AWillandAWaybyNoraRoberts

by SB Sarah Tuesday, April 19, 2005 at 12:11 PM
Our Grade:
D
Title: A Will and a Way
Author: Nora Roberts
Publication Info: Silhouette Books 1986, ISBN: 0-373-21819-2
Genre: Contemporary Romance

I’m still trying to wrap my brain around how to review “To Love and To Cherish” by Patricia Gaffney, so y’all will have to make do with my supremely vanilla follow-up read, a Nora Roberts Silhouette reprint from… drumroll please… 1986!

For the record, I have never been a big fan of the Silhouette/Harlequin/Mills & Boon romance novels, as they remind me too much of Sweet Valley Highs in size and scope. Also, whenever I’ve read one, they leave me kind of...unsatisfied, like eating a snack when I’m hungry for dinner. Either the plot leaves something to be desired, or the characters are sketches more than individuals, or the whole storyline leaves me cold. Also, the preponderance of Secret Freaking Babies? Gimme a break.

Thankfully, I found no secret babies in the Nora Roberts time-travel back to 1986. Shall I mention how old I was in 1986? I will not. But I will make the clumsy comparison that this book affected me about as much as I remember the events of this day in 1986, when I was in middle school. I am usually a big fan of La Nora, and I have been saving “Northern Lights” for an afternoon wherein I have many hours available for reading, but dang. This book was an almighty yawn.

Imagine a scenario where you have a hero and a heroine who love to scrap with one another, who can’t be in the same room without arguing, who barely tolerate each other’s presence - and of course there are sparks between them one could use to power a small metropolis, should the power of romantic attraction be harnessed for an energy source. Now, imagine a circumstance wherein you force those two characters to cohabitate for a period of about six months, causing them to have no choice but to endure each other’s company. What method would you choose? How would you force them together and create conflict that exists outside of their hissing and spitting at one another like cats being given a bath?

More,more,more!>
Picture of {name}
9 commentsTrackback Bookmark to del.icio.us Add to Technorati favorites Digg this post on digg.com RSS
Categories: Reviews by Author, Q-SReviews by Grade: D

Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.

Comments

Picture of Crystal Crystal said on...
04.19.05 at 12:27 PM |

I’m extremely sick and tired of seeing Nora Roberts HQN/SIL/et al being ran into the ground.  Sure they’re trying to get their money out of her.  But hell!  Give the readers a break.  Why don’t they try cultivating some new authors?  Wouldn’t that be something?
And Nora?  I love her.  I really do.  But I’m not wild about all her work.  And some of the early stuff...not so much.
Grins*

Picture of Candy Candy said on...
04.19.05 at 12:43 PM |

Oh, Sarah, how I sympathize with you, because I SO FEEL YOU (not in a dirty gropey way, but in a compadres-who-understand-your-pain kind of a way) about the whole “I hate you! No, I love you!” style of conflict between heroes and heroines. I don’t get it. I enjoy pointed, witty banter between hero and heroine, but the hostility in some of these romances (and most of them are pre-1989) go above and beyond trying to needle someone you’re attracted to just to see them flush and then enjoy having a spirited but rancor-free debate. I’ve never bought the whole “their enmity is just another facet of their love for each other,” because to me it just seems more like “their enmity is just another facet of them being massive assclowns.”

Picture of Sarah Sarah said on...
04.19.05 at 01:04 PM |

The whole “I love you! I hate you!” thing is so played out on soap operas I can’t stand it. Seeing it in my romance novels bugs the hell out of me because I think it is such a waste of plot effort. Banter is one thing. Sparks and snark are another. But outright insults? Then, Oh, wait, I LUUUUURVE you? Save it for Guiding Days of our Another Santa Barbara World. Assclowns indeed.

And Crystal? HELL YEAH they should cultivate other authors. I mean, it’s ridiculous how they reissue her entire backlist instead of trying a new author. I mean, some of these plots are incredibly dated! And it must be a royal pain in the ass for her current publisher to try to distinguish her new previously-unpublished works with the ‘offical Nora Roberts seal’ so as to keep readers from buying something that was last seen on the shelves in 1984.

I have her first book in a reprint. I actually really enjoyed it, but it was seriously contrived in places and treacly-sweet. I don’t want to pay $7.00 a copy for more of that. I can’t believe I did for this one. I don’t know if I can make it through the Ewing/Barnes Hatfield/McCoy saga next.

Picture of Sybil Sybil said on...
04.19.05 at 01:15 PM |

Am I the only person who has yet to read a NR book?

Picture of Reagan Reagan said on...
04.19.05 at 05:15 PM |

I have always thought that the “I love you!  I hate you!” dichotomy of romance novels comes from the continuing idea in modern culture that “nice girls” shouldn’t -want- sex.  As in: if the heroine somehow hates the love interest right up unto the moment when he overwhelms her with his manly passions, then it’s okay to enjoy it.

Eeech.

Picture of Beverly Beverly said on...
04.20.05 at 06:55 AM |

Sybil, it’s quite possible that you’re the only one.  ;-) I think I’ve read three, no wait, including the first three IN DEATH, that would be six. I just don’t get her overall popularity. Oh, I get that she’s consistent and very productive, but I always come away thinking her characters are the worst stereotypes in romances and that INCLUDES Eve and Roarke. (My daughter would probably disown me if she saw that last, but hey, it’s what I always think when I try to read on of Robert’s books.)

Of course, I also love some of Krentz’s wacky heroes and heroines and a lot of people think they’re extremely something else if not stereotypical, so what do I know . . .
:)

Picture of sybil sybil said on...
04.20.05 at 07:02 AM |

hmmm I haven’t read Krentz either ;)

Picture of Sarah Sarah said on...
04.21.05 at 06:45 AM |

I have to say, another thing I like about Nora Roberts, aside from many of her heroes, is that she is one of the most successful published authors, having outsold Stephen King and other major players, and yet she seems almost unknown outside of romance and publishing. I saw her speak and someone asked her if it bothered her that she was so successful and yet ignored, and she said, no, not really (and why should it? She’s still getting paid!). She likes the books she writes and she likes getting mail from happy readers, so what difference does it make?

But yeah - Eve and Roarke? I had to stop with the ‘In Death’ series, because they just got too damn formulaic, on top of stereotypical.

Picture of Nicole Nicole said on...
10.05.05 at 09:30 AM |

I know you wrote this critique months ago, but I just stumbled on to your site today and the review was so on the money I had to comment.  I’m a huge Nora Roberts fan (for the most part) so I checked this book out from the library when I saw it.

And then I proceeded to read it...the whole thing… and just wonder why?  But I was on a beach… on vacation… and really, hope springs eternal on vacation.

Excellent, dead-on review.  I’m sure it was bad even in 1986.  :)

However, bad novels such as these give me hope that I will one day get my own published.

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: