Untie My Heart

Title: Untie My Heart (2002)
Author: Judith Ivory (Avon)
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1896 England)
Grade: D+

I'm too busy of late to recap any reading but that which is truly spectacular. Spectacularly good or bad does not matter. And Untie My Heart is a spectacular clusterfuck.

Judith Ivory is famous for adult romances about complex people. No secret babies or amnesia for her. Yet, sometimes Ivory lives so much in her own head that her writing is hard to connect with, at least for me. This book presumes that her reader is going to enjoy the minutiae of Stuart's family finances over a contested title (which I do not) and Emma's in-depth world of London confidence games (which I do). I've spent years looking for a romance that didn't talk down to me, but I don't want to open an Excel spreadsheet to folllow the financial plot contrivances.

The real meat of the story is the control that dominates the relationship between Emma and Stuart. This isn't just sexual control although Ivory includes that in a way I find disturbing. I've read my share of non-consent bodice rippers. Some I even liked. I'm well versed in the ideology behind BDSM. The pleasure is in willingly surrendering control. Not being tied to a chair, fucked by some dude who threatens to send you to jail, and afterward told that you enjoyed it so he is absolved of any guilt. In fact, he is especially proud of his prowess and flexibility on said chair. Emma spends the bulk of the book resisting Stuart's control in the con game and in their sex life while he suggests she is just an uptight prude who isn't as adventurous and worldly as himself. What the hell? She doesn't want to walk naked in a hotel or be bound during sex. She says she doesn't enjoy it. But that's okay, because even though she says no, she clearly means yes.

If Ivory wanted to write about BDSM sexual relationship I wish she had crafted a heroine who embraced surrender, not one who fought against it. That isn't hot or sexy. That just sucks.

The Bride Hunt

Title: The Bride Hunt (2004)
Author: Jane Feather (Bantam)
Period: European Historical-Edwardian (1906 England)
Grade: C-

The Bride Hunt is a romance in the vaguest sense. It is the romance of a deep love and affection between three society sisters. The alleged romance between the hero and heroine is considerably less interesting and less believable.

Prudence's story is the middle book in Feather's bride series about three misses of reduced circumstances. I've had it up to my ears with financially irresponsible and neglectful ton parents whose family's are kept afloat by resourceful children. The Duncan sisters publish a suffragette newsletter/scandal sheet and extort "charitable contributions" for matchmaking services because their father refuses to economize. The sisters actively hide the truth of their family finances from their detached father. I don't, as a rule, enjoy plots that operate on the basis that true affection is reflected in how much or how long you are willing to deceive someone you love rather than have an honest conversation.

When the sisters' publication is sued for libel they seek the defense services of divorced barrister/single father Gideon Malvern. He has no interest in defending a woman's magazine against what he feels are valid charges, but feels an attraction to the dowdy and circumspect Prudence. The financially strapped sisters offer to use their matchmaking skills as payment but Gideon is instead hoping to get Pru into bed. They become lovers, they quarrel over his ex-wife, they solve the secret of libel suit, the sisters are acquitted, father learns the truth and we get the HEA. The romance and the sensuality are pretty bland by Feather's standards.

The Bride Hunt spends so much time with the sisters, their relationship, and the libel plot the romance is almost ancillary. Also, I'm not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV. But a magistrate allows a witness to testify in court veiled and with out revealing her real name? How could they plaintiff’s barrister preformed pre-trail depositions or prepared proper questioning? Shouldn't a romance with a legal setting know a bit about courtroom procedures? Maybe the American legal system has less in common with English common law than my college professors led me to believe.

To Love a Princess

Title: To Love a Princess
Author: Patricia Grasso
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1820 England)
Grade: D

To Love a Princess is a shitty Beauty and Beast knock-off. Judith Ivory's Beast this ain't. I'm sort of embarrassed that I finished this book. On the other hand, if I hadn't finished it, I'd have missed the sucktatstic conclusion. In keeping with the Disney theme, Grasso clearly did the bulk of her research on Russian nobility by watching the Disney version of Anastasia.

Princess Amber (could be worse, could have been Madison), the illegitimate daughter of the Czar, has fled the home of her evil guardian who plots to sell her into a white-slavery breeding operation. Sure. She travels alone across Europe to England to seek refuge with her cousins. How did she finance this adventure? Why didn't her evil guardian pursue her until after she was safely in England? If you ask any of these questions you are smarter than the characters in this book. Also, when the hero learns of the guardians plot he thinks it is ludicrous because slavery is unheard of in England. Even though slavery doesn't end in England for another decade and half. Grasso must not own an encyclopedia!

Miles, Earl of Stratford, was widowed and disfigured in a deadly house fire. His business partner, Amber's cousin, suggest Miles needs a wife and Amber needs a husband to protect her from the evil guardian. The Earl allows her to be his house guest (unchaperoned!) but does not offer to marry her. This is a-okay with her allegedly overprotective cousins. Miles still grieves for his wife and believes no woman would want a scared husband so he is chock full of Beta hero issues. He comes to care for Amber, but rather than offer her marriage he offers her a degrading proposition. Which she accepts for no damn reason. She is a beautiful princess with connection in both England and Russia. Why can't she enter society and find herself another husband? Why does she put up with his shitty behavior? He spends a lot of time insulting her for daring to intrude on his late wife's memory. Hey it isn’t like he invited her to stay at his home! They eventually marry. I get why Amber feels she needs a husband. I don’t get why she needs this husband.

Amber is also a junior Miss Marple who solves the mystery of the suspicious fire/murder in mere chapter. Thankfully the culprit set the fire with monogrammed lighter. Only your stupider romance villains do that. Amber is your typical romance heroine who is sweeter, smarter, and prettier than any woman the hero is ever known. Miles keeps his love a secret well after she has admitted her love because all good Beta heroes have to brood through at least 3/4ths of the book.

The pinnacle of the To Love a Princess comes when Amber disappears and Miles believes she has chosen to leave him. He ignores all evidence to the contrary and refuses to even search for his missing wife. Her cousin is forced to save the princess while Miles broods and feels guilty. He takes some very drastic steps in her short absence. The repercussions should be important to the plot and healing their relationship in a good romance. To Love a Princess, however, is a bad romance so Amber forgives him almost instantly without any serious discussions. How totally not romantic!

The Pleasure of Her Kiss

Title: The Pleasure of Her Kiss (2003)
Author: Linda Needham (Avon)
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1848 England)
Grade: D-

Gak! I usually complain about romances where the hero is required to save the heroine from her harebrained schemes ala "I Love Lucy," but in The Pleasure of Her Kiss the hero chose to enable and encourage the heroine's harebrained schemes. This book is about ten different kinds of awful. It is the kind of romance where the author thinks she's flipping romance convention but instead her book is just as dull and trite as anything else on the romance mass market shelf.

Jared, Earl of Hawksley, wed and abandoned Kathryn Trafford in Egypt moments after her father's death. The marriage was arranged to protect the heiress and her assets, but Kathryn was less than pleased about being sent to England and neglected by an absent husband. Jared, like all heroes in long-lost spouse romances, wants to settle into a life of domestic bliss with his wife and is shocked when she doesn't recognize him. There is a brief sub-plot of Jared posing as a visitor to the guest house she runs at his country estate rather than revealing his true identity. It is quite dopey and she soon figures him out which is pretty embarrassing when you consider Jared is a spy. Just not a good one.

The crux of the novel, as is the case with most Needham's, is adopted children. Kathryn has taken in a large band of abandoned children and work-house urchins. Jared is opposed to having a ready made family of 20+ children and instead wants to find the children good homes. This is presented as cruel and self-centered with Jared unable to appreciate Kathryn's Jolie-like benevolence. What is wrong with wanting each child to have a good home with families that could give them individual attention? Where they wouldn't be raised in a class that permanently regards them as less than by strict conventions and norms?

The Pleasure of Her Kiss is set against the Irish famine and the grain embargo. Jared's latest mission is to uncover who is robbing and exporting grain stores to aid the Irish after the post-February rebellion embargo. Of course, amoebas can figure out this plot twist. Jared, in love with his wife, offers to financially support her Irish soup kitchens but that isn't good enough. She insists that she must continue to steal grain from the lords who support the embargo to "punish them" for their actions. In response, Jared suggests that he'll become a double agent and aid her in perpetrating her crimes! What the fuck? Is that supposed to be romantic? "Darling, let's get ourselves hung together! It isn't as if we have the responsibility of raising a brood of adopted children with no one else to care for them!"

There isn't anything feminist or radical about the hero supporting the heroine's goals when her goals are asinine.

My Only Love

Title: My Only Love (1993)
Author: Katherine Sutcliffe (Jove)
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1863 England)
Grade: C+

I enjoyed Sutcliffe's A Fire in the Heart and the supporting role of Miles, the bastard brother, so that I immediately bought his book, My Only Love. It is an okay book. Slightly better than average, but lacks the depth of setting and plot of A Fire in the Heart.

The big problem is My Only Love is A Big Secret romance. If the author going to make that Big Secret the basis for the primary conflict between the hero and heroine it shouldn't be so transparent that the reader can decipher it on page one. Literally! On the first page of novel Sutcliffe provides the clue that reveals the truth. Thus, the reader knows the Big Secret and is preconditioned to perceive the hero as a moron who couldn't find his own ass with two hands and a road map.

I dig Miles so that kinda sucks. He is the (older) illegitimate brother of a Duke. He resents the social system that excludes him and denies him a title he believes should be his birthright. Perversely, he craves do be a respected member of the society that spurns him. He's profligate and a poor businessman. He's jealous and sensitive and cruel and charming. He is a fascinating hero with real flaws and human emotions. No cookie cutter alpha male here.

The Earl of Devonshire solves Miles financial woes by offering his unconventional eldest daughter, Olivia, in marriage. Olivia is the mother to an illegitimate son and the Earl hopes to remove the stain of scandal from his household to improve the marriage chances of his beloved younger daughter. Olivia has secretly loved Miles for years even after his affair with her sister. Miles reluctantly accepts the offer despite his dream of a marrying a respectable woman who will help him gain the Ton's favor. Olivia, meanwhile, goes to tremendous lengths to protect a selfish and manipulative sister, an ignorant father, and her husband from The Big Secret. Olivia and her son eventually worm their way into Miles' icy heart for the HEA, but I was hoping for something less rote from Sutcliffe after A Fire in the Heart.

Where Dreams Begin

Title: Where Dreams Begin (2000)
Author: Lisa Kleypas (Avon)
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1830 England)
Grade: C

I'm not fair to Lisa Kleypas. I expect so much from her, what would be a good book by another author is only average by Kleypas standards. These are determents of being the Jane Austen of your generation. Sorry!

In Where Dreams Begin she returns to her wheelhouse with a respectable (often noble) heroine and wealthy lower-class upstart hero. The widowed Lady Holly is ending her three years of morning for her beloved husband when she encounters Zachary Bronson. After a clandestined kiss, Zachary is smitten. He concocts a plan to hire Lady Holly to teach himself, and his marriageable sister, the minutiae of the ton. If you’ve read better Kleypas their romance feels predictable from start to finish.

He is a likeable enough hero, but Holly is an enigma. Kleypas suggests that she accepts Zachary's offer because she has a hidden wild streak and secretly hopes to challenge convention, but the reader never sees that in action. If an author has to repeatedly tell you the character is brave or smart or unconventional, it is usually because she hasn't shown you the character to be so in the context of the plot. Rose, Holly's daughter, like all romance novel children is delightful and perfect in every way. Also, the subplot romance between the sister and Holly's cousin wasn't given enough room to grow. Where Dreams Begin wasn't a bad book, but certainly isn't one of Kleypas' better works.

A Fire in the Heart

Title: A Fire in the Heart (1990)
Author: Katherine Sutcliffe (Avon)
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1861 England)
Grade: B

Another day, another positive English Victorian review. A Fire in the Heart isn't quite epic, but it is certainly grander in scope than most historical romance. Sutcliffe, who when I previously read I was not a fan, has crafted a dark novel that embodies the poverty and hardship of the period. It isn't a perfect novel. The hero is Alpha to the extreme, there are some weird age of consent issues, and some of the research/wording is lax but that will only bother a rabid history buff (i.e. me). In some respects it reminds me of Samantha James' Gabriel's Bride when a heroine from dire circumstances joins a noble family. It has many similar plot point but A Fire in the Heart has more texture of both character and setting.

Bonnie is an orphan fleeing horrid workhouse conditions. She finds refuge at Middleham Castle where she is sheltered and nursed back to health. Damien, the Earl of Warwick (also his last name, boo!), plans to return her to the workhouse once her health returns. The two bicker constantly as a front for their growing attraction. Bonnie loathes the upper class and isn't suitable grateful to the Earl. Her anger and distrust aren't artificial plot contrivances, but the result of her traumatic life experience. Damien, meanwhile, is conflict about embracing the family heritage or returning to America. He was burned in love before and refuses to acknowledge his feeling for Bonnie until it is too late. Also, he believes her to be younger than her age. After they make love he is stunned to learn she is eighteen because he had assumed she was fourteen. I know age of consent was different in the past, but gross!

She tells an enormous lie to preserve her safety that furthers his animosity. He is an Alphas-Alpha with much demanding and ordering and seducing abound. The novel then takes a Pygmalion twist when Damien becomes her guardian and attempts to marry her off. Misadventure turns tragic and the two are separated. There is also the mystery of Bonnie's past and her father's murder that neither predictable, nor an encumbrance to the plot.

Sutcliffe has done considerable research on the political entanglement of prosperous Englishmen and the American Confederacy. Damien isn't only a mill owner, but also a Mississippi plantation owner. Yet he isn’t a slave owner, Damien is morally opposed to the institution and only employs free blacks on his plantation. Southern history and African-American history are particular interests of mine so perhaps I'm the only one to notice how ridiculous this plot point. Mississippi has fewer free blacks than any Southern state, a mere 775 in the 1860 census. As the largest cotton plantations employed hundreds of slaves, that would mean almost every free black in the Magnolia State was in his employ! I know romance authors are terrified of making their characters slave owners because they fear it makes them unsympathetic, but abandoning historical accuracy to allow (the always white) hero and heroine to appear progressive just belittles the overall slave experience, IMO.

Tangents on slavery in romance novels aside, it was a good historical and I've now moved on to her sequel, My Only Love.

A Dangerous Man

Title: A Dangerous Man (1996)
Author: Connie Brockway (Dell)
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1878 England)
Grade: B+

I'm a sucker for a great cover. And by great I mean old-school bodice rippers cover. The trend of flowers and rainbow covers imply that we should be ashamed of reading romance novels. I wasn't wild about Connie Brockway the first time I read her but I couldn't resist this cover. Happily, I was not disappointed the second time around.

American Mercy Coltrane has come to England to find her missing younger brother. She hopes to enlist the help of an English gunslinger who once worked for her father's ranch & shot her. However, Hart Moreland was living a double-life in Texas because he is an earl attempting to hide from his unsavory past. Mercy appears at a house party where Hart is trying to arrange the marriage of his youngest sister to a duke. Desperate, Mercy blackmails him into assisting her locate her brother.

A Victorian, A Dangerous Man, highlights the seamy underside of London most Regencies ignore. The brother's opium addiction is painted in descriptive and grim detail. Most importantly, Mercy and Hart aren't perfect people. They make mistakes. They hurt each other. They say the wrong thing at the wrong time. But they don't behave like children. They are two adults who (slowly) fall in love with someone who is the exact opposite of who they imagined they'd love. It is a gradual feeling out process, but the tension never seem forced nor the characters stupid.

Good show, Connie! I'm now on the lookout for earlier Brockways.

Devil's Prize

Title: Devil's Prize (1995)
Author: Kat Martin (St. Martin's)
Period: European Historical-Georgian (1809 England/France)
Grade: C-

Kat Martin has long been one of my favorites. Her European Historicals have a gritty texture that is usually missing from most of the Regency ballroom fare. Devil's Prize had the darkness one expects from Kat Martin, but with cardboard cutout characters.

Damien (his title and his last name incorrectly the same) has decided to exact revenge upon the woman his younger half brother loved and killed himself over. He will make her fall in love with him and then ruin her. The plan works quickly and Alexa is soon on her way to ruin. Circumstances force them to marry, but Damien quickly discovers that Alexa is not the manipulative socialite he anticipated. She has been suffering with the guilt of her friend Peter's death. The two work towards a good marriage despite it not beginning on good footing. Had this been a book about two people working out personal conflict and grief it could have been well done.

Instead, Martin offers a spy plot involving the Napoleonic War. Damien is a double agent who's cover is only partially unveiled when Alexa overhears his plotting with the French. Rather than confront her husband, she turns him in to English authorities. Only one person in the English military knows Damien is a double agent so disaster unfolds. The two wind up escaping to France where Alexa spends the bulk of the book jumping to conclusions based on jealousy and a failure to have conversations. She almost gets them both killed on several occasions because she fails to believe him or trusts the wrong person over him. Damien is not a perfect hero, but he is certainly smarter and more committed to an open and honest relationship than she.

An interesting non-Regency European setting is spoiled by a dreadful plot and a dim, impulsive heroine.

Lily

Title: Lily (2003)
Author: Lauren Royal (Signet)
Period: European Historical-Restoration (1677 England)
Grade: F

Holy Shit! Some one wrote romance novel with Snow White as the heroine. Lauren Royal should watch her back because I understand those Disney intellectual property claims are a real bitch.

Lord Rand Nesbitt is an Oxford scholar, disowned second son, and jogging enthusiast. During the Restoration! He has for four years been smitten with his friend's young sister-in-law, Lily. The two are asked to serve as godparents to the friend and sister's twins and meet again at a christening/extended visit. Rand is attracted to Lily and pleased to see she is no longer a child, but he has no desire to marry. Which he proceeds to tell his best friend and her brother-in-law. Surprisingly, this doesn't get him punched in the face.

Lily is basically Snow White crossed with a doormat. She loves animals. Every fox and bird in the forest obeys her commands. Her dream is to open an animal rescue. During the Restoration! Lily is interested in Rand, but her scheming older sister, Rose has also set her cap for him. Lily, in true doormat fashion, allows her sister to bully her into promising not to pursue Rand. Lily agrees despite it being obvious to everyone in the house that he is smitten with Lily. Rose continues to throw herself at him, but eventually Rand forces Lily to accept his proposal.

It appears there problems are solved early in the novel, but au contraire! To avoid scandal Rand must break his engagement to Lily and take up with pregnant and unmarried friend to thwart his evil family. The plot takes other stupid side trips as well. I eventually could take no more and quit the field around page 200. Perhaps, Rand was able to save the day by inventing an airplane or a telephone. During the Restoration! That would have been about on par for this dreck.

Lady Hellfire

Title: Lady Hellfire (1992)
Author: Suzanne Robinson (Bantam)
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1854 England)
Grade: B+

Lady Hellfire is a very good fish out of water European Historical. I love stories about brash Americans finding love and adventure in the stuffy Ton. The Victorian historical elements are strong, particularly when Robinson explores restricting female fashion with the growing popularity of bustles and crinolette.

Kate is a true bluestocking. She is a fanatical reader, as well as being responsible for her maintaining her family's fortune after her father's death. She is outspoken and informal with little regard for the conventions and hierarchy of British society. I adore Kate. She has agreed to take her English mother on a trans-Atlantic visit to lift her spirits after her father's death. Her forthright manner and unconventional beauty made her open to ridicule from her cousin's neighbor the Marquees of Richfield on her previous trip to England. Alex, the Marquees, is complex hero. He was a war hero in the Crimea and he feels tremendous loyalty to the wounded veterans he cares for at his Estate. After his father's death, he was raised by his despicable mother and his sermonizing women-hating uncle. He suspects most unmarried women of trying to catch him in marriage for his wealth and title. Alex has issues.

When he and Kate are caught in a compromising position they announce a fake betrothal to save face. He attempts to educate Kate as how she can be more "ladylike" (i.e. boring) during their engagement. Kate, young and in love, goes along with the plan hoping to win his affections. She later realizes that Alex isn't worth losing herself. Happily, in reverse My Fair Lady fashion, he understands that he's rather have Kate as she is. The mysterious deaths around the castle (!) protract there HEA and the reader isn’t automatically certain of the murder.

Lady Hellfire isn't a perfect romance. Kate falls victim to a romance heroine's traits of crying and running away. She is conveniently in position to overhear just enough to create a Big Misunderstanding, but not long enough to understand what is really afoot. The villains are cut a bit too black. And one wonders when Alex will stand-up to his crazy family not just for Kate, but for himself. Very nice work with strong character development and excellent historical detail. I'll look for more Suzanne Robinson in the future.

The Perfect Lover

Title: The Perfect Lover (2003)
Author: Stephanie Laurens (Avon)
Period: European Historical-Victorian (1835 England)
Grade: C

My new historical romance pet peeve is author's who write suspense/mystery novels marketed as romance. To be fair, I'm sure the fault lies with Avon rather than Laurens.

The romance, minimal as it is, occurs between Simon (a Cynster) and his brother-in-law's sister, Portia Ashford. For Laurens, and one presumes her readers, being a Cynster is a personality trait in and of itself. The reader is to presume Simon is all things brave, virile, honorable, and wise. They both claim a long standing dislike. Laurens writes as if every reader has committed On a Wicked Dawn and its record of Simon and Portia's relationship to memory. One of the weaknesses with romance plot is the author continues to reference the conflict between the hero and heroine. Despite that as soon as we meet them in The Perfect Lover they are practically simpatico. They've conveniently both decided to embark on marriage hunts at the same time (and at the same house party) so one sees no real evidence they aren’t compatible.

The Perfect Lover is part of Laurens' Cynster series that like cockroaches and Rasputin just won't die. The success of this series in particular is, in my opinion, the cause of the explosion of familial romance series we see today. I'm not sure if that is an accolade or a rebuke. The book takes place at country house party with a lengthy and monotonous cast of Ton characters that would do the Illiad proud. The vast majority of these tertiarry characters are superfluous. Most have no role in the central plot whatsoever. There is a lot of tea drinking and escorting ladies to dinner, so only a handful of characters serve to advance the plot. Meanwhile, the eventual murder victim is so loathsome that one is left wishing all the guests conspired to do her in Murder on the Orient Express style. Laurens offer vagaries about the hero and heroine's shared sense of justice that leads them to solve the murder. I couldn't muster any interest in the victim, the investigation, or the romance.

Dangerous

Title: Dangerous (1993)
Author: Amanda Quick (Bantam)
Period: European Historical-Regencyish
Grade: D

I'm that last romance reader alive who still enjoys Amanda Quick's formulaic not-quite Regencies. So why was Dangerous so bad?

Sebastian, Earl of Anglestone has decided to entertain himself this season by courting "Original" Prudence. "Original" appears to mean a heroine with bad fashion sense. He wants to humiliate her foppish younger brother for reason's that are never made clear other than a deadly case of ennui. She attempts to dissuade him from the false courtship and a potential duel with her brother, however the two become entangaled in an investigation that is either criminal (Sebastian's theory) or spectral (Prudece's theory). They wind up betrothed and married amid the investigation which is a third rate who-cares who-done-it.

He is Quick's standard alpha hero. Brodding. Mysterious. Dangerous. Prue sport the antique name and curious hobby (spectral phenomena) that is the mark of all Quick off-beat heroines, but something is off. She doesn't have Harriet's intelligence, Pheobe's vulnerability, or Emily's determination. She is the kind of heroine who complains the hero won't allow her to rush into dangerous situation because "he doesn't want her to have any fun." Usually when a hero berates the heroine as "a little fool" it feels dated and weird. In Dangerous it feels apt.

Quick's writing lacks the zest and humor that signifies her early work here. In one telling example, Sebastian, an amateur criminal investigator, compares picking a lock to making love to his wife. When her character points out this oddity he offers a bizarre monologue comparing his wife (or perhaps her vajajay) to a lock. Quick offers the kind of lines that would have gotten any guy an elbow to the chops in high school as if they are clever, sexy, and romantic. They aren't. And neither is Dangerous.

Love Only Once

Title: Love Only Once (1985)
Author: Johanna Lindsey (Avon)
Period: European Historical-Regency (1817 England)
Grade: B-

Vintage Johanna Lindsey is my romance novel kryptonite. She has a routine formula of alpha hero + minimal character development + abduction plot + secret pregnancy = true love. I don’t know why, but it works for me. Maybe I just expect less in terms of plot and storytelling from 1980s romance. Maybe it is because I love old-school bodice ripper covers. Whatever the case, provided the she avoids the rape and forced sex of her earliest book, I can almost always enjoy a Johanna Lindsey. Love Only Once is happily no exception to that formula.

Nicholas Eden, a handsome rogue of a Viscount with some mommy issues, accidentally abduct orphaned beauty Regina Ashton one evening. He drunkenly mistakes her for a former mistress whose coach Regina has borrowed. They are, of course, immediately in lust. The word of her brief abduction quickly makes the round of Ton gossips and Regina’s powerful Mallory family fears she is near ruin. Regina’s uncle would like to arrange a dawn appointment, however Regina believes her near ruin perfectly fit with her current scheme to have her over protective uncles pick her husband. She insists that Nicholas is a perfect candidate and her uncles reluctantly force his hand. The Viscount, like many a romance novel hero, plans never to marry. In Nicholas’s case it is because he believes any society wife will shun him when she discovers his Big Family Secret. Nicholas treats Regina shabbily during their engagement period in the hopes she will cry off, excluding one night of gazebo nookie. He flees the country after their wedding in desperation.

Lindsey adds a half-cocked shipping/pirate plot that isn’t fully fleshed out to establish a back-story (however fleeting) between Nicholas and Regina’s uncle, James. When Nicholas does return to England he is forced to confront his unresolved family issues while attempting to win back the love and good graces of his wife and unknown son. Regina doesn’t give a fig about Nicholas’s Big Family Secret and is happy to reconcile all the parties involved. Nicholas has been an ass to Regina and thus offers her a heartfelt, if confused, apology for his behavior. Too many romance authors believe that a confession of love is enough to excuse poor behavior. The affective use of an apology along with Lindsey’s charming cast of characters makes the predictability of Love Only Once an asset rather than a detriment.

The Seduction of an English Scoundrel

Title:The Seduction of an English Scoundrel (2005)
Author: Jillian Hunter (Ivy)
Period: European Historical-Regency
Grade: D

The Seduction of an English Scoundrel reads like a historical romance Mad Lib. The plot, characters, and setting are all familiar but appears to have been constructed together with no rhyme or reason. Hunter offers a standard cookie-cutter Regency without even enough historical elements to call itself a wallpaper historical. The hero is a handsome rogue with a heart of gold. The heroine is a beautiful bluestocking. Why a woman with no scholarly pursuits and the intellect of a cocker spaniel is considered a bluestocking offers some insight into Hunter's character development. Jane is smarter than the other women in the book, so perhaps her half-cocked schemes make her something of a Jeopardy finalist compared to the Grayson's "spunky" (read: annoying) sister. The plot revolves around a collection of ludicrous schemes and misunderstandings that throw our hero and heroine into constant contact for no discernable reason. They naturally fall in love, but rather than have an adult conversation about their feelings they engage in competing asinine plots to dupe the other into marriage.

The author stresses repeatedly that Jane and Grayson have never meet before despite

1. her lifelong engagement to his cousin;
2. his hosting her aborted wedding;
3. she, her "spunky" best friend, and his "spunky" sister are all friends;
4. they travel in the same Ton social circles, including Jane's family's annual attendance at Grayson's family ball.

The real failure of plot comes when book reaches a climax of discovery. Grayson has fallen in love with Jane. He believes she is love with him. He learns about her role in the conspiracy to stop her own wedding, confirming that she was never in love with his cousin. Does he confront her with the truth? No. Does he ask his love to marry him? Nope. He concocts a bullshit plan (with the support of Jane's dopey parents) to pretend he wants her only as his mistress. Hunter attempts to incorporate a sexual manipulation plot appears out of the blue in a novel that offers PG-rated sexuality throughout. At her raunchiest, she includes a double entendre about rhubarb. Yes. Really.

The Seduction of an English Scoundrel is a routine novel of misunderstanding that any romance reader has read before, only worse.