That’s it, I’m done. I think if I were to be really fair, I would give "Welcome to Temptation" a 2-star rating. But I’m really upset at this book and I so wanted to like it that there is just no way I’m doing that. This gets a one-star rating. And after writing this review and coming back to it, I think I was always correct in giving it a one-star rating.
Sometimes it is really fun to ‘hate’ on a book, just like it can be fun to watch a bad movie. Read my review of "An English Bride in Scotland" to see what I mean. I gave that book a 1-star review and it infuriated me at times, but it was SO over-the-top bad that it felt a little more forgivable than "Welcome to Temptation". Maybe the reason I was so disappointed is because the first book of Crusies' that I read I had liked so much that every other book of hers that I read is an even greater disappointment. Now even "Charlie All Night" feels spoiled to me. Could it even have been as good as I remember it being if everything of Crusie’s that I have read since has been a massive letdown?
There are a lot of things that sort of rubbed me the wrong way in Crusie’s other books that I cannot ignore anymore. The casual misogyny is upsetting. I mean, I’m not reading a 70s or 80s romance where you expect a few eyebrow-raising moments of a woman being belittled, or a man taking over and telling her what to do with her life. But for that to happen in a book published in 2000? Please, no. Let’s be better than that. I read lots of other books written within that same era that aren't the same as how Crusie writes the relationship dynamics between men and women.
I started highlighting some of the parts of the book that bothered me the most and I ended up with, well, a lot. There are also parts that I liked, of course, don’t get me wrong. But by the time I’m a quarter of the way through the book, it becomes a lot harder to forgive what I did not enjoy or appreciate in "Welcome to Temptation" and that only things I highlighted were everything I did not enjoy.
I mentioned the casual misogyny earlier, as well as in my review of Crusie's "The Cinderella Deal". I could not immediately name it, or put a finger on it, but the men in Crusie’s books definitely belittle women. It is not just a character flaw in one or two of them, it is a consistent thing, which probably points to beliefs that Crusie as the author holds about women in general. There is never something ti overcome in how little they trust women to "do their own thing" because Crusie sees nothing wrong with it.
This is a trite thing, but I just realized that the men in Crusie's books always have a much better and more secure job than the women, which sort of forces the women to depend on them and ties them together. That occurs in this book, as well as "The Cinderella Deal". Also, in "Welcome to Temptation", there is an attempt to force a relationship between Phineas and Rachel. The age difference between them? 16 years; he’s 36 and she’s 20 years old. Rachel’s mother talks about making sure that Phin coached Rachel's Little League team so that he falls in love with her. It’s incredibly creepy and I didn’t enjoy it at all-not even as a joke. I don't understand, at all, how I am supposed to feel about a an almost 30 year old man coaching a 12 year old girl's baseball team in order to consider he a viable romantic candidate. I am disgusted that Crusie even wrote that in at all.
Phin is at times understanding of his mother’s suffocating love and her attempts to not lose him as her only son with a family name to carry. He is also downright incredibly rude to her. I don't care what you do Phin: you can move out if you do not want your mother intruding in your private business so much but she is literally the person who is spending hours with your daughter when you are at work. She is who takes care of her granddaughter all the time while you work one job, which is basically the most respected in town, which you also hate. How about a little respect and appreciation for the fact that she is the person you depend on? His mother has to tell him that his daughter is taking piano lessons because he doesn’t know. And, what, I am supposed to root for this guy? Screw that.
I hated Phin. He bullied Sophie in an attempt to get her out of her shell and to disenfranchise her from family who are using her. Yes, he was right, but Sophie needed to do things on her own terms, not to be LITERALLY bullied into it. "Sophie, you are being taken advantage of by your family so let me also yell at you and force you to grow up. See, why won't you thank me :(".
A bad message, in my opinion. Also, Amy, Sophie’s sister, can literally die. I despised her even more than Phineas. She is a 26 year old who needs to start acting her age. She interferes with her sister’s love life, calls Sophie's emotionally distant boyfriend to town (who she earlier told Sophie that she needs to get away from! Are you insane?) because she feels threatened by Phin and Sophie being together. The amount of plot holes is ridiculous — again, I have highlights, but I’m going to give up. Even ragging on this book isn’t fun. Just don’t read it.
I was surprised by the kid in "Welcome to Temptation". I usually don’t like children in romance novels because they are really badly written and too annoying, but Dillie in this book was not as bad as I would have expected. Yes she’s precocious and yes she immediately wants Sophie to be her mother after meeting her twice.. But Dillie wasn’t a deal breaker. It was everything else around this book. I even liked Sophie’s ending, except the part where Phin exists as a part of it, I guess.
Well, Crusie, this is where you and I part ways. I have "Bet Me" by the same author checked out too but I will be returning it because I may be a glutton for punishment but even I have a limit.