Ridley's Reviews > Wicked Intentions
Wicked Intentions (Maiden Lane, #1)
by Elizabeth Hoyt (Goodreads Author)
by Elizabeth Hoyt (Goodreads Author)
Ridley's review
bookshelves: 2-star, georgian, read-2010, paper, first-reads
Aug 25, 10
bookshelves: 2-star, georgian, read-2010, paper, first-reads
Read from August 18 to 19, 2010
I'll probably never win another book through Goodreads' First Reads again with this review. What an anachronistic, ungrammatical, unfinished book that was.
The book opens with the widow Temperance Dews wending her way through the dank and dangerous streets of St. Giles, clutching a loaded pistol. She’s on her way back to the foundling home she runs with her younger brother, returning with her maidservant and an infant they pried from the arms of a dead young mother. Along the way, she overhears a scuffle in an alley and ends up fleeing from a frightening man with long white hair and a voluminous black cloak who she saw standing over an inert bleeding man. Not long after returning home, however, she discovers that the frightening man has let himself into her sitting room and has a proposition for her that she can’t turn down.
Lazarus Huntington, Lord Caire, is searching St. Giles for a brutal murderer and he needs help navigating the streets and the people of the dangerous slum. Seeing how easily Temperance moves around the area, and knowing that the home is in dire financial straits, he offers her money in exchange for her guidance around the slum. She accepts, but with the caveat that he also introduce her to polite society so she may find a new patron for the home.
When a book begins with a contrivance, it’s a bad sign. Why, oh why, would a scandalous peer of the realm contract the services of a respectable woman as a guide to a slum in 1737? A woman? 60 years before Mary Wollstonecraft and her A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, I’m to believe a powerful man sees a lower-class woman as some sort of valuable helper?
Ok, but this is Romancelandia, you say, suspend your disbelief, you crone. Fine, I’ll ignore that absurdity. But must I also ignore the piano at the musicale many years before composers wrote for the pianoforte, much less the piano? Or how we never find out exactly what Caire’s title is? And all the anachronistic language? Why bother writing in a unique time period - the early Georgian era - if you’re going to go all wallpaper on me? Wouldn’t it be easier to just go with the familiar Regency period if you don’t want to set a scene? Constantly substituting “of the clock” for “o’clock” does not compensate for the modern tone. Quite the opposite, it grated on me. Set against a voice that could as easily have been telling a contemporary tale, it just glared at me, like a LARPer at the mall.
So, with the time period a silly theatrical setting, I would hope there’s a strong plot to make it all worthwhile. Unfortunately, I found the book alternately boring, absurd, untidy and confusing. Really, if I hadn’t won a copy and felt duty bound to finish and review it, I’d have quit the book at page 100. The suspense plot is poorly done with no clues or red herrings for the reader to use to play along, giving its resolution a shoulder-shrugging “Oh, that person” emotional impact. The hero’s motivation for undertaking the sleuthing is never resolved, just hinted at enough to raise unanswered questions. The side plot involving Temperance’s sister Silence adds nothing to this story but sequel bait. I don’t read romance to read about unresolved marital strife. The Ghost of St. Giles bit was freaking ridiculous. When Caire was ever fighting off hooligans back to back with a caped man in a harlequin mask with a long sword in one hand and a short sword in the other, I started to wonder if Hoyt had switched publishers and was now with Marvel Comics. There was so much going on that I never found myself invested in any of it.
I didn’t find much to like about the romance either. To begin with, I didn’t like either of the characters. Caire says terrible, insulting things to Temperance, mocking her and her dead husband because it amuses him to hurt her. He never makes amends, apologizes or grovels for it either. In fact, it’s Temperance who has to beg him to forgive her at the end. Not that she was much more likeable herself, being at times sanctimonious and others mindblowingly selfish. A breaking point came for me when her brother was sick, she just found out the home was again out of money and a baby was dying and she leaves the home unsupervised as she heads to Caire’s for some punishing rough sex. How could I respect someone so selfish?
***Slight Spoiler***
The bulk of their attraction was lust, rather than any sort of nuanced emotional connection. Throughout the first third of the book, a big to-do is made of Caire’s “unnatural desires,” all the secondary characters obliquely referring to them but not offering any details. As it turns out, Caire, who finds other people touching him to be mentally and physically painful (and bonus points for having the characters discuss mental pain 150+ years before the birth of psychology), likes to tie women up during sex. Temperance, apparently, likes to be tied up and manhandled. Match made in heaven...except, Hoyt couldn’t commit to it. She tones down the bondage, having them grow out of it as a result of Twue Love, and ascribes its appeal to all sorts of psychological shortcomings. Now she decides to adhere to outdated medical info, nice. She has the characters freak out about bloodletting, which was definitely SOP then, but embrace the well-debunked idea that bondage is an unhealthy behavior one grows out of. FFS, girl, can we get some consistency please?
***And moving on...***
Added to the scatterbrained plot, unlikeable characters and unbelievable romance is some rather distracting writing. I admit to being a bit of a grammar pedant, but misusing reflexive pronouns in a published novel is just sloppy. Myself, herself and yourself are not fancier ways of saying “me,” “her” or “you.” It’s not okay when work email says “Please send all further inquiries to either Bill or myself” so it’s definitely not okay in something I pay for. See previous comment on “of the clock” for not making the voice sound like authentic 18th century.
I didn’t like the book, but I didn’t hate it either, so I give it two stars. Shamelessly setting sequel bait, more anachronism than a SCA event and a limp story just left me unsatisfied. After having enjoyed so many of her previous books I’m left to conclude that either she’s changed or I have. In any case, I’m reluctant to continue the series. Disappointing.
Also, the hero had long white hair. Long white hair = Sephiroth. Too weird.
The book opens with the widow Temperance Dews wending her way through the dank and dangerous streets of St. Giles, clutching a loaded pistol. She’s on her way back to the foundling home she runs with her younger brother, returning with her maidservant and an infant they pried from the arms of a dead young mother. Along the way, she overhears a scuffle in an alley and ends up fleeing from a frightening man with long white hair and a voluminous black cloak who she saw standing over an inert bleeding man. Not long after returning home, however, she discovers that the frightening man has let himself into her sitting room and has a proposition for her that she can’t turn down.
Lazarus Huntington, Lord Caire, is searching St. Giles for a brutal murderer and he needs help navigating the streets and the people of the dangerous slum. Seeing how easily Temperance moves around the area, and knowing that the home is in dire financial straits, he offers her money in exchange for her guidance around the slum. She accepts, but with the caveat that he also introduce her to polite society so she may find a new patron for the home.
When a book begins with a contrivance, it’s a bad sign. Why, oh why, would a scandalous peer of the realm contract the services of a respectable woman as a guide to a slum in 1737? A woman? 60 years before Mary Wollstonecraft and her A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, I’m to believe a powerful man sees a lower-class woman as some sort of valuable helper?
Ok, but this is Romancelandia, you say, suspend your disbelief, you crone. Fine, I’ll ignore that absurdity. But must I also ignore the piano at the musicale many years before composers wrote for the pianoforte, much less the piano? Or how we never find out exactly what Caire’s title is? And all the anachronistic language? Why bother writing in a unique time period - the early Georgian era - if you’re going to go all wallpaper on me? Wouldn’t it be easier to just go with the familiar Regency period if you don’t want to set a scene? Constantly substituting “of the clock” for “o’clock” does not compensate for the modern tone. Quite the opposite, it grated on me. Set against a voice that could as easily have been telling a contemporary tale, it just glared at me, like a LARPer at the mall.
So, with the time period a silly theatrical setting, I would hope there’s a strong plot to make it all worthwhile. Unfortunately, I found the book alternately boring, absurd, untidy and confusing. Really, if I hadn’t won a copy and felt duty bound to finish and review it, I’d have quit the book at page 100. The suspense plot is poorly done with no clues or red herrings for the reader to use to play along, giving its resolution a shoulder-shrugging “Oh, that person” emotional impact. The hero’s motivation for undertaking the sleuthing is never resolved, just hinted at enough to raise unanswered questions. The side plot involving Temperance’s sister Silence adds nothing to this story but sequel bait. I don’t read romance to read about unresolved marital strife. The Ghost of St. Giles bit was freaking ridiculous. When Caire was ever fighting off hooligans back to back with a caped man in a harlequin mask with a long sword in one hand and a short sword in the other, I started to wonder if Hoyt had switched publishers and was now with Marvel Comics. There was so much going on that I never found myself invested in any of it.
I didn’t find much to like about the romance either. To begin with, I didn’t like either of the characters. Caire says terrible, insulting things to Temperance, mocking her and her dead husband because it amuses him to hurt her. He never makes amends, apologizes or grovels for it either. In fact, it’s Temperance who has to beg him to forgive her at the end. Not that she was much more likeable herself, being at times sanctimonious and others mindblowingly selfish. A breaking point came for me when her brother was sick, she just found out the home was again out of money and a baby was dying and she leaves the home unsupervised as she heads to Caire’s for some punishing rough sex. How could I respect someone so selfish?
***Slight Spoiler***
The bulk of their attraction was lust, rather than any sort of nuanced emotional connection. Throughout the first third of the book, a big to-do is made of Caire’s “unnatural desires,” all the secondary characters obliquely referring to them but not offering any details. As it turns out, Caire, who finds other people touching him to be mentally and physically painful (and bonus points for having the characters discuss mental pain 150+ years before the birth of psychology), likes to tie women up during sex. Temperance, apparently, likes to be tied up and manhandled. Match made in heaven...except, Hoyt couldn’t commit to it. She tones down the bondage, having them grow out of it as a result of Twue Love, and ascribes its appeal to all sorts of psychological shortcomings. Now she decides to adhere to outdated medical info, nice. She has the characters freak out about bloodletting, which was definitely SOP then, but embrace the well-debunked idea that bondage is an unhealthy behavior one grows out of. FFS, girl, can we get some consistency please?
***And moving on...***
Added to the scatterbrained plot, unlikeable characters and unbelievable romance is some rather distracting writing. I admit to being a bit of a grammar pedant, but misusing reflexive pronouns in a published novel is just sloppy. Myself, herself and yourself are not fancier ways of saying “me,” “her” or “you.” It’s not okay when work email says “Please send all further inquiries to either Bill or myself” so it’s definitely not okay in something I pay for. See previous comment on “of the clock” for not making the voice sound like authentic 18th century.
I didn’t like the book, but I didn’t hate it either, so I give it two stars. Shamelessly setting sequel bait, more anachronism than a SCA event and a limp story just left me unsatisfied. After having enjoyed so many of her previous books I’m left to conclude that either she’s changed or I have. In any case, I’m reluctant to continue the series. Disappointing.
Also, the hero had long white hair. Long white hair = Sephiroth. Too weird.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Wicked Intentions.
sign in »
Reading Progress
| 08/18/2010 | page 1 |
|
0.0% | "Won a copy through Goodreads, so here goes Hoyt's last chance for my good opinion." 2 comments |
| 08/19/2010 | page 105 |
|
26.0% | "If the hero's deep dark secret "notorious peversions" everyone keeps obliquely referring to end up being that he likes getting blow jobs, I'm lighting the book on fire." 22 comments |
| 08/19/2010 | page 115 |
|
29.0% | "The writing in this bad boy is pretty bad from a grammatical perspective. I'm grinding my teeth as I read." 1 comment |
| 08/19/2010 | page 180 |
|
45.0% | "Wish she would either take the suspense plot seriously or drop it altogether." |
| 08/19/2010 | page 256 |
|
64.0% | "I just noticed that the model in the stepback image is fugly. Wicked dirtbag looking dude with a bowl cut. Do not want." 1 comment |
| 08/19/2010 | page 307 |
|
77.0% | "Brother's sick, one of the foundlings is deathly ill, and you just found out the home is broke again, so you head to the bf's for some rough sex? Really?" 5 comments |
Comments (showing 1-36 of 36) (36 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
LethalLovely~I'll Be Your River
(new)
Aug 19, 2010 09:08pm
Sorry to hear you didn't like your GR giveaway book, Ridley! Better luck next time.
reply
|
flag
*
I had to google to figure out who Sephiroth was. LOL. That sucks that you hated it. Hopefully GR won't really deny you more wins just because you didn't like it. They can't expect you to like them all.
LOL. Yeah, you only see guys with long white hair in anime. I really can't see that in Regency England (if that's when this takes place.) I don't think GR takes into account your ratings, never fear, Ridley, LOL.
At last a person who feels about this book as I do! I enjoyed your status updates immensely Ridley:) However, as someone else pointed out, the image I had in mind for the white haired hero was that of Lucius Malfoy from the Harry Potter movies; not a turn on for me I'm afraid.
Zosia wrote: "I keep wanting to try this author.But all the reviews I've read of her recent books are negative..."
I agree with new user, Zosia: try her Prince series. Or if you don't mind reading series out of order try To Beguile a Beast. Not many people disliked them:)
Fani wrote: "Zosia wrote: "I keep wanting to try this author.But all the reviews I've read of her recent books are negative..."
I agree with new user, Zosia: try her Prince series. Or if you don't mind readin..."
Fani, Ridley's already read To Beguile a Beast. She's read pretty much every book in that series which leads me to believe that EH just isn't for her. She may not be for me either, to tell the truth. I've only read two novels by her so far & the only one I did like was TBAB.
She was suggesting the book to Zosia.Personally, To Seduce A Sinner was my favorite of hers. The wallpaper didn't bother me because the main event was rather well done. The hero and heroine acted believably, neither was larger than life, the dialog fairly snappy and his dick was not referred to as "it" nor was anyone commanded to put "it" somewhere.
Oops. Thanks for pointing that out, Ridley! That's what I get for trying to have intelligent conversations on little-to-no sleep. Sorry, Fani!I haven't read TSAS yet, but it's a relief to know you liked it. I value your opinion alot & after that FUBAR mess that was To Desire A Devil, I've been a little hesitant to give Hoyt another try. What did you think of To Taste Temptation?
ETA: Oops, I just saw that you haven't read it yet, or at least didn't put it on your shelf. I'll just shut up now & start a caffeine drip.
I have To Taste Temptation, but I haven't been able to psych myself up to read it. Maybe someday. It's the only book of hers that I haven't read.
Unfortunately Ridley, I can't say that To Taste Temptation will change your mind about Hoyt; it was nice but nothing exceptional IMO and most Hoyt's fans. But I also loved To Seduce a Sinner, To Beguile a Beast, The Leopard Prince (my favorite of hers so far) and The Raven Prince. I agree though with LethalLovely that To Desire a Devile was a mess:(
The Leopard Prince has been my favorite too. Although the heroine made me want to strangle her at the end. :(I have read any of the Soldier books. What made To Desire a Devil a mess?
"Set against a voice that could as easily have been telling a contemporary tale, it just glared at me, like a LARPer at the mall."::snicker::
"I don’t read romance to read about unresolved marital strife."
Hear, hear.
"Match made in heaven...except, Hoyt couldn’t commit to it. She tones down the bondage, having them grow out of it as a result of Twue Love, and ascribes its appeal to all sorts of psychological shortcomings. Now she decides to adhere to outdated medical info, nice."
Lame.
Great review! I've never read her before and I probably never will, and I could see myself (that's how you use it, right?) ripping this book apart. I think you're generous giving it two stars though! But that's me, I love to live dangerously, giving books by authors that people love 1 star and laughing maniacally. Lol.
Shannon wrote: "I think you're generous giving it two stars though! But that's me, I love to live dangerously, giving books by authors that people love 1 star and laughing maniacally."Well, 1-star books for me are books that either make me angry or are so ridiculous I force myself to read it only so I can write a snarky review. This book wasn't awful, just really, really mediocre.
Well, you did say that if you hadn't been given the book to review you would have stopped at page 100. The books that I couldn't finish because they were horrible always get 1 star. ::shrugs::
I'm a hair trigger away from lighting the torch! I'm ready to lead the mob!Seriously though. Have you actually had people get that worked up about it in the past?
No one's lost their shit on me here - which is a shame, since I'd probably love the fight - but Amazon, sure. Romance readers are loyal.
The closest I've come to someone getting snippy with my review was my review of Rakes & Radishes. Even then it was really tame and didn't bother me an hour later. I think I'm too lazy to hold an internet grudge that long.
Oh yeah, don't get me started on Amazon. Those people are ridiculous. I don't even post my reviews there anymore.
Glad I read this review before the pretty cover seduced me into buying it. The problems you had with the book seem to be problems I would have with it too.
Okay,so when I like a comment I usually take a peek at the profile, and your profile is hilarious. I love your picture and I love your interests!! I bet you're a load of fun at a party! Great review :)
lol i won't read this now since i really don't like picturing a hero with long white hair cause i agree, long white hair = sephiroth haha




