This is a story of a duke—who has sworn never to love again since his first love ended tragically—and a widow who yearns for love and children of her own. There is also a curious mystery in which they become embroiled. It keeps a reader engaged, trying to figure out “whodunnit.” There are clues laid out, but almost all are red herrings.
The plot is strong, the characters likeable, but the story suffers from the reiteration of each of the main characters’ issues (over and over, page after page). Marcus Roberts, Duke of Sinclair, needs to find a wife and beget an heir. He is the last of his line and his lineage goes back to Anglo-Saxon times. He is resistant to loving because he loved his first wife--now deceased--who was faithless, and he cannot get over it. We read about this a lot, a whole lot!
Charlotte Dexter, Lady Clayton, is a wealthy widow who craves children excessively. Her monotonous monologues focus on time being fleeting and she absolutely must have at least one child who will depend on and love her exclusively because she believes herself to be too plain, too tall, too inadequate, and we read this a lot, a whole lot!
There are terms used that are either not used during Regency times or which sound wrong for that time period. For instance:
Plain Jane: more than once our heroine refers to herself as a “plain Jane” and that term, as it is used here did not come about until 1902. There is a reference to the term in 1898, as in “plain Jane and no nonsense,” although this is not referring to an unpretty woman. Regency times predate the use of this term.
The heroine also refers to herself as “a freakishly tall Amazon.” Not only is the heroine excessively down on herself, the phrase doesn’t set well. All four words are in use during Regency times, of course, but together they just seem out of place.
The word, “Gosh,” hits a sour note. Although it is in use during Regency times, it was still an oath, an altered form of “God.” It’s used by Flora, the heroine’s best friend, and it seems unlikely that such an oath would be used by an aristocratic lady.
The word, “darn,” is used as an interjection. It was a tame American curse word noted in 1781, used as a milder form of “damn.” It is said to have originated in the northeastern U.S. where swearing was punishable at that time. Mark Twain used it, spelling it “dern” in 1865. Regardless, even Regency bachelorettes would be unlikely to use the word as a curse word, if indeed they had even heard of it.
Our heroine is so very down on herself. At 25% completion, it had become excessive. Her self-denigrating is tiresome in the extreme. We readers are not stupid. We know—even without being told over a dozen times—that she feels unattractive, unimportant, unimpressive, and many more words beginning with “un-“.
There are some disconnects in the book. For instance, the heroine is out riding her horse, Sir Galahad, and we are told, “The horse often spooked at his own shadow….” She is unhorsed when he spooks and a few paragraphs later we are told, “Something must have spooked the gentle gelding….” So, is he an easy-going, gentle gelding or a high-spirited horse that spooks often?
There are some errors in the book, as well. For instance:
The term “sit” vs. “set” seems to be a confusion for the writer. For instance, she tells us of “…the clock sitting on mantle….” Animate objects (like people and animals) sit and inanimate objects (like books or clocks) set. This should read, “…the clock setting on the mantle.”
The word “skill,” when used as a verb is intransitive. In this sentence, the writer has made it transitive, and it pauses the reader: “We men do not skill young ladies with traits to make a living.” The sentence makes a reader stop and reread it in order to figure out from context what the writer is saying. I think the writer means to say, “We men do not instill in young ladies skills that allow them to make a living,” but I could certainly be wrong.
There is a misplaced comma: “…make her feel so fragile, vulnerable,…yet still intensely feminine?” The comma after “vulnerable” is unnecessary since it is the end of a list of adjectives. It should read, “…so fragile, vulnerable…yet still intensely feminine.”
This sentence has a couple errors in it: “Flora, and John will here.” First, the comma is superfluous and second, the sentence is incomplete. Flora and John will do what here? It might read, “Flora and John will remain here,” from the context of the paragraph.
Quotation marks, used to indicate speaking, are problematic. At times they are left out and the reader must figure out that a character has stopped speaking: “…Take their horses and ride for Ivy Close. <- the sentence ends without quotation marks, and it appears the character is still speaking into the next paragraph.
In this paragraph, there are two people speaking, but it’s difficult to discern this because we need some helpful quotation marks and a new paragraph separating the two speakers: “I’m going to find Dharma.” Sin nodded at his friend. “Try to talk some sense into her. And ensure she understands the danger she faces. I’m off to talk with Charlotte.” I think this is Devlin speaking first, telling Sinclair he is going to find Dharma. Then Sin nods and begins to speak, and he will go find Charlotte. Otherwise, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. One speaker would not be going after both Dharma and Charlotte; they are not together, actually, they are quite far apart physically.
Here, Sin is thinking about what Charlotte said moments ago: “She’d agree to wait….” That should read, “She’d agreed to wait…” since it occurred in the past; a past tense form is required.
The writer does not use object pronouns. This could be idiomatic of a character’s speaking, but it grates, and these are members of the aristocracy who would know better (one would think). For instance, “It’s always been Bella and I against the world.” The pronoun, “I,” is a subject pronoun used here as an object. This should read, more properly, as, “…Bella and me against the world.”
I rated this book 3.5 stars and rounded up because I liked the characters, even if they did get in a rut about their issues; I simply skimmed over the paragraphs that droned on repetitively. The supporting characters also seem alive, not simply useful pieces of cardboard used to move the hero and heroine around in the story. The mystery was involving, and I did not guess who the villain was. I’d narrowed it down based on who it wasn’t, but did not know until the villain was revealed. Then it all made sense. I’m unsure about reading the other two (at this time) books in the series. I like the writing but get tired of rereading about all the angst from the past that the heroes and heroines seem to have.