Review: 2 1/2 stars
Rating: 2 out of 5
Date: 06 17, 2014
At the outset, I will say that the premise is solid: the stuffed-shirt, OCD-prone Montford falls for the rebellious, forward-thinking independent Astrid who is as opposite to him in temperament as possible. Add in the obligatory cast of secondary characters, such as the duke's rakish friends and Astrid's whacky eccentric family. Put the duke in the country in an environment where has no idea what he is doing. Watch the resulting fireworks and humorous situations explode.Well, the premise just was not executed all that well.  Astrid is 26 and supposedly has been running the family and the family business  since the age of 14.  Yet she acts like a spoiled selfish brat ALL THE TIME. Further, her dialogue is meant to show that she is independent etc. Instead, it is totally unrealistic for even the most forward-looking lady of her times. Her incessant  swearing and talking with the hired help about naughty limericks is ridiculous. There are NUMEROUS instances of over-the-top behavior and speech that no lady would have engaged in. It just became annoying because it was so over-the-top and unrealistic. I can understand and appreciate independent, but the h was simply vulgar and ill-mannered. Which is not the same thing as forward-thinking.The author had the same over-the-top can't-be-reigned in tendencies with the plot, as well as with a lot of the humorous asides and dialogue. Sometimes she really scored and there were truly funny moments. But many of the attempts at humor failed because they were too heavy-handed and went on forever.I actually liked the character of the duke and thought he was well done. Most of the rest of the characters were so-so. And I found myself more often than not wanting to smack Astrid.I really was annoyed by the many times the author mis-used words, such as not knowing what color puce actually is, and describing the h's eyes as quixotic. HUH???  Her eyes were "foolishly impractical"?  I think she meant exotic. The h is frequently called a strumpet. Really, insult her for her rude behavior but no one would have called her a prostitute.  The author also made a big deal about the frothy green pot-au-feu, evidently thinking that means soup in general rather than a hearty meat and vegetable combo. The book is styled as taking place in the Regency but the author often refers to concepts or items that did not exist in the Regency period. For example, one big exchange between the H and h involves her telling him that male aristocrats are like vestigial organs. and she ties it specifically to the appendix. And everyone around them knows what that insult means. It was not until decades later that Darwin first made this notion widespread. In fact, at the time of the Regency this notion was not widespread at all and there are only 2 instances of vestiges being used in this context prior to Darwin. And those contexts do not provide the usage that Astrid made. Stupid.Similarly, the duke and Astrid are in a barn and she lifts a bale  of hay over her head to smash him. WHAT?? a bale of hay is heavy and while a  woman can lift one, it would be really difficult to get it above her head. Did she mean straw?? In any event, the hay baler or hay press was not yet invented during the Regency. The hay press would not be invented until after 1850 or so. At this time, hay was stored loose.  I could go on and on. It was so annoying to be reading and find such glaring mistakes. I would get side-tracked and put the book down in disgust.So if you don’t mind historical inaccuracies, repetitive dialogue and an unlikable heroine, this book is ok. As I said, some parts were funny and the overall notion was a good one.