Ross, Julia - Clandestine

[oyceter]

This is book three of Ross' Wyldshay trilogy, which I apparently read book 2 of way back when.

Sarah Callaway is searching for her missing cousin Rachel, and she believes that Guy Devoran is the only person who can help her find her cousin. Unfortunately, though Guy has his own reasons for looking for Rachel, he can't tell Sarah them, which is kind of a problem when he starts to fall in love with her.

First: yay for the heroine not having unblemished ivory/porcelain/alabaster/cream/etc skin and having lots and lots and lots of freckles!

That said, I didn't get much of the heroine's personality, and although she's interested in botany and it plays a minor role throughout the book, it felt more slapped on than an integral part of her personality. Guy I did like, despite the Big Secret, and I could actually understand why he didn't divulge Big Secret right and the start and why he kept keeping it secret. Also, amazingly, he seems to be a fairly nice guy, and when he is a jerk, he usually owns up to it and apologizes later.

There's also a nice role reversal when Guy thinks Sarah sleeping with him means she loves him and will marry him.

Other than that, I read this two days ago and have already forgotten most of it. Oh! Wait, no. I remember I was extremely annoyed by the sequelitis; Guy is bosom buddies with the heroes of the previous two books and they go around swearing they will risk their lives for each other, and although the heroine of the first book thankfully doesn't show up (she's off having a baby of course), Miracle does. Alas, much as I love female friendships, I hate the whole "I have never met you before but since you are the heroine of the next book, I am certain we will get along swimmingly and will promise you things despite having known your love interest for many more years and not having any reason beyond heroine-of-book to trust you."

Overall, the prose and the hero is above average for most romances, but I ended up feeling like this was on the blah side of okay.

Comments

[daedala]

I swear, the more I read your books reviews, the more I want to write books for you. Haha.

[oyceter]

♥! I would not be adverse to that plan of action ;).

[heresluck]

Well, that sounds... underwhelming. Fortunately, I have a GIANT BACKLOG of romances to read at whatever point I'm back in a romance-reading mood. And at least half of them are directly attributable to you. :D

[oyceter]

Bwahahahaha! YAY!

[heresluck]

OMG EVIL MASTERMIND LAUGH.

::eyes you nervously::

...on the other hand, "world domination through book reviews" is probably not a bad thing. Hee.

[daedala]

Ok, when school is done I will write up the novel ideas and you can tell me which one to work on. (Actually it should be a poll. Ha.)

By the way, the new Anna Campbell is terrible. Why do I keep reading her? I DO NOT UNDERSTAND.

[oyceter]

^______^!!!!

Also, you are so right! I had almost reconciled myself to her old-fashioned bodice ripper-esque style, but really, the last book made no sense! And also, EW!

[daedala]

I only really liked one of her books (Untouched). And...it does not stand up to the book in my head any more at all. The rest of the books I hated for various reasons. Thinking out loud here...

I think that the primary issue is that she can put words on the page in order quite well; her prose is really really purple sometimes, but it's polished purple. She also seems to have a decent grasp of structure -- the story as a story works reasonably well, despite some pacing flaws. So we keep going back to the books because she can clearly write and maybe the next one will be ok...

Her problem, I think, is character. I don't mean they're flat or poorly drawn; they're well-drawn and sometimes deeply wrong, for the sake of the plot/theme. Her characters are often fatally flawed in ways she as author does not understand, to a degree unusual even in romance.

Kylemore was a seriously messed-up rapist, which I might even have been ok with if she hadn't been writing him as if he were Angstmuffin McAngsty rather than, you know, a rapist. And the heroine portrayed as deeply fucked up and insane. (I think Stuart has managed this.) I think I tolerated Untouched because I can't remember any horrible failures in the main characters (so maybe I just don't remember it, or maybe there wasn't as much of a problem), but the villain was idiotic and inheritance issues were just wrong. What's-his-name's PTSD backstory (chained to corpses WTF) reflected badly on the author as a person, and was resolved way too easily. Olivia's PTSD/sexual dysfunction issues rang very false to me and were also resolved magically. Diana's entire purpose in the latest one was so unethical that I didn't understand how Campbell could see her has a good person, which she clearly did.

Her characters sometimes lack, well, character; they're either bad people who get a Hero/ine Pass, or their PTSD Is Pasteded On Yay. And I think it's because she's otherwise pretty good that we keep thinking it's going to be different next time, because each book will have different characters, right? But I think she just has a problem with characters overall, and I should not read her books until I hear the characters get better.

Ok, babbling over...

[oyceter]

Oh that's interesting! I didn't finish Untouched, though less because I hated it and more because I didn't connect as much with the characters.

I feel some of Campbell's problems are character problems, and some of her problems stem from the fact that she wants to shove as much id stuff into her books as possible (forced to have sex! can't touch! he hates me! he loves me but can't touch me! she loves him but has to have his baby to win herself a house (wtfomgwtf)!). So the problems end up hijacking the characters. And sometimes it can work for me if her id matches mine in a particular case, but then she shoves in other stuff and I am all "What?! NO!"

It's especially weird because I finished reading both the Olivia book and the Can't Touch book because although the heroes start out alpha male, they are slightly less alpha than a lot of other romance heroes. But then she squeezes each situation to get the maximum amount of angst out of it, which results in stuff like "She was exploiting me! I hate her!" to "She still loves me! I love her back!" and then "Yay we beat the villain everything's fine now!"

... which is a long-winded way to say yes, her characters are totally not consistent and not broken in ways that are very realistic.

[daedala]

The weirdest thing about the last book is that I...don't actually think that what she was doing was necessarily that bad? I mean, if he really doesn't want bastard children, he really should find a better way to avoid it that sleeping with every woman in town and practicing withdrawal, for pity's sake. If she hadn't been so whinging and angsty about it, I wouldn't have thought so badly of her -- but she was clearly going against her own ethics.

A romance with the same setup, where she says outright she's sowing her wild oats before marrying someone she doesn't particularly love in order to take care of her future, because widows did not have that many options, might be interesting. But I don't think fathers get a say in whether a woman aborts, keeps, or even mentions a baby.

[oyceter]

I think for me what pushed the heroine's actions over the top wasn't necessarily the baby or the sex, but that it felt completely self-inflicted (possibly I am forgetting extenuating circumstances?). Especially after Campbell hammered in again and again how evil the villain was. I kept thinking, "Yes, the house is nice, but is it worth that guy? And if you want to run a house I feel giving up the estate you love and going for something that doesn't involve lying to people and legally tying yourself to someone despicable might be a better option."