TEST
The publisher of The Librarian of Boone’s Hollow classifies this book as a romance, but I don’t agree with this choice. Although love does develop between two of the characters, the dominant story follows the struggles, dreams, and choices of three people living during the Great Depression, as well as the people who surround them, and shows how God’s moral lessons can influence daily living as well as life’s journey.
University junior Adelaide Cowherd is forced to leave the Education program at the University of Kentucky when her family’s finances run out. A temporary, part-time job at the local library has allowed her to maintain her room in the dormitory until the end of the semester, but after that, she’ll need a place to stay and a job. A colleague at the library offers her a room until she can get settled, but Addie learns from the library director that there will be no job for her after this semester. The director suggests that Addie try the Want Ads in the Lexington Herald. Addie waits in the library for a man to finish with the paper but when she looks, the Want Ads section has been torn out.
Emmett Tharp is a senior at UK and looks forward to graduation. Hailing from the rural town of Boone’s Hollow where the largest employer is the coal mining operation, Emmett knows that employment is essential. His first search is in the Lexington Herald and finding a few possibilities, he rips the page out to take with him. His conscience later pricks him to return the page, but its crumpled condition makes the information unusable. For distraction, he attends the year-end fraternity bonfire and runs into Addie, who is attending with a friend and not all that happy to meet the man who ripped the ads from the paper. The meeting is brief, and acknowledging that they will never see each other again, they part.
Like Emmett, Bettina Webber grew up in Boone’s Hollow, but her reading disability has led her to consider herself slow and stupid. Her alcoholic father certainly thinks she is, and his regular beatings remind her of her place as his housekeeper. Bettina has been sweet on Emmett for years and eagerly awaits his return from college so they can marry and free her from her father’s house. The fantasy future she has built sustains her, and while she waits, she works as a packhorse librarian, delivering books to community members from the back of a mule.
When Addie accepts an offer to replace one of the packhorse librarians in Boone’s Hollow, these three characters are now in the same locale, brought together by fate and necessity.
The book’s title is somewhat misleading since there are several librarians in the story – the woman who runs the WPA library program in Boone’s Hollow, Emmett – who eventually replaces the woman as head of the program – and the packhorse librarians, who make the deliveries. From the title, I had expected Addie to appear in a leading role as librarian in the small town and was disappointed in the actuality of her position.
The author provides an accurate and sympathetic portrayal of life in rural Kentucky during the Great Depression. The characters are well-drawn and memorable, and I got good visual images of the challenges they faced in economic disaster. Several lessons from God’s Word are illustrated through the characters’ actions, the most prominent being The Golden Rule – treat others, no matter their station, as you wish to be treated.
However, the novel lacks romantic tension, and I never in any doubt that the couple would get together in the end. Although the characters adapt admirably to their circumstances, their personalities and moral stances are fixed at the beginning of the story and remain steady throughout the narrative. There is little growth or struggle against internal dilemmas to give the story emotional power.
For readers looking for historical fiction with a solid view of the period and a loving Christian message, this is a pleasant read. But regrettably, The Librarian of Boone’s Hollow lacks the romantic elements and emotional depth to receive my full recommendation.
Buy it at: Amazon or shop at your local independent bookstore
Visit our Amazon Storefront
Grade: C+
Book Type: Inspirational Fiction
Sensuality: Kisses
Review Date: 19/10/20
Publication Date: 09/2020
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.
Award-winning author of Romance with Sweet Intensity. I live by my lists. Fan of sea turtles, jigsaw puzzles, crocheting, the beach, and happy endings.
Related Reviews
This sounds a lot like the plot of The Book Woman of Troublesome Creek by Kim Richardson as well . . . . which is incredibly well written, is not a romance, and has been read by a lot of book groups in the last year or so. Just based on this review, it sounds like someone took Richardson’s idea and plunked it into a NA, inspirational fiction package.
;-(
This is a fairly old plot. I reviewed Wonderland Creek by Lynn Austin which was about a woman who did a travelling library in Kentucky and was written back in 2012. The Ballad of Calamity Creek was another story like that and it was written back in the 60s.
Because it’s a librarian on horseback? I guess all WW2 books are the same to you too?
I hate it when mislabeling gets in the way of a books’ reaching its potential greatness. I can’t tell you how many books I’ve read where the story would’ve been fine as a regular novel but fails as a romance.
On the writers’ discussion board where I post, someone will periodically start a thread asking if their story can be called a romance. Sometimes they’re just not sure what the definition of romance is, and think that a couple falling in love (or even just a couple, period) means romance. Other times, they’ve written a love story which ends sadly or with the couple separated. In the latter case, I always expect a reference to the movie GHOST, and I’m seldom disappointed (though the writers might be, when we let them know what most romance readers expect).
I think part of the problem is how the word “romance” can refer to a genre or a subplot. For example, a romance novel must contain a central romance that concludes with an HEA/HFN. But any genre of fiction can contain a romance as a subplot or even a main point. That does not mean, however, that a book with a romance in it qualifies as Romance-with-a-capital-R.
Incidentally, I have seen Gone with the Wind and Romeo and Juliet incorrectly categorized as romances for ages. The former is a historical fiction epic; the latter is a tragedy. They both have romances in them, but they are not romances. (Not that I have to explain any of this to you, but I’m sure you’ve had similar discussions with confused writers online.)
Likewise, the mystery has to be solved for a book or film to be classified as a mystery. Sure, you can have a story with an unsolved mystery, but it doesn’t fit the category definition.
I cringe every time I see Rebecca labeled as a romance. Or Anna Karenina. But then, I don’t consider Jane Eyre a romance, either. That’s one dismal “HEA.”
You’re right, a lot of people aren’t aware of the difference between a romance and Romance, the genre. I try to differentiate by saying “romantic elements” or “a romantic subplot” – a lot of books have romantic subplots, but you wouldn’t see Stephen King’s Rose Madder shelved with the romances even though the heroine of that book falls in love, gets married and even has a baby-logue of sorts in the story.
Another question we ask is whether the romance can be cut out of the story without the entire thing falling apart. If it can, then the story’s not a romance. This usually settles the issue of whether 50SG is a romance even though it ends with the couple separated.
I’m not sure I agree with the idea that a book is a romance if you can’t take the romance out without it collapsing. Plenty of books are based around romances and relationships that aren’t Romance books. If there isn’t a satisfying HEA or HFN, it’s a book with a romance, but not a Romance book.
The “can you take the romance out without the story collapsing” is, to me, another way of asking whether the romance is central to the story or whether it’s a subplot. It’s also something I think should be considered along with the HEA/HFN when a writer is wondering whether a manuscript can be classified as Romance. You could have an HEA/HFN in any genre. There was one writer who believed that a manuscript which ended with the hero and heroine parting ways to pursue their individual goals had a HEA (because these goals brought the hero and heroine fulfillment, plus they were still in love and would be pursuing their relationship later). The writer felt this was even more happy an ending than one where the hero and heroine sacrificed their personal goals and independence for each other.*
In other words, there are two questions writers should ask themselves if there’s doubt about their genre. Does this manuscript have an HEA/HFN, and does it focus strongly on the relationship between the characters?
*We ended up having an interesting discussion about whether characters should be physically together on the last page of the book for it to be considered a happy ending. I prefer it that way. I like their togetherness to be the final note on which I close the book.
Heh. I looked up the threads where we had these discussions, and came across this question from someone :
“Suppose you have a romance novel. It ends with a wedding. Then you add at the end, “Then he got hit by a bus.” Is it not a romance novel any more?”
Suppose you have a romance novel. It ends with a wedding. Then you add at the end, “Then he got hit by a bus.” Is it not a romance novel any more?”
Not in my opinion it isn’t.
I answered that romance readers are not looking for a gut-punch at the end of the story. Any more than mystery readers want a final chapter where the detective unravels the mystery, then adds at the end, “But this is all speculation. I really don’t know who actually did it.”
This is the very reason that, as much as I loved it and recommend it, I don’t think Taylor Fitzpatrick’s THROWN OFF THE ICE can be called a romance. It’s undoubtedly a love story but—because of the ending—not a HEA and, therefore, not a romance. Although, as Orson Welles once observed, “If you want a happy ending, it depends on where you stop the story.”
I think you’ve written a good summary of the two basic requirements of a Romance: 1) a romance that is central to the plot, and 2) concludes with an HEA/HFN.
Some writers, such as Susie Bright, find romance too restrictive, even though the requirements for a romance have loosened considerably over the years. It wasn’t so long ago, for example, that only MF romances were considered eligible for major awards and deserving of the classification “romance.” Plus, the HEA meant traditional marriage, period.
Personally, I like that romance has broadened its boundaries to include HFNs and non-traditional HEAs as options. But I think it’s a problem when certain writers want to throw away the core tenets of happiness and togetherness at the very end of the story for the sake of being “different.” In a way, I get it. You can write love stories that are tragic. Those stories are valid too, no argument there. But calling those stories “romances” defies reader expectations, just like an unsolved mystery erroneously classified as a “mystery” cheats all those readers who expect the mystery to be solved at the end.
In short, write what you want, but try not to mislabel clearly defined genres in the name of creativity. Granted, it can be difficult to create new genres and subgenres that catch on, but do your best. :)
There are also a few older romances which don’t exactly have an HEA. Bertrice Small’s A Moment in Time has the hero dying at the end (though there’s an epilogue where the reincarnated souls of the hero and heroine meet again). But yeah, the vast majority of romances will focus on the development of a relationship and end with the people in that relationship physically together and happy.
The writer who asked about physical togetherness had also written a love story where the hero dies, but she felt this was a romantic ending because the hero (now in Heaven) still loved the heroine, so much so that he was happy when she found another man. All the characters were happy in the end. But the story wasn’t likely to satisfy readers looking for a capital-R romance. It’s really all about what readers want and expect.
And speaking of genre labels, there was another interesting discussion on that board where a writer who had written a suspense/paranormal caper insisted that this was literary fiction. When we asked what made it literary fiction, the writer said the story included quotations from the Bible, poetry, and Japanese phrases.
It turned out the writer believed that literary fiction = beautiful, elegant writing, and genre fiction = pulp. So he was grasping at any straw for the manuscript to be considered literary. I said that genre novels sell better than literary ones, but I don’t think my reference to Filthy Lucre helped very much.
It sure gets complicated, doesn’t it? Although I think it’s unfortunate when people try to make genre classifications based on the quality of writing rather than the content of the story. Genre fiction doesn’t necessarily equal bad writing (although it might) just as literary fiction doesn’t necessarily equal good writing (although it might not).
As for literary fiction = beautiful, elegant writing, my experience has been more literary fiction = pretentious, depressing writing. I can’t remember who defined literary fiction as “boring white people having affairs- and then dying,” but it does seem to capture a trend. :)
Of course, like anything else, there’s a broad range within every genre. Really, I think official classifications work best to lay out general expectations for the reader as opposed to saying, “Here’s this story. Just read it.” And again, there’s the marketing aspect, which drives a lot of the decision-making at every angle.
A real challenge for writers, I think, is the often poor payout of cross-genre work and experimental forms of writing. Sure, an alternative historical fiction romance with paranormal elements and steampunk mystery might be fun to write and/or read, but how do you market it? A lot of readers are quite picky when it comes to the inclusion of crossover elements (as am I, not judging here). So it’s not like this story is going to appeal to both romance readers and sci-fi readers and mystery readers, even if the book is fantastic. More than likely, it will be a turnoff to all the categories because certain elements- even if they blend well together- will alienate the other portion of the audience that has wildly different genre expectations.
The other side of this issue is the strict confinement of writing to character types and tropes that are proven winners. In romance, as you’re well aware, this often means a deluge of titled Regency heroes. The fact that mainstream romance publishers are finally pushing a little bit beyond the traditional expectations in their catalog offerings is promising, but they don’t go broke by playing it safe with clearly defined genre boundaries the majority of their readers expect.
“I said that genre novels sell better than literary ones, but I don’t think my reference to Filthy Lucre helped very much.” LOL. I think we all wish our writing earned as much as “Filthy Lucre.”
Thanks for expanding on your comments. I agree with you.
“This usually settles the issue of whether 50SG is a romance even though it ends with the couple separated.”
I’ve never read Fifty Shades of Grey, so I can’t be sure of its classification. But if the couple ends up separated, I would say it’s not a romance by definition. From what I’ve heard, Fifty Shades is an erotica since it pretty clearly follows a character’s sexual journey. Erotica, by industry definition, must be sexually explicit but does not need to conclude with an HEA/HFN.
And here is where we get into some cultural baggage. Although romance is getting a bit more mainstream and respectable, erotica is still very much a taboo. So it makes sense that a publishing company would market Fifty Shades as a romance rather than an erotica. It makes them look less sleazy to the mainstream, and that goes for the reader too. When a book hides behind the “romance” label, a reader can be a little less embarrassed and defensive about reading it than if it were labeled “erotica” outright. So, I understand the reasoning behind the marketing and readership insisting Fifty Shades is a romance, but it’s misleading. Also, certain venues will not accept erotica in their catalogs but will accept romance- even if that romance is chockfull of explicit sex. So, again, these dubious classifications are often marketing decisions. No wonder people confuse the definitions when mainstream publishers play fast and loose with the rules!
Now, does Fifty Shades contain a romance? Possibly. Again, not having read it, I’m not sure. But that element alone does not transform an Erotica into a Romance. As for the hybrid genre “erotic romance,” there still has to be an HEA/HFN to qualify.
The Fifty Shades trilogy ends with the couple together and happy, babies and all. Maybe that’s why some people consider the trilogy (as a whole) romance, even if the first book technically doesn’t fit the definition?
I don’t know, I try not to think of Fifty Shades any more than I have to. :)
Ah, thanks for the clarification. I’ve heard debate whether or not each book of a romance series must end with an HFN with the ultimate goal of an HEA.
Couple together, babies and all? Sorry, but I’d rather not think about offspring in that kind of relationship. Maybe that’s just my erotica writing bias, but in my genre, kids are magically not supposed to exist for reasons of propriety. Given what I’ve heard about Fifty Shades’ dubious BDSM content, the idea of wrapping it up with a cliched romance ending complete with kids sounds kind of icky. Like you, I’d rather not think about the trilogy…
“Couple together, babies and all? Sorry, but I’d rather not think about offspring in that kind of relationship.”
IIRC, in the last book, there’s a post-coital scene where she’s pregnant and feels the baby moving around, and she says, “I think the baby likes sex already.”
Just remembering that makes me nauseated.
*Barf!*
That’s revolting!
“I don’t know. I try not to think of Fifty Shades more than I have to.”
I spit my coffee across the room! Between that and your comment above about Filthy Lucre, I’ve had the best laugh in days. You have a knack for understatement. Thank you!
I loved this book! To be fair, what romance ever leaves any doubt on the HEA?? It’s a romance. I much prefer low key ones such as this one.
I think many people read romances for the journey. Yes, we know the ending, but what couples overcome to get there is the reason I read. That’s why even marriage of convenience books are so popular with many readers. The couple may marry early on, but we then witness their journey to love.
That doesn’t mean this book isn’t really good and worth reading. It just means it might not fit the “Romance” label as well as other books.