Andrea's blood ran hot. Her eyes sparked fire. The cheek of David Newbury, Duke of Kensington. He began by inspecting Chloe as if she were a piece of goods, and ended by proposing - to Andrea!
Her own father, Lord Wycliff, had been a womanizer. Her twin brother was making a name as a rake. Andrea's mind was set on seeing her naive young stepsister married to the man who truly loved her. Now, as the Duke redoubled his efforts to win Chloe's affections, the girl was succumbing to his compelling charm. But Andrea was determined to outwit David Newbury. Who knew better than she that marriage was a trap for the unwary, that love was dangerous - and blind!
Andrea and Andrew (Andy and Drew) are twins and the best of friends and complete opposites. They reflect the best/worst sides of each other and are each other's harshest critics. When Drew's friend David Newbury, Duke of Kensington lets it be known he's on the hunt for a wife, Drew suggests his younger half-sister Chloe. Chloe is a sweet innocent and Andrea is incensed that her brother would suggest such a thing. That would be the very situation their lovely stepmother, Lady Jane, found herself in when she married the twins' father. Like David, their father was a well-known rake and Lady Jane was humiliated and retired from society. Andrea will die before she sees that happen to her sweet little sister. Chloe also has growing feelings for their neighbor, Jonathan, who is in love with her. When Andrew returns to the army of Occupation and David comes to visit, sparks fly. Chloe is a lovely girl but downright dull compared to her sister who makes David's blood boil in more way than one. He sets out on a scheme to make his little witch marry him - with possible disastrous consequences.
This story was written in the vein of Georgette Heyer. There's a lot of period slang and historic detail. However, the author was not as meticulous and the editor was blind. (is the stepmother's name Ladyjane or Lady Jane and who calls their much loved stepmother Lady anything?) My quibbles with the accuracy are minor: Unmarried ladies and gentlemen did not correspond and could not be friends; a lady who participated in a shooting contest would be beyond the pale and no Duke would ever ask a girl to call him by his first name. That being said, the story wasn't that bad. Andrea's rants got tiring and repetitive after awhile, especially once David proved time and again he has reformed. I wanted to yell at her to shut up. At the same time, I sympathized with her and saw my own temper staring back at me. I know I would act the same way in the same situation. David's pursuit of Andrea also got on my nerves. It went on too long and he was too persistent. There's such a thing as NO meaning no, even in the Regency era.
The characters are OK but none truly memorable. Andrea is firebrand and tomboy. She's a modern woman in a 19th century setting. David, once he reforms, is also hot tempered at times and stubborn to a fault. Even though Andrea did truly love him, I think he rushed things too much and should have SHOWN her what a nice guy he is. Instead he went around courting her sister and arguing with her. It was badly done. Andrew is downright annoying and Chloe is a lovely widgeon, much like Charis in Georgette Heyer's Frederica. Some of the secondary characters had potential, especially David's foppish cousin who came straight out of the Heyer book of best friends.
The book isn't worth tracking down but if you come across it for free, then it's worth checking out if you like couples who fight all the time.