Lady Scoundrels' discussion: Trick of Time by JL Merrow

Today it's time for Trick of Time by JL Merrow

Ok how about those sex scenes?

Ram: Clichéd.

Ana: What sex scenes? Is it a way to start a book discussion?

Blod: Well there was some licking in...ahem areas where..yeah and cuddling LOL

Ana:What kind of discussion is it exactly? Licking??? I feel scandalized now.

Blod: You told me to start! All I remember is the licking and the ohh whore! pants dropped scene.

Ana: Ram asked us to read a bawdy book, that’s what it was.

Ram: ...I asked you to read a M/M novella. Of course it’s a bawdy book.

Blod: Hihi, well there had to be some whore action considering 

Ana: it was all ridiculous but the most ridiculous of all was the time-travel aspect. Senseless

Blod: What! Noooooo! Time-travel rocks.

Ana: time travel is like rocks - plenty of writers have shipwrecked and some of them, they’ll never learn. I have never read a book where it was done right. 

Blod: Why was it bad?

Ana: How can it be called good? It lacked logic.

Ram: Whut? Why is what can be called good? 

Ana: Time travel and you should know it the best, our resident scientist.

Ram: Har har har.

Blod: I am a daydreamer, I believe and love all the silly things

Ram: I thought the logic was done well enough for a novella. I wasn’t expecting lengthy pseudo-scientific explanations. That a play in a certain theatre acted as a key to unlock a wormhole into another year worked for me. It’s called suspending disbelief, which I signed up for when I picked a book about time-travel.

Ana: But it was never explained why it was that particular play and not the other ones and why it affected only Ted, not anybody else. It was rubbish.

Ram: The accident. A series of coincidences. 

Ana: I snort in your general direction, coincidences. There are no coincidences in good books, novellas or otherwise.

Blod: GOD did it...ok maybe not.

Ana: what God and why he/she took that particular care of a queer? Idiotic.

Blod: Oh I should not joke about that, it was the universe

Ram: I’m starting to think you just wanted a book to rip apart now. 

Ana: No, not at all. I am not that mean. I am MEANER. This made me mad because it WAS bad.

Blod: Well I enjoyed it, fluffy time-travel, some whore smexing, and it was short

Ram: Sometimes fluff is good, although I’m usually allergic to the stuff.

Ana: damn, don’t tell me...and pray, how come Jem could travel along Ted without one single consequence? HOW?

Blod: Oh Ana, just believe

*Ana spits venom and fire* not a cat in hell’s chance. So tell me what else did you enjoy apart from the smexing and homoerotic fluff?

Blod: …..eh, true love wins?

Ana: true lust takes over?

Ram: Angst.

Ana: what angst? 

Ram: Ted’s suffering before the time travel bit and his continued worry about what his dead husband would have thought.

Ana *cackles* oh yeah, he suffered for about 10 minutes and then he had a blowjob and stopped, poor thing ;p.

Ram: It was a novella. Try to remember that. And he’d been alone for year and a half.

Ana: I hate novellas, it is known. You owe me a good novel, m/m but good.

Ram: I thought I’d already recommended you one good one with a rent boy. This balances the scales.

Ana: ? Refresh my memory, please.

Ram: What I need by Theda Black. 

Ana: *looks at it suspiciously* too short.

Ram: Maurice? American Love Songs? Counterpunch (with modern slavery)? Dark Space? The Marrying Kind? Muscling Through by JL Merrow?

Ana: will do.

Blod: Hey you guys, do not talk too much without me! *reads that Ana hates novellas* Well I do too

Ram: Oops.

Blod: But for a novella this one worked. I am usually very meh about them and they do not make me want to read more

Ana: It didn’t work for me, not really. Ok, maybe the fluffy scenes but still they were silly.

Ram: Silly? Yes. Bad? No. 

Blod: I do confess that I never got why Ted was so in love and I did think the rent boy was just after a quick easy way out. But it was a novella, I forgive it

Ana: well, I don’t. I am not a forgiving kind I suppose.

Blod: It was even the best Scoundrel book so far

Ana: now that’s pure outrage

Ram: *snort* I think I liked Song of Scarabeaus more though :P

Blod: Do not even mention that boring book to me

Ana: yes, Song of Scarabaeus was far better. ;p

Ram: *giggles*

Ana : who would you recommend this one to *nobody, say nobody* ?

Ram: Someone wanting to read a short M/M time travel story. Don’t expect to be wowed and be prepared to suspend disbelief. 

Blod: Fans of m/m

Ana: NOBODY.

Ram: You’re nobody then? Liar.

Ana: Nemo, call me Nemo *swims away*

Ram: It’s your turn to pick a book...

Ana: hahahahahahaha, wait and seeeee....

...problems with the broadcast. No one was able to get the last word and the discussion is still ongoing. We apologise....

Lady Scoundrels' discussion: The Sister Queens - Sophie Perinot

This time we discuss The Sister Queens by Sophie Perinot

Ana: Who loved this wretched book? Who?

Ram: Not me.

Blod: Yes fine fine! No I did not love the book I chose. *swears*

Ram: In Swedish? Gimme examples. Teachers skipped that part.

Blod: Satans helvete också!

Ana: You know, let’s stick to Queen’s English...

Ram: Why? This is more interesting than the book.

Ana: Should I write something in a fine Polish slang? Don’t tempt me.

Blod. yes please

Ram: Yes!

Ana: The Sister Queens - jaka cholerna szmira!

Blod: Lol, yes we obviously do not want to talk about the book. 

Ram: Ugh, no we don’t. And I haven’t DNFed it officially.

*Ana grits her teeth* It is supposed to be a historical fiction account told by two Middle Ages queens: Marguerite de Provence, the Queen of France and the wife of Louis IX (also known as Saint Louis,  a devout Catholic who expanded the scope of the Inquisition in France ) and her sister Eleanor de Provence, the Queen of England. 13th century. And what I get? A first person narration of two very modern ladies. They use modern French. They think like a 21st century woman would. Let me also add: a very shallow woman.

;P

Ram: A first person narration from alternating points of views. Their voices were indistinguishable.

Ana: : Here I agree completely. Sometimes I had to check several times which of the two sisters’ narration I was reading.

Blod: I got tired of the book and went on wikipedia and checked some stats instead, that was more interesting than the book. The book was all, ohhh sex, happy, orgasm, oh no my hubby does not love me *yawn*

Ram: Yeah. I’d rather have read the dry historical facts than this fictional account, although it’s not the worst possible. I would imagine.

Blod: I agree, it was not BAD, it was just....I did not care.

Ram: The quintessential MEH.

Ana: I would compare this book to a Barbie doll dressed up as a medieval princess or to one of the productions of  André Rieu who takes a popular classic tune, rapes it, makes it wear a whore’s clothes and pimps around, pretending it is still a classic, cheapening the whole experience.

Blod: applauds, well said

Ram: And not being offensive at all while doing it...

Blod *dead silence*

Ana: EVERYBODY agrees? Gasp!

Ram: ...Could not care less. And I’ll still end up finishing the book.

Blod: I read the end, still I did not care. I do want to read about these women, just not this book

Ram: It’s historical fiction. There are no such things as spoilers.

Blod: I had to see if it improved...it did not.

Ram: I was told, by the person whose review convinced me to put this on my tbr shelf, that the start is bad but that it gets better. It does get better, marginally.

Ana: I haven’t noticed. Really it gets better? I can’t believe it. 

Your least favourite character?

Ram: Of the two sisters? Marguerite.

Blod. Whiny Marguerite

Ana: What about our dear saintly king Louis?

Blod: Boring mama’s boy. And yes stupid religious ass. He was more fun when he smexed Marg up all the time.

Ram: I’m predisposed to hate all things religious, well, not quite. But he didn’t have a voice in the book.

Ana: I so hoped that Blanche de Castille would be a more pronounced character. NO such luck. She was one kick ass lady.

Ram: Marguerite was on her way getting there, to becoming the second dragon, but then she had the affair. And that’s as far as I’ve read.

Ana: LOL but but...it was a DNF? Don’t tell me I was the only one who got to the end.

Blod: I Dnf:ed, since it was my book I felt I could ;) I did not want the torture to continue. It was not true his fic. It was more lalala pretty princesses in lala land.

Ram: I’ve not DNFed. Officially. I’ll still read the end but I was... distracted while reading this. A lot. Pretty clouds outside. Should I send you pictures?

Ana: Yes please *cries*. I am horrible at not finishing a book.

Ana: Who would you recommend the book? ;p

Blod: For those who like the fluffier kind of historical fiction 

Ana: I would say a Middle Grade history geek, nothing more serious. Ram?

Ram: I would recommend an actual history books to people interested in the period and these people.

Ana: So nobody?

Ram: Maybe to someone who has to read every single book there exists about Eleanor.

Ana: And wants to laugh. A lot.

THE END

Lady Scoundrels': The Darkness that Comes Before by R.Scott Bakker

Aye we Scoundrel ladies be back!

And this time we discussed a fantasy book called The darkness that comes before by R.Scott Bakker.

First question, Ana, WHY?! Why this book?

Ana: Ehem, I warned you all, time and again, didn’t I? I linked the reviews posted on Goodreads, I told you it is a very different book, difficult, demanding. You said you wanted to give it a try and so you did.

Ram: I knew it would be a hate it or love it book, but the prologue was actually interesting. Then it just became such a mess of characters and points of views that I lost all perspective. I simply didn’t care anymore.

Ana: It is actually a pity you weren’t more...obstinate? Motivated? The novel is not that bad once you get past the first shock of excessive world building :).

Ram: I’ve read novels with excessive world building before and they weren’t as difficult to get into as this was. I’ve seen the book compared to G.R.R.Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire but I read the first two books of that series and that had the decency of starting with a single family unit tying the narrators together. It’s only as the story progresses that their voices and storylines deviate from each other to give the bigger picture. Reading this was like being a drop into an ocean one minute and across the the world on a small island the next. Then maybe I’d be back in the deepest part of the world two minutes later, or on top of the Himalayas. Or jumping from one infodump to another.

Blod: I did like the blurb..ahem, sort of. So I blame myself. But I agree with everything Ram has to say. So I do not need to ;)

Ana: How very convenient, right B? (*snickers*)

Blod: Ok if I must. It was not that it was dreadfully boring, I did make it to half of it. But I was also confused already on page 1. And then omg then! 1000 different POVs, one million languages, states and blah blah blah. I grew bored, I never liked or hated anyone. Well ok 2 guys seemed interested. I just wanted out in the end.

Ram: I’m totally blaming the ebook btw. A paperback with easy flipping to character index would have helped. 

Blod. I agree, I only realised when I skimmed the end that there actually was in index *head desk* Not that it seemed to help in this case because I could keep the peeps straight, I just would never remember their long long names.

Ram: I was too busy puzzling over the pronunciation to care.

Ana: Why  didn’t you hate anyone? There were plenty of characters to hate. Some of them were really well-rounded and complex.

Blod: Who?

Ana: Achamian for the starters, Kelhus next.

Blod: Eh, Akka seemed nice, Kelhus I only saw in the beginning and then I kept wanting him to come back and he never did.

Ana: Akka seemed nice? Oh, maybe you didn’t get to that moment when he condemned his own favourite pupil to death? Or when he left Esmi behind knowing fully well what she would have to do to survive?

Blod. Well you did tell me peeps were evil so I just went with it. It was a cruel world, people are cruel then.

Ram: Ana makes it sound so interesting. Too bad I never fully learned who the characters were to CARE. 

Ana: LOL maybe I will make you to read this one again or at least try to do so. Borrow a copy from your library.

Ram: If I do, it’ll be an eternity project. 

Blod: I am not really into to reading it either, it was just too much, too boring. And not nearly evil enough as Ana promised. But then I did not read it all.

Ana: NOT EVIL ENOUGH? I really don’t understand what you need more. The protagonists in this book kill and manipulate people right left and centre. They do it not because they want to survive or anything, they do it because of ugly politics and religious belief. There is more than one nearly-rape scene, there are Others who can change shape and blend with other people seamlessly, even taking over their bodies. If it is not evil then I am really curious what books you find so.

Blod: That is fantasy ;) Sometimes I do not get myself either. Still not evil enough. But then I just finished a book today where the main character, a woman, raped a guy, killed her own son for not doing what she wanted and then cut his lover’s belly open and taking out the child....yup.

Ram: The level of evil depends on how it’s done as well as the heinous acts themselves. If it’s written poorly it’s not evil enough or as evil as it could be.

Ram: Ana, you wrote a review for this and mentioned the historical and philosophical references. Could you give me an example from within the first hundred pages or so because I utterly missed them?

Ana: Sure. Kelhus is a monk who, reaching the tell-tale age of 30 (the age of Jesus when he discovered his calling and started his public ministry) is going to look for his father, allegedly somebody far more powerful than an ordinary human being. I consider it one of clearer religious references. Also take into account the fact that one of main religions in the novel worships an INRI. Do you know where these letters come from? If you are a Christian you should (look at the inscription on almost every crucifix).

Ram: Oh, those. I noticed those but didn’t really think about them. Maybe I’m just not religious enough to appreciate this book? (INRI = Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews, would have remembered it in Finnish but there’s a disconnect in my mind with these things.)

Ana : Then there is that Holy War going on which resembles closely crusades.

Blod: Ugh, Christian religion is so boring, was it my subconscious that made me dislike the book?

Ram: I’m just used to thinking fantasy books making references to Christianity boring or too judgmental  I’m a pagan at heart (although I was baptised and had a confirmation). 

Blod: Same here, I do not like it when fantasy books go too Christian (even if I like Ram has gone through the same boring rituals:)

Ram: I’d rather read contemporary or historical books set in real world examining and questioning the real faith than a fictitious one based on it.

Ana: Bakker is questioning EVERYTHING - the figure of Jesus/Kelhus is so skewed that I am really surprised no group of Christian fundamentalists has ever condemned this book for such a blatant blasphemy. 

Ram: Have you read Holy Blood, Holy Grail?I have. If there are people writing those kind of books without needing to create a fantasy world as a crutch I don’t understand why couldn’t Bakker do that too.

Ana: I suppose he wanted to tell his version of the story. And if you dared to continue you would see Kelhus marrying TWO women actually :D one of them being a prostitute.

Blod: Well go Kelhus then *eye roll* Another thing, so few women in this book, except for our dear prostitute and a queen called a whore a lot.

Ana: ...and there was that Serwe but I suppose you didn’t read far enough to meet her. By the way I agree - too few good female characters to make me satisfied.

Ram: Kelhus seemed like an interesting character but he basically disappeared after the very beginning. I think Bakker tried to do too much too soon and it overwhelms anyone not taking copious of amount of notes. And Christian fundamentalists will protest against anything. 

Ana: Definitely true - the world is unfurled too fast and you must get used to new characters being introduced every page which can be a pain you know where. I bet not many Christian fundamentalists read books at all btw ;) especially fantasy books with  religious undercurrents.

Blod. Ha, burn! :)

Ana: So how would you describe shortly your reading experience? (*puppy eyes*)

Blod: Confusion leading to interest and ending in boredom.

Ram: Intriguement killed by the scope of things. Aka poor writing.

Ana: I read it till the end and Iiked it with some caveats of course. I am a weirdo but don’t shoot me, please.

Ram: You’re just too smart for us. And that doesn’t get you shot, ever.

Ana: I think it’s not the matter of my brain, just pure obstinacy but thanks.

Ram: Or you just couldn’t get out of the house because of the snow.

Ana: ;P

Happy Easter from the past. Tune in again next month. 

Lady Scoundrels' review Rivers of London - Ben Aaronovich

Lady Scoundrels are back, and on Friday :) Today we review:

Rivers of London by Ben Aaronovich

If you have to sum this novel up in no more than three words what would you say?

Ram: And don’t you dare to use “Harry” and “Potter.” (<- My contribution) i.e. Not Harry Potter.

Blod: Lol, I would never think it. This was nothing like that weird little kid

Ana: It was exactly like that weird little kid but slightly older and in a uniform ;p.

Blod: Behave ;)

Ana: Let me rephrase it: Little Adult Wizard. Satisfied?

Do you think it is a good idea to mix magic and contemporary technology/science?

Ram: Of course it is. I want to see authors trying to work out where the limits go. What was magic to people from a few centuries ago is technology for us, what’s magic to us...

Blod: Yes I do.

Ana: Magic is indeed like a more advanced technology. Just smarter ;p.

There are some Latin quotes in this novel and magicians’ spells are also spoken in that language. Did it disturb you? Why, in your opinion, literary magicians love Latin so much?

Blod: Nope, why would it?  But yes why use Latin. I mean come one, was there no magic before that?

Ana: It seems like Latin was magical per se whereas it is just another dead language. Why not Greek or Hebrew? It bothers me a bit and it makes me laugh sometimes too.

Ram: It didn’t bother me, but I sort of wish they didn’t use it either. I generally dislike all spells that are not spoken in the language that the characters use. I dislike all spells spoken out loud.

Rivers of London (the UK) vs Midnight Riot (the US)- why do you think  the US editor felt the need to change the original title?

Blod: Oh this bothered me, the US title is just so much more US. And the cover does not fit the feel at all.

Ana: Midnight Riot left me with one big ‘WTF’ in my head. It is rather condescending to think that the American readers can’t deal with the original title i.e. understand it properly.

Ram: I just think that when Americans start changing things they never change them for the better. 

Ana: Different not always means better, unfortunately.

Blod: Just think about when they tried to make a British show American, does not work

Who is your favourite character? What do you think of the dynamics between Peter, Lesley and Beverly?

Ram: I didn’t like the triangle set-up but I liked the characters individually. 

Blod: Yes what was up with the triangle that wasn’t a triangle. That felt a bit male. But anyway, I liked them all, but if I have to choose...Nightingale, I wanna know more

Ram: I fear the triangle will be picked up later again in the series, but I haven’t had time to find out. I’ve only read the first chapter of book two. Nightingale, I want to know more but not too much.

Ana: I skipped book two (bad Ana, I know, very very bad) and progressed to the third part but I don’t want to spoil anybody. I didn’t like Beverly, I tolerate Peter and I am fond of Lesley, especially after her little accident which made her...more interesting. The fact that the author didn’t jettison her after that appearance-changing accident is a huge advantage in my view.

Ram: I know...

Would you like to continue the series (there are two more books available and the third is being written)? Why/why not?

Blod: Oh ..must  I answer? Ok then, the answer is no. Sure it was good, just not good enough.

Ram: Yes I would and I am.

Ana: I understand ‘not good enough’ but I am curious and you know what curiosity makes me do...different strange things. So yes, I will read on. However I might skip the second part - I’ve already started the third :p

Which scenes unsettled you the most and why? 

Blod: Nothing unsettled me. Horrible really. But I have been watching the tv show Utopia, ‘nuff said.

Ram: Personally, I wasn’t disturbed but I noticed a couple of things I’d warn my friends about, things I’d put in my review for those who want to know to avoid. Like <spoiler>the baby incident and mutilated corpses.</spoiler>

Ana: I suppose the possession was the ugliest moment but no, it wasn’t ugly enough to make me uncomfortable. I’ve seen and read much worse. Babies...well, I am not a fan of them and the one in the book was just a prop, like that child from the Punch and Judy show. That’s why there are no specific warnings in my review.

Who would you recommend this book to and why?

Blod: I would recommend it, because it felt different, it was well written and there is just something about the Brits. To all UF fans who want more.

Ana: I would recommend it to Harry Dresden fans and people who like London because there’s plenty of London in this series.

Ram: To anyone who asks, really.

Ana: Look, she will be proposing soon ;p.

Note to discussioners: Don’t try to impose word limits. It won’t work.

Note to readers: Until we meet again.

Lady Scoundrels' Saturday: Dirty - Megan Hart

Lady Scoundrels are back and this time we review Dirty by Megan Hart. First up is Scorn.


Synopsis 
What I liked: 

What comes to your mind when you see erotica novels? Of course plenty of graphic sex scenes, a skeleton plot, a very superficial psychological make-up if any at all, characters often limited only to a description of an appearance. Small wonder plenty of readers shun these books considering them a waste of time and money. I am usually one of such readers. However Megan Hart managed to break that mould. 

I would compare ‘Dirty’ to ‘Bitter Moon’, an old movie by Roman Polanski which told a story of a romance in a very intelligent, funny and moving way. With the emphasis on ‘intelligent’ which always, entices me more than anything and makes me cave in even if, officially I am hardly a romance fan, let alone erotica reader. I found Elle a surprisingly complex heroine, taking into account what genre we are talking about. Her actions were fully justified by her sad experiences and reading about her I felt as if she was really alive, not one more sex-crazed cardboard character you can find galore in such novels. After a while you understand why she has acted they way she did but the full story is revealed at the end and the more you read the more you want to find out. You sympathize with her and with Dan who tries to lure her out of her shell and engage in a mature relationship. 

What I didn’t like: 

Although, up to a point, I could relate to Elle, I doubt such generous, understanding and patient men as Dan exist at all. He was like that fairy tale prince – a well-rounded lover, ready to be taken, without major commitments or vices. I can’t help thinking that in real life he would have a wife and at least several part-time bimbos hidden somewhere in the closet; that and a nasty habit or two ;p. 

Final verdict: 

If you feel like reading erotica go for something intelligent and read this one. The love scenes are really steamy hot and when you finish you won’t despise yourself for spending so much time with a ‘pink’ novel. 

Warning: 

It is an erotica romance novel - it contains a lot of graphic sex scenes which are highly inappropriate for underage public. Such issues as incest, suicide and sexual abuse of a minor are mentioned as well. Keep it in mind while deciding whether you want to read it or not.

 Sense says:

You don’t need to know who she is or who he is. All you need to know is that they meet by chance, they start fucking each other everywhere, he bosses her around, and she turns frigid after each fuck. And that it’s all boring.

As refreshing at it is to read about a successful—and surprisingly a total pushover—woman who fully embraces her sexuality, reading about said woman fucking a stranger in public places without preamble is not. When connecting with the characters is a problem, even the hottest sex scenes fall flat.

After all that it’s a bit too late to start fixing things. Although. If you’d take Dan and all the sex out I’d probably give this book four stars, because the only thing interesting in this book is Elle’s relationship with Gavin, the boy next door. Her secret might hit red on your squick scale but it’s quite obvious from the start. It was actually my first theory after reading couple of hints in the book. 

The end reveal was rushed and disappointing in all its telling—as opposed to showing. 

And last Sensitivity

I will give you that, it was dirty and hot...really dirty and hot. But as I am a known sex scene skimmer I do want more than that. And here it just did not work.

Elle was, well yes I know the whole point was that she was cold and needed to find the way to love and be loved again. But I never connected to her. As for Dan, him I never knew at all. I did not understand why he was with her, I did not feel a thing.

So I am stuck with 2 people I do not care about. Which leaves me with dirty sex scene (that I end up skimmin anyway cos I get bored by too much sex). I did like the whole plot though. Why she was so fucked up.

But I was bored, a lot. And while reading I actually fell sleep. There was still something good over the book, the emotional drama, the hot scene, the writing. But in the end not the book for me. No connection, no deal.

Lady Scoundrels' Saturday: Battle Royale

We are back and today we are bringing you a Scoundrel review of

 Battle Royale by Koushun Takami

At first I had planned for short reviews and links to the longer but I do not want to censure thoughts in the end. Especially since Sense and Scorn are so awesome at what they do :) First up is Scorn as she brings us a synopsis.

Synopsis:
Welcome to a dystopian East Asian country (like Japan but larger) where people live happily and peacefully under the watchful eye of your average, sadistic Dictator. In order to keep things straight under control once a year a class of 15-year-old junior high kids is sent to an enclosed location. The kids are given different weapons at random, weapons as different as an Uzi is different from an ice pick or a crossbow from a fork, a day pack with a bottle of water and they are told to go and kill each other. The last survivor wins. It is called the Program. If it serves a purpose nobody knows what purpose exactly.

In order to ensure there is no cheating (you know those pesky teens, they always cheat) each of the students is fitted with a nice shiny collar which allows to track them and listen to their conversations. The collar has also an in-built explosive device. No deaths for longer than 24 hours? All participants are eliminated. More than one survivor? All the rest is eliminated as well. Trying to hide somewhere for too long or trying to run away? The same outcome – you are blown up to smithereens.

You follow 42 students – the newest batch of victims – who have to participate in the Program. Who will win this time: energetic Yukie, the class Representative, selfish and manipulative Mitsuke, acting as if she was a female Yakuza mobster, mysterious Kazuo, a boy so gifted and so calm that he is followed and admired even by thugs, Noriko, just your ordinary, averagely pretty girl, or maybe Shuya, a kind orphan boy who likes those forbidden rock and roll songs and plays the electric guitar? Or maybe somebody else? Can anybody truly be a winner in such circumstances?

What I liked:
There were many stories included in one bigger story and I found them the best part of  this book. More than dozen of students were given an opportunity to tell you about their hopes and fears. Because of that they became real, three-dimensional characters, not just a shooting range dummies. It was really the "good stuff"  for me - watching all the little petty relationships, conflicts and problems you have when you are 15 suddenly twisted horribly by the extreme fear of knowing only one person will be allowed to live and your classmates and friends have to become your deadly enemies.

Of course there was violence, quite a lot of it, but I would compare it to one of these cheesy movies of Tarantino - you are disgusted, you know it is bad but you still want to watch. Indeed it might be treated as great entertainment only by people with a tolerance for high amounts of guts-and-gore, but, as it was also a really well-done study of the psychology of extreme fear and included some insights about totalitarianism as well  somehow I managed to survive. The personal stories, often told in an almost poetic way, stop Battle Royale from spiraling into a mindless bloodbath.

What I didn’t like:
First let me tell you that the first 50-60 pages were downright boring. Then the action accelerated and here I hit another snag - Battle Royale was a lot more graphic than I'd imagined. So instead of puking up the contents of my stomach, I just skipped the paragraphs describing blood and bashed-in brains. In fact from time to time the plot was so childish that it reminded me those computer games when you kill and kill and kill and finally you forget about the reason why you keep doing it because it doesn’t matter as long as the next opponent lies, neutralized, in a puddle of blood. Frankly the detailed descriptions of different violent deaths were horribly ridiculous.

What’s more even from the first chapter the plot was rather obvious – you could guess with a high success rate who would be killed and how soon.  The style of the narrative I also found a bit uneven, or maybe it was the problem with the translation, I really can’t tell. Anyway the descriptions were very anime, which makes me think that if the writing had been really beautiful, or if any of the emotions had been deeper, I may have liked this book a lot better.

Finally the ending…I must say I was completely disappointed by it. It was a ridiculous and artificial construction of a plot-twist after a plot-twist (so you thought they were really dead?! No! They are alive! No, wait, they are going to be dead soon...or maybe not?). I was not amused.

Final verdict:
Personally I liked this novel despite its many flaws but in my view it is not perfect and certainly not for everybody. Still cult novels (yes, it is one of them) are so hard to resist so how to tell whether or not it is your next best thing? Well, if you salivate at the mere thought of a book which combines Manga and Anime poesy, Hunger Games-style action, Lord of the Flies political undercurrents and an amount of atrocities straight from Quentin Tarantino movies this might be a perfect read for you. Do not read it if you are feeling nauseous even after my quite innocuous synopsis. Helpful? I hope so.

---------------

And now on to what Sense has to say

What can I say about this black and red covered brick that hasn’t been said already? 

Not much. Nothing at all.

The translation sucks. It’s uneven, sloppy, and it’s painful to read at times. It’s the reason I kept putting this book down and reading something else instead. It’s not, however, enough to hide the great story underneath. 

The beginning of the novel is bogged down by long infodumbs explaining the game, the government’s approach, and pointing out most if not all of the 42 players. That’s a lot of names and factoids for a reader to remember and I wish the author had just picked a handful of core characters to properly introduce before hitting the “start game” button. Takami doesn’t have any trouble introducing new characters later in the book while detailing the progress of the killing game, and I don’t understand why he couldn’t have used that same tactic from the start. And that’s what I loved most about this book. As bloody and gory as it is, it also gives voices and personalities to even the most obnoxious characters. They were the best part of this book.

The heroes and heroine, however, were not. Noriko redeemed herself somewhat towards the end, but in doing so she took away Shuya’s last chance to morph into an interesting character. Of the three, both in the book and the film, most interesting was Shogo. You can guess how I felt about that moment on the mountain top, if you’ve read the book.

There are two endings for this story, the first on the island and the second off the island. I would’ve loved had the first been the final ending, but I can understand why the second one exists. The confrontation with the government representative was necessary because of the world Takami created and because of the message he wanted to convey at the end. 

I could have preferred had it been done without the lyrics, though.

.........................

And now on to Sensitivity (and I still claim I should be called Silly cos I have been harsh lately haha)

As ebooks always have funky pages I can't say for how long the book was REALLY boring, 60 pages perhaps. So very boring. If this had not been a Scoundrel book then I would have given up long before. So I read, but then I started to grow tired by it all again. It was not that it was bad, it as just long, and I read fantasy books longer than this. But it was slow and boring at times, and at other times it was really good

By page 300 or so I started to skim, and skimming on an e-reader takes time, so I still read most of it.

Why did it not work: A very SLOW beginning. The flashbacks, come on, flashbacks all the time, while I was all just kill each other and put me out of my misery. Also, what was up with the constant "who do you have a crush on?" Really, people are running around chopping each other to pieces and still everyone seems to take time and talk about crushes. I would be hiding and not talking..oh and checking so no one comes near. Stupid teens.

The violence was not that violent actually. I mean yes it was violent, but I would not say it was that graphic. Also it was interesting to compare with the Hunger Games. Yup she def took a few things from this one. And The Hunger games is a 8 year old girl's bday party compared to this book. Sure it's an adult book but you catch my drift. Games to the death should be bloody and freaking horrible.

I also did not like that there was no point to the Games. Other than a fucked up society. And the end, I did not like the end. I want conclusions. Not something that leaves me hanging. I hate that shit.

Good at times, boring at times. It gets an ok grade for me for that. Still an interesting insight into a society that is just all kinds of messed up.

The END

Lady Scoundrels' Saturday: A night Like this - Julia Quinn

Over the next 3 Saturdays we will be taking on A night like this by Julia Quinn.

Lady Scoundrels Review A Night like this

Part 1 Scorn:

The revenge will be bloody

Once upon a time an English aristocrat called Daniel returned home from three years of wandering abroad. You see, he was hiding from another aristocrat who wanted to kill him. Ok, never mind.  As soon as he returned he saw a beautiful girl. "She was petite, small in that way that made a man want to slay dragons". I don't doubt she looked like this:

Oh no, sorry, wrong picture. She was of course looking like this:

Nononono, wrong picture again. Ok, I am pretty sure she looked more like this:

Here you go. She was playing the piano and, as soon as he saw her and she saw him they fell in complete insta-lust. It was as if his inner self kept whispering into his ear:

WRhawwwrrrr....Of course, being a young man and an English aristocrat to boot he had to check whether that claim was more or less true. His beloved was called Anne Wynter and she was employed as a governess in the house of his female cousins who, being unbearably shallow and sweet, all looked the same :

They tittered and quarrelled and giggled...Well, they had every right to be similar and stupid, it's not their story, right? Anyway Daniel started to visit them very often just to be in the blissful presence of their governess and...er...touch her hand from time to time.

Still the governess had her own secrets and, being very sadly experienced when it comes to the close contacts with the so-called gentlemen she wasn't that willing to let him touch her...er... anything. Daniel also had a bunch of problems on his own. 

No, dear ladies, there is nothing to laugh about. English aristocrats do have serious problems and English governesses always have a secret or two hidden in a drawer right next to their underwear. Do you want proof? Here you go, a direct quote:

"He wanted her. He wanted her completely. But his family was waiting for him at supper, and his ancestors were staring down at him from their portrait frames, and she—the woman in question—was watching him with a wariness that broke his heart.."

You see? A real problem. 

Then they go to the country together and our sweet Anne found herself falling deeper and deeper in lust because Daniel was so sweet and so pretty and SO incredibly rich...and here the problems of our governess started to emerge from her overflowing drawer:

But really, it didn’t matter who she was. Anne Wynter . . . Annelise Shawcross . . . Neither one of them was a suitable match for Daniel Smythe-Smith, Earl of Winstead, Viscount Streathermore, and Baron Touchton of Stoke. He had more names than she did. It was almost funny.

Yes, dear sir, you heard it right. It was said 'funny'.

Then there is a lot of talk about food and food preferences, kissing or not kissing, strolling or not strolling and different trivial hobbies of young brainless ladies. You see, Daniel wanted to know his beloved better, to see her soul and her heart, not only her luscious body. Do guys necessarily need a woman's background history to spontaneously want to bang her or play epic-kiss-face? Yes they do. But only just a little bit. A real masterpiece of romance literature, with great, well-rounded, interesting characters don't you think, dear reader? 

After a while my eyebrows get stuck up high and I couldn't believe I was reading such a depressingly shallow book. Still a challege is a challege, right? After page number 65 I started SKIMMING.

It didn't help much. You see I kept encountering such fragments:

"Could you imagine? Telling Lady Pleinsworth the truth about her background? Well, the thing is, I’m not a virgin. And my name is not really Anne Wynter. Oh, and I stabbed a man and now he’s madly hunting me until I’m dead. A desperate, horrified giggle popped out of Anne’s throat. What a resumé that was."

I was just waiting for the main villain to appear and save the day. Silly, silly me. Instead of a villain I got a papercut bloke.

"George just shrugged, and in that moment he confirmed all of Anne’s darkest suspicions. He was mad. He was utterly, completely, loonlike mad. There could be no other explanation. No sane individual would risk killing a peer of the realm in order to get to her."

Irrefutable logic, my lady.

The ending was in perfect accordance with the rest of the book: senseless, stupid, shallow, not really resolving anything so completely redundant. But it was the end of my suffering. 

Final verdict:

After reading such a book I feel like this:

I do not recommend it to anybody. Unless you are a masochist.

Bridget/anachronist

Lady Scoundrels' Saturday: The Raven Prince - Elizabeth Hoyt

Today is the last part of Lady Scoundrels review: The Raven Prince. Next week we will be back with a new book. Stay tuned for that.

Part 1 Scorn 

Part 2 Sense

And today it's my turn, Sensitivity *coughs*

I was unsure about the grade but I am just gonna go all bitchy on this book. Truth be told, I sat there reading and nitpicking and never truly connected. Did it make me want to read more by this author...no. Would it make me pick up more books by her if I found them at the library, no, and that really means it should get a 2. Which is still of course an ok grade. Cos it was not all bad.

So many things irritated me with this book. The first time Anna sees and hears Edward she thinks of one thing..is that how his voice sounds when making love? Honestly? Wtf, someone needs to get laid and fast. I doubt a prim 18th century widow would think that.

Then she becomes his secretary, again, wtf is this? She is a woman! Then she dines and rides with him. Oh girl, do not talk about that your reputation might take a hit, everyone, I mean everyone would already think you are his mistress. And if they are not then something is seriously wrong with that village.

The sexual tension continues *yawns*. She is also not repulsed by his scars cos he is pretty on the inside or whatever. Really? I found him to be quite the ass in the beginning. Also how they sparred at once. No no, that is not proper etiquette. You are obviously a loose woman. Why he keeps thinking of you are a virtuous saint I do not know.

To the brothels! Yes she finds a note and begins to think why men gets to smex around but women don't. Hello, because that is the era you live in. Do not go all modern on me or I will kick your ass. Anyway, what does our prim heroine do, yes she talks to a whore for 2 minutes and decides to go to a brothel and have sex with Edward. What? When did this happen? I am totally lost by this plot. WHY on earth would you do that? Just lift your skirts to him in the library and have at it. Yes he would not think you all prim and proper afterwards but at least you would get laid. Pretending to be someone else behind a mask at a brothel is something that does not go through my head. You also put yourself up to be raped by strangers, sold, killed, where is your head?

Of course he later finds out, duh, so we could totally have been spared the stupid brothel story, oh and I must also mention that he has a magic penis. A very magical penis that cures every womb.

Let's see, anything else I can snark at....I actually liked that she took pity on the prostitute, that I liked.

Oh the villains. Do not even get me started, another stupid plot that made no sense. Someone making a big deal of nothing. I could have been spared that too, it was just embarrassing and I wanted to hide behind my book.

Last, I am sure all these things could have been forgiven one way or another but at the end I realized that I suffered through the book and never connected. Why would I connect to the prim widow who just thinks about sex. Or the earl who goes on and on about how ugly he is and lusts after his secretary. An easy way to fix that, try to seduce her, if that fails, pay her off. I did not feel the chemistry, I did not get why she liked him, or he her, as she was so plain and that he says a lot. But hey she was outspoken, he must like a challenge.

I fear that yes I like HR, but HR does not like me back. I keep trying and I am sure everyone thinks I love HR to pieces, but I don't. It seldom impresses me. I enjoy it, it's a good genre, good escapism in it's silliness. But great, no, not that often. Really seldom really.

Would I recommend it..no not really.

Cover Snark:

So that is the ugly guy..yeah, sorry can't see it. Then I do prefer this other cover:

Lady Scoundrels' Saturday: The Raven Prince - Elizabeth Hoyt

Part 1. Scorn reviews The Raven Prince

And today it's time for part 2 of The Lady Scoundrels review The Raven Prince by Elizabeth Hoyt!

The floor is yours Sense

It’s been almost two weeks since I read this book and the overwhelming joy I felt then has since dissipated. The four stars I gave to The Raven Prince doesn’t seem as appropriate now as it did before. If I were working with half stars, I might adjust my rating, but as I am not, I’ll stick with what I chose.

Because as clichéd as the story was, it was entertaining enough to set it apart from all the three star meh books I’ve read. 

I’ve come to expect some level of anachronism from modern historical romances. These books are written for a modern audience and there are things that couldn’t be thought of let alone written two or three hundred years ago that are expected in literature of today. As Scorn pointed out last week, it can be jarring, but if you’re prepared with a hefty dose the patented Suspended Disbelief magic powder you should be just fine. I was. 

It didn’t bother me that a widow was working as a secretary for an earl in 1760. It didn’t bother me that said widow chose to further risk her reputation by caring for a sick whore. Neither did it bother me that the same virtuous and overly gentle-hearted widow chose to travel to London and pretend to be a courtesan just to have sex with the pre-mentioned earl. No, that part I actually liked, because I’m a well known fantasy fan, and because I had this feeling of a déjà vu. I can’t be absolutely certain but I think I’ve read those exact sex scenes before. Perhaps in Finnish in a book I “borrowed” from my mother.

Because the powder was working it’s magic I could sit back and enjoy the delightfully rounded characterisations for the main characters and the people around them. There was a sense of who they were, where they came from and why they chose the futures they chose, even if—predictably—the villainess of the situation was left with a little less attention than she deserved.

I liked that Anna Wren, the widow, was a headstrong feminist around the time blue stockings were only becoming a fashion. I liked that Edward de Raaf, the Earl, had real hopes and dreams he ultimately, and painfully, relinquished for something he wanted even more. I also liked he wasn’t one of the stupid heroes who needed to be hit with a sledgehammer in the head to realise the obvious truth. 

“Would you prefer swive? Tup? Dance the buttock jig?”

Also, I have to echo Scorn’s spoilery remarks about the ending: <spoiler>I saw that a magic-cock-cures-all deus ex machina was coming around the time Felicity started thinking about her red headed child. For me, the only acceptable reason for Anna’s childlessness should have been her husband’s sterility. I’m aware that this happens in real life, that women who aren’t able to conceive with one man do with another, but this particular plot twist has been abused in romances and I would like to see it stop.</spoiler>

To summarise: The Raven Prince fairytale was the best part of the book. Although there was too much sex, it was entertaining and I liked it. Slow start. 

4 stars

Series: Princes Trilogy #1

Pages: 392 (paperback)

Publisher: Warner Forever

ISBN: 0446618470

Published: November 1st 2006

Source: Anachronist

Lady Scoundrel Saturday: The Raven Prince - Elizabeth Hoyt

Scorn, Sense and Sensitivity

reviews

The Raven Prince by Elizabeth Hoyt

The Lady Scoundrels are back and over the next 3 Saturdays we will bring you our reviews of The Raven Prince by Elizabeth Hoyt.

First up is Scorn (aka Anachronist)

Book info:

Genre: historical romance but I would drop the historical part

Target audience: adults

Form: e-book, pdf format

Synopsis: 

The Raven Prince takes place in eighteenth century England. 

Edward de Raaf, the temperamental Earl of Swartingham, nearly runs over Anna Wren, a relatively young widow returning from the market. Shortly after that, Edward finds himself in need of a new secretary. The last few secretaries have all fled the earl’s employ in the face of his appalling temper and since he doesn’t give his steward, Mr. Hopple, much time to come up with one, Hopple hires Anna. It is unconventional, to say the least, to have a female secretary but Anna has a fair hand and is not intimidated by Edward, so the job is hers. By the way she is desperate to keep her position - the investments that the late Peter Wren left to his wife and by extension, his mother, are not doing very well. 

It doesn’t take long for a sexual attraction to emerge between Edward and Anna as they spend time together. All of Edward’s family died of smallpox when he was a child, and he lost his first wife in childbirth, so starting a new family is important to him. Still Anna is infertile and she belongs to lower class, so he feels he can’t marry her, and he goes to London to propose marriage to a more appropriate young lady with a significant dowry. While in London, he also plans to visit Aphrodite’s Grotto, a luxury house of ill repute. 

A bit earlier Anna discovers a bill from Aphrodite’s Grotto, and she realizes Edward is a customer there. Soon afterwards she finds a sick prostitute lying in a ditch and takes her home to nurse. The girl, called Pearl, asks Anna to contact her demimondaine sister, Coral, who is living and working in London. Pearl and Coral help Anna to gain access to the said whorehouse wearing a mask and become secretly the lover of Edward. Still will it help solving other problems of Anna or will it make her situation even more complicated?

What I liked: 

Never judge a book by what is written on the insert or at the back of the cover. Frankly the blurb of this one reads like some idiotic erotic romance book that publishers seem to think are so popular and profitable nowadays – a virginal heroine turns all of a sudden a skanky ass prostitute in order to sate her newly discovered passions and get her man. 

It is a romance book with an actual plot and its characters are interested in something more than just going to bed together. Both Anna and Edward seem real and are grounded in the reality, as constructed by the author. What’s more their physical appearances are relatively ordinary – Anna’s only good feature is her luscious mouth and Edward is a blunt, unpretentious farmer, not afraid to get dirty, with pox scars all over his face and body – his appearance is actually closer to ugliness and he is pretty much aware of it. It was a nice surprise after reading about all these beauties who charm everybody around them and have just one big problem: what colour emphasizes their beauty the best. 

The fairy tale of the raven prince, intertwined with the story, was lovely, and I enjoyed the way the bird theme was woven throughout the book, with Anna’s last name, the comparisons of Edward to a raven and the fact that the prostitutes were sometimes (but not in this book, pity) called ‘birds of paradise’ or ‘soiled doves’. Oh, and the sex scenes were hot – one of the best I’ve read so far. Indeed, I have no gripes at all with Anna and Edward’s erotic encounters, which were sensual and rich with sensory descriptions. 

I also liked the character of Coral, the successful demimondaine, and I regretted she didn’t play a more important role in the novel. Her cynicism really appealed to me and I hope that she makes further appearances in future books of this series – she clearly deserves that. 

What I didn’t like: 

The biggest issue for me was probably how wrong and anachronistic the book felt to me. It was supposed to be a historical romance but it is as far from any historical reality as it can only be. In fact it would be better if you forgot about the ‘historical’ adjective altogether, treating all these stays, tricorn hats, bustiers and wigs as merely theatrical props. First of all let me tell you that the characters, ALL the characters, speak and think using more or less modern language and 21st century way of thinking. When Anna finds out that Edward patronizes a brothel in London she is incensed by his hypocrisy – why should whores be anathema when the men who use them remain perfectly respectable? Very well, my lady, I agree with you on principle but it is definitely not a way of thinking for a respectable, church-attending 18th century female. 

Then, Hopple and Edward hired Anna as a secretary, at a time when only men were secretaries and woman’s place was only in the kitchen and in the nursery or cleaning rooms. I am pretty sure a lady in the 1760’s wouldn’t be able to take up such a post to a peer without causing huge ructions and a lot of condemning - I found this really difficult to swallow. 

I’m not saying that these words themselves are actually anachronistic. They may in fact have been in use in 1760. But the expressions comprised of those words sound contemporary to me, and that was enough to pull me out of the story. For example, Anna goes on about Edward’s attractiveness to her mother-in-law and I just couldn’t suspend disbelief that this conversation was taking place in 1760. There were other examples of speech that seemed contemporary to me. Edward says “Shit,–? in Anna’s presence. He also refers to another character as “that baboon”. There’s mention of a “crackpot theory”. Edward’s valet says to Anna, “Don’t have to be snotty”. I really wish the author did some research or change the settings of the novel. 

Finally the little London adventure of Anna…well, it was something few modern women would be brave enough to do; I really couldn’t believe she, a respectable widow, decided to play a prostitute just to get the attention of Edward. When he found out her ruse he was surprised but not outraged. Are we really talking about times when a single woman, widow or otherwise, couldn’t talk to a gentleman face to face without a companion because she risked tarnishing her reputation? Edward was really strangely unconcerned by the resourcefulness of his beloved although before he had expressed his worry that she took a whore to her house. 

Now the ending…it was as if a nasty witch sneaked inside the novel and changed it from a reasonably good story into something unbearably naïve and inane because otherwise it wouldn’t be a romance. Spoiler - highlight to read or skip: although Anna was pretty much sure she was barren, all of a sudden we find her with a son and pregnant again, her husband on cloud nine. It seems the moment you find the right man you get cured from whatever ails you and you can have children if you wish so, right? WRONG. 

Final verdict: 

As far as romance book goes this one wasn’t bad – I really appreciated some fresh ideas and the fact that its characters were closer to real people. You can enjoy it providing you treat the whole historical set in a very liberal way and you don’t mind those cloying HEA endings