Review: "Believable" factor lost early and never regained
Rating: 2 out of 5
Date: 09 9, 2012
NOTE: Most potential readers would probably assign a higher rating. But for me, certain little and not-so-little things snowballed to the point where cumulatively, it killed whatever good parts there were to the story.MEMORABLE QUOTE: "To tell the truth of it my lord, aren't all men basically the same under their breeches no matter from whence they hail?"A closet fan of (non-Regency) historical romances and unfamiliar with Theresa Meyers, I had high hopes for "The Spellbound Bride" based on the blurb, the reviews and per the author, "over two years of research". However, after struggling to the finish, I felt as if I had read a book different from some other reviewers. It bothered me on so many levels, I actually felt insulted.Apologies in advance if this review seems harsh but in order to justify the 1-star rating (a very rare personal rating), I have to touch on areas that I generally avoid (partly to suppress my personal preferences but mostly out of recognition of the hard work writers put into their stories).  Another personal dislike but... MINOR SPOILERS ahead.(1) CHARACTER/PLOT POINTS--HUH? I willingly suspend disbelief and critical thinking in order to enjoy fiction but sometimes, certain things are so jarringly wrong that they leap out and smack me in the face.  Occur early enough in the the story and my continued reading is forever tainted. Four major "smack" moments (without giving too much away):-- heroine's belief in being "cursed by some dark deadly poison that dwelt insider [sic] her"... despite numerous NOTES left behind after incidents;-- heroine so skilled/knowledgeable, she brewed sleeping potions for her "da"... at AGE 4;-- Archibald is the 14-year-old Earl of Argyll yet on a trip, only Ian and Sorcha travel with him (around a storyline so implausible that I was rolling my eyes); and-- apparent (lack of) passage of time in the second half of the book yet the heroine already had a "slight swell"???(2) UM, WRITING STYLE? I can generally look beyond most writing styles but I simply couldn't understand the rationale behind splitting the speaker with the person's dialogue into separate paragraphs (ie, 1st sentence/paragraph is "He frowned." Next sentence/paragraph is the person's dialogue).Also, the one- or two-sentence narrative paragraphs became annoying. Maybe I'm old-fashioned but I expect such short paragraphs to be limited to crucial thoughts, information or turning points; too many and it becomes almost stream of consciousness, lacking cohesion and/or transitional writing skills. (At first, I though the foregoing was due to formatting/download error but nope, appeared throughout in parts to the end.  The wasted space (resulting in many more pages to turn) then made me think of "Kindle abuse".)Lastly, get a little too fancy with imagery and it can lead to output such as:"...an edge to his voice that was filled with both unsympathetic cold and hot anger..." (I still can't figure this out)and "...concern marring the dark trusting line of her brows..." (what does a trusting browline look like?)As a reader, I don't want to be distracted like this. This is not Nietzsche, for goodness sakes!(3) HISTORICAL CONTEXT? This is the least of my problems with this book. I don't give a fig about historical accuracy so long as deviating from it serves some purpose (case in point: love "Braveheart" despite its utter trashing of historical facts).  However, given the author's long research in contrast to the actual amount of historical background incorporated into the story, I couldn't resist looking up the North Berwick witch trials after finishing this book.The story begins in 1593 but the actual witch trials occurred from 1590 to 1592. Also, King James VI married Princess Anne in 1589 but the story refers to her as a "new bride". I hate to say it but unless there was a typo in the prologue's dateline, I read nothing in the story that warranted using the later date of 1593.  Such a tiny, simple thing but that alone rendered the historical aspects of the story incongruous.This final point is truly just me and my upbringing. I try to give as much leeway as I can when foreign phrases pop up in books.  But sometimes... FYI, the first known use of the term "tte-à-tte" was in 1696. Could it have been in use before that?  Absolutely. 100 years before? Not likely. Its use in this story, let alone in *dialogue* ... well, you decide.