Synopsis from Amazon:A protagonist who rebels against the social conventions of the Gilded Age, Nina De Bonnard has a sharp wit and a temper to match. As a young girl, Nina experienced a side of male behavior so damaging that she picks and rejects male suitors like the gowns in her closet. Such behavior earns her a reputation, and makes her a target for the amorous attentions of some and pedestal-toppling plans of others. She is drawn to Jordan Houghton Windsor, eldest son of the Windsor newspaper dynasty, who is the only man strong enough to challenge her willfulness. But misunderstandings keep them apart, and no sooner is one conflict resolved than fate conspires to separate them with another.
My rating: 1 star
My review: A really crap romance couched as "historical fiction." It's not even Edith Wharton-lite; it's more like Edith Wharton for Dummies. The author embraces the veneer of the Gilded Age, such as its incredible opulence, but she fails miserably in addressing the social issues of the upper class. The book's main problem is its main character Nina, a self-centered brat. Now, I like the occasional self-centered character (we can't all be humble, modest, generous souls) but Nina is so annoying that by the second half of the book, I began to wonder why Jordan even bothered with her because in my mind she had no redeeming qualities. Anyone who is a fan of Edith Wharton and/or Henry James will find this book ridiculous.
2 comments:
Obviously this reader is not familiar with either Edith Wharton or Jane Austen and other writers Helen Argers is compared to. Booklist gave "The Gilded Lily " a rave and compared it to Edith Wharton. The Star-Ledger review compared Argers to the best of the English writers --including Heyer and Jane Austen. The New York Times said "All the Glitters" is there. See her website www:helenargers.com for full reviews of all the novels - of this talented writer that got five and four stars from Romantic Times.
As for not addressing the social issues --there are several chapters about the Lady Bountifuls visitng the poor people to distribute food which is a brilliantly done ironic contrast of the super rich lives during the Gilded Era and the poverty that was ignored. And so much more this reviewer obviously missed. Her loss. The detailed description of the Centennial Exhibition is humorous and a satire of ladies who were shocked at the exhibition of the Women's Pavilion that showed all things done by women. Susan B Anthony is there and the scene when she reads The Women's Declaration of Independence at the ceremony is historically accurate and yet Argers flawlessly blends the characters of her novel in their reactions. Some joined the Women's Movement. Nina, the heroine, passed out copies of Ms. Anthony's speech. It's all there and more. Including how the socialites went to Europe to buy themselves a titled husband. Nina goes there and her reaction to the Anti-Americanism she faces there is priceless. All who love a great historical and love story will love this book. I give it 5 stars.
@Anonymous: Thanks for your take on "The Gilded Lily." It's always interesting to read a contrasting opinion.
As an avid fan of Jane Austen and having read most of Edith Wharton's works, my main objection with this comparison has to do with the style of writing. Austen and Wharton provide subtle social criticisms in their works, thus the reader is not beaten over the head with the author's social commentary. This is not the case with this book.
Furthermore, there are too many plot devices which end up making the story a farce. Maybe the book was supposed to be satire ...? But the earnest tone of the writing makes me think this is not what was intended.
Of course, we're all entitled to our own opinions and yours is just as valid as mine.
Thanks again for leaving a comment and your review!
Post a Comment