Retro Reads - Romance discussion

Hi, Retro Readers!

I can’t believe it’s already July! A big thanks to those of you who voted for our July Retro Read. It was between The Fatal Crown by Ellen Jones and The Miracle at St. Bruno’s by Philippa Carr. The results are in and you have picked . . .


The Fatal Crown!

Enjoy the passion and seething political intrigue of 12th-century Europe in the first book in the Queens of Love and War series. Two royal heirs must choose between their love for each other and their quest for power, as they vie for the most glittering, treacherous prize of all: the English throne.

Let’s jump right in with some questions to think about as you read. First of all, for those of you who voted for The Fatal Crown as this month’s read: What made you choose this title?

What is your first impression of 12th-century Europe, as told through The Fatal Crown? Does it match the ideas you had before reading this novel?

With May’s pick, No Quarter Asked by Janet Dailey, quite a few of you were torn regarding Cord, the rancher—Ionia liked Cord from the very beginning, while Lila and Julie found him to be an arrogant jerk. How do you feel about Stephen in The Fatal Crown? Do you trust him and his feelings for Maud?

I can’t wait to hear what you all think. Stay tuned for more discussions.

-- Whitney

I just finished The Fatal Crown. It was OK. I can't decide about the romance in this one. Knowing a little about the real life Empress Matilda, her story was frustrating. I thought the affair was quite passionate but there was a lot going on around them and the style in which the intimate scenes were written in reflected the time period the book was originally published in. ( early 1990's) I don't know what you would call it ... flowery?


The book was bit long which is why I am just now getting my review posted. LOL. It lost my interest a few times and I struggled to stay focused. I LOVE historical romance, but I had it in my head this was like historical fiction which I also love, but there is a definite difference between the two.
Either way I gave the book a 3 star rating and you can find it on August 3rd at http://www.cluereview.blogspot.com

Hello again, Retro Readers!

Julie, thank you so much for your thoughts! They actually relate very closely to the questions I was planning on asking, so thanks for getting the discussion started!

What do the rest of you think of The Fatal Crown so far?

There is no historical record of Maud and Stephen’s love for each other, but their relationship has been rumored. Do you find their romance to be believable in a historical context? What about the story and events that take place? Does the tone of the novel feel historically accurate? How does The Fatal Crown compare to other historical novels you have read?

Feel free to continue discussing, even if you haven’t finished the novel. I can’t wait to hear your thoughts!

-- Whitney

Actually, I have read Elizabeth Chadwick's "The Lady of the English" which also tells the story of Matilda/Maude. That novel I believe is more historically accurate.
Despite rumors about an affair with Stephen I don't know if that is really plausible. However, who could blame the poor woman if she did? A much older husband, then a much younger husband, who was a jerk by all accounts, so if she did have an affair it would be understandable. For me I would have to place this one in the Historical romance genre more so than historical fiction. There were way too many liberties taken with the historical facts, IMO. Usually historical fiction hits closer the truth.

I FINALLY finished (busy summer) and posted my review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

I chose this book because I was curious about the time period. It's so far in the past, it's entirely foreign to me, and to have it brought to life is a treat. I was familiar with Maud and Stephen's fight for the crown because I read Ken Follet's The Pillars of the Earth ages ago, so I was curious about these figures.

Without caring too much about the accuracy, I really enjoyed this book. And I enjoyed Stephen. I think he would do what he had to for his family and his ambition, regardless of his true feelings. I suppose it's realistic that he and Maud had some kind of fling at some point, given the way things could be at court, but I doubt it would have gone as far as it did in this book. So I guess I would have to agree with Julie that it's closer to historical romance than historical fiction, given that the whole premise, the romance, is in doubt. Even though as a romance it's definitely lacking an HEA.

(By the way, thanks for that recommendation, Julie. I think I'll check it out.)

The tone often didn't feel accurate to me -- in my review I mention that the frequent use of "totally" took me out of it, and there were other similar words that jarred me. Very 90s. Also, the shopping bugged me. Ugh. But I felt that I learned some stuff that was accurate, and in an enjoyable way, so I think the book accomplished something for me.

Lila

I love novels about royals. I also google a lot while reading them. I found most of the book to be accurate enough, but Maud and Stephen's relationship didn't ring true to me.

I think it is more than likely that they had a fling, given the fact that Stephen really got around with the ladies, but I don't think it was a grand passion.

I found the book to slip between a romance and a work of historical fiction not really knowing which way it wanted to go. I think if she really wanted this book to be a romance, she might have stopped at the birth of Henry.

Here's my review: http://achickwhoreads.blogspot.com/20...