Definition of Crazy

Thursday, September 28, 2006

In the comments to the post below, Tara asks: "So, have you read Sarah's Child yet?"


Yes.

Yes. I did.

I started a review that began something like:

"I hate f#!king Rome!" Rome I have three words for you: 1)Anger 2)Management, and 3)Evolution. Let's make that 4): Asshole. Eww on lusting after Sarah at INAPPROPRIATE moments. Like your own freakin wedding! Jerkasaurus!!

Sarah = pathetic spineless doormat!! And WTF?!?!? do you think you're doing, spineless wonder, hanging around your *bestfriend* when you're in love with her husband!?!?! You're what??! Going to have a baby in the same home with the father who wants NOTHING to do with said child!??!?

Oh, and, Hellooooo??!!!! Big Freakin Misunderstanding?? Let me 'splain something to you-- neither one of us wants to sleep in separate beds. DUH!! Tangential: Oral. Not just a toothbrush brand.

I stroked out before I could stomped all over the other issues I had with this book. Luckily all the frothing at the mouth contained enough oxygen to revive me. Then I realized my review was a rage fuelled incoherent mess and I deleted it. ;-)

Oh, and I kept the book. I love Linda Howard.
Blog Widget by LinkWithin

10 comments:

Devon Ellington said...

I read a book last week that so many people whose opinons I actually respect raved about.

I hated it. It was a 120 page self-indulgent pity party. I couldn't believe it. I kept waiting for the punch line -- and there was none.


AAAAARGH!

Dee said...

You know, in all the years we've talked and picked out book flaws...I don't think I've ever seen anything make you that mad, lol.

Sounds like "Like Water For Chocolate" shouldn't be on your Netflix list, lol.

Ouchie!
Dee

Jaye said...

LOL, Devon. I'm not even going to ask the title....

Okay, I'm weak. Give. :-D

Jaye said...

Deedle, the quote below--from the AAR review-- explains why I, er, *reacted* to this book. *gg* And also why I kept it.

"Linda Howard's writing is good, of course. And she does succeed in providing true-to-character motivations for their actions. The sex is hot, of course. But Sarah's Child is a perfect example of a highly unlikely, contrived plot that's sole purpose is to wring the reader out emotionally."

To be honest there were parts I liked.

I just can't remember them. lol.

But I'll try:

I think Ms. Howard took amazing chances with this book: 1) the heroine in love with bestfriend's husband. 2) Husband/ *Hero* deeply in love with wife, yet still very attracted to heroine/bestfriend. Whoa. With all the 'safe' set ups and 'likable' H/h populating the genre, kudos to LH for attempting/presenting this premise.


The lovescenes were hot, but without the 'graphic' labelling we've grown accustomed to in more current writing. And, for the most part, without the purple-prose euphemisms. (Yes, folks. It can be done.) Not the hottest she's every written, but, very effective and I like the scenes she describe that happpened off screen, so to speak. Where the character was just remembering what happened. There was a certain 'every-day' charm to them, while still heavy with sexual tension.

The set up/characterization was fast and the story well paced.

The story actually took place over ONE year's time. Another plus--you rarely see this type of time frame these days. Hmmm... well, maybe it still happens in categories if the secret baby/pregnant mistress plot element is still popular those imprints.

As big of an a-hole I felt Roman was most of the time, I did truly feel the absolute pain of his loss. Very well done, that.

So, if I reacted strongly, it's because this book does cause that type of emotional response, for good or ill.

Definitely not a 'meh' read. *g* For that alone I"m thankful.

raine said...

I'm getting thick in my old age...

Had to read the post 3 times to realize what you were talking about, and then the comments, lol! (sorry, I'd never heard of the book before this...).

A friend of mine insists that any writing that inspires emotion of ANY kind in the reader is successful.

If so, that book IS a keeper for you, lol!!!

Amie Stuart said...

>>I kept waiting for the punch line -- and there was none.

OUCH! I hate that--and seem to find it more in literary style fic than non--not that it's exclusive but...

Tara Marie said...

As big of an a-hole I felt Roman was most of the time, I did truly feel the absolute pain of his loss.

This is actually why the book works for me. He's an a-hole because of the pain of his loss.

When he's on his knees cradling the baby gets me everytime.

Oh, and I kept the book. I love Linda Howard. LOL--me too

Jaye said...

"A friend of mine insists that any writing that inspires emotion of ANY kind in the reader is successful. If so, that book IS a keeper for you, lol!!!"

Raine, that's *why* I kept the book. I didn't get all frothy at the mouth because the book sucked and was a failure, I got er, tee'd off (gg) because LH engaged my emotions. The H/h were three dimensional, with flaws and strengths. The flaws got stuck in my craw.lol. But they were supposed to. ;-)

Like I said, not a 'meh' read.

Jaye said...

Tara, that scene was veyr moving.

If Roman or Sarah had been 1 note wonders, or inconsistent in characterization, I wouldn't even of bother posting anything.

Like you said, Roman was a jerk, but he was a jerk because of he pain he'd suffered and also because he was an A-type personality, driven/successful etc.,

And to be fair to Sarah she did stand up to Roman in several ways, including going into business for herself. But I did feel she was too giving/understanding when it came to Roman. There were some places she could have drawn a line (trench *gg*) in the sand.

So there you have it. Hero was a jerk (with reason), heroine was a doormat(but did have her moments), story touch on some squirmy things (lusting @ wedding thing), book was a keeper. lol.

Like a said: Definition of Crazy. :-P

Michelle said...

I've actually never read Linda Howard. Got any decent books of hers that you'd recommend?

Related Posts with Thumbnails
 

2008 Vanessa Jaye | All Rights Reserved | Design by Katrina Glover | Back to top

You are visitor number:

web stats