rushthatspeaks: (Default)
rushthatspeaks ([personal profile] rushthatspeaks) wrote2011-05-06 02:26 am

A Kiss at Midnight, Eloisa James (365 Books, Day 249)

I wanted to read a romance novel that did not cause me to wish to throw it across the room or beat my head against the wall.

And hey! That's exactly what I got!

This is not a great book, but it's better than it had to be. It's self-consciously a Cinderella story, a frothy bubbly confection of a thing in which the hero has literally been given the war-re-enacting uncle from Tristram Shandy as a cross to bear in life, along with an entire castle (yes, castle, I told you this was Cinderella, he's the Prince of-- consults book-- that part of Ruritania known as Warl-Marburg-Baalsfeld) full of Old Retainers of the eccentric sort, including of course illegitimate half-brother, elephant, and lion. And the heroine spends much of the book dressed up as her own stepsister and therefore has to bring her stepsister's three adored tiny dogs along with her everywhere, despite the fact that she is not at all a tiny dog person.

You know. That sort of book.

But it follows the time-honored rules of screwball; it is not a comedy of embarrassment, ever, it does not run out of plot halfway through and go digging around for a villain the way some romances like to, and the hero's original fiancée is a perfectly nice girl who does not get treated badly. For that matter, even the wicked stepmother is basically doing the best she can, although that does not make her a nice person.

And I have to like the hero, because his one goal in life is to run off to Tunisia and dig up Carthage in the correct academic manner so he knows it's done right. But he has to Marry For Money, of course, to feed his uncle and his lion...

If you're looking for correct period anything, this is not your book. This is a book which has kicked over the traces, admits cheerfully that it takes place in never-never-land, and grabbed anything from the entire eighteenth and nineteenth centuries it thought was shiny. Honestly I approve-- I think this is a sounder approach than trying to write a plausible historical while still using all the standard romance clichés, which happens a lot. It's not terrible on gender, though it is not spectacularly good. It is basically what it wants to be: a lot of fun.

I should try more of James now, though I freely admit I am running out of non-throwing-things romance novels. I have read all of Laura Kinsale and Lydia Joyce, the Jennifer Crusie I care about, the Julia Quinn that seemed survivable, and the Loretta Chase that does not make me want to scream. I need to track down the new Victoria Janssen. Does anyone have recommendations? Suzanne Brockmann maybe? Other ideas?

Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting