Any Man of Mine is the sixth book in Rachel Gibson’s contemporary romance series about a fictional pro hockey team, the Seattle Chinooks. I received my copy free from the publisher via Net Galley in exchange for writing a review. I’ve never read Gibson, and in fact, only requested this book from Net Galley to see if I would get it, Gibson being a NY Times best selling author published on a major press (this was during the discussion we having about Net Galley getting stricter). I’m not sure why I hadn’t read Gibson before. Perhaps the covers looked too chick lit. At any rate, requesting AMOM turned me on to a new author I really enjoy. I’ve already read book 2 of the series (See Jane Score), and plan to read the rest, probably in rapid succession.
Gibson writes in the tradition of Susan Elizabeth Phillips’ Chicago Stars series*: rich, charming pro athletes, happily single and enjoying the perks of stardom, who strongly prefer sleeping with long-legged, large breasted and empty headed women who agree to their terms (“no strings”). The heroine suddenly appears on the scene, almost always a fish out of water in the sports world, and although she is all wrong — usually short and homey looking, sensible, borderline bitchy — he finds himself unable to stop thinking about her. He doesn’t want commitment — usually it’s because he is too focused on his career, but sometimes the heroine digs deeper and finds family of origin issues — but he can’t stay away, despite knowing this is not the kind of woman he can just sleep with and abandon. The sexual tension is very high as they fight their attraction, albeit for different reasons — she because she doesn’t want to get hurt, he because he doesn’t want to hurt her. Sometimes the heroine’s job — perhaps reporter or PR person — is threatened by all these romantic hijinks, but such concerns usually have all the weight of a down feather. Usually the character arcs in these books are strongly skewed to the heroes, but occasionally the heroine will have to change a bit too, maybe by giving up preconceived ideas about “dumb jocks”, or recognizing that she herself has made choices that have kept her single. (*although I think SEP’s books are more complex, and address more wide ranging themes.)
I absolutely love this kind of story, despite all of the problems in inherent in it from a political perspective, and AMOM was no exception. Folks have been talking lately about sexual fantasy in romance, and defending the right of readers to enjoy books with things like rape fantasy in them. Well, I look at this kind of book in a similar way: I would never, in real life, be attracted to a man like one of these guys, and I don’t, IRL, condone what he does, but as a fictional character, it’s a different — er — story. AMOM is the kind of book I whip through, completely enjoying it, only later thinking about the problems.
There are two things about AMOM that complicate the trajectory I described above: (1) the hero and heroine were married, and (2) they have a 5 year old child, Connor. Here’s the misleading blurb:
Autumn Haven’s Las Vegas “to-do” list said to catch a show and play the slots—not wake up married to a sexy jerk like Sam LeClaire. The first moment she saw him eyeing her like a luscious piece of the dessert buffet, her usually responsible self told her to run. And she did—right into the wildest fantasy weekend of her life. But Monday morning jolted her back to reality, and before she could say “pass the coffee,” Sam was gone.
Now a successful wedding planner, Autumn hasn’t clapped eyes on the heartbreaking hockey superstar for over two years . . . until she organizes his teammate’s “Special Day,” where Sam makes a big play to pick up where he left off! But she has vowed any man of hers plays for keeps. Is Sam the man for her or does she banish him to the sin bin forever?
If you missed “wedding” and “child” in that, don’t worry: it wasn’t there. And it’s those two things, especially the child, that have made so many readers absolutely detest Sam and dislike this book. Sam is, on the scale of cretin to human being, much closer to cretin. His attitude towards women sucks (he’s a terrified his son will show feminine qualities, for example. Quelle horreur!), he drives a big gas guzzling truck — and leaves it running when parked — just to prove his manhood, and on and on and on. Gibson definitely put the pedal to the machismo metal on this character, but I personally find Sam very much in the mold of a certain kind of romance hero whom I encounter often. The focus on career, the no strings attached sex, the partying, the dislike of smart capable women like the heroine, the demeaning of the heroine’s career — this is so par for the course, I’m amazed anybody mentions it. I just read See Jane Score, and Luc, the hero of that book, has all of the same attitudes and beliefs that Sam has, albeit with a little less of Sam’s special misogynistic flair.
What makes Sam a tougher hero to redeem in the end is not those things, but that they are combined with the fact that he married Autumn in Vegas, abandoned her, and has proved to be — in Autumn’s eyes at least – a terrible father for five years. As you might guess, this is a bit of a downbeat book, although Gibson takes us in flashbacks to Vegas, and I thought she did a great job showing the excitement of their whirlwind romance. Whether AMOM works for you will depend on how well you think Gibson portrays Sam’s change from absentee dad to devoted family man. Many readers complained that it was too abrupt, but I found it believable enough. I was also perhaps a but more sympathetic to Sam in a number of ways. It was Sam’s bad luck to have unprotected sex with a romance heroine who, unlike most real women in of our day and age, has never heard of the word abortion despite not being religious, being broke, single, and trying to start a business. I don’t blame Sam for divorcing her — it was a booze fueled 72 hours — or for asking her for a paternity test, although doing so via lawyers was very low.
He’s given more than adequate financial support to his child (it’s not his fault if Autumn is a cheapskate and prefers to live in a run down split level when she can afford much more), and when it comes to parenting, he’s done what he could, given his utter lack of maturity. Sam adamantly denies that he has been such an awful parent to Connor, and their disagreement over this issue is not just about the facts (how many times he showed up, for example), but about differing conceptions of what “being a good parent” means, conceptions that differ, I think in part, due to socialized gender differences. I found Sam’s attitude towards parenting a kid he didn’t want with a woman he doesn’t know or like pretty realistic, actually, and here’s where the constraints of the genre butt up against real life. The genre requires us to root for Sam, to like him and to want him to be happy. But most men in Sam’s situation would do just as Sam did. Probably less.
I also think it helped that Autumn is no great prize herself. She has a bit of a martyr complex, and her romantic life has essentially been on hold since she gave birth. Autumn, an attractive, young, successful woman (and let’s pause for a minute to consider the 100% success rate of heroines in small business! Even in a recession!), could have put herself out there and found a wonderful father for Connor if she had set that as a goal. So there is a bit of a tension in Autumn’s claim that she is over Sam and her actual behavior. Either she was spinning her wheels waiting for Sam to grow up, or she wasn’t, but the book kind of wants it both ways.
Add my susceptibility to dumb macho jock romance to my love for the second chance romance, and I couldn’t help but enjoy this one. Add one of my favorite mini-tropes: the hero shows up, uninvited, in the rain, because he cannot stay away, and I’m a goner.
There’s a line between “an immature man with old scars hiding from his love until he can handle it”, and “a tool who forgets her to have fun for 5 years, coming back when it’s convenient.” Where you think Sam falls will determine whether this book is an enjoyable read or a wallbanger.
What I said about this book when I read it is something along the lines of, “If you’re raising a kindergartener, why would you want to be involved with another.” I had more issues with Sam than I did with Autumn, although her wishy-washiness really did try my nerves. I didn’t understand how one could be all, “I seriously HATE you, now please, sex me up.” I certainly do not have the capacity to have sexytimes if I’m pissed off. This book was a miss for me because even at the end, I didn’t really believe in the characters’ HEA.
I had to read three Rachel Gibson books before I realized how much I just genuinely hate her male leads. Two of the three books I disliked overall (Not Another Bad Date and It Must Be Love), and the third (I’m in No Mood for Love) I didn’t think was so terrible except for the hero. None of them made me eager to ever see another Gibson novel again. Your last statement on how to see Sam hit the nail on the head for me, since I had the same reaction to Sebastian at the end of I’m in No Mood for Love – too quick a turnaround, too suddenly a family man without reason. I ascribed it to a magic hoo-ha. (Thanks, Smart Bitches.) I have to conclude that I’d probably find AMOM a wallbanger. Thanks for taking one for me.
I picked this up from the library on Wednesday after work and returned it the next day. Not because I hated it, but because Gibson managed to grab me from the first page and I literally couldn’t put it down until I’d finished it that evening. Whatever the faults may be (and I found some), she does manage to tell a good story with humor and some emotion. Personally, I was able to believe in Sam’s transformation more than Autumn’s. First she is over him. And then she’s not.
This is the 3rd Gibson I’ve read and in all of them it seems the endings come too quickly and it is hard to believe in the HEA. I have felt let down at the end of the 3 books I’ve read, especially when I had enjoyed most of the journey so much.
I also take issue with what I perceive to be a low word count. The book is 384 pages (according to the Amazon website), but there’s an awful lot of white space and a large font. I would be stunned if this book is any longer than your average HQN category. Agency-priced at $7.99 I would have felt totally ripped off had I purchased it for my Kindle.
See Jane Score is a well-established incumbent on an awful lot of “all time favorite” romance lists, but Gibson mostly just doesn’t work for me. The last one I tried to read was Tangled up in You, and the only thing I remember about it was the cover (legs, leash, entanglement). I can’t even remember whether I liked SJS, but I know I read it, and it didn’t put the author on my “must read” list. I read Jane Heller’s Female Intelligence around the same time and disliked it so much. I think I have the two Janes connected in my mind.
My biggest problem with Gibson is that her humor doesn’t work for me — obviously this is a personal thing; many people love it and I think it’s considered one of her best selling points.
Huh. I have a different experience than you, I guess, because this hero would stand out for me. When I encounter these kinds of heroes the character goes through a redemption storyline, complete with satisfactory groveling at the end. Even HP alphaholes have to do this. In the books where they don’t, readers who like them usually talk about them as guilty pleasures or hate the books and start avoiding the authors.
I read the first chapter of this book and was really turned off by Sam’s casual misogyny and hypocrisy. A 35-year-old man who sleeps with women he doesn’t like or respect is going to have to jump through some major hoops to turn into hero material for me. And none of the reviews I’ve read, including this one, suggests anything of the kind happens. So Sam decides suddenly that he wants to be a husband and (finally) a good father. What if down the road, he has a Porsche-and-fake-boob midlife crisis and reverts back to being an immature, cruel jerk? It would seem to be completely consistent with the way the character is written.
I read a couple of Gibson’s books and wasn’t impressed. I can see the SEP parallels, but as you noted, SEP tends toward greater complexity and more interesting characters, and more likable, IMO, for all their flaws. So AMOM will probably not go on my TBR list.
I want to address this comment, though:
In romanceland, maybe, but real life doesn’t always work that way. A successful and attractive young woman could try to find a new relationship for herself and a (step)father for her son, but I don’t think there’s any guarantee that she would be successful in this. I’m single, as are several of my friends, and I think we are all at least reasonably attractive (though not one successful small business owner among us!
). And I have to say, even without having to look for someone who will click not just with you but also with your child, dating isn’t necessarily that easy, and “putting yourself out there” doesn’t always lead to a meaningful relationship. I agree that it does increase the odds by quite a bit. But I can totally get how a young woman who is building a business and raising a small son might not have the time and commitment to be looking for a romantic partner. Of course, having not read the book, I may be totally off with this.
Great review, Jessica. Thanks.
@Meri: Meri, I think your comment is helping me to get at what I did not articulate in the review, which I wrote in haste while trying to do 5 other things. I can see how a single mom can be too busy to date, but she wasn’t totally happy going that route. She had a lot of negative feelings and anger.
I think I was supposed to read Autumn as a perfect woman, a great mom, a great sis, asexual, hard working. I think I was supposed to read her bitterness and anger as directed towards Sam’s parenting only. However, I read her as rather unformed, as someone who put her life on hold and then sort of blamed her situation and her ex rather than recognizing that her own choices, first to engage in unprotected sex, then to have a child, then to not date, were, in an important sense, hers.
@Sunita: I was hooked and found it satisfying, but maybe I’m just too easy. Then again, is it a book I’ll reread? Nope.
As for the heroes, maybe I’m reading the wrong books, but I see Sam as on the same continuum, albeit on one end, not on a different chart altogether.
As for the 35 year old who sleeps with women he doesn’t particularly like or respect, again, his attitude towards the supermodel he dated was more negative than the norm, but the no strings attached sex is practically a requirement for the single romance hero. Take Dating the Millionaire Doctor (which I am enjoying BTW): “He formed relationships with women who knew the rules — independent women who wanted nothing but a lighthearted relationship that went nowhere.” Or Inez Kelley’s Sweet as Sin: “He knew Livvy’s type well. She dreamed of white weddings and baby blankets. Those women, if tempted just enough, loved the forbidden nature of sex without strings, the kind he specialized in.” Likewise, Luc (age 32), in See Jane Score, “had several different women friends in several different cities”… “Maybe call a friend and have her over for lunch. A certain leggy redhead came to mind.”
How much do most of those guys “like and respect” their partners? I don’t know, because the partners usually don’t even get face time. But there is no doubt that Sam’s comments about his current lover when the book opens are worse than the norm.
@Kati:
LOL! Isn’t it funny how that works in fiction?
@Kate:
I cannot argue with you. I can’t defend her at all on this account.
@Nicola O.:
That’s funny, because I didn’t find this book humorous at all. But there were some humorous moments in See Jane Score. I think there were many more moments in SJS I was supposed to find funny, like when the hero thinks Jane is a lesbian because she wears glasses.
I read every Gibson book until, I think, Lola Carlyle Reveals All or Daisy’s Back in Town (I did read Any Man of Mine, but I’m not going there).
As far as I can remember, all Gibson heroes nursed thinly-veiled contempt, distrust and worst opinions of women including heroines, even after sleeping with them. Some had “valid” reasons and some didn’t, but all held same views and attitudes, and made similar reactions and actions, to prove how earthy they were. Heroines were often in the opposite direction (Special Flake With Capital S and F, Quirky Supermodel, New Age Lover,
PoorHeadstrong Little Rich Girl, Former Daddy’s Girl, Ambitious As Hell But Secretly/Openly Loves All Girly Girl Stuff, etc).Gibson had a crystal clear idea what defined masculinity and femininity, which I think heavily influenced her novels, characters and sometimes plots. Hence that element in every book that pissed a number of readers off. Of course, this very element attracted those who loved the kind where men were men and women were women without breaching the “unPC/Harlequin Presents-level” line. Like SEP and others, she made it fun, which made it easier for some including me to accept the dodgy elements. (In fact, in some cases, I preferred Gibson (and a couple of others like Jane Graves, Susan Andersen and Deirdre Martin) over SEP.)
I really did love her voice, but the fact that those issues involving masculinity and femininity appeared in every new Gibson release were alienating me to the point where I couldn’t take it any more. It was also obvious that she, like you in this case, had more sympathies and better understanding for hero than heroine in every book when comes to assessing both characters’ mistakes and bad choices, which I found rather annoying and unfair.
@FiaQ:
I think it is obvious that Sam’s behavior was very bad, and I gave numerous example of it in the review. I was trying to bring some balance to the drumbeat of “Sam is an asshole. What is this wonderful woman doing with him?”
There are two ways to view Autumn: a passive victim of circumstances, a classic suffering heroine … or as an agent who makes choices — not all of them good — for which she bears some responsibility. I feel it is more respectful of someone, not less, to see her the second way.
I think they are both flawed. When I said I found Sam “a bit more sympathetic” I wasn’t comparing Sam to Autumn, but rather I was comparing my view of Sam to other readers’ views of him.
@Jessica:
This conforms to your first two criteria (career, the no strings attached sex), and I agree that heroes in contemps are frequently highly ambitious and want no-strings sex. The latter serves to make sex and the eventual romance with the heroine even more special. But I would strongly disagree that Lennox’s hero fits your last two criteria (the dislike of smart capable women like the heroine, the demeaning of the heroine’s career). To the contrary, he demonstrates respect and admiration for her professional skills and commitment. And maybe you haven’t gotten to this part of the book, so I won’t spoil it by going into details, but when confronted with an analogous situation, he behaves the opposite of Sam.
True. But I don’t assume they are alphaholes unless I get direct evidence that they are. In AMOM, the first chapter establishes Sam’s contempt for the woman with whom he’s having a relationship.
This is very helpful, because it didn’t occur to me to read the review as being in dialogue with other reviews (especially since you didn’t link to other reviews or discuss them directly, as you have in the past). As a result, I read the review as in part a defense of Sam in which you used what you considered to be April’s failings to highlight his lack of culpability.
@Sunita: Totally agree Millionaire hero respects heroine’s career — this is manifest from the start.
I think the hero who sleeps around may or may not have respected and liked his past flings, and I don’t assume that he liked and respected them if it is not explicit. I think in HPs, in a lot of Blazes, in a lot of PNR, he does not, and this becomes clear when an ex shows up at some point in the story. But again, it is clear Sam doesn’t like or respect his current love when the book opens, which in itself would not be so bad (I think consent is enough for sex), if it didn’t signal his general attitude towards women.
I was actually thinking of writing a post on this. In both Gibson books, the heroes sleep around a lot. But they avoid “puck bunnies”, as if these women are the lowest form of scum. It seems there is always this “lower class” of “slutty” women that writers take pains to show the hero, who has loads of sex with loads of lovers, has NOT stooped to. So, it’s like creating this class of faceless “sluts” somehow makes what the hero does cooler, or more ok, or less pathetic.
Anyway, Sam is a bundle of a lot of the worst traits of romance heroes. Absolutely. And putting them all in one character is not that common. But the traits are pretty common in my reading.
Back to AMOM: If we are rating them, Sam is a worse person than Autumn. Sam did MUCH worse things to Autumn than Autumn did to Sam. Sam is the bad guy, by a mile. I don’t doubt any of that. But it doesn’t follow that Autumn is perfect, does it? Why can’t the partner of an alphhole also be a complex character?
Autumn loved Sam once, enough to marry him, and she comes to love him again, enough to remarry him. There’s been a consensus (one I share, in the cool hour, but not while in the throes of reading the book) that Sam could not have changed that much. I have to ask: what is Autumn’s role here? Do people also doubt that she loves him, that she knows her own mind (not very flattering to her)? Or do they think she is being a complete idiot twice over (not very flattering to her)? Or that she being duped and controlled yet again by this charmer (“fool me twice” … not very flattering to her)?
Because, as bad as the hero is, the heroine ends up with him, and is happy to do so. I think it is worth it to take a look at why she makes these choices, and what needs he might be fulfilling for her. It’s a truism in pop psychotherapy that we end up with partners at our same level of emotional development. Maybe that applies here.
I really liked this book. Rachel Gibson is an auto read for me. I like her character builds and her storylines. IRL, I am not at all interested in sports so I surprise myself with my love of SEP and Gibson. And I agree with Jessica on the various aspects she discusses in her review.
I thought AMOM was a very sad story of how, for some people, their actions while they are (not) coping with grief, can have some far-reaching consequences. And both Sam and Autumn are grieving when they meet. And Sam’s grief over his sister is a doozy (I’m surprised that this hasn’t been brought up at all).
Now, one might say unfortunately, but I know men (and dammit! I’m blood-related to some
of them) who have very similar attitudes about not allowing their sons to have feminine qualities, drive gas guzzling cars, talk/behave poorly toward women, etc. and as much as I might dislike their attitudes, they too, have partners and a romance story.
When I read a book I don’t feel that I need to like the characters I am reading about. However, I do need to understand why they behave in the way that they do and I feel this book certainly delivered a clear message. Sam’s behaviour toward women may be vile but it is not unrealistic. Nor is his turn around. I don’t even think that the turn around was all that quick. It took him 5 years to act responsibly – the book was a snapshot of a handful of these months. And as for his parenting, I didn’t think he was all that bad. He just wasn’t all that great either. But once the penny dropped – once again he turned around.
However, I wish the book had been longer. The character build and history took half the book and I would have loved a deeper exploration of the h/h developing relationship as well as their relationships with their siblings and parents. Do I believe in Sam and Autumn’s HEA? I do. His genuine repentance of his actions in Vegas and the ensuing years redeemed him, IMO but I do think that it’s only the beginning of their difficult journey together.
Fascinating conversation. Haven’t read the book.
My questions: What type of support network does this heroine have? Did she have the business and if so was it successful prior to the marriage/child?
The reason for questions is because there appears to be a good parent / bad parent vibe when I read reviews on this book. I know how many hours I’ve had to put in for my career, I also know how many hours I’d have to put it to have a successful small business so I’m left wondering how much time this woman could actually have to spend with her child and how much (if any) the child support (potentially spousal support) plays in her role as a successful business woman.
Only asking because of the comment about the abode situation mentioned in passing above. I understand frugal but I’ve also seen the heroine in substandard living quarters as a romance trope although many times it’s because they are being a martyr and proving that they aren’t like those other money-grubbing sluts. (LOL sorry, I had to add that because of the last conversation thread about heroes not stooping to the bottom of the barrel for sleeping partners.)
While I admit that AMOM was a wallbanger for me, I don’t think I ever saw Autumn as blameless. I absolutely did question her judgment in taking Sam back because I didn’t find anything redeeming about him.
Gibson had to walk a line with reader expectations. There are some who feel single mothers shouldn’t date, exposing their children to an endless parade of wannabe fathers. (which is the camp I think Gibson was appeasing by making Autumn celibate for 5 years). Then there’s the other camp: moms are women with normal sex drives. Why can Sam be promiscuous and Autumn has to remain, essentially, born-again virginal?
I think I’m somewhere in the middle. I don’t see any reason why Autumn couldn’t have seriously dated someone else. Even busy as she was. It seemed odd, and her lack of romantic experience post-Sam made me feel like she was returning to a bad habit rather than pursuing a new, healthy relationship.
@AQ:
She has a brother to whom she is very close, although he is quite shady and prone to violence, and IIRC, an employee or two who are friends.
I do believe there were some martyrish elements in the choice she made as far as housing goes (she paid in full for a small fixer upper, because she did not trust Sam to keep paying, was the gist I got), but I did not get the sense that Sam’s money started up her business or anything like that.
@Vassiliki:
This is an element of the book I found really interesting. Autumn saw him as the devil because he canceled dates with Connor, and yes, that was very bad, and I would be rightfully furious if I was the parent who had to clean up those messes, but he did enough of his parenting to fully financially support his child, and to have a nanny and a room for him. No, not what he should have done, but, as a noncustodial parent with a demanding travel schedule, not a 100% fail, either.
Sightly OT, but has anyone seen the Jim Carrey film Liar, Liar?. Carrey’s character is a divorced dad, a lawyer, who lies all the time, puts his career first, and constantly cancels on his kid, even missing his birthday party, much to the dismay of his ex wife, played by Maura Tierney (of ER fame). In the end, he learns what matters in life, he gets back with his ex wife and all is forgiven. Carrey is an extremely sympathetic character. Then again, Liar, Liar is a comedy, so maybe that’s the difference. Also, the ex wife had a boyfriend.
You’re right, this should have been mentioned. Sam was so immature emotionally that he had not dealt with his own feelings of responsibility for not protecting his sister from her abusive lover. However, I am not sure Gibson did what she could have to show the reader how he worked through this.
@Amber: Amber, these are good points. I think Gibson did have to walk a line with Autumn, although I am the type of reader that would have preferred it is she did something just for herself, and not in the name of being a good mother, over those 5 years.
Characters and character’s actions can make me mad all day long but if the story is a good one – I can forgive all of that. I have this one and plan to read it for myself. Gibson’s heroes have never been all that heroic so with this book I didn’t expect any different. Sometimes a story is just that – a story. I just care if it’s good or not. Yep, just call me easy.
But in Liar, Liar Jim Carey’s character is clearly the story lead as well as the primary viewpoint character. Who is the story lead in this novel?
@Jessica:
Ooh, thanks for the clarification. I didn’t get that impression from your review. Yes, I agree both are flawed (and equally stupid). I think some are harsher on him because his child is basically a victim of their actions. No reader likes to see a child, even in fiction, suffers. There’s no way round it; Sam did make his child suffer. That’s inexcusable for some readers, I suppose.
I have to say, Caroline (a reader friend) is firmly on Sam’s side, though, because she felt that he was a victim of her “selfish choice” (keeping the child, instead of having an abortion or giving it up for adoption, without his say so). So Sam has his supporters.
@FiaQ:
I had someone on Twitter accuse me of this, but I don;t share Caroline’s view at all. I did mention in the review that it was Sam’s bad luck to have sex with a romance heroine who has never heard of abortion, but that was my attempt at a joke about genre constraints, not a moral judgment of that character’s choice to go forward with the pregnancy.
I found Sam’s attitude towards parenting a kid he didn’t want with a woman he doesn’t know or like pretty realistic, actually, and here’s where the constraints of the genre butt up against real life. The genre requires us to root for Sam, to like him and to want him to be happy. But most men in Sam’s situation would do just as Sam did. Probably less.
This was the most interesting bit of your review, to me – I’m going to ponder those ideas for a while.
I think See Jane Score was the Gibson book I read several years ago – I don’t remember a lot of the details of the romance, only of hockey and sports journalism.
I’ve read all of Gibson’s books except this one and I’m sure I’ll pick it up one of these days even though I’m a bit ambivalent about it. I have found that her books tend to fall into two camps for my part – ones I enjoy which seem to have a bit more depth and length to them and ones I find frustrating and unfulfilling because they seem short on the word count and therefore on the story and character development. This one, sounds like it’s likely to fit into the latter category so I’m not busting a gut.
The first Gibson I read was Daisy’s Back in Town (as it turns out it was not a “typical” Gibson book – there’s very little humour in it, the topics are serious and Daisy’s actions, while I understood them in the context of the book, were low (secret baby, running off with father’s best friend). I loved it. I was moved by the story and I cried when I read about Steven. I remember thinking that the story was more than the lighter fluffy romance I was expecting – all 3 main characters had flaws and all 3 main characters had my sympathy as well. I’ll stop there in case others haven’t read the book and don’t want spoilers.
Next I read Sex Lies and Online Dating which was more of a romantic suspense type story and I loved that too. The Trouble with Valentine’s Day is another favourite of mine as was True Love and Other Disasters. It’s been a while since I’ve read any of the books mentioned so I may have got some of the details wrong – what I do remember is loving the books.
Regardless of how flawed the hero starts off, I have found that if Gibson devotes enough time and space to it, I can believe in his redemption and the HEA. It’s when the books are light on that I have trouble.
@ Jessica, BTW and FWIW, I didn’t read your review as being a defense of Sam as compared to Autumn’s flaws – maybe it’s because I’ve seen other reviews where the reviewer has really disliked Sam or the short Goodreads conversation we had, but I read it as being a differing view of Sam as opposed to how other reviewers saw him.
@Kaetrin: I just finished SLoD last night, and it is my favorite of the three Gibsons I have read (AMOM, SJS being the other two). I think I’ll read the Valentine’s one next!