I feel (and I know without asking you that you agree) that no one writer, regardless of her racial or ethnic background, should serve as an example or carry the burden which a whole genre and its readers and marketers share.

Yes, I do agree. Your comment puts me in mind of my college freshman English class, in which I was the only female student. It was me and 19 guys. The professor (also male) taught the whole class of the Norton Anthology of Literature by Women, and asked us to examine gender issues in our papers and our discussions. Though I enjoyed the class, it was a strange experience. The guys would express their thoughts and then everyone would turn to me, as though my opinions were representative of all womankind. I felt very self-conscious there.

With regard to writing, I think consciousness can be a good thing, up to a point, but I also know that it’sdifficult to write a book that represents all of one’s good intentions with regard to social and political issues in the genre. The way to produce a good book is to ask what serves the story, not necessarily what serves an agenda. Sometimes the two coincide, and that can be wonderful, but sometimes they do not, and the results can still be a good book, if the writer puts that which serves the story ahead of that which serves an agenda (however noble that agenda might be).

ETA: I’m looking forward to your more general post, Jessica.

I’ve read such great things about this book and I want it SO bad but I’m holding out for Washington DC as she will be there. So far that is.

I am jealous jealous jealous! Promise you will take a picture!!

Sunita wrote:

I definitely agree that we should think hard about how we portray developing countries and the people in them and be very careful not to use them to exoticize the ordinary or as window dressing. I was responding more to oyceter’s comments (which I appreciate your linking to) and trying to think about what common ground might be. I think it’s hard to find at the moment, and arguments like RaceFail make it more difficult.

Ah Racefail. Sometimes more talk is not better. I appreciate your comments, with which I wholeheartedly agree.

Janine wrote:

Maybe I shouldn’t have said anything, but I had all these thoughts swirling in my head and I wanted to expresss them, so I posted here.

I am glad you did! I haven’t totally jumped into this because I feel (and I know without asking you that you agree) that no one writer, regardless of her racial or ethnic background, should serve as an example or carry the burden which a whole genre and its readers and marketers share. I know I invited discussion of the issue by posting the link, but in my heart of hearts I would like to do a more general post on this topic so no one author appears to be getting singled out.

Glad you enjoyed the review! I certainly loved the book.

I thought of responding over there, but as I have never posted there in the past, I didn’t feel it would be appropriate to descend on people who didn’t know me with my disagreement.

Maybe I shouldn’t have said anything, but I had all these thoughts swirling in my head and I wanted to expresss them, so I posted here.

I reallly enjoyed your review, Jessica (Sorry I neglected to say that before). I always find your reviews thoughtful. You named a lot of the things I love about Sherry’s writing too.

I definitely agree that we should think hard about how we portray developing countries and the people in them and be very careful not to use them to exoticize the ordinary or as window dressing. I was responding more to oyceter’s comments (which I appreciate your linking to) and trying to think about what common ground might be. I think it’s hard to find at the moment, and arguments like RaceFail make it more difficult.

I’ve always found the “classic” romance novels set in India problematic, because they hinge on the half-European Indian, or the white heroine discovering the Orient, or something similar, rather than the experiences of the majority of the people. But lots of readers love these books, and I can see why: the authors tell a great story. Today you get much less of that sort of novel (Blood Moon Over Bengal notwithstanding) but it’s still difficult to write about life in a 19th century Asian or African colony without going all White Mischief or Bollywood. Authors like Sherry Thomas and Meredith Duran are infinitely more sensitive to the topic, but it’s still really difficult to depict that era on its own terms (rather than through 20th or 21st century eyes). I love reading the results of their efforts, though; even where I disagree with how they do it, I feel enlightened by it.

And I didn’t say this before, but thanks for the great review! It made me read the book sooner rather than later, and Delicious just moved way up in the TBR.

I finished this in one sitting, and I really enjoyed it. Sherry Thomas has the amazing gift of being able to create a difficult-to-like character that the reader becomes very attached to and understands, and it’s all done without obvious manoeuvring, if that makes sense. Also, I find the combination of detachment + emotional wallop unusual and really compelling (maybe that’s what is meant by straightforward?).
On the context: I wasn’t bothered by the use of the word coolie, it seemed appropriate to the context. And I haven’t experienced it as a “scare quote” word in the Indian context, although I’d never use it in US or UK settings, or to directly address someone.
I think it’s a fair comment to say that the Indians and India provide a background rather than being important characters in their own right (the physical setting is clearly a character, but that’s something else). I think the only Indian who has lines to speak of is Ranjit Singh (and I wouldn’t have chosen that name for a minor character). OTOH, *none* of the other characters in India are important other than for context. It’s a road romance, and everyone else is superfluous to the developing relationship between the h&h. If you start saying that contexts are off limits unless the minor characters are fully realized and developed, then you’re tying authors’ hands far beyond what is fair.
There were a few instances where I felt a wrong note, but nothing that seriously jarred me out of the reading experience. Definitely a book to be reread and savored; I tore through it on this reading because I wanted to find out what happened!

Sunita,

These are great points. I haven’t been able to answer your excellent question as to why I called Thomas’s writing straightforward and spare (I have no degree in literature, not even an undergrad minor!). I guess because that’s how it feels to me — economical in some way — like the Lucifer angels quote above, in 4 words she conveys a very complex piece of imagery. Also she invests very basic common things like hand gestures and posture with a lot of meaning.

I understand your point about how difficult it would be for authors to fully develop developing world characters. When I raise issues like that, it’s not because I am trying to prevent someone from doing something, but because I am curious to hear about how other readers experience the books I read. That is all.

Aoife wrote:

I just finished NQaH. Without hesitation I’ll say that it is my favorite book of the three. By the time I was a third of the way through I was completely immersed in the story, and all the little quibbles I had had at the beginning were not gone exactly, but fairly irrelevant. I’m going to go a little against the trend, though, and say that I really loved Bryony. I didn’t find her cold at all, just wounded and defensive. Thomas did a wonderful job laying the psychological and emotional underpinnings for why Bryony is the way she is. I felt as though I understood her, and why she had made the choices she had.
There were a few little things that I noticed towards the end of the book that seemed a little too neat, in too short an amount of time, but by that time I was so totally on board that I didn’t care.
Sherry Thomas gets better with every book.

Aoife,

For me, too, it was a slight favorite over PA and D, and I agree Thomas gets better with each book.

I also agree that some of the issues at the end, especially with Bryony’s family, were resolves a bit too quickly or conveniently.

So glad you read it and liked it!

AnimeJune wrote:

I’m actually thinking of reading this one, when I get the time/money.
I tried Private Arrangements and while nothing turned me off with the novel (and I liked the heroine for the most part), I just didn’t “click.” I still have no idea why, so I might want to try “Not Quite A Husband” to give Thomas another shot.

NQAH is much less choppy than PA. It flows better. But the feel is similar. I hope you try it!

There were a few little things that I noticed towards the end of the book that seemed a little too neat, in too short an amount of time, but by that time I was so totally on board that I didn’t care.

Sherry Thomas gets better with every book.

On the context: I wasn’t bothered by the use of the word coolie, it seemed appropriate to the context. And I haven’t experienced it as a “scare quote” word in the Indian context, although I’d never use it in US or UK settings, or to directly address someone.

I think it’s a fair comment to say that the Indians and India provide a background rather than being important characters in their own right (the physical setting is clearly a character, but that’s something else). I think the only Indian who has lines to speak of is Ranjit Singh (and I wouldn’t have chosen that name for a minor character). OTOH, *none* of the other characters in India are important other than for context. It’s a road romance, and everyone else is superfluous to the developing relationship between the h&h. If you start saying that contexts are off limits unless the minor characters are fully realized and developed, then you’re tying authors’ hands far beyond what is fair.

There were a few instances where I felt a wrong note, but nothing that seriously jarred me out of the reading experience. Definitely a book to be reread and savored; I tore through it on this reading because I wanted to find out what happened!