In Monaco, 1937, life is ideal. Palm trees sway, celebrities shine, and the Grand Prix thrills spectators from around the world. With war on the continental horizon, billionaire auto tycoon, Jacques Tourangeau, looks to Dash Bradford, a visiting American businessman, to help him protect the regal principality's way of life. Hesitant to get involved, the young Bradford is drawn in irreversibly when he saves the life of Tourangeau's beautiful daughter, Margaux. The new couple seems destined for what the press increasingly lauds as the 'perfect romance,' but when Tourangeau Auto begins to compete with the dominant Germans, unexpected challenges threaten the happy ideal.
In his debut novel, seasoned essayist Eric Robert Morse brings to life the warm allure of Monaco and the explosive world of golden-age auto racing through the eyes of a young dreamer striving for success against all odds. In an age of quick fixes and strained relationships, Morse offers a story of permanence and justice to show us that love, redemption, and even perfection are not only still possible but, ultimately, necessary for the good life.
Eric Robert Morse is an entrepreneur and writer of several books, which include a political commentary on the Trump years (Tearing at the Seams) a critique on Behavioral Economics (Psychonomics), a theory of political economy (Juggernaut), an history of Feminism (The Economic Theory of Sex), a psychology of storytelling (The 90-Minute Effect), and two novels (Monaco and Ricky Wills It).
A beautiful piece that defies modernity with a subtle character study and a sincere longing for decorum and piety. There are those who hate this kind of book, but not because it is terrible in any way, they hate it because it is so good. Read it if you don't mind striving for something greater.
A novel with a social message that bravely defies convential wisdom and modern culture. In that sense like Ann Rand but better written. Very interesting insights into the nature and purpose of love and ideals. Gave it 4 rather than 5 stars only because:
1) Many of the characters are one dimensional (to best clarify the message?).
2) I could not follow the author's logic in parts of his outright philosophical discourses, although I can't say for sure if that is becuase they are incoherant, or above my head.