This was not just a take on the “lost in a snowstorm near Pemberley” trope, and the plot was singular, with lots of excellent new scenes and twists. What was not so fantastic was the plethora of non-Regency words and phrases and Regency errors that pulled the reader out of the feel of the story—this by a writer who claims to want to live the Regency day by day!
I don’t write a synopsis or much in the way of subjective analysis of the book, instead, I write a technical review that pinpoints issues that niggle at the reader and causes them to drop stars, even when other reviewers don’t mention these points.
- This book had a good plot whose start was angsty and adventuresome, going into a slower main story that had a few short and minor dramatic moments, but mostly was low angst. An unresolved subplot left readers hanging to some extent, but the main story arc was completed.
- After the fast-paced opening, the pace was average and even slow at times where not a great deal of forward action was taking place and some redundancies were seen.
- Point of view was third person multiple narrator with head-hopping. Head-hopping should be avoided in novels so readers are not required to reread to understand whose POV they are reading when changes occur. One POV per scene with clear marking of POV changes is standard in the industry. One point of view issue that’s annoying is that the POV character cannot she herself blush.
- The author used a combination of showing and telling in her writing. More showing would improve the reading experience. “Bingley gave Jane a gesture of impatience.”: What does that gesture look like? I was baffled, as I have no idea. Much like spoon-feeding, this sentence is an example of poor telling.
- The author had a penchant for larger-than-life language, with overuse of complex words, including eight difficult words that this reader had no ability to discern in context and had to look up and would never again have a need to know. Please, there’s no need to impress the reader with big words. Instead, impress them with correct words: 24 non-Regency words and phrases (4x the normal JAFF novel) and eight bad word use or wrong word use situations were used by this writer. In addition, on the more normal scale, there were two misspellings, five contractions, and an Americanism by this British writer.
- The author had multiple uses of sentence fragments where they did not make sense as an artistic style. In other words, they were a mistake and read as an awkward situation.
- In the Regency, there were periods on words such as Mrs., where the author used the modern convention with no periods. In addition, there was a situation of missing closing quotes that could cause confusion for readers. No other punctuation errors were seen.
- Regency errors included calling Lady Catherine “Aunt” or “his aunt Catherine” instead of “Lady Catherine;” there was no such thing as a permission for courtship, rather, the gentleman called and showed his preference until he was ready to propose; only four adults fit in a carriage; there was no such thing as a modern day wheelchair where the user could push themselves—Bath chairs had to be pushed by another person; it is unlikely that the sound of a log settling in the hearth would have made a noise since the fireplace would have been coal burning; and the introductions were backwards in terms of precedence for Jane and Mrs. Gardiner to Lady Catherine.
- Scene setting was exceptional in places, for example, in the opening scene, in the orangerie or making snowmen, where sounds, smells, sensations, etc. enhance the reading experience. In other places they could have been improved to this level, e.g, when Caroline falls.
- I enjoyed the choices made by the author in terms of which of the Austen character traits to focus on when deciding how to create her version of the canon characters, and the new characters were fleshed out appropriately for their roles in the book.
- The pace for the development of the romance was realistic and believable, and the dramatic tension created within some of the situations to add angst was well done since it added interest to the main romantic match without seeming contrived.
- The cover reminds me of scrapbooking gone haywire: there’s too much going on and nowhere for the eye to focus, so the brain goes into overdrive or shuts down. This is par for the course for the amateur arts and crafts person, but a big no-no for a cover you want to grab readers with. At one glance, there’s nothing that says “Buy me.” It’s just noise. The author had good intentions in her attempt to capture the whole book in the cover, but overdid it with too many images. Readers will pass it by and go to the simple, bold cover, even though that other cover might be trite and the style ubiquitous.
I enjoy Joana Starnes’s stories, but between books, I forget that I don’t enjoy the glitches of her prose and buy the next one, then I’m disappointed again. Ouch. I wish she’d get a good editor who would help her correct her errors and rein in her verbosity in terms of the uninteresting big words. If I recall correctly, she’s currently relying on beta readers, most of whom are well intentioned and may even be well experienced, but they’re better at an attaboy response than real concrit. The opening scenes of this book were truly genius—I could gush for days on the merits of the heart-stopping madness so well described. This setup was far and above better than just a stalled carriage in a snowbank, which is what one expects from the title, based on all those other stories. She should try to write an action/adventure novel based on that scene alone! Yet there were slow spots in the book where the action was near nonexistent and the story dragged a little. Cutting some repeats of the reporting of the drama would have tightened things up—another reason for a good editor. Even so, this was an exceptional book overall, and I’d still recommend it to other JAFF readers.
Disclaimer: I’m a JAFF writer, and some might say that this review is a conflict of interest. However, I was a reader first, and my reviews are honest and impartial. I write them for the benefit of both the reader and the author.