JO

I have never read one of her books before and I know I won't again. This book was so boring it took me a week to read it. I usually polish off a book in one night but this one kept going and going. It really doesn't have a good plot I found myself wishing that I could just smack the heroine and make her shutup, but alas it is only a book. Plus the evil sheriff part had me a bit confused as to why he was even included but hey what do I know.

In 1101 England, Lord Renald de Lisle, acting as the King's Champion, duels and kills the peace loving Lord Clarence of Summerbourne, a traitor who refuses to pledge fealty to the throne. King Henry grants the Summerbourne estates to Renald with the caveat that he marry one of the three maidens residing there.

When Renald arrives, he receives a cold reception from the residing four women, but marries Clarence's daughter, Claire. He soon falls in love with his bride, but worries that when she learns the truth about her father's death, she will hate him forever. She reciprocates his feelings of love until she learns the truth on their wedding night. Can their love be strong enough to overcome the fact that he killed her father?

LORD OF MIDNIGHT is an extremely enjoyable Medieval romance that fans of the sub-genre (and for that matter historical romance readers in general) will relish. The story line is an intriguing period piece and the battling lead protagonists make a fun to read couple. Jo Beverly is clearly one of the leading writers lighting up the Dark Ages.

Harriet Klausner

For some reason, I am less keen on mediaeval romances than on those set in the Regency or Georgian period. However, with books like this one, and Mary Jo Putney's Uncommon Vows, I might read mediaevel more often!

Renald de Lisle, the new King's Champion, fights in a tourney on the king's behalf, and kills his man. As a reward, he is given the dead man's estate, Summerbourne, but the king asks him to marry one of the unmarried women on the estate. By process of elimination, he chooses Claire Summerbourne, the dead man's daughter, as his wife.

Claire - still in mourning for her father - is deeply distrustful of de Lisle: she is wary of him because he is a warrior by profession, and she resents his acquisition of her father's property. She doesn't want to marry him, but has little choice. However, by the day of their betrothal the two have come to understand each other, and by the following day - their wedding day - they are ready to admit that they love each other.

However - as the editorial review above makes clear - it's at this point that Claire discovers Renald is the man who killed her father, and she realises that she cannot commit to him.

The remainder of the book deals with Renald and Claire coming to terms with the harsh knowledge which lies between them, made all the more difficult by Renald's feeling that he did nothing wrong; he was acting lawfully and in accordance with the king's instructions. How Claire comes to understand and forgive, and to reconcile her love for Renald with her love for her father, is told very well and very convingly by Beverley.

The historical detail is also very interesting, as well as being accurate; I certainly learned a lot from this book.

My only complaint is that - typically - there was no indication on the book's cover, or even inside before the start of the book, that this was a sequel to another mediaeval romance by Beverley, Dark Champion. While reading Lord of Midnight, I kept coming across references to Imogen and Fitzroger, and when eventually these characters were encountered, it did seem as if readers were supposed to be familiar with them. Beverley's postscript then revealed that Lord of Midnight is a sequel to Dark Champion. I wouldn't say that it's essential to read Dark Champion first, but I did feel that it might have been useful to have read it. I do wish publishers would be honest when one book is a sequel to another!

I'll readily admit that every book has its place and that nothing should be censored no matter what the content may be, but the pity-me story that Ms. Thornton decided to tell the world should have been censored. The world does not need one more tragic story with a nice pretty ending. To quote a review from above, "This is basically an "Oh, poor me. I was born with nothing except for God's grace and good parents" story." To say that this book was original or even worthwhile would be a gross overstatement, possibly even leaning towards a humorous hyperbole.

From an early and the first page, it is quickly revealed that this whining is not new. The line, ""Daddy, don't you love us?" we wailed," is a prime example. The question is not formed to allow the asked to answer how he would like, but begs a yes answer. Frequently used by children to get what they want, this explains the tone that this book takes despite it being written by an outside source. Even the word 'wailed' is highly dramatic. It has a way of seeming like someone is being abused and to demonstrate the inequity of it all. Had the word 'wailed' been changed to 'said' the entire scene would have changed considerably. It would have lessened the seeming pain that these girls experienced. But dramatic was what was wanted.

Donald Thornton doesn't yell. He roars. Or at least that's what the narrator would have you believe. There is no decibel level given for how loud he spoke or an audio recording of their lives to make sure that the wording was exact. How else can you demonstrate two extremes of the same man? Scenes are set up to disarm the reader. Take the sick child incident for example. If Donald arrived at home to find a sick child, he would 'gently suggest, "You want Daddy to fix you some nice fruit salad and maybe a nice piece of cake?". He wouldn't demand, persuade, or order. He would 'gently suggest.' Of course, when he found that the child was able to eat such treats, "then he'd roar, "Okay, you're well! Get outa that bed!"" The contrast from the beginning of that scene to the end was sharp and was designed to knock the reader off kilter.

Then just to throw a bit metaphor in with the rest, Thornton describes a scene in which the news that must be presented to Donald was a grenade. "And then, as though her news was a grenade, she pulled the pin." No one would describe the delivering of news as similar to pulling a pin, unless they were doing so to purposefully demonstrate what was to come. But, again with the throwing the reader off, Donald doesn't explode. Thornton makes Jeanette out to be the bad guy, as if she had purposefully chosen to change majors just to harm Donald. He was "stunned and devastated," and when he did speak he said it weakly.

But Jeanette didn't stop there. No, of course not, she "was destroying the family joke, and it made us all ache with sadness...Our castles in the air were being dynamited."
Thornton assumes that the family was devastated over the loss of a tacky family joke. And there she goes again with the dynamite. Everything is just exploding around them. Even after tossing in a grenade and crushing the family dream, Jeanette is still not done being the bad guy. Or at least, Thornton is not done making her the bad guy. Donald then begins to react in the manner first expected, "He outlined...how cruelly she was letting him down." So much for the theme of, "It's all for the children." No, Jeanette wasn't doing herself a disservice, she was letting him down. Also, the word 'outlined' lends a sense of preparation. Perhaps Donald was ready for this led-down, perhaps he knew that Jeanette would fail. Or maybe that's just what Thornton wants you to believe.

There is a certain amount of cruelty in this novel written by one of the two children out of five to actually succeed in obtaining Donald's goal for the girls. She has to lend at least a certain amount of loyalty to him because she wouldn't, in fact, be where she is without him. There would be no point to a book about a black woman who didn't succeed, about a woman who did exactly what her father wanted. This is precisely why Jeanette didn't write this book.

What a loving tribute to parents who usually never receive credit for their sacrifices in raising upstanding children. I had to write this review after reading another review (January 4, 2001) which was totally out in left field about this wonderful book and resilient author.

The scathing comments were from an attorney, so that explains her unnecessary and unwarranted attacks on Dr. Thornton. The other review totally missed the point, but lawyers usually do. I have two young daughters and I am thrilled to have them read this book and learn what it is like to rise above poverty and practice medicine. Maybe PhDs have obtained the highest degree in academia, but I can tell as one, I am always being told that I am "not a real doctor". But that doesn't bother me because I know if I am really ill, I don't want a PhD but rather an MD taking care of me. The book was FABULOUS and heartwarming and every American should read it.

I'm a 32 year old white upper middle class female and picked up this book that was on my 16 year old sister's high school reading list (from a private catholic school ~can only hope they're mature enough to benefit from its powerful messages!).... WOW is this a good one! I like to read biographies, non-fiction, true stories and this is an awesome tale! It made me laugh, feel angry about injustices and ultimately cry (at the end when Mr. and Mrs. Thornton's lives were coming to an end....they had accomplished so much with dignity and acceptance. Unselfish, determined to do the right thing! ) I felt disappointed and sad , too, because I did not have the encouragement & advice from Mr. Thornton throughout my life! Sure, many parents struggle of all races and backgrounds, but how many so persistently insist on such lofty goals? not many...they give up...the children give up, too..... I would like to one day sit down & write each bit of advice from Mr. Thornton's wise, witty, and endless supply, I would have quite a stack to refer to! I'm encouraged to be a better person and a better parent under circumstances that will probably never ever be as a challenging as those of the Thornton's. Way to go Dr. Yvonne Thornton...p.s.Maria Shriver's latest best seller should step aside! It doesn't compare to The Ditchdigger's Daughters!

I am a Mary Jo Putney fan, and am busy collecting all her books set in the Regeny, not to mention her Silk trilogy and Bride series. Generally, I admire her inventive plotting, her very interested (and often tortured) heroes and heroines, not to mention her beautiful style of writing. Unfortunately, I also like some consistency in the way characters think and act - and for medieval romances, I have an especially high standard.

I picked this book mainly because it was a medieval by Mary Jo Putney. Having read two of Jo Beverley's three medievals, I wondered what one of my favorite writers would do with the medieval period. Unfortunately, although the book is well-written and some of its characters are very intriguing, I cannot recommend this as highly as I wanted to, especially to fans of the medieval period in romance and historical fiction.

It is not that the hero is inauthentic. Yes, he is harsh at times, but he is also a lot kinder than the typical noble of his day would have been [compare how Adrian treats Meriel, who claims to be a Welsh commoner caught in the Royal Forest, with the treatment meted out to serf women and slaves by noblemen in Ellis Peters's Cadfael series].

One of the problems I have with this book is the high rank given to the hero - as Earl of Shropshire. Yes, there was no earl in Shropshire, given that a great earl (the founder of Shrewsbury Abbey) had died and his descendants had committed treason. But the earls would have been styled "of Shrewsbury" not "of Shropshire" if an earl had been created from a different family. Earldoms were not usually granted under the conditions described in the book as well - even allowing for the creation for rival earls. This for me was one of the first historically inauthentic notes. I would have preferred to have seen Adrian remain a baron; it would not have lessened the force of the story, and the distance between him (a great baron) and the daughter of a minor knight would still have been considerable.

The family name of the heroine is also slightly problematic for me, but this and the title issue are minor problems compared to the way Meriel behaves.

I loved the beginning of the story, and the decision to have both the hero and heroine come from strongly religious backgrounds. The evolution of Meriel from a novice to the sister of a minor knight with his own small manor was indeed interesting. Right upto the point where Meriel was captured in the Royal Forest, I was with her and the hero. This is the point where things started to fall apart.

I simply could not believe that Meriel would choose to claim herself as a Welsh commoner, rather than a noble lady of Norman birth. Even in this time (a period of unusual strife), noblewomen who fell into the hands of the opposing side were treated much better than were peasants. It would have been excusable for Meriel to make the mistake she did (in concealing her identity) if she had just come out of the convent. But she had been out of the convent for several years. Not only did her decision make no sense, it actually put her in greater danger. Even a wicked and brutal baron such as the villain would prefer a good ransom for a young noblewoman to the temporary pleasures of ravishing her. [Knights and squires were usually held for ransom, and not killed]. Furthermore, Meriel had plenty of time to find out whether the Earl was indeed a wicked man or not, and his actions did not seem to point to him as a wicked man, in the context of *his* times. Again, if she had been a novice just released from her vows, her inability to judge men would have made sense.

The worst part was when she chose to throw herself into the river, rather than accept an honorable offer of marriage. Yes, she had been overwrought considering the fate of virgin martyrs, but the Earl was not a pagan, not of an unknown race or family. Her actions struck me as silly and self-serving, as much as her refusal to acknowledge her real identity was not only silly, but cruel to those who thought her dead. At this point, I completely lost sympathy for the heroine.

The rest of the story was thus an anti-climax. It is one thing reading a story about a fairly self-centered heroine. It is quite another thing reading about a heroine who reveals herself to be anything but sensible and thoughtful of others. Frankly, I did not feel that Meriel deserved Adrian, even though I could not applaud his actions. Yes, he did not behave well, but he behaved quite well by the light of his times. And Meriel? She was simply too stupid to live.

Romances consists of about a quarter of my recreational reading, and have done so for about six years, now. I've been led to believe that amnesia storylines are not unusual plot devices in this field, so I was kind of surprised, and now grateful, that I never bumped into one until I read this book.

Dispensing with the praise first, Mary Jo Putney writes good characters, with complex heroes and heroines. They have the messy internal contradictions and battles that make for very engaging reading. All this is complemented by a confident writing style that would be enough to carry the reader through the normal plot, characterization, and historical inconsistencies which one must expect in a novel. Putney also makes excellent use of a huge (for the time) plate window with a commanding view that is just screaming to be smashed most cinematically.

Plotting, though, is where this book stumbles. Not only does this romance rely on The Misunderstanding and The Deception to drive the initial conflict between the hero and heroine, but the introduction of the amnesia device steers it right over the cliff. A nice, tense medieval romance can carry itself just fine without a Gilligan's Island-style plot complication.

That said, the story does offer some genuine surprises in the form of tactical errors -- that might also offend the reader's modern sensibilities -- made by the normally forward-thinking hero, as well as a curiously melancholic showdown at the end. If Putney had made the villain less cartoonish, the whole thing would have felt much more satisfying.

UNCOMMON VOWS is Mary Jo Putney's best novel by a mile. I've read all her books and enjoyed many of them, but none of her others has ever matched the intense emotions in this one. I wish Putney would write more romances set in the medieval era since this, her only medieval, is the also the best medieval I have ever read. It is a story of dark obsessive love, heartrending loss and finally redemption.

I would just like to add that the reviewer from Indianapolis who complained about the improbable amnesia plot twist missed the boat completely. I found the heroine's behavior in character, considering what she had been through. The hero made a prayer pleading for a miracle and made a vow to God of what he would sacrifice if his prayer was granted. The miracle was accompanied by the heroine's memory loss (her first vision was of angels). This memory loss, and the later restoration of her memory, by lighting bolt in a place of spiritual power and magic, showed that the higher force that granted the miracle was now requiring the hero to fullfill his vow. That's why the book is called UNCOMMON VOWS. Duh. And since both times the amnesia was caused by a supernatural event, I felt no improbability, only a sense of destiny.

This is Putney's best book. For people who loved this book I also recommend Putney's SHATTERED RAINBOWS and DEARLY BELOVED, Laura Kinsale's FOR MY LADY'S HEART and Patricia Gaffney's TO HAVE & TO HOLD.

Daughter of Venice, overall, was a pretty good book. In the beginning it was so boring. I kept saying to myself, "Who really cares?!" I wanted to stop reading it, but I didn't have time, since I had to write a report on it. As I read on, the book got exciting. I finished the book with so many unanswered questions. Also, I think the author, Donna Jo Napoli, should add much more description to her writing, so you would feel like you were in Donata's position. Overall it was an okay book.

Fourteen-year-old Donata is fortunate to be the daughter of a noble family. However being the daughter of a respective family has its problems for headstrong Donata. She is protected from the outside world and all noble's daughter will not get an education. Being not the oldest daughter, Donata will not marry either, her destiny is to confined in a covent for the rest of her life. But because she has a twin sister Laura, Donata clings onto the hope that her father might find a husband for both of them. When her hopes are dashed, Donata comes up with the plan to see Venice, the Venice outside of her palazzo, before she is shut away forever. Her choice will bring many changes to her family and will alter many people's lives, including her own.

This was a wonderful historical fiction book by Donna Jo Napoli seen through the eyes of a remarkable girl with big dreams of the future. I read this book in one sitting and it was way better than I ever dreamed it would be. It illustrates perfectly the hopes and aspirations of a girl who wants to see the outside world---a world she has never known.

This book was absolutely awesome. I love how Donna Jo Napoli writes about women's rights in the 1600s. The one thing that saddens me about this book is the fact that Donata loves Noe' but they can never marry because of their difference in religion. *OVERALL FANTASTIC BOOK...A MUST READ FOR ANYONE WHO LOVES VENICE*

Two things struck me while reading this book, the first is that I doubt there is a book out there that is truly balanced and not somewhat biased. The second thing was that Gore really got the shaft, not so much by the recount wars, but by the election official that came up with the Butterfly Ballot. In the history of the USA this decision ranks up there with new Coke and the XFL, what a mistake. As far as the reporting in the book it was not bad for a review of all the articles they had in the paper, but it did not really dig into the particular issues very deeply. I wanted more detail and behind the scenes with both the candidates. I also wanted more details on the court cases; I felt like the sky-high overview of the issues of the cases did not do such an important issue justice.

In reading the book I think a little bit of a democratic bias comes out, just a little, but enough to notice. I also thought it interesting that they had far more details of the Gore group then the Bush camp, it follows the perception that the Post is somewhat liberal in its views. The book is an overview that came out almost 10 minutes after Gore hung up the phone on the second concession call so there are a few more details out now that they did not get in the book. Overall it is a good effort and a readable book, but not the end all be all on the subject.

I don't care what Repubs say, there was no liberal media bias apparent in this book. They showed both campaigns, warts and all, and let the public form its own opinion. The book was a fantastic behind-the-scenes re-telling of America's most recent Constitutional crisis, one that could have disrupted government for years to come. Of course, recent events have taken peoples' minds off of this contentious election, but this book should be pushed as much as possible so people will never forget that every vote actually does count sometimes.

DEADLOCK BY THE WASHINGTON POST IS ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS ON THE BUSH/GORE 2000 ELECTION RECOUNT VOTE.

Please. If you wasted your time on this book, seek counseling immediately. The title alone tells us all we need to know - the author favors trite cliches over substantive thought and has never had an original idea in her life.

I am not sure what point Miss Jones was trying to get across in this book. I found the brush-with-death and family issues to be somewhat inspiring, but most of the other parts in the book came off as arrogant. She seemed to be using this book to tell the world how great she thinks she is. In the book, Star says that she now knows where the line is drawn between confidence and arrogance. I'm not so sure she does. The book seems to be sloppily put together, in a sort of random-thought fashion. However, if you are a fan of "The View", it can be a somewhat entertaining and fast read.

I enjoyed this book so much. Star Jones is definitely a role model for the young and old alike. She is sassy, educated, and a true DIVA! Her level of self-esteem is amazing and empowering. Her upbringing and closeness of her family members, reminds me much of my own relationships. I must say I can relate with so much of what she wrote. This is a "must read".

Lady Sophia Rowley is back from her home in London for the funeral of her third elderly husband. Hers was a marriage of convenience and arrangements. It was agreed that if she gave her husband his much wanted heirs she would be set up with nothing to worry about in London. With the unexpected death of Rowley, Sophia has returned from her frivolous existence among the Ton to resume her position of mother to her 2 sons. It is at the reading of the will when she learns that her husband has named the local vicar, Charles Heywood, guardian of the boys. And it is during his first visit when Sophia learns that Charles is NOT the usual dull, pios, and elderly gentleman- but handsome, young, and very caring man who serves as vicar. He is unlike any other man she has met- someone that is not after her sexually but seems to enjoy her as a person, for who she really is. It is from this visit that instead of the wicked and scandalous woman he has heard gossip about, Charles sees for himself Sophia's beauty, intelligence, and sincere feelings for her children. Charles finds himself falling in love with Sophia at first sight. But how would she be interested in someone with as dull a life and as little to offer as Charles has compared to what she is use to.

The story is a sweet one but it was dull in parts and didn't keep my attention. I found myself thumbing through pages. It wasn't a keeper for me. I recommend you read it for yourself.

Lady Sophia Rowley, Sir Isaac Reblow's jaded and sophisticated mistress from "The Reluctant Guardian" is the heroine in this tale of redemption and love, "Seducing Mr. Heywood." Though you might be forgiven in thinking that this romance novel about a young woman who has been more sinned against than sinning, and who finds her way back from the brink of self destruction, should actually have been entitled "The Reforming of Lady Sophia."

Thrice married, and now thrice widowed Lady Sophia Rowley has returned to Rowley Hall, in a high temper. Her ex-lover, Sir Isaac Reblow, whom she had hoped to marry upon her aged husband's death has married another, and she (Lady Sophia) is now the laughingstock of London. Unable to face the gossipmongers there, Lady Sophia has returned to Yorkshire for the duration of her period of mourning, but she is not happy at all. She finds the country side boring, her neighbours boorish, and she is not looking forward to reacquainting herself with the two young sons, John and William, she abandoned in favour of a good time in London. Furthermore, she has to contend with the village vicar, Mr. Charles Heywood, whom her husband had named as guardian of John and William. No, all in all Lady Sophia is not in a good humour at all.

And when she finally meets Heywood, she finds to her surprise that he is rather young and extremely good looking. Feeling rather bored, Lady Sophia sets out to seduce him into having a discreet affair with her. But to her surprise, anger and mortification, she finds that while Heywood is very susceptible to her charms, he refuses to fall in with her desires. And yet, something about the morally upright and deeply smitten young man (as well as the easy affection and acceptance of both her sons) inspires in Lady Sophia the wish to change from being the hard and brittle London socialite into something else -- to become the young lady she should have been before her father had started selling her off in marriage to rich dissolute older men. But can the once notorious Lady Sophia, whose affairs were a byword of polite Society, change? And then Lady Sophia's despicable father, the Earl of Dunhaven, arrives at Rowley Hall, with a plan to marry her off to his latest protege. Will the earl succeed in his evil plan? And will the introduction of a gentleman from Lady Sophia's milieu spell the end of all of Heywood's hopes where the lady is concerned?

The plot is a rather sophisticated one in the sense that it deals with a heroine who has led a far from exemplary life. Rich, beautiful and somewhat rakish, Lady Sophia had (hitherto her husband's death) led a rather jaded and carefree existence -- having affairs with whomsoever she pleased, going from one social gathering to another with little thought of her ailing husband or the sons she left behind. The death of her almost too-saintly-for-words husband, her reconciliation with her sons, and her friendship with Charles Heywood, allows for Lady Sophia to see that there is another path open to her -- one would allows her to some self-respect and feelings of self-worth, as well as the promise of a deep and abiding love. However, as with all good stories, the path to redemption is not so easy. Lady Sophia has to contend with her uncertain temper, her father's evil machinations and the fact that her relationship with Heywood may actually harm his reputation and prospects. This plot is not a very original one, and is one that has been used over and over again. What I liked most about it was that it was the heroine who was a bit of a rake, and the hero who stuck to his guns about propriety. Far too often, in plots such as this one, the hero would have given in to the heroine's lures before the denouncement is reached and everything ends as it should. For the hero to remain firm and strong no matter the temptations Lady Sophia threw at him, was a refreshing change. And one that I welcomed.

The novel unfolded smoothly, if a bit slowly. But this allowed for the change in Lady Sophia's character to be believable and credible. As I noted before there is really nothing terribly new or different about this particular story. The difference lies in the manner in which Jo Manning tells her tale, and the clever way in which she manages to make one care about the characters and the manner in which the novel developed. A very engaging and elegant read.

Lady Sophia Rowley is not your typical Regency herione; she is older, widowed, and hardly virginal. She returns to the country after her husband's death to see to his estate and her step-sons. Against all her expectations, the country is not dull and boring. Her first encounters with the local parson are hardly promising, but he finds her fascinating. It is also time for her to get to know her step-sons, and provide them with the happy family life she did not have. A good introduction to the Regency period for those who don't normally read Regency romances... unlike some of the genre, this is hardly insipid, but rather a lively romp. I look forward to seeing more heriones along the lines of Lady Sophia Rowley.

This is the second of the Fallen Angels series in order of writing, though chronologically it occurs later than a couple of its successors. This is Rafe's story, and it is a book I've been waiting to read ever since I read The Bargain (the end of The Bargain is reprised from Rafe's point of view at the beginning of this book). In The Bargain, Rafe was presented as a cynical rake with shadows in his past, and I was really looking forward to learning more about him, particularly after meeting him again in Thunder and Roses.

I was a little disappointed in this book, however. Rafe shares the limelight here with Robin, the hero of Angel Rogue, and as such we don't learn as much about him as we would like. Minor characters also occupy far more of a centre-stage role in this book than in other Putney novels, to the point of having entire scenes written from their point of view, for example.

Maggie, or Margot, is a fascinating heroine, and I enjoyed her relationship with both Robin and Rafe - and yes, she did choose the right man!

But I had wanted so much to get to know Rafe properly, and - particularly after reading Thunder and Roses, which is just *so* good - I found this book ultimately a bit unsatisfying. I will no doubt read it again, but by no means as often as I'd re-read Thunder and Roses and The Rake.

Petals in the Storm comes as the second in the Fallen Angel Series. If you pay attention to the time line though, these books are not really in chronological order. Rafe, the Duke of Candover and the oldest of the Fallen Angels, fell in love right out of school. However, this young man that always was an aristocrat and rarely showed weakness let his pride and anger ruin his chances with the girl. When a mission takes him to Paris, much to his surprise his contact turns out to be the girl only she's now in disguise and one of the best spies for England. Margot Ashton is not the same girl that Rafe fell in love with. She has known excrutiating pain at the hands of men and only trusts one man explicitly... Robin, her protector of many years. As Rafe works through his feelings, his jealousy grows towards Robin and his fear for Margot in this dangerous masquerade begins to consume him. In the end, Rafe, Margot and Robin face their greatest enemy together and find an unlikely alliance that leads Margot and Rafe to the love they denied so many years ago. It's worth having for the bookshelf. It's more whodunit than romance. The sensuality is not really there like in Thunder and Roses. But it's still a good read and I really liked Rafe from his other roles in the Bargain and Thunder and Roses.

Contrary to what the person below said, this book had a lot "of intrigue and suspense, and of course, passion and tension and humour." Saying there was a lack of all of the above makes me want to ask, "Did you READ THE BOOK?"

The book was really good, and it kept me interested all the way through. Rafe, the main character had to share the spotlight with another handsome, dashing fellow.. Robin Andreville (who has his own story in Angel Rogue). I liked Robin a lot. Very honorable, amiable guy. And I felt closer to him than Rafe... which is the wrinkle I find with Petals in the Storm. Though I love this book, and I would have to say is one of the better Fallen Angel Series (and trust me, all were exceptional!), I walked away from it not truly knowing Rafe as well as I feel I know the other Fallen Angels. I don't know.. was it because Rafe had the least demons among all of them? He makes appearances here and there in the other books, but he's not as distinct as Nicholas, Michael, or Lucien. The most distinguishing factor about him is his "Duke stare" and that's it. I want to know MORE of him, but alas, his story is over.. and a good story at that.. very suspenseful. Highly recommended! Hopefully it gets back on print so I could get a copy!

Suggestion: Have Rafe make a larger appearance in some new book...like Nicholas' role in Shattered Rainbows... something that would give more windows into Rafe's character.

I enjoyed this story tremendously. Given the period of time in which it is set, Putney approached issues that were completely untalked about during that time period. I thought their coming together as a couple and healing together was a fascinating and thought provoking journey.

Just finished re-reading it and I have to agree with fellow reviewers - it is still one of Ms Putney's best. I read it when it first came out in 1990 and reading it again still makes me wonder how she manages to put so many ingredients into it. I do agree with some of you out there that there are some unpleaseant plot twists in the book. But we have to give Ms Putney due credit for being brave enough to deal with taboo issues like homosexuality, breast cancer and epilepsy in her story. Don't forget, this book is set in the early 19th century and people DO not talk about them.

Diana Lindsay is one of Ms Putney's most unforgettable characters as she is loving and warm despite her bad start with the hero, Viscount Gervase St. Aubyn. She was brave enough to find herself a lover even if it meant it had to be with her very estranged husband. No doubt readers do not care for Gervase's behavior when he finds out Diana has been witholding the truth from him all along, but they have to understand his attitude is very much shaped by his dark and horrid past. I also admire Diana's go-getting attitude after Gervase spurned her (again) and she had to "take the bull by the horns". Of course, it helps that this book has some of the most sensuous scenes Ms Putney has created. Moreover, there is a double romance between Maddy and her reunited lover, Lord Farnsworth.

I would dearly love to read Geoffrey's very own book. I wonder if Ms Putney will oblige? He is certainly a character worth expanding as he has so many lovable qualities - smart, warm and loving - just like his Mom. It would also be great to see an older version of Diana and Gervase come back. All in all, Dearly Beloved remains one of Ms Putney's best, if not the best.

Many issues were raised here and i truly empathise with the characters. Whilst Gervase unfortunately managed to be 'harmed' by his mother, Diana (whose father felt the same unnatural 'likings' towards her), luckily escaped such physical overtures. Imagine if her father had been truly deranged, he would have 'destroyed' her, and left her more wounded compared to what Gervase did to her in that inn.

Towards the end, i truly felt like strangling Gervase for spurning Diana's love. If not for Geoffrey's quick actions, Diana would have been dead...and Gervase would have thought the worst of her (thinking she'd a tiff with the Count-whom he jealously thought was Diana's lover)...but this is just my imagination..but i just hated him when he doubted Diana...

Anyway, i should've blamed his mother more..and thankfully, despite his torturous past (compared to the hero Michael Connery or 'Mikhail Kanauri' in Silks and Shadows - Gervase's past incident was still minor, correct me if i'm wrong), he turned out okay.

I am usually a huge fan of Mary Jo Putney but this particular book left me wanting more. One of the issues is that the first chapter is actually near the end of the story. This sort of tells you what things are leading up to. This for some reason really annoyed me.

Another issue was that while the book was unabridged by tape 5 I found myself skipping parts that seemed to have no bearing on the story as I thought it was dragging on and on and not going anywhere fast.

In this story you learn about Alex who was taken prisoner (along with her daughter) while sailing home from Australia to England. Along comes Gavin 6 months later and sees Alex up for auction at a slave market in the East Indies. He tries to buy her but the Sultan know what he wants and makes him win her instead, yes the last item in the game is easy to figure out is going to happen.

Then they find her daughter and eventually get married along the way there is fires, murders, dishonesty, brutal rapes, unexpected inheritance, deception, an almost hanging etc...

I still recommend the book but I wouldn't put it on my top 10.

When returning to England from Australia, Alexandra Warren's ship is attacked by pirates and she is separated from her daughter and sold into slavery. Her constant rebellions lead to her being resold where she is sighted by handsome American merchant Gavin Elliott. Elliott can't stand by when a 'woman of his own people' is enslaved and agrees to undertake a deadly challenge to save her...

Author Mary Jo Putney writes a compelling and emotionally powerful novel filled with action and adventure. THE BARTERED BRIDE is strongest when set in Indonesia... Putney handles the emotional damage done by Alexandra's captivity and brutalization perfectly...

The English component of THE BARTERED BRIDE is still fine adventure. Still, the motivations for Alexandra's kidnappers to hold her alive seems stretched. For me, this reduced the emotional impact of the adventurous ending.

Minor quibbles aside, THE BARTERED BRIDE is an exciting and emotionally compelling story--and a fine addition to the Putney series of east/west romances.

In 1834, American sea merchant Gavin Elliot sets sail from The East Indies for London after making his fortune in trade. He plans to reestablish his family name previously disgraced among the aristocracy.

On his journey to England, Gavin stops at the island of Maduri where Sultan Kasan surprisingly orders a personal visit from the sea captain. While there, Gavin learns that English widow Alexandra Warren is held in bondage after her ship was captured by pirates. Alexandra's eight-year-old daughter is either dead or incarcerated elsewhere. Though he knows not to intercede, the honorable Gavin challenges Kasan to play Lion's Game in which his loss means two decades of servitude, but a victory frees Alexandra. Of course, Gavin has never played before while his opponent is a pro in this deadly encounter.

THE BARTERED BRIDE is an exciting, action-packed historical romance that never slows down until the tale is completed. The story line is loaded with a taste of an exotic 1830's environment that provides a fresh outlook to the audience. The lead couple is a courageous duo though the odds of Gavin defeating Kasan in the Lion's Game seems greater than Douglas-Tyson and would have been kept off Vegas and White's books. Still Mary Jo Putney continues to provide a vast panorama of an intriguing bygone era by placing her romances in unique locals.

Harriet Klausner