The Bachelor List

Matchmaker Duncan Sisters #1

by Jane Feather

In this exhilarating new trilogy from New York Times bestselling author Jane Feather, a trio of spirited sisters secretly run a thriving matchmaking service. But these three good catches of impeccable pedigree have little interest in matrimony themselves—until, one by one, they meet their matches.

Constance Duncan may be the eldest of three sisters, but she has more important things on her mind than finding a husband—for herself, at any rate. Through the Personals services of her popular newspaper, The Mayfair Lady, Constance connects lonely hearts. But her own heart lies in her work, and nothing will distract her from it—until she finds herself irresistibly drawn to a man of disastrously different views. Max Ensor is a politician whose outmoded attitudes outrage her—even as his powerful presence intrigues her. Clearly there is only one thing to do with such an exasperating man: convert him! Little does Constance know that Max has the same plan in mind for her. . . . What follows is a fiercely passionate duel in which two headstrong people discover that, differences or not, sometimes one gender cannot—will not—do without the other.

Genres: Romance, Historical Romance, Historical, Fiction, Historical Fiction, Regency, British Literature

343 pages, Mass Market Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

Jane Feather (born Jane Robotham) is a popular British–American writer of historical romance novels. In 1984 she wrote five contemporary romances under the pseudonym Claudia Bishop. She is a New York Times-bestselling, award–winning writer, and has more than ten million romance novels in print.

Reviews

[⋆Isaᵕ̈ · Rating 2 out of 5]

↬ 2.90 ★

This was... fine. Not terrible, not gripping. Just kind of there.

The pacing was slow, but not in a "builds tension" way — more like nothing really happened. If a book's events can be considered all CAPS, then this one is fully lowercase. Like, italics lowercase. I kept waiting for the plot to kick in or for the romance to feel like it mattered, but both stayed flat. Their values clashed so deeply, I genuinely thought the main characters would call off their "relationship" at some point. There wasn't enough emotional payoff to make their ending feel earned. When they said 'I love you', I said, What? Where?

As for the sisters, they all blended together. No one stood out personality-wise, which was disappointing because the concept had potential. And honestly, the title? "The Bachelor List" made no sense. If there was a list, it barely played a role. Definitely misleading.

The one part that did work for me was the sisters' job. The matchmaking agency, the anonymous letters, the secret magazine — that part was way more engaging than the actual romance plot. Shout out to Amelia and Henry, side characters who I found myself way more invested in than the main couple.

Lastly, the ending was underwhelming. It just... stopped. No big moment, no strong resolution. Not enough to make me want to continue the series.

Glad I finished it, but I wouldn't recommend it unless you're really into low-stakes, slow-burn stories with minimal conflict.

-~-

⋆｡˚❀༘⋆ Pre-read:

Saw this book at the library — it looked good, so I picked it up. Found out that it's actually the first book in a trilogy — a trilogy that follows three sisters!! Having recently finished the Vawdrey Brothers Trilogy, I was so excited to follow siblings in a series~ If this is good, I have another two books of found family, and romance, and sisterhood. I'm so excited ♡♡

[Yara · Rating 2 out of 5]

The Bachelor List includes no actual bachelor list which sets the tone for the novel.

It’s a novel about people who claim to be one thing but it's really just a facade. The main characters Constance, Prudence, and Chastity are supposed to be feminists working towards women’s suffrage but it seems more like a hobby than an actual life avocation.

I didn’t hate the book, the way I hated or disliked other books I gave 2 stars to, but there was a lack of spark to the book. I kept thinking that there was no sense of urgency throughout the story when towards the end we finally got something but even that went out in a whimper, instead of the bang it should have been.

I won’t spoil the scene but the protagonists come to a head when an actual conflict ensues but instead of having it out and discussing their differences the author has the heroine act completely childish and immature by dumping a vase of flowers on top of the hero’s head while he’s trying to argue with her. And while the hero is pretty much in the wrong this action might just reinforce to the hero his misogynistic beliefs about women. But this is ignored and after that, there’s no resolution to their differences of opinions. And this is supposed to be a huge thing.

The entire episode felt unresolved and glossed over. It’s very frustrating because what could have been an interesting story about women seeking their independence at the turn of the 1900s was just a mealy-mouth pseudo-feminist story that really wasn’t what it was advertised to be.

This is my first book by this author and I’m not sure I would read any more of her work.

[Darbella · Rating 3 out of 5]

Constance and Max. With the title being The Bachelor List I was expecting bachelor list. Kwim? This was just an okay read to me I probably should rate it 2.75 stars, but I am not sure if my not liking this one is because I expected the story to be about a bachelor list. Ha! Instead of a bachelor list expect a mentioning of a bachelor list.

[Megan · Rating 2 out of 5]

First of all, there is no bachelor list in this book. There is a brief line in which one of Constance's sister suggests they compile a list of bachelors to help with their matchmaking business, which they don't start until almost halfway through the book, and which is all but completely tangential to the actual romance plot, but they never make such a list. The bachelor list is a lie.

Unfortunately, that sums up a lot of The Bachelor List . Duncan sisters Constance, Prudence, and Chastity are talked up as independent, suffrage-minded women (especially Constance), but they don't always live up to the hype. In light of their stated (and re-stated) values, I found their situation singularly curious. Following the death of their mother (the founder of The Mayfair Lady), their father makes a bunch of bad investments, loses a bunch of money, and lives in a state of denial about their finances, continuing to spend money of things like a motorcar or fine wine, despite the mountain of debt. The Duncan sisters turn their mother's free magazine into a paid one (charging a few cents a copy) and then spin a matchmaking service off of it to try to make ends meet. But the story never satisfyingly answers any kinds of questions like how wide the paying audience for the paper is or how much their matchmaking clients pay them (honestly, except for the pro bono case of Amelia Westcott, they don't seem to do a whole lot to earn a fee), leaving their ventures with this childish, pipe-dream feel. On top of this, they don't do anything to actually moderate their lifestyle. Sure, they jump on their father whenever he wants to do something extravagant, but they continue to wear all the latest, expensive fashions, with barely any mention of re-styling/purposing older garments or fabrics, and they spend an AWFUL lot of time eating out at cafes and restaurants. Beside not redecorating their parlor, I can't think of a single way they are trying to reduce their expenses. Constance tells Max near the end of the book that she and her sisters support themselves independently... but we never see any evidence that such is the case. If so, one has to question why they live at home, eating their father's food, being attended by their father's servants, using their father's horses and carriages, and wearing clothes paid for by their father.

They claim not to care about society's rules (case in point, the way apparently all three of them decided they had to get laid after their mom died... because that totally made sense, and just went out and found willing guys for it). Three adult sisters living together in a small, female establishment is definitely not beyond the realm of the possible for the time. If they are really as radical and independent as they claim, they should reshape their lives and not be dependent on humoring a man who wants to live in a day dream (or woman up and confront him with the truth). Instead, you get the impression that the Duncan sisters enjoying talking the talk of women's lib, but enjoy the privileges of their social position too much to really challenge society.

While there are some interesting moments between Max and Constance, the author chooses to make their relationship much, much too sexual waaaaaay too early in the story. The intimate scenes are off-puttingly crude, and the overall effect is for both characters and story to ignore the basic incompatibility of values between Constance and Max. While they do come to respect each other more as people, they never actually come to agreement on any of the big questions they disagree on-- like are women fundamentally equal to men? There's no compromise, there's no coming around, there's just a basic compatibility problem that they are just ignoring because they want to be together. If Constance becomes an activist in women's suffrage, it WILL affect Max's political career. Does he care about her more than he cares about that? Does she love him more than she wants societal change? The book never bothers to answer these questions. In fact, it feels so unresolved, despite the H/h's engagement, that I was still expecting some kind of eleventh hour drama to occur and force some of these issues to light, when the book abruptly ended.

The title (and its utter irrelevance to the story) is far more revealing than one might think. In every way, The Bachelor List demonstrates that it is far more interested in dropping in marketing-friendly concepts (matchmaking services, suffragettes, sexually-liberated heroines, bachelor lists...) than actually doing anything interesting with them.

[Gerrie · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is my first book by this author. It's terrific in so many ways. The story takes place in 1906 Edwardian England, and is the first in a series about three sisters. Constance, the heroine and eldest sister, is a suffragette. She is mature, fiercely intelligent, and passionate about her cause. Max, the hero, is an up and coming member of Parliament, as well as a member of the inner circle of the Prime Minister. Max, like the PM, is opposed to granting women the vote, and they are looking for ways to defuse the suffragettes. Although Max and Constance have diametrically opposed political views, they are strongly attracted to each other. You can really feel the sparks fly with their verbal jousting and sparring. Their strong physical attraction is also believable as it is part and parcel of their intellectual attraction. Max has a lot of the arrogance and condescension to women that is a reflection of his times and class, but he is flexible enough to recognize an equal in Constance.

These are two mature people with very real conflicts, who can't stay away from each other. The plot and conflict drive the story, as do the really well drawn characters. Constance and her two sisters also publish a magazine, which mixes society gossip with their political message, and is a major part of the story. The relationship between the three sisters is beautifully depicted, and each sister is a very separate and unique individual. The other secondary characters are also fully drawn. The political differences between Max and Constance explode into a serious, believable conflict, not some made up big misunderstanding. For all this, the book would be at least a 4 - if not - 5 star read (especially since I love historical romances with political themes).

So, why only 3 stars? Constance and Max start having sex almost right after they meet. They're not engaged or even in love at that point. And Constance keeps saying she's "in lust" with Max . Even though Constance and her sisters were certainly forward thinkers for their time, they still were upper class women of Edwardian England and should be depicted within the context of their time. Unmarried women of that era did not tend to have recreational sex, the potential consequences were too severe. Even for upper class women. Suddenly, Constance the Edwardian heroine became a 21st Century woman in period costume. And that ruined the wonderful flow of the story for me because it completely jolted me out of the time period. (That said, the author does write very sensuous love scenes, and refers to body parts by their correct names, and doesn't use euphemisms. Hallelujah.).

However, Jane Feather writes well, and tells a great story. I certainly look forward to reading her other books.

[Koki · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jane Feather je známa tým, že vo svojich dielach sa venuje politickým témam. Politike sa nevyhla ani v tejto knihe. Kým vo svojich ostatných príbehoch sa zameriavala skôr na intrigy na kráľovskom dvore alebo riešila vojnové obdobie za Napoleona, v tomto románe sa zameriava na práva žien. Z knihy číha feminizmus, ženská inteligencia a túžba po rovnosti a emancipácii.

Hlavná hrdinka je sufražetka ako bič. Bojuje za práva žien ako levica, i keď v danej dobe to nebolo vôbec jednoduché. Spolu so sestrami sa nielenže zúčastňujú rôznych -nazvime to jednoducho- feministických stretnutí, ale aj vydávajú časopis The Mayfair Lady, v ktorom sa venujú práve politickým témam. Tie však medzi ženami, obzvlášť tými vysoko postavenými nie sú veľmi obľúbené. Prečo by aj boli? Ženy v danej dobe bývali jednoduché, netúžili po vzdelaní (a ak aj túžili, nebolo im to dopriate) a politike nerozumeli. Preto ich ani neláka nič podobné čítať a noviny ani neberú do rúk. 

Sestry sa však nevzdávajú a premýšľajú ako by zaujali.... Zvyšok recenzie nájdete tu: http://kokinakniznica.blogspot.sk/201...

[Julie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I went on a Jane Feather reading kick at one point and now I have a hard time remembering which ones I read. I remember liking them, but I also remember that after a few books, they're pretty much the same book but with different characters - and in the case of the series, the characters aren't even significantly different. Therefore, they aren't memorable enough to remember details. But I did read them and like them. I'd say if you're looking for a romance to read by the pool or on the beach, the Jane Feather books will do nicely. You won't be blown away, but you won't be disappointed, either.

[Debby *BabyDee* · Rating 3 out of 5]

First Jane Feather read and i thought it was just okay. It did not thrill me although it did have its moements in the story. There was not bachelor list and some characters just irritated me. I thought it could have been better...where I just don't know. I modestly gave this a 2.5 rounded to 3 Stars.

Just an okay read in this series. Will I read the next in the series..not sure at this point but maybe later in the year.

3-Stars

[Rain Rtree · Rating 1 out of 5]

membosankan.. hahaha
bener-bener gag kuat baca

masa 3 bersaudara cewe, cantik-cantik, semuanya memutuskan untuk menghilangkan keperawanannya di usia muda...
dan yes, di critanya semua udh gag virgin,,
wkwkwk

give up smpe halaman 187, langsung tidur

[EB · Rating 1 out of 5]

I don't even think I hated this book, I just didn't fucking care. Neither party is particularly likable or loathsome. But it's the most ill-conceived and poorly thoughtout coupling I've read in a while. Not to mention there's zero spark between them.

[Jane · Rating 2 out of 5]

There's something about this novel that I enjoyed immensely, but I fear that there were also parts that didn't quite do it for me, and therefore, in the end, I must admit that it falls very nicely right in the middle of like and don't like.

I really liked the idea of the book as I usually don't read books from the beginning of the 20th century, let alone books about suffragette movement. Although I usually stray far and wide from talks about politics, I didn't really mind it this time and actually found myself enjoying it quite a lot.

What I really couldn't get behind was the romance and I'm quite sad about it because the whole point of the book was a good love story, was it not? I kind of liked Constance and Max together, but at the same time I couldn't really see what they saw in each other nor did I scream from joy when they first decided to jump between the sheets. I would've preferred if it had happened later on - partly because I think that would've felt more true to the time period and partly, okay, mostly, because I am a sucker for slow burn and slow burn does not equate two people between the sheets after a few weeks of an acquaintance.

The other thing that I seem to object in Feather's novels is her story telling. Mind you, I've only read two books by her (this one included), but I don't fancy the way POV-s seem to jump randomly from one character to the next and sometimes includes even some minor characters.

[Christine (KizzieReads) · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed the writing. There were some instances where I cringed, but a lot where I laughed. I did like that certain characters agree to disagree on some points, and agree that everyone is allowed their own opinions. There is a lot about women's suffrage in this, which is what the arguments are about, mainly. Some characters are for it, some are not.

[Marian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Constance Duncan may be the eldest of three sisters, but she has more important things on her mind than finding a husband--for herself, at any rate. Through the Personals services of her popular newspaper, The Mayfair Lady, Constance connects lonely hearts. But her own heart lies in her work, and nothing will distract her from it--until she finds herself irresistibly drawn to a man of disastrously different views. Max Ensor is a politician whose out-moded attitudes outrage her--even as his powerful presence intrigues her. Clearly there is only one thing to do with such an exasperating man: convert him! Little does Constance know that Max has the same plan in mind for her...What follows is a fiercely passionate duel in which two headstrong people discover that, differences or not, sometimes one gender cannot--will not--do without the other.


This is the first of a trilogy set in around 1904 London. You've got the newfangled motor vehicles and gaslights and women's suffragette. A lot of humor here.

[Titis Wardhana · Rating 3 out of 5]

Jadi ceritanya ada 3 bersaudara Constance, Prudence, Chastity yang bikin koran gosip kalangan atas gitu. Tapi isinya juga ada politik, kebetulan mereka bertiga ini pendukung supaya wanita diberi hak pilih. Terus, mereka ketemu Max, anggota parlemen yang anti sama kesetaraan hak antara pria dan wanita. Meskipun begitu, hubungan Max sama Constance jadi deket meskipun hanya sebatas hubungan fisik hahaha (you know lah. Berantem terus tapi akhirnya ya balik2 juga.

gw baru nyadar kalo baca buku ini dua kali, dulu pas review, skr pas ngedit :D

[Hero · Rating 1 out of 5]

Preachy. I'm a big time feminist. Nonetheless, I don't really want that to be the focus of a romance novel. In this book the author pits a suffragette against a man-of-his-times manly man. The result is that they spend a lot of time having distinctly unromantic arguments about politics. The heroine finds the hero's views repugnant and after that, it is hard for the reader to consider him much of a prize. Eventually I found that I didn't like either of them and couldn't care less whether they got together.

[Mahareni Sukadi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Belum 100 halaman udah nyerah euy! Ternyata critanya emank gak menarik kayak sinopsisnya. Yeaaaahhh...ato mungkin daku yg gak berselera ama HR yg ada politik2nya ato emansipasi wanita, dan lain lain, dan lain lain.

Kok malah bagusan Widow's Kiss ya daripada buku ini?

[Shelly · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5. This book moved a little slow for me. It didn't help that I really didn't care for either of the main characters. They both were hypocrites. Here's hoping the next book in the series will be better.

[Lauren · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Bachelor List
4 Stars

Constance Duncan and her sisters, Prudence and Chastity, have found an original way to circumvent their widowed father's spendthrift ways - The Mayfair Lady a newspaper offering an advice column, a lonely hearts section, and a variety of articles on women's suffrage. Unfortunately, the paper has caught the eye of Max Ensor, a newly elected MP whose antiquated views of women are the antithesis of everything Constance believes in. By all rights, she should despise Max, so why can't she forget the exasperating man?

While the titular bachelor list is missing from this book, it is; nevertheless, an enjoyable opposites attract romance.

Jane Feather's writing is excellent in terms of period-appropriate diction and style. Moreover, the information on the early days of the suffragette movement forms a compelling backdrop to Constance and Max's adversarial relationship. The inclusion of historical figures, such as Emeline Pankhurst and her militant daughter, Christobel, as well as Prime Minister Henry Campbell-Bannerman and Chancelor H.H. Asquith, adds authenticity to the storyline.

Constance is a breath of fresh air. She is an independent, forthright, and experienced heroine, which is rare in historical romance, but suits the changing perceptions, attitudes, and roles of women in the Edwardian era.

It is a testament to Feather's skillful characterization that Max is an appealing hero despite his pomposity, condescension, and egregious views concerning women. Like Constance, I found myself liking him against my better judgment.

Max and Constance have excellent chemistry, and their battle of wills is very entertaining, especially Constance's attempts at bringing Max down a peg or two (even though she is not always successful). The only problem is that their conflict is glossed over too easily - They forgive and forget, and decide to ignore their political differences rather than coming to a real understanding or acceptance of each other., which is unfortunate.

Overall, The Bachelor List, sans an actual list, is an engaging story with compelling and original characters. I look forward to reading Prudence's book next.

[Enirehtak Melas · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was so original. Reading about the Duncan sisters was a definitely one of a kind experience when it comes to historical romances. Although this is set in the Victoria era, is just near the end and almost to the beginning of the Edwardian period. Soon to follow is the Modern Era. This explains a lot when considering the evolved attitudes and independent nature of the Duncan sisters. The financial independence, the fight for educated women, a woman's suffrage, and freedom within their sexuality made all for a compelling read.

I fought to like Max Ensor because he was very much a product of the mentality that women are inferior to men. However, Constance soon proved to be a force that he had to reckon with. I liked that they, the sisters, all challenged his archaic sensibilities on the feminine sex. I absolutely loved how Constance told him that the sisters all agree to lose their virginities prior to marriage. That was bold! I loved it. A welcome change.

Constance was not this naive girl who was afraid of her own sexuality. She is near 30 and is not ashamed to admit her sexual experiences nor to challenge the idea that women should be kept home "barefoot and pregnant" while the men pursue the responsibilities of the outside world.

I read this in two days and already am devouring the second book (Prudence's).

[Sophie Garthoff · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is the most unsatisfying and frustrating thing I have ever had the displeasure of reading.

It had a chance to be enjoyable. The premise is quaint but not unsalvageable. For what it is, a ten-cent piece of grocery store checkout line mind-numbing entertainment, the premise is actually interesting. But there is no significant character growth or development throughout this entire book. You read it and you think, this protagonist who has been made out to be a strong, principled woman fighting for her rights, surely won’t throw all she cares about to the wind simply because she is horny! But that is EXACTLY what she does. If even for one moment the main male love interest conceded that women were beings deserving of basic human respect, I might have loved it. It would have made sense. It would have been predictable and annoying, but yes! It would have had an actual resolution other than “we can agree to disagree about women’s rights and still get married.” Literally so disappointing.

[Iznaerf · Rating 3 out of 5]

Light and fluffy romp, with a backdrop of very serious issues.

Pro:
- Fun Setting, Edwardian Times, lots of "modern" issues and problems in a historical setting
- Fun dialogue, the sisters banter is lovely, love it how they manage their father.
- The heroine and her sisters are unusual, in that they have strong political convictions, but they are not primarily defined by them. Not every Suffragette was a through and through serious lady with no sense of humour or other interests.

Con:
- The sex scenes did not seem plausible. While the heroine is a "modern woman" I do not think she should be this free to have sex.
- The book has a bad name: The bachelor list is such a minor plot point, it is misleading.

[Eliška Kolorédyová · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sestry Duncanové pokračujú v šľapajách svojej matky a bojujú za práva žien. Constance sa zaľúbi do muža, ktorý má ale úplne odlišné predstavy o postavení mužov a žien v spoločnosti. Bola som zvedavá, kto upustí od svojich ideálov, a či sa vôbec dá dojsť k nejakému kompromisu.
Kniha bola útlučká, prečítaná rýchlo a bola presne tým, čo som od nej očakávala, príjemnou oddychovkou. Všetky 3 sestry mi boli veľmi sympatické a páčilo sa mi ich odhodlanie. V našej dnešnej spoločnosti si neviem, ani nechcem predstaviť, že by som bola v podobnom postavení - nemať anilen volebné právo. Koniec mi prišiel taký dosť narýchlo spravený, zaujímalo ma práve to, ako spolu dokážu fungovať, ale tak snáď sa o nich dočítam aj v ďalších častiach.

[Nancy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having accidentally read #2 in the series, I was a bit out of order. I'd already developed a fondness for the Duncan sisters, especially Prudence, the heroine of #2. This is Constance's story. She is the older Duncan sister whose fiance had died in battle. She is a suffragette like their late mother. Her romance with Max, a member of Parliament with opposite views, is interesting, but not as compelling as Prudence's story. I look forward to reading #3, Chastity's story soon.
My biggest question after reading is: "What Bachelor List?" Go Between, the Duncan sister's new matchmaking service, makes a couple of matches but I don't recall a list.

[Miriamgreen · Rating 3 out of 5]

For the details, the fashions, the clubs, the social agitation for women's suffrage as background, it was a sound plot. For Con and Max a very satisfying relationship with no shyness. Max at 40 has found a fixed feminist in Constance, at 28, bold and independent. She makes the first invitation which Max eagerly takes up. Then it is a chemistry experiment with an explosive and funny climax. They are a perfect couple and this was all I was interested in. The rest was background noise. Had already read the second book of the series which made small mention of Con and Max on their honeymoon. It passed the time away from our fraught reality just now. no complaints.

[Gail R · Rating 5 out of 5]

Three lively sisters invite you into their non-traditional views and subterfuge as they covertly support themselves and the English suffrage movement. Great characterization, the heroine and hero are wonderfully entertaining but flawed, but still manage to be believable. Plus a pleasantly paced plot that had just the right amount of details to not become tedious moved the story along well. I'm looking forward to seeing what happens next with the other sisters' love stories.

[Patti Irwin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reread. A different historical era from most the romances I read. After the Boer war but before WWI. The times there were a-changing with women advocating for those changes. So rather being an anachronism of feminism, these women as contemporaries of the Pankhursts really for their time and place.

[Alyse · Rating 5 out of 5]

This historical romance trilogy is about the formable and spirited Duncan sisters, set during the time of the women’s suffragist movement. They secretly run their own magazine and matchmatching service and find unexpected husbands along the way. Jane Feather was fantastic with these. I loved the characters and found the books funny and enjoyable.

[Jeanne (love2cook) · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good historical story of the three Duncan sisters. This story concentrates on Constance the oldest of the sisters. She has a passion for women's rights and the man, Max Ensor, she chooses to reform to her way of thinking does not. Will it become a problem for them as they fall in love with each other? A good read.

[Katie Chapman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great

Jane Feather takes readers on a journey to whatever period the story is set. Her characters are compelling and the story is imbued with the politics of the day. Readers come away with a greater knowledge of life in that era. Loved it.

[David Richey · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Lovely Read

The Duncan sisters are a delectable trio of red heads who want women to have the right to vote. Constance is the oldest and captures the attention of the newest member of Parliament.