How do you begin a review of the most insane romance you have ever read? With action figures, of course!

I think we need a closeup of that hero, don’t you?

Yes, folks. That’s the hero. How many lab animals do you suppose had to suffer to get those eye colors just right? And what shall we call the lip shade? Paul Revere Rose? But the pose in the top pic is significant, as we shall see below.
This Pocket historical romance, published in 1987 as the seventh in Deveraux’s Montgomery series, called to me as I walked by the charity used book table at my local supermarket. I don’t know if it was the masked hero on the cover, the fact that the setting was Maine (then Massachusetts) in 1766, or that the heroine shared my first name (oh, didn’t you know? The name Jessica was third in popularity in Revolutionary era New England, right after “Mary” and “Elizabeth”). But I had to have it.
I knew it was going to be good when it started out on a ship, heading to America, with the hero and his new best friend, Nicholas, who just happens to be His Imperial Highness, The Grand Duke, Twelfth in line to the Tzarina Catherine of all the Russias. Despite the important sounding title, Nicholas has nothing better to do than sail his friend Alexander Montgomery back home to New Sussex to save the town from the Redcoat-collaborating jerk his sister has married. As the ship enters port, Alex wonders if Jessica Taggert, leader of a poor, motherless gaggle of kids, is “as hot tempered as she always was” and lo, our heroine has been identified.
Alexander, after some rough treatment as he is entering town by the English, decides to become The Raider, a black-mask-wearing, black-horse-riding saver of Colonial butts. In order to keep his heroic identity secret, he pads his belly, dons a powdered wig, and borrows the wardrobe of Nicholas’s dandy cousin, which includes vests of canary yellow, breeches of emerald green, and lots of embroidered flowers.
Alex used to tease Jessica as kids, and she’s a bit defensive as a rule — oops, I mean “proud-tempered” – so when Alex arrives looking all flowery and Pooh sized, Jessica makes merciless fun of him in front of the whole town. When he protests, she says Mean Girl things like, “the piglet has claws” and when he threatens her, she wonders aloud if his weapon of choice is creme cakes. She is, as Alex thinks later, a “damned hardheaded little she-cat”. He falls immediately in love.
It’s pretty amazing actually, how de-masculinized Alex is when not in character as the Raider. He’s more than beta — he’s theta. He “shudders delicately”, primps in front of mirrors, waves embroidered fans, gently combs the heroine’s hair, listens to her talk about her man troubles, and “gets the vapors more than a woman.” He’s the gay best friend, essentially.
Alex complains to Nick that “Fat doesn’t make me less of a man!” but Jessica begs to differ. She describes him as “not an actual man”, and at one point, she disrobes in from of him, thinking that “Alexander was so far removed from being a man that it seemed quite natural.” In what must be the most unusual similes ever used to describe a hero, Jessica thinks at one point that Alex resembles “an oddly shaped lighthouse” and at another, compares him to a “nest of fireflies.”
Basically, the Raider raids, and then checks in with Jessica to bodice-rip her every so often. Jessica ends up having to marry “that peacock” Alex, to avoid criminal charges for fighting back against the English. As they get to know each other, she begins to appreciate her husband’s intelligence and kindness. She even offers him pity sex, but Alex tells Jessica he finds sex vulgar, only to rapidly change in to Raider gear (step 1: remove wig; step 2; don black mask) and attempt to seduce her.
It is amazing to see the alignment of gender and sexuality come apart, like a zipper unzipping, in this book. Masculinity, personified by the Raider, is signaled by virility, brawn, dark clothing, and sexual aggression while femininity, personified not by the heroine but by dandyfied Alex, is associated with chastity, brains, vanity, and passivity. The heroine is basically an appendage in this book: the real romance, the real conflict, is between Alex and the Raider.
The Raider is a total fail as both a raider and a lover. For example, on one of his first raids, he is under Deep Raider Cover. Jessica and her friend Abigail follow a group of Redcoats, hoping for some musket action:
“Where’s the man in black?” Abigail whispered.
Jessica listened to the sounds of the town and the evening. “There”, she whispered, directing her glance to the trees behind Ben’s house.
Oh, snap!
Later, in a rare moment of self-awareness, the Raider notes it is “a little disconcerting” that everyone seems to be able to predict his actions. In yet another scene, Jessica and the Raider are making love in a dark cave and fail to discern the arrival of six soldiers … with lanterns.
Jessica hits the nail on the head when she says:
“Some Raider you are! The only successful raid you’ve ever made is under a woman’s skirt!”
Unfortunately, she is forced to retract the harsh truth of her words (“I didn’t mean it. You are a successful Raider!!”) to get some Raider nookie. Still, it’s hard not to love a guy who uses a weighted fishnet to snare the baddies, and then scoops women up as he gallops away, giving them punishing kisses (see the verisimilitude of the figurine pose above). Jessica’s not too bright herself: she can tell that the Raider is a “handsome man”, but never figures out he’s Alex.
She also denies her growing feelings:
“You can’t keep appearing in my life, ridiculing me, holding me against trees, mauling me in blackberry patches, and expecting me to … to … .”
But just because Jessica hasn’t read Signs He Is Your Soul Mate 101 (too busy clamming. Oh, did I not mention her occupation?) doesn’t mean we readers aren’t well aware that she falls in love with the Raider the minute she says “I hate him” three times fast.
As to the “lovemaking”, I use the term advisedly. There are several kissing sessions which involve struggling and that extreme form of Cartesian mind-body dualism for which Old Skool heroines are known. But the pièce de résistance is the deflowering. Never has a lover been so respectful of a woman’s personal autonomy:
He kissed her again. “You have a choice. We make love tonight on the soft cool sand or I rape you tonight on the sharp rocks.”
Or so giving:
After a few swift strokes, trying not to hurt her, he collapsed on top of her, sweaty, limp, and sated.
For his part, Alex is trapped. He has created an alter ego that he can’t claim. Echoing the plaint of Colonial men everywhere, he says:
“I want her to love me for myself, not because I wear a black mask and ride a black horse.”
Finally, all is revealed, and Jessica, embracing the multiplicitous (not to mention duplicitous) nature of her man, proclaims:
No matter how many people you are, you’re the one I love.
Sigh. And who can’t get behind a metaphysically wonky love like that?
Related posts:
- Review: Ain’t She Sweet, by Susan Elizabeth Phillips My Take in Brief: I loved this book. But I can’t believe it’s an SEP. Setting: Contemporary small town Parrish,...
- Review: Someone Like Her, by Janice Kay Johnson This is my first review for my first challenge: Avidbookreader’s TBR Challenge, and already I am one day late. Sorry...
- Review: Taking Chase, by Lauren Dane My Take In Brief: A good book which made me wonder why Lisa Kleypas got all the credit for writing...
- What *IS* a soul anyway? Review of Dead Sexy by Kimberly Raye My Harlequin Blaze Audible subscription is the gift that keeps on giving, and this week it was Kimberly Raye’s 2007...
- 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...
- TBR Challenge Review: Dragon Slayer Virgin, Game Hell Whore, by Kathleen O’Reilly Ok, “Dragon Slayer Virgin, Game Hell Whore” is not the real title. It’s Keishon’s Feburary challenge was a virgin hero,...




#1 by Shiloh Walker on June 16, 2010 - 9:09 pm
Oh, man, I forgot about the barbie dolls!!! And I love that book-it’s just crazy fun. That’s all there is to it.
#2 by Lusty Reader on June 16, 2010 - 9:18 pm
whoa blast from the past, this was one of my favorite romances when i was 13! i love any re-tellings-ish of The Scarlet Pimpernel, or anything close (can’t wait for Sherry Thomas’ His at Night btw!) and The Raider’s disguise and Jess knowing but pretending not to and then the town all dresses up in disguise, even the cat! *happy sigh* god i read that book a bajillion times in the summer because i was too young to go to the library by myself.
one of my fave scenes ever is when jess walks around town and Alex, and some nefarious gov’t official i think?, are standing on a hill watching the disaster that follows her because she is just TOO pretty and people get in carriage accidents and one guy breaks his coffee mug against a door frame?!
these books are never as good as i remember them tho.
/long nostalgic comment
#3 by Angela/Lazaraspaste on June 16, 2010 - 9:35 pm
LOL! This totally reminds me another awesome and amazing love story where the same person is constantly confounded by their more attractive alter ego:
No, not Swamp Girl on Days.
Jem from “Jem and the Holograms”!
#4 by Evangeline on June 16, 2010 - 10:09 pm
I adore this book. I have a soft spot in my heart for romantic farces (Catherine Coulter is another fave) and The Raider never fails to make me hoot with laughter.
#5 by Wendy on June 16, 2010 - 11:15 pm
I never read this particular book, but I fell head over heels for Jude Deveraux’s Velvet series back before I donned my cape and became the Super Librarian. Oh the passion! The adventure! And I don’t remember a darn thing about any of them now except (I think?) Velvet Angel had a food fight scene that (naturally) segued into a mad passionate lurve making scene. I also read Knight In Shining Armor and ::gasp:: liked the ending.
Of course I haven’t reread any of these books. I’m almost afraid to. Because while I did love them back in the day? Yeah, I read them when I was like 14/15ish. Me thinks they won’t hold up for me. Just a hunch anyway
And holy cow! I always suspected Ken was a drag queen, and now we have photographic proof! Although, that being said, I think drag queens might wear less make-up.
#6 by willaful on June 17, 2010 - 2:15 am
What the hell?! Where on earth did you find that picture? Or did you photoshop it?
So glad I have that book in my TBR, it sounds… amazing.
#7 by Jessica on June 17, 2010 - 7:09 am
@Shiloh Walker: I have looked around, and I think this may be the only book that got the Barbie treatment.
@Lusty Reader: oh, I am glad this post inspired a memory of your 13 year old self!
@Angela/Lazaraspaste: Jem was after my time, but that calls for a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmYU4CeuZQ0
Good old Jem. Multimillion dollar recording artist who ran an orphanage.
@Evangeline: It is very funny. Whether it is intentionally so, I am not sure.
@Wendy: I didn’t care for KISA, none of it. I am not sure why. I think it was one of those books where “you had to be there” — it was cutting edge back in the day.
And yeah, I think Ken could give RuPaul a few tips. It;s so funny how “I must look totally weak and vain and narcissistic” translates into “I must look like a woman”.
#8 by Victoria Janssen on June 17, 2010 - 8:29 am
This book sounds like a LOT of fun.
And not at all like the other Devereaux I read, WILD ORCHIDS.
#9 by Jessica on June 17, 2010 - 8:35 am
@willaful: Oh, it’s real. And yours at Amazon for a mere $188! Check it out: http://amzn.to/9OEvBx
But how did this make it into your TBR pile? That’s what I want to know.
#10 by limecello on June 17, 2010 - 10:21 am
I laughed at the “He falls immediately in love.” – but after, like Lusty Reader, I couldn’t help but think Scarlet Pimpernel all the way. And… enh. I love SP – and this seems like travesty of crazy romance. Sad. But, entertaining review!
#11 by Carolyn Jewel on June 17, 2010 - 11:10 am
Oh, very lovely review! Thanks for the amusement.
#12 by Sherry Thomas on June 17, 2010 - 11:32 am
I read this one, probably more than once, as a teenager. Good times, good times.
“Paul Revere Rose” made me fall down laughing. As did “hat extreme form of Cartesian mind-body dualism for which Old Skool heroines are known.”
I clicked through the doll link, at first thinking it was an Etsy offer. Color me shocked to see that it was Mattel. Sigh. Historical romances used to be soooo popular.
#13 by Julia Rachel Barrett on June 17, 2010 - 11:56 am
This book came out way before I fell into romance – I think I would have clawed my way back out if I’d read it! I’m sort of thinking your review and re-enactment was more entertaining than the story – but…perhaps I’m selling the book short – this quote is arresting: He kissed her again. “You have a choice. We make love tonight on the soft cool sand or I rape you tonight on the sharp rocks.” Did/do women find this appealing? Does this epitomize a bodice-ripper? I actually haven’t read one.
#14 by Evangeline on June 17, 2010 - 12:03 pm
I’ve actually begun to read a lot of old, old favorites in historical romance because though the writing can be rough and purple in patches (or the entire book *g*), there’s this earnestness, this genuine enjoyment and exhilaration in writing romance that permeates the words. It’s rare for me to pick up a historical these days and just laugh and cry because it all feels so…serious and cautious.
#15 by Karenmc on June 17, 2010 - 1:13 pm
Oh, what fun! My work days have become extremely tedious of late, so this review was a big ol’ drink of happy.
I think I read one of Deveraux’s books a few years ago. I see now that I failed to wear my sarcasm glasses.
#16 by Heloise on June 17, 2010 - 1:34 pm
I actually remember reading half this book and throwing it against the wall. It’s so much more fun in your review. Maybe that’s it, we need cliff notes for old time romances! What fun. I have to admit I did not think your review could top the action figures, but you did very nicely.
#17 by Jess. on June 17, 2010 - 2:12 pm
Jude Deveraux has been like my guilty pleasure for so long. I honestly haven’t picked up this book in years, but your review made me want to do it. Also, I really want the dolls for it. LOL I’m just weird.
#18 by Shiloh Walker on June 17, 2010 - 2:57 pm
@Julia Rachel Barrett:
Re: “Did/do women find this appealing?”
Actually, yeah. No offense, but the book is just sheer fun-it’s a romance version of a swashbuckler, and I have no trouble with the quote referenced, or any of the book.
It’s sheer, campy fun.
In a way, it’s also a safe way for a woman to visualize what it would be like to taunt and toy with the idea of pushing a man past the point of his control, which is what the heroine did throughout the book…of seeing a strong man that desperate. That’s one of the things some women find appealing about books that involve rape fantasies.
Do they work for everybody? Of course not.
But it does work for some of us…and there’s not a thing wrong with enjoying the book for the sheer fun of it, IMO, and that’s what this book is. Just sheer fun.
#19 by willaful on June 17, 2010 - 3:19 pm
@Jessica:
Oh, I am a sucker for the library sales and PBS bargain bazaar! (Or used to be, I am trying to control myself more these days.)
#20 by Kate on June 17, 2010 - 4:40 pm
I love it! I’ve always enjoyed the Deveraux but my caveat is nothing early and nothing recent, leaving a swath of Mongomerys in between. I’ve probably read this one and promptly forgot it, being an early one. Thanks for giving it an airing.
#21 by Lorelie on June 17, 2010 - 5:03 pm
Man, I <3 me some Jude Deveraux. She's probably my favorite Old Skool rom writer.
You should read The Duchess, just for the curious characterization of Brat, the younger sister, if nothing else. Of course, Trevalyn is interesting too – starts the story laid low by malaria, IIRC. Though the heroine struck me as a bit of a foot-stomping martyr on a recent reread.
@Victoria Janssen: Wild Orchids marked the beginning of Deveraux’s slide into women’s fiction. I mourned.
#22 by Evangeline on June 17, 2010 - 9:27 pm
@Lorelie: The Duchess is, hands down, one of my favorite historical romances. I consider it the best American heiress-themed historical ever. I also love The Awakening, since it includes real historical events, early motoring, social injustice, and my top trope: a prim, buttoned-up heroine+wild hero (well, Hank’s not really “wild”, being a professor).
#23 by Julia Rachel Barrett on June 17, 2010 - 9:39 pm
No offense meant or taken. It’s something I was wondering about. I’ve never actually read a bodice ripper. I think I should, not only for the entertainment value, but for the experience. I’ve spent too much time with my nose buried volumes about religion, history and philosophy. I think I missed all the fun!
#24 by Lorelie on June 17, 2010 - 11:14 pm
@Evangeline: Hah. That’s so funny coz my favorite trope is the opposite – buttoned up man undone by wild girl.
#25 by Jessica on June 18, 2010 - 6:50 am
@limecello: I’ve really got to read SP. I think I have only seen some awful TV adaptation, many years ago.
@Carolyn Jewel: You’re welcome!
@Sherry Thomas: Do you think historical romances sold more in the 1980s than today? I keep hearing romance is growing. But perhaps that refers to other segments of the genre like paranormal and contemp and erotic rom?
@Julia Rachel Barrett: IMO, this does epitomize a bodice ripper. The heroine fights with herself over sex with the hero and he fights to get it. Women DID enjoy this, if sales of this kind of book 20 years ago were any indication.
I can hardly be upset about it, as the whole tone of the book is so over the top and ridiculous. I the scene from which I quoted, the heroine’s “body” very much wants sex, but her mind resist because it “should”. IMO, the rapey aspect of the scene was just a way to accommodate certain things, perhaps both historically (it was a technique –not a good one — for writing hot yet historically implausible extramarital sex; and perhaps also a way to accommodate the sensibilities of the women readers of the day, who maybe did not want to read a “slutty” heroine). The heroine was never harmed. frightened, upset, worried or anything but in love and hot for the hero during the scene, so it did not bother me at all.
@Evangeline:
I agree completely. As Shiloh says, it’s “campy fun”, but it’s FUN. I mean, I think it is a terrible book in many other ways — cardboard characters, implausible plot devices, etc. — but there is something there for people who love the genre.
@willaful: Me too!
@Kate: Boy Deveraux really followed those Montgomeries for many centuries. Talk about sticktuitiveness!
@Lorelie: Ok, when I recover from this one, the Duchess it is.
@Evangeline: that sounds fab.
@Julia Rachel Barrett: Well, for me, it is a part of learning about the genre. But it’s also fun.
@Lorelie: I like both actually.
#26 by Wanderer on June 18, 2010 - 8:54 am
Great stuff
I can’t believe there is a doll! Which, btw, looks like a girl on a man’s body. The hair, the eyelashes, the lips…
As for the story, what I want to know is di the Raider leave a carved R at the scene of his crimes ala Zorro?
I’ve read a couple JD books, one (I can’t remember the title) had an heiress (I think) sneak into the hero’s tent early on in the book. Hero thinks she’s a prostitute his servant sent to him and they get it on. She’s all shocked at his actions but doesn’t tell him the truth and she leaves a happily de-flowered heiress. They end up traveling together and I don’t remember what else happens. But after that beginning I do remember thinking, wtf?
The other JD book was AKISA and like Wendy, I liked the ending. There were definitely some dated material in there and a couple annoying things in the book but I enjoyed it.
Gah, still can’t get over that doll
#27 by Kate on June 18, 2010 - 9:00 am
@Evangeline:
:
Me too! Oh, absolutely my favorite, mostly for Trevelyan, not Claire. I love the scene in the derelict ballroom when she dances with Harry, who is promising he’ll make her a good husband, and all she can think of is Trevelyan telling her that he himself would be a terrible husband. Though Brat and what’s-her-name from Pasha are less than amusing, and Claire is a bit of a barnstormer. But I really did like her struggle between the love and respect of history against her desire for modernization for better conditions. The end was sort of a cop out on that theme, but nice at least that it was raised.
Jessica, I fear your review of it
#28 by Sherry Thomas on June 18, 2010 - 9:52 am
Type your comment here@Jessica:
Historicals were HUGE in the 70s and 80s. When I bought my copy of Sweet Savage Love, it was in January of 1990, I believe. The book was first published in 1974, and it was available in Wal-Mart, new. And my particular copy was from the book’s 53rd printing!
And I forgot to say earlier, what I remember best from The Raider was actually not the primary romance, but the secondary one between the Russian archduke and one of Jessica’s friends. There was something larger than life about the archduke.
#29 by katiebabs on June 18, 2010 - 10:57 am
LOL. The Raider raids the heroine’s luscious body all over the countryside.
#30 by Shiloh Walker on June 18, 2010 - 12:48 pm
@Wendy: Wendy… I loved the ending of Knight in Shining Armor, too. Up until recently, I didn’t even KNOW people had a problem with the ending-it fit the book!
@Jessica: You described it better than I did-her body wanted it ~and that’s not the ‘man saying, oh you know you want it’… she really did want the guy, but she didn’t think she should. This was how they got around it.
She wasn’t ever really scared of the guy, or intimidated, and he wouldn’t have hurt her anyway-he was besotted. There was nothing even remotely akin to true rape in the book. I guess that’s why it never bothered me. Some bodice rippers did have it and I hated them, but this wasn’t one of them.
#31 by Carolyn Crane on June 18, 2010 - 10:03 pm
I’m dying a little inside that I wasn’t reading romances as a teenager, and hadn’t read this. Oh, what glorious insane fun. And also, this review of yours! LOL. It’s wonderful. I love that the tension is truly between Alex and the Raider. And the Cartesian aspects of the heroine’s desire.
I’m glad you provided an answer to the appearance of the dolls, too. It was blowing my mind just a bit.
#32 by KristieJ on June 18, 2010 - 10:03 pm
LOL – I loved me some Jude Deveraux in my day though I don’t know if I read this one. Oddly enough though – she was also one of the authors that turned me off romance for years.
#33 by Jessica on June 19, 2010 - 8:46 am
@Carolyn Crane: I regret not starting to read romance earlier, myself. Which is why I occasionally enter the wayback machine and red books like this. Of course, judging form comments here, I can never replictae the awe and wonder that would have accompanied my reading of this book at age 13. But sarcasm and amusement will have to do.
@KristieJ: That’s interesting, that she turned you off. Was it a case of a good author going in a direction you didn’t like? Or just getting sick of the same old same old, I wonder?
#34 by Julia Rachel Barrett on June 19, 2010 - 11:40 am
Jessica, your statement that somehow a forced seduction or sort of semi-forced seduction eliminated the ‘slut’ factor and somehow made a woman’s sexual side more acceptable back then is fascinating….that her body wanted him but her mind knew it shouldn’t….great stuff. I’d love to read a post about that particular subject.
#35 by Jessica on June 19, 2010 - 1:01 pm
@Julia Rachel Barrett: oh, thank you, but that is so not new to me! I’ll see if I can find out where it originated.
#36 by Janet W on July 5, 2010 - 7:03 pm
You are so mean … well, what I “meant” to say was oh I would have been all over this review like white on rice had I not been away! So I know a few other books where you get more than one hero for the price of one (well, he’s the same guy) … Mary Balogh has a couple. My head is swimming with everything I want to catch up on!