Getting Over It by Anna Maxted

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥

In Getting Over It, Anna Maxted reminds us that the Brits, as a people, are hilarious. And even though I had some issues with this book, it cannot be denied that I laughed out loud so many times that the lady sitting next to me in Starbucks inched away and gave me a look reserved for the homeless dude who stares at the 2% milk carafe and talks to it all day.

Many, many more sour candy tidbits like these:

"...it'll be as awkward as sex in a bath. Your stomach bunches up and the aesthetics are ruined."

"I fed the hunger on a gluttonous diet of pre-1970s Harlequin romances."

"If we always made the smartest choices, we'd never get laid."

"I am dumping Jasper tomorrow. He deserves it for being called Jasper, for a start."

I struggled with this. 4 hearts because it was hilariously funny and there was a LOT going on (death in the family, serious trouble in a close friend's life, many hits and misses with some foolish men, anxiety at work, tumult with roommates, a sick cat at home)? Or 3 because the heroine acts like a serious wanker in every single one of her dealings with the hero and through all the other challenges in her life. Methinks 3.

She: A 26-year old lowly employee of a girly magazine who shares many of the manifold amusements one would expect of a young, hot City gal. She hangs with her friends and bitches about men, goes out and gets sozzled on a semi-regular basis, fails to save money, makes terrible decisions with men, and loves her cat. 

It's all plodding along swimmingly until her father dies.Then, suddenly, the depression, anger and her complicated Daddy-issues seem to attack from within. For half the book she is a viperishly angry creature and the other half she's a sodden lump of despair and  a BAD-DECISION MACHINE.

He: A vet. Hot. Sweet. Jolly-humored. Kind to her cat. Good in bed. Polite to her family. Takes the higher road with rude characters. Just a good dude. A little beta.

Story: There's no plot exactly. It's more of a story of how she needs to come to terms with her issues with her parents and how she must untangle the gnarly mess of her other romantic and platonic relationships.

The main thing stopping me from loving this is the fact that my main concern wasn't addressed and that is: WHY DOES THIS DUDE EVEN LIKE HER?

By the end of the book, she does some reflection and learns a few things so yes, at THAT point, I can see why he might think she's ok. But until that point? She's a HOT MESS for the entire book!!! Even the reconciliation scene was a sticky, icky bowl of day old chili. There are far too many misunderstandings (all caused by this crazy woman) and I can't believe that a guy wouldn't just be like, alright lady, ENOUGH already!

There is not one instance where she helps HIM out. She seems totally self involved (obsessed) and up her own arse. I understand that it's because she's going through a tough phase, but if the tough phases of life reveal what type of person we're dealing with, then here, we are dealing with an overgrown brat. She doesn't seem to have a nice, kind bone in her body. When she does do something nice, it's with some resentment and bitterness. Except for the thing with her friend. That was all good. But I can't say what it is because it was the one "surprising" thing in the book. 

Can we all just agree that there is NO person who will agree to take on such a garbage heap of unresolved emotion unless they were already in a relationship with them. It just defies everything that I observe to be true.

Skeptic's last word: Annnnnyyyyway... the book is funny. Hilarious, even. But it didn't QUITE pass the Skeptical smell test as an actual, believable romance. But who cares right? It was a fun read and that's all you need sometimes.

Strange Bedpersons by Jennifer Crusie

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥♥

He: Ambitious lawyer, hell bent on making partner before 40

She: "liberal flake", grew up in a hippie commune, lives to save the world

Conflict: see "He" and "She".

H&h are attracted to one another, they've even dated. But they are just too different in their views - it would never work! So they part amicably, until H needs h's help. He needs her to be his date at a work thing. Oooooh. A work thing, huh? Okaaaayyy.... 

Even with the contrived way they are thrown together for the weekend (he needs her to pretend to be his fiancee so that he can get in the good books of a potential big name client and therefore make his partner-before-40 dreams come true), this turns out to be a sweet little story of how two totally opposite people can be wonderful together.

I loved the way that they both are quite up front about their attraction for one another. They have been friends for a while and they both know the logical reasons they shouldn't work. And I love that there was no overly dramatic scene where one or both throw a tantrum about how this is just not going to work and how they are losing themselves as individuals etc etc. It was all dealt with very maturely and both parties are shown to be willing to adjust and be sensible. 

As an aside - I must revisit some of JC's other books. I have Bet Me and another and I don't remember being transported by them or anything - and from the blogs and other Amazon reviews, it would seem that I am in the minority. Maybe will give them a re-read and see if I change my mind...

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>

Rescuing Rose by Isabel Wolff

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥

Rescuing Rose was definitely well-written and sometimes charming. But I thought the story has been told a thousand times before in sort of the same way (woman loses everything husband, job, home, security) and romantic interest seemed a little 2-dimensional.

My main issue with the lead character is that she seemed like a controlling, emotionally constipated, angry shrew some of the time and I found her a bit difficult to like. I guess she comes across that way because her character feels abandoned and insecure, but while I sympathized, I just never grew to like her. She spends her whole life trying to get into other people's problems (she's an agony aunt for a newspaper) so she doesn't have to deal with her own, which I thought was a little too obvious of a characterization. And then, even while "helping" people, she comes across as snappish and rude, rather than actually warm and empathetic to the troubles of her "clients".

I liked the angle of the adoption of the main character as a baby and how that affects her whole outlook on life, but I felt that her issues sort of just go on and on and the "Resolution" seemed a little too perfectly packaged to be believable. Just feels like this woman should have taken herself to therapy years ago!

I also appreciated the fact that the character is 40 and Ms. Wolff didn't make the story into a whole Must Have Baby Now thing. Thank goodness for that.

The romantic interest seemed very underdeveloped as a character. You learn a few things about who he is and what he does, but even at the end of the book, I feel like I didn't really grow to love him because I just didn't know WHY he was attracted to her in the first place.

Skeptic's last word: This was an ok read. I would save it for a "slow" reading time. Like if you're between some heavy books and just need a palate cleanser. I think it was a little light on the "romance" angle, but it dealt sympathetically with a character whose issues revolve around feelings of inadequacy and abandonment.

All He Ever Dreamed by Shannon Stacey

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥

You know that feeling when you are on your first date with this guy that you're totally into and everything is going fine - he doesn't have gunk in his teeth during dinner, he has good manners, you share a few laughs - but then when it's all over you're like "Huh. That was...nice"? You know that feeling? Well, that's where I am right now.

First, a quick story review and then I will try and explain why I'm not calling my best friend up and giddily rhapsodizing about my hot new date.

He: Josh Kowalski - the youngest brother of the Kowalski clan - is sick of holding the bag of familial responsibility for the running of the Northern Star Lodge. He's been sick of it for ages and is just waiting for the chance to get out of there as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

She: Katie Davis has practically grown up with the Kowalski family and has been best friends with Josh since they were little. She's always been one of the guys and even though she's harbored a secret longing for him to notice her as a girl, they've remained close.

Conflict: He's desperate to get away from what he sees as his "noose" and lack of life choices - running the family-owned lodge himself after the death of his father has meant he hasn't really had the opportunity to build a life for himself anywhere else. He's resentful and frustrated by the smallness of his life and just wants out. Even when he realizes he is attracted to Katie, he still feels like he needs to go out into the world to discover what he really wants.

What I was troubled by:

1) The hero was basically a huge whiny baby

I appreciated that Josh was very rightly resentful that he was the only one in the family who bore the responsibility of running the business, and can easily understand how he would be keen to get out of that rut. But he doesn't really seem to have any other passions to fall back on, so the way I see it, if you don't have a plan to do anything you love, you may as well do something useful. 

He goes on and on about how he needs to break free to go forth and discover what he wants to do, he doesn't want it to be imposed upon him. That sounds like something a whiny 5 year old would say. Everyone has stuff imposed upon them! If you really have some burning desire to DO something - say you want to play professional sports, or you are an artists or writer, or you want to be a doctor or design buildings - wouldn't that desire translate into actions taken from the minute you realize you have them. 

And ok, if you were unlucky enough to never have left the 20 square miles around your hometown for 30 years and didn't have a clue what you wanted to do, and all you knew is you didn't want to be doing THIS, wouldn't you just say, ok guys, I'm taking a gap year. I need to travel and clear my head. It's going to be expensive but you're all going to just have to suck it up and or you guys should just pitch in with a little help.

To do something about his unhappiness that didn't involve categorically rejecting everything would have required maturity that this guy didn't seemed like he possessed. It just seemed like the attitude of someone who was 22 - not really an adult of 30.

Not hot.

2) The heroine was more like his mom than his partner.

There was a lot about how Josh and Katie had been bffs since childhood. But their entire relationship seems to be based on talking about football and hockey and her fielding grunted, emotionally constipated responses from him and then cracking a joke to neutralize the tension so he wouldn't get too wound up. Poor baby.

He just comes across as a child and she as a mature adult who constantly needs to give him space, and time, and whatever else kids in a funk need.

Also, not hot.

3) Guy Sees Outline of Cold Nipple and Gets An Epic Hard-on That Just Won't Go Away. 

It MUST be love.

Have you guys seen this before? Guy feels nothing but chummy brotherhood with this girl - his best pal, like forever, but then one day, he gets an eyeful of cold nips and ba-BOOM, he's 30 floors up Erection Tower in Lust City in the express elevator. Puhleese. 

First of all, if he's a guy and they've been friends through his hormonal adolescence, even if nothing happened, he'd have noticed the outline of her parts waaaaay before now. And secondly, there is this out-sized reaction to a dress that makes him want to rip it off her post haste and have his way with her over a table NOW. Sure. She's one of the guys and you never see her like that, and now she looks feminine and nice and it's INEVITABLE that you'll feel an interest, right? Julia Roberts wore that hooker dress that was arguably ASKING to be ripped off but Richard Gere managed to keep it in his pants the entire evening. Are you asking me to believe that this woman looks SO amazing in a basic black number than this guy gets an unmanageable woody that can not be held back unless he has sex with her Right. This. Second. That he basically spends like 30 pages (like days) of the book "distracted' and in a state of semi-arousal? 

I love stories of guys being hilarious dummies as much as the next girl, but if this condition could even be physically possible, I shudder to think how little blood flow was being directed to the poor man's brain. No wonder he was irritable and moody all the time.

What was nice:

1) Just the right dollop of torturous anguish

Weirdly, I thought the most romantic part of the story - and basically what saved the whole thing for me - was their phone conversations when they "break up". By this point they know they love each other, and they understand why the other is doing what they're doing, and they know they're just prolonging their anguish by keeping in touch, but they do it anyway because they can't help it. That was so sweet.

2) No cheapo plot device to raise the stakes 

Often, when the characters need to be made to See The Light, the author will introduce a new entanglement like a second male character who makes the hero jealous and drives him back to her like a raging papa bear protecting his mating rights. Luckily, Ms. Stacey is too smart for that. Because those are super lame.

Skeptic's last word: So yeah... would I do on a date with this again? Nah. Not a re-read or anything. But it was a nice way to spend a few hours.

How to Trap a Tycoon by Elizabeth Bevarly

Skeptic scale: ♥

I did NOT like this book. I get that this was supposed to be an ironic and tongue in cheek take on gender politics but it just felt like one long gasbag lecture about how "girls and boys are different but equal". C'mon now. Is equality even a question at this point!? 

The book is filled with long rambles about gender politics and sexual power dynamics that become frustrating and repetitive - perhaps a thorough edit could have solved that issue. But the truth is, NOTHING could have hidden the fact that the entire premise of the story was UNBEARABLE, flawed and offensively silly.

The protagonist is a woman holding down two jobs - she's a bartender at an exclusive club as well as a Sociology TA. In addition to her jobs, she has pseudonymously penned a bestseller called How to Trap a Tycoon where she talks about how women shouldn't feel bad about "getting theirs" and if money is their objective, they should follow her carefully laid out plan to trap a tycoon. 

Ok now I am going to go a bit nuts. I know it's "just" fiction yada yada, but it's DANGEROUS for anything to be this out of touch with reality. Let's begin the madness!

1) The premise of the book Totally Sucked. 
Here was the main point of the book (as well as the book within this book) summarized in a few lines spoken by the protagonist:

"How to Trap a Tycoon is a book that tells women how to go about getting ... nice things, things that they don't already have because they've been denied them by men."

Ummm...WHAT THE EFFING EFF??? How has this book not ended up on the banned list for this nonsensical premise!!?? Surely this is a more dangerous book than Lolita ever was? She's basically saying that because traditionally women have tended to be at an economic disadvantage, the way to even out that difference is to WHORE THEMSELVES TO A MAN WITH MONEY?? How does that not just EXACERBATE the bloody problem? Oh, so you don't have economic power so why don't you just make yourself so desirable a nice rich man will fall for you and then you can have everything you want, baby! Are you kidding me? 

Nothing about educating yourself so YOU can claim economic advantages for YOURSELF? How about arming yourself with the tools to acquire economic power (a fulfilling job, the capacity to provide for yourself, retaining control of your body etc)? You really think trapping a man is going to solve the whole gender power distribution thing?

2) Hugely irritating female characters
For all the big talk about women being up front and asserting themselves in male/female relationships, every single female character is extremely passive and panders to men. The main character, while educated and eventually financially independent, is entirely passive when it comes to her relationship with her love interest. He makes all the first moves, he is the sexual aggressor and he is the one who must "forgive" her for something he perceives as her betrayal. In fact, she never takes a single assertive step to help define their relationship. I mean, this could be a character from a Regency romance novel set in 1820 for all the pluck the woman shows.

Every single woman in the novel is portrayed as a passive player in their own lives and almost each needs to be saved by Mr. Alpha Dude Rich Guy. One of the main side characters was a woman who had been abused when she was younger and only comes to terms with her fears when a man takes it upon himself to "save" her. The main character's mother is not exactly passive, but she is a prostitute - oh, sorry courtesan, who has depended on the indulgence of men all her life. This character feels like she is truly "independent" because she doesn't need marriage. Um, I don't think being the sexual dependent of a rich benefactor counts as being independent, lady...

The one woman who is actively involved in shaping her own destiny - the owner of the bar where the main character works - is portrayed as a stone cold bi-atch. Because hey, you can't be an ambitious, money-minded, successful without being kind of a stinky shrew!

3) Equally annoying male counterparts
As annoying as I found all the female characters, the men were even more pathetic. Each man had exactly two attributes that define his entire personality  1) How wealthy he is, and 2) His willingness and ability to save the woman. 

For example, the main character's father was 1) Rich and 2) Unwilling to accept his bastard daughter. Ergo, he was a douche bag. By contrast one of the side characters who "saves" this girl who had been abused in her early years is 1) Rich and 2) A knight in shining armor. Ergo, he is a "hero". The main character's love interest is 1) Rich and 2) Willing to "forgive" his love interest for hiding her secret identity from him, so he too, is a hero. Douche bags and heroes. That's it. No further analysis of their characters. We know next to nothing about these men's motivations, their ambitions, their personal quirks, WHY they feel the need to save (or reject) these ladies. Nada.

Well at least we see some equality between men and women - as in there are equally dumb.

4) Wasted opportunities
There were so many other ways this book could have gone. I could CRY for all the wasted opportunities here...Maybe, in spite of writing about trapping a tycoon, the main character could have fallen for a poor man and then realized that true happiness has nothing to do with money and power when both are happy, well adjusted people. 

Maybe the secret author of How to Trap a Tycoon was the male character who was writing a tongue in cheek book to stir the pot, and then has to untangle the mess he makes when the female characters try to trap him, but he ends up falling for a women who doesn't try to trap him at all. 

I mean, ANYTHING other than the premise that girls should feel free to jiggle their boobs and learn how to give creme de menthe blow jobs would have been peachy. Oh sweet Aphrodite, I need to Listerine my mouth just thinking of how much garbage I ate reading this thing. Gack.

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evie by Marianne Stillings

Skeptic scale: ♥♥♥

He: Detective investigating the murder of a wealthy, eccentric old novelist. The murdered guy was also the H's step-father.


She: The ward of the murdered author who  loved her guardian, even though he had apparently been a difficult person.

Note: H - Hero, h - heroine

Conflict: H hated the old novelist because he had been the cause of some childhood trauma involving his mother. Turns out that the murdered guy "knew" he was going to get killed by someone so he sets up a "treasure hunt" for a few chosen guests to figure out who the murderer is. The H & h are on the same team as they try and figure out the mystery from the clues the old man leaves behind. Their divergent opinions of the dead old dude keep H&h on opposing sides.

The mystery is set up as a "whodunnit" treasure hunt where the winner who figures out who the murderer is gets all the dead man's money. H&h are on the same team and must work together to figure out who committed the murder. 

This is not a terribly mysterious mystery but it was generally funny, maybe a little hammy, sometimes even sitcom-y humor, but a decent read.