TEST
Ravish Me With Rubies, the third book in Jane Feather’s The London Jewels series just did not work for me. I wanted to punch the hero – which is the kiss of death for a romance novel.
When Petra Rutherford was fourteen she met and fell in love with twenty-four-year-old Guy Granville, Baron Ashton, while he was visiting friends near her country home. She had just started going out in society and he was bored; they danced, strolled along a moonlit lake, kissed a few times and then he left Somerset abruptly. She has never forgiven him for leaving without a word and when she meets him again ten years later, she decides to make him want her again and then drop him like he dropped her.
“I can still play the game. In fact, if he thinks I’m still malleable and yielding as I was ten years ago, it might be even more of an unpleasant surprise for him when he sees who I really am. I’ll shatter his preconceived notions like crystal on concrete. That’ll teach him to make assumptions.”
Petra and her two friends think this is a delightful plan. Guy is beyond arrogant and a known rake; he is also opposed to women’s rights – a movement that Petra is deeply involved in. In their eyes, Guy deserves to be bested. Petra decides to make him fall for her but instead they both fall into serious lust with each other and tumble into bed (or sofa) after just a few weeks.
I’ve never been a big fan of heroes and heroines who play games with each other, so right away this was going to be a tough sell. And I know things were different back then but why is a twenty-four-year-old man kissing a fourteen-year-old girl? And why is that girl/woman still holding a grudge ten years later? It all seemed off to me. I was also surprised when Petra and Guy have sex so soon after meeting again; she’s a virgin, he mentions nothing of marriage and they embark on an affair with little concern for Petra’s reputation. Again, not really true to the time period. Which leads to another confusion. No date is given (at least in the ARC) in the book but since Emmeline Pankhurst is mentioned and Guy has a car, I’d date the book around 1905. But then Petra mentions the queen having nine children – clearly Queen Victoria – and attending a horse race – clearly NOT Queen Victoria (who died in 1901 and was not seen much in public before then). Confusing!
But my biggest problem with Ravish Me With Rubies is with Guy who is, simply detestable. There’s a scene where he and Petra argue about her choice not to wear a corset –
Petra stared at him, astonished. “Do you know what such a constriction does to one’s insides?”
“I know what it does to a woman’s outsides,” he commented with a smile that she found infuriating. “And I have to say, my dear, that in general I approve.”
Okay, so maybe he is ignorant. Petra then proceeds to have a demonstration with a typical corset applied to her body while a woman doctor clearly explains what it is doing to Petra’s insides and Guy’s reaction is to dismiss the doctor and instruct Petra to put on an evening gown and stand in front of the mirror.
“I’m not at all sure what that little demonstration was intended to achieve, my dear Petra,” he remarked, closing the door behind him. “But it gives me an opportunity to demonstrate something of my own. Come to the mirror…Look at you, how graceful and elegant you are.” He turned her sideways to show her profile. “Don’t tell me you can’t see the difference the corset makes. It gives you stature”.
And sadly, Guy doesn’t improve much as the book goes on. He continues to be overbearing, judgmental, condescending and dismissive until the last few pages of the book. Too late my dear Guy, you are an arse and that’s that!
I just don’t see the point of writing (or reading) a book with such an unlikeable hero. If another man had stepped in, punched Guy, and courted Petra, that would have been much more romantic. As it was, watching Petra put up with Guy was not enjoyable. So, unless you are into this sort of thing, I advise you to skip Ravish Me With Rubies and find something less infuriating.
Buy it at: Amazon, Audible, or your local independent retailer
Visit our Amazon Storefront
Grade: D
Book Type: Historical Romance
Sensuality: Warm
Review Date: 23/01/21
Publication Date: 01/2021
Recent Comments …
Yep
This sounds delightful! I’m grabbing it, thanks
excellent book: interesting, funny dialogs, deep understanding of each character, interesting secondary characters, and also sexy.
I don’t think anyone expects you to post UK prices – it’s just a shame that such a great sale…
I’m sorry about that. We don’t have any way to post British prices as an American based site.
I have several of her books on my TBR and after reading this am moving them up the pile.
Related Reviews
I read the first two books in this series and I hated them so very, very much I vowed never to read another book by Jane Feather EVER AGAIN. The heroes are absolute and utter bastards in both. So, nice to hear that my decision was entirely justified.
Yes it’s so strange – the women in the stories are bold, confident suffragettes and yet she has them marrying these men who undervalue women – and in some cases belittle and insult them. I kept looking for the hero’s redemption and was stunned when it never came.
She seems to be balancing the difference between the old skool heroes she’s known for and the kind of heroines that sell these days. The trouble is the heroes don’t learn or grovel enough.
Ugh, I so badly want more GOOD romances set in the early 1900s (I’ve read them as fast as I can find them, but there are so many settings and situations that are really, really ripe for exploration and have sadly been underused); too bad this one sounds like a complete dumpster fire.
I just finished a review for a Gilded Age romance ( a little bit earlier ) – probably coming this week – that is terrific!
You’re not kidding about the early 1900s being underused. Out of curiosity, I checked Harlequin Historical’s catalog just now. They only have 122 results for “Victorian Historical Romance” (I realize the Victorian Era technically ends in 1901, but they don’t have an Edwardian category) and 37 results for “20th Century Historical Romance,” which mostly has stories set in the 1920s.
However, if it’s any consolation, Harlequin released a wish list for their historical line in early December. One of their requests is stories specifically set between 1820 to 1914- excluding Westerns- so maybe you’ll find some stories soon. Here is the blog post in case you are interested in the details: What the Harlequin Historical Team Want – Write for Harlequin.
The fact that there is no official ‘Edwardian’ category is no surprise to me but still makes me sad. I love the Victorian era and I love the ’20s, but I always want to shout that there was a big era in between where a lot of things happened!
I really like Mya Rodale and Joanna Shupe’s various gilded age romances.
I’ve read both and like them (especially Shupe) but all my faves seem to be authors who were big in the ’90s and early 2000s (when I was first getting into reading romance) and either no longer write or write very differently nowadays. Plus, although I’m thrilled to see Gilded Age New York finally get its due, I feel as though a lot of them focus on high society and business empires much the way Victorian British historicals do. I’d love to see more romances taking place among the bohemians and artists and freethinkers of the time — and I can’t believe I’ve only ever found one (!) romance that takes place in and around the early silent movie industry. (‘Dance’ by Judith Ivory/Judy Cuevas, which I recommend wholeheartedly to anyone who can get their hands on it!)
Think of England by KJ Charles is Edwardian, if I remember correctly, and it’s one of the best books I’ve ever read! And published fairly recently too (2017)
The “prequel” – Proper English (which is f/f and set in 1902) is excellent, too.
I haven’t read Jane Feather in years. I did like some of her early books, but either my standards raised or hers dropped. This review doesn’t make me feel like giving her books another chance.
According to the book I read in the series for the site (Tempt me with Diamonds, Diana’s story), it opens sometime after the Siege of Mafeking, which ended in 1900, so these books take place around 1901-1903. I fear the queen Feather is referring to is definitely Victoria, whose children – even the youngest – were scattered off in marriages or dead by that time (And all of them grown), if she were appearing in public at all.
That’s been my experience with the author as well, sadly – shitty heroes, good heroines who at minimum are more interesting than the heroes and at maximum deserve better.
Actually, it’s unfortunate to have to agree that Feather seems to have slipped so badly in recent years. I have a romance on my keeper shelf which she published in 1990 called Bold Destiny. It’s set in the time of the British Empire’s incursions into Afghanistan, and the h/h are a British officer, and an Englishwoman who was captured as a child by Afghans. It’s a very accurate depiction of the historical conflicts in that area (nothing seems to change, does it?), and the problems faced by the heroine to readjust to a European culture. And the romance is quite realistic–and hot!–, with two people who communicate about their feelings, despite anger, prejudice and issues of imperialism.
I had to check this tripe’s publication date because I was sure it must be a re-release of something from the 1970s. Shocked to learn that’s not the case. Sounds like utter rubbish and should be avoided at all cost!!
I read another of the books in this trilogy, Seduce Me With Sapphires, and all I can remember of it is that the gently bred young heroine goes wherever she wants without a chaperone, and when this is brought to her father’s attention, he shrugs it off by saying that he trusts her. Disregard for the heroine’s reputation seems to be a running theme. I’d like to try other Jane Feather romances, but I’m going to check the reviews here to see if they mention the level of historical accuracy first.
Don’t hold your breath. It’s been a while since I read Feather and I don’t think I’ve reviewed her here, but as far as I recall, historical accuracy isn’t one of her strong points.
That’s too bad. I loved the cover of her book The Widow’s Kiss, which got a DIK review here, and the review said the author did her research on the historical setting. Maybe it’s hit and miss.
I recently tried to read Vice – which many readers/fans consider her best work. I posted some specific details (not unlike the ones Evelyn calls out above) here at AAR. The book was published in 1996 (well past the AIDs epidemic) and AAR reprinted the 1999 review with its A grade. I DNF’d the book 30% in. Clearly this author has fans. She’s being published by a “major” publisher (Zebra Books in imprint of Kensington in NY). But not me.