
Categories: Reviews by Author, H-K • Reviews by Grade: C
Tags: This entry has not been tagged yet.
Ann Herendeen has written a very clever, highly articulate, historically sharp and delightfully entertaining romance, one that would make certain factions of the RWA tear their hair out in massive clumps. Forget one man and one woman. We have two men and one woman, a few men with other men, another man and a woman and a few other men, and a butler. If these folks ever got around to playing Twister, the video rights would sell for billions.
Great review, Sarah, that really makes me want to read this.
It’s interesting, though, because I associate any grade in the “C” range with averageness or even mediocrity (I think that’s from years of grading undergrad essays), but this book sounds anything but average from your description of it.
It is certainly not average, that is for damn sure. It’s an entirely unique book. But the grade is based not on the quality of the writing but on the flaws I found in the storyline - the multiple resolutions to all the conflicts, and the elements I ascribed to author’s fantasy. The beginning was marvelously promising, and I found myself frequently frustrated by the ending chapters. There’s a lot going on in this book and I felt like I was reading three or four final chapters one after another. But wait, there’s more!
However, the SB grading curve is also different from comp - it’s not at all like undergrad essays! I’ve graded my share of those!
I definitely plan on reading this book based on this review.
Although the review is a C, and I can understand why it is, at the same time I can understand that there were many elements that made this book stand out well enough that I want to read it. All in all, it sounds very good but flawed.
If I were the author, I’d find the review valuable because if I ever had a chance to rewrite it or write a sequel, I’d know what I needed to fix.
One of my favorite reviews for one of my books (at another review site--not here) was one that pointed out I had inconsistencies in the world that I had created. Although I winced when I first read it, it did help me to write a better book for the next one in the series and helped answer questions for those reading the first book so that the world made better sense. I am a better writer for it.
1. Your husband is so brilliant it makes my eyes hurt.
“The Brotherhood of the Traveling Brokeback Ya-ya Pants”
2. I want to read this book.
I don’t want to be one of those nitpicking authors who respond to a good review by complaining about a “misinterpretation” of some obscure detail rather than with the polite and heartfelt “Thank you”—and I’m also not sure how you feel about authors’ wading into the “Comments” section—so I’ll just start by saying “Thank you” for the terrific first paragraph of this review and for the other great things you had to say about Phyllida.
I’ll add that I actually agree with the criticism (most of it, anyway), especially the complaint that the book is too long and has too many plot threads, leading to one-damn-resolution-after-another at the end. One reason for this, of course, was that, once committed to writing a “bisexual romance” featuring a hero with both a wife and a boyfriend, I was then required to come up with not one but two “money shot” resolutions of both romances. But that’s only part of the problem. I did the best I could without editorial help of any kind, and gambled that the aspects you praised and that I thought were good—the writing style, dialogue and characters—as well as the crying need for a hot MMF bisexual love story, would carry Phyllida through.
OK. Now to the nitpicking. I really just have two nits, maybe two and a half, and I’ve brooded for a couple of days about whether to pick at all. (I haven’t been brooding all these days since the review came out. I didn’t see the review right away, so I’ve only been brooding for two or three days, but still.)
These nits have to do with the declaration in the penultimate paragraph of the review that “certain modern elements in the story were jarring … Andrew’s position on abortion, for example, and the final scene that creates a happy ending for Phyllida, Andrew and Matthew were as off-putting to me as Phyllida’s initial comfort with the idea of marrying a sodomite.”
I felt a response of some kind was needed, if only because abortion is such a divisive topic, and could prevent any straggling potential readers just coming along now from trying a book they might enjoy. In fact, there is no reference to abortion in the book—this was, truly, a misreading—although no doubt my fault for using language that sounded too much like modern pro-choice rhetoric. I also admit that what is being discussed, the “disposal” of a newborn after birth, may not be any more palatable to readers, although it is historically far more accurate, and, I believe, is perfectly in keeping with our upper-class Regency hero’s expedient outlook on such matters.
As for the final scene, that has genuine historical precedent, despite seeming as if I included it expressly to get in on the most trendy hot-button issue in the gay-rights world. Again, it’s my error for not putting more of the factual evidence into my Author’s Note or even into the more detailed essay on the gay subculture of the past on my Web site:
http://www.annherendeen.com/Gay_subculture.html
In this case, I only came up with the idea after discovering in the course of my research that a number of similar scenes had taken place throughout the 18th century and into the exact time of Phyllida. Because I hated to spoil the surprise for my readers I restricted any discussion of the historical background for this scene to a mention that John Church, the instrumental character, was a genuine historical figure.
On the final point, Phyllida’s lack of disgust at Andrew’s sexual orientation: well, that’s the half a nit. I think we’re too often forgetful that the morality of Jane Austen’s class, which is what most of us think of as the Regency standard, was not the morality of all levels of society. Austen came from the most conservative class, the landed but not especially wealthy country gentry, somewhat like the Republican middle class of the mid-20th century. People at the upper and lower social levels could be much more tolerant in private, if just as loud in their denunciations in public, as the most hypocritical of today’s so-called conservatives.
While Phyllida’s response to Andrew’s frank proposal and his attractive appearance might be atypical for a young virgin of 1812, I maintain that they are at least possible, given her upbringing, her own nature, and the fact (as I see it) that throughout all cultures and time, not only have there been hot bisexual and gay men, but women who love them. Or, to quote from your recent “Cover snark” on gay romances: “two hot men embracing, looking like they’re about to kiss? Ohgodyessss.”
Again, thanks to for such an honest and generally glowing review of my book.
Rather than extend a “comment” into the length of another novel, I’ll put my more detailed defense of these three “modern elements” into my own blog, where any masochistic readers can find them at:
http://ann-amalie.livejournal.com/4973.html
07.30.06 at 02:41 PM |