Friday, July 26, 2013

Is it possible for a romance to be too contrived?

I was looking for a literary "quickie," so I used Overdrive and perused the romance section.  I decided on Mr Darcy Forever by Victoria Connelly.  It was set in Bath, during a Jane Austen festival.  I like Jane Austen, why not give it go?

From the beginning, it had a little more substance than I thought.  The two main characters, Mia and Sarah, are sisters who each identify with the Dashwood sisters of Sense and Sensibility: one practical, one impetuous.  As they each prepare to attend the Jane Austen Festival, it becomes clear that something terrible happened between them and they haven't spoken in years, despite having been so close.  What adds an odd twist is that Sarah reveals she suffers from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Already, not you average fluffy romance.

As the sisters attend events, they each dread/hope they will run into one another.  As the current story progresses, we slowly learn what happened between them, and, of course, it involves a man.  Even that story ends up sort of "twitchy," not your usual romance fair, other than he turns out to be a cad of the worst sort.

Without giving away too much, Mia, Sarah, and Mia's friend Shelley, all meet men, and GASP, fall in love.  Plus, of course, the sisters reunite (I assumed that would happen).  This sort of contrivance is expected in Romance, however, for heaven's sake, Sarah manages to find a fellow OCD sufferer!  The Cad shows up, secrets are revealed, and in the end, no one really learned anything from the terrible thing that happened.  The ending may have worked in a fluffy romance, but there was a serious tone that is at odds with the "happily ever after" ending.  It wasn't carefree enough to satisfy my guilty pleasure, and wasn't serious enough to live up to the problems.

I post mostly teen and children's lit reviews.  This book was written with an adult audience in mind, but there is no objectionable content.  It would be fine for teenagers, but might not appeal to them....too fuddy-duddy in tone, perhaps.


No comments:

Post a Comment