Comments on: Review: Passion, by Lisa Valdez

By: Lisa Omstead

Lisa Omstead — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 23:53:11 +0000

OMG! I just spewed my red wine all over the keyboard. This has got to be the funniest (and most astute) of any review I’ve ever read:)

Thanks for making my day!

By: Julia Rachel Barrett

Julia Rachel Barrett — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:14:25 +0000

ROTFLMAO! You should be on Comedy Central with this one! And…um…owwwwww!

By: azteclady

azteclady — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 23:31:23 +0000

Oh my good God, this is… all kinds of amazingly amazing

By: Tumperkin

Tumperkin — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 11:45:47 +0000

Superb review Jessica! Your best ever. I loved it.

Aren’t you even tempted to read Patience? Maybe it’s because I read Passion a couple of years ago that I’m considering it but all the reports of cellos and leg-humping are making me horribly curious…

By: Jessica

Jessica — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 11:14:08 +0000

Well, I am glad this review struck a chord. Glad folks enjoyed it! @Vanessa Jaye: yes, many read this book, and many loved it. Reviews were mainly in the B range, at AAR and elsewhere. So what was it? I think you are right about the intensity. Everything about the book is intense. It reminded me of a paranormal dressed as a historical. Like the BDB in Victorian England. @RfP: oh, you are right! Sunita said on Twitter that Valdez appears to lack a sense of irony and it is so true. Everything is so earnest. @Pamelia: Your point about it being two books is really interesting. The erotic component did recede after the first half. Kind of like the heroine's cervix. @Kaetrin: Ok, but don't blame me if you do read it! The cruise was a lot of fun! My kids especially loved it. They want to go on another one immediately.

By: Pamelia

Pamelia — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 02:54:58 +0000

Yeah. It was two books for me: one was a really squicky icky uncomfortable (literally and figuratively) attempt at erotica (and I did my research and NO: cervix penetration is neither probable nor would it be pleasurable if it happened — go figure); the other book was a kind of satisfyingly intense emotional story that was all kinds of improbable and all kinds of crazy, but did in fact keep me reading (even though I SO did not want to hear ANY MORE about the copious, say rather “megacopious” amounts of fluids gushing forth.) I read Patience too and it was better on the sex front (if you like some light bondage and dominance play) but a little less emotionally intense.
What I like about them most is that they are not the same old trope and they take some risks.

By: KristieJ

KristieJ — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 02:23:37 +0000

A hellofa funny review! And now that you mention it – it does have a very “Dynasty” type feel to it doesn’t it? I liked it when I read it – a lot for the ‘I can’t believe what I just read’ aspect. But like Dynasty, I’ll never make a steady diet of this author. I’ve no desire to read the sequel either.

By: Kaetrin

Kaetrin — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 01:23:24 +0000

Ouch – rearranging the internal organs? Penetration of the uterus? I haven’t read it and I don’t think I’d like it but I have to admit that I do feel a kind of sad fascination with the idea of reading it – I suspect I’d be o-O most of the time though!

Thanks for the AMAZING review Jessica!

Did you enjoy your cruise?

By: RfP

RfP — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 01:10:18 +0000

Yes, the Kama Sutra covers similar territory with more humor. I'd rather read about a rabbit/bull/horse attempting to mate with a dove/mare/elephant.

By: Wendy

Wendy — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 20:25:54 +0000

Oh man. I see lots of spam in your future. Lots and lots of spam……

I read this back when it was first published. I suspect a large reason why I *liked* it (didn’t lurve it) was for the Dynasty/Falcon Crest comparison you made. I’ll admit that trashy primetime soap operas are my crack. Melrose Place, Dallas, Falcon Crest etc. They just don’t make ‘em like that anymore…..