AAR
Click here for full forums index
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 
Scandal Wears Satin, Loretta Chase
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AAR Forum Index -> Let's Talk Romance Novels Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Eliza



Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Posts: 1128

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:20 pm    Post subject: Scandal Wears Satin, Loretta Chase Reply with quote

Boy I loved this book. Sophie and Longmore were a couple I enjoyed immensely. I also thought the author gave everyone great names. So far this is my favorite book of the year, which is neat since my favorite book last year was the first in this series, Silk Is for Seduction. Can't wait for #3 but I will. Loretta Chase really is the best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
merryweather



Joined: 27 May 2010
Posts: 531
Location: Encinitas, CA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I enjoyed it very much as well, but my favorite is still the first in the series. Marceline and Clevedon are such a great characters and great together. I've read a lot of criticism of the unrealistic situations in both books (relationships between shop clerks and titled gentlemen) but I feel like Chase works out the plot in a pretty believable way and I'm always suspending disbelief when I read most books anyhow. Smile So no problemo for me.
_________________
For the first time in her life, she saw exactly what she’d thrown away when she decided to have him by means fair or foul……that she’d not saved him but wronged him by consigning to him all the ability of a box turtle to make his own choices. ~Gigi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tinabelle



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 875
Location: SE Wisconsin

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I normally enjoy Chase's books but this one just fell flat for me. I had high expectations since I loved the first book in the series. It is really hard for me to put my finger on what didn't work for me. I don't have trouble suspending reality so that was not the problem. Bottom line - I really did not like Sophie or Longmore or Clara very much in this story. The emotion, the chemistry, the plot - it was boring. I have read so many reviews of this book and I know I am in the minority, but there you have it. I hope the next book will work better for me.
_________________
So many books; so little time!
www.shelfari.com/tinabelle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Blackjack1



Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Posts: 724
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am still reading it and so far really enjoying the book. I don't find the class issue to be a difficult obstacle in this book (same with the first in the series) because Chase creates so many loopholes in that Sophia is French, she is more of an artist and modista than a mere "shopgirl", and the family is referred to repeatedly as former bluebloods fallen on hard times. There is therefore an attempt to reduce any negative associations with the working class, and so it becomes more palatable for Longmore to justify his attraction to a dressmaker.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anne_Gresley



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blackjack1 wrote:
she is more of an artist and modista than a mere "shopgirl", and the family is referred to repeatedly as former bluebloods fallen on hard times.


Exactly. A modiste is totally different than a shop girl/seamstress, especially one with formerly genteel connections and (in this book) a sister married to a peer. I don't get why people have a problem with it. That sort of thing was incredibly rare, but it did happen. Men married their mistresses (eg. Elizabeth Armistead, Lady Meux etc) and, if you go back far enough, one Duke even married a laundress.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
dick



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 2498

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I enjoyed the book, but I do weary a bit with the repetition of the same kinds of pairings in the H/h. Sophie/Longmont aren't much different from Bathsheba/Rathbourne, Olivia/Peregrine, and even Jessica/Dain. And each heroine is remarkably adept at manipulation. I'm beginning to think Chase is misandrynous.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eliza



Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Posts: 1128

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anne_Gresley wrote:
Exactly. A modiste is totally different than a shop girl/seamstress, especially one with formerly genteel connections and (in this book) a sister married to a peer. I don't get why people have a problem with it. That sort of thing was incredibly rare, but it did happen. Men married their mistresses (eg. Elizabeth Armistead, Lady Meux etc) and, if you go back far enough, one Duke even married a laundress.


Anne, do you follow Loretta Chase's board? She has some great historical stuff, like this reverse situation she uses in Scandal Wears Satin:

"Loretta reports:
The Sheridan-Grant elopement, which more or less kicks off Scandal Wears Satin, was the talk of London for many weeks in the spring and early summer of 1835. It's hard to make heads or tails of, going by the entries in the Court Journal, which assume one knows all the principals & can translate the initials & cryptic references. I couldn't sort out who was whom until I read the following summary in a life of King William IV.

You can click on the text here for an enlarged version, or read it online beginning on page 398 in The Sailor King: William the Fourth, His Court and His Subjects, Volume 2."

http://books.google.com/books?id=ilEpAAAAYAAJ&dq=the%20sailor%20king%20life%20of%20william%20iv&pg=PA398#v=onepage&q&f=true
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anne_Gresley



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eliza wrote:
Anne, do you follow Loretta Chase's board?


Thank you for the link. I love the "Two Nerdy History Girls" blog, but I hadn't seen that post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tinabelle



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 875
Location: SE Wisconsin

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dick wrote:
I enjoyed the book, but I do weary a bit with the repetition of the same kinds of pairings in the H/h. Sophie/Longmont aren't much different from Bathsheba/Rathbourne, Olivia/Peregrine, and even Jessica/Dain. And each heroine is remarkably adept at manipulation. I'm beginning to think Chase is misandrynous.


Interesting that you mentioned manipulation, dick. This trait was at the center of Sophie's character IMHO and it bothered me. I felt that all she really cared about was the shop and she would go to great lengths to bring about the desired outcome. I understood its importance to her but I really didn't feel the love she had for Longmore or Clara, for that matter. Plus some of the angst over the future of the shop was diminished due to the Duke's willingness to provide a financial security net for the sisters. The women wanted to make it on their own but they would never end up on the street either. I know I am swimming against the tide on this one!
_________________
So many books; so little time!
www.shelfari.com/tinabelle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anne_Gresley



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 3:18 am    Post subject: Scandal Wears Satin Reply with quote

It's certainly true that the Noirot sister are manipulative and I can understand why people don't enjoy reading about chatacters with that trait. But I'm so bored of reading about the same girl with different coloured hair. So many heroines are interchangable place-holders that I enjoy Chase's manipulators for the very reason other people are annoyed by them; it's not an admirable trait. Not all of my traits are admirable either and it's nice to read about a woman with flaws.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Blackjack1



Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Posts: 724
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 3:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And yet, the Noirot women are trying to succeed in a world that excludes women from earning a living or having a role at all in the public sphere outside of their relationship to a man. I tend to like Chase's respect for her female characters and the respect the men come to feel for the women with whom they fall in love. Longmore seems equally manipulative to me in that he is scheming to seduce Sophy for much of the book. I am finding that both characters here seem well-matched. I haven't finished it yet though Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anne_Gresley



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dick wrote:
each heroine is remarkably adept at manipulation. I'm beginning to think Chase is misandrynous.


When I read this bit before, my brain wasn't quite in gear and I thought you meant that Chase didn't like women (which would of course be misogyny) and that's why her female characters are manipulative. I hope you don't mind me asking, but why would you think Chase guilty of misandry?

Personally, I've always thought she wrote strong male characters. Eg Ainswood from The Last Hellion, James from Your Scandalous Ways and, though I didn't love Mr Impossible as much as everyone else seems to, I thought Rupert was a great character.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eliza



Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Posts: 1128

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Funny but I was more drawn to Longmore's character because in a world of social artifice, I found him refreshing, acting just as he was and who he was.

Chase did take the mick out of him in the beginning for intelligence, but I trusted where Chase would take him. I thought she was having fun with him to start and would reveal more about him as the novel when on. And she did.
------------
Also, on a different topic, you can see fashion plates of Sophie's outlandish dresses here that Chase describes in detail in one scene, especially the outlandish, oversized sleeves:
http://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2012/07/fashions-for-july-1835.html


Last edited by Eliza on Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:03 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dick



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 2498

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chase makes no bones about describing several of her heroes as short on mental ability; they are often characterized as almost puerile. Whether the heroes are strong or weak, the heroine's "take care" of them, doing what they think is "best" for them. She seems in many books to look upon the heroes as children. Even when their mental capacities are at least average, the heroine's "manage" them, as with Jessica in Lord of Scoundrels, Olivia in Last Night's Scandal, and to some extent Bathsheba in Lord Perfect. One of the reasons I've always disliked Lord of Scoundrels is that it always brought to mind Philip Wylie's "Generation of Vipers," a chilling suggestion that women--mothers in particular--managed to emasculate their sons' psyches, as, in my reading of the book, Jessica did to Dain. Even the duel in that book was, in the end, a manipulation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anne_Gresley



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dick wrote:
One of the reasons I've always disliked Lord of Scoundrels is that it always brought to mind Philip Wylie's "Generation of Vipers," a chilling suggestion that women--mothers in particular--managed to emasculate their sons' psyches, as, in my reading of the book, Jessica did to Dain. Even the duel in that book was, in the end, a manipulation.


It's a long time since I read 'Lord of Scoundrels', but I remember the first half as a battle of wits between the protagonists. Jess certainly wins, but I don't call that misandry. After all, there was always a power imbalance in male/female relationships at the time the story is set. Dain is physically stronger, he doesn't have to worry about the loss of his good name and he has the lion's share of the money and consequence. Jess has her wits and that's it. If Jess had a brother (other than the perennialy useless Bertie), custom would dictate he fight the duel for his sister's honour (I admit it's a silly custom), but Jess fights for herself instead. Her choice is marriage or ruin and so I forgive her for 'managing' Dain.

I've never read "Generation of Vipers", but is that a belief to which you subscribe? How does a woman go about emasulating a man anyway?

@ Eliza Sorry in advance for taking this thread so far off tangent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AAR Forum Index -> Let's Talk Romance Novels Forum All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group