent prose and dialogue and some sparkling wit, but not enough to redeem it. In all honesty, I can't really recommend this book without a revamp. Disclaimer: I'm a JAFF author, and some might claim this review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. I write them for both the author and the reader. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 10, 2022
|
Dec 18, 2022
|
Dec 10, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B00Q92RXJO
| 4.11
| 9,861
| May 17, 2014
| Feb 2021
|
really liked it
|
This is not my normal type of reading so I'm going to write a slightly different review than my normal technical review. This is a LIGHT romance. Empha This is not my normal type of reading so I'm going to write a slightly different review than my normal technical review. This is a LIGHT romance. Emphasis is clearly on the light. You don't need a high school diploma to understand it, the simplicity is so obvious. The hardest part was remembering all the names of the characters, because there were some who were extraneous to the plot. Ouch! I shouldn't have used such a big word for this book--no one who reads this book can understand such big words. Nonetheless, the story line, as predictable as it was, provided some entertainment. Some descriptive scenes were too deep for the need, and bogged down the story. I don't need to know that the author knows exactly how to make a barbed wire fence, for example, to get the drift of the danger that comes later. The detail was too much. There were a couple of errors I caught, but otherwise the editing was stellar. The author used flat for apartment in the US. The word saving was used for savings. And good old Zane "stilled loved the place." Research seemed well done as far as I could tell. You'd have to ask some specialists about details regarding the military situations, though. The romance through letters trope was used well; however, the hero having second thoughts near the end and the whole town coming out to cheer him on was too goofy for words. It just didn't fit his character. The novel was more than a little formulaic, but for the most part, the author applied it well. It works. Even with this nit-picking, I'd still recommend this novel for someone who loves a cheesy contemporary romance novel. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Sep 12, 2022
|
Sep 14, 2022
|
Sep 12, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B08GZPF99G
| 3.00
| 5
| unknown
| Sep 15, 2020
|
it was ok
|
This book was a horrible example of what happens when you don't hire an editor--it was difficult to keep your head in the time period, never mind to m
This book was a horrible example of what happens when you don't hire an editor--it was difficult to keep your head in the time period, never mind to make sense of it with all the errors. The book is also an example to show that sexy, romantic banter is not sniping, hurtful arguments. And to top it off, it's an example that sex scenes don't make up for generally weak writing. My reviews are technical, so there will be little subjective material here. I capture the issues that most reviewers forget about, but that turn off readers and cause the loss of stars. First, because I didn't finish the book, I was unable to tell whether the plot made for a full story arc. The story idea itself was clever, if a little uneven in the execution. The part I read was fairly well paced and flowed forward without deviations from the main story line. The point of view was third person multiple, with plenty of head-hopping to confuse the reader into wondering whose point of view was being represented. At times, when the point of view was steady, there was excellent deep point of view utilized with showing style, though filter words (e.g., the protagonist felt, saw) did creep in on occasion. Language was reasonable for the Regency (1796 is the book's setting, the long Regency), with the exception of a much greater than average number of non-Regency words and phrases for a Regency romance. Some examples include bratty, stressed/stressing, yeah, nope, okay, alright, timetable, foyer, and staff for words (not a complete list), and modern no-nos like "sucked into," "you're not the boss of me," "brutally honest," and "she was going to lose it." These knock the reader out of the feel of the era with a sledgehammer. In addition, the author knocked the reader further out of the story with Americanisms that just would never make it into the mouth of a British person. For example, gotten, and stores instead of shops. There were erroneous words and typos such as an invented word dopily, drug for dragged, bare for bear, to for too, and groomsman for groom. Over five dozen contractions were counted in the part I read of the book. Though contractions were used in the Regency, they were rarely used, and mostly by foolish and silly people, in particular, from lower classes. Some of the contractions the author used weren't even invented yet. A good rule of thumb on how many contractions to use in a Regency novel is Pride and Prejudice: it had eight, and most were by servants and Lydia. I'd keep them out of the mouths of peers. Punctuation errors included extra periods, and hyphens used for the em-dash. Parenthesis were used, which are a no-no in fiction (commas and em-dashes are used to set off parenthetical phrases). Style issues included multiple instances of the POV character "seeing" themselves (e.g., she can't see her face change colour). Once in a while, the present tense slipped in. There were copied phrases from Jane Austen that were so out of context that they didn't work. The author had sentence fragments that weren't style, but were just poor writing. A continuity error of saying five thousand when it should have been seven thousand was detected. Regency errors included referring to "their" bedroom instead of the master's and mistress's separate chambers, simple bread and soup for dinner, hiring a maid to cook, and confusing shooting with hunting when they were separate things. Wearing a 20 year old gown for a wedding that had panniers and a stomacher would have been next to impossible to remake. Characterization was a bit uneven. The female protagonist was difficult to like, and the male protagonist was inconsistent. Some minor characters weren't used to the extent they could have been, yet others were annoyingly present with no purpose but for us to wish they'd leave the room. The descriptions of the hero and heroine were over done. Descriptions used for scene-setting used all five senses, so that part of the book was well done. The romance development needed help. We find out quite by surprise that the male protagonist has been in love with the heroine for some time, yet he shows little in the way of romantic love for her, more a desire to dominate her and enjoy sex with her. The female protagonist insists she detests the male protagonist but is extremely sexually forward for the time period. This is just a ploy to get in some sex scenes early in the story rather than to actually work at developing the romance. There is lots of dialogue between them that had potential to bond them, but it was biting, vicious arguments that set them back, and it did the opposite of causing tension in the reader--after a while, it was so irritating, you wanted to throw the book across the room. Where was the clever banter from these two? The sex scenes were well written and titillating, while not overly explicit. The beef I have about them is that they occurred too early in the development of the plot. The characters weren't ready for sex at that time. It was as if the author wanted a sexy book and just twisted her plot to suit. Angst was intended to be moderate, but as an angst lover, I didn't get a sense that I cared that these two weren't getting together, because they didn't strike me enough as deserving it, so there wasn't the level of tension that the author probably planned for. The cover has a model in a modern polyester gown that is no way something from 1796, where a round gown with an Empire waist made of a natural material would have been in style. The text isn't quite balanced, but it's close. The scale is good for an Amazon thumbnail. However, next to other Regency romances, this does not scream "Buy me." It's a bit pretty, but ordinary. The author makes an end note that she wrote this book when she was eighteen and then went back and did some work on it. I wish she'd hired a good Regency-knowledgeable editor for it, as well as learned to spell out her contractions. It's pure laziness to use them. We as authors fuss over spelling, punctuation, grammar, formatting, cover art, etc, and yet we can't even make an effort to make the book sound like it was in the period it was written for? Give me a break. This sounds like a very negative review, and it is, despite my efforts to find the good parts of the book. However, I did read 78% of this book for some reason. It was boring, repetitive, low tension, full of Regency errors, yet there was enough there in the writing to keep me going for a while (I started wanting to quit pretty early on, though). This means the writer should take heed of all the issues above and keep at it. Fix those errors. Learn about point of view and head hopping. Watch to make your heroine more likeable and your banter teasing. You can do it. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 26, 2022
|
Aug 29, 2022
|
Aug 26, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B071Y4TLK6
| 4.17
| 733
| Apr 18, 2017
| Apr 18, 2017
|
really liked it
|
In trying to decipher why this book was such a slow read, I realized it was the lack of conflict. It was not so bad that I had a hard time finishing i
In trying to decipher why this book was such a slow read, I realized it was the lack of conflict. It was not so bad that I had a hard time finishing it, but it seemed I was reading it forever without a real sense of wanting to turn the pages. Even so, I enjoyed it. My review will not be a synopsis, it will be a technical evaluation. These aspects are often what reviewers miss yet what bother readers to the point of finding the book worth fewer stars. The story arc was complete, with a few side stories that were realistically tied to the main story line. The intention of the plot was a good one, fresh and interesting, but where the story failed was in drama that comes from conflict. The only conflict came from introspection as the characters changed, and that was not enough. The initial narrative was engaging, but by the end, it was the same old thing over again. This boredom led to the sense of a slow pace, even though there was nothing technical to show for any delays in the story's rate of development. That is not to say it is a bad story line. It was just slow due to low angst. Language was well done, keeping the reader engaged due to use of a good Regency tone. A few non-Regency words were used, but the number of them and even the selection was within the norm for a book of this length. They included bored, obsession, trousseau, chuckled, heading, normal, "wedding breakfast," reaction, mesmerised, intervention, and staff. In terms of British language, "write" was used where "write to" would have been appropriate, as well as "I will" and "we will" where the English would have said "I shall" and "we shall." I noted a case of a filter word that could easily have been changed: "felt" to "was." There were additional filter words that could have helped the book become more of a deep read if corrected. In terms of point of view, for the most part, the book was in third person, alternating, but there were cases of head-hopping when the author was clearly too deeply into the characters' points of view to be speaking on behalf of an omniscient narrator. A canon error was having the Gardiner children be Elinor 7, and Edward 8, when Austen is clear that there are two older girls of 6 and 8 and two younger boys. We have a spelling issue with Elinor and Eleanor for the same character. A Regency error is the concept of "compromising" which is a modern Regency romance concept. In the Regency, the word "compromise" meant "to settle a dispute by mutual concessions." In addition, the mention of "ten courses" and "five courses" was excessive for the Regency. Two courses was the norm for a lavish Regency meal, since a single course was already enough to stuff the most hungry eater. In addition, the author uses the word "courses" when she means "refreshments." A modern phrase was used: "what have you done with my..." and this is quite off-putting. Characterization is consistent, if unusual. Darcy is more brooding than we are accustomed to, in fact, his continual self-recrimination is a bit of a downer that isn't typical of Austen's Darcy. However, the author does a good job of showing his character development, so the change makes it worthwhile. New characters are well-drafted and fit the story well. Lilian always includes some lovely scene-setting to perk up the senses in her books, and this one is no exception. The cover is a good one, in that it's different enough to stand out when set against all those other JAFF covers that look the same. It tells the story of the book inside as well. The choice of silhouettes saves me criticizing the book for the blow-dried Darcy! In sum, this is a long book with a lack of traditional conflict, so be prepared for the low-boil angst of introspection instead of heavy drama. It's a worthwhile read with a fresh story concept, though. Disclaimer: I'm a JAFF author, and some might say that this review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. I write them for the benefit of both the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 22, 2022
|
May 05, 2022
|
Apr 22, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B08QGS8XD2
| 3.78
| 150
| unknown
| Dec 12, 2020
|
it was amazing
|
This novella is a 4.5 star book with only minor technical errors and a light and pleasing story. The book is low angst with some out of consecutive sc
This novella is a 4.5 star book with only minor technical errors and a light and pleasing story. The book is low angst with some out of consecutive scenes that are the only thing that mar its excellent prose and story. I don't write normal reviews. You won't get a synopsis from me. Instead, I write technical reviews so readers are aware that they may find issues within the book that can snap them out of the comfort zone and cause them to drop stars in their reviews. The plot is a complete story arc without unnecessary side plots, typical for a book of this length. Nothing is wanting in terms of the completeness of the story. The book ends with a full chapter of excellent prose in a non-explicit but extremely steamy wedding night scene that is slightly an aside from the story and could have been dropped. The end line is precious. Some events within the story are out of order without time line tags, which can be slightly confusing. Flow is a pleasant pace, not too fast and not too slow. Language is enjoyable for the most part, with excellent canon tone. The language of the letter is mesmerizing, it's so well-written. Use of words didn't include anything that had to be looked up, though, so the tone suited your average JAFF reader. There are a few errors, and I hope the author corrects the e-version. She has used non-Regency mesmerized, libido, and synapses: only three words where most JAFF books have a half-dozen such words. The American "I will" was used where the British would have said "I shall." Typos included "helps" for "help," "overcome" for "overcame," and a possessive was used for a plural. The book refers to the envelope of a letter when letters did not have such. They were merely folded and a blank side of the writing paper served as the envelope. Scene-setting is simplistic and brief yet it works for a book this short. Characterization is more or less parallel with canon. At one point, the story refers to "the older woman," and I think that means Elizabeth. It's an inconvenient choice of words. To say "the lady" in comparison with a child would have been sufficient. The cover is awful. It doesn't stand out next to other JAFF covers and say "Buy Me." The colours are on the dull side, the layout is awkward, the font choice isn't good for small size as on Amazon (you can't even read the author name!), and I tend to dislike floral covers for the simple reason that they say nothing at all about the story. A better choice would have been to select a cover that indicated a key scene in the story and used bolder colours and fonts. Overall, this is a pleasant read with excellent prose that pulls you into the Regency feel quite well. This author has a knack with words. Those who prefer a so-called clean book can just skip the last chapter down to the final words of the last paragraph and there you go: happy. Those who love steam will enjoy the well-executed private marital love scene within the final chapter, which will definitely make your toes curl despite the lack of detail. Disclaimer: I'm a JAFF author, and my reviews might be considered a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. I write them to benefit both the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 18, 2022
|
Apr 22, 2022
|
Apr 18, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B09RH9SWWJ
| 4.28
| 562
| unknown
| Jan 28, 2022
|
it was amazing
|
Apparently this is a re-edited re-release. I never read the first version, so I only get to comment on the shiny new version, which shows excellent ed
Apparently this is a re-edited re-release. I never read the first version, so I only get to comment on the shiny new version, which shows excellent editing. The excellent story deserves an excellent editor to make it shine, and it does. My reviews are technical reviews so they don't dwell a lot on big picture, rather, they look at details that could put a reader off. For a synopsis or spoilers, you have to look to another review. The plot is set up so there's no choice but to have a great deal of tension because the protagonists will be separated. There are chances for them to get out of their difficulties, but they can't save face and maintain their good character while doing so. Big angst that is so anticipated, it isn't as bad as it sounded. Contrivances are avoided, which is interesting given that most authors would have jumped at the chance for the quick finish line. The book starts with a long, though interesting narrative that's too long and should have been spread out throughout the book. We call this type of writing a "backstory dump." This can turn off a reader quickly. The book is moderate in flow, with a balance of narrative and dialogue that doesn't lend itself to a quick pace. Language is used to suit the Regency and very few exceptions exist, probably due to that excellent new editor. Some examples of exceptions were "gold digger," mesmerised, staff, and "wedding breakfast." This is nothing compared to the average JAFF novel, however. Some typos existed: has for had and have for has. An appositive was missing its commas. Point of view is used relatively well with a few exceptions: twice the author has the protagonist seeing something on herself (she can't see her cheeks lose their colour, for example), and there was a specific section where head-hopping was in use. Otherwise, the changes and depth were excellent. A Regency issue that I could not understand was why was Lord Alveston not Lord Kendal? Perhaps it was explained in the book and I missed it. I was also confused over some timing issues, as the book said three months had passed, then some action took place, then the book said there were seven months left in the mourning period. It was as if that action took zero time. Another issue was the fetching of a "glass of fresh water." All water was contaminated during the Regency, so a small beer or watered wine would have been the refreshment of choice. No one drank water to refresh themselves. For readers who are sensitive, the book is steamy with no detail. This was masterfully done. Characterizations of the canon characters took specific aspects from Austen's descriptions and capitalized upon them to make them work well for this story. Excellent choices. As for new characters, they were fresh and believable and not described any more than necessary for their role in the book. All characters were appropriately consistent, in one case, almost to a flaw! Great work. Scene-setting was also excellent, as the senses were used to make the reader feel like they were in the moment. The cover is one of Lory Lilian's best to date, literally popping out from amongst all those same old covers you see in JAFF. Her covers have never been same-old though. The featured artwork and the fonts suit the story well. I am thrilled to be able to say that this is a favourite Lory Lillian novel and it shines from all sorts of directions from a technical standpoint as well as the actual story, which is unique and new. We learn to love the new characters, even those who seem like they could be problematic to the HEA we're seeking, and yet we get that HEA in a realistic fashion without contrivances. Kudos. Disclaimer: I am a JAFF author, and some might say this review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. I write them for the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 16, 2022
|
Feb 21, 2022
|
Feb 16, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B09BRHWGYD
| 4.06
| 133
| unknown
| Aug 25, 2021
|
liked it
|
A book with this many errors should not make it to publication. A delay of a month or two would have offered readers a much better read, as Massey is
A book with this many errors should not make it to publication. A delay of a month or two would have offered readers a much better read, as Massey is a talented writer, but this is an abomination. I will not be writing a synopsis or spoilers as my reviews are always technical in nature and capture those details that put readers off, whether consciously or in the back of their minds. First, this is the report I gave Amazon: Chapters change in the middle of a page; extra quotation marks in the middle of the page; extra commas; missing commas; single quotation marks used where double should be used; capitals in the middle of sentences; person names not capitalized; apostrophe in the wrong place in a possessive; many missing periods in dialogue; missing words; incomplete sentences; spelling errors; homophones; improper use of quotation marks when dialogue of a character continues in the next paragraph, missing plurals. The author is aware of these, apologises for them, and has not rescinded the book to correct them. Here are some examples of typos: Distain for disdain, bennet, your's, hm for him, you for your, plantation for plantations. There are also non-Regency words: guffaw/guffaws/guffawing, modiste, staff, aback, heading, attitude, drab, kindred spirit: these were used in the wrong context or not in use in the Regency. (A side comment: To say that they can be used because they may have been in use even if they weren't in print is ego in the highest. What makes the person who makes such a statement more knowledgeable than an etymologist? What makes them so omniscient as to know that the word or phrase was in use 200 years ago?) Americanisms include use of "I will" for "I shall" and "the holidays." A homophone was illusive for elusive. Regency errors include dinner at 7. Dinner was at 4. Supper may have been at 7 at the earliest. Also, a grown lady would not be learning to embroider. She would have learned it as a child. Canon errors are Sir Henry de Bourgh, "breaking their fast," and Sense and Sensibility being referred to as "a slim volume." The book was published in three volumes. The premise is fantastic, and it was carried off fairly well, though some more time spent honing the details would have made for a better book. There were plot holes, vagaries, and contrivances which I can't really state without spoilers. None were huge, they were just details that the author could have found and fixed with a good editorial review. The story arc is complete, though, with no extra side plots to muddy the waters. The only real slow spot was when too many extra minor characters (family members) were named at 40%. Tips to writers: don't introduce more than about 4-5 characters per chapter, and if they don't get a line in the book, don't name them. Without introducing spoilers into this review, I must say that at the point where this reader believed the truth that was revealed near the end, the author introduced a red herring that forbade that truth. That is one huge plot hole. This was not a little hint, it was a large statement. So essentially, it made the rest of the book a lie. Ms. Massey, you tried too hard to trick us. There was excellent scene-setting and story-telling all around, and this is where Massey excels. Some of the situations around the carriage accident are vague, however, in the interest of not wanting to read details in that sort of a situation, it is appreciated why that choice was made. However, it did make it harder to follow the story at times. Use of language, other than that listed above, was good. There were no difficult words to look up, yet one truly got the feel for the Regency. One problem was the use of the word "mulatto," which is considered outdated and offensive, but which would have been normal in the Regency. Care must always be used to put words such as this into the right mouths so as to not offend modern readers. I suspect it would be best to stick with use of such a word for villains rather than heroes. Edit: my intention is out of the mouths of villains not heroes. Sorry for the confusion. I enjoyed the characterizations, both canon and new. There were complications for the canon female protagonist that were sometimes well done and sometimes not so well done, and for me to leave specifics would be a spoiler. A few times, I found her a little too breathless and naive for the intent of the book, though. Darcy was the romantic hero in this case, with his deep, passionate side and superior intelligence showing through all along. The new characters were well drawn out and worth the sketching. The gay side story was well worth it. It added to the plot and to the richness of JAFF. The same goes for using a Black woman minor character. We need to see more of this, and Beth Massey did her best to introduce these underrepresented characters to this book and make them a real part of English history, as they were. I also have no objections to the loving scene that involved sexuality for the protagonists once they were married. The cover is stunning. It stands out among all those other covers and says "Hey, buy me!" It tells of the book inside and has a style all its own. I really like it a lot. In the end, this is an unfinished book due to the editing problems. It requires not just a proofreader, but a content editor for some of the other details. I cannot in good conscience recommend it in its current state, but if it were updated, I would be able to strongly recommend it because it has great bones. Disclaimer: I am a JAFF author, and some might say my review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. They are written for both the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 10, 2021
|
Oct 15, 2021
|
Oct 10, 2021
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B00HMXLW9Q
| 3.98
| 4,783
| Dec 29, 2013
| Dec 29, 2013
|
really liked it
|
If this is the style of Regency romance that is up and coming, I say no, thank you. Oh, it entertained me enough. But it had a fluffy heroine, self-ab
If this is the style of Regency romance that is up and coming, I say no, thank you. Oh, it entertained me enough. But it had a fluffy heroine, self-absorbed hero, disbelief of the actual romance, redundancy, too much sex, too many contractions, no attention to non-Regency language, poor editing, book stuffing. Now the first three are par for the course. Even the fifth can be, though the sex was part of the redundancy. But I draw the line at those jarring moments where I'm knocked out of the mood by language and errors. That's where the star went. I won't summarize this novel, that's not the type of review I do. I'll mention the technical issues that can make or break a book and how this book fared. First of all, this book was a bit cheesy, but in a good way. The PTSD angle was well done, if overdone and redundant. We got it. The plot idea was a good one, but the breakup of the contract and subsequent courtship was a suspension of disbelief, as was the Duke's eventual agreement. The dog was cheesy, the romance was almost hard to believe it actually happened, but I did have tears at the poems, though. More than average contractions for a Regency romance were an annoyance, especially when the author used them sometimes and then spelled out the words other times. Make up your mind! Thing is, in the Regency, only low class or silly people used contractions. Your hero and heroine had more than a dozen each. Then there's toward for towards, "I would" for "I should," "written me" instead of "written to me," peddler for pedlar: typical Americanisms in a British based book. Glenarvon was published in three volumes. Just sayin'. This is one of those small things that your readers know and that you should be aware of when you make comments in your book as if it were one volume. Also, hair styles in the Regency were devoid of the chignon, which is a bun at the base of the neck. Rather, the bun was high on the head, at the cowlick. And your heroine can't get out of the carriage herself because there were no latches on the inside, plus it was a veritable jump to the ground. She depended on someone to open the door and then put out a step for her. In bookshops, the books lined the walls--there were not rows of shelves. Compromise meant "to settle a dispute by mutual concessions" in the Regency. The usage of it to mean to press into marriage came from some Regency romance author and is incorrect. Here are the non-Regency words and phrases that knock the reader out of the Regency feel of the story: bounder, normalcy, decolletage, "kindred spirits," survey, stuffy, stodgy, scanned, headed, snort, musicale, "dance card," scrunched, townhouse, trigger, and staff. At best, a few of these are Victorian. At worst, they're later in the usage the author chose. There were spelling mistakes, e.g., strait-laced, loathe for loath, Wilcox' for Wilcox's. Missing and extra punctuation was noted. The author used some words incorrectly, for example, erstwhile and facade. She also used filter words that took away from the showing by going into telling mode. The characterization is not always consistent. Characters are kind and cruel at the same time, and I don't think it's in a good way--I think the author messed up by making them that way and it wasn't realistic. The use of the letters at the beginning of each chapter was clever and tied things together well. The cover is too cliche to stand out. The prom dress rather than a Regency gown irks me and other readers of this era. The arrangement of the models could be for any old book--it doesn't make any statement about this particular novel, or say "Buy Me!" over the book next to it. All in all, it doesn't stand out among the dozens that look more or less the same. Too bad, this was an opportunity lost. In sum, this book was a decent Regency romance hidden amongst a bunch of flaws. The author has good skills. She should get a better editor. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 15, 2021
|
Jul 22, 2021
|
Jul 15, 2021
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| unknown
| 4.00
| 3
| May 17, 2012
| May 17, 2012
|
it was amazing
|
Set in 1978-79 with lots of hints to the music of the era, non-disco.
|
Notes are private!
|
1
|
not set
|
Jan 2019
|
Apr 23, 2021
|
ebook
| ||||||||||||||||
| B08SL8H3RC
| 3.57
| 249
| unknown
| Feb 02, 2021
|
really liked it
|
I had read two of Elaine Jeremiah's time travel books (they have cliffies in them, which still pisses me off, and then she goes and releases this with
I had read two of Elaine Jeremiah's time travel books (they have cliffies in them, which still pisses me off, and then she goes and releases this without finishing the series), and expected good writing and excitement, and got it. The trouble was, there were so many plot lines, one was unsure what the point of the story really was. Then to top it off, they weren't complex enough to lay deeply enough in my memory. I needed a mental tweak to remember what the book was about to write this review (I cheated and checked the synopsis in another review). I'm not going to summarize the story, just highlight the technical issues, as usual. As I said, the book contains more than one story arc, and though the second is nestled inside the first to add dramatic tension from an outside force, it falls flat. An FMS usually has its own dramatic tension due to the inside forces of the incompatibility and then growing love with misunderstandings for the protagonists. Though the author set this up with a (spoiler alert) remark from Miss Bingley, she never carried it out, instead opting for a too-quick romance thread that was not believable. The second story arc (regarding Wickham) was not well thought out, missing details and final tie-ups for the threads left loose, and thus was essentially full of plot holes. It depended upon Elizabeth's loyalty to Darcy to have grown exponentially too early in the plot. Also, I saw no evidence of research compared to my knowledge of real life Regency punishment fitting the crime. Finally, though I love me a steamy romance, the sex scene in this book was out of place and unnecessary. During all this, the author writes with pretty good language. She makes use of rhetorical devices such as alliteration a few times. She has good use of scene-setting and the senses to make her story come alive. Her word choices are such that a reader with a good vocabulary rarely has to look a word up, and yet the language selection is lovely for an entertaining read full of prose you enjoy. Problems exist where the language pulls the reader out of the story, and that's the non-Regency words and phrases, including staff, snob, snorted, cryptic, bun, lunch-time, unconscious, "taken aback," "reception room,", and "wedding breakfast." This is an average list for a JAFF novel. As a British author, Ms. Jeremiah doesn't make the mistake of getting those words wrong like other JAFF authors! The author used the word "careered" where I think she meant "careened." I only found one contraction (don't). Filter words like "felt" and "saw" were used with the POV character--that's telling where the author should be showing. There are quite a few run-on sentences where more than one comma was needed. However, I liked some of her word choices such as mizzle, amble, and roguish, and a line "frost that was coating the glass with a certain ethereal majesty." Formatting was inconsistent, and some chapters did not break properly, rather started halfway down the page. As for characterization, she has the main characters of Darcy and Elizabeth well drafted from canon and doesn't try to make them into too much more than that. Nice. She chooses the timid Georgiana and the evil Wickham and evil Lady Catherine trope. The latter two are too much compared to canon where he was merely an opportunist and she was merely a control freak. It makes that part of the story into a bit hard to swallow. The cover is pretty and eye-catching, though I'm not certain it's in any way indicative of the content of the book. The reader should be enticed to read because of the exciting story within as well. This cover could be a mere sweet romance with zero angst. In the end, this was an entertaining book with good prose and an okay story line, even though the author took too much on in one novel. It's worth the read. Disclaimer: I'm a JAFF novelist and some might say my review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. I write them for both the reader and the author. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 08, 2021
|
Apr 13, 2021
|
Apr 08, 2021
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B07XLB1NB2
| 4.35
| 621
| Sep 10, 2019
| Sep 10, 2019
|
it was amazing
|
Here is a novel which begs the question as to why other authors feel they must write epics to get the point across, as the this book's journey takes y
Here is a novel which begs the question as to why other authors feel they must write epics to get the point across, as the this book's journey takes you through what is really several stories in one over-arching plot line in an average sized book! And what a tale it is! As usual, I'll leave the synopsis writing to other reviewers and focus on the technical aspects. The story starts out with some beautifully written scenery to enhance the feel of dread. Is that a spoiler? Something has to go wrong to build up the typical Starnes anxiety! It's not terrible in this part of the book. In fact, the worst of it is in the middle, where per normal JAFF drama meter, the worst angst is the parting of ODC under the worst terms and the feeling that they'll never get back together. Anyhow, back to scene-setting. The beautiful use of all the senses continues throughout the novel. I particularly like how she uses flowers in the more light and pleasing scenes towards the end. When I wrote a story with a head injury, I was told by a physician not to feed my character broth because they would inhale it and be caused injury. That meant my character would live a maximum of three days due to dehydration. (spoiler) However, due to the clever use of a tablespoon Joana Starnes kept her character hydrated. I was also surprised at how quickly he recovered. But I swallowed that and let the story move ahead as it did move quickly, and I like that in a story. The extra characters are not too much. I was able to keep track of them well enough, and there's a list in the back of the book just in case it's needed. Some were downright special, like Bella and Meg. The feelings of the characters came through loud and clear, as did their specific characterizations. The angst in Starnes' books is almost a character, and she doesn't disappoint. I love angst, and this book had its rewarding ups and downs for me. Because I can count on HEA, I am not as fragile when it comes to separation angst, but even so, misunderstandings and the dialogue that inevitably works around them are always difficult. This book did well in that regard. The balance of narration and dialogue was one of the key issues that moved the plot forward so cleverly. The language was not particularly to a huge Regency bent, and didn't seem to be attempting to sound like Austen. Starnes' story telling ability is not in prose, but in pictures. For that reason, there were an average number of non-Regency words within the story, many of the most common to Regency writers (mesmerize, outing, norm, fingertips, headed/heading) and words used incorrectly for the Regency (hypnotic, snort). Starnes' habitual use of the word admixture in non-scientific situations was down to three in this book. It's a word that shouldn't be in the book in the first place--mixture will do. One tiny instance of head-hopping was included, and one of the POV character "seeing" her own eyes. The book had a morning call "this afternoon"--afternoons were almost never referred to in the Regency, and certainly not in this context. Elizabeth had a chignon, which is a rolled hairstyle at the neckline--Regency hair was done in high topknots or buns at the cowlick or higher. Paisley was called boteh or buta in the Regency. I'd typically drop a half a star for all of this, but since the sum total here is no more than average, I don't see the point. As much as the photo of the Lakes is clever, the cover doesn't impress me as being a huge draw to the book. It's not dramatic enough, and that Darcy sitting there is too content in appearance to make me want to delve into the pages. I know this is the signature Darcy, but you could have him in a more action packed secondary scene or something like that, to garner interest. I'm no artist, but I see a lot of covers and have specific expectations. The steamy scenes are some of the best written non-sex sex scenes I've ever read. They deserve the first prize for what I call 'The Kissing Challenge," that is, to write an extremely hot scene with only kissing and no sex. They are a bit long, though, so just bordering on becoming gratuitous. But we all love our reunions. Is that a spoiler? I don't know how Joana Starnes manages to get such quality packed into such an intense book with so many rich themes and not allow it to become a tedious epic, yet this novel is action-packed, fast-paced, thrill-filled, heart-rending and totally worthwhile as your next read. Disclaimer: I am a JAFF author, and some might say that my reviews of JAFF are a conflict of interest, however, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 27, 2021
|
Feb 02, 2021
|
Jan 27, 2021
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B007387N5M
| 3.72
| 71
| unknown
| Jan 28, 2012
|
really liked it
|
Did the villain have to be so evil and so close to the hero? I kept asking that throughout the book. Apparently I should have read the second book to
Did the villain have to be so evil and so close to the hero? I kept asking that throughout the book. Apparently I should have read the second book to find out why, but it was poorly rated, so I skipped it. I liked the first book and thought that the excellent reviews for the third book would bode well for its value, and it appeared as though I didn't have to read them in order. This book met my expectations for the most part. I'm not going to give a synopsis full of spoilers; other reviewers revel in that task. Rather, I'll analyze what I liked and didn't like about this book. The hero and heroine are well-drafted and lovable, their romance feels real and works. Adriana is a strong female lead, in fact, she is stronger than Morgan in some senses, which is okay. Minor characters were likewise carefully written so they were well understood and fit their role in a superior sense. There were no extraneous characters so the book was tight in terms of extra scenes. All the senses are on alert in the story, which is pretty easy to do in a novel where magic is a character. The magic is balanced well and clever, fitting in without taking over, and understandable enough for the average reader without long descriptions of how it works. It's almost too little magic. I was able to predict Adriana's surprise early on. The author left us a bit of a WTF as to why she didn't just go out and (spoiler) sell something rather than let it be used as a weapon against her, and that was never explained. But the twist on that aspect near the end was genius, then the double, then the triple twist--good writing! Visual scene-setting is wonderful. The author sure knows how to describe the background. Speaking of visuals, the cover is attractive and draws the reader to this book, giving a hint of what's in the book. Language is suited to the Regency with the exception of some applications of contractions. The American "toward" was used rather than the British "towards." Marshmellow is a misspelling, and the proper word is from 1877 in any case. In the Regency, "stout" meant sturdy or athletic and not fat. Regency fashion and styling seems to be impeccable with the strong exception of Morgan's hair, which begs the question "why?" There's no need. The story arc is complete with no side-plots distracting the author, and it ends fairly well. The biggest problem with this book was slow pacing. Given that it's an action book, this shouldn't be the case, but it was. At times, I felt like abandoning the book, and it lost a star for that reason. Some love-making scenes were gratuitous and redundancy of description of back-story contributed to the ho-hum feeling. The tight scenes and plot twists near the end did make up for this, though. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 22, 2021
|
Jan 27, 2021
|
Jan 22, 2021
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
| B07TWTBMK3
| 3.24
| 21
| Oct 01, 2019
| Oct 01, 2019
|
it was ok
|
Firstly, in sum, this anthology is not really what its title promises. Only half the stories are Austen-inspired and Christmas stories, and some are s
Firstly, in sum, this anthology is not really what its title promises. Only half the stories are Austen-inspired and Christmas stories, and some are so poor, they don’t deserve to be in this anthology. I’ll review them one by one on content without a synopsis, as that can be left to other reviewers. “Mr. Darcy’s Christmas Surprise” by Debra-Ann Kummoung is one of the better stories in this anthology, which starts out well and goes downhill from there. This pleasant short story about overcoming Darcy’s sadness via a (spoiler alert) series of gifts inspired by today’s advent calendars while slowly bringing Darcy and Elizabeth closer is a unique and satisfying read. It required some minor edits regarding missing words and British language, but is rather well constructed in comparison with the other stories in this set. The romance development was lovely and the story was tight. 4.5 stars. The time travelling “The Spirit of Mr. Darcy” by Sheena Austin doesn’t inspire me to buy books by this author. The voice of Mr. Darcy in the Regency period is modern. Extra commas stall the reader, yet the author should have used them in the run-on sentences. The story doesn’t end well and its (spoiler alert) alternate pairing was grating, even with the paranormal aspect that was supposed to explain it away. Well, sorry, Darcy, but it didn’t, because the plot itself was rather convoluted and thus, confusing to say the least, and the sex seemed gratuitous. However, this story can claim an Austenesque theme, in contrast to several in the book. 2.5 stars. Margo Bond Collins’s excellent short story “Snow Flight” showed me that each author had their own editor, since this interesting paranormal short was well-edited, with only minor typos. That extra effort by the author gave me a chance to enjoy the brilliant plot and great visuals that the author brought forward to enhance her tale. It did end at somewhat of a cliff-hanger and book sale, which was a disappointment after such a good story, but it was an upbeat ending with a full story arc all the same. However, there was no Austen tie in this story. Four stars. This anthology started to go downhill at about the point of “Shades of Pemberley” by Claire O’Dare, with its misused words and plot involving (spoiler alert) a blatant alternate pairing, that is, a clear romantic plot line for the two. This is a daring sort of premise for any Austenesque fic, but IMO it’s out of place in a Christmas themed anthology, particularly when it involves (spoiler alert) D&E and adultery and the dark tone that this author uses to weave her tale. The romance was well-written, but this sort of deviation is too painful for D&E purists. Even the author knew it was depressing material with the voice used by the protagonists and the redundancies within. 2.5 stars. The melancholy mood continued in the longer “Twelvetide Chaos” by Deborah E. Pearson. It was also at this point that the stories started having head-hopping, causing the reader to have to go “huh?” about who was the point of view character. This one had an all-centred format as well, which a formatter will tell you is off-putting to the reader. Numerous modern phrases and non-Regency words pulled the reader out of the story, as well as did the odd spelling and punctuation mishap—and I’m not one to be that fussy about punctuation. But the big thing here was the story. The plot was well developed and credible, using appropriate devices to show character development and changes that were key to the excellent story idea (no spoilers). But it was far too dark for a Christmas anthology, and that would be gloomy enough if this were the only dark story, but it was one of too many. And it was much too long, deviating off on tangents it didn’t need, sometimes solely to match its chapter titles. 2.5 stars. I was tired of this anthology by now, and weighed down by the depressing stories. Charlene Johnson’s “The Demon and the Christmas Curse” wasn’t much lighter—at first. Christmas played no real part in the story, it just happened that the story took place at that time. It could have been at any time. The story had some canon errors from Northanger Abbey (Henry didn’t inherit) and the characters from that era spoke some modern expressions, but other than that and the head-hopping, the editing was good. A formatting glitch appears in the middle. Some parts with the higher-ups made me want to skim—they were a bit boring and redundant in places, and backstory dumps slowed the story. One scene (spoiler alert) with a prostitute was over-the-top on the bawdy side rather than being steamy, and it didn’t contribute to the story at all. I’d have cut it. All-in-all, though, the story was well-written and believable, and the romance fit well. The protagonists were likable and well drawn out for such a short story. For a story about stealing souls, it was surprisingly pleasant. The end was weak, though, leaving loose ends. 3.5 stars. I was ready to throw the book out the window within the first few pages of “Charity” by Sophie Bellabone. What was a (spoiler alert) modern disaster wedding with adultery and multiple near misses of murder doing in an Austen Christmas anthology? It went from bad to worse, too! At about 1/3 of the way through, I finally couldn’t take it any more and flipped page by page to the end, trying to find where the part about Christmas and Austen were. The one word “Christmas” appeared to be a millisecond obligatory nod, and Austen didn’t exist. The bits I did read were pure garbage in my opinion. Slapstick posing as dark paranormal farce. An attempt at entertainment that failed. Perhaps had I read more than fragments after 1/3, I would have found a plot. However, the confusion with poorly-described action, the rambling dialogue, and the extraneous characters were too much for a short story. Head-hopping and sentence structure problems (in the section I did read) rounded it out. One star. “Northanger Dorm” by Ivy Hearne at least gave some hope of an Austen tie. Could the trend for dark drama be over as well? I find yet another paranormal story. I’m not averse to these, in fact, I’m a big fan of paranormal Regency, something there’s a dearth of, but there’s a surfeit of paranormal modern stories in this anthology to my opinion. This one had promise, and held my attention, but it had barely begun to develop its story arc and character development when it ended with a sales pitch. There was no Christmas in the story, either. Two stars. At least “The Christmas Pudding Disaster” by Susan Burdorf is Christmas and Austen. The five “okays” are clearly not Regency, though, as are a number of modern words and phrases. Other than that, editing is spotless, though the (spoiler alert) spill of the Christmas puddings is vague enough that I had to read it twice. It should have had more fanfare than it got! Loose ends/plot holes were left as well, regarding a note and some whispering, and some suspension of disbelief was required regarding a (spoiler alert) home birth. But in comparison to the rest of the anthology, this story shone and was a good way to end the book. 3.5 stars. I’m actually angry that this book was passed off as "An Austen-Inspired Christmas Collection." Several of the stories had "Christmas" thrown in as a word just to get their story in the book and otherwise had no tie-in at all to the season. A third of the stories were dark and depressing. Too many non-Austen paranormal stories in the bunch belonged in their own book with a different title. Whoever “edited” the entire book did not think well regarding the entire reader experience, that's for certain. The editing of individual stories was inconsistent, and most had some pretty common errors. Why was an editor not hired for the whole book? The cover is stunning. It would influence many readers to want to buy the book. Kudos to the artist. I bought this book on sale, which is a partial relief. I bought it so long ago, I can’t get my money back. I hope others who read it shortly after it came out got theirs. Overall, I can’t give it three stars, because that would imply I liked the entire book when I really only liked less than half the stories. I rarely give a book under four stars, but this one doesn’t deserve three. Any author in this anthology that I gave more than three stars to is encouraged to continue as they are with my best wishes, but watch that modern language! The others should take steps to learn more about honing their craft. Disclaimer: I am a JAFF author and some may consider my reviews a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are all honest and impartial. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 05, 2020
|
Dec 13, 2020
|
Dec 05, 2020
|
Kindle Edition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 3.88
|
really liked it
|
Jul 31, 2023
|
Aug 01, 2023
|
|||
|
| 3.97
|
it was amazing
|
Jun 06, 2023
|
Jun 04, 2023
|
|||
|
| 3.97
|
really liked it
|
Mar 23, 2023
|
Mar 24, 2023
|
|||
|
| 3.93
|
really liked it
|
Nov 05, 2023
Feb 07, 2023
|
Feb 06, 2023
|
|||
|
| 4.36
|
it was amazing
|
Feb 05, 2023
|
Feb 01, 2023
|
|||
|
| 3.96
|
really liked it
|
Jan 30, 2023
|
Jan 27, 2023
|
|||
|
| 4.18
|
it was amazing
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
Dec 14, 2022
|
|||
|
| 3.97
|
liked it
|
Dec 18, 2022
|
Dec 10, 2022
|
|||
|
| 4.11
|
really liked it
|
Sep 14, 2022
|
Sep 12, 2022
|
|||
|
| 3.00
|
it was ok
|
Aug 29, 2022
|
Aug 26, 2022
|
|||
|
| 4.17
|
really liked it
|
May 05, 2022
|
Apr 22, 2022
|
|||
|
| 3.78
|
it was amazing
|
Apr 22, 2022
|
Apr 18, 2022
|
|||
|
| 4.28
|
it was amazing
|
Feb 21, 2022
|
Feb 16, 2022
|
|||
|
| 4.06
|
liked it
|
Oct 15, 2021
|
Oct 10, 2021
|
|||
|
| 3.98
|
really liked it
|
Jul 22, 2021
|
Jul 15, 2021
|
|||
|
| 4.00
|
it was amazing
|
Jan 2019
|
Apr 23, 2021
|
|||
|
| 3.57
|
really liked it
|
Apr 13, 2021
|
Apr 08, 2021
|
|||
|
| 4.35
|
it was amazing
|
Feb 02, 2021
|
Jan 27, 2021
|
|||
|
| 3.72
|
really liked it
|
Jan 27, 2021
|
Jan 22, 2021
|
|||
|
| 3.24
|
it was ok
|
Dec 13, 2020
|
Dec 05, 2020
|
Loading...