11. Mr. Impossible – Loretta Chase [Eur Hist 2005]
No comment. I’m still reading this, thanks to DA Janine’s urging.
12. Romancing Mr. Bridgerton - Julia Quinn [Eur Hist 2002]
My thought upon seeing this: “Why?”
Don’t get me wrong, I actually liked this book as I found it an enjoyable bounce. I just can’t think of good reasons why this fourth Bridgerton book should be placed so high up. Especially when there is already The Viscount Who Loved Me above as there aren’t many differences between those two. As far as I can recall, anyway.
Statistics probably did the job. I wish there were a rule that it had to be one title per author only. The list would look a lot different otherwise, I’m quite sure.
13. Paradise - Judith McNaught [Contemporary 1991]
This surprises me. What is it about this that differs it from similar romances? I’m thinking the likes of Sandra Brown, LaVyrle Spencer, Janet Dailey and Karen Robards.
To be honest, I shouldn’t comment on this one as I quite cannot recall anything about Paradise except it felt typical of its time. I can’t even be sure if my impression was right or fair, or both. Hm, I’m wondering if it’s a good idea to re-read this?
14. Lord Perfect – Loretta Chase [Eur Hist 2006]
Unread. Janine of Dear Author has repeatedly, strongly, suggested I should read the Carsington series. Thanks to her, I’m still reading the first two Miss Wonderful and Mr Impossible. It’ll be some time before I could get to read this third book and the last one, Not Quite a Lady. I barely have the time to write this post, to be honest. Curse you, Real Life. *shakes fist*
Nah, I can’t quite blame it all on Real Life. I was hugely put off by Don’t Tempt Me (the harem book), but I’m still giving this series a try.
15. It Had To Be You – Susan Elizabeth Phillips [Contemporary 1994]
This was solely responsible for the first time that I inhaled an author’s entire back-list in one go. It was a fun read, even though the series has so much wrongness. Kinda like The Fifth Element or To Catch a Thief.
I stopped auto-buying the Chicago Star series after This Heart of Mine. No, it wasn’t because of the rape scene. It was because, I felt, the name-dropping trait, the heavy-handedness of “political correctness” or self-help psychology stint (a problem I had with Mary Jo Putney’s novels) , and the Women’s Fiction element were becoming too noticeable. The barely-plausibility became the implausibility in Technicolor® as well.
My tendency to buy a new SEP book finally ended after trying Breathing Room, which I felt was a return to her Women’s Fiction era. In spite of all this I still carry a soft spot for this series as it gave me a great time when I needed it.
16. Bet Me – Jennifer Crusie [Contemporary 2004]
Fun, but I still prefer Welcome to Temptation. I should re-read this because all I could remember about this one is a) constant mentions of Chicken Marsala and Krispy Kreme, b) there is an odd feel to the story (I remember describing Bet Me to a friend: “It’s a paper house with living dolls” – I wish I could remember what I meant by this!), and c) it’s connected to Welcome to Temptation via Cal the hero.
So, yup. Time for a re-read. Some day.
17. The Duke and I – Julia Quinn [Eur Hist 2000]
I read this, but I don’t remember anything about it now. It’s a Julia Quinn, isn’t it?
18. Not Quite A Husband – Sherry Thomas [Hist Rom 2009]
My first Thomas book (and at the moment, due to lack of time, only). I quite enjoyed it. To be honest, the best thing about this is the correspondence with Thomas afterwards, discussing the historical aspect of this novel. That pretty much coloured my current perspective of this book.
When I read NQAL I was so thrilled with certain subtle details (and intrigued me enough to contact Thomas to find out which sources she used as a basis of her research). She has a good ear for British-style dialogue, for instance, I felt. It’s these little things that made me forget the story as a whole. I don’t know if this makes sense, but there you go.
19. The Bride – Julie Garwood [Medieval 1989]
*twitches*
20. The Spymaster’s Lady - Joanna Bourne [Eur Hist 2008]
I did try, but it easily became a DNF. No fault on author’s part, though. I’m willing to admit that there are three things I usually avoid at all costs: all things French, all things Scottish, and all things Spy.
I have always been indifferent towards spy historical romances when the spy was a high-placed member of the English nobility. It just can’t seem to hold my willing suspension of belief long. Mostly because the nobility tended to consider spying on peers dishonourable.
In the older works of English literature, spies were usually portrayed as two-faced, untrustworthy, narcissistic, greedy, dishonourable and more, even if some did it for ‘right’ reasons. It’s like with how some said it was highly dishonourable to shoot a person in the back, even if the person was the vilest bastard on earth; the kind that deserved to die.
The school of thought during that time had influenced me to the point where I can’t quite view it as a heroic trait in context of a highly-placed nobleman or noblewoman. It simply doesn’t fit in with this particular socio-political environment. It would make more sense if spying was done for personal reasons or by someone who didn’t have much to lose.
I feel it’s hell a lot more believable than the current and seemingly popular explanation in spy romances: “Oh, I’m doing it as part of the service for Her/His Majesty and the government. ‘Tis a noble job”, which is bullshit and somewhat anachronistic. I’m more likely to enjoy it if the spy wasn’t a duke or like so. It doesn’t help that authors rarely gave good reasons why these heroes and heroines would be so willing to lose everything to become spies.
Like someone once said, spies weren’t romanticised until – if we were to ignore the Scarlet Smug Prat – James Bond. Earlier than this, spies were usually doomed to die, no matter how likeable they were. Heck, James Bond failed to keep his true love alive if I remember films correctly (I haven’t read the novels). See the legendary German director Fritz Lang’s romantic thriller film, Spies (1928, which features a spy heroine who falls for a man whom she was ordered to spy upon) for reference as well.
It’s too complicated for me to articulate, to be honest. I’m not saying it’s utterly implausible or anything like it. It just simply doesn’t work for me. Spy historical romances are quite popular with an army of readers and I honestly have no problem with that. A little like with those who adore Scottish historical romance novels. I have a whale of problems with this sub-genre, but none whatsoever with readers who enjoy it. It’s a matter of personal preferences, isn’t it?
Anyroad, commenting on this novel would be like shooting at a fish in a tea cup so I won’t bother. 
—
Judging by his comments, it looks like the colleague now believes I no longer hang out on the Internet. Yay! Thank you to you all for helping me out with this and for being so patient. I really appreciate it. For what it’s worth, I’m on Twitter under FiaQ if you’re not yet sick of my prattling. I respond at other blogs under Fia.
Right. That’s me back to work. Cheers!
Yay! Stupid git. Will follow you on twitter ASAP. I have been off Twitter for a few weeks (too much traveling to the other side of the world) and I’ve been a bit afraid to get back on and get swept back into the vortex. But I miss it.
On your Next 10, I am one of the minority who prefer Miss Wonderful to Mr Impossible or Lord Perfect. And I prefer His At Night to Not Quite a Lady.
Agree on the Crusie; everyone always references Bet Me, but I so prefer WtT.
And The Bride. Christ on a cracker. I couldn’t get past page 25, I feared for the permanent dislocation of my jaw from its constant dropping at the WTFery that is that book.
I absolutely adored It Had To Be You when I read it quite some time ago. Even though I should have had issues with certain aspects of it.
As for Loretta Chase, hmmm. I did like Miss Wonderful and Mr. Impossible–a lot.
And yet, other books of hers that people seem to adore do very little for me.
I really liked NQAL too. I might even reread it sometime. But it’s my first successful Sherry Thomas. I’ll have to read her next one.
Paradise is one I still love. I was completely obsessed with it when I first read it (I think I was about 14 at the time). I passed it on to my sister and a few friends, and we were all in love with Matt Farrell. I kind of forgot about it for about a decade, but then a couple of years ago I decided to reread it, thinking it probably wouldn’t have aged well. I was surprised to see it had. It was old-fashioned in many ways, but it still packed quite the emotional punch.
The Duke and I is one I can’t reread at all, because it upsets me too much, in the way the rape in This Heart of Mine upsets others. It’s the scene where she is determined to get pregnant, even though she knows the hero definitely does not want children.
Very restrained of you to just twitch at the Garwood. My reaction is more like “Garwood – blergh!!”.
hey some of us like Garwood LOL. When I read her books I am not looking for accuracy but I like her writing style. Her books to me are like a warm blanket. Sorry!
So far I have read most of these authors at one point or another and even have some of the books listed. I have tried re-reading but found they didn’t hold up well and they are now on the list for donation.