What do you think?
Rate this book
The Six Sisters #1
Minerva
When the Reverend Charles Armitage, an impecunious country vicar in Regency England, announces that raven-haired Minerva, the eldest of his six daughters, is to have her coming-out in London, the news is not well received by the rest of the family. Mrs. Armitage has one of her Spasms and has to be brought round by burning a quantity of feathers under her nose. Annabelle, the nearest in age to Minerva, is clearly jealous, the boys are all surly, and the other girls just start off crying.
Minerva is despatched to Town under the wing of the disreputable old Lady Godolphin. Her task - to find a rich husband and thereby restore the ailing family fortunes.
But the other five daughters will all get their chance, because Minerva is but the first volume in The Six Sisters series by Marion Chesney.
240 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1982
179 people are currently reading
1113 people want to read
About the author
Marion Chesney
139 books750 followersMarion Chesney Gibbons
aka: Ann Fairfax, Jennie Tremaine, Helen Crampton, Charlotte Ward, M.C. Beaton, Sarah Chester.
Marion Chesney was born on 1936 in Glasgow, Scotland, UK, and started her first job as a bookseller in charge of the fiction department in John Smith & Sons Ltd. While bookselling, by chance, she got an offer from the Scottish Daily Mail to review variety shows and quickly rose to be their theatre critic. She left Smith’s to join Scottish Field magazine as a secretary in the advertising department, without any shorthand or typing, but quickly got the job of fashion editor instead. She then moved to the Scottish Daily Express where she reported mostly on crime. This was followed by a move to Fleet Street to the Daily Express where she became chief woman reporter. After marrying Harry Scott Gibbons and having a son, Charles, Marion went to the United States where Harry had been offered the job of editor of the Oyster Bay Guardian. When that didn’t work out, they went to Virginia and Marion worked as a waitress in a greasy spoon on the Jefferson Davies in Alexandria while Harry washed the dishes. Both then got jobs on Rupert Murdoch’s new tabloid, The Star, and moved to New York.
Anxious to spend more time at home with her small son, Marion, urged by her husband, started to write historical romances in 1977. After she had written over 100 of them under her maiden name, Marion Chesney, and under the pseudonyms: Ann Fairfax, Jennie Tremaine, Helen Crampton, Charlotte Ward, and Sarah Chester, she getting fed up with 1714 to 1910, she began to write detectives stories in 1985 under the pseudonym of M. C. Beaton. On a trip from the States to Sutherland on holiday, a course at a fishing school inspired the first Constable Hamish Macbeth story. They returned to Britain and bought a croft house and croft in Sutherland where Harry reared a flock of black sheep. But Charles was at school, in London so when he finished and both tired of the long commute to the north of Scotland, they moved to the Cotswolds where Agatha Raisin was created.
aka: Ann Fairfax, Jennie Tremaine, Helen Crampton, Charlotte Ward, M.C. Beaton, Sarah Chester.
Marion Chesney was born on 1936 in Glasgow, Scotland, UK, and started her first job as a bookseller in charge of the fiction department in John Smith & Sons Ltd. While bookselling, by chance, she got an offer from the Scottish Daily Mail to review variety shows and quickly rose to be their theatre critic. She left Smith’s to join Scottish Field magazine as a secretary in the advertising department, without any shorthand or typing, but quickly got the job of fashion editor instead. She then moved to the Scottish Daily Express where she reported mostly on crime. This was followed by a move to Fleet Street to the Daily Express where she became chief woman reporter. After marrying Harry Scott Gibbons and having a son, Charles, Marion went to the United States where Harry had been offered the job of editor of the Oyster Bay Guardian. When that didn’t work out, they went to Virginia and Marion worked as a waitress in a greasy spoon on the Jefferson Davies in Alexandria while Harry washed the dishes. Both then got jobs on Rupert Murdoch’s new tabloid, The Star, and moved to New York.
Anxious to spend more time at home with her small son, Marion, urged by her husband, started to write historical romances in 1977. After she had written over 100 of them under her maiden name, Marion Chesney, and under the pseudonyms: Ann Fairfax, Jennie Tremaine, Helen Crampton, Charlotte Ward, and Sarah Chester, she getting fed up with 1714 to 1910, she began to write detectives stories in 1985 under the pseudonym of M. C. Beaton. On a trip from the States to Sutherland on holiday, a course at a fishing school inspired the first Constable Hamish Macbeth story. They returned to Britain and bought a croft house and croft in Sutherland where Harry reared a flock of black sheep. But Charles was at school, in London so when he finished and both tired of the long commute to the north of Scotland, they moved to the Cotswolds where Agatha Raisin was created.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 248 reviews
April 23, 2010
I read all of the books in the Six Sisters series within a couple of days, and my reaction to all of them is basically the same, so I'm only going to review the first. Even though it's clear almost from the first few pages who is going to end up with whom and the books are mildly formulaic, the path the characters take to come together is enjoyable and relatively unique in each book, as Chesney (M.C. Beaton) does a good job of making each of the six sisters their own person, and not simply pale imitations of each other (the male halves of the couples seem more interchangeable). And there's lots of delicious (?) information about the habits & fashions of the Ton, although I notice that Chesney very carefully avoids assigning any of the grosser habits to the romantic leads.
Because the books themselves are fairly short, you don't drag your way through page after page waiting for the main characters to come to their senses, making the books a fun way to wile away a couple of hours. Some of the situations/characters border on the farcical, but the most ludicrous character, Lady Godolphin, surprised me by continuing to be amusing without becoming as tiresome as I thought she would be. And the vicar is really quite fun.
These are not great literature, but they aren't pretending to be either. They are the British sit-com version of Regency England.
Amazon tells me these books are out of print, so your best bet for finding them is probably your local library (although they are available for the Kindle at ~$10/each).
Because the books themselves are fairly short, you don't drag your way through page after page waiting for the main characters to come to their senses, making the books a fun way to wile away a couple of hours. Some of the situations/characters border on the farcical, but the most ludicrous character, Lady Godolphin, surprised me by continuing to be amusing without becoming as tiresome as I thought she would be. And the vicar is really quite fun.
These are not great literature, but they aren't pretending to be either. They are the British sit-com version of Regency England.
Amazon tells me these books are out of print, so your best bet for finding them is probably your local library (although they are available for the Kindle at ~$10/each).
August 22, 2017
My favorite Marion Chesney's book as for now. Simply charming.
Characters were well chosen. Thanks to them I felt like I was reading rather Austen than just Regency romance. Lady Godolphin, Rev. Armitage, Minerva, Comfrey were one of the best but I felt that all characters, even minor, were considered by Chesney. And the potential of the rest sisters. It is obvious that I am going to read at least next two book of series (I am sure Annabelle and Deirdre had own charming stories.)
Really, it is hard to find so much believable main heroes in Regency romances. Minerva and Comfrey were full of positive and negative characteristics.
The plot had a few surprising twists. And the moment, - splendid. It doesn't happen often that my heartbeat quicken during reading Regency romance.
It was also funny. But more thanks to wonderful characters than through dialogues or situation per se (although there were a really funny situations).
There was also a message: Don't judge people by your own narrow eyes and views. Be more tolerant and try to understand the other human.
Seriously, I don't wonder that it is considered by GR-readers as second best romance by Chesney.
So, I am staying with Armitage sisters, the story of Annabelle have started already...
Characters were well chosen. Thanks to them I felt like I was reading rather Austen than just Regency romance. Lady Godolphin, Rev. Armitage, Minerva, Comfrey were one of the best but I felt that all characters, even minor, were considered by Chesney. And the potential of the rest sisters. It is obvious that I am going to read at least next two book of series (I am sure Annabelle and Deirdre had own charming stories.)
Really, it is hard to find so much believable main heroes in Regency romances. Minerva and Comfrey were full of positive and negative characteristics.
The plot had a few surprising twists. And the moment, - splendid. It doesn't happen often that my heartbeat quicken during reading Regency romance.
It was also funny. But more thanks to wonderful characters than through dialogues or situation per se (although there were a really funny situations).
There was also a message: Don't judge people by your own narrow eyes and views. Be more tolerant and try to understand the other human.
Seriously, I don't wonder that it is considered by GR-readers as second best romance by Chesney.
So, I am staying with Armitage sisters, the story of Annabelle have started already...
July 9, 2017
Marion Chesney wrote six six-volume series: Six Sisters, House for the Season, School for Manners, Travelling Matchmaker, Poor Relation (my least favorite series), and the Daughters of Mannerling. I know that later publishers lumped her books together in some semblance of non-chronological order, but these were her groupings.
Minerva is the first book in the author's foray into serious series, and after reading her older works (I'll get around to reviewing all of them at some point), I can see why this series won an award at the time. At least from what I remember of the library version I read back in the day, I think I saw some acclamation of that sort. In fact, it is such a higher caliber of writing in character development and interaction, as well as historical details and a much tighter plot that I feel like she worked on the first two books of this series for a while before it went to print.
In her six series, only Six Sisters and Daughters of Mannerling concentrate solely on the protagonists. The other series have the running background plotline of a group of servants, or spinster sisters, or other sideline characters who are really the main characters of the series and who serve to help the love story along. Of these two series, although the Daughters of Mannerling was Marion Chesney's last attempts at historical romance forever and is slightly more sophisticated, the Six Sisters is a funner and livelier series, with each of the sisters having distinct and developed roles and personalities.
Minerva is the oldest of a clan of six sisters and two twin brothers and has taken care of them all in lieu of her hypochondriac mother. She is energetic and possessed of that self-righteous character of the Christian-who-has-never-erred. She takes this martyred air with her all through the book and finds herself knocked off her perch in the vain and superficial society of London and by, of course, falling in the love for the first time in her life. Her falling for Lord Sylvester is almost par for the course, given that he is urbane, smooth, wise-cracking, elegantly dressed, and confident -- oh, and almost twice her age. For a young, slightly arrogant, religious woman wrapped up in the cloak of her morals to be knocked off her soapbox by life and to be rescued by a supreme leader of the fashionable world who urges her to confide in him "like a brother"-- it is not a stretch of the imagination for sparks to fly. It is formulaic, it is predictable, it is also vastly enjoyable in the way that a good formula for fiction has been for hundreds of years.
The change in Minerva is probably jarring for some readers -- she not only falls off her moralistic perch, she also has a very PG love scene with Lord Sylvester (when it appears that he may die in a duel) in which she very definitely breaks all rules of propriety and decorum and loses her virginity (before marriage!). This is also, unfortunately, probably quite true to form as Marion Chesney seemed to be telling us in her usual tongue-in-cheek observations on religion and life.
Lord Sylvester was more fleshed out than a majority of Marion Chesney's former heroes and has any number of interactions with Minerva, from their meet-cute first encounter to his noble "she's too young and innocent for me" conversation with his good friend.
As usual for the author, the secondary characters never fail to delight, from the father of the sisters, the Vicar Armitage, who is simple, worldly, and mad for the hunt, and yet, in his own way, more sympathetic to the common people than any religion-mad clergy, to Lady Godolphin, the female version of the vicar. Lady Godolphin is full of funny malapropisms, irreverent, clutch-fisted, but eternally optimistic, youthful, and ebullient.
In other words, if you're looking for a contemporary historical fiction, this book probably will fail to deliver. But for an older, traditional historical romance, this one is excellent, and jam-packed with any number of delicious and accurate historical facts.
Minerva is the first book in the author's foray into serious series, and after reading her older works (I'll get around to reviewing all of them at some point), I can see why this series won an award at the time. At least from what I remember of the library version I read back in the day, I think I saw some acclamation of that sort. In fact, it is such a higher caliber of writing in character development and interaction, as well as historical details and a much tighter plot that I feel like she worked on the first two books of this series for a while before it went to print.
In her six series, only Six Sisters and Daughters of Mannerling concentrate solely on the protagonists. The other series have the running background plotline of a group of servants, or spinster sisters, or other sideline characters who are really the main characters of the series and who serve to help the love story along. Of these two series, although the Daughters of Mannerling was Marion Chesney's last attempts at historical romance forever and is slightly more sophisticated, the Six Sisters is a funner and livelier series, with each of the sisters having distinct and developed roles and personalities.
Minerva is the oldest of a clan of six sisters and two twin brothers and has taken care of them all in lieu of her hypochondriac mother. She is energetic and possessed of that self-righteous character of the Christian-who-has-never-erred. She takes this martyred air with her all through the book and finds herself knocked off her perch in the vain and superficial society of London and by, of course, falling in the love for the first time in her life. Her falling for Lord Sylvester is almost par for the course, given that he is urbane, smooth, wise-cracking, elegantly dressed, and confident -- oh, and almost twice her age. For a young, slightly arrogant, religious woman wrapped up in the cloak of her morals to be knocked off her soapbox by life and to be rescued by a supreme leader of the fashionable world who urges her to confide in him "like a brother"-- it is not a stretch of the imagination for sparks to fly. It is formulaic, it is predictable, it is also vastly enjoyable in the way that a good formula for fiction has been for hundreds of years.
The change in Minerva is probably jarring for some readers -- she not only falls off her moralistic perch, she also has a very PG love scene with Lord Sylvester (when it appears that he may die in a duel) in which she very definitely breaks all rules of propriety and decorum and loses her virginity (before marriage!). This is also, unfortunately, probably quite true to form as Marion Chesney seemed to be telling us in her usual tongue-in-cheek observations on religion and life.
Lord Sylvester was more fleshed out than a majority of Marion Chesney's former heroes and has any number of interactions with Minerva, from their meet-cute first encounter to his noble "she's too young and innocent for me" conversation with his good friend.
As usual for the author, the secondary characters never fail to delight, from the father of the sisters, the Vicar Armitage, who is simple, worldly, and mad for the hunt, and yet, in his own way, more sympathetic to the common people than any religion-mad clergy, to Lady Godolphin, the female version of the vicar. Lady Godolphin is full of funny malapropisms, irreverent, clutch-fisted, but eternally optimistic, youthful, and ebullient.
In other words, if you're looking for a contemporary historical fiction, this book probably will fail to deliver. But for an older, traditional historical romance, this one is excellent, and jam-packed with any number of delicious and accurate historical facts.
October 18, 2019
I am a great fan of the Regency, and Jane Austen and Georgette Heyer are my most frequent re-reads. Unfortunately, I have found all authors attempting the period after these two ladies to lack. I don't know how it is, but even when they get the period right, and even when they make an attempt at actual plots, there's always something missing. That thing that makes you excited about the hero. That makes you swoon a little for him. That thing that makes your heart beat a little faster, when all misunderstandings are cleared up and hero and heroine get together at last. That thing that makes you cackle like an idiot at their last bit of witty banter, before they ride off into the sunset. You know the thing I mean. There's no word for it, but you know it when you experience it. Most literature in the genre penned after these two ladies is apparently aware of the thing but, unable to reproduce it, just replaced tension with sex and called it a day. Chesney doesn't exactly do that, but I'll say right up front that that thing was lacking here too.
So okay, on to my actual review. First of all, the good bits:
1) The period felt like the period
All too often writers in the genre are unable to make their books feel like they happen in the past or in England, often both. If they are funny, they sound like American sitcoms. If they are historical, they're all over the place. So this did feel like Regency England-ish. There are some inaccuracies, and some situations seemed really inappropriate for the time, but I'll be generous and say that the general feel was all right.
2) The set up was interesting
I know there's the well-worn romance trope of rake meets bespectacled bluestocking and they make sweet love. This seemed like an interesting variation on the theme. Minerva is not bespectacled or a bluestocking. In fact, she is quite beautiful, but is also extremely preachy and prosy and a goody-two-shoes so holier-than-thou that she disgusts people in droves. I liked that the author made her flaws have consequences other than attracting the hero. She really was annoying with her preaching, and it was a character flaw that was realistic.
3) It had amusing and varied side-characters
I liked Lady G., and the vicar, and altogether there was a great variety of characters that felt alive and were funny and colourful, which is what you want reading a book like this.
4) It had something approximating a plot
Romance of this kind often doesn't follow normal plots, and is instead focused on incidents that further relationships. The challenge is to make these incidents amusing or exciting or both, and to thus keep the reader interested. This novel is semi-successful in accomplishing this.
5) It is funny
I had a few laughs with the author and it made reading this novel an enjoyable experience.
Now to the bad:
1) The characterisation is inconsistent
Minerva is a straight-laced prude. It's literally her main characteristic. It's what makes Minerva Minerva and not her flighty sister. It is what sets her apart from the whole of society and though I didn't like this about her, I did grudgingly admire how she was willing to defy the whole of society to stick to her principles. So it seems beyond unbelievable that she would get around as much as she does in this novel. The transition from one state to the other doesn't happen by way of any revelation or character development. I was a little confused as to what she believed by the end, and was disappointed that she'd let go of her principles because of some guy. She should have been given a better reason to do it, or not done it at all. Otherwise, this is not character development but, frankly, her exposure as a complete and utter hypocrite.
2) The characterisation is lacking
So the romantic hero in any romance is so, so, so important. The great romances that have prevailed over centuries are what they are in part due to how interesting the hero was. How funny, how manly, how heroic and, often, how transformed he was by the heroine. I realise that Chesney did not attempt another Heathcliff or Rochester or Darcy here. But neither did she accomplish a Lord Damerel, Lord Vidal or Lord Salford either. I think Heyer accomplishes her heroes by writing them with some consistency: their dialogue sounds uniquely their own, and they are uniquely cleverer and wittier than any other man in the novels in which they appear. Not so Lord Sylvester in Minerva. Yes he has occasional flashes of wit, but Chesney keeps telling us he is dangerous and a rake, and aloof and haughty, while showing him constantly good-humoured, a little silly, at times horny, at others full of avuncular advice. This characterisation makes him an uneven character, and robs him of any great impact.
3) It lacks a good arc
What I would have really liked is for one of them, if not both, to have undergone some sort of journey. They should both be changed by the end in ways that are clearly defined and a logical consequence of the experiences they have had with each other. This, unfortunately, does not occur here, and it is unclear why they fell in love with each other (other than horniness on both sides), or how either of them deserves a happy ending.
4) They are not agents in their journeys
This is probably the biggest plot problem in the novel. The conflicts that are set up as a result of bad choices, poor communication or misunderstandings are not resolved by good choices, good communication or the clearing up of their misunderstandings by the MCs. Rather, it is the side-characters who have the most agency, come up with various plans and execute them. It is their will and motivation that moves the plot along, and Minerva and Lord Sylvester just entangle themselves in them, either unwittingly or because the minor characters intended it so.
5) It didn't make me feel anything
I enjoyed myself reading this novel, for the most part. And it did make me laugh. But the romance left me entirely cold, unfortunately.
So, to sum up, in my harsh assessment of a genre I actually really love, I find this a mediocre entry. I have read far, far worse, and I do appreciate the good parts, but I wish it was more. I sort of feel the author could have achieved more, because she has the wit and the writing ability. Though I am not tempted to immediately read the next one in the series, I might check out other writing by this author.
So okay, on to my actual review. First of all, the good bits:
1) The period felt like the period
All too often writers in the genre are unable to make their books feel like they happen in the past or in England, often both. If they are funny, they sound like American sitcoms. If they are historical, they're all over the place. So this did feel like Regency England-ish. There are some inaccuracies, and some situations seemed really inappropriate for the time, but I'll be generous and say that the general feel was all right.
2) The set up was interesting
I know there's the well-worn romance trope of rake meets bespectacled bluestocking and they make sweet love. This seemed like an interesting variation on the theme. Minerva is not bespectacled or a bluestocking. In fact, she is quite beautiful, but is also extremely preachy and prosy and a goody-two-shoes so holier-than-thou that she disgusts people in droves. I liked that the author made her flaws have consequences other than attracting the hero. She really was annoying with her preaching, and it was a character flaw that was realistic.
3) It had amusing and varied side-characters
I liked Lady G., and the vicar, and altogether there was a great variety of characters that felt alive and were funny and colourful, which is what you want reading a book like this.
4) It had something approximating a plot
Romance of this kind often doesn't follow normal plots, and is instead focused on incidents that further relationships. The challenge is to make these incidents amusing or exciting or both, and to thus keep the reader interested. This novel is semi-successful in accomplishing this.
5) It is funny
I had a few laughs with the author and it made reading this novel an enjoyable experience.
Now to the bad:
1) The characterisation is inconsistent
Minerva is a straight-laced prude. It's literally her main characteristic. It's what makes Minerva Minerva and not her flighty sister. It is what sets her apart from the whole of society and though I didn't like this about her, I did grudgingly admire how she was willing to defy the whole of society to stick to her principles. So it seems beyond unbelievable that she would get around as much as she does in this novel. The transition from one state to the other doesn't happen by way of any revelation or character development. I was a little confused as to what she believed by the end, and was disappointed that she'd let go of her principles because of some guy. She should have been given a better reason to do it, or not done it at all. Otherwise, this is not character development but, frankly, her exposure as a complete and utter hypocrite.
2) The characterisation is lacking
So the romantic hero in any romance is so, so, so important. The great romances that have prevailed over centuries are what they are in part due to how interesting the hero was. How funny, how manly, how heroic and, often, how transformed he was by the heroine. I realise that Chesney did not attempt another Heathcliff or Rochester or Darcy here. But neither did she accomplish a Lord Damerel, Lord Vidal or Lord Salford either. I think Heyer accomplishes her heroes by writing them with some consistency: their dialogue sounds uniquely their own, and they are uniquely cleverer and wittier than any other man in the novels in which they appear. Not so Lord Sylvester in Minerva. Yes he has occasional flashes of wit, but Chesney keeps telling us he is dangerous and a rake, and aloof and haughty, while showing him constantly good-humoured, a little silly, at times horny, at others full of avuncular advice. This characterisation makes him an uneven character, and robs him of any great impact.
3) It lacks a good arc
What I would have really liked is for one of them, if not both, to have undergone some sort of journey. They should both be changed by the end in ways that are clearly defined and a logical consequence of the experiences they have had with each other. This, unfortunately, does not occur here, and it is unclear why they fell in love with each other (other than horniness on both sides), or how either of them deserves a happy ending.
4) They are not agents in their journeys
This is probably the biggest plot problem in the novel. The conflicts that are set up as a result of bad choices, poor communication or misunderstandings are not resolved by good choices, good communication or the clearing up of their misunderstandings by the MCs. Rather, it is the side-characters who have the most agency, come up with various plans and execute them. It is their will and motivation that moves the plot along, and Minerva and Lord Sylvester just entangle themselves in them, either unwittingly or because the minor characters intended it so.
5) It didn't make me feel anything
I enjoyed myself reading this novel, for the most part. And it did make me laugh. But the romance left me entirely cold, unfortunately.
So, to sum up, in my harsh assessment of a genre I actually really love, I find this a mediocre entry. I have read far, far worse, and I do appreciate the good parts, but I wish it was more. I sort of feel the author could have achieved more, because she has the wit and the writing ability. Though I am not tempted to immediately read the next one in the series, I might check out other writing by this author.
April 15, 2023
Regency Romance Panto
It was quite entertaining in a humorous, slapdash, exaggerated way and Marion Chesney got her Regency Ps and Qs mostly right, but sometimes I could not decide whether the joke was on the characters, the genre or on the reader.
It was quite entertaining in a humorous, slapdash, exaggerated way and Marion Chesney got her Regency Ps and Qs mostly right, but sometimes I could not decide whether the joke was on the characters, the genre or on the reader.
March 20, 2012
I can’t remember where exactly I heard about this book, but I’ve seen the author’s name around and heard that this series of six sisters was clean so I thought I’d give it a try. I liked the overall story; unfortunately there were just too many things that bugged me. In a way it reminded me of the movie Grease, where the nice moral girl is transformed and becomes more worldly. Those kinds of stories just make me sad, it’s sad when someone gives into peer pressure and changes who they are in order to “fit in”. This was just an odd one for me, I didn’t really like or dislike Minerva. She is pretty confused about who she is, but is loyal to her family and will do her duty to find a husband to help provide for them. As for our leading man, Lord Sylvester, I did like him. While he is supposedly a rake, he seemed to have more manners and morals than some of the other men. The best parts of the book are when they are together, they had good chemistry and Sylvester does have a certain charm about him.
There are two groups of guys who are put off with Minerva and decided to do her harm. One group of four plan to rape her, while the other group of three just plan on making her fall in love and then humiliate her by shunning her. Her father is a cheat and creep (even though he is the town vicar) and come to think of it there are no moral men in the entire story. Which is just sad, I would hope there were at least some moral men back then, but in this case Lord Sylvester is the best we can get. It seems that in books like this when there are guys (or girls) with morals they are the ones painted in a negative light, which doesn't make sense and is kind of sad.
There is a lot of detail I the book in regards to the people’s attire and their habits which I guess is interesting, but at times kind of dragged a bit. The ending felt rather rushed, considering how much time was spent on the rest of the story. It is almost like the author had a page limit and realized she was reaching the end and just hurried and wrapped everything up. While at times the story was enjoyable and again I did like Sylvester and Minerva together, I don’t think I’ll be reading the rest of the series, I didn’t really care for any of the side characters in the story and don’t see the point of continuing on.
Content: There is one love scene, that is very short (like a paragraph) and not graphic.
There are two groups of guys who are put off with Minerva and decided to do her harm. One group of four plan to rape her, while the other group of three just plan on making her fall in love and then humiliate her by shunning her. Her father is a cheat and creep (even though he is the town vicar) and come to think of it there are no moral men in the entire story. Which is just sad, I would hope there were at least some moral men back then, but in this case Lord Sylvester is the best we can get. It seems that in books like this when there are guys (or girls) with morals they are the ones painted in a negative light, which doesn't make sense and is kind of sad.
There is a lot of detail I the book in regards to the people’s attire and their habits which I guess is interesting, but at times kind of dragged a bit. The ending felt rather rushed, considering how much time was spent on the rest of the story. It is almost like the author had a page limit and realized she was reaching the end and just hurried and wrapped everything up. While at times the story was enjoyable and again I did like Sylvester and Minerva together, I don’t think I’ll be reading the rest of the series, I didn’t really care for any of the side characters in the story and don’t see the point of continuing on.
Content: There is one love scene, that is very short (like a paragraph) and not graphic.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 7, 2019
İnsan otomatikman başladıkları seriden devam edeceklerini düşünüyor ama bu yayınevlerine akıl sır ermiyor.
April 3, 2011
This is one of the few books/series I would read again. These stories of Marion Chesney started me on my adventure...reading Regency Romance/Novels/History! I love them all. It must be a "past life" thing:)
March 8, 2014
I'll tell you one thing: Mary Bennet would Not Have Approved of this book.
I mention the third Bennet sister because Minerva Armitage, heroine of this book, is comparable to her. Both possess exacting moral standards and a tendency to preach without sensitivity to the situation or regard for the people around them.
Where they differ lies in the fact that because Minerva's a main heroine, she gets to be ravishingly beautiful, with a more generously endowed chest (if it's explicitly mentioned in the book, that gives me license to mention it too) and admittedly, with a bit more likability than poor maligned Mary.
In the first half of the book, I was extremely amused by Minerva. It was fun to see a typical Regency beauty being rather holier-than-thou and preachy yet sweet enough to remain in the reader's good graces. One might say she has reason enough for her personality, having to take care of five sisters and two brothers alongside a rather negligent father and hypochondriac of a mother.
It was funny to see her in 'evil' London society where her morals and standards are so far removed, and how she reacts in the most awkward, wrongest way possible. Priggish and missish as she may be, it is a characterisation not often seen or handled well. In this case though, I thought it succeeded. I rooted for her because I was shown that the true heart of gold behind the prudish front existed. AND despite the fact she doesn't allow novels in her house. HORRORS.
On the other hand, in the second half of the book where the girl finally admits that she's in love... hooboy. The prudish pragmatism, the backbone she has and her characterisation seems to all crumble into a litany of "Oh GOD THIS GUY will NEVER LOVE ME and I must marry another to save my family but NO...!" Losing your heart is one thing but losing your entire head is quite another.
The love interest, Lord Sylvester Comfrey, is, to be frank, Your Typical Rake-Hero. Tall, handsome, experienced, urbane. Dialogue snarky enough to prick yourself on if you slide your finger along the sentences the wrong way. Kind enough to show a country girl how to behave in society although (probably, secretly) honouring her attempts to remain true to herself. Keeps denying he's attracted to a country miss because "she's not my type, NOES". Oh naturally I LIKED him - who wouldn't when you see him in action for his girl? - but honestly, we've seen his make before and doubtless we'll keep seeing his kind in future stories to come. Reformed rakes after all make for perfect romantic heroes.
Rev. Armitage is also quite a character, as a vicar more interested in the world than the divine and not exactly the best of men - manipulative half the time yet he DOES care for his family in his own way. If he were a landowner, one wouldn't blink too much at his actions. But since he's a vicar, his vices give him dimension and add unexpected depth when he DOES behave decently. It sets him in contrast with his daughter who acts more like a man of the cloth than he does. For that, I give Beaton props for his character.
It is in my opinion, because I know there will be those who disagree, that because the plot is nothing new, it is the cast of characters who make this stand out from the rest. And while I feel like shaking the main couple towards the end, it's not a bad thing. A reaction is better than complete apathy.
As for the story, it goes as follows: Girl must marry rich guy or her family will fall into debt. Girl meets Boy who teaches her how to act in proper society. Girl falls in love with Boy but believes he will never love her because she is far too naive/poor/whatever reason. Boy loves her anyway even though he denies it for as long as the Nile runs. Girl runs into trouble which Boy must extricate her from. Confessions of love ensue, combined with misunderstandings and finally a happy resolution.
Not exactly mindbogglingly groundbreaking. However, there IS an added thread to this plot by way of a bet being run by two rival groups of men. All of them arrange a "Make Her Love Us and Dump Her/Dishonour Her Horribly" scheme after Minerva deflates their ego with her overly blunt remarks. One feels no sympathy for any of the antagonists since most of them are rather flat without much charm or depth. (This is probably deliberate since you're supposed to be falling for Sylvester).
Oh, and there's a subplot about her younger sister, Annabelle and an unsuitable suitor, followed by the appearance of one Marquess of Brabington, the latter acting as a technical Deus ex machina of this story. The subplot takes focus away from the main story, rather like intermissions to allow for time to pass within the story (and probably also to make the book slightly thicker). It's not really annoying since you do see how ironically different Minerva and Annabelle's viewpoints are.
Beaton's writing is not Austen and to its advantage, it doesn't pretend to be. It doesn't have the subtlety of Heyer's descriptions - while you DO get the details of dresses and environments, it can feel a bit forced in. And whether you think this a pro or a con, it's not as graphic/vividly sexual as a Quinn or Kleypas or Laurens book. It's strength is in the tongue-in-cheek quality Beaton has developed. Sometimes through the dialogue, but mostly through the narrative, you can hear the author describe events, people and their motivations with a grin and a laugh. Lady Godolphin is a favourite target mainly because of how utterly ridiculous the character is. . There are also moments of genuine, passionate UST between the two main leads, my favourite being that scene by the lake. And I will admit, I did feel for Minerva when she succumbs to her 'He'll Never Love Me' blues. Sometimes, if not all her moments.
Yet there are specific plot points that rather marred my enjoyment of the book, the main one being The transitions from scene to scene are also sometimes awkward and the ending honestly felt rather rushed. A last minute moment of dramatic tension also just didn't quite tally with the way the story was going . It felt a bit like padding, really and added little to the story.
Overall, it's an okay romance novel. It takes a formula that's been done before and adds its own little twists and flavour. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I wouldn't call it pure fluff since there are dramatic moments in it, albeit without much suspense. Check it out if you're in the mood for a light, quick read to amuse yourself.
I mention the third Bennet sister because Minerva Armitage, heroine of this book, is comparable to her. Both possess exacting moral standards and a tendency to preach without sensitivity to the situation or regard for the people around them.
Where they differ lies in the fact that because Minerva's a main heroine, she gets to be ravishingly beautiful, with a more generously endowed chest (if it's explicitly mentioned in the book, that gives me license to mention it too) and admittedly, with a bit more likability than poor maligned Mary.
In the first half of the book, I was extremely amused by Minerva. It was fun to see a typical Regency beauty being rather holier-than-thou and preachy yet sweet enough to remain in the reader's good graces. One might say she has reason enough for her personality, having to take care of five sisters and two brothers alongside a rather negligent father and hypochondriac of a mother.
It was funny to see her in 'evil' London society where her morals and standards are so far removed, and how she reacts in the most awkward, wrongest way possible. Priggish and missish as she may be, it is a characterisation not often seen or handled well. In this case though, I thought it succeeded. I rooted for her because I was shown that the true heart of gold behind the prudish front existed. AND despite the fact she doesn't allow novels in her house. HORRORS.
On the other hand, in the second half of the book where the girl finally admits that she's in love... hooboy. The prudish pragmatism, the backbone she has and her characterisation seems to all crumble into a litany of "Oh GOD THIS GUY will NEVER LOVE ME and I must marry another to save my family but NO...!" Losing your heart is one thing but losing your entire head is quite another.
The love interest, Lord Sylvester Comfrey, is, to be frank, Your Typical Rake-Hero. Tall, handsome, experienced, urbane. Dialogue snarky enough to prick yourself on if you slide your finger along the sentences the wrong way. Kind enough to show a country girl how to behave in society although (probably, secretly) honouring her attempts to remain true to herself. Keeps denying he's attracted to a country miss because "she's not my type, NOES". Oh naturally I LIKED him - who wouldn't when you see him in action for his girl? - but honestly, we've seen his make before and doubtless we'll keep seeing his kind in future stories to come. Reformed rakes after all make for perfect romantic heroes.
Rev. Armitage is also quite a character, as a vicar more interested in the world than the divine and not exactly the best of men - manipulative half the time yet he DOES care for his family in his own way. If he were a landowner, one wouldn't blink too much at his actions. But since he's a vicar, his vices give him dimension and add unexpected depth when he DOES behave decently. It sets him in contrast with his daughter who acts more like a man of the cloth than he does. For that, I give Beaton props for his character.
It is in my opinion, because I know there will be those who disagree, that because the plot is nothing new, it is the cast of characters who make this stand out from the rest. And while I feel like shaking the main couple towards the end, it's not a bad thing. A reaction is better than complete apathy.
As for the story, it goes as follows: Girl must marry rich guy or her family will fall into debt. Girl meets Boy who teaches her how to act in proper society. Girl falls in love with Boy but believes he will never love her because she is far too naive/poor/whatever reason. Boy loves her anyway even though he denies it for as long as the Nile runs. Girl runs into trouble which Boy must extricate her from. Confessions of love ensue, combined with misunderstandings and finally a happy resolution.
Not exactly mindbogglingly groundbreaking. However, there IS an added thread to this plot by way of a bet being run by two rival groups of men. All of them arrange a "Make Her Love Us and Dump Her/Dishonour Her Horribly" scheme after Minerva deflates their ego with her overly blunt remarks. One feels no sympathy for any of the antagonists since most of them are rather flat without much charm or depth. (This is probably deliberate since you're supposed to be falling for Sylvester).
Oh, and there's a subplot about her younger sister, Annabelle and an unsuitable suitor, followed by the appearance of one Marquess of Brabington, the latter acting as a technical Deus ex machina of this story. The subplot takes focus away from the main story, rather like intermissions to allow for time to pass within the story (and probably also to make the book slightly thicker). It's not really annoying since you do see how ironically different Minerva and Annabelle's viewpoints are.
Beaton's writing is not Austen and to its advantage, it doesn't pretend to be. It doesn't have the subtlety of Heyer's descriptions - while you DO get the details of dresses and environments, it can feel a bit forced in. And whether you think this a pro or a con, it's not as graphic/vividly sexual as a Quinn or Kleypas or Laurens book. It's strength is in the tongue-in-cheek quality Beaton has developed. Sometimes through the dialogue, but mostly through the narrative, you can hear the author describe events, people and their motivations with a grin and a laugh. Lady Godolphin is a favourite target mainly because of how utterly ridiculous the character is. . There are also moments of genuine, passionate UST between the two main leads, my favourite being that scene by the lake. And I will admit, I did feel for Minerva when she succumbs to her 'He'll Never Love Me' blues. Sometimes, if not all her moments.
Yet there are specific plot points that rather marred my enjoyment of the book, the main one being The transitions from scene to scene are also sometimes awkward and the ending honestly felt rather rushed. A last minute moment of dramatic tension also just didn't quite tally with the way the story was going . It felt a bit like padding, really and added little to the story.
Overall, it's an okay romance novel. It takes a formula that's been done before and adds its own little twists and flavour. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I wouldn't call it pure fluff since there are dramatic moments in it, albeit without much suspense. Check it out if you're in the mood for a light, quick read to amuse yourself.
June 9, 2020
O kadar kötü bir historical romance’ti ki. Anlatamam. Berbattı. Aşırı ağdalı, devrik bir dil...
Ruhsuz karakterler...
Berbat diyaloglar.
Çok nadirdir ben bunu niye aldım ki dediğim Kitaplar ama diyorum.
Ben bunu niye aldım ki?
Ruhsuz karakterler...
Berbat diyaloglar.
Çok nadirdir ben bunu niye aldım ki dediğim Kitaplar ama diyorum.
Ben bunu niye aldım ki?
November 8, 2020
I like this author and I'll continue reading Her School of Manners series. On the other hand, will definitely not continue with this series, since this book was dreadful. But at least it was short.
Minerva was such a prig, I think there is only one time where I found her ok, which was when she was being mean to her suitors. I liked that she was honest and that she didn't try to appeal to people just because it was the norm. She didn't like parties and the debauchery of London society, and that was fine. She also had a funny scene when she was reading to her aunt while said aunt had her lover under the sheets. And that's it. All the other times she was so prim, giving lectures, being too serious, too martyr... And then, at the end of the book, she makes a 180 degrees transformation: from a girl who wasn't into frivolous stuff nor physical to "take my body" and throwing herself at the Lord. MEH.
Her father is awful, her sister Annabelle is awful... Truly, all characters are awful, with no morals, no virtues... There is plenty of adultery in this book, and it is seen as normal, acceptable. There are men who makes wagers over who is going to take Minerva's virginity, and at the end, said men are willing to gang-rape her (of course Minerva is the damsel in distress and there comes the hero to save her). Everybody talks about Cyprians and harlots (high-maintenance mistresses) like it is nothing, her aunt, who is vulgar, talks about "fornication" and "vaginal" in public (she meant "fortifications" and "virginal").
Annabelle is the second sister and of course I am not going to read her book. She is nasty, she is selfish... Her story takes half of this book and I was bored to death. She is only interested in being pretty and be with men (she has a suitor in this book, who is a slave trader, but he is handsome). And by the end of the book, after seeing her sister's fiancee for the first time for like, 2 minutes, has a tantrum in the privacy of her room, where she cries (paraphrasing) "why can't I have him? I will make him mine, he is not married to my sister yet". Awful! Do I need nore reasons to not read her book? Also, Minerva is black-haired, Annabelle is blond, another sister is auburn-haired, another is brown-haired... is that even possible?? (I am not an expert in genetics, but it seemed too far-fetched.. 8 children all with different color of eyes and hair).
Her father is the priest of their little town, and has 8 children with his wife, but takes a lover every now and then. He makes Minerva write his sermons, he is more interested in hunt and hounds, take Minerva to London to make a deal and why not, having a good time with some girl, and also has the fantastic idea of having his eldest daughter have her Season so she marries well and bring money to the family. But oh wait, he is sorry he did that.. after the hero gives him a lot of money to free Minerva. He also knows one day that Annabelle has been seen too friendly with some guy in the stables, but she has always being incorrigible, he isn't sure of what to do. Awful!
Sylvester, the hero (I love his name) was ok, since he has a sense of humor. Nevertheless, I can't understand why he falls for her. He is twice her age (ew), has plenty of mistresses, has a sense of humor (she doesn't), seems pretty intelligent although somewhat sadistic (puts Minerva in danger twice), is pretty decent until the end, where he can't control himself and takes her virginity, making me dislike him in that moment. Next day he has a duel, drunks until he passes out... and ok, bye hero.
This is not the kind of Traditional Regency I like. I am not very familiar with this period, except a little bit of their fashion, and although it was interesting, it was also truly ridiculous. Was this period so full of debauchery and vulgarity? This is not what I am looking for when I pick a Traditional Regency book. And this one is supposed to be light and funny. Yeah right.
Minerva was such a prig, I think there is only one time where I found her ok, which was when she was being mean to her suitors. I liked that she was honest and that she didn't try to appeal to people just because it was the norm. She didn't like parties and the debauchery of London society, and that was fine. She also had a funny scene when she was reading to her aunt while said aunt had her lover under the sheets. And that's it. All the other times she was so prim, giving lectures, being too serious, too martyr... And then, at the end of the book, she makes a 180 degrees transformation: from a girl who wasn't into frivolous stuff nor physical to "take my body" and throwing herself at the Lord. MEH.
Her father is awful, her sister Annabelle is awful... Truly, all characters are awful, with no morals, no virtues... There is plenty of adultery in this book, and it is seen as normal, acceptable. There are men who makes wagers over who is going to take Minerva's virginity, and at the end, said men are willing to gang-rape her (of course Minerva is the damsel in distress and there comes the hero to save her). Everybody talks about Cyprians and harlots (high-maintenance mistresses) like it is nothing, her aunt, who is vulgar, talks about "fornication" and "vaginal" in public (she meant "fortifications" and "virginal").
Annabelle is the second sister and of course I am not going to read her book. She is nasty, she is selfish... Her story takes half of this book and I was bored to death. She is only interested in being pretty and be with men (she has a suitor in this book, who is a slave trader, but he is handsome). And by the end of the book, after seeing her sister's fiancee for the first time for like, 2 minutes, has a tantrum in the privacy of her room, where she cries (paraphrasing) "why can't I have him? I will make him mine, he is not married to my sister yet". Awful! Do I need nore reasons to not read her book? Also, Minerva is black-haired, Annabelle is blond, another sister is auburn-haired, another is brown-haired... is that even possible?? (I am not an expert in genetics, but it seemed too far-fetched.. 8 children all with different color of eyes and hair).
Her father is the priest of their little town, and has 8 children with his wife, but takes a lover every now and then. He makes Minerva write his sermons, he is more interested in hunt and hounds, take Minerva to London to make a deal and why not, having a good time with some girl, and also has the fantastic idea of having his eldest daughter have her Season so she marries well and bring money to the family. But oh wait, he is sorry he did that.. after the hero gives him a lot of money to free Minerva. He also knows one day that Annabelle has been seen too friendly with some guy in the stables, but she has always being incorrigible, he isn't sure of what to do. Awful!
Sylvester, the hero (I love his name) was ok, since he has a sense of humor. Nevertheless, I can't understand why he falls for her. He is twice her age (ew), has plenty of mistresses, has a sense of humor (she doesn't), seems pretty intelligent although somewhat sadistic (puts Minerva in danger twice), is pretty decent until the end, where he can't control himself and takes her virginity, making me dislike him in that moment. Next day he has a duel, drunks until he passes out... and ok, bye hero.
This is not the kind of Traditional Regency I like. I am not very familiar with this period, except a little bit of their fashion, and although it was interesting, it was also truly ridiculous. Was this period so full of debauchery and vulgarity? This is not what I am looking for when I pick a Traditional Regency book. And this one is supposed to be light and funny. Yeah right.
September 3, 2015
As another reviewer wrote, it's a "British sit-com version of Regency England". I like the fact it was written by Scottish author.
June 14, 2024
Dopo aver letto la serie di 67, Clarges Street, mi aspettavo di meglio da M.C. Beaton nei panni di autrice di romance. Non che la storia non sia gradevole e i personaggi particolari, ma manca forse un po' di passione. Naturalmente, Beaton tributa un omaggio a Georgette Heyer, visto il nome del protagonista maschile, Sylvester, anche se non mi sembra ci sia molto in comune con la storia di Heyer. Minerva, all'inizio bacchettona, vera colonna portante di casa Armitage, sarà costretta a sposarsi per portare un po' di denaro in famiglia, e viene mandata a Londra per la Season, dove verrà patrocinata dalla discutibile Lady Godolphin. L'incontro con Sylvester - il ricchissimo terzo figlio di un duca, che è noto per essere un grande libertino - è quanto mai imbarazzante, ma Sylvester con Minerva si comporta sempre da gentiluomo, come se lei fosse la sua sorellina minore. Solo che per Minerva lui non è un fratello, visto che risveglia una grandissima passione che non sapeva di avere in lei.
Intanto, Annabelle - la sorella secondogenita di Rebecca, che ha tutto un altro carattere - si dà da fare, anche lei a caccia di marito. E infatti, al lettore resterà la curiosità di scoprire cosa combinerà nel secondo romanzo della serie, quello dedicato proprio a lei!
Intanto, Annabelle - la sorella secondogenita di Rebecca, che ha tutto un altro carattere - si dà da fare, anche lei a caccia di marito. E infatti, al lettore resterà la curiosità di scoprire cosa combinerà nel secondo romanzo della serie, quello dedicato proprio a lei!
September 26, 2013
"Follicles! .. uttered in a whisper by a hairdresser" is the "favorite oath" of Lady Godolphin p 66, a poor chaperone for Minerva. Hunt-happy vicar Armitage sends his eldest daughter to restore the family fortune in a London season. Lady G stumbles over malapropisms, mistaking French military "fornications" for "fortifications", and overnights with married Colonel. Her "barrage of peculiar scents" are "from lead paint to a perfume called 'Miss In Her Teens', brandy, rose water, and sour sweat" p 64. Double-standard allows Armitage to bestow "hearty kiss" and "slap on the bottom" a floozy "lady of the town" p 43. At the end, his interference is a pleasant surprise.
Hilarious when Minerva repeatedly falls atop handsome Lord Sylvester Comfrey 33, "out and outer" p 39, even "his nightcap at a rakish angle" p 45. His observant eye, quick reactions, and thoughtful care save her debut after she preaches at everyone, especially alienating two sets of Dandies whose bets nearly cause her doom. Her "repellent grey wool" garters slither downward p 72, a just response from Fate for her prim moralizing "too much rigidity" p 73. "Prinny might award .. the Order of the Garter if he but heard" p75.
The characters are best at their worst. Fancy dress details, hat feather to pointed toe, are forced, false, perhaps required by editors/ publishers who slotted books into "romance" niche? Negatives are the positives, author forté.
Neighbor "Lady Wentwater was a small, dumpy woman, like a lump of dough into which someone had pushed currants for eyes and a piece of cinnamon stick for a mouth. Her clothes were old and musty and smelled of some horrible things, two of which a lady was not suppposed to know about" p 31. Her nephew Guy trades in "black ivory" p 48 and woos second daughter Annabelle, setting up sequel.
The more outlandish, the better. Every young miss knows not to take the darkened path in garden shrubbery. "'Oh, list and hist .. a little pussy cat in distress' .. Lord Sylvester was sitting on the low branch .. 'Miaow', he said conversationally" p 108. In a duel, one shot hits right down the other's gun barrel. TV "Museum Secrets" re-enacts possibility of French sharpshooter to the heart of Horatio Nelson amid mighty ship battle, surprisingly accurate. High school curriculum may prescribe Pride and Prejudice, this take on the same moral is much more lively. Minerva tries to read edifying poems to "wicked rip" Lady G, her "bedclothes .. heaped up around her in an untidy mountain" of Colonel Arthur Brian p 119, heading for "carnival knowledge", "carnal knowledge, I ain't had it yet" p 120.
Hilarious when Minerva repeatedly falls atop handsome Lord Sylvester Comfrey 33, "out and outer" p 39, even "his nightcap at a rakish angle" p 45. His observant eye, quick reactions, and thoughtful care save her debut after she preaches at everyone, especially alienating two sets of Dandies whose bets nearly cause her doom. Her "repellent grey wool" garters slither downward p 72, a just response from Fate for her prim moralizing "too much rigidity" p 73. "Prinny might award .. the Order of the Garter if he but heard" p75.
The characters are best at their worst. Fancy dress details, hat feather to pointed toe, are forced, false, perhaps required by editors/ publishers who slotted books into "romance" niche? Negatives are the positives, author forté.
Neighbor "Lady Wentwater was a small, dumpy woman, like a lump of dough into which someone had pushed currants for eyes and a piece of cinnamon stick for a mouth. Her clothes were old and musty and smelled of some horrible things, two of which a lady was not suppposed to know about" p 31. Her nephew Guy trades in "black ivory" p 48 and woos second daughter Annabelle, setting up sequel.
The more outlandish, the better. Every young miss knows not to take the darkened path in garden shrubbery. "'Oh, list and hist .. a little pussy cat in distress' .. Lord Sylvester was sitting on the low branch .. 'Miaow', he said conversationally" p 108. In a duel, one shot hits right down the other's gun barrel. TV "Museum Secrets" re-enacts possibility of French sharpshooter to the heart of Horatio Nelson amid mighty ship battle, surprisingly accurate. High school curriculum may prescribe Pride and Prejudice, this take on the same moral is much more lively. Minerva tries to read edifying poems to "wicked rip" Lady G, her "bedclothes .. heaped up around her in an untidy mountain" of Colonel Arthur Brian p 119, heading for "carnival knowledge", "carnal knowledge, I ain't had it yet" p 120.
August 26, 2018
I don't think I'm going to be good friends with Marion Chesney's (and her alteregos') books.
This one was, for me, a dollar/euro store Jane Austen. It did not have any depth. It was written in an entertaining and easy to read way, I am going to give it that, but it was written quite poorly. It was REALLY "tell, not show". It was literally spoonfed to us what each character was like.
What I had most of my issues with were the characters, their motivations and their personalities. I like unlikeable main characters - when they are unlikeable for a REASON and it is shown that their flaws are flaws. In this case, I found that Minerva's flaws were almost shown as positives, or maybe sometimes just used for comedic effect... but they were mostly shown as "but look at how virtuous she is" (which in the end, she wasn't even...). I LOOOOVE me some virtuous characters usually, but hers was in an "I'm better than everyone else and it gives me a free pass to be rude"... as if rudeness becomes non-rudeness magically if it is done by a virtuous person. Also, her 'suitors"... of course, the only person who liked her "fantastic" personality was the one who was good-looking... all the others were so conceited and of course, butt ugly (but thought they were the hottest things(...
I found the other characters really flat, to an extent I did not believe the story (moustache-twirling cartoon villains, the trope of the non-virtuous comic priest etc.). Some of the events were just so dumb, too (someone accidentally entering someone else's room and they start kissing all of a sudden without looking at who they hell they are smooching with). There were some inconsistencies, too... Minerva does not know shit about London, but she knows who the best shooter in London is. Yeah right.
I also found Lady Godolphin's character too farce-ish, and also, some of her behaviour did not make sense. Sometimes she was clearly working against Minerva's case. Annabelle was really cliché, too. Also, she was written as a good sister, even if she is unlike Minerva and is too flirty for her own good... and the ending... I don't want to even think about it.
This one was, for me, a dollar/euro store Jane Austen. It did not have any depth. It was written in an entertaining and easy to read way, I am going to give it that, but it was written quite poorly. It was REALLY "tell, not show". It was literally spoonfed to us what each character was like.
What I had most of my issues with were the characters, their motivations and their personalities. I like unlikeable main characters - when they are unlikeable for a REASON and it is shown that their flaws are flaws. In this case, I found that Minerva's flaws were almost shown as positives, or maybe sometimes just used for comedic effect... but they were mostly shown as "but look at how virtuous she is" (which in the end, she wasn't even...). I LOOOOVE me some virtuous characters usually, but hers was in an "I'm better than everyone else and it gives me a free pass to be rude"... as if rudeness becomes non-rudeness magically if it is done by a virtuous person. Also, her 'suitors"... of course, the only person who liked her "fantastic" personality was the one who was good-looking... all the others were so conceited and of course, butt ugly (but thought they were the hottest things(...
I found the other characters really flat, to an extent I did not believe the story (moustache-twirling cartoon villains, the trope of the non-virtuous comic priest etc.). Some of the events were just so dumb, too (someone accidentally entering someone else's room and they start kissing all of a sudden without looking at who they hell they are smooching with). There were some inconsistencies, too... Minerva does not know shit about London, but she knows who the best shooter in London is. Yeah right.
I also found Lady Godolphin's character too farce-ish, and also, some of her behaviour did not make sense. Sometimes she was clearly working against Minerva's case. Annabelle was really cliché, too. Also, she was written as a good sister, even if she is unlike Minerva and is too flirty for her own good... and the ending... I don't want to even think about it.
November 23, 2015
This is the first in a series of six Regency romances about the various daughters of a country vicar, similar in style to Georgette Heyer. It's years since I read anything like this, but at one stage I worked my way through pretty much everything Heyer wrote, so when the whole set were on Amazon's Daily Deal, it seemed worth a shot.
This one focuses on the eldest daughter, but there's enough interaction with the second in line, Annabelle, to set the stage for book 2 of the series. All these romances follow a set formula, with no real surprises, the plot (such as it is) is all about keeping the hero and heroine apart by misunderstanding, misadventure or circumstance until the very last page or two. This one is fairly contrived, and some of the early interactions border on farce.
Of the main characters, Sylvester (the hero) has a certain charm, and all the best lines, while Minerva is fairly silly, makes some unbelievably stupid decisions and doesn't really deserve her happy ending. Of the rest, the Marquess and the vicar have some interesting aspects, but almost everybody else is just silly. One would think there would be one or two people of intelligence or just common sense inhabiting Regency London, but apparently not.
For anyone looking for a Heyer substitute, this isn't really it. The author has obviously done her research and splatters about Regency slang and costume details with a heavy hand, but the writing has little of Heyer's intelligence or charm. There are a few laugh out loud moments, however, and things come together quite nicely at the end. Three stars.
This one focuses on the eldest daughter, but there's enough interaction with the second in line, Annabelle, to set the stage for book 2 of the series. All these romances follow a set formula, with no real surprises, the plot (such as it is) is all about keeping the hero and heroine apart by misunderstanding, misadventure or circumstance until the very last page or two. This one is fairly contrived, and some of the early interactions border on farce.
Of the main characters, Sylvester (the hero) has a certain charm, and all the best lines, while Minerva is fairly silly, makes some unbelievably stupid decisions and doesn't really deserve her happy ending. Of the rest, the Marquess and the vicar have some interesting aspects, but almost everybody else is just silly. One would think there would be one or two people of intelligence or just common sense inhabiting Regency London, but apparently not.
For anyone looking for a Heyer substitute, this isn't really it. The author has obviously done her research and splatters about Regency slang and costume details with a heavy hand, but the writing has little of Heyer's intelligence or charm. There are a few laugh out loud moments, however, and things come together quite nicely at the end. Three stars.
August 10, 2016
Rev. Charles Armitage, a country vicar, loves nothing more than hunting and hounds but alas for him, more mundane problems face him when a series of poor farming techniques and bad harvests, a wife who continually seeks "treatments" for her "spasms" combined with his excess of spending to create financial difficulties. The Reverend realizes he can send his daughters to London to marry and chooses his eldest, Minerva, to visit a distant relative for her come-out. Prim, proper Minerva takes an instant dislike to London manners while on a trip to a nearby village with her Papa. She is insulted by so-called ladies and literally runs into a fashionable gentleman, Lord Sylvester Comfrey. When Miranda arrives in London, she discovers her elderly chaperone, Lady Godolphin, is also on the hunt for a husband (#4) or at the very least a gentleman to warm her bed. Miranda runs afoul of London Society with her moralizing, preachy manners and verges on the edge of social ruin. Lord Sylvester takes her under his wing to ensure her success, little dreaming of the results. Meanwhile, Minerva's next youngest sister Annabelle attracts her own suitor whom her family does not approve and her normally indulgent Papa must take a stand.
This is a true comedy of manners romance novel with many hilarous encounters between Minerva and Lord Sylvester and risque malapropisms from Minerva's chaperone. I loved this novel right up until the last few chapters when Minerva makes a decision that is totally out of character and the author goes a little too far in describing what happens. I think I will enjoy this series best of all the Chesney series' I have read so far!
This is a true comedy of manners romance novel with many hilarous encounters between Minerva and Lord Sylvester and risque malapropisms from Minerva's chaperone. I loved this novel right up until the last few chapters when Minerva makes a decision that is totally out of character and the author goes a little too far in describing what happens. I think I will enjoy this series best of all the Chesney series' I have read so far!
May 20, 2017
The heroine was too dumb.
Read
January 7, 20243.5 humorous but predictable. witty at times.
May 13, 2025
absolutely enjoyed this book, a bit of frustration with the characters but it all worked out in the end
October 16, 2007
The first of the "Seven Sisters" series, Minerva was my introduction to author Marian Chesney. This author writes slim Regency-period romances, not as polished or in-depth as Jane Austen or Georgette Heyer, but they are fun. Most are also mysteries. I love these for the information you WON'T find in other Regency novels, the disgusting habits of the Ton that are left out of novels by Austen or Heyer. Fascinating, easy reading, often lots of fun. All Chesney's books are not as well written as Minerva, but it's a great one to start with.
December 23, 2013
I could swear I have read this before, but maybe it was pre-Goodreads. Anyway, I could read it every year and enjoy it just as much. A coruscating gem among Chesney's Regency romances. I'll have to go back and pull out some of the best quotes. As usual her descriptions of characters are unforgettable - "that old rip" Lady Godolphin among others - but there are some striking one-line evocations of landscape also. (And not just of the landscape revealed in romantic encounters...but there is that too!)
December 8, 2024
Hmm. This book is probably better than I'm giving it credit for. However, since I have recently been on a Georgette Heyer binge, I suppose any other Regency novel (obviously barring Austen, who is the best) would fall flat.
Girls ages 11-14 aren't little, wouldn't cry and cling to skirts, and certainly wouldn't sit on strange men's laps. Also, there were far more racy comments than I expected from the description and reviews (once again, I have been spoiled by greatness).
Will I attempt to read the rest of the books in this series? Probably. Will they join the masses in my personal library? I think not.
Girls ages 11-14 aren't little, wouldn't cry and cling to skirts, and certainly wouldn't sit on strange men's laps. Also, there were far more racy comments than I expected from the description and reviews (once again, I have been spoiled by greatness).
Will I attempt to read the rest of the books in this series? Probably. Will they join the masses in my personal library? I think not.
July 15, 2021
I'm surprised the reviews were so mixed. It was a super cute book and the length was perfect for a fun regency romance read. I also love when authors makes super quirky characters (Minerva is a total prude! It made her story funny/endearing in its own way).
October 8, 2022
This was a Regency romance, rather than the cosy crime that I'm used to from MC Beaton. There were some different characters to get used to, but I liked it. It was a nice light read, I read it in one sitting, and it made me chuckle.
April 21, 2025
2.5
Beaton may be good with prose, but this book was so fuckin creepy wtaf. The love interest kept defending her from being assaulted but also assaulted her MULTIPLE TIMES. Also he kept insisting she was too young and emphasising how he viewed her as a child but then threw that all away right at the end to marry her.
The historical accuracy of the world building was actually good though. Also, Minerva was (until the end) a fun take on a regency heroine.
Got this as the first short available book on borrowbox because I needed to listen to something and here we are.
Beaton may be good with prose, but this book was so fuckin creepy wtaf. The love interest kept defending her from being assaulted but also assaulted her MULTIPLE TIMES. Also he kept insisting she was too young and emphasising how he viewed her as a child but then threw that all away right at the end to marry her.
The historical accuracy of the world building was actually good though. Also, Minerva was (until the end) a fun take on a regency heroine.
Got this as the first short available book on borrowbox because I needed to listen to something and here we are.
March 26, 2018
YA BASIC.
October 13, 2018
3.5 out of 5 stars
November 21, 2018
2.85 stars
Displaying 1 - 30 of 248 reviews