AAR

[Kristie(J)]

LOL!! These two reviews for the same book really show dramatically that one person’s keeper is another person’s wallbanger. We all know this, which is why if one is contemplating getting a book based on a review, one must carefully read the review to see if things that bothered the reviewer will bother the potential reader, or something the reviewer liked is something that’s a hot button for the potential reader.

I don’t think I’ll be getting this book, not because of either the DIK grade or the D grade, but because I’ve really cut back on my historical reads lately and only a select few are exceptions, but I really do appreciate seeing the two completely different reviews and the back to back comparisons.

[LFL]

FWIW, although I didn't think this book was perfect, my view of it was closer to Rike's and I gave it a B+.

Agree the side-by-side comparisons are nice.

[Eliza]

[JulieLeto]

Was anyone else bothered by the spoiler in the negative review? The one that gave away the hero's "secret?" The first review (at least, the order I read them in) avoided giving that away. I haven't read the book yet...will knowing that now make a difference?

[janet w]

Hi Julie,

I asked about that too -- in a different review -- and was told that the information is shared with the reader so early in the story that it isn't really to be considered a spoiler. I certainly didn't find that knowing it was an impediment to my enjoyment.

This was a very adult book, in the sense that both h/h had choices to make about their married lives that were in no way trivial, or easy. They really did need to build bridges of understanding, one to the other. I liked it a lot -- and interestingly, some of what the 2nd reviewer disliked, was what I liked a lot.

Different strokes as they say. Thanks for the double whammy: I enjoyed it AAR.

[JulieLeto]

Thanks, Janet. This sounds like the type of book I would like...but I didn't want to download it if I already knew the big secret and that the reading experience would be diminished. Looks like I'm safe.

[msaggie]

I got this book at its reduced kindle price after reading an earlier positive review at Dear Author (Janine's actually!) and really enjoyed it. So, although it's not a DIK for me, it is at least B+. I liked both protagonists and empathized with the hero's problem. The only thing which irked me a bit was the melodrama near the end. [mild spoiler] I just don't like shoot-outs in my historicals set in aristocratic England of the 1800s - it's a bit incongruous to me, as I tend to think that knives were better weapons to threaten people with at the time, and didn't have the risk of jamming or backfiring or making so much noise Having said all that, I would align more closely with Rike's review.

[xina]

I probably won't read this book in the near future..too much on my plate right now, but so refreshing to see two different sides of how, we as readers, see a book. I love that the grades are so different. Kudos to AAR for posting both reviews. This is a perfect example on how readers differ in their opinions. Cool.
_________________
"As you wish"
~The Princess Bride

[JaneO]

I also like having the two contrasting reviews. However, I have a quibble.

I realize that most of our enjoyment of a book comes from our sympathy with the characters, and we don't all like the same ones. After all, we don't all like the same people in real life. Why should it be any different in fiction? And Miranda often behaves very much like a know-it-all 19-year-old, which can be irritating.

Nonetheless, a D review? I think of a D review as a truly dreadful book, badly written, purple prose, incoherent plotting, pasteboard characters, etc. Not just "I find the heroine annoying, unsympathetic, etc."

If this book can garner a D, what kind of grade should some of the Indies I've encountered get? J or K? Maybe even a a Q.

[erika]

An annoying heroine or hero can ruin a book at least they can for me.
I appreciated both reviews. I use negative and postive reviews to help in my book buying decisions. I won't be buying this book because I'm done with the liberal activist historical heroine trope.

[dick]

I thought the book was better than OK, too. And I don't recall that the dyslexia was completely revealed very early in the book, although there were a number of strong hints. I think hero's wish to keep his problem secret was perfectly understandable. Even today, those who can't read strive to disguise it; how much more necessary in a society that didn't even know about the disorder. And Minerva's not realizing the problem earlier than she did was likely due to the hero's skill in disguising it. My wife, for example, had a worker in her office (college registrar) who couldn't read; the fact wasn't realized for quite some time, because that person was remarkably adept at getting around the problem.

[PamelaM]

I thought this was a better than average read. This didn't have so much of the fairy tale aspect to it that drives me crazy in so many historicals. As Rike mentioned, Neville puts her characters more in the social context and I found this refreshing. The h/h had some interesting challenges in their journey to their HEA. Not a perfect book. I rate it a solid "B."

[Eliza]

I think dick was exactly spot on when he said:

[Cee]

I loved this book! I loved how the heroine was strong without being "feisty," and how Blake had a vulnerable side. I loved how she and Blake learned to care for each other over time. The development of their relationship felt real and honest. No love at first sight, no falling into bed within five minutes of knowing each other. It was so refreshing.
_________________
"When the day shall come, that we do part," he said softly, and turned to look at me, "if my last words are not 'I love you' -- ye'll ken it was because I didna have time."

[skyblue23]

As JaneO noted, Miranda was 19 years old. She gets married shortly after the ball at which she's formally presented to the ton. I found it incredibly hard to believe that she was basically leading the opposition party through Blake. She may have been brilliant and had prepared for this role all of her life, but she was still just 19 years old! She grew up in a small village and read news reports. She spent a year in Vienna (although I don't think the book said what she did during that time). She might have known the lords and politicians socially, but she wasn't able to attend speeches at the House of Lords or be involved in politics. She is knowledgable about the issues, but she had no experience in real politics. She makes one misstep, but otherwise we're supposed to believe that she is an instant success as a political wife in her first year out in society.

Also, it seemed as if Miranda was pushing Blake to live the life she wanted rather than what would make him happy. He wanted to manage his estates, but she kept pushing him into politics. Maybe I missed something, but it seemed like she would tell him what position to take on the issues and he would do it. He had opinions on the issues, but he would do what she told him to do. She just seemed overbearing and more concerned about her ambitions than their marriage.

I didn't dislike the book, but I don't think I would ever read it again.