And Then He Kissed Her by Laura Lee Guhrke

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥

Hmmm... I am not really sure what to say about this book except that it wasn't really my cup of tea. Maybe if I liked really boring tea...Well, no. That's not entirely fair. There is ONE interesting thing about this book at that is the fact that it is set in 1890s England - a really interesting time - well after the Regency period, late into the repressive Victorian era, and right before "Modern" Britain. Change was afoot and some of that change was reflected in this book. 

Economically, Britain was booming - there were the Railways, international trade and imperialism; even telephones and electric lights in some households. Culturally, women had a smidge more options. The heroine of this story, the delightfully Victorian-ly named Emmaline Dove, for example worked for a living as a secretary. She had independence and respectability and although she lived modestly, she wasn't in the kind of desperate circumstances of any of the unmarried, un-dowered Austen heroines of the Regency.

Sexually however, the Victorian period was a bleak time for ladies. Not that any time in the past seems to have been particularly breezy for women, but the Victorians seemed to take special delight in removing any thought of pleasure or fun for the fairer sex. Like a good Victorian lady, Emma, begins as a rather mousy sex-less creature, who is taught early on by her aunt to suppress any baser instincts. 

Aside: Recall that this was a time that sexual frustration in women was referred to as "hysterical mania" to be treated by doctors providing "pelvic massage" to induce "hysterical paroxism" in order to relieve the patients hysterical symptoms. 

Another aside: There was this lovely movie called "Hysteria" (trailer below) that I watched a while back starring Hugh Dancy and Maggie Gyllenhaal which tells the story of Dr. Joseph Mortimer's 1880s invention of the electromechanical vibrator. The hilarious-but-also-kinda-sad reason for mechanizing the vibrator was basically because the good Doctor Mortimer's wrists starting hurting from giving so many women pelvic massages that he needed good old technology to help a brother out. The obvious question arises - how the hell many massages was this guy giving anyway? Can you get carpal tunnel from too many pelvic massages? Have All the Women been informed? Because it seems like that would be information ladies would like to have.

I seem to have digressed far, far off the garden path. 

Anyway, my POINT is, that while this story was incredibly tiresomely AND pedantically dull, it was set in a cool period in history.

I should outline the He/Her/Conflict of the book so at least you have all the facts to decide for yourselves:

He: Viscount Marlowe, or Harry, is one of the modern haute ton who actually works for a living. This was a time when the aristocracy was broke and had to either marry rich American heiress (Downton Abbey, Season 4 Coming Soon, what whaaat!) or actually work for a living <gasp!> Harry chooses to work and runs a successful publishing enterprise.

She: Emmaline Dove is the quiet, spinsterish, plain, humorless secretary who keeps Harry on schedule and is the silent force behind everything at the company actually getting done. She keeps working for him even when he asks her to do stuff like buy "going away presents" for the mistresses he ditches and even though she knows he's selfish and a faithless rake, because he is fair minded enough to pay her what he would pay a male secretary, and because she dreams of one day being able to publish her own book.

Conflict: He never wants to get married again because of a whole thing with his previous wife who was in love with someone else and ran off and now he's scarred for life and feels guilty for subjecting his family to the stigma of his divorce. There's some sexual chemistry between Harry and Emma, they embark on an affair, he unveils the hedonist beneath her starchy, repressed exterior, she knows he's a love-em-and-leave-em kinda guy but she falls for him anyway, he skirts the issue of commitment until there's a whole Grand Gesture event (which wasn't that grand, honestly - he bought her a bunch of books) and boom they live happily ever after.

Basically the plot of Any Romantic Comedy Ever. But this wasn't really that funny. It was just sort of obvious and un-funny. And I found Emma incredibly tiresome and unsympathetic. She just caved. Like in 2 seconds under his smoldering gaze, she CAVED and gives everything up. It just felt like all her snippy attitude and sense of independence and moralizing were nothing more than a cloak to hide her sexual frustration. She didn't really seem to have a personality except "sexually frustrated spinster" and then when she finally gives it up (and oh, of course HE'S the one who is responsible for all this flowering and passion, right? Honestly, it could have been ANY DUDE, she was THAT wound up) she's all hedonistic and sexual. Please. 

Anyway, the writing wasn't bad. I mean, I liked it but I wasn't transported. Maybe I was in a bad mood because I thought she was lame and he was a selfish jerk and I just hit a wall. As I said, not my cup of tea.

But I leave you with the trailer of Hysteria which WAS my cup of tea. Really funny tea.

Goddess of the Hunt by Tessa Dare

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥♥

Lovely, beautifully written and so, so sweet.

Lucy loves Toby. Toby loves Sophia. And Jeremy loves Lucy. Love is so complicated, n'est pas?

This could have turned into a hilarious romp in the vein of The Importance of Being Ernest (one of the most wonderful books I have ever read), but it was just too sincere and well, earnest, to be anything other than a darling story about love growing between friends. 

She: Lucy is the younger sister of a slightly distracted, but loving brother who has practically grown up with her brother's two best friends Toby and Jeremy. She has formed a tendre for dashing and handsome Toby who had playfully crowned her Diana, Goddess of the Hunt once when he was in a particularly flirtatious mood. She is convinced that he's the man for her even though everyone else disagrees and sets out to seduce him in order to prove her point.

He: Jeremy is the serious one of the three friends and has been the self-appointed look-out for Lucy and her various scrapes with disaster. He has always known she is special but doesn't really let himself go for it with her because she is his best friends sister and there are Rules against that kind of thing. Plus he's an Earl and has to marry someone suitable - Lucy, for all her charms, hardly fits the mold for his perfect countess.

Conflict: First of all there is a whole love triangle. That one is solved in the first 50% of the book. The last 50% deals with a whole series of misunderstandings that keep the two apart.  

Loved:
1) The words. I LOVED all the WORDS. I cannot say enough about romance writers who treat this genre like it's "proper" literature. 

2) The heroine is a bit of a dummy (she's young), but she's a ball of unstoppable energy that just made me smile. She does a lot of dumb things but she's pretty funny doing them, so I didn't mind too much. And despite her youth, she doesn't really need anyone to take care of her which is also a departure as far as young-girl-weds-older-man tropes go.

3) The female friendships in the story. I liked that the ladies were complicated and wanted different things but still found a way to bond. I liked that there was honestly between friends and that the women showed true regard and sympathy for one other.

What wasn't as awesome:
1) I think the "Series of Misunderstandings" conflict is a bit overdone. I realize this book was written years ago, but I just think when all the tension between the hero and heroine can be instantly dissolved with a single honest discussion between the characters, then it's all a bit silly that it isn't being instantly solved with that conversation. 

Favorite lines:
"Goddess he may have dubbed her, but the worship was all on Lucy's side"

"He employed six-and-twenty footmen - in London alone - to heed to his every command. Now he catered to the whims of a despot in dotted muslin."

"This wasn't a blind, mindless craving for anything woman and willing. This was needing with a name."

The Flame and the Flower by Katherine Woodiwiss

Skeptic scale: ♥♥ 
The Queen of Bodice Rippers

It's hard to talk about this book without mentioning its context in the history of the genre. Especially since it was the book that actually helped define the genre. It must have been so thrilling/shocking to have picked this book up in 1972. Imagine being a young Skeptic, having never before read an explicit sex scene in a romance novel, picking this little piece of goodness up and being faced with a rather full-on rape scene in the first 40 pages! 

It's stupid to try and "judge" the material in today's context, but let me just say this thing reads ... interestingly... this second time around, after having read all the generations of historical romance that have been written since. It's hyperbolic (sex scene: stars, heaven, bursting, shattering), and expansive (poor orphan, horrible abuse at the hands of men, journey across the high seas, introduction to an untamed new world) and if it wasn't the Classic it is, it's a pretty horrendous read.

I don't mean any disrespect to the Duenna of the grand tradition of the historical romance as we know it, so I'll doff my hat and drop a curtsy to her right now before I begin outlining the wtfs that had me rolling my eyes in my journey.

1) The Hero and heroine were tres idiotique and never, ever COMMUNICATE like adults: Granted that the heroine was 18 when they meet, but having been 18 myself, I would have bloody well said something like, hey dude - I'm not a prostitute, I'm actually just lost, so you should probably not try to have sex with me. And I get that he's horny and not thinking clearly, but surely he had the company of his right hand for all those months at sea, and unlike a lion or a horse or a wombat who couldn't possibly take care of matters by themselves, this dude could have behaved a little less like a ravening beast and more like a dude who just wanted a little female company. 

And worse than the actual rape (ACK!) was the hero's rather amused reaction when he realizes his mistake. I mean, what the WHAT THE WHAT???? I get that times may have been "rougher" then, but surely he might have spared a moment's regret at having basically hurt and ruined this chick! What a dummy.

2) Fake tension: After the weird rape scene, there is about 80% of the book where the hero behaves like a chaste little choirboy. A moody, irritable little sh!t in other words. God, that guy was the WORST. He's mean and silly and seems unable to communicate like an adult man. And then, when they eventually DO get it on after this torturous almost-year of frustrated chastity, he's kinda nice. So all the aggression and black humor was just a case of extreme sexual frustration?? Again, something that could have been solved in about 100 seconds of him getting cozy with his hand. C'mon bro.

I wonder if their not sleeping together while she is pregnant had more to do with some sort of squeamishness from the audience at the time than something the author necessarily wanted to show? These days, romances seem to have gone the opposite direction with couples going at it like bunnies while she's preggers. Which I don't know if I'm totally into either...

3) The heroine has zero personality: Unless you call being young and hot a personality. She's a scaredy puss in her every interaction with "danger" or intimidation. Fine, she's young. She shows the occasional flash of temper but then it subsides at the first sign of conflict. Ok, she's young and has had a hard life that have left her gun shy. She doesn't seem to have any interests (except taking baths - there are like 25 bath scenes in this book - I appreciate the nod to cleanliness, but c'mon.) People either hate or like her because of her beauty. Her husband basically falls for her because of her ravishing figure and pretty face. But apart from the beauty thing and the youth thing, there doesn't seem to be much going for her.

Maybe this is a way to make the heroine's character more of a "vessel" into which the reader can pour in her own personality and feel all the events with more sympathy? I dunno. I just thought she was lame.

4) Two-dimensional characters: The baddies are BAD. And there are SO MANY BADDIES. Her abusive aunt. Her aunt's lecherous brother. The rapey villain. The hero's jealous lover. The hero for most of the book. The hero's horse was kinda of a d!ck too, come to think of it. I'd have enjoyed a 3rd dimension on some of this stuff.

Anyway, I'll stop there. Would I read this book again? Never. Should you read it? Obvi, sisters. Obvi. It's part of the canon. And when you read a romance novel with the passion that many of us do, you need to know where the genre has come from. Think of it like reading Othello or Moby Dick or some other tedious read that you somehow convince yourself is "art" and clever and enriching.

Skeptic's last word: My recommendation would be to read it aloud, in the company of other Skeptics. In fact, I wish I had read this aloud with my husband and watched his reactions. It would have been a great experience to be able to explain my way through some of the riduculosity that was going on. Ooh. Maybe I WILL read it again, after all!

A Lady By Midnight by Tessa Dare

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥

This book started at a 4-5 ♥ for me and sort of held there for the first 2/3rds of the book. I was thrilled and prepared to settle in for a nice Sunday Funday of just me, Tessa and a bottle of something cheap and red! But THEN. Oooooh then. Well, I'm sorry to have to tell you that the last third just stretched my patience a LITTLE too far and just brought the whole thing down to an average of 3 ♥. Sigh.

Here's the lowdown.

He: Corporal Thorne's militia unit is stationed in Spindle Cove, a quaint little seaside town inhabited by an abundance of unusual and interesting ladies. He's quiet and surly and not much of a conversationalist. We find out that he's had a wretched childhood and his taciturnity is partly a result of a lifetime of getting kicked in the cojones by Life. He's also just a reserved guy.

She: Kate is the village piano teacher. She is sweet and kind, a well-liked member of the village. Underneath her sweetness, she is masking her loneliness and an almost desperate need to find her family. She is an orphan who had the good fortune to be left at a school for girls where she was relatively well treated but she still pines to discover what she can about her own roots.

Conflict: He is wildly attracted to her, but feels so beneath her that he can't allow himself to touch her. She always feels intimidated by his dark scowls and moodiness. The main reason he won't allow himself to be near her is because he knows something about where she comes from, something bad, and that information could potentially destroy the nice little life she has built for herself. And he likes her so much he just can't bring himself to ruin everything for her no matter how much she thinks she wants to find out about her past.

So...The first bit starts out really nicely - classic Tessa Dare. Witty, sweet, fun. All the elements of a cozy love story all lined up like a bunch of yellow duckies toddling along behind their mom. The right amount of longing and lusting and broody staring. All great stuff and I was all set to 5 heart this puppy. 

But THEN... there is a series of what I shall call Hysterical Events (including an idiotic sword fight / impromptu duel at a house party, a marriage proposal from someone who is a good guy but basically needs to marry her because he needs her inheritance, the constant self-denial of the hero because he just Wants Her to Be Happy even though she keeps telling him she will be Happy Only With Him). 

And as much as I dislike hysteria perpetrated by the heroine, I equally don't like it when it's perpetrated by the hero. The hero's problem is that because of his painful childhood he feels alone and unlovable and has experienced all sorts of terrible violence. But the way he tries to do what's best for her is always this overly dramatic, operatic nonsense that leaves me feeling like "huh?" Is this a full grown man? Because he's kind of acting like a 16 year old girl...

I'm being very harsh. I know that. I did like the H. He was a really decent dude who was only trying to do what's best for her. But I feel like his insecurity just made him behave in ways that I didn't find rational or even sensible. So I didn't fall for him and that just made believing the whole HEA that much harder for me.

Anyway. Having said that, I think this was a sweet story with all the hallmarks of a good Tessa Dare read - humor, wit, some spiciness - so it wasn't a total loss. I just wished I connected with the H more.

Lady Louisa's Christmas Knight by Grace Burrowes

Skeptic scale: ♥♥

I think Ms. Burrowes is a superb writer so it pains my to say how incredibly bored I was by this book. Usually, I cannot WAIT to take myself and my book to a quiet place where I can read in peace, but I found that I actually avoided opening my kindle because I knew I had to finish this thing and it was just too dull a prospect to bear. Sigh...

Anyway, now that I have finished it, let me explain why I was so underwhelmed. But first, a short summary.

He: A knight who has come back from fighting the war (bravely and honorably) with a limp. He isn't from a grand family, and only became knighted because of his performance in the war. In fact, he was so impressive he is endorsed by the great man himself - Wellington. Oh, and he's in line for a "proper" title of Baron but he really doesn't want it.

He has some secrets. Lots of illegitimate children that he has fostered. There is some attempt to make it seem like they are actually his bastards but that was SUCH a weak attempt at mystery that I won't even bother to keep the spoiler a secret. Because you'll see through it anyway in half a second if you do read this. Anyway, he's a decent, honorable chap who reads poetry to his pig and has long rambling chats with his horse. 

She: Daughter of a powerful duke who is just bored. With everything - society, her life, her routine. She's supposed to be quite a polymath - poet, mathematician, strategy expert, bruising horsewoman and excellent dancer. She's beautiful and kind and everything genteel and proper. With a hidden passion, that he uncovers, of course. 

She's got this terrible secret, that if exposed, will destroy her reputation so she stays away from men in general.

What was nice:

1) The writing is very Georgette Heyer-ish. There is a keen sense of time and place and absolutely correct usage of Regency language. 

What I did not like at all:

1) The pace was slumberous. I mean, it took 15 pages for ONE thing to happen. I think I've gotten used to more "modern" historical romances that are written with quicker pacing, with a structure that gives the characters more "tension".

I think we were supposed to feel urgency due to the fact that these two characters had these secrets that they were withholding from each other. But then it turns out they both find out about each other's terrible secrets before actually the other reveals it to them. Then we see that they're both just ok with those secrets. I mean, what was the point then? Where's the tension? What do they really have to overcome?

They have these made up internal struggles and then everything falls flat like a badly made souffle in this big "reveal" scene with a villain (who was a weak, pathetic person who had no real power over anyone). I felt a bit cheated that I struggled through the whole series of (extremely slow) events only to be treated to this weak climax scene.

2) Dull sex scenes. It's all just too proper to be really hot. Again, I think this is because I'm used to raunchier language in the more recently written historicals, but these two talk like they are at a tea party while doing it. In fact, there's just too much TALKING. Long, witty sentences that are fine when they're building the tension, but then when we're supposed to feel their passion, there is all this noise from their yammering that I was like SHUT UP AND DO IT ALREADY!

The weird thing is that the proper talk is juxtaposed with this incredibly clinical description of his bits and her bits and their bits mashing together. It just felt really strange and not very sexy at all. Like sex between the Queen (forgive me, Your Highness) and her consort. Shivers.

3) No tension. At all. None. And that was surprising. I mean there was a duel, some improper behavior, clandestine smooches, scandalous secrets in both their pasts, a villain... but it all was like a bunch of milky porridge with no texture or grit or sense of urgency. I just didn't give a fig by the end of it. Maybe the pace was intentional since this was a "Christmas" romance and maybe there was the feeling that readers want a nice, slow read for the winter days but I would have been annoyed if I wasted my Christmas break on this.

Skeptic's last word: I still think Grace Burrowes is a solid writer and I'm definitely reading her again. This one was simply too slow for me. Also, I need to be more strategic about when I read her. I need to be in the mood for a Heyer-type read with lots of fun language and less romp.

Bound by Your Touch by Meredith Duran

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥

He: James is the rakish heir to the Earl of Moreland whose sole aim in life is to infuriate his father in order to "punish" him for this terrible thing his father did in the past. James never forgives his father for abandoning his sister during her most difficult time because of the Earl's obsession with being dignified in the eyes of society. 

She: Lydia is a proper, spinsterish miss who for lack of a "better" occupation (i.e. marriage) is her father's right hand man in his business affairs in the trade of Egyptian antiquities. She doesn't seem to have any special passion for antiquities for all she writes papers about them, but she does do her duty to her father admirably.

Conflict: Both H & h are loyal to a fault. Lydia is loyal to her father, despite the fact that he basically abandons her and her sisters to hare off to Egypt to dig up artifacts. James is loyal to his sister even when it means ruining his relationship with his father, ruining his own reputation in society and generally living with his sweltering bitterness and guilt. 

Eventually both are made to see that loyalty and faith, while excellent attributes, cannot be given indiscriminately. Lydia and James each need to give up a little of their stubbornness in order to face reality and finally learn to be happy.

What I liked: 
1) I liked the psychological complications of relationships between fathers and their children. It shows how those initial key relationships with one's father/mother teach people to love and trust in future relationships. When those initial relationships go wrong, it can have devastating effects on the person's ability to really achieve true peace of mind until they resolve the conflicts with their own families.

In the story, it is imperative for both Lydia and James to achieve some sort of closure with their respective fathers before they can truly be free to forge a new, healthy relationship with one another. I appreciated the fact that the author didn't try to resolve everything with a pretty ribbon at the end, but left in a little of the messiness that a real life family with internal troubles might have.

2) The writing was amazing. Sometimes. 
MD would write these beautifully complicated sentences, witty dialogue and some lovely, wrenching internal character monologues, and then she would have a sentence like "you, sir, are a cad!" Huh? Seems a little trite, no? Then there were these awful, awful, awful American-isms ("bully for you") that just made me wince. And many times characters refer to James as "Viscount" rather than "My lord". There should be a proper editor who edits this kind of stuff out. I mean, I know it's not THAT big a deal, but if you're writing a period book, why not just treat the topic with respect and do it properly?

Anyway, MD is clearly a wonderful writer. But I thought this was only good when it could have been edited to be superb.

What I grew super annoyed with:
1) Lydia spends a whole lot of the book chastising the poor man for being a "cad", being useless, being a rake, being a bad son etc etc. Get over it, lady. It was especially annoying because she seems to go overboard criticizing him because she herself is such an insecure bundle of nerves (she's insecure about her looks, her standing in society, her desirability). And anyway, who was she to criticize someone so roundly? She was plenty damaged herself.

2) Although everything was really well written, I felt like the internal monologue just went on and on and ON. There were some points where one character would say something, and before the other responds there would be 3 PAGES of internal monologue - so I had pretty much forgotten what the last bit of dialogue even was by the time the other person responds. 

3) Throwaway secondary characters. Lydia's sisters, James' friend Phin and certain other secondary characters are mentioned, play some role in the story and then sort of just disappear. We don't get a sense of the "world" Lydia and James live in because we don't really know the people in their world. We know a lot about their relationships with their respective fathers, but very little about their relationships with other people. Even Lydia's relationship with her sisters seem a bit two-dimensional. All I know is that one sister sucks and one is nice. And that's about it. MD probably set it up that way to write other books about these other characters, but I thought their roles were a bit unsatisfying in this particular book.

Skeptic's last word: I think MD is a super writer - she seems to be someone I would normally love reading. I am going to pick up another of her books to see if I perhaps just picked wrong this time since this seemed to miss somewhat with me. 

A Lady Awakened by Cecilia Grant

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥♥

He: the wastrel son of a baronet who's been banished to the Sussex countryside to behave himself. He's a good-natured, affectionate sort who misses his uncomplicated London life of fun and easy manners. But to end his banishment, he needs to prove to his father's steward, and by extension his father, that he has become a respectable land-owning gentleman and has left the life of dissipation behind him. 

The task becomes especially hard when his very pretty, very widowed neighbor makes him an offer impossible for a cad like him to refuse. Not that he wants to refuse.

She: The widow of a man who was rather careless of his lands and responsibilities while he was alive. She took on all the responsibility of running the household and oversaw the duties to their tenants and lands. But now that her husband has died without an heir, the land and life she regards so highly will be lost to her dead husband's villainous brother. She cooks up a plan to find an "heir" in a month by recruiting the H to be her hired stud. Wha whaaaat!

Conflict: She's prickly, proper to the point of being tedious, and entirely without the capacity to charm. She's single-minded in her goal to fake an heir because she knows if the property gets into the nasty old lech of her brother-in-law's hands, he will be a threat to the virtue of every female servant and she just can't let that happen. She thinks the H is vain and silly and has little respect for him, even though she needs his help to conceive. She hires him to be her "stud" for a month in the wild hope that she can keep the property but remains entirely aloof to his charms.

What I liked:
1) Considering that the construction of the story required 30 days of sex scenes I was worried that it would all get a bit comme ci comme ca by the nth description of their heaving bosoms and trembling nerves. 

Noting could have further from that expectation! In fact, for most of the book there were no heaving bosoms! The heroine remained frigid and unresponsive to his bedroom blandishments for the majority of their doing-it scenes. I thought it was hilarious that the only times she felt turned on by him he wasn't trying to seduce her at all - it was during totally serious moments where was talking about wheat prices or being "intellectual" or when he being useful and fixing a tenant's roof. 

2) There was some actual character development - as in both characters developed into richer, more complicated people as the story progressed and began to like each other as they saw and learned more of the other. 

There was an interesting juxtaposition of this puritanical, "innocent" friendship that grows between them, while they're conducting this strange, rather scandalous physical relationship where neither is getting all that much pleasure. Usually romance novels present stories the opposite way - beginning with this explosively amazing sexual chemistry and using the rest of the story to develop an out-of-bedroom relationship between the characters. This sort of turns that formula on its head a bit because there non-sexual chemistry actually grows a lot faster and their sexual relationship has to catch up.

What I thought was a bit weird:
1) It seems sort of a stretch to think that a prim, governess-y lady would approach a random dude to hire him to be her stud. Pun intended. Why not just travel somewhere and adopt a baby? I get that she was desperate and things needed to be done really quickly so the baby seemed legitimate - but surely there were other ways to deal with the issue that didn't involve sex with a total stranger who has a reputation for being a philandering rogue. Did no one fear the pox in those days!? Seriously though, why wasn't adoption a viable option?

2) Why does he try so hard? It becomes clear from the first few interludes that she wasn't getting any pleasure out of his bedroom skills. This sort of compels him to try even harder, going to even greater lengths to see that she derives pleasure from their little interactions. To no avail. In fact, she just sort of acts holier than thou the whole time because she considers him useless and directionless. Um. He's not the one hiring someone to fake an heir so I feel like her feeling of superiority was a tad misplaced.

I see why he would be intrigued by her initial suggestion and go with it for a lark. But then when she proves to be a pain in the butt, why doesn't he just end it? Wouldn't a guy just feel kind of demoralized after day 5 of frigid reception? She's not very likable in the beginning so not sure why he decides to keep going? The way it's described in the book, he is determined to turn her on with his legendary bedroom skills and needs to prove to himself that he can. I call bullshit. 

Skeptic's last word: Anyway, despite a couple of over-engineered plot points, this is a fun, craftily constructed story. CG cleverly weaves in so much more than a love story here - we talk about the rights of women during the times, the politics of land ownership and the social politics of the co-dependent role of landowner and tenant. The love story wasn't as dark and intense as the other one of hers I  loved (A Gentleman Undone) but all in all, a good read.

Any Duchess Will Do by Tessa Dare

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥♥


Warning: There is a bit of d-baggy snarkiness up front but then I'm nice again.

Publisher: Hey, you know what story hasn't been written yet? Something about a duke who reeeeeeally doesn't want to marry but gives in just to get his mom off his back, who then falls in love with a commoner. 

You should totally write a book about that! 

Oh wait, you know what would make it even more original? 

If the commoner wasn't really "common" - what if she had the grace and intelligence of someone in a much higher class who had a lot more education? So, slap some pretty clothes and a shiny jewel or two on her and she walks and talks pretty much as any lady of goodly breeding would except for the occasional adorably charming gaff or wobble with proper etiquette that would make her seem all the more fresh and unique. Yeah, you should write that. I don't think anyone has read anything like that before!

I know. I am SUCH a jerk. I need to get over myself, right? I agree. And I promise that I WILL get over myself and just appreciate a story for what it is. Right after this one last thing I have to say. No, you don't understand. I HAVE to get this out of my system before I de-jerk-ify myself for the rest of the review because I might bust my spleen - which, as everyone knows, is where all the bad blood and angst pools like a whole lot of chocolate sauce at the bottom of an unstirred glass of chocolate milk.

Here is the last mean and ornery thing I will say about this: A duke (nay, any gentleman of Quality) would never, ever, ever, EVER wed a barmaid. He maaaaaay marry a courtesan, a mistress who has so bewitched him by her bedroom accomplishments that he simply can't let her go. Maybe even some lesser baronet's daughter. But NEVER a daughter of a poor farmer who births calves with her bare hands as a matter of course. Ever. I don't care how motivated she is to exceed her circumstances. I don't care how beautiful and innately graceful she is. Or how much charm and wit she has. It would NEVER happen. I mean, a serving girl in the Regency era would barely be able to read, and would have had less than a couple years of formal education.That education would have been limited to reading Bible passages. Her diction would be a lot worse than simply dropping a few "h"s and uttering some colorful swear words every now and then. Certainly nothing that could be My Fair Lady'd out of her in a week. So yeah. This would just NEVER have happened. 

Hang on. I fear I may not have been emphatic enough. Allow me to be clearer. This would NEVER happen - not in a million zillion years.

Phew. Ok. That's the sum of my angst all puked out, I can move on to happier things.

Like saying that I really did enjoy this story. A lot! It was beautifully, sympathetically written and everything moved along at a nice clip with a lot of humor and sensitivity. The H & h were both extremely likable characters and for ONCE, I found that the "meddlesome older female" character (the duke's mother) was portrayed with a lot of heart and depth.

Here are the highlights of the H & h and conflict:

He: Griff, the 8th Duke of Halford convinced he will never marry even if that means the Halford line dies with him. There is a tragic backstory about why excatly he is so anti-matrimony. His mother, however, is convinced that he MUST be wed. And more specifically, that he must produce little mini-me's for her to care for and coddle. 

She's driven to such desperation that she agrees to accept ANY woman of his choosing and declares she can turn any girl into a duchess.

To punish her for her meddling, he decides to be difficult and chooses the least duchess-like woman he can - a barmaid and the daughter of a small-time farmer. 

She: Although born to a poor-ish family with a terrible and cruel father and a defeated mother, Pauline Simms is determined to rise above her circumstances. She's saving for a future for both her and her sister.

She's charming, beautiful, impertinent - you know the drill.

Conflict: She's a poor serving girl and he's a duke. Never gonna happen. 

What I liked:
1) The opening scene where Griff is getting kidnapped by his mom and dragged off to get a wife was genuinely adorable. And hilarious. I think it really helped set the mood, like someone holding up a sign at the beginning of a play saying "Please turn all cell phones and electronic devices to Fairy Tale Mode." For me, the scene went a long way in silencing that niggling voice at the back of my head that kept saying "Dude. This would never happen" in this bitchy tone of voice, so that I could actually read and enjoy the story.
  
2) I don't want to sound like a raging sex-crazed ho-bag, but the one sex scene in the duke's library where he dirty-talks all the way through this rather erotic master/servant scenario was the turning point for me. That was the exact moment where I just decided, to hell with it, I'll go for it. This IS a great story. They SHOULD be together. Duke, servant? Heck yeah. This could totally happen. 

Also, it seems like there would be a market (me) for a lot more fantasy role play scenarios in historicals. They could play duchess and the footman, or queen and stableboy, duke and chambermaid - the possibilities are endless! My poor husband is quaking in fear as he reads this over my shoulder.

3) The writing, editing, pacing and characterizations were superb. To be able to take about 153 cliches and turn them into this lovely, sweet romance so that even the worst sort of Skeptic like me could just say, shove it, I'm IN, sistah! That was just superlative.

So. Bottom line is that this book is wonderful fun - sexy, charming and adorable - which is a hard combo to pull off. It's eating chocolate covered snowdrops while sitting on a pillowy nest of cumulus clouds with a bunny in your lap while reading about Cinderella and Charming's sexy-times. Naughty, but SO nice. 

Skeptic's last word: My advice would be to acknowledge the preposterous premise of farm girl/barmaid + duke up front and then just go with it. If for that dirty talk scene if nothing else. <Rapidly fluttering fan to cool heated cheeks>

It Happened One Midnight by Julie Anne Long

Skeptic Scale: ♥♥♥

Huh. What shall I say about this book that won't seem make me seem like a totally demanding d!ckhead. First of all, this was a good read. Julie Anne Long is obviously an amazing writer and the Pennyroyal Green series is a winner. But like the totally demanding d!ckhead that I am, I just wanted MORE. 

I mean, first of all, I was all disappointed by the fact that this wasn't the big Lyon/Olivia story that I have been waiting for for ages and ages (JAL and George R.R. Martin are KILLING me with all this SUSPENSE. I BEG you both to put me out of my misery already.) 

And second, I thought that maybe this particular story had a bit less uniqueness and knock-you-knickers-off-ness than the others did and that could be why I'm having such a hard time articulating why it missed slightly with me. 

He: Jonathan Redmond, the youngest son of the famed Redmond family of Pennyroyal Green. No one really expects much of him - not his father, the business-obsessed Isiah Redmond, not his siblings and not his friends in the ton. But Jonathan does have passion and interests outside wagering and gadding about Society. He has a knack for investing in good ideas - it's just that he doesn't always have the money to do it.

She: Thomasina, or Tommy, is the bastard daughter of a Duke, she had a tragic life but has scrapped and saved and has managed to build a place for herself in Society. It's a fragile foothold, to be sure, but she's determined to cling to it and to build the thing she wants most - a family.

Conflict: Tommy needs a wealthy, titled man to marry her and give her his name and to finally give her the respectability she's never really had. Jonathan doesn't have a title or wealth making him the exact opposite of what she wants. His father has also decreed that Jonathan must get married to a respectable lady of good breeding within 6 months or he loses what money he does receive in his allowance. Tommy is the exact opposite of respectable and not at all someone Jonathan can think of pursuing. Nothing seems to align for them and they know it.

My take:
1) I wish the hero was more "tortured" by his decision to follow his heart. 

I'm not a sadist or anything, but I like there to be some tension in the lead up to when H & h eventually get together. I want it to feel like the odds are so hugely against them, the risk of choosing each other is so fraught with peril that there is always the chance that they won't get to be together. Even though these are romance novels and I KNOW the ending, I want to feel like that ending is in mortal danger of never happening. I want to feel weak with relief when the HEA does happen for them. Dramatic much? Hells yeah...

Here, it just felt like both knew what they felt for each other early on. Jonathan's character was painted like this noble nice guy so that you already KNOW what his attitude to his father's ultimatum would be. I wasn't ever in doubt of his actions. Or hers.

2) I'm so over Good Guys - give me a leeeetle bad.

The hero is the classic Good Guy. He has a superhero complex and feels the need to save everyone, he's nice to children and ladies, he's an affable friend etc etc. I feel like I read this characterization a LOT. I would love to believe these Good Guy types actually exist but remain unconvinced. I wish there was a way to make a REGULAR person, one who doesn't naturally act like a saint and risk bodily harm to save others, be heroic. I wish he was even a little bad. Or regular even. At least that way I can pretend such a hero could actually exist somewhere in this big bad world. 

Speaking of Good Guys. I wouldn't have minded if this heroine was a little less tragically wonderful. I mean, she's like a lollipop. All unrelenting charm and sweetness. 

She got a superhero complex of her own and in spite of all the crappy things that happen to her growing up, she still has this fresh naivete and delightful innocence about her? C'mon. The last scene in the Epilogue made me roll my eyes even though it was supposed to show how she was such a dignified and magnanimous person in spite of being wronged by life. People don't work that way! Or maybe I'm just a huge jerk.

There were some other issues I had, but basically I thought the story was a bit blah and I kept feeling this deja vu, because honestly I feel like I have read the story of ruined-bastard-daughter-comes-up-in-the-world-relying-on-her-wits-and-incomparable-beauty-and-in-spite-of-the-tragedy-of-her-own-life-seeks-to-save-others-from-similar-fate-while-attaining-saintly-aura-of-untouchable-innocence. Nyeeeeh. 

I read somewhere that the next one in the Pennyroyal series is about Ian Eversea. Aaarrrgh. Shoot me nowwwwww. Give me Olivia and Lyon dammit. Although when I've calmed down I won't be that crushed about Ian's story - I like that guy in the other books so fine. I'll wait even LONGER for Olivia/Lyon. Waiting even longer for their story won't raise my expectations or anything...