by a lukewarm review in a trade publication. A Little Bit Wild was a delight to read and I'm still not sure what prompted the negative comments about anachronisms, characterisation and plot holes. I see from the reviews here on Goodreads that a few readers exhibited similar negative reactions. I found the idea of a cheeky, vivacious heroine with a supremely healthy interest in sex to be a refreshing change from the demure and fragile ingenues who sigh, whimper and swoon their way through so many historical romances. Perhaps a heroine who enjoys staring at, and then groping, mens' butts and thighs is too 'modern' for fans of the genre. As for plot holes, I didn't notice any, but maybe I was ripping through this delightful yarn so quickly that I zipped over any cracks in the narrative without noticing. Marissa is a truly memorably heroine and her spiky relationship with the reluctant Jude crackled with high-voltage electricity. I'm not a big Historical Romance fan. No...that's not true. I don't read Historical Romance at all. At least not until I read A Little Bit Wild. I can't say that I'll go buy every HR book on the shelf, because -- well, yeah- I'm still not sure that I like the genre in general. However, I do love Dahl's writing regardless of genre. As I've said before, not many authors can write cross genre and me like every book. She can and does. I love that the women in Dahl's books