Friday, 3 April 2015

After Dark with a Scoundrel - Alexandra Hawkins

Young, tender, and highly impressionable, Lady Regan can’t help but be intrigued by her brother’s wayward friends—the wickedly charming Lords of Vice. One man in particular, the dashing Lord Hugh Mordare  (known simply as “Dare” among the ton), utterly captivates her—in spite of his reputation as a notorious womanizer. But when she steals an innocent kiss from Dare, Regan is swiftly packed off to boarding school, safely away from danger…and desire

Five years later, Regan returns—a proper lady and ravishing beauty. Miss Swann’s Academy for Young Ladies has taught her how to behave in polite society. But all the training in the world cannot extinguish her love for Dare. Now, she hopes to beat the master of seduction at his own game—by daring Dare to love her in return. This time, both of their hearts are on the line…and winner takes all. 

My thoughts:
A nice, kind of short historical romance.

But I did have some issues at first. Some very disturbing things mentioned. Regan grew up with the Lords of Vice, scoundrels all of them. Ok nothing wrong there. That thing came when Dare thought back about how he stopped swimming with her at 13 cos he felt something...ok euwwww! She was 13, you were 21! I can forgive you for kissing her at 15, but that is still, ok no. I tried to put that behind me so I could enjoy the book.

She comes back at 20 and he does not recognize her at first...whatever.

She wants him, he thinks with his head in his pants and stuff obviously happens. Her brother is very whatever about the whole thing. Not a fan of her brother.

But hey, I enjoyed it... after getting over the euww parts. They have their little dance. There is drama with his family and everyone will live happily ever after. 

P.S. Two dots over the o and his name means murderer, so that is what I read it as every time...


Cover
I do like heads on people

Mass Market Paperback, 292 pages
Published February 1st 2011 by St. Martin's Paperbacks
Lords of Vice #3
Historical romance
Own

31 comments:

  1. Even if they aren't entire heads?

    ReplyDelete
  2. That is icky. Pervy. And I guess he held on to that torch because they still ended up together.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was, I mean why even mention it! Say it another way, they stopped swimming cos well just cos

      Delete
  3. Not my read, especially with pedophilia undertones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh whyy did the author mention it? It was not romantic, it was icky

      Delete
  4. Eeeh yeah that's creepy young. Fine when they're older but, yeah, no.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm not sure this one is for me.

    ReplyDelete
  6. As long as you enjoyed it. Plus, they do have half their head! LOL Happy Friday!

    ReplyDelete
  7. smh. That is way too young.......and why is it he doesn't recognize her? I DOUBT she changed that much in 7 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, she left when she was 15, so it has only been 5 years

      Delete
  8. I doubt that is my kind of book, but that's a sexy cover. And I do find most romance covers only show neck down, or at most 3/4 of the face ^_^

    ~Mogsy @ BiblioSanctum

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's cheaper to show less face...I am told

      Delete
  9. Ewwww... Murderer, LOL - but I pronounced it that way in my head too ;)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ah yes... complicated, I understand.

    ReplyDelete
  11. For us is wrong and perv in many levels, but in those years girls were getting married when they were 15 or so, and it was perfectly accepted by society. :(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But this was 13, and not that many were married at 15 either. Big difference between the 2 also

      Delete
  12. Lol, I like heads on people too! 13 is gross, though in those days girls were being married off very early and usually to much older men. However ... gross. It's why I could never really get into Lolita. Gross, disturbing, and a plethora of similar feelings... Beautiful review. I hope you're having a fun weekend :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But not at 13, that is just euwwww. They did not even come out that young. it was too disturbing

      Delete
  13. sorry creepy ... and lol on his name.

    ReplyDelete
  14. sorry creepy ... and lol on his name.

    ReplyDelete