Old vs New: What do you like in your reviews?
Over half (21 of 38) books I’ve reviewed for AAR in 2020 are not books that have been published this year. My oldest? Marion Chesney’s 1983 Regency The Miser of Mayfair, re-released in 2011 under her other name M.C. Beaton.
Another interesting fact? I’ve given fourteen DIKs in 2020, but just three (
Queen Move, The Switch, and Bench Player) are 2020 releases. That’s a measly one-fifth.
I give these numbers as background for explaining why I, as both a reviewer and a reader, love reviews of older releases.
As a reader, I do get a kick out of a well-written roast review. And I appreciate thoughtful Bs and Cs, which help me figure out if I might like the book more than the reviewer did, and which give me an overall “state of what’s coming out” guide to help me with purchases and new authors. At the end of the day, though, I come to review sites to find books I’ll love, and that means looking for DIKs. And my numbers should show you that relying on new releases to find DIK-worthy books isn’t going to cut it.
Another reason I like reading reviews of older books is my personal reading habits. The library is my go-to for books, and in the quarantine/pandemic era, that means ebooks. With the way publishers restrict ebooks in libraries, I’m much more likely to be able to get older books, especially within a reasonable amount of time. (And of course, when I’m looking for new reads to review, my access to older books is much stronger).
I also appreciate recent reviews of older books because I know that I am a much more thoughtful reader about issues of sexuality, race, and inclusion than I was when I started reading romance over two decades ago. Romances of the eighties and nineties, for instance, are chock full of the “evil skanky gay villain” trope. While the trope hasn’t died the death it should, a modern review of that book is much more likely to give a reader a heads-up than an older review is.
I’m a completionist (you should see my museum on Animal Crossing) and a data geek, so I also love and believe in AAR’s database. To me, it’s the most distinguishing aspect of the site. It’s not just something for readers to use. I hope someday it could be a tool for scholars or historians of the genre. I mean, can you think of anywhere else you can search nearly 15,000 thoughtful, long-form reviews of romance, for FREE? And every book added is more data!
Finally, from my reviewer perspective, sharing DIKs is why I want to be here. When I finish a book I love, I’m just itching to find somebody to evangelize about it to. I don’t see any reason not to do that just because the book isn’t brand new.
What do you think? As readers, does AAR get the right balance between solid coverage of the present and throwbacks to the past? When you think back on your most recent AAR-inspired discoveries, are they new or old? What older books aren’t in our DB at the moment that you think somebody should give a go – and would you consider submitting a guest review to us?
~ Caroline Russomanno
I prefer the reviews of new or at least recent books over reviews of old books for 2 reasons.
1) The new reviews help me to discover new authors.
2) Many of the older books just don’t hold up well — especially books written in the 90s. “Untamed” by Elizabeth Lowell is a perfect example. That’s not to say that there aren’t any good older books — just that I am more interested in the reviews of new books.
It is handy to have all the reviews (new & old) in a searchable archive for reference.
I am happy with AAR, I love reading reviews even if I will not read the book, or only a small fraction of the books. I do not mind AAR mostly reviewing new books. I like you flagging old reviews, reminds me of the treasure trove of older reviews. I most love when you either reference an older review in a current one, or just add a current intro to am old review. Clear Marking what it is – which you do well! – is key.
M y current reading experience and detailed reasons for above:
Through AAR, this year, I found a chain of old series authors, and historical series.
CR:
Mary Burchell, Sophie Weston, Jessica Hart, Melissa James, Essie Summers.
HR:
Sheila Bishop, Joy Reed, Elsie Lee
Mostly these were readers’ recommendations. Thank you, AAR and readers.
Connecting your question to the prior discussions, related to older books:
These books have more nuanced supporting casts, spend more time on details, get a lot of period detail on the page – examples: people lighting fires or lamps or entering dark rooms, or drafts and shawls being important, courtesies and greetings, long journeys in bad weather, women cooking every day for a whole bunch of people on a working farm – – it really makes me realize how daily life was without instant light, food, travel and communication. Time is also taken for family members, uneven layered personalities for side characters, and descriptions. This makes a more leisurely read. Immerses more. Feels true to period. Things I want from a historical and a strong sense of place and time period.
It also means more flaws, in persons, such as prejudiced narrow minded elders still being respected, wives and daughters being obedient to men, communities rejecting people based on gossip and people conforming to narrow rules. Shame over divorce, sisters shunning you for being ruined and authors tacitly approving this. Servants being treated like furniture by heroines, heroes being total prigs, a spanking being part of an education, wives treated like children and so on. And total blindness to the diversity- it takes authors like KJ Charles to show us a different historical England.
I seems hard to review these books today without totally condemning the above. And therefore deeming them unreadable, today.
Does this happen? That you reread or read an old book and cannot give a good grade though you like it, for what it is?
So maybe, leave the original review, clearly marked, and add a “2020 Comment” ?
I will read both old and new, and notice the narrow focus on the “essence” in new romances, especially series. Main characters, less detail except on the main topic (job, passion, main locations, fewer characters). A faster read. I like that, too, just not exclusively.
Currently, 70% old and 30% new, for 2020. This can switch anytime.
A lot of old recommended authors is on KU, so accessible that way.
Beware: for example old Roberta Gellis ebooks are disappearing from Amazon, you cannot rely on ebooks staying available forever. Though if you bought it, you have it, of course.
Lieselotte – I adored Elsie Lee’s books, both CR and HR with the latter my favourites. That’s a blast from the very distant past!!! Joy Reed is scandalously over-looked IMO and Sheila Bishop was someone whose books I read at the beginning of my romance reading career. So glad you have read them and I hope you liked them.
I mostly enjoy them, they sure well written.
Al these flaws you’ve enumerated give the older books a more authentic feeling IMO, especially in HR, while the newer ones sound unrealistic. But I’m a historian and therefore not so easily deterred by realism.
Yes, that mostly happens for me.
Your comment: “ Does this happen? That you reread or read an old book and cannot give a good grade though you like it, for what it is?” It put me in mind of Jo Walton’s reference to the “suck fairy” (although I don’t think the idea was original with her—that’s just where I first heard of it) who visits your favorite books (especially favorite books from childhood) and sucks all the remembered joy out of them. That’s why it’s always a tricky proposition to go back and reread favorite books from years past. There’s an old saying, “You never read the same book twice because you’re always a different person each time you reread the book.” None of us lives in a vacuum, our ideas and likes & dislikes change, cultures & beliefs change, so what was fun, entertaining, or acceptable a few decades ago will now show a few cracks. On the other hand, growth and change means that we seek out new books with different themes and ideas. For example, I think if you had told me and my cohort of baby-boomer bodice-ripper readers back in the 1970s & 1980s that in about 40 years many of us would be reading heaps of romances featuring male-male couples, I suspect most of us would have been disbelieving…and yet, here we are. (Grabs HEATED RIVALRY for the, oh, twentieth reread.)
My first m/m romance was Zero at the Bone by Jane Seville in 2010. I was blown away. I haven’t reread it to see how it stands up, but at the time it was world changing for me. I was struck by the difference having two males as the love interests made for the power dynamics. I wrote in my review how I would love to see more of that equal power dynamic in m/f books. Ten years down the road, and I think we do see this more in m/f books. Even so, two males or two females bring differences in how relationships seem to work; how they feel. Probably my favorite singer right now is LP, who is LGBT. Her songs about other women and love probably wouldn’t be written by men in the same way. The songs have a female voice–bringing something unique and powerful to the admiration and desire for another woman.
All this to say, I wouldn’t have thought I’d enjoy LGBT romances years ago. Tastes do change. I so appreciate Zero at the Bone for opening my eyes to how women and men approach desire and love a little differently, and how stories about m/m or f/f couples bring a wonderfully unique insight into how our minds and hearts work.
Hah – I’m reading that for this month’s TBR Challenge, so watch this space for a review!
Very good! I can’t wait to read your review. I have a review on goodreads if you’re interested, although maybe wait until you read the book. I’d be interested to see if some things struck you the same way.
Completely true, I love having the options – I want both worlds, not either or.
The only series of Tamara Morgan’s that appears in the database is the Penelope Blue romantic suspense. I much prefer her contemporary romances and think others would also. I am not volunteering to review them, however. I appreciate all you do!
Getting Physical Trilogy: The Rebound Girl, The Party Girl, and The Derby Girl are set in a suburb of Philadelphia in a cosmetic surgery practice.
Games of Love: Love is a Battlefield and The World is a Stage are set in Spokane Washington and involve Highland Games, Austen re-enactments, and Shakespeare.
Her In the Clear is a great Christmas novella.
I like to learn about a good book no matter when it was first published. All I ask of an AAR review of an older book (or the republication of an older review) is that it is obvious that the book is not newly published. DIK Classic does this disclosure. For new reviews of older books, which may not merit that rating, more is needed. Some publishers are very bad about clearly disclosing that a book is a reissue. Some even change the names. AAR can do a real service beyond just helping readers discover hidden treasures by prominently including “Originally published in 2008” or “Originally published in 2008 under the title xxx”
When there’s been some kind of metadata change (name, title, etc) we do disclose that when we notice – see my Marion Chesney /M.C. Beaton review for an example, or my review of The Beast of Blackmoor. If all that’s happening is that we haven’t gotten around to reviewing the book yet, we don’t do anything special, but the publication date is always part of the data of the review along with heat rating, etc.
If I review an older book – especially if it’s a MUCH older one, I try to make a point of including details like that in the body of the review.
I value the reviews of both older books and new releases highly, and find them equally helpful. As I’m reasonably new to this genre, the chances are I haven’t read the older books anyway, and if I have it is always interesting to hear what other people think about them. I use the power search and the tags A LOT to find the kinds of books I’d like to read plus there are excellent book recommendations in the comments all the time, so I think most of my AAR inspired book discoveries have been older books. But I also make wonderful recently released discoveries at a pretty steady pace, so I guess what I’m trying to say is that what you’re doing now works really well for me.
Most of my most recent AAR-inspired discoveries are new books – because the vast majority of the reviews are for new books. But like others, I enjoy reviews of older books too. I read the Elizabeth Lowell you just re-posted the review for; and posted some comments about it just last night on that review: I think the original reviewer was a little generous. She was clearly a big fan of the book. But it was a decent read.
Also, I loved the *comments* that showed up when AAR reposted reviews of all its most recent Top 100 books in anticipation of the last Top 100 poll. So I think reposting original reviews is interesting; but my favorite is reading an updated review. It’s interesting to see how perceptions and tastes change when books are read with fresh eyes.
I agree with other commenters that older books are easier to find. And at 2-3 books a week, I can’t afford to buy – much less buy brand new – most of what I’d like to read. OTOH, I refuse to read crap because it is cheap (e.g. Kindle Unlimited – yes, they have some good stuff there but Amazon wants subscribers to read what they are offering up, so they make it time-consuming and clunky to find favorite authors/the good stuff.) There are a lot of great reads sitting out there on library and bookstore shelves (physical, ebook, and audio). And, like others, I check AAR when I’m on library sites and/or in bookstores.
So yes, bring on the backlists!
I need to give more thought to books/authors that have yet to be/should be reviewed. Josh Lanyon is an author who’s best/favorite work has never been reviewed (e.g. nothing from the Adrien English or Holmes & Moriarity series at all, and only book 3 of the “Fair” trilogy). Fans of Gregory Ashe, for example, might particularly like the Adrien English series (and guess what, the whole series is available at KU . . . !)
Adrien is on my list of “to review when I have time!” books.
Oh . . . I envy you your first time with this series! But you have to read them all. The “mysteries” within each book are solid and stand alone. But it takes all five books for the relationship stuff to completely resolve.
Its a great series, isn’t it? I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read or listened to it. Right after Christmas last year my mm group on Goodreads did a buddy read of it, and it was so fun! Adrien’s snark and his witty exchanges with Jake are often hilarious.
It was also interesting to note that it was a groundbreaking series in many ways; there were not a lot of mm romantic suspense novels reaching a mainstream audience at the time; the first book was published, which was 1999 I think. And, AIDS was still very much in the news then, gay marriage was pretty much a pipe dream, and homophobia ran rampant in traditionally masculine pursuits like police departments.
I highly recommend the series to anyone who likes mm fiction, especially mysteries that have a bit of a cozy quality to them.
I appreciate the reviews of older books and new releases equally.
This year, I’ve tried to read more 2020 books than ever before so I can keep up with the discussions here and elsewhere that primarily focus on books that came out recently, but 2020 books still only make up about 12% of the reading I’ve done so far.
As I’ve said before, I love history and my instinct with always be to reach for older books, even if it’s just to better understand new ones. But it would be impossible for me to sort through the infinite number of older romances without AAR’s help. Whenever I go to a used bookstore, I’m constantly cross-referencing titles against the database.
AAR is responsible for my discovery of Elizabeth Essex’s “Reckless Brides” series this year and although I haven’t read them yet, I’ve also bought older books by Sarah Mayberry, Kathleen O’Reilly, Anne Calhoun, Kathleen Giles Seidel, and Marsha Canham based on AAR recommendations.
I read over 10 books a month- probably half CR and half the older HR titles. So I truly appreciate the reviews of older books. (Sorry to have missed that quiz), 95% of the books I buy and read I buy based on your reviews. The other 5% are when you haven’t done a review- I’ll check DA or GR (with a hefty grain of salt). I love it that you have the older titles and authors. Right now I’ve found Judith Ivory (!) based on a few of your comments. Whether shopping online or standing in bookstores I check AAR first to see what you all have to say. You database is invaluable. You’re wonderful for your fabulous insights, your analyses, and especially your references to past titles. I cannot find the depth or trustworthiness of your reviews anywhere else. Also the humor is great (Em!! “switcheroo bullshit” – a riot)
Always, 100% down to discuss Judith Ivory. She’s the Queen. I’m so happy you found her! :)
Cece, Thanks!! Found Bliss finally after about 10 months of hunting for a decent price. Now looking for Dance. Yikes!! The prices!! Beast is my favorite. Wish AAR would do a panel discussion on her and what made her great. I love the words but am horrible at analyzing why.
I know, the prices are frightening!! I have a lot of “romance genre dreams” but perhaps my top one is that a publisher will reissue her novels as new editions. It would be great to read a copy of a Judith Ivory book that I hadn’t paid a ton of money for and was half-terrified of having fall apart on me.
Beast was my first Judith Ivory and it’s still probably my favorite as well, but I also love Black Silk, Sleeping Beauty, and Bliss.
I love the words too! I’ve heard her style described as “purple prose” which I think is slightly off-base, it’s very sensual, corporeal, and descriptive and hews closer to literary fiction than a lot of historical romances published today.
And while many romances are working in the tradition of Jane Austen or Charlotte Bronte, it strikes me that Judith Ivory’s influences might be more in line with Henry James or Edith Wharton (in Bliss & Beast) or George Eliot (in Black Silk).
Yayy, I love finding another Judith Ivory fan!!! :)
I think AAR is striking a good balance between reviewing brand new publications and blasts from the pasts. Like a number of commenters here, I don’t care about a book’s publication date. If it’s worth reading, it’s worth reading whether it was written in 2020 or 1970.
I also agree with those here saying that contemporary romances tend to be a bit too modern, being overly stuffed with pop culture references, celebrity name-dropping, and constant texting. That’s going to get dated really fast and doesn’t appeal to me now either.
Yes to the technology and pop culture references. Anne Calhoun’s LIBERATING LACEY is one of my all-time favorite romances, but just over a decade since its publication, the constant references to Lacey’s Blackberry make it seem somewhat dated.
Agreed. The constant pop culture references make almost every contemporary I’ve read, or tried to read, this year feel like NA, even if the protagonists are older than the usual NA. Romantic suspense has been a go-to for me for years, but I’m over reading about serial killers or top secret military agencies.
On the other hand, writers are sort of between a rock and a hard place, since it’s impossible to write about today’s world without pretty constant references to cell phones, internet, social media, gaming, music, etc. If I imagine someone writing about someone like my own children (ages 23 to 35), there would be little to say if social gaming, online role-playing, streaming music, and online community wasn’t portrayed as a big part of their lives. Of the three in relationships right now, two met while playing online games.
Not sure what I’m looking for in a contemporary romance,so it’s probably more me than “them.”
“Romantic suspense has been a go-to for me for years, but I’m over reading about serial killers or top secret military agencies.”
Have you checked out any of the Harlequin Romantic Suspense or Harlequin Intrigue titles? There’s a lot of the standard serial killer and government agency stuff, but there are also some other premises if you dig through their catalog. Plus, they release several titles per month, so that’s a bonus.
“On the other hand, writers are sort of between a rock and a hard place, since it’s impossible to write about today’s world without pretty constant references to cell phones, internet, social media, gaming, music, etc.”
Well, I wouldn’t say it’s impossible to keep these elements to a minimum in a contemporary story, but it certainly isn’t easy. Believe it or not, there are some off-grid types who eschew a lot of modern tech, and I don’t necessarily mean stringent religious communities (although that’s also a possibility). And just the other day I saw on a news program a single mom complaining to the school district that her son can’t attend online distance learning programs because they don’t have internet access in their apartment and the libraries are closed. Definitely a tough situation, but one that still exists in 21st century urban America. So there are possible angles for contemporary story telling that don’t involve constant internet usage. I would also like to think there are young people who have hobbies and interests that don’t involve constantly pecking away at smartphones and texting. Then again, maybe not…
Getting back to romantic suspense, I think that’s a real challenge for writers nowadays too. With all the surveillance and security measures we have today, how does anybody get away with being a criminal short of being a genius cybercrook? Or better yet, how do fugitives survive these days? Seriously. I had to laugh when I saw the intro to the old TV show The Fugitive that opens with something like, “He survives, going from place to place, taking jobs which require no identification.” Really? What jobs are those? You can’t even mop a floor nowadays without an SSN and background check!
On that note, Chrisreader said on another post that mystery and suspense writers have their work cut out for them more than previous generations. A power outage or cut wire isn’t enough to isolate the hero/heroine because cell phones generally still work. Again, difficult but not impossible.
I noticed years ago authors specifically wouldn’t specifically reference celebrities or current song titles in their works. They would say something like “when a new popular rock song started playing in the club, Sandra noticed the green eyed gentleman who had been staring at her get out of his seat and walk towards her.”
I don’t know if authors were foresighted enough to be thinking of people reading the book years later, or there was prohibition against mentioning anything that may cause copyright issues.
I personally find reading older books from pre-cell phone days and the internet really isn’t jarring for me unless the author throws in things like the “current” technology. And even then I tend to think of the books as slightly “historical” romance. I don’t mind reading a book that is clearly written/set in the 60s-90’s. A lot of the classic gothic or suspense novels I read were older ones from the 60-70s.
I think it’s when things are just a few years out of date it seems jarring. Over time, like fashions, it will become more charming.
“I don’t know if authors were foresighted enough to be thinking of people reading the book years later, or there was prohibition against mentioning anything that may cause copyright issues.”
It might be a little of both. Production times for traditionally published books are so long, naming a popular song will already sound dated by the time it hits the shelves. Also, I’ve heard you have to be super careful when dropping song names or song lyrics, more so than referencing other media for some reason (stronger copyrights, maybe?)
As for modern tech, I think another part of the problem isn’t just the fact it gets dated but that it can be distracting. I don’t want to read a romance where the characters spend the majority of the time tweeting and texting, which feels superficial to me. It’s just way too close to stuff I can’t stand in real life.
Plus, I don’t read a lot of contemporary in any genre because it’s generally not an exciting escape. I don’t want to read a plot that comes down to, “Oh no! Kelly accidentally texted her boss a compromising photo. Yikes!” I want to read, “Influenced by the dime novels she has secretly been reading, Hattie flees her straight-laced Bostonian family for the American frontier- only to be captured by outlaws and fall for an undercover Texas ranger.” Or, “In the 24th century, only Na’kor and her band of revolutionaries can save the Kexoxyl galaxy, etc.” Day to day office drama just pales in comparison…
If you write that story about Hattie I will totally buy it!
Heh heh. Thanks for the vote of confidence. Unfortunately, I suck at plotting, heavy research, or anything else that would make an HR readable. At least with historical erotica shorts, I can hide behind the cowardly excuse of, “You know what? It’s a sex story. Deal with it.” (Let me tell you though, writing an erotic novelette in Shakespearean English is a b****! Been there, done that.)
However, there are actually some old Harlequin Love Inspired Historicals that follow a plot similar to the one I described, such as The Outlaw’s Secret by Stacy Henrie. For a clean romance with the highly improbable premise of the heroine trying to get kidnapped by outlaws to do research for her next dime novel, it was a fun fluffy way to spend the afternoon- even though the heroine was TSTL.
The problem with Inspirationals for me is they often have interesting premises that tend to favor American Frontier stories (i.e. Westerns), but they beat you over the head with religion and don’t have anything racy that helps make romances fun. But I will give the defunct line credit for somewhat old fashioned, over the top stories that feel like they could have been episodes of Bonanza or Gunsmoke but with different characters.
Maybe I’m jaded, but these days, I get into fits of eye rolls and giggles over outlaws who miraculously never utter a curse word and sexual tension never arises. I mean, the heroine in The Outlaw’s Secret essentially ends up playing Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs to her captors…
“Maybe I’m jaded, but these days, I get into fits of eye rolls and giggles over outlaws who miraculously never utter a curse word…”
On the writers’ discussion board where I post, someone once said that we shouldn’t use four-letter-words in our work because that limited our audience. His reasoning was that no one ever stopped reading a book because it didn’t have enough f-words, but there are people who will avoid novels that contain profanity. To gain the largest readership, we should therefore not have our characters swear.
Thankfully there was plenty of pushback against this. As well as what you pointed out, the realism factor, we can’t weigh every aspect of our books in a “who will be turned off by this?” balance. As K. J. Charles put it, “I don’t want to upset anyone is a useful mantra for people who write…advertising copy, I guess? Not fiction.”
There’s definitely a balance when it comes to profanity versus audience as well as issues surrounding reality and quality. It’s certainly true a lot of the great movies during the Hays Code somehow managed to work around prohibitions on swearing, even in gangster flicks. Then again, there are some cringeworthy moments that you know were the direct result of censorship. A film noir where a gangster called someone “a dumb cluck” immediately comes to mind. I knew what he wanted to say and felt kind of sorry for him that he couldn’t say it. He certainly would have out on the streets in real life!
Plus, publishing lines have their own rules when it comes to profanity that authors need to work around. Harlequin Intrigue, for example, never goes beyond mild swear words. As I’ve said before, I’ve said a lot worse when I’ve stubbed my toe but tough guy characters being shot at can’t manage any worse than, “Oh, hell!”
It goes the other way too. I’ve gotten annoyed when movies obviously throw in a single “damn” or “hell” just to avoid the dreaded “G” rating where no swearing was necessary.
In short, context, context, context!
When my house was a Building Site I had – surprise – builders. A few of them were unable so say ANY sentence without using the “f-“ word.
as in: “f, give me the f hammer”, or: “the f door is fing too narrow for the f box, f it.”
I got used to it.
When I read, I still do not enjoy a book with characters talking like that.
I do not believe I am a prude, I just find a character who talks like this boring quickly. Some authors, when they want us to see a group of tough people, seem to model on my builders dialogue, instead of making some effort to use language that sounds authentic, uses the full range of language, and remains interesting to the reader.
Some books manage this well.
I do nor remember any at the moment.
Do you recommend any that did it very well?
LOL about “builders dialogue.” That could be a new content warning label! On that note, I remember overhearing a roofer tell his buddy, “No, I don’t have one of those nails, you f****** a******!” But I’m sure he meant it in a spirit of frustrated comradery. :)
As for adult book recommendations without swearing that still feel authentic, I can’t really think of one. Sorry!
I meant the opposite:
a book with lots and lots of swearing that still manages to have great dialogue.
Sorry, I can’t believe I didn’t find your post earlier. In regard to your question, I think Elmore Leonard’s crime novels have great sounding dialogue. He was a big influence on Quentin Tarantino’s work if you need a reference for style.
Done well, a character using profanity can become humorous and even iconic for that character. In Suzanne Brockmann’s Troubleshooters series, the character of Sam Starret uses the F-bomb in nearly every sentence. He’s a tough Navy SEAL, and a young gay FBI agent Jules Cassidy teases him about it. ‘It’s like aloha for you, isn’t it? It can mean hello, goodbye, how’s your uncle…’. Sam hadn’t much liked Jules up to this point, but the teasing breaks the ice and the two eventually become extremely close friends over the course of the series. Sam still swears all the time, though!
I don’t like swearing done for shock value or just because its an easy way to write dialogue. All too often, that seems to be the reason authors use those words, and that’s just lazy writing. But swearing in extremis, swearing used to help define a character or group of characters can be done effectively.
I’d forgotten the Aloha exchange. You are correct. Sam has a lot of great lines/moments in those books. He was frequently used by Brockmann to break the tension in a scene with some comic relief.
Sam is hilarious, as is Izzy a bit later in the series. He doesn’t swear so much, though. I keep hoping there will be more Trouble shooters in our future, but Brockmann is sure making us wait….
It’s been so long. I don’t think Brockmann has any plans for more books in the series. But that is a hunch, not based on anything from the author. It was quite the ride, though, while it lasted.
Oh, absolutely! I used to joke with people saying, “Don’t swear for the hell of it.” But really, it comes down to character and context.
One thing that annoys me in films these days is when a mild-mannered family film throws in one obvious “damn” or “hell” just to avoid getting a G rating because the filmmakers are afraid it will make them look uncool. I’ve heard there are even a couple of Jane Austen films that forced themselves into PG ratings by having light swearing in the background of a gentlemen’s club or purposely referring to a female dog as a “bitch.” Seriously? There’s no good reason for a Jane Austen movie to try to make itself cool or nab a higher rating by sticking in a random swear word.
On the other hand, I don’t want to read sanitized marines who say things like, “Oh, dear. The enemy is coming over the hill. Gee whiz.” (Well, short of a parody, of course. Context! Context! Context!)
The cast of Justified, based on a Leonard short story Fire In The Hole, after Leonard died, wore bracelets with WWELD on them as a reminder to be true to his dialog in the show.
Yes, I read that recently! I haven’t seen the show except for a small clip, but just based on what little I’ve seen, I’d say the staff writers were true to his tone. And I think Leonard lived to see the first couple of episodes get made if I’m not mistaken (he died in 2013).
Another fun fact about Leonard: He created the character “Rayland” when he met a man with that same first name. Leonard asked him if he could use his first name as a character, because it sounded so cool, and he said “yes.” Leonard then recounted how the guy ended up being disappointed his name was used for the good guy rather than one of the bad guys but got over it. Ha ha!
Well, Rayland is a borderline good guy. Justified is a perfect TV show. Just phenomenal from beginning to end.
“Rayland is a borderline good guy.” So many of Leonard’s characters are. :)
I’ll have to check out Justified sometime. Maybe I’ll start by reading the books it was based on. I believe there are three titles starring Rayland, including the last book Leonard wrote.
Also on my Leonard TBR/TBW list is Rum Punch (book title)/Jackie Brown (movie title). It is the only book Tarantino ever adapted as he generally prefers to do his own original writing. Plus, I heard Leonard praise the movie in an interview. I think it’s usually a good sign when the original author says an adaptation got it “right.”
Recently, I also enjoyed watching the Charles Bronson film, Mr. Majestyk, which Leonard wrote the screenplay for and then novelized. Like most novelizations, the movie was better (I did read the book first though). But in this case, I think this largely had to do with the cast and good directorial decisions. Also, some forms of humor just work better when presented visually rather than in writing. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I see the two mediums as companions in this case- especially considering Leonard wrote both- but with the movie being slightly more fun for the visuals.
Did you see that Timothy Olyphant (Rayland) is playing a “marshal” in the new season of the Mandalorian? My DH is a huge fan of both Justified and this new series (streaming at CBS).
My youngest son was so excited about that he called me the moment Olyphant stepped into view! I’ve not watch the Mandalorian, but am now inspired to! And my daughter loved the first two seasons of The Santa Clarita Diet which he stars in with Drew Barrymore.
I like seeing a range of books from currently published to very old being reviewed. For myself, new books only make up around 20 percent of my reading. I’m not a particularly fast reader, either, and am limited by what I can afford to buy or is available at my library or subscription sites. My library’s romance selections are slim pickings. They do a little better carrying YA books that have romantic plots (and most of those are fantasy).
Reading a lot for me is anything over 150 books per year (and from a variety of genres, not just romance). A slow year might be only 50 to 75 books. I also often wait to read new books until the hype has died down because I don’t like hype to be fresh in my head. That often means that I’m reading those *new* books several years after they’re first published. I think AAR strikes a nice balance. I’m here for discovering new authors as well as older books I might have missed out on. I’m always delighted when reviews of older books pop up and discussions get renewed.
This is one of my current obsessions! What is going on with the market for YA romantic fantasy vs. adult fantasy romance?! YA/NA romantic fantasy is going through a golden age right now — there’s a ton of it! As a whole, it’s also super dynamic, diverse and exciting.
At the same time, adult fantasy romance has a few stand-out authors here or there (Milla Vane, Grace Draven), but is shockingly weak as a genre.
I’ve read romantic fantasy since childhood and as an adult woman, I’d like to continue to read fantasy romance…for adults. With sex. But it doesn’t feel as if there are books out there meant for me. Are adult women just really into paranormal and leaving it at that? Or, are adult women all reading YA romantic fantasy and I should suck it up?? Do people still consider adult romance yucky and feel more comfortable picking up the YA version of the exact same thing?
Last year, I got really excited for a debut adult fantasy romance (Maxym M. Martineau’s Kingdom of Exiles — which btw has an on-page bisexual hero!) and then, I saw the news that the rest of the series would be YA.
I agree there is a lot of innovative stuff going on in YA/NA romantic fantasy (though I’m picky about emotional maturity and internal logic issues with plots in YA). And I get really tired of 1st person present tense in that genre (contemporary YA/NA romance has some of the same issues).
I also agree that it’s hard to find adult fantasies that include explicit sex that isn’t BDSM/erotica or paranormal/urban fantasy. CL Wilson and Elizabeth Vaughn are some other authors I can think of if you like Grave Draven and Milla Vane (but I suspect you’ve already tried them).
Have you read Jacqueline Carey’s Kushiel books? I loved her first Kushiel trilogy.
One of my favorite books of this year is Fortune’s Fool by Angela Boord, which is an alternate historical fantasy that has mythic elements, incredible worldbuilding, and a slow-burning relationship that blew me away. It’s definitely one of those rare DIK books for me.
Agreed! Also, lots of bickering/bantering enemies-to-lovers and “strong female protagonists” with male-coded strength, which often understands itself as a girl power message but usually works to reinforce a cultural understanding of strength as exclusively masculine.
This year, I read Elizabeth Vaughan’s Warprize and C.L. Wilson’s The Winter King on the hunt for adult fantasy romance and I was…unimpressed. I think they’re examples of what I’m trying to get at too because they belong squarely in the genre I’m looking for, but they’re 14 and 6 years old respectively. I haven’t read Kushiel’s Dart yet (I’m excited for the feminism, but I’ve hesitated over the BDSM) and that novel is nearing its 20th birthday.
Thank you for the recommendation of Fortune’s Fool by Angela Boord! I haven’t heard of it & will have to check it out. I only wish adult fantasy romance was half as strong as the YA/NA version.
I loved Kushiel’s Dart, and the whole 3 series in that world. Though the first book, was the very best, and I think you can stop there, a good story ends at that point.
Jacqueline Carey’s voice – I cannot call it otherwise – in that book is transcendent, the beginning of the book a work of art.
“Lest anyone should suppose that I am a cuckoo’s child, got on the wrong side of the blanket by lusty peasant stock and sold into indenture in a short-fallen season, I may say that I am House-born and reared in the Night Court proper, for all the good it did me. It is hard for me to resent my parents, although I envy them their naïveté. No one even told them, when I was born, that they gifted me with an ill-luck name. Phèdre, they called me, neither one knowing that it is a Hellene name, and cursed. When I was born, I daresay they still had reason for hope. My eyes, scarce open, were yet of indeterminate color, and the appearance of a newborn babe is a fluid thing, changing from week to week. Blonde wisps may give way to curls of jet, the pallor of birth deepen to a richness like amber, and so on. But when my series of amniotic sea-changes were done, the thing was obvious.
I was flawed.”
Though the sadism topic was difficult. It does not take much space, but enjoyment of pain is part of who the heroine is. This is more a grand novel, like Gabaldon, than a romance, in breadth – and beautiful.
I hope quoting is ok.
Wow, what a recommendation! Transcendent writing is definitely a quality I appreciate and I love grand romances like Gabaldon’s so I’m sure I’ll enjoy Kushiel’s Dart.
I’m glad that BDSM erotica has migrated into the mainstream and found cultural acceptance after 50 Shades of Grey and I would never, ever want to kink shame anyone, but on a personal level, I find reading about BDSM very boring. Although I like my share of kinky stuff, it’s just not my thing.
But from the sounds of it, Kushiel’s Dart has too many things I like for me to sleep on it for too much longer. Thanks for the tip and the quote, Lieselotte!
I enjoy reading the reviews here, period. I like the reviews of new releases, older releases, or reposted older reviews. I think the balance feels pretty good. My track record with newly released romances hasn’t been great this year, so I’ve perhaps benefited more from older reviews, and reviews of older releases. Add to that the fact that older books are more accessible for me because they are often available at the library or less expensive to buy, and the reviews of older books is even more important.
Agreed, I tend to buy physical copies of my books and I find that new romances (contemporary or historical) are increasingly coming out in trade paperback rather than mass market paperback and that doubles the price. It makes older titles from half-price used bookstores or online sellers that much more appealing. Why would I buy a new release for $15 when I can get 5 $3 romances from a local used bookstore?
I’m not sure if you’re differentiating between reposting older reviews of books that were new at the time the review was written and new reviews of older books, but in either case I’d be happy to read the reviews and decide if I want to add the books in question to my never-ending tbr. During the past year, I’ve read any number of books that I first discovered through AAR—and two were favorite reads of the year: Taylor Fitzpatrick’s THROWN OFF THE ICE (a favorite read of 2019, although published in 2018 and not really a romance because of the way it ends) and Leonie Mack’s MY CHRISTMAS NUMBER ONE (which I never would have looked at twice without the rave review here and is now on my favorites list for 2020).
I think Caroline is referring specifically to new reviews of older books here.
I am so very glad this subject has been raised. I value the old reviews hugely and it’s been my introduction to authors often “new to me” so I then look into back lists, etc. and discover a whole tranche of books that I am willing to track down. When I first visited AAR in 1999 many of the authors referred to here were not or not yet published in the UK so it was a real source of reading for me. I also agree with KesterGayle about historicals as this subgenre is my personal favourite and makes up the bulk of my romance reading. Yes, sometimes I might blink (or even cringe) at something in an old Signet Regency but they were so often well written and often worth keeping on the keeper shelf. Right now I have been looking at my collection of Signet anthologies in the run up to Christmas because often they provides first class writers like Mary Balogh, Carla Kelly, Mary Jo Putney, Jo Beverly, Edith Layton or Barbara Metzger, authors from the past whom I can re-read almost always with great pleasure. Ed Sheeran, who he???? (;-} )
Especially when it comes to historicals, I appreciate reviews of older books. And newer contemporaries can be so full of pop-culture references that they leave me scratching my head. I finally had to look up Ed Sheeran because there were so many books referring to his music! My only issue is that older books are sometimes less likely to be on audio, but I will still read the review and wishlist it. Forever Amber finally turned up on Audible, so there’s always hope.
So, go for it if you find an older book that you’d like to review here. We all might discover a ‘new’ old book to discuss!
Have fun with Forever Amber. It’s excellent! I wouldn’t have known about it except I read an interesting article about ten books Banned in Boston, and that was one of them. The plot and time period sounded interesting so I checked it out and wasn’t disappointed. You are in for a whirlwind!
Forever Amber always makes me think of Ava Gardner talking about how her then husband Artie Shaw didn’t want her reading the book and said it was “trash” but then went on to marry the author after he and Ava Gardner divorced!
God, Shaw was terrible. He broke Judy Garland’s heart by marrying Lana Turner, then allegedly emotionally abused Turner and Gardner and his other wives.
His marriage to Kathleen Windsor, it’s worth noting, was annulled even though it lasted two years.
I listened to the first hour or so, so think I will like it a lot! Now, only 40-some hours left to go…
The movie, with Linda Darnell, Cornell Wilde, and George Sanders (as King Charles II), is a favorite guilty pleasure. I learned about the book through the movie and it has been in my TBR pile for a while. I’ll have to move it to the top of the pile.
FOREVER AMBER is very good—Kathleen Windsor did a tremendous amount of research, especially about the plague, but I will caution it is definitely NOT a romance—although there’s a lot of sex (fairly euphemistic, since it was published in the 1940s).
I like to think it influenced Bertrice Small’s work. Amber and Skye O’Malley seem to have been married roughly the same amount of times but Skye ended up in a lot more harems.
I LOVE the old reviews. Recently prompted me to read Untamed by Elizabeth Lowell which, despite flaws linked to the time in which it was written, gave me a couple of hours of real enjoyment. I wouldn’t have found this book on my own.
I’m delighted to read any review of a book that “speaks” to the reviewer whether the book is “old” or newer. I would rather have a reviewer be inspired in some way over the book, even if it’s just outrage or annoyance than read a blah review of a blah book.
I’m notorious for stumbling onto series years after they begin (Kresley Cole’s Immortals was a pandemic glom for me thanks to Dabney’s recommendation) so the searchable database is a godsend for me. When I find a “new to me” author or see a great book or series mentioned I’m in the AAR reviews database immediately.
Like you, I find getting the newest romance releases from the library almost impossible. I took a glance through the new release section of my library’s website tonight, saw a new random (to me) historical romance listed and clicked on it to check it out. According to the site it has an estimated 6 MONTH WAIT due to all the holds for it. I am always looking for buried treasures or gems that I haven’t read yet that aren’t “hot” or I’m demand so I can snag them.
With ebooks and the availability of pretty much all an author’s oeuvre at a reader’s fingertips nowadays (and often cheaper and/or more available than very new stuff) I say review whatever seems interesting and noteworthy. “Out of print” seems to be a thing of the past.
I love it when posters new to the genre say they discovered an author like Carla Kelly here. That means a talented author who produces quality work might make an extra few dollars on older books that would enable them (hopefully) to keep creating more wonderful stories.
I’m not so sure availability of out of print books is opening up indefinitely. It seems to me publishers are trying to clamp down on so many things, or they go out of business, or author rights get tied up in legal issues. There are plenty of older books that fall into the black hole, or they come and go within a short time frame. I had a series I started several years ago. The first two books were published by Samhain. Then Samhain went under. I don’t remember who books three and four were published by. Book five was only available for a few months on Amazon. It was long gone by the time I found out about it.
I loved being able to use Open Library for some of these out of print books, but now there is a legal dispute over licensing between OL and the publishers and some authors. Most books have been limited to 1-hr reads only. Most of the books I got there were by dead authors or have been out of print for decades. It’s just another example of how we can’t take current accessibility for granted.
I also loved the Open or Internet Library during the pandemic. It was amazing the amount of old, obscure and out of print books it has.
I think a lot of the problems on finding books are due to ownership issues. A lot of authors seem to have gotten or are getting rights to their books back and most of them are making them available at least via ebook.
Years ago you couldn’t get your hands on Joanna Bourne’s first romance published decades ago or any earlier Carla Kelly books for less than a small fortune, if you could find them. Now they are readily available on Amazon for a fair price and the authors are actually making money from it. Laurann Dohner was able to the get the rights back on her books after the Ellora’s Cave disaster and I hope the other authors tied up there did as well.
I think authors that aren’t alive, still producing or haven’t taken ownership back on their books are the ones most likely to slip through the gap and not be found for purchase.
I understand the dilemma over the Open Library as the books in contention are owned by someone and don’t fall into the exception that ones at the Gutenberg Project do. It’s just frustrating when you really, really want to read something and can’t get your hands on it.