LynneC’s review of How the Marquess Was Won (Pennyroyal Green, Book 6) by Julie Anne Long
Historical Romance published by Avon 27 Dec 11
Julie Anne Long has a lovely, light style that lends itself well to historical fiction. It’s just a shame that it’s not a history I recognize (yes I know, here she goes again!) So seriously, if you don’t care about history and you can put up with the fantasy in this book, have no hesitation in picking this up. It’s part of the Pennyroyal Green series, but you don’t have to read the series in order, or at all, come to that. And I pray and hope that the final version is better than the ARC, because that made reading an adventurous experience.
First, the ARC. I had it sent to my Kindle from NetGalley. Mostly this leads to a pretty decent copy, but this copy is a disaster. Every chapter has an “nm” below the heading for no perceptible reason. The leading capital is separated from the rest of the text. The first chapter has indents for paragraphs, then they just stop. And then start again. It drove me demented after a while, but I kept on reading. And there are haphazard capitalization, too. “His Lordship,” where it refers to “the marquess” earlier in the paragraph.
The hero is Julian, usually known as Jules, the Marquess of Dryden (I can’t bring myself to call him the Marquess Dryden. That “of” makes a huge amount of difference). He is tall, dark and handsome, the leader of the ton. You know the deal. The heroine is Phoebe Vale, who is a schoolteacher at a girls’ school in Pennyroyal Green. She’s blonde, lively and answers back. I like both of them. Jules is a man who takes his responsibilities seriously, and Phoebe seems intelligent enough to cope with him.
They meet in the country, when Jules visits the local country house in order to give the once-over to a young lady he is thinking of marrying, Lisbeth. Phoebe’s family holds a parcel of land he wants, the last one his father sold off to pay his debts. Jules has bought them all back but this one. The young lady is charming, sweet and a product of her class. She is kind to Lisbeth but never sees her as her equal. She proves benevolent compared to what Lisbeth has in store, but to say what it is constitutes a spoiler, and, although that’s one of the best parts of the book, I’ll refrain.
But this is a Regency where Faberge has started making his eggs, a Regency where pound notes are in common circulation. Fireflies and crickets populate the countryside and gentlemen drive landaus. Gentlemen wear trousers, not pantaloons or breeches, and their shirts button down the front. Where they drink whiskey. Where a Marquess foregoes the proper title. Where they say “Bloody hell” and “bloody,” and sometimes they’ll stay “stuff it.” Where young ladies go to school. Where there appear to be a lot of Catholics about, and nobody questions it. Rosaries and maids called Mary Frances seem to be around everywhere. Where men drink in pubs and say “gotten.”
What’s wrong with this? Faberge made his first egg in 1885. Pound notes were very unusual until the Victorian era. Fireflies and crickets aren’t native to the UK. Landaus were a lady’s vehicle, much favored by widows (Queen Victoria was fond of them and the present Queen uses them on state occasions) and were not made for travel, merely for pottering about in town. The Cossack trouser was a particular style, heavily pleated at the top, narrow at the ankle and what’s described in this book isn’t the Cossack. Whisky (definitely not whiskey) was a product of the mid-Victorian era. Only the illegal stuff was available before, and it could be clear, not the caramel color we associate with it today. The rank of Earl and above, and definitely Marquess was styled “the Marquess of Dryden,” not “Marquess Dryden.” And a knight or baronet, someone with the title “Sir” is addressed by his first name, not his last. Harry Dildo would be “Sir Harry,” not “Sir Dildo.” The people in the story would definitely know this. “Bloody hell” as a curse wasn’t used until World War One, and “bloody” wasn’t just rude, it was vulgar. Crude and rude were allowed, but vulgar, no. My grandmother used to say it was “common” and this was a woman who used “bugger” regularly. Girls of good family didn’t go to school. Despite extensive searches, the only schools for girls in this period seem to be the charity schools for poorer girls, to give them a better start in life. There was no need to educate girls of good family and their upbringing was haphazard, to say the least. Catholics were still looked down on, even the Catholic peers, who lost out on a lot of privileges, including taking their seats in Parliament, because of their religion. There is more, but I stopped taking notes after a while.
The errors spoiled my enjoyment in what could have been a fun book. Likeable characters and an engaging plot should have meant hours of pleasant reading, but it didn’t. Almost every page contains something that made me go “huh?” and make a note (since I knew I was reading this book for review – I don’t usually make notes, I just give up and take the author off my reading list). One or two little slips? Okay, fine. Nobody’s perfect, but this number is close to insulting, both to the age and the reader. Is it considered not important enough? To many people it won’t be. But it will destroy some people’s enjoyment of what could have been a good read. It wrecked mine. I would have DNF’d the book after the third chapter were it not for the style and the characters, and the fact that I wanted to find that elusive new historical author to love. If you don’t care about the plethora of errors, then go ahead, because you’ll enjoy it. If you have any knowledge of the history of Britain, then maybe you’ll want to think again.
But always remember, this is the opinion of an Englishwoman, brought up with this history and taught to regard it as hers. So if you’re not, then you might love this froth of a book. I felt like I was kicking a meringue while I was writing this review, but I had to be fair and give my honest opinion. Never forget that it might very well not agree with yours.
Grade: C-
Summary:
Ruthless, cold, precise, Julian Spenser, Marquess Dryden, tolerates only the finest—in clothes, in horseflesh, in mistresses. And now he’s found the perfect bride, the one whose dowry will restore his family’s shattered legacy and bring him peace at last: the exquisite heiress Lisbeth Redmond.
She’s not afraid to play with fire…
But one unforgettable encounter with Lisbeth’s paid companion, Phoebe Vale, and the Marquess is undone: this quiet girl with the wicked smile and a wit to match is the first person to see through the icy façade to the fiery man beneath. But their irresistible attraction is a torment as sweet as it is dangerous: for surrendering to their desire could mean losing everything else they ever wanted.
No excerpt available.
I enjoy Ms.Long’s books. I have noticed, however, that they’re poorly edited. The books usually contain run-on sentences and incorrect grammar. I overlook this because the stories are so good. In fact, her last book was one of the best romances I read this year. Your concerns are valid and I’ll take note of them when I read this. If the story is really good though, I’ll try to ignore the historical inaccuracies and just enjoy the plot.
I did feel a bit mean, but the constant bombardment of inaccuracies really did keep me from enjoying the book, which is a terrible shame, because she has such a lovely style.
It’s stories like Julie Anne Long’s that make me glad I don’t have all that history in my head. I love her writing and her characters. It’s too bad all of that ruins it for you, Lynne. I think she’s one of the best.
I have to ask about the schooling issue, because I am trying to write something in the period. I admit (sheepishly) to getting my history from Jane Austen, and sometimes going no further in terms of research. In Persuasion, I was sure that Anne Elliot met her friend Mrs. Smith at a school in Bath, and the older girl took Anne under her wing. Since Anne was the daughter of a baronet, I have assumed that some well born girls, perhaps not of the highest rank, might go to school. Am I way off base then? Thanks for any feedback you can provide.
““bloody” wasn’t just rude, it was vulgar. Crude and rude were allowed, but vulgar, no. My grandmother used to say it was “common””
This is a big bugbear of mine. Liz Carlyle especially has her upper class heroes saying “Bloody” and “arse” every other sentence and it really jars – not because they are rude or historically inaccurate (which I had no idea, to be honest), but because of the class connotations of those words.