Erastes's Reviews > Undefeated Love

Undefeated Love by John Simpson

by
151619
's review
Jun 24, 12

bookshelves: gay-historical

Rating:1.5 stars

There’s one major thing that should be key when one reads a book, and particularly a romance: one should care about the protagonists. Even if they are anti-heroes, you should care about them in some way.

Sadly this book falls short of doing that in rather a spectacular fashion by having a two-dimensional guy joining the SA (Sturmabteilung ”Storm Division”) and then the SS (Schutzstaffel ”Protection Squadron”) because he didn’t like to say no. Then of course he realises how fabulous he looks in his uniforms and he’s totally on board as a card-carrying member of the Nazi Party. In no time at all, he’s causing the deaths of 300 so-called-communists just because one of them demoted his lover from an “important” machine to one that just made drills. Overkill, much? (He thinks to himself that he’s “not really a Nazi” but erm, sorry – yes, Kurt you are. You bought the uniform (or had them given to you as a present), you joined the party, you wore the jackboots.

I’m appreciative that he might have been afraid as to what might happen to him, but as there’s no actual context to give us that perspective i.e. we aren’t told about any of the gradual and terrible changes happening in Berlin, the things that would have made him scared to say no to Röhm, a powerful leader of the SA, (Simpson oddly spells this without the umlaut, and the editor missed this too, but more on the editing later) but other than the SA were “brawling in the streets” we aren’t told why Kurt is so petrified of saying no.

I’m afraid Kurt lost ALL respect for me the first time he used the excuse “I was only following orders.” He behaves like a schizophrenic, one minute holding his pistol to the head of men and threatening to blow their brains out (for gossiping about him in the bathroom as to whether he was Röhm’s lover, despite him knowing that’s what they’d think) and the next he’s charging about saving lives. But there’s no connect there, we are told that he’s scared, he’s happy, he’s mad about the uniform, but we aren’t shown these things happening. Add to that some very serious head-hopping–we can leap into four or five points of view in one small scene–and I found myself having to force myself to read on.

Editing was a real problem, the editor is credited in the book, or I’d wonder whether it had been edited at all. Subject confusion was one of the biggest issues such as:

“he was holding a cigarette holder with a lit cigarette”

which is a good trick, if you can manage it.

or

he stared back into Stefan’s eyes, long and hard.

And some of it just doesn’t make any sense, as if it’s been translated

The show went on for just over two hours. When it was over and nobody was feeling any pain…

or

No one had the slightest guess as to who Kurt’s dance partner was

and so on. Too many to list. I suppose I thought Total-ebound would be better at this stuff, being British, but clearly not.

The timeline is shaky, too. First of all, the book begins in 1929 and at the time, Röhm was in Bolivia–he didn’t return to Berlin until 1930 and didn’t take up his position as head of the SA until January 1931. Simpson brushes this aside, and in January 1931, Kurt has already moved from the SA to the SS as part of Hitler’s bodyguard. The errors ramble on, Röhm was shot by Lippert, not Eicke, The concentration camp section has continuity problems too, as they are arrested in 1934, get out in 1939, but we are told they were in the camp for two years! minute they were in there for four, perhaps five years, but they tell each other they’ve only been in for two. The major hurdle being that the concentration camp mentioned didn’t even come into being until 1936 – two years after Kurt and Stefan were put there.

I’m sad to say that the historical inaccuracies pile up until the last page.

The trouble is when you find this level of inaccuracy, you start to doubt everything and you find so much more wrong than you originally suspected. Things like the names of a plane, slipped in when Kurt travels to Munich, I looked up and found that they didn’t start manufacturing that type of plane until 1932. And the name of the plane is a Junkers Ju52 NOT a Junker Ju52. Why mention the plane at all if you don’t research it? It looks sloppy that you can’t even get the name right. I would expect any editor to check this kind of detail too–in this day and age you don’t need to be a historian to use Google, and “epublishers simply don’t have the time” or “why bother when an ebook will be forgotten in six months time” doesn’t cut it. Have pride in your product, or don’t produce it.

There is a plot here, and if I could care about either of the protagonists it would be an interesting plot–it follows the demise of the SA, the rise of the SS and the implementation of paragraph 175 (anti-homosexual law) throughout Germany. The thing is that it simply didn’t emote. I think this is due to a preponderance of telling, not showing. We are told that someone is “visibly scared” or visibly shocked or visibly angry, instead of the prose showing us these emotions. When the writer wants to emphasize the love affair he simply has his guys telling each other how much they love each other and having mind blowing sex (yes, even within the concentration camp.) A better edit would have
smoothed this out, made it more believable and eased the author into showing us more.

The concentration camp section won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, there’s a lot of beating, and some rape, even gang rape (even though Kurt consents, it’s still rape, despite the “dubious consent” label put on by the publisher.) But even this section is held at arms length. I know that not everyone wants to read the worst of human experience, but if you are choosing a concentration camp as a setting for a romance, you cannot go prettying it up. Kurt turns into a veritable Mary-Sue here, saving Stefan (who seems to exist merely to nag, weep, suck cock, or to be saved) and their final journey is achieved – with just the two of them getting all the gear (uniform, money, forged letter of carte blanche from Hitler which of course everyone falls for, and ID papers) they need with no problems at all – with such ease it’s almost unbelievable. All I could see in my mind was the film “Bent” and the stellar and harrowing story told there, compared with this almost Disney version of the Great Escape with a happier ending.

There’s so little emotion in this book (other than the random outpouring of love between the protagonists), that it was so hard for me to warm to it. There’s no emotional fallout from the things that they have experienced and seen, no sense of loss for their friends (if any, it’s never mentioned) No details of the changes to their way of life (they continue to live together and sleep together and go snogging in public) no mention of the Jews – and the men come through to their happy ending with nary an emotional scar. Even the author’s note – usually the place where the author acknowledges their research, confirms that certain things happened, etc – is amusing as Simpson tries to convince us that Kurt’s defection and subsequent debriefing made a big difference to the war effort. I found this very odd–it would have been better in an epilogue, perhaps.

I suppose the main reason that I’m so disappointed with this book is that Simpson clearly has a flair for story telling, but there are so many obstacles that mar the path to him doing it really well, despite him obviously selling books. When I look back at the books of his that I’ve reviewed I say the same things every time, shoddy research, telling vs showing, head-hopping. These are are solvable issues, and I hope that he finds an editor who can really help him mould his work into something to be proud of in the future.

I like the cover a lot.

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Undefeated Love.
sign in »

Comments (showing 1-50 of 66) (66 new)


message 1: by Aleksandr (new) - added it

Aleksandr Voinov The premise sounded good, but I can't deal with the craft issues you've pointed out.


message 2: by Aleksandr (new) - added it

Aleksandr Voinov What a classy response - and clearly, there are plenty of historical mistakes in the text and the spelling of major German politicians is wrong, too. Will that be fixed in the next edition?


message 3: by BlackTulip (new)

BlackTulip John wrote: "Erastes, you're just a cow.....the facts are indeed correct and it has received 5 star reviews everywhere, bot of course you. You don't like me, I don't like you. I expect nothing out of you but a ..."

ooh la la ! why are you so rude ... a review is just an opinion and you say it has received 5 stars everywhere ... surely you can handle one bad review and besides she explains why she doesn't like the book. I haven't read it and I don't intend to but only because my father spent 2 years in Dachau when he was 18 years old as an Austrian political prisoner ; so it's not a subject I can ever enjoy.
I don't understand such an answer !


message 4: by Aleksandr (new) - added it

Aleksandr Voinov John - I'm German too and currently deeply involved in WWII-related research (different focus from you though, so there's no "competition"). I'll read your book and report back on the facts and dates.


message 5: by Kate (last edited 23 juin 14:54) (new)

Kate a) Why do authors do this? Who cares that other reviewers liked the book? That is completely irrelevant to THIS review.

b) If the author is going to respond to specific criticism it should be with specific answers.

c) Out of 19 ratings on GR I see five 5's, six 4's, three 3's, two 2's, and three 1's. That hardly equates to "5 stars everywhere".

d) I refuse to read authors who are as rude and disrespectful as John was on Feliz's review comments at Jessewave. No need to reward nasty behavior.


message 6: by Dhympna (new)

Dhympna du Maurier It is an infringement of a reviewer's copyright to post reviews sans permission.


message 7: by Lori (new)

Lori Toland John wrote: "Erastes, you're just a cow.....the facts are indeed correct and it has received 5 star reviews everywhere, bot of course you. You don't like me, I don't like you. I expect nothing out of you but a one star. Hate my writing so much, don't fucking read it. BTW, the book is being made into a screenplay and will end up on the big screen eventually. You better check your facts again heifer. "

I have to speak up because I don't think this is John Simpson.

1. Author Accounts on Goodreads are unable to be made private. This one is. Click on the link to the name.

2. John is a US citizen who has worked with the US government. As a US-born citizen married to a Brit-born US citizen, the only people I've ever heard use the term heifer or cow toward a woman as an insult is a Brit.

Please give John Simpson the benefit of the doubt. If this is actually him, I'll sit here with popcorn and watch the meltdown but I've notified Goodreads and John directly to check to see if this is real.


message 8: by Aleksandr (new) - added it

Aleksandr Voinov Lori - I'm hoping you're correct. However, John's account is not an Author Goodreads account (when you click on the book, there's no "Goodreads Author" in light grey behind the name).


message 9: by Dani (new)

Dani Alexander John wrote: "Erastes likes to assassinate other authors work even when she is wrong. "

Just going to pop in here and address this:

Erastes gave me a beautiful review for my book, though she didn't like it. So please edit that portion of your response to "this author" not "authors".

I feel less assassinated. Unless I missed the bullet holes somewhere. I will have to have the husband to a thorough examination.

PS: I'm not sure cows can type out reviews so coherently. If they can, it's a very good argument for vegetarianism. *nod* So, Mr. Simpson, I think you need to remove such vulgarities, or stop eating beef.


message 10: by Val (last edited 25 juin 11:19) (new)

Val Kovalin Lori, I think this is really John Simpson. I experienced the same reaction from him on my blog a few years back when I gave what was actually a 90% positive review to one of his books. Here are two of his responses to other reviews:

http://www.reviewsbyjessewave.com/201...

http://speakitsname.com/2009/10/08/re...


message 11: by Aleksandr (new) - added it

Aleksandr Voinov Couple more links. John has attacked seemingly every "negative" reviewer on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/review/RMTF2TR3...

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2BDUXAJ...


message 12: by Gwen (new)

Gwen Just wow. I was going to sample this and see how it is, but I don't think even that's going to be happening now.


Cassi aka Snow White Haggard I expect this really is John Smith because I don't know if I've ever seen a troll pose as the author to troll bad reviews. That would be a new one on goodreads (I have seen them pose as reviewers, unfortunately).

I'm guessing this is another author to add to the will not read shelf for bad author behavior.


message 14: by Richard (new)

Richard Good heavens, how childish this "John" is in his response. Erastes, you are quite patient in your own response. I read the Amazon responses Aleksandr linked to and was heartily amused at the "is not, is not, is not!" tone.

Another writer I'll never consent to read, not based on the reviews being bad, but the author's response to the reviews being bad.


message 15: by Lori (new)

Lori Toland Val wrote: "Lori, I think this is really John Simpson. I experienced the same reaction from him on my blog a few years back when I gave what was actually a 90% positive review to one of his books. He doesn't s..."

Oh I know all about author meltdowns. They are epic when they happen and rubberneck worthy.

I was telling Aleks on Twitter, I do like to think the best of people, rather than assuming the worst. Then he called me innocent. :P

Like I said, if this does turn out to be John Simpson, I'll sit here with popcorn. I'm not above rubbernecking at a train wreck.


message 16: by Dani (new)

Dani Alexander Lori wrote: "Like I said, if this does turn out to be John Simpson, I'll sit here with popcorn. I'm not above rubbernecking at a train wreck. "

I think he does it too often for it to be an actual trainwreck. Now it's just a little amusing. Like when my dog tries to stick his nose in the cat's tummy and adds another scar to his nozzle.


message 17: by Lori (new)

Lori Toland Dani wrote: "Lori wrote: "Like I said, if this does turn out to be John Simpson, I'll sit here with popcorn. I'm not above rubbernecking at a train wreck. "

I think he does it too often for it to be an actual ..."


Wow. I feel so out of the loop. I'm going back to writing now.


message 18: by Val (new)

Val Kovalin I do like to think the best of people, rather than assuming the worst.

Me, too. *sigh* But I've seen over time that this behavior is par for the course with John Simpson. Oh, well. One less author for me to read means more of my money is available to spend on other authors' books. :)


message 19: by Lori (new)

Lori Toland *is sad* :(


message 20: by Aleksandr (new) - added it

Aleksandr Voinov Awww. *hugs Lori*. There, there.


message 21: by Chris (last edited 23 juin 16:41) (new)

Chris Val wrote: "Me, too. *sigh* But I've seen over time that this behavior is par for the course with John Simpson. Oh, well. One less author for me to read means more of my money is available to spend on other authors' books. :)"

My list of authors I will never read (or never read again) because of bad behavior (meltdowns, reader abuse, drama llamaing, etc) grows. You're right, Val, it does cut down on the pool of authors to read, but - that's actually helpful. :D


message 22: by Aleksandr (new) - added it

Aleksandr Voinov Well, I've made that list for some people, too. :) But since I keep my own list (based on craft and style, but often enough personality, too), I can't say anything.


message 23: by Val (new)

Val Kovalin Hi, Chris! *waves*


message 24: by Alicia (new) - added it

Alicia I might have read this before, too. Disgusting behavior. I'm sorry you're having to deal with this, Erastes.


message 25: by Lyn (The Heartless) (new) - added it

Lyn (The Heartless) John wrote: "Erastes, you're just a cow.....the facts are indeed correct and it has received 5 star reviews everywhere, bot of course you. You don't like me, I don't like you. I expect nothing out of you but a ..."

Way to take a review personal. Calling a reviewer a "cow" shows that you have no respect for other people's point of views. Belittling and bullying will not make someone instantly LOVE your book. No one can write a book that everyone likes. It is impossible.
So put on your big girl panties, grow up, and get yourself some anger management.


message 26: by Lori (new)

Lori Toland Chris wrote: "Val wrote: "Me, too. *sigh* But I've seen over time that this behavior is par for the course with John Simpson. Oh, well. One less author for me to read means more of my money is available to spend..."

Hi Chris! :D


message 27: by Lori (new)

Lori Toland Aleksandr wrote: "Awww. *hugs Lori*. There, there."

*sad panda*


message 28: by Lyn (The Heartless) (new) - added it

Lyn (The Heartless) Also, before I forget:
Goodreads Average: 3.42

I don't know about "cows", but I do detect some bullshit here.


☆Jessie☆  (Ageless Pages Reviews) Lyn wrote: "Also, before I forget:
Goodreads Average: 3.42

I don't know about "cows", but I do detect some bullshit here."


Comment is made of win!


Karla (Mossy Love Grotto) Too bad. The setting is one that I'd really want to read, but your review (and the author's antics) have killed any curiosity about it. :-\


message 31: by Cole (new)

Cole Riann Like Chris, my no-no author list grows longer.

I wish I had the power to block some authors from the internet, I feel like I develop another wrinkle every time an author makes a fool of themselves like this.


message 32: by Carolyn (last edited 23 juin 17:58) (new)

Carolyn Gray Based on the book's description, I know I would've wanted to read this as I too am highly interested in the subject matter. But, I don't care who it is, calling a reviewer, whether professional or a reader who is moved to have their say, a cow (not that cows aren't beautiful creatures), is rude, uncalled for, and pretty damn pathetic. Good grief man, my own books have garnered everything from emphatic 1's to enthusiastic and glowy 5 stars - that is just how it is. And, for me at least, I've found I can learn from those 1 and 2 stars, esp. when the same thing crops up over and over again. When that happens, it's worth looking seriously at, yeah?


message 33: by Dhympna (new)

Dhympna du Maurier Looking at the author's website and his "reviews" section, I wonder if he realizes he can have his entire site yanked for copyright infringement. Authors don't own reviews of their books and you can't post a review someone else wrote without their permission.


message 34: by Lavenderrose (last edited 23 juin 22:50) (new)

Lavenderrose John wrote: "The names of the German politicians are not wrong. "Feliz," who gave the second review, is a German Critic from Germany, and knows her history very well. Erastes likes to assassinate other authors ..."

If you left off an Umlaut from the name of a real-life historical character whose name HAS an Umlaut, then that is a serious misspelling. Letters with or without Umlauts are two different letters. And I'm German.

Having now read the review of said Feliz, I see that he has spelled the name "Roehm". This means it has an Umlaut; the Umlaut can be replaced by an e. This means the name "Rohm" is spelled wrongly.


message 35: by Erastes (new) - rated it 1 star

Erastes Lavenderrose wrote: "John wrote: "The names of the German politicians are not wrong. "Feliz," who gave the second review, is a German Critic from Germany, and knows her history very well. Erastes likes to assassinate o..."


Trouble is (although I don't want to dwell on such a small nitpick, there's so much else wrong) that he didn't spell it Roehm, he spelled it Rohm.


message 36: by Erastes (new) - rated it 1 star

Erastes John wrote: "Erastes, you're just a cow.....the facts are indeed correct and it has received 5 star reviews everywhere, bot of course you. You don't like me, I don't like you. I expect nothing out of you but a ..."


I have no personal "beef" (see what I did there?) with you, John. I don't know you, know absolutely nothing about you (if indeed this IS you, and not just some rabid fan trying to stand up for you). My reviews are never personal. I said clearly that this would have been a good book if it had been edited better, that's all. Allowing a book into the public eye with so many errors in it reflects badly on the publisher and yourself.

As I'm not 100 percent sure that the commenter was you, I'm not going to engage on this forum any further - if you wish to please feel free to contact me directly, or via the Speak Its Name review blog.


message 37: by Lavenderrose (new)

Lavenderrose Erastes wrote: "Lavenderrose wrote: "John wrote: "The names of the German politicians are not wrong. "Feliz," who gave the second review, is a German Critic from Germany, and knows her history very well. Erastes l..."

I know; but he seems to think that Feliz, as a German, approved his spelling of it as Rohm. But Feliz spells it Roehm. A tiny nitpick, it's true. But still, it's very important to get the neames of historical characters right.


message 38: by Claire (new)

Claire Simpson John wrote: "Erastes, you're just a cow.....the facts are indeed correct and it has received 5 star reviews everywhere, bot of course you. You don't like me, I don't like you. I expect nothing out of you but a ..."

This is uncalled for. It's not professional and it's not acceptable.

Where do authors get off attacking a reviewer because they didn't like a book? Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If you can't handle that then you shouldn't be a writer.

Try to remember that once something is posted on the 'net it's there for the whole world to see. My advice would be to stop and think about that, how your actions come across and how those actions might impact on your career.

Don't humiliate yourself any further.


message 39: by Aleksandr (new) - added it

Aleksandr Voinov What, No Hittler or Callygular? :)


message 40: by Feliz (last edited 24 juin 11:20) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Feliz John wrote: "The names of the German politicians are not wrong. "Feliz," who gave the second review, is a German Critic from Germany, and knows her history very well. Erastes likes to assassinate other authors ..."

Just for the record I'm no historian; all I know about WWII comes from my grandfather's and brother in law's tales and history class which was waaaay back. I stand by my rating of this book which I loved for very personal reasons some of which I shared with the author before I even wrote the review. But I don't claim to know much about major or general historical facts beyond what I googled after reading the book, which generally matched the descriptions in the story.

I agree about the misspellings but forgave them because the author isn't German and I'm used to misspellings of German words, particularly when umlauts are involved.

I also feel compelled to mention that I was taken aback by the author's comments on my post at jessewave's.


message 41: by Lasha (new) - added it

Lasha Feliz wrote: "I also feel compelled to mention that I was taken aback by the author's comments on my post at jessewave's."

As was I. It is why Mr. Simpson went on my do not buy nor review list after that. Reviews are very subjective and if an author cannot understand that their novel may not appeal to everyone, that is their loss.

As for a movie being made of this book, if it happens, I say good luck to Mr. Simpson as that would be a wonderful for the genre. I probably still won't watch it, but I'd be happy for any m/m romance author who got their book made into a movie.


message 42: by Erastes (new) - rated it 1 star

Erastes Lasha wrote: "Feliz wrote: "I also feel compelled to mention that I was taken aback by the author's comments on my post at jessewave's."

As was I. It is why Mr. Simpson went on my do not buy nor review list aft..."


I was shocked when I saw those comments, the sheer rudeness - when you'd given such a good review and all people were saying was "sounds good but it's too close to home for me to read it" was simply appalling. But then he never seems to care who he offends.


message 43: by Dumbledore11214 (new)

Dumbledore11214 Erastes wrote: "Lasha wrote: "Feliz wrote: "I also feel compelled to mention that I was taken aback by the author's comments on my post at jessewave's."

As was I. It is why Mr. Simpson went on my do not buy nor r..."


He does not seem to care at all, very true. Oh well. There are so many books being released that I can only try the tiny fraction of them anyway.

Sirius.


message 44: by Katie(babs) (new)

Katie(babs) John wrote: "Erastes, you're just a cow.....the facts are indeed correct and it has received 5 star reviews everywhere, bot of course you. You don't like me, I don't like you. I expect nothing out of you but a ..."

You have no right to call yourself an author. WTF is wrong with you calling a reviewer a cow and a heifer just because they didn't like your book? You just alienated a big audience and you should know this has gone viral on Twitter and elsewhere.

You should be ashamed by your actions and as an author and a reviewer myself, you make authors look bad in general for your childish and immature reaction. If you can' take criticism from a consumer, aka a reader who spent their own money to buy your book, then you are in the wrong industry. A reader has a right to say what they want, no matter how harsh it may seem. Reviews are not for your benefit.

Shameful and disgusting.


message 45: by M (new)

M A John wrote: "Erastes, you're just a...

Hello. Look, I can see you are passionate about your storytelling and I can understand you're disappointed your work didn't resonate with this reviewer, but please have the grace to remove your disturbing and shocking posts from this thread. Don't call people ugly names. Please just take a deep breath, count to ten, and relax. Whatever has made you so angry, it'll be okay.


message 46: by Tara-Chan (new)

Tara-Chan I love WWII-era fictions, so I would have loved to read this. But after I read Erastes' review about the mistakes and such, and seeing the author's response, I will not be going anywhere near that book or any other books by that author. The behaviour -- if it's really the author posting -- is appalling!


message 47: by Arthur (new)

Arthur One more name on my not-to-contribute-to-auhors-lunch-money list.


message 48: by Desiree (new) - added it

Desiree I'm sorry that you have been attacked by this author. I hope that he realizes how many potential readers he has lost by treating you in this way. I for one might have been interested in this book but will now never come close to touching ANY of them due to his acts of douche baggery!


message 49: by Chris (new)

Chris LOL, now that it appears his flagged comments have been removed by GRs, this thread loses some coherency. :)


message 50: by Alicia (new) - added it

Alicia I know several of us took screencaps. (I haven't uploaded mine yet though.)


« previous 1
back to top