Review: writer or editor didn't do their job
Rating: 2 out of 5
Date: 10 18, 2012
Sketchy efforts at characterization were tossed into sketchier plotlines.  A good bit of overwriting about characters' thoughts and motives could have been deleted.  The plot could have been fleshed out to make this a true tale with beginning, middle and end. It's a novella which takes up 65% of the book and tacks on 45% more excerpts from other works thereafter.  I didn't have the patience to read those.Several times the writer repeats paragraphs, explaining at length the hero's reluctance to get involved, but he has to get involved because he owes his aunt so much, etc. etc. enough-already.  In the next sentence he's captivated by the heroine, then he has to teach her not to love him, not to be hurt by him. He's supposed to be a strong character, but he comes off wishy washy, giving mixed signals.She of course finds him annoying at first, then fascinating.  She 'sees through' his false front.  He's supposed to be hard and hedonistic (only hinted at), but she sees more depth in his character (never detailed).  He's supposed to be a rake and she's supposed to be an ingenue, but the author assures us she has much wisdom.  Then she does something impulsive and stupid and everynone finds her charming.  There's a lot of name dropping--Beau Brummel, Lady Jersey, the prince regent, Byron and Lord Nelson--all of whom show up in a very small space and time. One sentence suggests the hero is a spy for the home office, but that is never explained. He does seem to know everyone, however, and he introduces the heroine to all of them in the most careless and haphazard fashion.A good editor could have helped rework this into a decent read.  Instead, it's an Irish stew of a story. And if you don't know how to make Irish stew, it can be bland.