@Sam:

So big thanks to Jane and all the reviewers over here for insightful and honest reviews. You make it easy for me to wade through what I don’t want to spend my money on and for that I’m truly grateful.

I second that motion!

**spoiler**
*
*
*
*
*
* (I think it’s a spoiler?)
*
*
Short version: I was not as crazy about the last chapter as I was about the remainder of the book. The romantic commitment could have been more couple-initiated and their HEA/HFN would have been more believable for me had Ruby or Mark initiated, rather than been thrust together by Yvette.

I think it’s marketing plain and simple. As for the KMM books, I was pointing the finger at St. Martin’s Press and Ace….. They also do that in some MM, Kenyon’s Dream Hunter books are coming to mind.

So big thanks to Jane and all the reviewers over here for insightful and honest reviews. You make it easy for me to wade through what I don’t want to spend my money on and for that I’m truly grateful.

I’m sure an editor who is working on an Author’s story knows the difference between HEA and a HFN.

But again, what one editor classifies as an HEA, another might classify as an HFN. It seems, to me, from experience, the diff b/t an HEA and an HFN is subjective; so if it’s subjective, how does one classify it? I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you either; imo, the ending should be pretty unambiguous; but clearly, many aren’t.

I’m not sure, not being in the writing industry, how often an editor actually reads an entire MS; or even if they’re required to do so. If they are, is the ending part of their domain? I know a lot of the epubs have editorial problems, and we all know that Anne Rice and LKH have contracts that exclude them from editorial review. So it’s not unheard of for a MS to go to print without review. And is it the editor’s responsibility, anyway, to classify the ending? Or is it marketing, or the store? It’s these types of issues that prevent me from ever seeing a real workable solution, aside from word of mouth (which includes blogs, Amazon, and other internetty things).

I also noticed that certain publishers use large print in the books, comes out to like 320 pages but if it were in regular print it would be like 150 pages and they charge $25 for the hardback. Not very nice either.

Hmmm, thinking of Moning’s Fea series, at all? hahahahahaha. I’ve noticed that with the bigger Mass Market soft covers as well (it is MM, right? Those are the bigger books? As opposed to the regular sized paperbook? I can’t keep it all straight. LOL. ) I look for thick MM books, because I’m not about to lay down $16 for what’s essentially a novella. The anthologies are the worst, imo.

Sorry for highjacking the thread, Jane!

I just do some research before I compulsive buy. I used to just buy it and then put it in my DNF pile and send them off, but not anymore. I also noticed that certain publishers use large print in the books, comes out to like 320 pages but if it were in regular print it would be like 150 pages and they charge $25 for the hardback. Not very nice either.

The other problem is, there is not uniform shelving instructions. So B&N can, and does, have differnent shelves from Borders, than Half Price Books, or Powell’s, or whatever. For instance, B&N has a huge Fiction section, and that’s where you can find Erotica, right along with Moby Dick. You can actually find some Romances in Fiction (like Lauren Willig; she’s shelved in Fiction, rather than Romance). I’ve also found me some Jennifer Crusie in Fiction, though she is also shelved in Romance. So, often, I’ll check both sections if I’m looking for someone specifically. HOWEVER, if I’m up for something new (which is often), I can’t go rummaging around Fiction for three hours and check every shelf. So I go straight to Romance, because that’s where I’m supposed to find my HEA romances.

I don’t know if publishers, or even the stores themselves, can do much about it. Because I know, from other threads about this very topic, that there are just as many people who are fine getting a non HEA romance in the Romance section. So, how to please both sides? And if publishers were to, say, code books on the spine with HEA or HFN, or whatever, who decides which it is? For instance, my first Megan Hart book was Tempted. I didn’t like it much and I for sure did not find it a HEA. Hell, I didn’t even find it a HFN (there wasn’t much happily at all, for me). However, tons of people loved the book and had their HEA. So, just because I didn’t get the HEA, doesn’t mean others won’t.

It does bug me, but I just don’t see any workable solution to it.

I have read books by Maya Banks that I feel have HFN and she’s also in the romance section or Megan Hart also in the romance section which I think should be right next to Eden Bradley in the Erotic section. I don’t know who makes these decisions but obviously they need to do something about that.

As for “reader expectation” yep, if you label it a romance and it’s something else, damn right I’m going to be pissed. I remember reading a certain “erotic romance” and wanting to shove that book up the publishers a$$. Another burn was by Cameron Dean who was shelved in the ROMANCE section and after her third book she killed the HERO. Ooooh that really pissed me off. Reader expectation? I think publisher’s need to get their acts together and stop relying on the romance community to make them a quick buck.

But see, here’s my take, and I know there are posts all around Romancelandia debating this. If I find you (a book) in the Romance section, I expect an HEA. If I find you in Fiction, anything goes. But my default expectation for Romance shelved books is HEA. So when I get a book out of Romance that ISN’T HEA-I fell cheated. And I have to say, this is happening more and more.

@ Jane: In conjunction: both. But it’s amplified by, what I perceive to be, Mark’s casual attitude towards Ruby. Oh, he says he understands her fidelity concern and admires her business and that she has a career, but his actions just don’t play out (that whole saying vs showing thing). Additionally, I just didn’t get the feeling that Mark was ready to settle down. I get that he has feelings for her, but not the long lasting love kind. I don’t remember Mark having to give up or risk anything for Ruby, while Ruby does (though I read pretty fast so maybe I just missed it).

So, while I can see Sam’s HFN, I don’t see the HEA. I think, if we were to see Ruby and Mark five years down the road, they would be seperated. I can also see that Mark would, after some more years go by, get a real HEA. But it would require him to be in a different place in his life, and also understanding how and why he and Ruby didn’t work. Considering his fairly well-evolved understanding of himself, I could see that happening. On the other side of the coin, Ruby just didn’t strike me as ornery or aggressive enough to be able to handle Mark in the long run.

Personally, I took the book as a HFN not so much HEA. There was definitely romance in this book but with Marks issues with his music I don’t know how 6 months down the road Ruby won’t get tired of his ass.

I didn’t like that part in the book at all, (referring to Jane’s spoiler) and I also didn’t like Ruby’s response outside the hotel. I wanted to throw the book into the wall. Overall I enjoyed the dynamics and I really liked the Author’s voice.

I did have issue with the “feisty” comment in the book, but then I took that as tongue-in-cheek.

cheating incident or the “I didn’t show up at your super important business event because I was too busy writing music?”

s
p
o
i
l
e
r

Also-if you had planned on reading Shiloh’s new book, Chains, I’d be interested in your impression of the first story.

-Randi

Ruby’s insecurity/so-called lack of self-awareness didn’t strike me as off. I know many women who don’t realize aspects of themselves until late in life – a preference of women over men, for example, or a realization that they hate their jobs or feel trapped in their marriages. By the same token, I know younger men who are far more self-aware than their older counterparts.

Mark and Ruby each demonstrated complexities that appealed to me on “real person” v. “idealized hero/heroine” levels and I’m glad I decided to buy it. BOUND TO PLEASE is a keeper for me.

I agree wholeheartedly with your review. I was sooooo hoping someone here at DA would review it, so I could add my two cents. ;)

Like you, I had a preconceived idea about what the book would be about, based on the title and, to a certain extent, the cover. The story did not, at all, live up to it’s packaging. Also like you, I was sorely disappointed in the lack of depth of the BDSM relationship. And, also like you, I didn’t quite believe the HEA.

Mostly, I was disappointed with the superficial BDSM. There just aren’t a whole lot of really good BDSM stories out, yet, so, when something comes along, I get super excited about it. Usually, I’m disappointed, but sometimes I get surprised (Shiloh Walker, I’m looking at you! I really enjoyed Chains, especially the first segment). On the one hand, I’m glad BDSM is becoming more mainstream in romance; on the other hand, not too many authors seem to know much about it, so the stories come off as really shallow.

Was this a terrible book? nope. Was it a great book? nope. It was definitely smack dab in the middle. It’s not a keeper, but I read it on a plane, and that was about the perfect place to read it.

Thanks for reviewing!!

“I could never bring myself to read a book by an author named Lilli Feisty.”

Perhaps this is part of the reason:

Feisty: ORIGIN late 19th cent.: from earlier feist, fist [small dog,] from fisting cur or hound, a derogatory term for a lapdog, from Middle English fist [break wind.] Compare with fizzle.

(from the New Oxford American Dictionary)