smilagros's review against another edition
4.0
It amazes me how much I fall in love with Julie Garwood’s characters. They make me laugh, cry and feel things that I don’t feel often when reading romance. I love how brave Elizabeth was and how she was as stubborn as her husband and yet gentle and sweet at the same time.
ppchili93's review against another edition
dark
emotional
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
Ugh! Julie! WTF.
I wasn't surprised to learn that this was Garwood's first book - it felt like it in all the worst ways. While there was definitely promise and some recognizable tropes and characters from later versions, nothing worked here for me.
At first, I thought Elizabeth was going to be kick ass with her pet hawk and wolfhounds, but these animals popped up so randomly I think Garwood forgot they were in the story half the time. To make matters worse, this novel had even more of the uncomfortable homophobia I first noticed in Honor's Splendour (in part because these novels occur in the same time period, one with a rumored gay King of England). However, where HS had charming characters and an obsessed hero, this book just had Geoffrey (even his name sucks). He was definitely taken with Elizabeth from the moment he saw her, but more than any of Garwood's heroes, he continually rejects the idea that she is anything to him but a possession he desires and property he covets. I wished at several moments that Elizabeth would assert herself and make Geoffrey see the error of his ways - that his treatment of her and tyrannical outlook on marriage were wrong - but instead Elizabeth sort of dances around his behavior and manipulates him in various ways.
By the novel's conclusion I just felt sorry for her. First, she loses her entire family in a bloody and terrifying massacre, then she is near-forcibly married to her baron. With no leverage or control at all, she is miserable as she attempts to navigate a marriage to a man who seeks only to control her while trying to get justice for her family. What pissed me off most of all was that Geoffrey knew from the outset who the likely culprit was and refused to tell her or involve her in the plans. If he would have helped her understand his plan, she would never have tried to seek revenge on her own. I wish she had though!
P.S. What was even more ridiculous about this book was that everything is centered around this revenge plot and conspiracy against her family and then when the guilty parties are identified all of the action occurs off-page and her Uncle isn't even held accountable.
I wasn't surprised to learn that this was Garwood's first book - it felt like it in all the worst ways. While there was definitely promise and some recognizable tropes and characters from later versions, nothing worked here for me.
At first, I thought Elizabeth was going to be kick ass with her pet hawk and wolfhounds, but these animals popped up so randomly I think Garwood forgot they were in the story half the time. To make matters worse, this novel had even more of the uncomfortable homophobia I first noticed in Honor's Splendour (in part because these novels occur in the same time period, one with a rumored gay King of England). However, where HS had charming characters and an obsessed hero, this book just had Geoffrey (even his name sucks). He was definitely taken with Elizabeth from the moment he saw her, but more than any of Garwood's heroes, he continually rejects the idea that she is anything to him but a possession he desires and property he covets. I wished at several moments that Elizabeth would assert herself and make Geoffrey see the error of his ways - that his treatment of her and tyrannical outlook on marriage were wrong - but instead Elizabeth sort of dances around his behavior and manipulates him in various ways.
By the novel's conclusion I just felt sorry for her. First, she loses her entire family in a bloody and terrifying massacre, then she is near-forcibly married to her baron. With no leverage or control at all, she is miserable as she attempts to navigate a marriage to a man who seeks only to control her while trying to get justice for her family. What pissed me off most of all was that Geoffrey knew from the outset who the likely culprit was and refused to tell her or involve her in the plans. If he would have helped her understand his plan, she would never have tried to seek revenge on her own. I wish she had though!
P.S. What was even more ridiculous about this book was that everything is centered around this revenge plot and conspiracy against her family and then when the guilty parties are identified all of the action occurs off-page and her Uncle isn't even held accountable.
shaebug's review against another edition
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
askine09's review against another edition
2.0
After readng this book I wish there was a rating for "meh". If this had been my first Garwood romance, I doubt I would have read any more of them. The Secret, Honor's Splendour, Saving Grace and more are all better books.
xakyr's review against another edition
4.0
This was a standalone Garwood Historical, dealing with the Norman/Saxon time of England under King William. I read it in about a day, and while I got somewhat annoyed at what the heroine was doing, overall, I enjoyed the book.
cozyreads_fruityteas's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
3.0
memurphy's review against another edition
3.0
3/5 stars
The hero ruined it for me. Too possessive and aggressive for me.
The hero ruined it for me. Too possessive and aggressive for me.
schomj's review against another edition
1.0
1.5 stars
So I decided to go on a Julie Garwood glom, starting with books I haven't read or have only read once. This falls into the read once and never re-read category and I now remember why.
It's her debut novel, and you can kind of tell that Garwood hasn't yet hit her stride as a writer in that she doesn't have her characteristic fluffy tone in this one. It does have an overuse of the description "contradiction" that she still tends to bestow on her heroes and heroines. It also makes use of the spunky ingenue of a heroine and more experienced hero-with-issues standard.
Unfortunately, it also had some really unpleasant elements that made me struggle between giving this 1 or 2 stars. The first big problem I had were the jokes about domestic violence. Given that those jokes, whether made by the heroine's grandfather, husband, or herself, are interspersed with the heroine's fear that they're actually threats, makes them really not funny. They also made the romance kind of squicky.
There's also the homophobia. Even taking into account the medieval setting and the time the book was written (c1985, hello Reagan years), it doesn't add anything to the book. I mean, the villain conspired to kill the heroine's parents. Making him gay, fat, and slovenly and treating those all as moral failings equivalent to murder is uncool, unnecessary and, frankly, lazy character building/plotting. There's another villain who actually is way more villainous in my opinion, but it seems like, since he's straight, he gets less screen time.
Eh, I don't know. I still have really fond memories of some of her later historicals so I'll keep with this glom. I just hope my lack of memory about some of those yuckier elements means she dropped them from her list of standard tropes.
So I decided to go on a Julie Garwood glom, starting with books I haven't read or have only read once. This falls into the read once and never re-read category and I now remember why.
It's her debut novel, and you can kind of tell that Garwood hasn't yet hit her stride as a writer in that she doesn't have her characteristic fluffy tone in this one. It does have an overuse of the description "contradiction" that she still tends to bestow on her heroes and heroines. It also makes use of the spunky ingenue of a heroine and more experienced hero-with-issues standard.
Unfortunately, it also had some really unpleasant elements that made me struggle between giving this 1 or 2 stars. The first big problem I had were the jokes about domestic violence. Given that those jokes, whether made by the heroine's grandfather, husband, or herself, are interspersed with the heroine's fear that they're actually threats, makes them really not funny.
Spoiler
I wouldn't find them funny anyway. Jokes about domestic violence are a warning sign about real danger.There's also the homophobia. Even taking into account the medieval setting and the time the book was written (c1985, hello Reagan years), it doesn't add anything to the book. I mean, the villain conspired to kill the heroine's parents. Making him gay, fat, and slovenly and treating those all as moral failings equivalent to murder is uncool, unnecessary and, frankly, lazy character building/plotting. There's another villain who actually is way more villainous in my opinion, but it seems like, since he's straight, he gets less screen time.
Eh, I don't know. I still have really fond memories of some of her later historicals so I'll keep with this glom. I just hope my lack of memory about some of those yuckier elements means she dropped them from her list of standard tropes.