I went into this book knowing it was going to be dumb and get on my nerves, but also that I couldn’t not read it.
And guess what folks?
It was somehow worse.
Because a book can be dumb and not wonderfully written, yet still FUN. This was not that book. It lacked the charisma, the skill and the verve.
All historical fiction, and historical romance in particular, are set in an imagined past, for better and often for worse. But most decent authors attempt to do something interesting with that setting, and try to at least engage in the historicity of the period they have selected.
No such effort is made here. Why bother to write this if you aren’t going to actually engage with some more coherently imagined past? For one having everyone in 1812 harping on about the American revolutionary war when the war of 1812 is literally happening or in the offing is a truly bonkers and lazy choice.
Lizzy is a 90s girl power heroine without the girl power or the charisma. She doesn’t read convincingly as a regency heroine, or even a regency underdeveloped side character. Her motives are nonsensical, her wider context is ludicrous and her reactions are astoundingly childish.
Tucker is not compelling or fully realised in the slightest, there could be a particularly interesting look on how an American goalie had to navigate regency period england, if the author had any creativity and ambition. Alas. He was wildly incurious and inconsistent, a modern mouthpiece to go oh wow isn’t it weird how the past and the present are so different and so the same. It was wearying.
Lizzy’s family itself was a particularly sour note, unconvincing stock villainy for the step father and brother, rah-rah social climbing weaponised femininity for the mama.
It beggars belief that someone with seemingly no interest in the regency period, good romance book practices or even hockey would bother to write a book that featured all three. It is like the author threw in everything she had read on buzzfeed about 19th century English history, two doll-like characters with less personality than a thimble, eighteen tired cliches and fanculture around Jane Austen and then shook it up.
The romance itself was impressively lacklustre and rote, with little effort put into to developing or selling the relationship. It is also, to fully be a bitch, so funny to have these long impassioned speeches where the male love interest is convincing the main character that she is something special when she has shown zero personality to this point.
Some other gripes that I cannot bear to put into full paragraphs include:
- faux regency language like nails against a chalkboard
- Jane Austen I’m so sorry girl you deserved so much better. Not only did she have you giving an actual shovel talk (???????) but let some hockey player from Texas title pride and prejudice????
- Aforementioned bad sense of history
- lack of ambition — girl how did she get a PASSPORT
- A woman of her class would speak French enough to recognise what a dentist likely was!!!
- you have to CONVINCE me why a woman of her class would aspire to work!! None of her male relatives would have modelled that for her.
- her favourite food wouldn’t be pineapple???
- pocket rocket??? As a nickname??? made me so!!! 🔪🔪🔪
This was a bad book do not read it.