My Take In Brief: Sometimes I love a romance because it is new or different. I loved this one because it was all the regular things you expect from romance, done (mostly) right.
Cover comment: Above is the original cover. I couldn’t resist showcasing the original stepback, with the Duke and Duchess of Grunge. Matching pirate shirts, ahoy!
Series? Yes. Devils’ Bride (1998) is the first in the long-running Cynster series. The 15th, Temptation and Surrender, was published in March 2009, and Laurens’ website indicates there are 5 more to come.
Setting: Regency England, the ton, beginning in the Cambridgeshire and ending up in London
Heroine and Hero: 24 year old Honoria Prudence Anstruther-Wetherby has turned her back on her high born heritage, working as a “finishing governess”. She hopes to earn the funds to go to Africa to follow in Lady Stanhope’s footsteps. Sylvester Sebastian “Devil” Cynster, is 6th Duke of St. Ives, head of an infamous but powerful and wealthy family. Although their names ostensibly set up a character conflict, in fact, both hero and heroine are honorable, strong, forthright, passionate, and intelligent, with nary a character flaw in sight.
Conflict: This is a hard one. I would say in general the book doesn’t turn on one large issue, but a series of smaller ones. At first, Honoria refuses to marry Devil in order to pursue her Africa plans, and because she thinks he’s a bit too high handed, albeit sexy. Then we discover Honoria faces an internal struggle to overcome the deaths of her parents and siblings (the old “I will never allow myself to love another human being again”). Still, this only takes us through the first 40% or so (Thanks Kindle. Love the lack of page numbers. Not.). After that, it’s a series of issues that crop up, including an external threat.
Word on the Web:
All About Romance, Ellen Micheletti, A
All About Romance, Beverly Latham, B+
The Romance Reader, Lesley Dunlap, 5 hearts
Bookwormom, “not a keeper, but I enjoyed reading it”
Outlandish Dreaming, 3.5 out of 5
Amazon.com: 4.5 stars after 115 reviews
Racy Romance Review: (Contains spoilers. Hey, you’ve had over a decade to read it!)
This book grabbed from the start. Honoria stumbles across Tolly, a mortally wounded young man on the road in a driving rain, and within minutes the dashing Duke comes galloping up (on a giant black stallion named, naturally, Sulieman), not revealing his identity, either as the Duke or the victim’s cousin. They make haste to a country cottage on the Duke’s estate and take each other’s measure as they tend the dying young man. By morning, Devil has decided that this goodlooking, courageous, level-headed woman “would do very well as his wife”. When folks show up, Devil announces their engagement, ostensibly to protect Honoria’s reputation, and sets his formidable sights on that goal exclusively until the midpoint in the book, when they eventually do marry, and Devil’s Bride becomes something else: a pretty interesting study of early marriage.
Oh, sure, there’s the “mystery” of who killed Tolly, a mystery only to those readers under the age of 8 or on crack. Tolly’s death serves to (a) force Honoria to stay with Devil for a while, though the funeral at least, (b) gather the Cynster clan, allowing a display of Mass Cynsterness. As the book continues, the mystery serves create hazards for the blossoming couple, forcing them to learn to trust each other and protect each other.
Nicola O. recently heard Jayne Castle/ Jayne Ann Krentz/Amanda Quick give a talk at an RWA event, and reports this:
Slightly paraphrased, Ms. Castle (her birthname, but probably her least known penname) made a statement that just stunned me: Popular fiction, especially romance, is rooted in the ancient heroic epics … More so, it’s about values. Popular fiction, Castle maintains, values ancient heroic virtues of courage, honor, integrity, and love. These kind of tales have been popular throughout history because, among other things, they have enormous survival value.
Ciara Stewart, who attended the same event, gives her take:
Popular fiction, on the other hand, pits good against evil on a broad scale. Its protagonists may be victims, but honor, courage, determination and love they triumph despite the hurdles in their path. Pop fiction holds up optimism over despair. It has an enormous survival value.
Until the words, “survival value”, and except for the invidious and unsupportable distinction Castle draws between literary fiction and popular fiction, I liked this point. (Rant ahead: Why oh why is the “survival value of romance” argument appealing to romance writers? Evolutionary biology and psychology are, in the main, when it comes to progressive social concerns, the devil in devil’s clothing. Yes, let’s throw ourselves in with the gang who use evolution to defend rape, to decry homosexuality as unnatural, and who refer to the egg as “wastage” and sperm as “victorious.” Sounds super!!).
I was thinking, as I read Devil’s Bride, that Castle’s description worked for me with this book.
There were a few things that I had to overlook, and I’ll list them here:
1. The constant references to the Cynster personality or reputation. How many times could I be expected to read a line like, “Cynsters are invincible, remember?” without mouthing it while rolling my eyes? There were also frequent references to Honoria’s lineage, along the lines of, “She’s got that Anstruther-Wetherby stubbornness!”.
2. It”s a measure of how much I liked this book that I let slide my usual number one criterion for a good romance novel: compelling, clear character motivations. I had to overlook several strange choices of Honoria’s, like her fierce and immediate determination to find Tolly’s murderer (why? She never knew him. It does, however keep her hanging around Devil. I think I am on to something!), and her early childhood loss as a motivator to remain unattached. I never figured out why she wanted to go to Africa, either. And why Devil decided at that moment to marry Honoria I will never know. But I went with it.
3. Purple prose. In the AAR review, Devil’s Bride is praised for the long intimate scenes. She notes that it reversed a trend towards shorter ones. I felt they were way too drawn out and sometimes purple. Too many “throbbing nubbins” and “hot steel through the finest peach silks” (okay, there was only one of those, but one is too many, n’est pas?) and references to the “mortal plane” for my liking.
What carried the day for me was the relationship between Devil and Honoria. Especially in the early scenes, I found myself almost holding my breath when they sparred. One example is a long scene when they are catching some fresh air outside his family home in the evening:
“Because you’re shortly to become my duchess, that’s why.”
The glance she bent on him held every ounce of exasperation she could summon. Then, with a swish of her skirts, she turned and stepped out of his shadow, following the balustrade. “I’ve warned you – don’t later say I haven’t. I am not going to marry you at the end of three months.” She paused, then, head rising; eyes widening, she swung back and waved her finger at him. “and I am not a challenge — don’t you dare view me as such.”
Later in the same scene, he says to her,
“I will not permit you to turn your back on who you are, on the destiny that was always intended to be yours. I will not let you turn yourself into a governessing drudge, nor an eccentric to titillate the ton.”
He is imperious, but he’s also right. Eventually, Honoria comes around. They marry just past halfway through the book, and they actually have to adjust to daily life. Here’s Honoria meditating on it:
Quite what she’d expected, she couldn’t have said — she had come to her marriage with no firm view of what she wanted from it beyond the very fact of laying claim to the role, of being the mother of his children. Which left, as she discovered during those long quiet weeks, a great deal to be decided. By them both.
Assisting in this process is Laurens’ portrayal of domestic life in London among the ton. I am such a bad judge of historical accuracy, but I can tell you that as an ignorant reader, I felt this book did a wonderful job of taking me back there, much more so than many others I have read lately.
In the last third of the book, we get some excitement as murder attempts are made by the bad guy (who actually has kind of an interesting motivation, but is one dimensional otherwise), and Honoria and Devil put themselves in danger by trying to catch him.
Devil’s Bride was very entertaining and very romantic. I admired both lead characters almost immediately and they grew to be even better, more interesting people as they fell in love, putting this book in just the mold Castle describes.
I am tempted to keep reading in the series, but I gather all the books follow a little too closely, and I would hate to have my enjoyment of Devil’s Bride diminished by inferior copies. What do you think?
Related posts:
- Joint Review: Tempt the Devil, by Anna Campbell Tumperkin’s Take: Tempt the Devil by Anna Campbell: High Concept Romance Tempt the Devil is the second book I’ve read...
- Review: Beyond His Control, by Stephanie Tyler My Take in Brief: I succumb to man titty, and the results are not horrible. Her and Heroine: Justin and...
- Review: His Mistletoe Bride, by Cara Colter My Take in Brief: If you hate the First Amendment, you will love this book! Acquisition note: This is a...
- Creepy Covers Pt. 4: Society Bride by Elizabeth Bevarly What results when the Hemlock Society and Hospice Foundation of America join forces on a new Harlequin line. In this...
- Review, The Lost Duke of Wyndham, Julia Quinn Cover comment: Holy clavicles, Batman! The female cover model is Norwegian/Egyptian model/soap actress Ewa Da Cruz (there was a cover...
- Review: Immortal Warrior, Lisa Hendrix Cover Comment: Ok, this males only thing is no longer a trend. It’s a takeover. Series?: Yes. This is Book...
#1 by Bookwormom on May 20, 2009 - 11:36 pm
I still read the original Cynster family books, although timed far apart or else interspersed with the Bastion Club books. I don’t read the so called related spin offs- distant family members, friends, etc. I don’t buy her books in HC. My favorite books by her are her short regencies originally released by M&B. For me those are her best work.
I do find that, generally speaking, her books work well for me & are consistent, which I think is a huge plus. I originally read this title several years ago, review here.
#2 by Nicola O. on May 21, 2009 - 12:30 am
So, from the snip (and probably from my summary), I’m not sure if it’s clear, but Castle’s point about survival value had to due with the virtues of courage, honor, integrity, and optimism having survival value, not that sex is good for the propagation of the species, or that since heroic epics have been around a long time they are a good thing for having survived.
Does that change your thinking on it? Still not sure I’m articulating adequately.
#3 by willaful on May 21, 2009 - 1:41 am
My advice: quit while you’re ahead.
#4 by Laura Vivanco on May 21, 2009 - 4:00 am
Jessica: Evolutionary biology and psychology are, in the main, when it comes to progressive social concerns, the devil in devil’s clothing.
Nicola O.: Castle’s point about survival value had to due with the virtues of courage, honor, integrity, and optimism having survival value, not that sex is good for the propagation of the species
Regardless of the influences on, and intentions of, Castle, that phrase does recall an article/speech written by Stephanie Laurens herself, titled “READ ROMANCE OR PERISH: A BIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE ON ROMANCE NOVELS.” Laurens definitely does think that the romance genre is necessary for the survival of the species and her assessment of feminism (which has greatly influenced thinking about “progressive social concerns”) is decidedly negative:
Genre Fiction today – is what carries the most powerful and important biological survival lessons we – as the audience – have determined we need today.[...]
romance novels came into the 70s at a relatively low level – because they weren’t needed. There was no threat to marriage and birthrate through the 60s. But then came the Pill and feminism, and women heard the feminist’s message – but most of them thought, well, yes, but that’s not how I feel. I want love, marriage and the whole nine yards – so they reached for reaffirmation. It wasn’t Kathleen Woodiwiss writing the Flame and the Flower that sparked the modern growth of romance – it was women wanting to hear the message that book contained. [...]
If you want women to have children, you need to ensure they view finding love and marriage as worthy goals. The US also has a marriage rate more than 50% greater than any of those other countries. [...]
The US [...] allowed romance novels to respond to women’s need to hear the biologically, socially critical lesson that love, marriage and family are worthy and desirable goals. And the US thrives.
I wonder if Laurens’ biological perspective might also help to explain the frequent references to “the Cynster personality or reputation” and “frequent references to Honoria’s lineage”?
#5 by Jessica on May 21, 2009 - 5:50 am
Laura, it was in fact this I was referring to. Thanks for tracking it down! I think Eloisa James has a speech somewhere where she gives a similar defense of romance.
Amanda, I am sorry I missed your review. It’s been added!
Willaful, I will take your advice to heart!
#6 by Jessica on May 21, 2009 - 5:56 am
Nicola,
I appreciate the clarification. But from an evolutionary perspective, there is one value: propagation. So anything that helps the species survive, whether it’s virtues or speedy sperm, will be considered a good. In practice, applications of evolutionary theory to morality or to social life are reductive and regressive, which is why I don’t like them. What can I say except admit this is a hot button issue for me.
#7 by Taja on May 21, 2009 - 7:13 am
I’ve read two novels by Stephanie Laurens. One was DEVIL’s BRIDE, the other was A SECRET LOVE (#5 in the Cynster series). That alone probably tells you that I wasn’t all that impressed by DB. I know it is frequently referred to as an example of a perfect romance. And every time I read a review of it, I’m tempted to read it again to see what I had missed, and then I don’t. *shrug* But I lovelovelove A SECRET LOVE though I clearly see its “faults” and have to overlook quite a few things reading it so that I can enjoy it properly.
As for the purple prose – A SECRET LOVE has some beautiful examples of it!
#8 by Jill D. on May 21, 2009 - 8:03 am
Yep, this is a classic in my opinion. It was just an all around fun read. I like how you state it was an “interesting study of early marriage”. That was the big draw for me and also how Devil takes one look at Honoria and decides he will make her his wife. No indecision on his part. He wants her and he will have her. There is no other option for him. Yum!
Willaful has good advice, though!
#9 by BevBB on May 21, 2009 - 8:48 am
“All About Romance, Beverly Latham, B+”
Oh, my god. They still have that name on that review? Sigh. I told Laurie to change it. Know how I keep talking about my one and only review? Thaaaaat’s it.
People never make the connection because I’ve use B.B. Medos online but for some reason Laurie never got that message. (rolling eyes)
I also know for a fact it wasn’t me praising the love scenes because I’ve always had a problem with Lauren’s love scenes. And I like erotic romances. Matter of fact, I’m pretty sure that’s why the grade went down from a A. As much as I love Devil’s Bride as a story and I do and as much as I adore Honoria and I absolutely do that – I believe she’s one of the best heroines in romance – Lauren’s love scenes have almost always seemed to be somehow oddly out of flow with the rest of the narrative. This was really apparent in DB.
As to the “survival value” discussion, how do you reconcile romances being creation myths with your reactions there?
#10 by BevBB on May 21, 2009 - 9:02 am
Jill D. wrote:
Well, I wouldn’t go quite that far.
Oddly enough, I’m one of those that actually enjoy some of the supporting books more than the main Bar Cynster stories. My personally favorite of all of them is The Perfect Lover (Simon’s story).
So go figure.
But the reason I quoted Jill here is that she brought up exactly what originally got my attention about Devil’s Bride way back when I read it the first time – how Devil basically takes one look at Honoria and makes that decision. For some reason, that was absolutely riveting to me. And it’s not like I hadn’t read a whole lot of romance before DB where the heroes were single minded or even nicely alpha, if you know what I mean. There was just some “different” about this one that almost literally made me sit up and go “Whoa. This is going to be good.”
And I know exactly where it happened because it’s the scene I go back to the most. Still. The one where he’s sitting in the chair watching her sleep and realizing he’s going to marry her.
#11 by Phyl on May 21, 2009 - 10:35 am
BevBB talked about what Jill wrote:
Wow, that is it EXACTLY for me. I first read this book some 5-6 years ago when I was new to romance. This scene totally stood out from anything I’d read to date. Sometimes I go back and re-read the last 10-15 pages of books I liked. With this book, I go back to THAT scene.
To answer Jessica’s question about continuing in the series–I did enjoy the first few books that followed; a couple of them are quite different. But eventually the plots become less distinct and I have not kept up with the series lately. Some of the later books give us scenes with Devil & Honoria and I like the way that Honoria becomes the family matriarch–she wields a great deal of Cynster power.
#12 by ReacherFan on May 21, 2009 - 1:53 pm
OMG – Time Warp. I remember reading that book when it was first released and thinking Regency had a new author worth watching. Alas, Stephanie Laurens is no Loretta Chase, but she was then a good read. Funny, in 10 years it seems a bit dated and the whole ‘Cynster’ series just got on my nerves after the 5th book or so. It never earned a spot on my keeper shelf.
#13 by Angela on May 21, 2009 - 3:08 pm
Hey Jessica. See, I’m commenting as requested.
I remember when I first read this book, I too was baffled by the motivations of the characters. After awhile I started thinking of Honoria as one of those Faux-Rrrrrtt Girls that walk around talking about feminism but are never not in a relationship and always defer to their fella. Still, I enjoyed the book, however I would take willaful’s advice and quit while you are ahead with the exception of A Secret Love, which was my favorite of hers because I love disguise stories.
What is going on with the evolutionary biology/psychology thing and romance? Talk about baffling motivations, there’s one I don’t get. Not to mention the fact that I have long had serious issues with the legitimacy of evolutionary psychology.
Angela
#14 by azteclady on May 21, 2009 - 3:58 pm
I really like this book, and yet I see a lot of its flaws, as you do.
One of the things I liked is that Devil wanted Honoria for her strength more than anything else. I may be remembering wrong, but Devil didn’t want to change Honoria, he only wanted to have her as a wife.
Perhaps I should re-read this one, tough–it’s been years since the last time.
#15 by Tumperkin on May 21, 2009 - 5:10 pm
“The constant references to the Cynster personality or reputation. How many times could I be expected to read a line like, “Cynsters are invincible, remember?” without mouthing it while rolling my eyes?”
Yes. I had exactly this with a Jo Beverley Malloren book. ‘ ‘Nothing is impossible for a Malloren’ and all that crap. I liked the book but every time this came up I just thought OH, GET OVER YOURSELF!
I tried one Laurens – it was a DNF.
#16 by Marianne McA on May 21, 2009 - 5:33 pm
I agree with Bookwormom, my favourite books by her were the M&B regencies.
That was before I’d discovered the internet and there was therefore much less romance available, so I don’t know how they’d hold up now. But at the time, they were absolute autobuys for me, and I preferred them to the Cynster series.
I liked Devil’s Bride, and read the series for a good while. But, for me, it was definitely a case of diminishing returns – DB was the best, the next couple were okay, and I eventually stopped reading with the twins’ books which I loathed with an unholy passion. If I hadn’t liked her early books so much, I’d have abandoned the series sooner.
#17 by Jessica on May 21, 2009 - 8:45 pm
Taja wrote:
Maybe I should try that one. For sure, I have been in the minority on many a favorite romance. I know how it feels.
Jill D. wrote:
Yes, I agree. No backstory. He just IS.
BevBB wrote:
LOL! I had no idea that was you! And no, yours wasn’t the one that praised the love scenes.
BevBB wrote:
Yes, I agree, they aren’t just purple, they are out of sync.
BevBB wrote:
Yes, I totally agree!
ReacherFan wrote:
I also love Chase, but do you think romances keep getting better and better? Or is it like pop music — not as new as we think, and soon to seem embarrassingly dated?
Angela wrote:
Thank you!
Angela wrote:
Hmmm. I am not sure how I feel about disguise stories. have I ever read one? I doubt it. Will try it.
Angela wrote:
I will go you one further: E.P. is a crock. A lot of us like to defend romance using sexual agency and feminism (although we may have different ideas about what they mean) but I think Laura’s comment indicates that not everybody agrees. Some romance readers and authors are quite conservative, and for them, an evolutionary story that provides normative support for traditional heterosexual sex roles at the expense of alternative social arrangements works.
azteclady wrote:
This is exactly right, at lest as I read it. they were two strong people who appreciated each other’s strengths.
Tumperkin wrote:
Really! I mean, who refers to themselves this way?
Sure you don’t want to do that DNF column…?
Marianne McA wrote:
I find that remarkable, when a book draws that reaction from me. I often remember those books as well or better than the ones I adore!
#18 by jp on May 23, 2009 - 12:16 pm
willaful wrote:
I’m with willaful on this. I remember this book and it was ok – the mystery plot was annoying since it was so obvious who did it – but I couldn’t get past the first 35 pages of the next Cynster book.
It seemed to me that all the Cynster men were going to be the same, with each being taller, darker, broodier, and more alpha than the last.
All I recall from the few pages that I read was that the hero raised his eyebrows A LOT. He raised them sardonically, he raised them coolly, he raised an arrogant brow left and an imperious brow right… you get the drift. It felt like there were 35 brow raisings in as many pages and by the 35th page, I was done – I felt it would be as much fun to watch a wooden puppet with movable eyebrows. A tall, dark, broody puppet.
#19 by ReacherFan on May 23, 2009 - 12:41 pm
I actually do think many genres get dated – just like pop music. Stephanie Laurens took the ‘Regency Lite’ path. Just enough bare bones historical verisimilitude to get by, but lacking in the emotional and historical depth, as well as story complexity, to stand up well over time. Is it like trendy music? Yes, that’s a good analogy. Just like some songs can be recorded by 100 different singers over decades and always sound good. But was ‘Wonderful World’ ever done better than it was by Louis Armstrong? Will ‘Living la Vida Loca’ – a fun song, be memorable enough to last for 50 or more years? Not likely. Was it fun at the time? You bet.
I think some character types and certain story lines are ‘fashionable’. Like Disco music or some pop singers, they just don’t age well. Seriously, how many of those vampire and werewolf novels we all enjoy will hold up over time and be as good 50 years from now? Hell, 20 years from now when they can evoke a nostalgic response? Gone With the Wind (I know, it’s technically not a romance) is still a GREAT book. Now, name a book by Amanda Quick, Stephanie Laurens, Madeline Hunter, Liz Carlyle, Elizabeth Boyle or a hundred other that will last that long.
The Spymaster’s Lady would not have had the same reception 30 years ago. And Mercy Thompson and others like her would have been ought right rejected in 1970 and probably on shaky ground in 1980 even 1990. The most likely audience than would have been science fiction/fantasy, NOT romance. Now we embrace the idea of a strong woman and will go beyond the limits of traditional romance to get then. This has much to do with evolving reader attitudes as it does with writer’s choices.
Even historical romance – whatever the period – are influenced by modern sensibilities. I look at ‘Whitney My Love’ and see an abusive relationship. Even when I read it over 20 years ago I had a negative reaction. Others see it as tortured love. It had more or less universal acclaim when released and remains in print 25 years later. But look at Amazon ratings now and you’ll see the split between readers as more and more women recognize abuse for what it really is. But a surprising number still view it as a moving love story. I find that rather disturbing. But you are right about those books we hate being among the most memorable.
I reviewed ‘Only Pleasure’ by Lora Leigh, one of her menage books in the Bound Hearts series. I am mostly ambivalent about Leigh to begin with, but went nuts over that book because of the abuse – emotional, financial and psychological, exerted on the heroine. And like Whitney, she forgives and embraces those responsible. I’m sure my neighbors heard me yelling, “Seek professional help!” – repeatedly.
I swapped it before I did what I really wanted to do – tear it to pieces.
Yup, the ones that I hate are truly memorable.
#20 by willaful on May 23, 2009 - 1:10 pm
“A tall, dark, broody puppet.”
Now I’m having flashbacks to season five of “Angel”!
#21 by Meriam on May 23, 2009 - 3:17 pm
“A tall, dark, broody puppet.”
Now I’m having flashbacks to season five of “Angel”!
—-
Nice catch!
Jessica, I love your review but I’m inclined to agree with wilaful – quit while you’re ahead. I enjoyed Devil’s Bride (particularly the post-marriage section) and the goodwill it engendered carried me through the next couple in the series… which got progressively worse. The writing is beyond purple (I’m surprised RfP hasn’t commented; she does a wicked Laurens), and the biggest sin of all; the characters and plots are interchangeable.
Having said all of that… the one other Laurens I really enjoyed was A Secret Love. But other than that – see above.
#22 by Julie on May 23, 2009 - 8:09 pm
I loved your review, and I too agree with everything you said. I’m with the others that said Devil wanted Honoria initially for her strength and mettle to be his duchess. The book was enjoyable, but I haven’t had any burning desire to read the rest of them, though I will eventually read the next few. Though I’m even having second thoughts, based on what everyone says – except for A Secret Love.
#23 by FD on May 23, 2009 - 8:55 pm
Auk, the excerpts and the implications of that speech by Stephanie Laurens are exactly why I avoid many authors online presence.
I second willaful and the others who suggest quitting while you’re ahead, although I will add I have read most of her books, and usually pick up new ones at the library. However I do so in the full knowledge that I will be reading a retread of previous books, just with different character names, so I only pick hers up when I am in the mood for that sort of book.
#24 by Kaetrin on May 25, 2009 - 12:24 am
I have read almost all of Stephanie Laurens’ books – these days I wait until they are in MMP at KMart before I buy them so I get them cheap rather than pay full price. I can wait. I still buy them but they’re not the crack they used to be.
But, Devil’s Bride is in my top few of favourites by this author and it is definitely a keeper for me. I have re-read it a couple of times and there are scenes I go back to when I feel like a quick pick-me-up.
A Secret Love didn’t really do it for me in as much as I didn’t think it was particularly memorable – I loved On a Wicked Dawn (I think I have that right – it was the second one of the twins books anyway and their titles are disconcertingly similar…) – I know another commenter above loathed it but this was my first ever Laurens and I really liked it. There was a very very minor subplot about a thief but basically, it was all about Luc and Amelia and the progression of their relationship as they admit their feelings to one another. It is also the book **Minor Spoiler** where Devil finally says “I love you” to Honoria – (did you notice he didn’t in DB?) and after I read DB, I went back and re-read it and it was delicious!!
I also love An Ideal Bride (Michael is Honoria’s brother) – this is a great one where the hero has to overcome the heroine’s (Caroline) issues about being wanted/loved for herself, not her political expertise and grace as a hostess. His speech to her toward the end of the book about “I will never turn from you…” was so good I’ve re-read it many times – of course it was in the midst (and I do mean in the midst!!) of a sex scene which on the one hand was a bit odd but, when coupled (pun intended!) with the root (oh, I’m so bad..) of her issues, it made sense.
I also loved Chillingworth’s story (All About Passion) – you met him in DB (although there is an odd erotic scene where he’s teaching her about trees or something… still confuses me…
Also, The Promise in a Kiss which is the story Devil’s parents which I appreciated because I already knew from the other Cynster books that they’d had a legendary love and it was nice to see the beginning.
My other favourite is Tony and Alicia’s story in the Bastian Club novel – A Gentleman’s Honour.
I do agree that many of her books seem to be more a “search and replace” these days – the names change but not much else and I am really really sensitive to the repetition she uses which now mostly pisses me off and used to (sort of) charm me.
eg;
“Far from being freed, she was caught, trapped.”
or
“Emboldened, she hesitantly kissed him back – tentative, unsure.” or
“He’d been feeling restless, dissatisfied with his lot…”
or “the sound slid through him, sank in and set its claws, fraying his reins…”
Now, I’m like, Oh for God’s sake just say it ONCE already!!!! grrr! Oh, and ENOUGH with the reins – fraying, loosing, slipping, tightening – just ENOUGH!!
I just finished Where the Heart Leads and it was an okay read and I finished it (unlike the previous two books I started by other authors) but it was probably a C – satisfactory but missing something.
I think I’ve probably moved on as a reader whereas she doesn’t seem to have as an author. I still enjoy going back to my favourites of hers occasionally but I don’t expect much for the future. Her heroes are almost all super alpha who (for some curious reason) don’t want to admit they’re in *whispers* love and who spend an inordinate amount of time trying to win the girl without having to “humble” themselves by admitting their feelings – I’m a bit over that now.
But, Devil’s Bride – ah, yes…. one of my favourites.
#25 by Mistress on May 25, 2009 - 7:40 pm
Seemed Honoria wanted to travel to eygpt mostly to snub the “place” society deemed she fill, by choosing to pursue a experience deemed irrational/improper for a woman. Then Sebastian decides she’ll due nicely, similar to picking a thorough bred horse. And that was the end of that.
The highhanded “you were made for this, for me. So woman up & deal…it’ll only cost you your dreams. which are silly anyway.” attitude was irksome. So was his reluctance to love Honoria, after all the wooing and manipulating to win her hand. “Devil” liked her just the way she was, as long as she colored inside the lines he set. But that’s par for the course in Historicals, so I let it slide.
#26 by Jessica on May 27, 2009 - 7:19 am
jp wrote:
LOL! I will never be able to reread this book!
ReacherFan wrote:
Thanks for your thoughtful answer! This is a good question. You are probably right. I often equate longevity with excellence, but there’s also a kind of excellence in capturing the moment, in being of the moment.
willaful wrote:
LOL!!!
Meriam wrote:
Ok, well there are so many authors I want to try. I think this will be it for SL for me for now. But I now REALLY want RfP to comment!
Julie wrote:
I loved this, too!
FD wrote:
I know. It is just way too dicey. And it’s not even that authors behave badly. Sometimes, as in this post, they just happen to hold views I find repugnant. I’d rather not know we disagree so strongly about issues dear to my heart.
Kaetrin wrote:
No, I did not. thank you for pointing it out!
Kaetrin wrote:
See, this is why glomming for me is a bad idea. You go back for all of the good things, but you can;t help but notice these problems.
Mistress wrote:
This never worked for me. I didn’t see anything in her character that backed this desire up —- no wanderlust or thirst for adventure or anything at all.
Mistress wrote:
Yeah, I think this can work as a fantasy for modern women readers because of the setting. It can feel comforting to have the gender lines neatly drawn after so many decades of messing around with them.
#27 by Caffey on May 27, 2009 - 2:30 pm
Its been a while since I read this one of Laurens and have since read a few but not all of them. I think of these books of those that you can go back to re-visiting the ‘family’ and many related books (even the Baston (sp?) Club books ends up with Cynster characters there and from other books). So its a tough one if you only read in order, then I’d probably go with the publishing date.
One of my favorites of Lauren’s is CAPTAIN JACK’S WOMAN. It was actually my second book I read of hers when I got back to discovering historicals and she had many books out already. I always recommend this one when someone wants to try Laurens book. I loved this one more than DEVIL’S BRIDE which I read first.
Great review here! Love reading your posts on the book reviews and more. I can’t get my thoughts down as you do but you do get me to remember more and think more about these reads. Glad to find this blog recently! Thanks!
#28 by RfP on June 24, 2009 - 11:51 pm
Ach, how did I miss this? Meriam is correct: I’m helpless, captive, rapt, before the inchoate, intangible, and highly fungible Laurens setting, that inimitable, that exquisite experience, that world, that realm of sensation, of sensibility, of seductively sensitive, yearningly stoic, painfully independent, that newly discovered yet forever in the making, that irresistible, undeniable force, that power most almighty, even if it never be named, never spoken–even among the many, many (really, many) words, gestures, sighs, touches that signify clearly what is not, nohow, nor contrariwise to be breathed aloud.
But apart from that, I’m glad to hear you enjoyed some of the same qualities that I do/did in Laurens. As you say, part of the charm of Laurens is “all the regular things you expect from romance, done (mostly) right”. However, I often find some irregular things in her work too, and that’s part of why I still read her occasionally.
I wasn’t aware that Devil’s Bride was considered one of Laurens’ best. It’s not my favorite because it’s so conventional. E.g. this is really unappealing in D’s B:
and I don’t think either protagonist’s motivations are convincingly developed. OTOH Laurens has interesting ways of giving a heroine agency even with an imperious duke in the mix. Those introspective scenes in which the heroine reflects on the balance of power and different types of intimacy in her marriage are characteristic of Laurens.
I do have a couple of favorite Laurens novels (even though the lovemaking, the heated caresses, the sighs, the moans, the passing of warm afternoons in bowers and beds and broom closets, the giving, the taking, the sexx0ring, the intimacy, the compact between lovers, the question, the answer, the to, the fro, the rumpy and pumpy, is impossible for me to read any more).
My favorite is A Secret Love, which starts and ends preposterously but in between develops a good ensemble cast and lovely sense of intimacy and “fit” in the central relationship.
I also like much of The Ideal Bride for its interesting gender roles, though its purple is of the purpliest and its sex scenes of the unreadabliest. E.g. the “woman up & deal“/silly dreams factor is turned on its head. The heroine is the well-traveled, politically savvy one. Older women let her know that she’s selling herself short and needs some *genuine* ambitions (unlike Honoria’s wallpaper-thin travel fantasy). So in TIB, when the heroine comes into her own, she explicitly decides to take the hero under her wing and teach him what he needs to develop his career, and he acknowledges her tutelage remarkably graciously.
On a Wicked Dawn is not a favorite, but is another that really emphasizes the adjustment to marriage. The engagement and mystery are ridiculous contrivances, but the evolution of the relationship after marriage is the heart of the book.
“One of the things I liked is that Devil wanted Honoria for her strength more than anything else.”
That’s a common thread in the Cynster books. Including A Secret Love.
BTW, there’s another interesting feature to this series. In the time period of most of the Cynster books, Helena is a widow, and we know that she took in her husband’s bastard child. So when Laurens later told the story of Helena and Sebastian’s romance (a generation-earlier prequel to the series), many readers felt that that foreknowledge of his infidelity and death violated the HEA. I think that says something fascinating about the importance of the “ever after” in the ending; happy for now might suffice as long as the ending’s not undercut by prior knowledge.
The evopsycho bit… I sort of wish I hadn’t read that. I think Laurens is smart and has some interesting things to say about gender roles and relationships, but ugh to biological determinism.