CONVERSATION: Enemies to Lovers
Janine: In our conversation about our reading in 2021, the enemies-to-lovers trope came up. I loved some of what you said and thought we could have a wider and deeper conversation about it. Here are some questions to start us off:
Do you enjoy the enemies-to-lovers trope? Why or why not? What are examples of the most successful books with romances between people who begin as enemies? Which enemies-to-lovers books have been least effective for you? Whether you like or dislike enemies to lovers, have you always felt this way about the trope, or was there a time when you felt differently? And how do you feel the trope has evolved over time?
Love it or hate it?
Sirius: I love love love “from enemies to lovers” trope. Of course when I am professing my love of it, this does not mean that I love *any and all* plot twists and characterizations that this trope may include and I rolled my eyes many times when I sought out this trope and read the actual book that used the trope, but in theory yes I love it very much.
I love it first and foremost because to me this trope provides the most believable (if executed to my satisfaction of course) source of internal conflict between two protagonists. If two people do not like each other for whatever reason and through the course of the story they find out that they have something in common and something they can like, respect, love each other for, to me it can be most satisfactory. It is not that I do not like the guys starting as friends, I think in life two people starting as friends may end up in love way more often than enemies, but too often in romance the authors choose some kind of ridiculous misunderstanding to make sure the men just do NOT see that they have feelings for each other. They are blind, stupid or both? Or we can have Oh he is not worthy of me, or I am unworthy of him.
Again, I am only talking about internal conflict which for me works best within the constraints of this trope, external ones are different animals all together and I really don’t pay much attention towards the set up when blurb hints at “Us against the world” type of story.
Janine: I’m also fond of the enemies-to-lovers trope, but it generally works better for me in fantasy, historical or paranormal/UF settings than in contemporary romances. In speculative and historical settings, it’s possible to set a romance against a backdrop of warring countries, societies or worlds. Cultural differences and histories inform the conflict and the stakes are higher. With contemporaries, the reasons frequently don’t justify it. Anyone above the age of nine shouldn’t have an enemy unless they’re in a war zone. I’m most likely to feel this way about romantic comedies—the cuter the enmity is supposed to seem, the more likely it is to be based in a ridiculous reason. You are right, though, Sirius, that when the trope works it can make for amazing internal conflict.
Sirius: Janine, I absolutely agree that in contemporaries the reasoning underneath characters being enemies frequently do not justify it to me. Considering that contemporaries in general are my least favorite romance subgenre, I would agree that in SFF or historical this trope works much better for me as a rule. I do read some, but not nearly as much as I read SFF, or paranormals or historical (well I read very few real historicals this year, but that does not diminish my desire to read some). More often than not in contemporaries I read mysteries with romantic elements, but romantic mysteries is the kind of genre where from friends to lovers actually works for me often enough.
Kaetrin: Regarding enemies to lovers I don’t generally like the trope in contemporaries. As Janine said in SFF or fantasy I think it works well.
Jennie: Enemies to lovers – I am not generally a fan because I associate it with characters acting rather childishly towards each other. This is actually a concept that works better for me if it’s very serious – if there is actually a deep misunderstanding between the h/h that they need to overcome in order to make their relationship work.
Jayne: I don’t have much to add to this conversation as despite the number of them I’ve read in the past, enemies to lovers isn’t one of my favorite tropes. Looking at the number of them I’ve tagged this way, quite a few were books in which the hero and heroine started out on enemy sides (usually due to war) but didn’t feel they were ever actual enemies when they met.
Favorites and Least Favorites
Sirius: Favorite “from friends to enemies” story? Tamara Allen The Only Gold, hands down. The two main characters clash over the seemingly different approach to work and life. They are both passionate about what they do, but they show their passion so very differently. Of course, another reason why the story is a huge favorite (besides being from a favorite writer) is because despite their seemingly different approach to work and life the men have similar values as we find out. They are both good people. They just need to learn about what makes each other tick better and compromise somewhat.
Now, if we would have the story between assassin and a cop falling in love, man the writer would have to work hard to convince me that this story would make some sense.
I also read many good stories from Megan Derr who writes this trope very often. I do hesitate to recommend her stories if copy editing is important to you. Some are better than others in that regard, but the stories (especially her longer stories) are very good if you love the trope.
Janine: A great example of a speculative enemies-to-lovers romance is one of my favorite books of 2021, The Jasmine Throne by Tasha Suri. Malini is the princess of an empire, while Priya is from a country that empire has subjugated for generations. They are brought together when Malini is imprisoned in Priya’s homeland. After accidentally witnessing maidservant Priya using magic that she hides, Malini realizes she can use Priya’s secret to arrange her own escape, and she gets Priya assigned to help guard her. The romance begins with Priya feeling sorry for Malini, who is abused by her keeper, and Malini attempting to further that compassion so that she can escape.
A contemporary enemies-to-lovers story that is the exception to my general rule is Rachel Reid’s Heated Rivalry, which is about NHL players from rival teams. I love the enemies-with-benefits trope because the sex scenes always really matter. In the case of Heated Rivalry, the trope also works because Ilya and Shane are really young when they discover they have incendiary chemistry—barely eighteen. That’s an age when many people take wild risks with sex and other intimacies. Their competitive personalities also help sell it because there’s a one-upsmanship element to the sex.
Kaetrin: Milla Vane’s A Heart of Blood and Ashes is a great example of when it really worked for me. (Note: Many CWs for this one!)
In contemporaries I like rivals to lovers but not enemies to lovers. I’d classify Shane and Ilya from Heated Rivalry as rivals not enemies. Another example where it worked was Ruby Lang’s Open House. The characters each had good reason to be on opposing sides but they were not mean to one another. It was a genuine conflict that made sense in the story.
The difference for me is whether the contemporary characters are just mean and horrible to one another. It’s hard for me to root for a couple if I don’t like them and I dislike meanness. I DNF’d The Hating Game because I did not like the way the characters treated one another at the beginning of the book. I know I’m not alone but I’m certainly in the minority in that opinion – it’s a wildly popular book.
Janine: LOL, the Milla Vane book is a good example of an enemies-to-lovers book that didn’t work for me. Maddek was too angry (even his name starts with “Mad”) and mean.
Sirius: Heated Rivalry worked very well for me too, but funny thing is I did not exactly consider it as example “from enemies to lovers”. I think you very aptly noted that in contemporary one should not have an enemy unless one is in the war zone. To me Ilya and Shane were ferocious competitors, fighters, but I would not consider them enemies. I would consider them rivals. As I am typing this, I wonder if *softer* varieties of this trope actually do work better for me in contemporaries. In other words, when we have *people who do not like each other*, people who compete with each other, eventually getting past that and falling in love, maybe that does work better for me, of course if written well. Maybe if they start being less of real enemies, but just people who dislike each other, maybe in contemporaries it is easier for me to buy the transformation.
On the third hand, one of the softer varieties of this trope to me is people who just like to bicker and yes, that happens in romantic comedies and it can be SO SILLY.
Janine: I’m not usually into the rivals-to-lovers trope in romantic comedies either. I don’t want to read a You’ve Got Mail type romantic comedy where he opens a chain bookstore across from her independent bookshop. Those just make me want to say “Grow up, you’re not in third grade anymore.”
You and Kaetrin are right, though, I misspoke in calling Heated Rivalry an enemies-to-lovers book. It isn’t, but I do consider it an enemies-with-benefits book–that’s when the lovers start out disliking each other or there’s a difficult history they haven’t gotten over, but they still periodically meet in secret for sex because the chemistry is just that good.
Alisha Rai has a book like that as well, Hate to Want You. There’s an enmity between Nicholas and Livvy’s families. Nicholas and Livvy were young and dating when it first arose; it split them up and ten years later they still haven’t gotten over the fallout. But they meet once a year on Livvy’s birthday, each time in a different city, and spend the night together. Livvy texts Nicholas her GPS coordinates and he drops his work and meets her there for one hot night. Then they go their separate ways and don’t communicate again until their yearly date the following year. When the book starts more than a year has passed since their last meeting but Livvy didn’t text Nicholas, and now she moves back to their hometown.
I loved that book; it’s a star-crossed lovers story because even when they admitted their feelings, they still faced the obstacle of the tension between the families (the two families aspect made the book a touch soapy, though). Something similar happens with Ilya and Shane–when they realize there’s more than sex there, there are still the tension between their rival teams and the obstacle of being queer and in the NHL. When the enmity is between the characters’ groups (countries, races, packs, teams, etc.) it presents an external conflict and not just an internal one.
Layla: I like the enemies to lovers trope (like all others!) when properly done. My favourite enemies to lovers book are not so much enemies— I don’t like it when the protagonists have good reason to dislike each other and [I] don’t believe that certain obstacles can be overcome for example bullying— but more misunderstandings where one person appears cold or unknowable to the other. The classic best book I can think of is Pride and Prejudice of course!!! Also North and South.
Evolutionary History
Janine: My idea of what kind of enemies-to-lovers books I want to read has changed over the years. When I was young, I liked books that are a lot more problematic than I would enjoy today. For example, Johanna Lindsey’s historical romance A Gentle Feuding, which was about a couple from enemy Scottish clans. It probably *was* gentle for its time (and for its author at the time) but it had the “sex while sleeping” trope and today my feelings about that aren’t what they were then. Many enemies-to-lovers historicals were even worse—I’m thinking of Rebecca Brandewyne’s Forever, My Love and Christine Monson’s Stormfire. Authors could put their heroines through things that most of today’s readers wouldn’t want to read, and the heroes were often the vehicles for all that suffering. A backdrop of warring families or clans was frequently part of the package.
Jayne: I will admit that back in the day, I read and enjoyed Lady Gallant by Suzanne Robinson. I’m middle aged now and a lot less willing to put up with the shit that was used in “enemies to lovers” especially in historical books. But I definitely feel that the real-world issues of the past few years have also played a part.
It’s time to turn the discussion over to you, readers. Do you generally like or dislike the enemies-to-lovers trope? What are your recommendations and your most frustrating reads within the trope? How do you feel about the trope’s evolution and have your feelings about it also evolved?
I prefer the term antagonists-to-lovers because, as you note, “enemies” has a lot of connotations that don’t translate well to modern romance. I like the trope as long as there are valid reasons for the antagonism. In addition to HEATED RIVALRY (one of my favorite romances ever), probably my favorite romance featuring that trope is CD Reiss’s IRON CROWNE: she’s an environmental attorney; he’s a property developer with a reputation for skirting environmental regulations; they’re baffled by their attraction to each other, even while they’re burning up the sheets. On the other hand, I know so many people loved it, but I did not care for THE HATING GAME: the conflict seemed so manufactured and the MCs seemed like junior high students doing office cosplay.
@DiscoDollyDeb: LOL! I didn’t read The Hating Game (I tried a few pages but the writing didn’t grab me) but I would love to hear from some of the people who loved it or who love this type of book about why the enemies (or as you say, antagonists) to lovers trope appeals to them. Particularly in romantic comedies! They’re obviously popular so there must be a ton of readers they appeal to and I would love to hear more—it’s always great to have insight into why readers feel a certain way.
I also really want recs for enemies (or antagonists) with benefits books. Book where there is clearly some antagonism (especially in public) but also booty calls. Or a historical/fantastical equivalent with no phone or text messages, just an arrangement. It can be in any genre. I love that trope so much, and there aren’t many of them.
I’ve never been able to get more than 25 pages through The Hating Game but I try again every once in a while. Sarah Mayberry wrote two of my favorite enemies/rivals to lovers: Her Best Worst Mistake and Her Favorite Rival. I also like Practice Makes Perfect by Julie James despite a rather cringe reveal at the end.
Another vote for “antagonists-to-lovers.”
@Janine Ballard: I have a couple antagonists with benefits recs.
Stupid Love by Riley Hart – Frenemies to lovers MM NA IR romance set in Atlanta. Two compelling and believable twenty-somethings snarking, hate-flirting, denying and stumbling their way into love.
The Hate Project by Kris Ripper. It’s the 2nd in zir Love Study series and it’s pretty stand alone – mm contemp romance that starts with two grumpy acquaintances having pity sex, becoming frenemies with benefits and then developing inconvenient emotions.
I think your enjoyment of this book will depend on how well you can handle being in the head of our narrator Oscar – an anxious, depressed underachieving 29 year old. The description of his anxiety felt very real – different than my experience but believable and overwhelming. I also thought that the romance was under-developed, mostly because this is told only from Oscar’s point of view. But I enjoyed reading about Oscar and his found family of queer friends so much that I didn’t mind.
Also – Goalie Interference (Hat Trick #2) by Avon Gale and Piper Vaughn – mm rivals to lovers hockey romance about 2 antagonistic goalies competing for the opening goalie position while having the occasional booty call. I didn’t love this as much as my other two recommendations but I liked it.
@Jenreads: I remember that Her Best Worst Mistake was beloved by many. I didn’t connect with it (I’m not so into stodgy heroes) but I’ll check out Her Favorite Rival.
Practice Makes Perfect was an interesting one. I liked it at the time and I especially liked the equitable way the conflict was resolved but I don’t think I’d be into the hero now because of his politics. I’m also not sure I’d feel the same way about something else–I loved the part where he cut the heroine’s (his rival for making partners at the law firm where both worked) sandal strap so she would stumble when delivering oral arguments in court. There was something about the low down dirty trick that was really fun to read at the time. Times have changed. What was the cringe reveal? I am completely blanking.
@cleo: Thank you! The Riley Hart sounds the most appealing to me of those. Is that the one you’d normally recommend starting with, or did you like The Hate Project better?
Also, I wonder if it’s possible that Goalie Interference inspired Heated Rivalry, or vice versa.
@Janine: I liked both the Riley Hart and Kris Ripper about equally but for different reasons. Stupid Love is much, much lighter than The Hate Project.
I want to mention that when I read Stupid Love I initially was annoyed by the writing style – it’s written in alternating first person and some of the descriptions and explanations seemed stilted to me. But once I got caught up in the story I didn’t notice it. It may bother you more, since you’re a writer. I did think the storytelling was really good even if some of the wording was off. There’s a lot going on for a low conflict romance and it could have been a big mess of mashed up tropes, but the author wove it all together to create a romance that I thought was light and joyful.
Keep the recommendations coming! And do you have enemies-to-lovers books to rant about?
I wasn’t a big fan of The Hating Game as some of the actions seemed hurtful.
As regards Practice Makes Perfect, I THINK that the male lead lied and told someone that the female lead had done something of a sexual nature (with him, at work?). I’d have to reread it to be sure.
@cleo: Thanks. I think maybe I’ll start with The Hate Project then. I can be picky when it comes to language.
@Kareni: It sounds plausible but I don’t remember it at all. I usually have a good memory for books but apparently not in this case.
That was it, Kareni. I reread it recently and realized how poorly that reads now.
Stormfire brings back memories! I still have the paperback – back in the day it was one of my favourite books (how???). I’m glad we’ve moved past those kind of books. My 15 year old self who had no idea about anything could embrace it but I don’t think it would fly now. Certainly not with me!
This discussion reminded me of Joanna Bourne’s historicals, which I love. Because they are set when Britain and France are at war, and the hero and heroine are usually spies on different sides, they can be political enemies yet recognize the good in each other as people. There’s also the external conflict, not only of war and travel during wartime, but of feeling torn between duty to one’s country and spymaster versus feelings for the love interest.
@Janine, I liked Practice Makes Perfect when I read it but would struggle with it now. What the hero does is so wrong and he’s not sufficiently apologetic for it. Also his rationale was something like “well I was upset you liked someone else,” or something stupid like that. Which…no.
OT but I forgot to post this in the open thread. Is anyone submitting nominations for the Swoon Awards? The nomination round ends tonight at 11.59 PM EST
https://www.theswoonawards.com/
I’ve gone back through my notes and found a few more antagonists-to-lovers romances that I enjoyed in 2021 (although not all of them were published in 2021):
CLAIMING THE RANCHER’S HEIR by Maisey Yates: rival vineyard owners have always “hated” each other…but we know what that means in Romancelandia!
WRECKLESS by Katie Golding: two professional motorcycle racers have been rivals on the Moto Cross Grand Prix circuit (which is one of the few professional sports where men and women race against each other) for ten years, but attraction simmers beneath the surface. Lots of competence p0rn in this one.
NOT WHAT I EXPECTED by Jewel E. Ann: this book sort of straddles the line between romance and women’s fiction and is also an age-gap with an older heroine, but the basic antagonists-to-lovers elements revolves around two people who both own specialty-food stores in a small town that can only conceivably support one business of that type.
A NEW ENEMY and I’M NOT YOUR ENEMY (The Enemies Duet) by Cara Dee: m/m with heroes who are initially antagonistic because one is deeply closeted and doesn’t believe he can come out to his family and both men feel proprietary toward a young boy with Down Syndrome (the nephew of one of the men) and resents the part the other plays in his life.
AFTER WE FALL by Melanie Harlow (this is a long-time favorite of mine) and MAKE ME WILDER by Serena Bell: I grouped these two books together because they have a very similar plot line, but in terms of style and execution are completely different (although both equally good). A PR consultant arrives to assist a family-run business in re-branding itself for a bigger market, but one member of the family is resistant to the suggestions the consultant makes—but that doesn’t stop the sparks from flying. These two books show that two writers can take the same basic story and make two completely different books from it.
I admit I have a knee-jerk reaction to the term enemies-to-lovers because when I hear it I immediately think of contemporary romances where, as Janine notes, the enmity usually comes off as rather juvenile as it plays out on page. And it takes me back to years of Harlequin Romances where the H&H sniped for 90% of the book and in the last 10% they finally admit to being in love.
In Christina Lauren’s THE UNHONEYMOONERS, a book I absolutely enjoyed, I did like how it was executed — up to a point. The book is first person POV from the heroine and from her perspective she at first kinda liked the hero, but he dislikes her for some reason unknown to her and makes no bones about his dislike so she reciprocates out of self preservation. On the one hand I was exasperated with his constant disdain because, yeah, it felt childish, but otoh, I also allowed that maybe the heroine was an unreliable narrator and a lot of what we got from her was heightened and not as bad as she made it out to be. But still when we finally found out why he disliked her, yeah, it felt pretty juvenile.
I think what I am not mostly a fan of in this trope is when it is an the external agent that places what feels like an arbitrary barrier or situation that forces the enmity which happens a lot in contemps. But when I get past that contemporary-knee jerk reaction I do like it when an author can make the enmity something deeper, more personal and internal.
In Mariana Zapata’s KULTI the hero is just a equal opportunity jerk overall who is so unhappy with his own situation so he takes it out on the heroine. That sounds bad, but it works though especially since he is also her coach.
As has also been noted here, I think the trope works best in historicals or SFF and especially Urban Fantasy. I am reminded of Sharon Shinn’s MYSTIC and RYDER where the hero is one of an elite personal guard for the King who vow absolute loyalty to him. The heroine is a mystic who has the King’s ear and deep trust. They are forced together on a road trip task for the king. The hero is mistrustful of the heroine because he doesn’t understand her relationship with the king. Why does the king trust her so much? Does she have some sort of mystical hold over him etc. etc. I liked this because the enmity is all coming from one direction and is coming from a place of anxiety and mistrust. She is aware and doesn’t exactly return it, but she also doesn’t try to allay it either. It makes for a nice tension that feels natural.
@Jenreads: @Sydneysider: Yes, that strikes a cringey note now. I don’t know how it is that fifteen years ago many of us we thought that book was good fun. Times change and readers’ outlooks change. I wonder if newer readers who haven’t read it before are unhappy with the book.
@Kaetrin: Stormfire! I didn’t try it until the late 1990s, by which point I was close to thirty, and so I couldn’t get past chapter one. As I recall the hero rapes the virginal heroine and then sends her bloody underthings to her father (stepfather?) who is his mortal enemy. I could read no further but a friend told me that later in the book the hero breaks the heroine’s rib. I read equally bad stuff (OMG Wicked Loving Lies by Rosemary Rogers is so horrible—the hero leads a gang rape of the heroine and brands her on the thigh) though I wasn’t a fan of much of it. Not necessarily because of objections to rape (much of it didn’t bother me at the time) but because of extreme cruelty or the lack of monogamy (in my teens) or (in my twenties) also when rape was portrayed as something about as serious as a hangnail, with no lasting aftereffects.
Those books don’t work for me these days. I had a longstanding love for To Have and to Hold by Patricia Gaffney for many years and I still think it’s the most fascinating and complex example of this kind of book, with a lot of depth to the main characters’ characterization and layers to the metaphors and the language. That doesn’t make it okay, though.
I suppose the most recent example of an enemies-to-lovers book I liked that included non-consensual scenes is Captive Prince by C.S. Pacat. That was in 2013. I don’t think it would work for me anymore but I haven’t tried to read it since. I just know that I’m more sensitive to depictions of rape or even just presumptuous come ons that didn’t bother me at one time. What Jayne said about the events of the last few years has made a difference with me too.
Long ago, I remember DA Robin pointing out that the bodice rippers of the 1970s and early 1980s came about during the “battle of the sexes” era—a time when there was still a lot of controversy about women entering the workplace instead of being homemakers and quietly supporting men. Not that there’s anything wrong with staying at home, it’s just that at that time it was the expected thing and going against the grain incited some people to anger. This was also the era when on General Hospital Luke raped Laura and then their wedding was the highest rated episode in daytime television history. Similarly, Saturday Night Fever, a movie in which John Travolta raped his dancing partner, was also a big hit and did not lessen Travolta’s popularity as a movie star.
I was around ten when I first saw Saturday Night Fever, twelve when I encountered General Hospital and thirteen when I picked up my first romance, Johanna Lindsey’s Heart of Thunder (not to be confused with her later book Savage Thunder), a bodice ripper. Maybe that’s why I enjoyed this kind of storyline as a teen. This kind of material isn’t what I want to read now and I am so glad times have changed.
@Kris Bock: Duty vs. love is one of my favorite conflicts ever, which is probably why Casablanca is my favorite movie (even though it doesn’t have a HEA). When Rick (Humphrey Bogart) says “The problems of two little people don’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world,” he’s describing the fact that there are bigger considerations than his and Ilsa’s happiness. They can choose happiness (to be together) or they can choose to do the right thing, their duty. And never the twain shall meet. It’s poignant but also gloriously romantic that though they love each other so much they put the good of the world ahead of their happiness.
That’s the thing I find dicey in love vs. duty romances, though. You have to really convince me that love is more important than duty, because duty in this case means selflessness and the romantic relationship, a certain degree of selfishness. And if duty isn’t so important then the conflict is less powerful. It’s a tricky balance to resolve.
I did think of Joanna Bourne’s books when we were having this discussion. I’ve only read her debut and it didn’t work for me (not for that reason, though). I’ve often thought I should give one of her others a try. She is clearly a gifted writer and I love her prose.
The other author I thought of is Donna Thorland (disclaimer: a friend). She has four Revolutionary War historicals in her Renegades of the Revolution series where the hero and heroine are on different sides of the war. One of the things I love in her books is that the hero is on the British side and switches to the American side during the book. Too often in wartime enemies-to-lovers historicals, it’s the heroine who is on the wrong side of history.
@DiscoDollyDeb: I think you’ve recommended the latter two before as well and the first of these intrigued me (I wish I could remember what it was about it—something more than the enemies-to-lovers setup, I think). Wreckless also sounds good. I love competence porn.
@TinaNoir:
I remember those! Can I admit to a certain nostalgia for Penny Jordan’s 1990s books? I liked them and I don’t know why really. The heroines, I think. She was good at writing a heroine who was vulnerable but had backbone. She also wrote a couple of non-category books that and those had interesting if improbable and melodramatic plots.
I haven’t read Christina Lauren but that is sometimes the trouble with books where the backstory informs the motive but that motive and backstory aren’t revealed until later on. By the time that point is reached, readers have sometimes built up certain expectations and while those can be subverted in interesting ways it is also possible for the explanations to fall flat and collapse the reader’s reading pleasure.
Me too.
Kulti has been recommended to me more than once. I need to bite the bullet but it’s so long!
Mystic and Rider was pretty good. DA Jane *loved* that book. My favorite book in the series was Dark Moon Defender. It could also be described as an enemies to lovers book, not because the hero and heroine treat each other (or even recognize each other much) as enemies but because they are on opposite sides of the series conflict when the story begins.
@Janine Ballard: When I read Stormfire the first time I was extremely young and naive. I completed skipped over that first rape scene to the point where I didn’t even register it had happened. I have no idea how I managed it.
With the caveat that (clearly!) my memory of the book is faulty, the hero doesn’t break the heroine’s rib. She’s injured and he puts her in what is effectively a dungeon and leaves her there because she’s betrayed him. When she’s released from the dungeon she’s very unwell and clearly more injured than he realised. That’s not an excuse. He does some very horrible things. Later in the book he’s tortured himself and one of his testicles is cut off – she rescues him before the torturer can finish the job – lucky for them(?)
It’s not Sweet Savage Love but it’s definitely of it’s time and very violent and the heroine is extremely long-suffering.