Sometimes It's a Matter of Preference
Feb. 4th, 2014 06:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shipperxSo I hit "Good Reads" to read some book reviews and it's a singularly strange experience sometimes to realize how much tastes differ.
I ran across one scathing review of Judith Ivory's "The Proposition." I actually enjoyed that book... though of course, it wasn't perfect. There were legitimate criticisms that could be made of it. For instance, the ending truly is pure deus ex machina and I can easily see how that could annoy someone (I personally just shrugged that part off. a) Because it's a romance and a 'happily ever after' has to occur somehow and b) because the whole thing is a gender swapped "My Fair Lady" so there's an almost fairytale-esque aspect to it. Deus ex machina away. As long as it is enjoyable, I'm game.
So, when I saw a scathing 1-star review, I figure that it's going to be about the deus ex machina conclusion that, admittedly, is both unlikely and too easy (and I didn't care that it was. I prefer the fairytale-esque happy ending). However, I don't even know whether the reviewer got as far as complaining about the ending because the reviewer hated everything about the entire novel. She hated the BLURB SUMMARY of the novel, saying that it wasn't something she wanted to read (at which point I wondered why she had read it) and that she hated everything about the story and its leads, who spend entirely too much time in their heads. I could only go, wow, do we have different tastes (and I thought the 'time in their heads' was 'character development').
Also, over the last decade I've seen a bazillion recs for Loretta Chase's "Lord of Scoundrels" claiming it's the best thing ever. And, honestly, it may well be. I don't know. I've never read it. I enjoyed Loretta Chase's "Mr. Impossible" quite a bit, so I can see how it could be a highly enjoyable book. Still, every time I try to convince myself to read "Lord of Scoundrels", I read the summary and the whole 'dissolute rake' thing puts me off. Plus, the summary seems to imply that it may go down the well-worn path of 'bitter alpha hero has all the power and treats the heroine like crap.' The reviews on Amazon and Good Reads, no matter how glowing, never assure me that this isn't the story and so I always hesitate to commit to purchase (that said "Mr. Impossible"'s blurb reads like its hero fits the 'dissolute rake' template and the actual character in the novel doesn't. He's just an impulsive, funny, 19th century slacker. He's neither dissolute nor particularly rakish, just constantly getting himself into scrapes due to a good heart and irrepressible sense of humor. That's the sort of hero that I can often enjoy. And, here's the thing -- both Ivory's "The Proposition" and Chase's "Mr. Impossible" share heroes who DO NOT BROOD and ARE NOT ANGST RIDDEN. I often gravitate towards those.)
I'm not judging the quality of Chase's "Lord of Scoundrels" (again, I have not read it). It's just that I never quite get around to reading it because it sounds like it may live in an area of tropes that are not my usual preference. (And please tell me if the reviews are misleading and it isn't a dissolute brooding rake who behaves like a dick and treats the heroine like crap. It's always been praised, so if it's not that, I might want to read it. I'm not constitutionally resistant to angst or to damaged heroes, it's just that it will then heavily depend on execution.).
It's somewhat surprising to realize that people really, truly WANT different things from a story. And I do think that's what it tends to boil down to in the end.![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
shadowkat67 even mentioned some people on Good Reads hating Sherry Thomas' "His at Night," which I thought quite fun (again, not perfect. Plenty of valid criticisms, but mostly fun), so I do know that sometimes it's just that people react and interpret differently.
It's funny sometimes to realize that though we may read the same book, rarely do we read the same books in the exact same way. One person's "ooooh, I likey!" is another's "WTF is this?!"
I ran across one scathing review of Judith Ivory's "The Proposition." I actually enjoyed that book... though of course, it wasn't perfect. There were legitimate criticisms that could be made of it. For instance, the ending truly is pure deus ex machina and I can easily see how that could annoy someone (I personally just shrugged that part off. a) Because it's a romance and a 'happily ever after' has to occur somehow and b) because the whole thing is a gender swapped "My Fair Lady" so there's an almost fairytale-esque aspect to it. Deus ex machina away. As long as it is enjoyable, I'm game.
So, when I saw a scathing 1-star review, I figure that it's going to be about the deus ex machina conclusion that, admittedly, is both unlikely and too easy (and I didn't care that it was. I prefer the fairytale-esque happy ending). However, I don't even know whether the reviewer got as far as complaining about the ending because the reviewer hated everything about the entire novel. She hated the BLURB SUMMARY of the novel, saying that it wasn't something she wanted to read (at which point I wondered why she had read it) and that she hated everything about the story and its leads, who spend entirely too much time in their heads. I could only go, wow, do we have different tastes (and I thought the 'time in their heads' was 'character development').
Also, over the last decade I've seen a bazillion recs for Loretta Chase's "Lord of Scoundrels" claiming it's the best thing ever. And, honestly, it may well be. I don't know. I've never read it. I enjoyed Loretta Chase's "Mr. Impossible" quite a bit, so I can see how it could be a highly enjoyable book. Still, every time I try to convince myself to read "Lord of Scoundrels", I read the summary and the whole 'dissolute rake' thing puts me off. Plus, the summary seems to imply that it may go down the well-worn path of 'bitter alpha hero has all the power and treats the heroine like crap.' The reviews on Amazon and Good Reads, no matter how glowing, never assure me that this isn't the story and so I always hesitate to commit to purchase (that said "Mr. Impossible"'s blurb reads like its hero fits the 'dissolute rake' template and the actual character in the novel doesn't. He's just an impulsive, funny, 19th century slacker. He's neither dissolute nor particularly rakish, just constantly getting himself into scrapes due to a good heart and irrepressible sense of humor. That's the sort of hero that I can often enjoy. And, here's the thing -- both Ivory's "The Proposition" and Chase's "Mr. Impossible" share heroes who DO NOT BROOD and ARE NOT ANGST RIDDEN. I often gravitate towards those.)
I'm not judging the quality of Chase's "Lord of Scoundrels" (again, I have not read it). It's just that I never quite get around to reading it because it sounds like it may live in an area of tropes that are not my usual preference. (And please tell me if the reviews are misleading and it isn't a dissolute brooding rake who behaves like a dick and treats the heroine like crap. It's always been praised, so if it's not that, I might want to read it. I'm not constitutionally resistant to angst or to damaged heroes, it's just that it will then heavily depend on execution.).
It's somewhat surprising to realize that people really, truly WANT different things from a story. And I do think that's what it tends to boil down to in the end.
shadowkat67 even mentioned some people on Good Reads hating Sherry Thomas' "His at Night," which I thought quite fun (again, not perfect. Plenty of valid criticisms, but mostly fun), so I do know that sometimes it's just that people react and interpret differently.It's funny sometimes to realize that though we may read the same book, rarely do we read the same books in the exact same way. One person's "ooooh, I likey!" is another's "WTF is this?!"
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2014-02-05 01:55 am (UTC)So, is Lord of Scoundrels worth it? I can take some angst and a bit of dickishness. I just tend to have a low tolerance for hyper-controlling behavior and inequality of power.
no subject
Date: 2014-02-05 12:04 pm (UTC)For me the crucial thing about Lord of Scoundrels is that Chase has a really light hand with the material, with wit and humor scattered throughout. But that still might not be enough for you. As you say, preferences and tastes differ.