Reviews tagging 'Sexual content'

The Lady's Guide to Celestial Mechanics by Olivia Waite

64 reviews

sofipitch's review against another edition

emotional slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

4.25

My main issue with this one was the B plot was not super interesting. It took up a good portion of the book, which yay feminism but I'm sorry I'm hear for uhhh not that 🙈
Otherwise good, sex scenes were hot but could have been longer, some had a fade to black that had me pouting

Content Warnings

ember_eyes_are_for_tigers's review

Go to review page

emotional hopeful lighthearted fast-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

4.25

In comparison to the books that I’ve read in the genre since now this book was so much better. And, it wasn’t because it was a sapphic love story (although, that might have contributed to my overall enjoyment).
Of course, this isn’t without saying that the book has some pitfalls. Lucy, the main character, sometimes feels a bit bland and just a canvas for things to happen (whilst I enjoyed Catherine’s character much better and felt she was developed much more in depth), and there is a small issue with the pacing.
However, the writing is incredible. It’s lyrical and poetic in just the right points that makes the love story that much more romantic.

Content Warnings

apaine's review

Go to review page

emotional inspiring slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

4.25

Content Warnings

saeruh's review

Go to review page

emotional inspiring

4.5

I loved this novel! Such a sweet love story between Catherine and Lucy. I thought the story was so original and had a good built up to the end reveal of who Oléron actually is. I thought all of the characters were really fleshed out well and there was some really good writing bits.
My only real complaints was that the relationship was definitely insta-love, the beginning was a bit slow and hard to get into, and I kept getting a little (i think that may just be a me problem with historical romances).

Also, Lucy went WAY too easy for doing that painting that made her look like a total novice while she already being doubted by all the old science dudes.

Content Warnings

littlewishling's review

Go to review page

emotional inspiring lighthearted medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

5.0

What a beautiful romance! I loved all the characters and the nuance of woman in STEM in the time period. It was really wonderful and made me want to learn more about astronomy and learn to embroider.

Content Warnings

netflixismyroommate's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional hopeful informative inspiring mysterious slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.5

Content Warnings

tangleroot_eli's review against another edition

Go to review page

emotional hopeful inspiring lighthearted reflective medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? Yes

Waite handles society, science, and sex with an equally deft touch, never getting too frivolous or too preachy. And, yes, I deeply disliked the part where

Our Lovers part ways because they will not use their words like actual grown-ups. But that lasts less than a day

, and then I could get back to enjoying myself.

Content Warnings

vchapple17's review

Go to review page

emotional hopeful inspiring medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

5.0

Content Warnings

martamae77's review against another edition

Go to review page

medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.5

Content Warnings

friends2lovers's review against another edition

Go to review page

tense slow-paced

1.0

This started out promising. If you would have asked me a third of the way in what my rating would be, I’d have said 3-stars. As I got further into the book, the negatives kept piling up and by the end, outweighed the positives by a large margin. Waite completely undermines the book’s central theme—the unfair treatment of female scientists and the lack of recognition for their work—in a couple of major ways.

First, Waite erases the existence of Caroline Herschel, an acclaimed female astronomer who was working at the time the book is set. As K. J. Charles states in her review, this is, in effect, “erasing a woman scientist in order to make a point about the erasure of women scientists.” Not only is Caroline Herschel a non-entity in this book, but Lucy is under the impression that she’s the first and only female astronomer—at least up until 87%, when she peruses some books and papers and discovers the existence of “so very, very many of them.” Having experienced the science society’s sexist gatekeeping herself, and her father getting the credit for work she completed, Lucy should know better than anyone that the contributions of female scientists are often undervalued if not concealed. (But not so hidden that they can’t be found without a bit of digging, if one is so determined, which Lucy is apparently not.) I guess it never occurred to Lucy that the sexism she’s experienced is not unique to her. That Lucy assumes she’s a pioneer reflects very poorly on her character. She comes across as both willfully ignorant and arrogant.

Second, and by far my most serious criticism, is that Lucy translates, edits, publishes, and profits from the work of a French astronomer, Oléron, without ever asking for permission or offering compensation. Before the 'translation' is published, a fellow astronomer named Mr. Frampton tells Lucy to contact Oléron sooner rather than later. Lucy does not heed his warning and it doesn’t come up again until months later, again in a conversation with Mr. Frampton, when the book is a success. Mr. Frampton (correctly) points out to Lucy that her work is not entirely hers and adds: “The more popular it got, the more uneasy I became with the notion that the original author had no idea your translation existed.” Lucy never expresses any similar unease or guilt nor does she attempt to contact Oléron or make amends. Worst of all, she never offers Oléron a share in the royalties. Based on some cursory online reading about the 1710 Statute of Anne, it does not appear that Lucy violated any copyright laws of the time. However, that doesn’t make her actions any less unethical or exploitative.

It seems to me that the only reason Lucy never contacts Oléron is

so Waite could pull off the last minute reveal: Oléron is a woman. Which just makes it all the more frustrating! It's like Waite wants the reader to find this situation morally okay and on the up-and-up because they're both female scientists and they should support each other. But, no one should have their work co-opted by someone else, even if they're of the same sex or gender. Oléron has every right to be upset and take legal action against Lucy for what she did. And the fact that this isn't even brought up as a possible ramification within the narrative is frankly baffling to me. And there are other aspects of this that don't make sense. Like, why did Oléron never contact Lucy herself once she was informed by Mr. Frampton of the translation's existence? Why, if Waite intended for the message of the book to be about female solidarity, would she keep Oléron a hidden figure for the entire book? And Oléron herself seems to be fluent in English, so why didn't she translate her own work?

As for the romance—I don’t typically like romance novels that focus so much on work or business because then the HEA becomes more about whether or not the character(s) achieve professional success and less about the romantic relationship. In terms of Work-Romance balance, The Lady’s Guide unfortunately leans heavily towards the former. Lucy’s astronomy work is the main focus of the plot and intertwines so much with the romance that the romance feels underdeveloped and overshadowed. Lucy and Catherine’s relationship is built on mutual respect for each other’s intellect and work accomplishments, and not much else. And on top of all the astronomy stuff, there’s a subplot involving Lucy’s ex that leads to jealousy and misunderstandings. The resulting rift is quickly and inexplicably resolved, just in time for Lucy’s astronomy work to take center stage again in the final act.

Overall, I cannot recommend this. The audiobook narrator, Morag Sims, was good, though. She had perfect pacing, used distinct voices for all the characters, and there wasn’t anything about her narration that annoyed me or was distracting. Sims is the only reason I’d consider reading the next book in the series.

Series: Feminine Pursuits #1

Genre: Historical Romance

Setting: 1816 (Regency era), in London, England and also briefly Lyme

Heroine: Lucy Muchelney, astronomer (I didn’t catch their ages, but Catherine is about 10 years older than Lucy. I’m guessing Lucy’s in her 20’s and Catherine in her 30’s.)

Heroine: Catherine St. Day, Countess of Moth, widow

Point-of-View: 3rd person, past tense, alternating between Lucy and Catherine

Tropes/Themes: age gap, widowed heroine, scientist heroine, feminism

Format/Edition: audiobook (borrowed from MCLS via Hoopla)

Narrator: Morag Sims

Length: 8h 27m, 309 pages, 84k words

Read Date: July 18, 2022

Heat Index: 3🌡️🌡️🌡️

Quotes

It was printed and put up for sale. [...] the title was embossed in silver on rich blue leather: The Lady’s Guide to Celestial Mechanics, with the author listed as L. Muchelney. Lucy had agonized over this initial, before ultimately deciding that she would use her full name when she published her own unique work, and initials when she wanted the focus to be on the work she was translating.

Note: Um, she’s listed as the “author” and not the “translator” or "editor"? How does that keep the focus on the work she’s translating? The extent of Lucy’s edits and additions is not clear, but an “author” credit seems disingenuous to me. Oléron is the author, Lucy is not. It would be more appropriate to say “translated, edited, and annotated by L. Muchelney." Also, Lucy agonizes over whether to use her initial or full name, but doesn't agonize over the fact that she still hasn't contacted the original author about their work getting translated, published, and sold for profit???

Fury was an anchor in the swirling storm: she turned it on him in spite of her better instincts. “I shouldn’t have to perform like a dancing bear. My work should be proof enough on its own.”
“Your work,” he said, “is not entirely yours.”
Lucy stopped short.
Mr. Frampton continued, inexorable. “It would be one thing if you’d translated the Méchanique céleste for the benefit of your fellow scholars. The more we share, the faster we all advance. But it was a commercial success, far beyond any expectation.” His mouth was a flat line by now, his displeasure plain. “The more popular it got, the more uneasy I became with the notion that the original author had no idea your translation existed.”
“So you sent it to him,” Lucy whispered.
“I did.”

Note: Mr. Frampton is the ONLY character in this stupid book who seems to be "displeased" with Lucy about this. But still, even he brushes it off later in this conversation. I don't get why this is not a bigger conflict!

“I believed I was the first woman to really try and advance the progress of astronomy—I fancied myself a brave pioneer, an explorer like you once were. A shining beacon to girls and women of the future. It was a great comfort, whenever people like Mr. Hawley and Mr. Wilby offered insults and dismissals. All I had to do to claim victory was to prove them wrong—and don’t men of science value proof more than anything? Once people saw what I did, really saw it and acknowledged it, they’d believe other women were capable of thinking, of learning, of discovering the world in the same way that men are. But tonight I learned that there were other women before me. So very, very many of them. They were here all along: spotting comets, naming stars, pointing telescopes at the sky alongside their fathers and brothers and sons. And still the men they worked with scorned them. Scoffed at them. Gave the credit and the glory to the men who stole their work—or borrowed it or expanded it. Rarely cited it directly. And then those men did their best to forget where the work came from. Women’s ideas are treated as though they sprung from nowhere, to be claimed by the first man who comes along. Every generation had women stand up and ask to be counted—and every generation of brilliant, insightful, educated men has raised a hand and wiped those women’s names from the greater historical record.”

Note: (Bolding emphasis is my own.) Isn't Lucy getting all the credit and glory for work she stole/borrowed and expanded? Does she really not see that her actions are akin to what she's condemning here, and therefore antithetical to her own professed ideals? The hypocrisy is infuriating!

Oléron was a woman! A dark-skinned woman! As soon as the first shock had passed, she was flooded with chagrin at one simple, telling fact: the possibility of Oléron being anything other than a white-skinned man had quite simply not occurred to her.
What a mortifying realization for someone who prided herself on being keenly observant. Well, astronomers did spend most of their time being wrong. What mattered was what they did when they realized the truth.

Note: I don't even know what to say about this contrived, predictable plot twist or Lucy's reaction to it. I'm not surprised that Lucy didn't see this as a possibility.

Content Warnings

More...