I found an excerpt online, and it seemed very bumpy to me. … the meaning’s pretty clear, if you’re willing to help the author out by adding in missing words or punctuation.

I just finished the first book, Silent in the Grave. I see what you call “bumpy” language, but it didn’t bother me. The last book I read was an Anne Bronte, and the unclear sentence structure and missing words weren’t an obstacle there either. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.

Is it awkward, or is it style? If I find the writing assured in other respects, I can often accept a style in which not every sentence is perfectly clear at the outset. It makes for a slower read, but that’s not a bad thing. Odd metaphors can offer an interesting glimpse of the narrator’s thought process and associations. (Or they can be simply odd, as they struck Laura.)

The setting and characters remind me strongly of Amanda Quick’s Arcane Society novels. I found the mystery flimsy, but Raybourn’s heroine is more introspective and less ditzy than Quick’s; in the course of the book Julia learns a lot about herself and the world.

I enjoyed the first book but don’t feel any great urgency to read Sanctuary. Based on Jayne’s review and others, I might wait till book 3.

Yes, and it’s clear that the shrug and the curl are separate things, but because of how the phrase is constructed they could both be assumed to relate to the lip.

if we’re going to say that the problem is that we visualize a bridal train, which is much bigger than a thread, why are we not including the needle in our mind’s eye?

I was. If the needle is the (very skinny) bride, and the thread is her train, and if trains on wedding dresses tend to be wider than the bride and often widen as they descend to the floor or as they pool around the bride, then there’s a problem with the metaphor, at least for me, because a thread is always narrower than the needle through which it passes, and the thread’s circumference remains constant.

An American speaker would have said, “they don’t have fleas” or “they haven’t got fleas.” But not our Lady Julia. It’s that kind of deft touch with language that gives this novel such an authentic British feel.

Well, I’m British and I’ve wouldn’t use the construction that you think has an “authentic British feel.” I did a very quick search, and in Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest (1895) Jack says “What nonsense! I haven’t got a brother” and Cecily says “But I haven’t got a cough.”

Just as a small example, do you those of you who have read the novel remember when Lady Julia suggested that one of the house guests take a pup to bed with her to act as a bed warmer? Lady Julia comments about the dogs, “They haven’t fleas.”

An American speaker would have said, “they don’t have fleas” or “they haven’t got fleas.” But not our Lady Julia. It’s that kind of deft touch with language that gives this novel such an authentic British feel.

I’m sure there are other examples, but that’s one that has stayed with me.

As an aside, I like Tasha Alexander, too. I’m eagerly awaiting her next book, A Fatal Waltz, which will be published in May.

I thought there were several nice tongue in cheek moments, though, not least that the guy who speaks like a romance hero is a horses’ ass and meets a bad end. Having read it, I have to say I enjoyed the plot and I’ll pick up the next one. I just didn’t like it as much as I’d expected to.

The book in its entirety is a better read than the excerpt Laura didn’t enjoy.

I liked T Alexanders books too.

Also CL Harris’s Mermaid Sings or something like that.

I haven’t read either of the books, only the excerpt from this one.

I wasn’t thinking of a railway train, I was thinking of bridal train. But bridal trains tend to be at least as wide as the wedding dress, if not wider, which was why the description made me feel as though she must be trying to sew with a ribbon instead of thread. I suppose different people might think of different types of wedding train.

So true. Now, based on your comments, I’m envisioning a Princess Di type bridal train. lol. I’ll leave the seasons turning thing alone; we’ll agree to disagree on that–although the use of the pural did give me pause, too.

It’s always interesting getting a peek into the thought processes and impressions of others. Pity Rayburn didn’t work for you. Was it both books, or just this one that’s been reviewed?

I wasn’t thinking of a railway train, I was thinking of bridal train. But bridal trains tend to be at least as wide as the wedding dress, if not wider, which was why the description made me feel as though she must be trying to sew with a ribbon instead of thread. I suppose different people might think of different types of wedding train.

btw, Laura, didn’t think you were being critical. You just had an opinion that you shared. It’s all about having a dialogue, nothing more. :)

Meriam, I love Marion Chesney! The Hamish MacBeth series (written as A.C. Beaton) is another favourite of mine (loved the BBC series too with Robert Carlyle), but never really cared for the Agatha Rasin books. And, of course, I love the Regency Trads she wrote.

I’m not sure what to tell you about the comparative romances in any of these Historical Mysteries. In all cases they’re not as prominent as I’d like — for example, I love the balance of romance vs suspense Karen Rose does — but they’re still relatively satisfying in a ‘teaser’ sort of way.

I didn’t set out to be critical, but unfortunately the writing felt strained to me, as though Raybourn was trying very hard to make her protagonist sound authentic and English, and it just didn’t work for me.

Laura, I certainly understand writing styles working, or not, for individual readers. It’s not something that bothers me beyond the “See Spot run” variety and in this case, I appreciated the fact that Raybourn at least made the attempt to make Lady Julia seem English as so often an attempt isn’t even made by American authors

The restrained romance continues in book two and at the end, he convinces her with a wonderful gift. They’re still not married yet but are deeply in love. No sex in either book though.

I also enjoyed the Tasha Alexander book, and in the same vein, Marion Chesney has a cozy series of historical novels (complete with romance subplot), the titles all contain “An Edwardian Murder Mystery”.

I love, love, love Marion Chesney. I used to read her regencies and historicals, whatever I could find in the library. I must find this series.

As for Tasha Alexander vs D Raybourn, I think I need to spend half an hour in a book shop. Although two things might decide me: which one is set later in the Victorian period, and which has a stronger romantic element?

“the seasons were turning inward” might work for me if they are turning from warm to cold, since people tend to be driven inside by cold weather, and sometimes it can seem as if the rain and snow themselves are trying to get into our homes.

That still wouldn’t work for me, because there are four seasons so although one, on it’s own might “turn inward”, the fact that this is in the plural suggests that more than one season (autumn/winter/spring/summer) is turning inwards and that doesn’t seem chronologically possible to me. We may have to agree to differ on this one, as our tastes in imagery seem to differ.

It’s a loverly way to describe the summer leaving and oncoming winter–especially when you think of the seasons as a continuous cycle, and on the flipside the usual descriptions of spring as being a re-emergence or rebirth. ::shrug:: just my two cents.

But if summer’s leaving, then is it turning outwards while winter turns in? Maybe the image works if you think of autumn/winter as a pair which “turn in” and spring and summer as a pair which turn out, but that’s not how I think of the seasons. I’d think of a cycle being like a wheel, which rotates. So there’s a turning/rotating motion, but not a motion of turning in/curling inwards towards the centre of the circle.

However, I think the “She gave me a shrug and a curl of the lip” line is pretty clear, since I can’t think of a way to shrug a lip. The line about Lysander having left his thritieth birthday also seems pretty clear to me — he has left it in the past.

Oh yes, the meaning’s pretty clear, if you’re willing to help the author out by adding in missing words or punctuation. If there had been a comma after “shrug” I wouldn’t have read that phrase the way I did, nor could I have speculated about the location of Lysander’s birthday if it had been made explicit that it had been left in the past/behind him.

I didn’t set out to be critical, but unfortunately the writing felt strained to me, as though Raybourn was trying very hard to make her protagonist sound authentic and English, and it just didn’t work for me.

I also enjoyed the Tasha Alexander book, and in the same vein, Marion Chesney has a cozy series of historical novels (complete with romance subplot), the titles all contain “An Edwardian Murder Mystery”.

I actually love the phrasing in this book. “Seasons turning inward” for instance, makes me think about retreat, withdrawal and solitude. It’s a loverly way to describe the summer leaving and oncoming winter–especially when you think of the seasons as a continuous cycle, and on the flipside the usual descriptions of spring as being a re-emergence or rebirth. ::shrug:: just my two cents.

How and why an author’s voice may or may not work is a highly subjective thing. There are many authors that are raved about that I can’t get past the first paragraph of their work. I can *see* the skill, but the voice just doesn’t connect with me.